Chord Electronics Hugo 2 DAC/AMP Review

Chord Hugo 2 Pros&Cons

Chord Hugo 2 Specs

• Headphones impedance: Up to 800Ω
• Output impedance: <0.025Ω
• Frequency response: 20Hz ~ 20kHz
• SNR: 126dB
• THD+N: ≤ 0.0001% (1 kHz)
• Channel Separation: 135dB @ 1kHz 300Ω

Packaging 

Fancy packaging is not something that Chord is exactly well-known for using. Heck, you could even consider their packaging scheme to be a barely acceptable “meh”, especially when you take into account that all of Chord’s products really are luxury items.

In the case of the Hugo 2, we are given a mostly-black box which features the Chord and Hugo 2 names printed in both a contrasting white, as well as a in a glossy UV-printed texture. It’s only on the underside of the box that we get some additional info with regards to specs and features of the device.

Lifting off the lid reveals our first glimpse of the Hugo 2. Behind a layer of protective foam and inside a plastic sleeve sits Chord’s updated and redesigned version of the original Hugo.

Underneath the Hugo 2 sits yet another box which contains all of the units accessories and cables.

What’s in the box?

• Chord Electronics Hugo 2
• Power adapter
• 4x regional power adapter plugs
• Micro-USB cable
• Optical cable
• Short optical cable
• Micro-USB to Micro-USB interconnect cable
• Remote control
• 2x AA batteries
• User guide

Read: FiiO X5 3rd Gen High Resolution Music Player Review

Accessories 

So, basically, Chord have gone the route of giving you pretty much all of the cables you’d need to use the Hugo 2…almost. Notable omissions are a USB-C to Micro-USB cable and Lighting to Micro-USB cable. More and more devices, both DAPs and mobile phones alike, are being released with USB-C ports in particular, so it would’ve been nice to see these cables being included too. Really, at this price, Chord should have included every cable that makes up the Mojo Cable Pack.

One pretty cool inclusion is an IR remote control. The remote control allows you to turn the device on or off (but this does require the Hugo 2 to be plugged into an external power source) as well as changing the input source, digital filter selection, crossfade function, and of course changing the volume or entirely muting the device.

Unfortunately there is not protective case included with the Hugo 2, although Chord did announce an optional leather case which can be purchased at an extra cost.

Design

Design-wise the Hugo 2 is a blend of the original Hugo and the Mojo. Chord’s iconic view glass to indicate sampling-rate has been incorporated too, as well as the volume control that was featured on the predecessor.

A notable change are the selector “sphere” buttons, which are the same as those found on the Mojo. Howevere, unlike the Mojo, the spherical buttons on the Hugo 2 are essentially fixed in place, and so do not spin around at their own accord.

The left side of the device is where you’ll find the Micro-USB power input port, as well as a separate Micro-USB data port. The left side also features labels to indicate the function of each of the spherical buttons. The right-hand side houses the 1/4″ and 3.5mm headphone/lineout jacks, stereo RCA jacks, COAX port, and Optical port.

The Hugo 2 does have a somewhat more aesthetically pleasing design compared to the original Hugo, and it’s nice to see that Chord has carried over some design elements of the Mojo to the new device. Iconic design-cues are part of brand recognition, so it’s great to see this move from Chord.

However, putting certain design elements aside, the Hugo 2 suffers from the same underwhelming aesthetics and build quality problem as the Mojo, only even more so.

The Hugo 2 is a high performance, premium device…so would it be unfair to expect the device to also look the part? By this I mean, none of Chord’s devices seem to have genuinely modern, refined, and gorgeous designs. Brushed metal, glass panels, a mix of curved and straight edges…these are modern design elements. Chord’s products simply don’t look premium
Then there’s also another issue in terms of quality control. Actually, there are a few issues.
As briefly mentioned, the Mojo’s spherical buttons can rotate freely, which means that they’re a little loose. As such, when you shake the device, you can hear those buttons rattling a bit. Unfortunately, the Hugo 2 has the same problem, only worse. Whilst the Hugo 2’s buttons don’t freely rotate like the ones on the Mojo, they are still loose. In fact, they’re so loose, that if you shake the Hugo 2, it makes an even louder rattling noise than the Mojo. Seriously, you would expect FAR greater quality control and tighter tolerances for a $2000+ DAC/AMP.
Then there are also some aesthetic issues. The IR port has a few blemishes as well as a really noticeable crack too.

Moreover, some damage had been caused on the finish of the casing due to what seems like shoddy workmanship. On this particular review unit, we can see the squiggly trace left by an electric screwdriver during the assembly process.

Again, this is a $2000+ device. At this price-point we shouldn’t be seeing any blatantly obvious imperfections. The problem is that, when you can see flaws so blatantly on the outside of a product, it really makes you wonder what level of pride and workmanship has been applied to the parts that you can’t see

 

User Interface

Of course, not many DAC/AMPs out there have a user interface per se, and as we’ve seen on Chord’s previous products, they’ve employed the use of differing coloured LEDs to indicate various functions and/or states.
The power sphere button, for example, will be lit up blue as long as the battery level is at 80% – 100%, and will switch to red when it falls to 2% – 20%, and eventually will start flashing red when the battery level is 0% – 2%.
The Filter sphere will be white for Filter 1, green for Filter 2, orange for Filter 3, and red for Filter 4.
For the input sphere, Chord has chosen white for USB, yellow for COAX 1, red for COAX 2, green for Optical, deep-blue for Bluetooth, and light-blue for COAX Dual Data Mode.
And lastly, the Crossfeed (X-PHD) sphere is unlit in the off state, red for Minimum, green for Medium, and deep-blue for Maximum.
Likewise, the volume control will be dimly lit in a red colour to show that the volume is at a minimum level, and white at maximum level.

The use of coloured LEDs is a bit of a polarizing issue. Some people seem to really like it, whilst others find it unintuitive. To be perfectly frank, we sit somewhere in the middle for this. Using colours to indicate battery level or selected input is OK, but using the same idea to denote volume level and other functions do seem unintuitive. We say this simply because it requires the user to kind of have to remember what each colour means. Now, it’s not quite as complicated as the colour scheme that was used for the Mojo, but it still doesn’t feel like the ideal way of going about it. It’s certainly different, and a little bit quirky…but different doesn’t necessarily equate to being great.

Sound

A quick Google search for something along the lines of “best portable dac” will quickly point you to numerous web pages about Chord’s Mojo and Hugo, as well as a few lists that include those same products. There’s no denying it, Chord truly does make some exceptionally sounding products. The Hugo in particular has, for many people, become the gold-standard for the type of sound quality that all portable Hi-Fi devices should aim to achieve. And honestly, it’s incredibly difficult to argue with them.

As mentioned, the Hugo 2 is indeed a wonderful sounding device. It’s ability to be incredibly detailed, yet not come across as being artificially bright either is very, very impressive. It’s got an ever-so-slight sense of warmth – just enough to lure you in and make you feel all fuzzy inside without sounding intentionally coloured. But really, it’s the realism that gets you. The Hugo 2 has a fantastic ability to give a sense of naturalism to the sound. Of course, this is going to depend on how well you music of choice has been recorded; but throw something decent at the Hugo 2 and it’ll pretty much make you question how you could have ever been satisfied with any other device.

Well, almost.

Unfortunately, we’ve not had the chance to check out the original Hugo, so if you were reading this review in the hopes of getting a comparison…sorry.
However, we do have the Mojo on hand – a comparison that we know many people are expecting to see too. We’ve also got the iFi Micro iDSD Black Label to compare the Hugo 2 to.

 

Hugo 2 vs. Mojo

Ok, first we need to address a slight issue here. When comparing 2 products (or within any scietific experiment), it is important to have as few variables as possible. This is because, when comparing 2 products, you are comparing those variables against each other. The more variables exist, the more difficult it is to determine which variable is responsible  for the difference percieved between the 2 products.
In the case of audio products, we want to see if there’s a difference in how they portray the music, right? As such, the playback volume is something which is exceptionally important to monitor. This can go both ways. If the volume is louder on the one product, then that product may appear to sound clearer and more dynamic than the other product. Likewise, the louder device could also be percieved to be “brighter” or more “analytical” than the other product.
So, it’s important when testing to ensure that the products are volume matched – to ensure that the differences you do hear (if you hear any at all) are due to the hardware differences of the devices, and not due to a simple mismatch in volume level.

So, having said that, we do have a problem when comparing the Hugo 2 to the Mojo. You see, both devices employ a digital volume control. What this means is that each volume step will increase the output volume by a certain fixed amount. For both the Mojo and the Hugo 2 that step amount is 1dB. Unfortunately, though, this makes it impossible to accurately volume match both devices as they simply cannot be set to be at the same volume level. The closest we could get the 2 devices to each other was with the Mojo being 0.3dB louder than the Hugo 2. This is definitely not ideal, so keep this fact in mind when reading the following comparison.

Also, this comparison may seem a little unfair, taking into account that the Hugo 2 costs well over 3 (almost 4) times the price of the Mojo. But – and I cannot stress this enough – cost is not as big of a factor as most people think. Yes, ideally, a higher priced item should perform better than a lower-priced item – but in reality this isn’t always the case. All that matters in the end is whether or not a product does or doesn’t perform better than another product.

Compared to the Mojo, the Hugo 2 does seem to have a more transparent and more neutral signature.
Where the Mojo tends to offer a slightly warmer, thicker and rolled-off signature (what some will describe as being “musical”), the Hugo 2 has the more linear, refined, and mature signature.
Where the biggest difference seems to come in is in the Hugo 2’s ability to add a bit more separation between the foreground instruments (and/or vocals) and those instruments which tend to be placed more towards the back of the stage. This separation makes both the foreground and background sounds come across more clearly and coherent.
The Hugo 2 also seems to have a tighter grip on less ideal recordings in terms of sharp treble peaks. By this, I mean that tracks which might usually come across as containing some undesirably sharp high frequency peaks come across as being less fatiguing on the Hugo 2 than on the Mojo. However, this may very well also be due to the difference in volume level rather than a difference in capability of the devices.
Overall, it’s very interesting to be reminded of just how competent the Mojo is for such a tiny device. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of it all is, despite the Mojo outputting a slightly louder volume level during this comparison, the Hugo 2 still sounded like the superior device. Sure, the differences weren’t huge, but perhaps if we could properly volume match them the Hugo 2’s sonic superiority would come across in a more obvious manner.

Read: Chord Electronics Mojo DAC/Headphone Amplifier Review

Hugo 2 vs. Micro iDSD Black Label

Thankfully, due to the fact that the iDSD Black Label has an analogue volume pot, it’s possible to properly volume-match its output level to that of the Hugo 2.
Again, this may seem like an unfair comparison, just like before with the Mojo, but there certainly are people who are interested to know what differences they can expect between these 2 companies and products.

This comparison was quite enlightening as it reiterated the sheer value that the iDSD BL packs. Switching back and forth between the 2 devices revealed that the Hugo 2 is indeed an incredible piece of audio tech. In terms of the sound character, the iDSD BL is a bit colder and more energetic in comparison. In essence, the iFi just sounds a bit closer to neutral.
However, that slight warmth of the Hugo 2 works incredibly well.
Personally I feel that the Hugo 2 is the superior sounding device. It just feels as though it portrays the finer details a little better, and that slight warmth just makes the Chord feel like a more appropriate device for extended listening sessions. It’s got this effortlessness about it that puts you at ease and allows you to drift away in the music. There also seems to be just a little bit of a roll-off in the higher frequencies, but that perhaps just adds to the warmer feeling sound, as it doesn’t appear to prohibit the Hugo 2’s ability to extract every last detail out of a track.
Overall, if I had to sum it up in as few words as possible (and I kind of have to do that), I’d say that the iFi perhaps sounds more accurate, where as the Hugo 2 sounds more pleasing. And that pretty much encompasses what we can expect from such devices despite their widely set-apart price point. For the most part it simply is going to come down to a personal individual preference, along with whichever headphones or IEMs you end up pairing to either device.

 

Read:IFI Micro iDSD Black Label DAC/AMP Review

Value 

Value-wise the Hugo 2 is an incredibly difficult device to quantify. Yes, it sounds incredible, and yes, it’s got a lot of features built in. But, let’s be perfectly honest with one another, $2000+ is a A LOT of money to be splashing out on a personal music device. unfortunately, most people simply would never have the opportunity to experience such a device, let alone even own one.
Moreover, if we were to consider the outright sonic capability of the device versus the cost of the device, well then the Mojo and iDSD BL both have a far greater bang-for-buck value than what the Hugo 2 could possibly hope to have. The Mojo really isn’t all that far behind the Hugo 2, and the iFi gets awfully close.
If someone wants the best bang-for-buck value device, then no, the Hugo 2 wouldn’t be recommended. It’s just gone too far on the diminishing returns scale.
However, let’s consider the Hugo 2 as a total device. When we take into account that it does have built in Bluetooth (and AptX), as well as the ability to control it with a remote control, then it starts to make more sense. But still, do those features justify the end cost of the device?
As such, the Hugo 2 is only going to appeal to a very tiny group of people. These would be the type of people who simply must have the absolute best. And really, the Hugo 2 absolutely will provide you with one of the most refined sonic signatures you could hope to get; and is a luxury item very much akin to an Omega watch. Does an Omega offer significantly (if any) better performance than a higher-end Seiko? Of course not. At the end of the day it mostly comes down to bragging rights and the peace-of-mind that you own one of the absolute best products available.
So yes, if you’ve got the cash to splash, the Hugo 2 might very well make perfect sense to you. But, if you’re on a tighter budget, the Mojo is a very good compromise, and sonically the iDSD BL punches waaaay above its price bracket.
However, what really does hurt the Hugo 2’s value is the questionable quality control for its build. At this price-point, absolutely nothing should be rattling, and there certainly should not be any damage to the device’s finish due to shoddy workmanship.

Rating

The TECH MERIT rating system is designed to take as many aspects of the device into account as possible. As such, we have a basic rating, as well as a final rating. The basic rating rates the product purely as a high quality portable audio device, and is generally a good indicator of how it stacks up to its rivals in terms of standard features and specs. The final rating, however, grants bonus points for any extra features and specs that aren’t quite as common, and is a great way to judge the product as a complete package.

Packaging
Look and feel: 8 / 10

Included Accessories
Protective case: –
Cables: YES

Build
Quality control: 5 / 10
Seems durable: –
Use of metal: –
Relative silence when inserting cables: 8 / 10

Sound
Sound stage: 9 / 10
Detail retrieval: 10 / 10
Sibilance: 10 / 10
Instrument separation: 10 / 10
Neutrality of sound signature: 8 / 10
Plays lossless audio: YES
Plays 24-bit: YES
Hiss: 10 / 10

Portability
Small size: 5 / 10
Relatively low weight: 6 / 10
battery life more than 10 hours: –

Value
Competitive price-point: –
Relative value: 6.5 / 10

Basic Rating: 7.8

 

Bonus points
Has a screen: –
Ability to EQ: –
Bass boost: –
Various digital filters: YES
Number of cables included: 4
Number of gain positions: –
Fast charging: –
How premium the case feels: –
Bluetooth: YES
Apt-X: YES
Premium look and feel of the device: 7 / 10
Number of digital connections: 4
Number of analogue connections: 3
Power adapter included: YES
Balanced output: –
WiFi: –
Dual DAC setup: –
Premium DAC chip(s) used: YES
Plays DSD: YES
Plays 32-bit: YES
Wireless connection quality: 9 / 10

Final Rating: 8.9

Check Samma3a Amps and DACs Shop for all options.