Audiophilepure

https://www.headfonia.com/chord-hugo-vs-hugo-2-review/

“Yes, the Hugo 2 presents an analytical sound especially against its predecessor. But I don’t find it too analytical, at least not that much like the people say. To me it has great dynamism, very sharp separation and sublime transparency. But there’s a sense of musicality in it, and if you pair it with a warmer headphone/IEM, it is simply wonderful to listen to.

Overall, the Hugo 2 makes you think about the “taps” that Rob talks about. The more taps you have, the better sound you will hear. It has better bass decay, a blacker background, better imaging and better micro detail reproduction. The timbre is more realistic as well, which I put a lot of emphasis on because it’s one of the most important aspects.

But among all of those improvements, the most striking difference when I switch to Hugo 2 is the air. The original can’t give you that, as it’s made of romanticism and intimacy. It has that organic gene, which you can’t change or alter in any way. And that’s totally fine. You win some you lose some, it’s normal.”

http://www.hifiplus.com/articles/vitus-mp-201-masterpiece-da-converter/

” Yes, the Vitus MP-201 is a masterpiece product as the name states but it can only work within the limitations of the system it sits at the heart of and this means that its likely destinations are high-end systems, or in other words, expensive systems assembled by those fortunate enough to be able to afford them. You are going to need to make sure that every detail has been thought through. This means from the router onwards. You really need to give the conductor the right tools and there are no short cuts. I have heard so many systems that cost more than a house that failed to deliver anything other than a loud and rather tiring facsimile of music. Brimmed full of the most outrageous detail but totally lacking in soul or humanity. Digital-based music can still be like this. It has always been that way since Digital began to show its (then) ugly face to the world through recordings on vinyl. I read the reviews and rushed out and bought this early stuff and ended up hating it, for years in fact. Early CD too was shockingly bad. But, where we are now is light years away from those days. What hasn’t changed is that realising the potential out of any system includes the painstaking business of considering the infrastructure that surrounds the electronics themselves.”

https://www.innerfidelity.com/content/ifi-zendac-review

“While that might sound relatively modest compared to smaller desktop amps which now routinely offer several full watts of power, there’s been a bit of confusion about what exactly the result of that is. More power does not determine a system’s volume – that is in fact determined by gain. A lower powered amp will actually sound louder than a higher powered one if it has more gain at a given input. Power is more important in determining what the maximum current or voltage a device can swing into a transducer when hit with musical peaks as well as how loud waveforms are. So, think of power as being a rough indicator of how dynamic a system can be, and gain as determining its relative loudness when listening. I’m grossly oversimplifying and all the electrical engineers are squirming, but I think you get the point.”

https://hometheaterhifi.com/reviews/dac/auralic-vega-g1-streaming-dac-review/

“I like the sound quality of the UMC-200’s DAC, but subtle details are often lost in the music. I did not notice this so much over the years until I heard the DAC (DA1) in the McIntosh C49 that I reviewed earlier this summer. The PS Audio DirectStream DAC has a warmer, more analog sound. Any digital harshness seemed to melt away from the music. The sound stage was open and very 3D, both in width and depth. Its sound is no doubt flavored a bit by its conversion of all digital inputs to DSD. “