Dedicated Schiit Yggdrasil thread

Feel free to have you own opinion about 13bit linearity, crossover distortion, aliasing, etc. this DAC produces. Personally I'm not impressed.

 

The first release initially reviewed in Stereophile. Noise floor measured bad if I recall. Excuses made. Then the next software fixed it. Sounded better and measured well. PP came after.

 

Wouldn't hurt if you could complete your system profile.

 

Have you heard it before?

 

So your animosity is directed at ladder DACs in general or the Yggdrasil specifically?

 

Ted Smith's design is somewhat controversial. I've heard Pike's Peak and was impressed. But this thread is about the Yggy.

 

Gloomrider, it's not so much animosity on my part, as simply my opinion about the measurements of the DAC. R2R DACs are often hyped as cure-all solutions and absolute perfection. But it turns out that all DAC architectures (and their implementations) have their pros and cons.

 

You're pretty well known over at Computer Audiophile and from what I've seen, positive comments in general are not your forte.

Have you actually looked for Yggdrasil measurements that were made after the recommended warm up period (~160 hours), or are you happy to point to data that was gathered after only 1-3 hours? And do you think data gathered prior to the recommended warm up period is apropos to the discussion?

 

Did you happen to disagree with any of my comments at CA? If so, by all means, feel free to pipe up and correct me.

Have such measurements been made?

 

I understand exactly which component that this thread is about. I brought up the DirectStream as an example where measurements were disappointing in one regard or another, dismissed by the manufacturer, but then subsequently corrected. I'm not suggesting the Yggy suffers from any design concerns, but if no one raises questions then that's a problem for all of us. Surely, Schiit will be on top of any bad info or will otherwise address valid concerns should those arise.

Meantime, are you enjoying the sound? Are you playing it 24/7 for a couple weeks straight? My line level pre has a headphone amp, so that's what I used when I broke in the DAC section of my SACD player.

 

What is your reference DAC these days?

 

Relevance?
If you're asking if any DAC can deliver better than 13bit THD, then just look at Mola Mola DAC for example, which has THD at -150dB.

 

Can someone please explain what "13 bit" means with respect to THD+N? I thought it was measured in dB, but I'm no expert.

 

13bit = 78dB

 

Have you bothered to read the thread where the measurements are posted? You'd have your answer.
There are reserved posts in the thread to post the measurements after warmup and when he has time to do the measurements.

 

Trolling is trolling. Especially when you're intentionally pointing to bogus data. How long have you owned the Mola Mola DAC and how much did you pay for it?

 

I'm confused. I've read that thread multiple times, and I don't see anything about 13 bit or 78 dB discussed anywhere. Are these numbers being discussed accurately here, and could someone please explain their significance? Preferably someone without an apparent agenda.

 

Trolling? Bogus data? I didn't make those measurements. If you question the integrity of the data, or think the person who made the measurements has some hidden agenda, then please direct these concerns to the author of the measurements.

 

The THD+N is measured at 0.01169% (or -78dB in dB) and presented on one of the graphs. Ditto for crossover distortion, it's there on another graph.

 

Yes, I saw that. It's a number that strikes me as very low, compared to other equipment I've seen. What I don't understand is how we get from 0.01169% to 13 bits = 78 dB, and whether that is good or bad. I can read the chart, but apparently not interpret it as you have. Perhaps you could fill in the details?

 

Please see the link below for an explanation:
http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-thd.htm

 

Thanks, that helps. So it looks like the Yggdrasil has good numbers, if not theoretically best, on THD+N.

 

Just thought I'd check in with a sound quality report. I crossed the 80 hour mark yesterday. The first thing that really jumps out is vocals. There is a "natural" quality to vocals I've never heard with Redbook files on other DACs. Most original issue CDs in my collection now sound impressive. Perhaps I'm now hearing what they heard with pro equipment in the 80s when they mastered those? Not sure. An example: Adele Bertei's vocals on the original issue of Thomas Dolby's Hyperactive! are no longer metallic sounding. It sounds like vocals instead of metallic ear torture. The other thing that I've really noticed is that classical piano sounds more "woody" and less "glassy".

More feedback when Yggy hits 160 hours.

 

We can ask Steve, but I don't believe that there was any DAC anywhere on the planet in the 80s or 90s which can do what today's best can. The mastering engineer can do the best A/D for the time using the best playback, but that doesn't keep us from hearing the D/A better and better. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of the better modern mastering work on 60s-80s recordings will sound even more dramatically better than original mastering work. Of course, much depends on what the speakers are capable of resolving.

 

My point is that the sound quality of many original issue CDs in my collection is mediocre at best. The Yggy makes them enjoyable to listen to. So maybe the record companies did not willfully flood the market with poor quality digital masters after all.

In my case, the same speakers/headphones were/are used before/after the Yggy replaced the Gungnir.

I really need to wait until Friday evening (the 170 hour mark) before doing any real critical listening.