Schiit Bifrost DAC - My Break-In Diary

Rather than continuing my posts on the main current forum thread on Schiit's new Bifrost DAC (http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=255489), I thought it would be better to start my own to document how its sound evolves during its "break-in" period. However if mods think it's more appropriate to keep the threads as one then feel free to merge this thread with the former.

My previous two posts (http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=7638487&postcount=154 and http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=7664003&postcount=180) describe my experiences with a Bifrost demo unit I was kindly given on trial for a fortnight. To recap:

The demo unit has since been returned and my new Bifrost arrived yesterday. My next post will describe how the new unit sounds straight out-of-the-box compared to the demo unit, and my subsequent posts over the coming weeks/months will (hopefully) document how the sound evolves as the new unit breaks in.

For each diary entry, the equipment used to form the evaluation will remain as follows (unless otherwise stated):
iTunes -> Mac Mini -> toslink -> Schiit Bifrost -> Van Damme interconnects -> Yamaha CR-1000 -> Van Damme 2.5mm Studio Blue OFC -> Tannoy Edinburgh 3149 12” DC

 

1st Diary Entry - 0 to 10 hrs on Bifrost

1st Diary Entry - 0 to 10 hrs on Bifrost:

Significantly different tonal presentation to Bifrost demo unit, more like my former DAC (Pioneer PDR-555RW). Crisp edge to top end of cymbals and vocals (sssss sounds etc) that I like. Mids are recessed into soundstage, appearing and more distant and thinner. Vocals, piano/synth and guitar lack creamy warmth/bloom and do not ring and project into the listening space. Low end is present but seems constricted (and congested?) and one dimensional and does not breathe into the listening space. Overall the tonal presentation is sterile as if a slight “smiley” EQ curve has been applied, making mids thin and recessed especially in the 800Hz-1500Hz region. Top end appears more sizzly than the demo unit but very similar to PDR-555RW, which actually suits my playback equipment (which verges on the smooth side in terms of top end bite). Top end is possibly presenting this way because of the current apparent midrange “suck-out”, rather than the top end being exaggerated in its own right. Once the midrange opens out there should be better balance between mid and top end. Spatially, the stereo image lacks width and perhaps also separation compared to demo unit, and the soundstage is less enveloping and three-dimensional. Overall the sound of the new unit is much less organic and therefore far less captivating than the demo unit. (Note: Tannoy DC loudspeakers are known for their 1kHz-3kHz midrange colouration (accentuation), therefore on a pair of loudspeakers with a flatter/thinner mid response I’d predict that the midrange “suck-out” and subsequent sterile sound would be even more apparent).

 

Nice.

 

Give it time, I'm sure it will sound different. I'm a true believer in break-in time.

 

what is it that breaks in on a device with no moving parts? I am not trying to be a smarty pants, just curious.

 

The listeners brain.

Class A devices do sound better once they're warmed up though.

 

You don't need to have moving parts. Do your amps/speakers/pre-amp/cartridge/speaker cables..... still sound the same way as when out of the box? Have you not noticed any change in sound? I hear different charateristics after a certain break-in time.

 

Thanks for this thread. I enjoy that sizzling top-end myself....it's also a characteristic of their Valhalla tube amp. The Bifrost has a lovely texture to vocals, but I agree there is less air and stereo width than I'd like, and my Bifrost has about 300 hours of playlist burn time.

I'm starting to worry that I sold my Simaudio Moon 100 D too soon

But I love the looks and build quality of the Schiits, and wanted my DAC to match the Valhalla.

The Simaudio was an asynchronus upsampler which bothered me, but so far, I seem to have prefered the sound of the analog stage in the Moon. More wider imaging and more "air" and holography.

Wonder if it has to do with having a DC power brick rather than an internalized power supply.

 

Exactly...it's all in your mind... There is no way you can rely on audio memory to recall how a component ''sounded'', when you first bought it. The only way we can hear differences, is with split second comparisons. You would have to put a brand new component next to an older one, and do an A/B with a level matched switcher that will allow you to quickly switch between the components.

If one does that test and hears a difference, then I'll believe them...

 

This wasn't intended to start yet another debate on the existence/non-existence of break-in. Contrary to what might be inferred from my initial posts, I am open-minded / indifferent to the concept of break-in in general. I am simply documenting my experience with the Bifrost and in the process am hopefully providing useful feedback to others considering purchasing this particular DAC. I can't help but find it fascinating that some have such confidence in their views to dismiss others' findings straight-off, especially when they themselves have (presumably) not listened to the audio component in question. In hindsight I should have made the request "please no threadcraps" in my opening post, my bad....

 

Keep the impressions coming! This DAC seems to be a good value and I, for one, am curious about how it matures or settles into your system.

Enjoy the ride

 

Ok, I'll rephrase a bit. I don't mean to say it's all in your mind - I don't mean to discount your credibility, or anything like that. What I meant was, in a lot of instances, the break in period is one's brain/senses, etc. getting used to the new sound.

In this specific instance, I don't want to state that the *****t Bifrost DAC doesn't break in. Like you said, I haven't heard the DAC during any point of the time that you've owned it.

This isn't about whether I think break-in exists. It's about conducting the listening process in a way that allows us to verify this change accurately. Actually, I find it fascinating that some have such a confidence in their views, when they're relying on something that is so undependable, as their sensory memory. Like I said - the only way to discern between components, is with no time gap between them, so our little brains can hear the differences...

That's just the way we were designed...

 

I've owned a Schiit Bifrost for about a month now, and the burn-in on this unit is ridiculous. Honestly, you wouldn't have been able to find a bigger skeptic of the burn-in process than me before I heard what happened with the Bifrost. I was so disappointed with the sound out of the box that I was planning to return it. It was shrill, lacked any meat to the bass (although the notes were well defined), and sounded really claustrophobic. I much preferred my HRT MSII at that point. It just didn't sound good at all.

Anyway, long story short (since I've already posted all this in the other BiFrost thread), the burn-in on this dac was mindblowing. I can honestly say, there is no possibility that it was merely my mind becoming accustomed to the sound. My observations track exactly with Puma Cat's time with the Bifrost.

The BiFrost at this point in time is the best audio purchase I've ever made. Two big thumbs up from me. If anyone decides to purchase one, I'd recommend not doing any critical listening for at least 150 hours. Even at 250 hours the sound was still maturiing.

Anyway, thanks for posting the diary, will be interesting to see how your results track.

 

My observations as well.

There is a measurable sonic evolution with this unit.

 

As mentioned earlier, it's much easier when you can compare a fresh one out of the box with a unit that's racked up hours.

I find when I don't have that option in a review situation, it does help to start the day with the same handful of tracks. But I can't say that I've seen massive changes in units not possessing large film capacitors under the hood. Most gear tends to change more in the first 72 hours than elsewhere and I suspect that's more from being powered up continually and fully stabilizing from an electrical and thermal standpoint.

 

What I don't understand is why does burn-in result in a better sound? Seems like that is the rule. Wouldn't there be just as much of a chance of the sound changing to worse not better?

 

One would hope the designers were working with well worn in prototypes and have a good idea what it will sound like down the road.

 

No, it's not.

If someone said they can perceive that the sky is blue, someone here would say it's in their mind.

 

Yes, and my observations were all a figment of my imagination, apparently.

As well as f=ma and pv=Nrt.

 

Like the OP, I emailed my detailed chronology of the burn-in of Bifrost to Schiitt, and Jason Stoddard wrote me back that my chronology tracked their own exactly.

 

That could definitely explain break-in. Thanks.

 

I appreciate where you're coming from. I do agree on the value of true A/B 'switch-flick' tests conducted in real-time and I have often conducted these in the past when comparing two components. Unfortunately I wasn't able to test both Bifrost units in this way, as the demo unit was returned at the same time that the new unit arrived. However, it was only a few hours at most between my last listening session with the demo unit and my first listening session with the new unit, and the sound of the demo unit was still very much fresh in my ears/mind.

As PoeRaider and Puma Cat have stated, and I have since found, there is a HUGE difference in sound between a new-out-of-the-box Bifrost and one that has been run-in for a significant time period. In fact I was genuinely amazed by the audibility of the difference, which was many orders of magnitude greater than the differences I have heard when comparing, for example, two different amplifiers. In fact the difference was so obvious I would liken it demo'ing two different pairs of loudspeakers!

I will admit however that today when writing the next entry in my break-in diary, I found the evaluation more difficult than when I wrote my first entry. This is presumably due the combination of: a) my memory of the sound of the demo unit starting to fade; and b) my ears starting to adjust to the sound of the new unit. However I still feel confident enough in my ability to discern the changes, and I have taken the following steps to minimise the risk of my judgement being impaired:

1) I only listen to the DAC for max 1 hour at a time, to minimise the degree by which my ears become accustomed to the new sound.
2) I only listen to the DAC at 50 hr intervals, to increase the degree of change in sound I experience from one listen to the next (e.g. it's easier to see the sun move across the sky if you observe it at intervals, it's much harder if you try to watch it continuously!)
3) I listen at the same time of the day and to the same specific recordings to which I am very familiar with, and volumes are always matched from one session to the next.

 

There are far too many human variables involved as regards perceived changes in sound of the exact same setup over a period of time. Our own hearing changes signifcantly from day to day with threshold changes across the crucial audio band varying by as much as 15 - 20 dBHL from 0dBHL. Add to that different food additives, the ototoxic effects of everyday drugs, mood, state of tiredness, etc, etc and it is very difficult to make creditable cases for burn in.

Then there are environmental factors which effect sound itself, changes in the listening room from day to day, ambient noise, weather conditions, etc.

I am not saying break in does not exist - I believe it does exist to some extent. It is not a valid test to compare two components of the same type as a way of determing changes in sound with burn in, as production variables between the two samples could be responsible for the differences.

My advice to anyone trying to determine the effects or otherwise of burn in is to make a high quality high resolution digtal recording from the output of the device in question at 50 hours of use intervals. Then the resulting files should be double blind tested against each other. This way, not only can burn in be valided or not, but any changes are much more easily quantified.

I have done many such experiments before and I must say that apart from phono cartridges, changes due to burn in are extremely subtle indeed and certainly no where near the sorts of significant changes I often read about. Additionally, it is my experience that virtually nothing at all changes aftrr the first 24 hours of use and that any changes heard after that are almost certainly state of mind changes on the part of the owner.

 

Toto Man - My question to you now is- how do you compare the Bifrost to the Moon DAC?