• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Measurements and Review of Schiit Yggdrasil DAC

Status
Not open for further replies.

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
2,375
Likes
1,253
Listening observations usually won't be proven or dis-proven via computer testing.
Listening impressions can only be substantiated using bias controlled blind listening tests.
Any impressions made under sighted conditions have no validity, the human brain is way too easily fooled by expectations and all the rest.

@Sal1950 , you wrote:

«Any impressions made under sighted conditions have no validity, the human brain is way too easily fooled by expectations and all the rest».

This is illustrated by the McGurk effect:


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGurk_effect

It’s not entirely the same, but shows the capacity and incapacity of our senses.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,737
Likes
241,877
Location
Seattle Area
Quick question re: that graph. Is the reference for the Analog board measurements 0 or -.5 dB's (i.e. is the delta -1 dB or -.5 dB)?
Good catch! I kept reading it as 1 dB error but it is 0.5 dB of error. I will correct the review. :)
 

L0rdGwyn

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2018
Messages
295
Likes
676
If the tests do not show any difference between cold and warm yggdrasil, then I'll know computer testing in general is somehow flawed.

I think this line of thinking is exactly what this forum is trying to avoid. You have omitted one possible, and very likely, conclusion. Perhaps it is your ears that are flawed, not the computer testing? I am no expert, others here can speak to the subjects better than I, but I would encourage you to read into expectation bias and the capacity of echoic memory. Research has estimated the duration of time that large amounts of auditory information can be stored by your brain is less than 4 seconds!
 
Last edited:

sonci

Active Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
233
Likes
112
I'm seriously considering a Schitt Dac.
It seems to be the only dac that measures differently, maybe more close to vinyl, maybe more musical, maybe it doesn't have that analytical sound that plague digital devices?
I really prefer my turntable to any Dac..
 

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,260
Likes
16,306
Location
uk, taunton
I'm seriously considering a Schitt Dac.
It seems to be the only dac that measures differently, maybe more close to vinyl, maybe more musical, maybe it doesn't have that accurate sound that plague digital devices?
I really prefer my turntable to any Dac..
Fify :D
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,205
Likes
12,524
Location
London
I'm seriously considering a Schitt Dac.
It seems to be the only dac that measures differently, maybe more close to vinyl, maybe more musical, maybe it doesn't have that analytical sound that plague digital devices?
I really prefer my turntable to any Dac..
Schmitt do offer quite a wide range for the analogue enthusiast, it might be quite a job deciding which one is most analogue sounding.
Let us know how you get on.
Keith
 

Jerry Sobel

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 15, 2018
Messages
122
Likes
88
It should be if it is not indicative of other problems in the DAC. Getting that slope to match may be tricky though but maybe not critical.
My dsp is a MiniDSP DDRC-88A which is an 8 channel unit. I run both balanced inputs and outputs. When I look at my Dirac Live EQ files the amount of room mode issues as expected in the low frequencies is so much greater than the 1 db or now 0.5 db difference. I looked at the balanced outputs are a straight line.

The thing about the Yggdrasil DAC that I own that bugs me is that it struggles with 16 bit resolution and one of their bug bullet points in the marketing is that their DAC gives a real 20 bit resolution unlike "all of the other DACs out there."

In reference to a recent post about the Schiit being more analog sounding. I have a few nice vinyl set up as well a tube DAC and I can tell you straight up that the Yggdrasil does not sound more analog. I have had it on and playing music now for 1,008, wait....1,009 hours so far.
 

sonci99

Active Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2018
Messages
123
Likes
77
Com'on British amplifiers and speakers are not the most accurate, but still a lot of people prefer them to the neutral japanese..
I don't know how many of this dac designs are original, but a lot should be copycats. How difficult is to reverse engineering a Benchmark dac?
so, maybe the Schmitt guys use their ears in place of the instruments.
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,205
Likes
12,524
Location
London
They certainly aren’t using any instruments,
Keith
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,737
Likes
241,877
Location
Seattle Area
'm seriously considering a Schitt Dac.
It seems to be the only dac that measures differently, maybe more close to vinyl, maybe more musical, maybe it doesn't have that analytical sound that plague digital devices?
Nothing about distortions I see resemble what Vinyl does to music. Of course you can imagine it to be the case and it will become that. Until the effect wears off. :)
 

drconopoima

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
51
Likes
40
Nothing about distortions I see resemble what Vinyl does to music. Of course you can imagine it to be the case and it will become that. Until the effect wears off. :)
How do you recognize (i.e. look for) what vinyl does to music?
 

rebbiputzmaker

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
1,099
Likes
463
When I look at my Dirac Live EQ files the amount of room mode issues as expected in the low frequencies is so much greater than the 1 db or now 0.5 db difference. I looked at the balanced outputs are a straight line.

The thing about the Yggdrasil DAC that I own that bugs me is that it struggles with 16 bit resolution and one of their bug bullet points in the marketing is that their DAC gives a real 20 bit resolution unlike "all of the other DACs out there."

In reference to a recent post about the Schiit being more analog sounding. I have a few nice vinyl set up as well a tube DAC and I can tell you straight up that the Yggdrasil does not sound more analog. I have had it on and playing music now for 1,008, wait....1,009 hours so far.
Are you saying your bass roll off is due to the dac? I would not think so. What is your system, speakers etc? What makes you think your dac has only 16bits of resolution? When you say more analog, compared to what? What does "more" mean to you? What is you other equipment? What music are you using for comparisons?
 

rebbiputzmaker

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
1,099
Likes
463
They certainly aren’t using any instruments,
Keith
The gallery comments are rather funny. The other day we were talking about classic dacs from the past and how sought after some were. How the Berkley has stood the test of time and still sounds good. Mike Moffat is the pretty much the first designer of the stand alone dac, and some of his designs are sought after and still recognized as excellent sounding. You really can't have it both ways. If you can talk about sound quality of classic equipment it would only be fair listen to current equipment and factor that in to get a total assessment.
 

Fitzcaraldo215

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2016
Messages
1,440
Likes
634
I think this line of thinking is exactly what this forum is trying to avoid. You have omitted one possible, and very likely, conclusion. Perhaps it is your ears that are flawed, not the computer testing? I am no expert, others here can speak to the subjects better than I, but I would encourage you to read into expectation bias and the capacity of echoic memory. Research has estimated the duration of time that large amounts of auditory information can be stored by your brain is less than 4 seconds!
Well stated.

Why is it that some audiophiles believe their hearing perception is somehow so absolute, perfect and unvarying, such that even small differences between the sound now vs. days ago, even minutes or hours ago, is detectable?

Obviously, they have been brainwashed by many audiophile writers, even some very famous ones, who have done this with impunity for decades, even comparing in detail the sound of current equipment to stuff that was shipped back to the manufacturer years ago, all in paragraphs of glorious, descriptive, microanalytical prose.

They are also able to do this via the magic of ex-post-facto comparative level matching, somehow or other. How could that possibly be important or even relevant? What a special gift these guys have, in that they are able to adjust sounds heard in the, even distant past, to the precise level of sounds heard now or vice versa, without benefit of cumbersome, confusing measurements. Awesome. Hey, they are the "experts", aren't they? And, they don't need no bloomin' measurements when they, at least, have far superior ears, as is well known.

The wannabe audiophile tribe fully accepts, then amplifies and adopts these attitudes and practices online repeatedly, so it must be the truth. Some may question that such simple Abso!lute truths are seldom to be seen in any area of human perception, least of all hearing. Rubbish! It is not the ears or empirical science about the perceptual hearing mechanism that matters at all. The only things that matter are did I boogie to the music? How loudly did I tap my foot? How many things I had not heard before are now clearly audible? How big were the goosebumps I got when listening?
 

Dismayed

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
392
Likes
417
Location
Boston, MA
But dont you understand that even if this really is the case that it is simply indication of shit performance? Who wants a DAC thats thermally unstable? Who wants a DAC that doesnt perform properly for 3 days? What a load of rubbish the design is in that case.

So do you really expect us to take your sighted uncontrolled subjective opinion as an indication that the measurements are flawed? Really? BTW I think you'll find Amir has done this thing and the measurements problems found with the dac dont change over time.

This Schitt debacle is honestly pure comedy. I guess most of it comes from people being invested in the products they have bought and really, well feeling a bit foolish for getting it wrong.

Good luck arguing with 'true believers'.
 

Dismayed

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
392
Likes
417
Location
Boston, MA
I'm not saying his measurements are flawed. I'm saying you can hear a difference between a yggdrasil that's warm and cold, and if a computer is unable to see the difference then perhaps computer testing is flawed or maybe not capable of reading what a human ear can hear.

I'm not a schiit fan boy but I do happen to own the yggdrasil and wanted to share the sound differences I can hear when it's warm or cold.

I also agree with you about warmup time. It sucks and I wish it didn't exist in a product that's this expensive.

I also believe Amir when he says the power supply is noisy. Plugging the yggdrasil into a power conditioner makes a pretty major difference in sound quality, which lead me to believe the power supply was lacking.

It's likely that you adjust to Schitty sound after a few days.
 

maul

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2017
Messages
15
Likes
29
I thought some of you might be interested in Mike Moffat's, ahem, "colorful" response to some of these issues back in 2016 (in a now deleted thread interestingly enough):
baldr said:
Please excuse my delay in addressing Peter and his minion Mani's criticism of my design choices and philosophy with respect to the Yggy. At the time they initially went off, I was in a pre hospitalization mode where I could barely walk. I then went in for some fairly major neck rebuild surgery and just now can function well – much better! I am still wearing a medieval torture device neck collar which prevents me from looking down, and for that reason may leave some typos in this missive. So now that I am healthy, please allow this retort:

1. Audio vs. Industrial DACs. Forty years ago, I designed and built the first no feedback, passive RIAA equalized, and 6DJ8 exclusively tubed audio preamplifier. At the time, the audio tubes in use were the 12A_7 family which indeed were designed to be for audio use. They were proper and inexpensive enough to be designed into the cheapest of phonographs. Although embarrassingly cheap, they were used in the finest preamps of the late first tube era, MacIntosh and Marantz. The 6DJ8 was a lower noise, far more inherently linear, and much wider audio through RF bandwidth device. Those capable of qualitative differentiation realized that the 12A_7 was a subset of the 6DJ8 – the latter featured much lower noise and much better distortion as a bonus. A total freebie was the much wider bandwidth which enabled much higher slewing rates. At the time, I was savaged by an engineering troglodyte of the day who called me out for not using audio parts and high amounts of feedback. Well, here we are 40 years later as the second tube era enters maturity. It seems the 6DJ8/6922/etc tube family has been well established – screw all of you Luddites.

Fast forward to today. We have audio DACs (largely used by engineering insophisticates or troglodytes). We also have industrial DACs which are faster, and far more accurate. Accurate you say? You bet. There are two specs that inexpensively designed audio DACs leave unspecified. DNL and INL. I don't want to turn this into a tech wiki, but those specs are less than 1LSB on both the AD5791/81. DACs unspecified thusly are prone to errors much higher than -110 db, possibly as high as -6db according to which code is problematical. This is why cheaply designed audio DACs are totally unsuited for weapons (missile can hit the orphanage instead of the real target) or medical imaging (Doc is going to think cancer is metastasized when it isn't or in the wrong place). Industrial DACs are just like 6DJ8s – you get more good stuff. THERE IS NO INHERENT ADVANTAGE IN USING AN AUDIO DAC FOR AUDIO EXCEPT COST – PERIOD. Again, I am savaged by trogs and Luddies on using industrial DACs for all of the wrong reasons – see immediately below.

2. The alleged Yggy AD5791 glitch problem. The shill Mani has pointed out this “massive” glitch with the approval of his tech guru Peter. A number of posters have become fully erect and piled on to the incorrect notion that the AD5791 has a glitching problem. This incorrect magnitude characterization (massive) is so widespread, it has even been used by the forum moderator. It is unfortunate that those accusations are not only based in bullschiit, but the accusers are so lame they are not even aware they are wrong.

The glitch referred to on the AD5791 data sheet occurs once per conversion – that's once every 2.5 to 2.8 microseconds or so. The glitch displayed graphically by Peter/Mani occurs every 500 microseconds. It seems these geniuses have not enough fingers and toes to count. Either that or they really cannot read sophisticated DAC data sheets.

The glitch pointed out (and agreed to by me as glitch before my surgery) is DAC glitch proper to multibit DACs driven by 2s compliment math at zero crossings, already pointed out by one poster, but ignored by many on this thread in their haste to condemn the DAC. This glitch worsens with lowering decoded output on any DAC.

The rest of the world deals with this zero crossing phenomenon is by adding dither, which is random noise just above the level of the glitch. This can either be done on purpose digitally or accidentally with an overly noisy analog section. Mani's claim that he can hear the glitch but that he does not hear the stuck toilet noise or dither at nearly the same level visible in the plot on his reference DAC tells me he is tossing himself off.
It is ordinary to employ dither. For the record, there is no dither employed in the Yggy. Then again, the Yggy in not an ordinary DAC. As of yet, I am not convinced that dither is the best to do. That is why the zero crossing is so obvious. If this changes, it is a trivial software upgrade.

I'm done. Perhaps my accusers may study 2s compliment math, dither, and R2R zero crossing glitches, and sophisticated DACs in particular before they jump on me again.

Interesting behavior and language for a person in his position. His response recently on Head-fi is more toned down, but definitely still convey that he seems to take objective measurements that show issues with his products as personal attacks. More responses, and refutations, to his statement here (WayBack Machine): https://web.archive.org/web/2016101...alogue-converter-available-24351/index60.html (Jason also chimes in, Usernames... Mike:"baldr" Jason:"schiit")
 

rebbiputzmaker

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
1,099
Likes
463
Sounds
I thought some of you might be interested in Mike Moffat's, ahem, "colorful" response to some of these issues back in 2016 (in a now deleted thread interestingly enough):


Interesting behavior and language for a person in his position. His response recently on Head-fi is more toned down, but definitely still convey that he seems to take objective measurements that show issues with his products as personal attacks. More responses, and refutations, to his statement here (WayBack Machine): https://web.archive.org/web/2016101...alogue-converter-available-24351/index60.html (Jason also chimes in, Usernames... Mike:"baldr" Jason:"schiit")
Sounds about right to me. Actually owned the preamp, and the comment regarding 6DJ8s was correct. Maybe he knows something?
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,225
Likes
16,991
Location
Central Fl
I'm seriously considering a Schitt Dac.
It seems to be the only dac that measures differently, maybe more close to vinyl, maybe more musical, maybe it doesn't have that analytical sound that plague digital devices?
I really prefer my turntable to any Dac..
Yep, you got it going there. Your on the correct path to assembling a true High Fidelity system.
This whole digital thing has been an enormous waste of time & money.
100 % analog, that's the ticket.
 

Dismayed

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
392
Likes
417
Location
Boston, MA
I'm seriously considering a Schitt Dac.
It seems to be the only dac that measures differently, maybe more close to vinyl, maybe more musical, maybe it doesn't have that analytical sound that plague digital devices?
I really prefer my turntable to any Dac..

I found that I can get close to the sound of my old Schiit DAC by playing music through my new Teac DAC and listening with cotton stuffed in my ears. I still haven't figured out how to generate the distortion that I heard when saving files and playing music, though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom