Review and Measurements of Schiit Yggdrasil V2 DAC

[Alcophone]

The owner has bought a $2,500 DAC. Why do you think he would be anxious to think that a $400 DAC would be better?

Well, I'm doubly biased. Exactly as you stated above, but the thing is I also want a good DAC in my speaker system at home. And the DX7s works with a remote, and is tiny, and doubles as a preamp. It would have been awesome to be able to sell the Yggy and buy two DX7s for the price and still have change left, while improving on the sound. Alas, as hard as I tried, that's not what happened for me.

 

[Alcophone]

"I don't think this going anywhere, though. So this will be my last post on the subject. I hope you find a way to move on."

On the subject of Amir's and Schiit's measurements.

 

[Grave]

What is the crosstalk of the DX7s? I am sure it is inaudible.

So more distortion sounds better, more natural. This is nonsensical.

If you want to prove something in a blind test, it would have to be 5/5 or 10/10 or similar. >95% confidence. Even if you did this it would not mean that the specific difference that you think you hear exists, but that some difference exists.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I don't disagree with the big con of subjective listening is bias and poor recollection. I'm not sold on level matched testing as being the true arbiter of sound quality.

So what method of testing would you propose?

 

[Alcophone]

So more distortion sounds better, more natural. This is nonsensical.

I'm not sure why you're so hung up on the distortion. If you take a piece of fruit A and B, and A has 20% more salt, and I like A better, it must be because of the salt, right? Well, maybe you should have measured the sugar as well, cause B has twice the sugar of A. Oops!
Yes, I don't know what else exactly needs to be measured to truly have enough measurements, but I don't see a clear connection between distortion and naturalness or sound stage. Do you?

If you want to prove something in a blind test, it would have to be 5/5 or 10/10 or similar. >95% confidence. Even if you did this it would not mean that the specific difference you think you hear exists, but that some difference exists.

Right, I'm shooting for twenty. Would be easier with a nifty little blind A/B switching tool instead of pesky humans.

 

[March Audio]

As for bias, I still don't see how one could be biased.
.

That is a massive error in your understanding in that case

 

[Alcophone]

BTW, @amirm, I appreciate you not outright banning me here. Guess this ain't like... certain other places.

 

[tranq]

https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/673awsi/index.html

Interesting article regarding distortion. Granted its from the 70's. DACs probably hadn't been produced for hi fi use yet, but I found it interesting, if admittedly subjective.

 

[Grave]

I'm not sure why you're so hung up on the distortion. If you take a piece of fruit A and B, and A has 20% more salt, and I like A better, it must be because of the salt, right? Well, maybe you should have measured the sugar as well, cause B has twice the sugar of A. Oops!
Yes, I don't know what else exactly needs to be measured to truly have enough measurements, but I don't see a clear connection between distortion and naturalness or sound stage. Do you?


Right, I'm shooting for twenty. Would be easier with a nifty little blind A/B switching tool instead of pesky humans.

OK, so learn about measurements. You said that the distortion makes the Schiit DAC sound more natural.

I am going to quote NwAvGuy because I like him.

"TRANSPARENCY GUIDELINES: The What We Hear article offers information and references outlining guidelines as to what’s required for a piece of audio gear to genuinely disappear from the signal path and not alter the sound in any audible way. Here are what I believe to be relatively conservative criteria for audible transparency and the ODAC passes all of them:

• Frequency Response 20hz – 19 Khz within +/- 0.1 dB (Most DACs, due to the Nyquist limit of 22 Khz, start to roll off past 19 Khz when operating at 44 Khz sampling rate—the ODAC is down about 0.4 dB at 20 Khz). The widely accepted, but less conservative standard is +/- 0.5 dB (1 dB total variation) from 20 hz to 20 Khz.
• All Harmonic, IMD, Alias, Modulation, & Crosstalk Components Below –90 dBFS and total sum below –80 dBFS (0.01%)
• All Noise Components below –110 dB and total sum below –100 dBFS
• All Jitter Components below –110 dB and total sum below -100 dBFS"

The Schiit DAC actually fails this criteria.

 

[Liberal Democracy]

Well not trying to be purposely obtuse here, but use the one that works for you because at the end of the day, you're the one that lives with your decision.
As for scientific testing for audible descriptions of sound quality in a way that would be valid and repeatable for more than one person, I got no clue.

You can do whatever makes you happy mate just please stop coming here dragging threads down with the same tired arguments.

If you have something substantial to contribute please feel free but enough with the subjectivist antagonisms.

 

[amirm]

BTW, @amirm, I appreciate you not outright banning me here. Guess this ain't like... certain other places.

You have done nothing at all to cause me to ban you. The thought has not even occured to me.

 

[Blumlein 88]

https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/673awsi/index.html

Interesting article regarding distortion. Granted its from the 70's. DACs probably hadn't been produced for hi fi use yet, but I found it interesting, if admittedly subjective.

https://thecarversite.com/index.php?/topic/3580-amplifier-distortion-bob-carver-1973/

You can read the Bob Carver Stereo Review article Holt is referring to at the above link.

Interesting too that a few years later Mr. Carver would completely convince Mr. Holt that he could make his ss amps sound like the expensive Conrad_Johnson tube amp they considered a reference.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/carver-challenge

 

[Alcophone]

OK, so learn about measurements. You said that the distortion makes the Schiit DAC sound more natural.

I did not. I said the Yggy sounds more "meaty", which I could imagine being the result of distortion.

The Yggy also sounds more natural to me, but I suspect the filter to be responsible for that. Or maybe the multibit approach, though I expected to find evidence for that in the form of smoother wave forms, yet I have not seen that.

 

[derp1n]

though I expected to find evidence for that in the form of smoother wave forms, yet I have not seen that.

Smoother wave forms? Can you expand on this a bit please?

 

[Alcophone]

Smoother wave forms? Can you expand on this a bit please?

Sure! This article influenced me there: http://www.mother-of-tone.com/conversion.htm
Seems to be a bit exaggerated to me now.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Sure! This article influenced me there: http://www.mother-of-tone.com/conversion.htm
Seems to be a bit exaggerated to me now.

Yes, exaggerated misdirection.

Have you seen the infamous video, Digital Show and Tell by Monty Montgomery?

Those all analog HP high precision analyzers sure do seem to find the digital wave plenty smooth.

 

[amirm]

Sure! This article influenced me there: http://www.mother-of-tone.com/conversion.htm
Seems to be a bit exaggerated to me now.

Wonder how the poor people who listen to SACD think it is music if this guy is right:

Hint: that is not what you hear out of the DAC when you play SACD.

Some concepts in audio are simple. Some others are not. Audiophiles like him should not attempt to reason through signal processing using lay logic. It only leads them astray. His write-up is a clear example of this.

 

[derp1n]

It's hard to tell if that site is dishonest or stupid, but it is certainly wrong. No surprise that the author sells an R2R DAC and more dubious audiophile bait like several 1200€ jitter "fixing" devices.

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

I think we may be overthinking things here....

you think???

 

[Liberal Democracy]

You have done nothing at all to cause me to ban you. The thought has not even occured to me.

But what about the attack drones you told me to dispatch...