-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.
Review and Measurements of Schiit Yggdrasil V2 DAC
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
You take offence at a perceived personal insult, and then follow directly on with one of your own.
The point being made is you haven't done a controlled listening test. Without one you won't be taken seriously, the more paragraphs of not so thinly veiled insults the less you will be taken seriously.
Go away and do the ears only tests, if you find something that contradicts the science / measurements we will be fascinated.
The point being made is you haven't done a controlled listening test. Without one you won't be taken seriously, the more paragraphs of not so thinly veiled insults the less you will be taken seriously.
Go away and do the ears only tests, if you find something that contradicts the science / measurements we will be fascinated.
First of all, thanks for the paragraphs!
Correct. Nothing personal. Where did I attack you? Not smarter, just more complete information. 2+2=5 isn't an alternative point of view, and if someone really believed it, that wouldn't make it more valid.
It was a generic representation of how it tends to go. Folks make claims that are questioned, folks get upset and double down on claims, more questions come, butthurt sets in, then it turns into a bunch of straw man arguments, attacks, and becomes less than productive. At some point, claims need to be backed up with more than 'yeah me too.'.
No, I got that.
And here we have the strawman...
To summarize, without listening controls, results and conclusions are going to be unreliable. That's true for every human on the planet, other than possibly Chuck Norris.
Oh look... Another strawman. Amir outlined how you can easily do a basic test at home. It isn't hard.
Correct. Nothing personal. Where did I attack you? Not smarter, just more complete information. 2+2=5 isn't an alternative point of view, and if someone really believed it, that wouldn't make it more valid.
It was a generic representation of how it tends to go. Folks make claims that are questioned, folks get upset and double down on claims, more questions come, butthurt sets in, then it turns into a bunch of straw man arguments, attacks, and becomes less than productive. At some point, claims need to be backed up with more than 'yeah me too.'.
No, I got that.
And here we have the strawman...
To summarize, without listening controls, results and conclusions are going to be unreliable. That's true for every human on the planet, other than possibly Chuck Norris.
Oh look... Another strawman. Amir outlined how you can easily do a basic test at home. It isn't hard.
Have you ever switched a pre amp from active to passive or vice versa while music was playing? Did it sound different? Not simply a change in the volume but was there even a slight change in the sound of the music itself? How about switching from a tube amp to solid state? Without controls you didn't hear anything different. Say that to yourself in the mirror, slowly, until it sinks in.
If you or anyone else says the signal sounded ANY different, even slightly, when switching from passive to active, make sure you remind yourself about basic controls. What about all those active circuits coming into the signal path with the flick of a switch? Nah, just an illusion without controls. There is truth to controls, but dismissing any perceived differences because of their absence is absurd. A 1964 Marantz Model 9 tube amp sounds the same as a AHB2? Yes, it's actually those skilled manipulators at Benchmark with their snake oil. Switch tubes in a pre amp? Why? Without Precision = TruePositives / (TruePositives + FalsePositives) you couldn't have possibly heard any difference and it's sacrilege to suggest otherwise.
OK, I'm having some fun with the absurdity of controls being an absolute but you get the idea. Interconnects, power conditioners, power cords, the CD Stoplight Pen, HDMI cables- are indistinguishable even with controls IMHO. People saying one digital transport will sound much better than a different model are high on bat guano. DACs are more similar than amps but less than transports. Look at the range in Amir's DAC and amp measurements, then look at digital transport measurements, if you can find any.
Imagine being told two different soups were indistinguishable because you held the spoon different. You'd be laughing... at 'science'
If you or anyone else says the signal sounded ANY different, even slightly, when switching from passive to active, make sure you remind yourself about basic controls. What about all those active circuits coming into the signal path with the flick of a switch? Nah, just an illusion without controls. There is truth to controls, but dismissing any perceived differences because of their absence is absurd. A 1964 Marantz Model 9 tube amp sounds the same as a AHB2? Yes, it's actually those skilled manipulators at Benchmark with their snake oil. Switch tubes in a pre amp? Why? Without Precision = TruePositives / (TruePositives + FalsePositives) you couldn't have possibly heard any difference and it's sacrilege to suggest otherwise.
OK, I'm having some fun with the absurdity of controls being an absolute but you get the idea. Interconnects, power conditioners, power cords, the CD Stoplight Pen, HDMI cables- are indistinguishable even with controls IMHO. People saying one digital transport will sound much better than a different model are high on bat guano. DACs are more similar than amps but less than transports. Look at the range in Amir's DAC and amp measurements, then look at digital transport measurements, if you can find any.
Imagine being told two different soups were indistinguishable because you held the spoon different. You'd be laughing... at 'science'
Imagine being told they tasted different for the same reason. That's more what you are saying.
You're getting there. What do you say to those sincere folks that DO hear differences? Do you encourage them to maybe try a different way to compare? What about when they try to convince others that unless they buy that $10k/meter cable, they'll never know what they are missing? Maybe step in then, so others aren't unwittingly convinced to spend money that might go somewhere useful?
It's no different around here, and MY hope is not that you'll go away, but that you'll actually try what many of us suggest. Match the output levels. Compare without knowledge of which is playing, and see if it doesn't make the differences become much, much harder to identify, if they can be identified at all.
There isn't anything hiding in the measurements. While there could certainly be a valid (non-psychologically based) reason for what you hear, you won't really know unless you make it an ears only comparison.
You're getting there. What do you say to those sincere folks that DO hear differences? Do you encourage them to maybe try a different way to compare? What about when they try to convince others that unless they buy that $10k/meter cable, they'll never know what they are missing? Maybe step in then, so others aren't unwittingly convinced to spend money that might go somewhere useful?
It's no different around here, and MY hope is not that you'll go away, but that you'll actually try what many of us suggest. Match the output levels. Compare without knowledge of which is playing, and see if it doesn't make the differences become much, much harder to identify, if they can be identified at all.
There isn't anything hiding in the measurements. While there could certainly be a valid (non-psychologically based) reason for what you hear, you won't really know unless you make it an ears only comparison.
At least 5 posts of yours into this and all I can do is 
. It's not possible to say it any clearer than has been said before.
Your methodology for testing equipment is flawed if you want to determine if A is audibly different to B. Not flawed in the minds of the people who have responded to you, just plain flawed. No amount of shouting about how obvious some differences are will change that. Close your eyes, match the levels and have someone switch very quickly.
Never noticed you perceive the same song played on the same kit in the same room at the same volume differently? Some days it's enjoyable, some it's off, some it's magical?
Your ears aren't calibrated microphones and your brain isn't a pc. The only way to compensate for that is the testing methodology others have outlined for you.
Resistance is futile
. It's not possible to say it any clearer than has been said before. Your methodology for testing equipment is flawed if you want to determine if A is audibly different to B. Not flawed in the minds of the people who have responded to you, just plain flawed. No amount of shouting about how obvious some differences are will change that. Close your eyes, match the levels and have someone switch very quickly.
Never noticed you perceive the same song played on the same kit in the same room at the same volume differently? Some days it's enjoyable, some it's off, some it's magical?
Your ears aren't calibrated microphones and your brain isn't a pc. The only way to compensate for that is the testing methodology others have outlined for you.
Resistance is futile
I happen to have Schiit Saga V1 preamp that can switch both Tube and passive mode with a flick of a remote. Unfortunately, the volume with Tube mode ON is slightly louder than the passive mode which pretty much invalidate proper controls hence volume matched A/B won't be possible without varying the digital volume (software) control when tube mode is engaged. The change in sound of the music is due to increased overall volume itself and thus the A/B is considered uncontrolled. We can't really have a proper discussion here with your flawed methodology unless you conform to the rigorous quick switching double blind volume matched to 0.01 dB SPL difference A/B test and get 95% correct choice.
The only thing Amir shared that I didn't do was level match. The 2 DACs were in variable mode, the difference was present at all levels and I wasn't going to set buy and set up microphones and sound level meters to reaffirm what I already heard consistently in three weeks of A B switching. I wasn't even trying to establish if he D90 sounded different, that was obvious. for some reason you are spurred to action as this runs counter to you closely held beliefs. That's your problem not mine.
My goal was to find a combination of my aps, pre amps and speakers that mitigated the different lighter bass response of the D90. I couldn't get it done after weeks of trying and I liked the way the D90 sounded otherwise.
Declaring I can't hear a difference between the D90 and other DACs, pretty stark terms for sure, is condescending and arrogant. It seems odd for anyone to insert themselves as an arbiter into something that has already been ruled on long ago. Saying normal listening is of no value without controls is flat out BS. Sure, you aren't foolish enough to actually phrase it so boldly but it's still communicated in a pandering beta male kind of way. Weird behavior.
Paraphrasing an assertion isn't a straw man argument. You may not not have been the person making that actual claim but I don't really care. I don't use exact quotes for the same reason I don't wear an estrogen patch. Your tactic seems like it's to become so annoying that any reasonable person withdraws from the racoon vomit and 'shuts up', so... xoxo
My goal was to find a combination of my aps, pre amps and speakers that mitigated the different lighter bass response of the D90. I couldn't get it done after weeks of trying and I liked the way the D90 sounded otherwise.
Declaring I can't hear a difference between the D90 and other DACs, pretty stark terms for sure, is condescending and arrogant. It seems odd for anyone to insert themselves as an arbiter into something that has already been ruled on long ago. Saying normal listening is of no value without controls is flat out BS. Sure, you aren't foolish enough to actually phrase it so boldly but it's still communicated in a pandering beta male kind of way. Weird behavior.
Paraphrasing an assertion isn't a straw man argument. You may not not have been the person making that actual claim but I don't really care. I don't use exact quotes for the same reason I don't wear an estrogen patch. Your tactic seems like it's to become so annoying that any reasonable person withdraws from the racoon vomit and 'shuts up', so... xoxo
What people are suggesting here is more like this:
Two different soups. The only differences being visual appearance and some ingredients that neither your taste buds nor your sense of smell are able to detect. When you taste the soups, the visual appearance and the knowledge of the ingredients being different makes you believe that you are experiencing a difference in taste. Now you put on a blindfold and taste again. The difference is gone. They actually taste the same.
Two different soups. The only differences being visual appearance and some ingredients that neither your taste buds nor your sense of smell are able to detect. When you taste the soups, the visual appearance and the knowledge of the ingredients being different makes you believe that you are experiencing a difference in taste. Now you put on a blindfold and taste again. The difference is gone. They actually taste the same.
At least 5 posts of yours into this and all I can do is . It's not possible to say it any clearer than has been said before.
Your methodology for testing equipment is flawed if you want to determine if A is audibly different to B. Not flawed in the minds of the people who have responded to you, just plain flawed. No amount of shouting about how obvious some differences are will change that. Close your eyes, match the levels and have someone switch very quickly.
Never noticed you perceive the same song played on the same kit in the same room at the same volume differently? Some days it's enjoyable, some it's off, some it's magical?
Your ears aren't calibrated microphones and your brain isn't a pc. The only way to compensate for that is the testing methodology others have outlined for you.
Resistance is futile
. It's not possible to say it any clearer than has been said before.Your methodology for testing equipment is flawed if you want to determine if A is audibly different to B. Not flawed in the minds of the people who have responded to you, just plain flawed. No amount of shouting about how obvious some differences are will change that. Close your eyes, match the levels and have someone switch very quickly.
Never noticed you perceive the same song played on the same kit in the same room at the same volume differently? Some days it's enjoyable, some it's off, some it's magical?
Your ears aren't calibrated microphones and your brain isn't a pc. The only way to compensate for that is the testing methodology others have outlined for you.
Resistance is futile
3 criteria
1. Level matched (you acknowledge this wasn't done)
2. You don't know which DUT is active in the chain (you've not said how you have achieved this, you originally outlined consecutive set ups, not concurrent). Even better, you dont even know which devices are being tested, but that's near as damn impossible for most of us
3. Flick of a switch change in DUT (not sure how you manage that in what you've outlined)
This is no 2 of 3 permutation makes any DAC comparison valid.
But let's go a different direction. Leaving aside output levels, what do you think makes a D90 sound different to any other DAC to your ears?
1. Level matched (you acknowledge this wasn't done)
2. You don't know which DUT is active in the chain (you've not said how you have achieved this, you originally outlined consecutive set ups, not concurrent). Even better, you dont even know which devices are being tested, but that's near as damn impossible for most of us
3. Flick of a switch change in DUT (not sure how you manage that in what you've outlined)
This is no 2 of 3 permutation makes any DAC comparison valid.
But let's go a different direction. Leaving aside output levels, what do you think makes a D90 sound different to any other DAC to your ears?
Don't worry. We are not trying to gang up on you or starting a pissing contest.
It's just that your claim about hearing differences in frequency response among DACs seems to contradict all other data points we have so far. You can't really blame us for insisting on eliminating as many elements of uncertainty as possible.
It's just that your claim about hearing differences in frequency response among DACs seems to contradict all other data points we have so far. You can't really blame us for insisting on eliminating as many elements of uncertainty as possible.
More like quite the opposite: you hear psychoacoustical/unicorn differences with sighted, without volume matching i.e. uncontrolled listening conditions due to our fallacy to always be subjected to psychoacoustics. Doesn't matter whether you want to like the new DAC or the other way around. I have owned 5 different DAC brands, 3 of them are standard delta sigma (AKM 4499, ESS 9218P, Cirrus Logic for Apple), one FPGA programmed delta sigma DAC (Chord Mojo) and one R2R on a chip (Schiit Bifrost 2). Under uncontrolled listening conditions, I can't help but notice sound difference between them, but when put to double blind volume matched A/B (thus eliminating all bias), all the unicorn things that I hear disappear and the truth that I cannot discern a difference is revealed. What you're experiencing is just psychoacoustical bias that's all.
You have to perform all that controlled double blind A/B volume matched to 0.01 dB SPL difference listening conditions and experience the cleanest/most unbiased listening session in your life, and with that your perception around this audio hobby will forever be changed.
You have to perform all that controlled double blind A/B volume matched to 0.01 dB SPL difference listening conditions and experience the cleanest/most unbiased listening session in your life, and with that your perception around this audio hobby will forever be changed.
Imagine not being able to taste the difference between red and white wine
https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/08/the_most_infamous_study_on_wine_tasting.html
In a sneaky study, Brochet dyed a white wine red and gave it to 54 oenology (wine science) students. The supposedly expert panel overwhelmingly described the beverage like they would a red wine. They were completely fooled.
https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/08/the_most_infamous_study_on_wine_tasting.html
In a sneaky study, Brochet dyed a white wine red and gave it to 54 oenology (wine science) students. The supposedly expert panel overwhelmingly described the beverage like they would a red wine. They were completely fooled.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Review and Measurements of Schiit Aegir PWR Amplifier | Stereo and Multichannel Amplifier Reviews | 174 | |
|
|
Review and Measurements of Schiit Valhalla 2 Headphone Amp | Headphone Amplifiers | 60 | |
|
|
Review and Measurements of Schiit Valhalla Amp | Headphone Amplifiers | 69 |
Similar threads
-
Review and Measurements of Schiit Aegir PWR Amplifier
- Started by amirm
- Replies: 174
-
Review and Measurements of Schiit Valhalla 2 Headphone Amp
- Started by amirm
- Replies: 60
-