Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    Schiit Audio Yggdrasil Multibit DAC Review

    Late last night I was about to conduct a final listening session with the Schiit Audio Yggdrasil DAC. I planned to finish writing this review after listening to one, maybe two albums. After all, I really didn't need to listen to the DAC for another minute, let alone another couple of hours. I already spent quite a bit of time with the Yggdrasil, but I just had to give it one more listen. I turned out the lights and turned up the volume on a Constellation Audio preamplifier. A track or two into the first album and I knew my plan for the evening was moot. I was not going to be able to stop listening and start writing. The sound was so good and the experience so enveloping, that I couldn't stop listening until the cause of my head bobbing switched from incredible music to incredible sleepiness. Hours after the listening session began, I had to call it a night and get some rest. I was eager to write, but I was in no condition to concentrate and collect coherent thoughts. This is the kind of component the Yggdrasil is, one that can suck the listener in and alter one's plans for the evening. I've enjoyed the Yggdrasil so much since I took delivery of the unit that I can say it's unequivocally one of the best DACs at reproducing acoustic music I've ever heard. Of course this DAC is fabulous at amplified / electric music as well, but there is something about its ability to convey realism when reproducing acoustic instruments that is remarkably alluring. In my experience, sound quality of this caliber comes at a price that most of us simply can't afford. We read the reviews of ultra high-end products as aspirational buyers who may one day get lucky enough to find a gem on the used market for well below the original price. Many audio enthusiasts know what I'm about to say, but those who are unfamiliar with the Yggdrasil, and Schiit Audio in general, should stop skimming this review and pay close attention. The aforementioned sound quality of the Yggdrasil, Schiit Audio's top-of-the-line digital to analog converter, can be had for $2,299 USD. That's a new-in-box component with a fifteen day return policy and a five year warranty, for less than the cost of sales tax on many items in this wonderful yet sometimes crazy world of high end audio. Come along as I share my extraordinary experience with the Schiit Audio Yggdrasil digital to analog converter.

     

     

     

    Schiit Audio and DAC Topology

     

     

    Two audio industry veterans walk into a bar… No, two audio industry veterans get together to start a new company in June 2010. Just what every business analyst recommended, start an audio company focusing on sound quality and do it during the worst economic crisis since the great depression. What could go wrong? That's obviously a rhetorical question, but the facts are the facts. Schiit Audio was founded by Jason Stoddard and Mike Moffat in 2010. These guys created some terrific and groundbreaking products in their previous lives, and wanted to shake things up a bit in the HiFi industry. There's really no such thing as an overnight success, but it sure seemed like Schiit Audio hit the ground running with accolades from everywhere and a huge fanbase immediately, especially with the Head-Fi crowd. Propelling this success was the founders' willingness to speak their minds and do so in a lighthearted manner, yet still get the point across that their products were as serious as a heart attack. Good rapport between a manufacturer and potential customers only goes so far, the physical products are where the rubber meets the road. Release high quality and high value products, and enthusiastic customers will be the best marketing team for which a company could ever hope. That's exactly what Schiit Audio did, and people sang its praises in audio forums the world over.

     

    I was late to the Schiit Audio party compared to most audio enthusiasts. I heard about the company and saw its products, but for some reason I simply moved on to other things. That is, until the Yggdrasil DAC was announced, then the ball started rolling. I researched the Yggdrasil DAC and immediately emailed Jason at Schiit to obtain a review sample. Like most good companies, Jason told me to wait until the customers who'd pre-ordered the DAC received their units. I had no problem with that, other than my short patience. In August 2015 the opportunity arose for me to attend the inaugural Schiit Show in southern California. This was my first real opportunity to spend time listening to Schiit's products and equally as important to spend time talking with Schiit's digital wizard Mike Moffat. I spent a large amount of time, the evening before the show started, talking to Mike. The conversation started with a technical discussion of many concepts from USB audio to DAC topology. By the end of the night we were talking about everything with the exception of audio. Prior to the end of the Schiit Show I gently reminded the Schiit team that I was still waiting for a Yggdrasil review unit. To my surprise the company had delivered DACs to all its customers who pre-ordered and there was a unit available for review. The Yggdrasil arrived a week later and was immediately placed into my audio system.

     

    Before getting into the details of how the Yggdrasil converts digital into analog audio, I want to make sure readers understand that this review is neither a referendum on DAC topology, nor a treatise on multibit versus Sigma-Delta designs. Thus, I am purposely leaving out some of the minute details that only serve to move the review comment section further into the weeds. Trying to find the best sounding component by debating multibit versus Sigma-Delta topologies based on specifications only is preposterous. Let me be a bit more blunt, it's stupid. The final product of a DAC, the analog audio output quality, depends much more on the intellect of its designer than the physical hardware and the test measurements. When both great internal components and a great engineer are combined, the outcome can be fabulous no matter which road one takes to Rome (or sonic heaven).

     

    The "Yggdrasil is the world’s only closed-form multibit DAC, delivering 21 bits of resolution with no guessing anywhere in the digital or analog path." According to Schiit Audio. Let's dive into that statement a bit. Many audio enthusiasts will immediately see the 21 bit number assume this DAC is inferior to other DACs that claim 24 or even 32 bits of resolution. Several manufacturers today advertise the fact that their DACs feature multiple 32 bit DAC chips per channel. Making a judgement on a DAC's superiority or inferiority based on the number of bits advertised is foolish. For example, a 24 bit DAC has a theoretical maximum SNR of 144 dB, but the best current DACs can only obtain an SNR of 124 dB or 21 bits due to the noise floor of the components. In addition, human hearing has a dynamic range of about 120-130 dB. What's more, DACs have what's called Equivalent Number of Bits (ENOB) to signify the actual resolution of the DAC. A closer look at many 32 bit DACs reveals they actually have an ENOB of 19.5. Can you see why making judgements about DACs based on specifications is ridiculous?

     

    Readers may be asking themselves, what happens when I play a 24 bit recording on the Yggdrasil if it only supports 21 bits? The reality is that 24 bit recordings don't have 24 bits of resolution / information. It's possible to select 24 or even 32 bits as the output resolution for the Yggdrasil in Audio Midi. The truth is that it doesn't matter on any DAC. Note 1: Vinyl playback has about 12 bits of resolution, CD has 16 bits. Note 2: The Yggdrasil doesn't support DSD.

     

    Two more items I want to touch on are the filtering and hardware components inside the Yggdrasil. Again, these items individually don't mean a thing (if the designer ain't got that swing). Schiit Audio uses its own closed-form filter that's hallmark is using the original samples, not throwing the original samples away while upsampling like most DACs. Good, bad, or indifferent, this is Schiit's way of filtering. Schiit says it doesn't do guess work because it keeps the original samples. On the CA forum, Mike Moffat elaborated further by saying,

     

    "It is a digital filter/sample rate converter designed to convert all audio to 352.8 or 384KHz sample rates so that it may drive our DACs. You get it uniquely from us; it is our filter. It took five people many years to design and perfect at the dawn of digital playback, way back in the early eighties. It keeps all original samples; those samples contain frequency and phase information which can be optimized not only in the time domain but in the frequency domain. We do precisely this; the mechanic is we add 7 new optimized samples between the original ones. All digital filters multiply the original audio signal by a series of coefficients which are calculated by a digital filter generator. Over the years, before Theta Digital was born (my original company), we developed this filter design/generator. The common digital filter method is a Parks-McClellan algorithm, which has been used in all of the older oversampling chipsets, and persists to this day as the input filter in most Delta-Sigma DACs. Why? I assume it is because it is royalty-free, and the algorithm is widely available as are digital filter software design packages to aid in a cookbook approach to the design. Now Parks McClellan an open form math solution, which means that the coefficient calculation is a series of approximations which always get halfway there. This of course, means it never completely solves. The worse news is that all original sample are lost, replaced by 8 new approximated ones. Further, the Parks McClellan optimization is based on the frequency domain only – flat frequency response, with the time (read spatial) domain ignored. Our filter is based upon closed form math – the coefficients are not approximations, the equations solve; the matrices invert and the math is done. The filter also optimizes the time domain."

     

    In addition to Schiit's unique filter, the company uses unique hardware (at least in the audio world) in the Yggdrasil. Schiit uses four of the Analog Devices AD5791BRUZ DACs that are typically used in MRI imaging and military weapons. These DACs aren't trivial to implement in a digital to analog converter. I've heard many engineers in the industry suggest that the newest Sigma-Delta chips can be implemented much easier than a multibit design and that it doesn't take much to get a Sigma-Delta DAC up and running. It certainly takes quite a bit to get a Sigma-Delta to sound as good as possible, but nonetheless Schiit's selection of the AD5791 DAC has made its job significantly more difficult. In other words, not every engineer is capable of implementing the AD5791 in a great sounding audio component.

     

     

    yggy-pcb-900.jpg

     

     

    Listening Impressions

     

     

    The Yggdrasil DAC is built on a very solid technical foundation that translates terrifically into pure sonic enjoyment. This is what it all comes down to, enjoying the sound that comes out of one's audio system. My system for this review consisted of the Aurender N10 music server -> Yggdrasil DAC -> Constellation Audio PreAmp 1.0 -> Constellation Audio Mono 1.0 amplifiers -> TAD CR1 loudspeakers, all cabled with Wire World Series 7 Platinum. As I said in the opening paragraph, the Yggdrasil is unequivocally one of the best DACs at reproducing acoustic music I've ever heard. The overall sound signature of this DAC is a bit thicker in the midrange than I am used to hearing in some of the other DACs I've had through my listening room. One other quality that is very noticeable through the Yggdrasil is the amount air around the instruments. This DAC doesn't have the most air I've ever heard, in fact it seems to reproduce less air around instruments than most DACs. However, the more I listened the more I thought it's entirely plausible that the Yggdrasil could be on the right side of history, if you know what I mean. The multibit topology in the Yggdrasil eliminates the Sigma-Delta problem is pre and post ringing. I may be incorrect here, but I believe the post ringing in Sigma-Delta DACs may be responsible for memorializing transient events and creating more air around instruments than is actually present in the recording. Thus, the Yggdrasil may be reproducing just the transient event, nothing before or after, more accurately. Another impression I received when comparing the Yggdrasil to the sound of other DACs, is that the other DACs reminded me of an old boombox I had in the 1980s that had a setting called ST-WIDE. The Toshiba boombox had a setting for Mono, Stereo, and ST-WIDE (Link). When using the ST-WIDE setting the sound grew much larger in an inauthentic manner that was pleasing for a little while and would have been really neat had I never heard what the normal Stereo setting sounded like. I'm not suggesting the other DACs in my comparison sounded anything like the old Toshiba boombox, rather these DACs may have an unnaturally large soundstage or be memorializing transients to sound bigger than the recording.

     

    Let's go a bit deeper into the Yggdrasil reproducing unamplified acoustic instruments, specifically Gary Karr's double bass. His instrument is commonly known as the 1611 Amati double bass, given to him by the widow of Serge Koussevitzky. However, further research into this bass reveals that it has a history all its own. In 2005 the Tree Ring Society released a paper detailing its investigation into the instrument. The Society found that the bass was not made by the Amati brothers, Antonio and Girolamo, in Italy in 1611. According to the Tree Ring Society, "We used four reference tree-ring chronologies developed from treeline species in the European Alpine region to anchor the dates for the tree rings from the double bass absolutely in time. The bass yielded a 317-year long sequence, the longest sequence yet developed from a single musical instrument. Statistical and graphical comparisons revealed that the bass has tree rings that date from 1445 to 1761. Based on the strength of these correlations, the spruce tree harvested to eventually construct the double bass likely came from the treeline Alpine area of western Austria, not too far from Obergurgl at the Italian border. Our results demonstrate that the double bass was not made by the Amati Brothers, but likely by French luthiers in the late 18th Century." What does this dendromusicology have to do with the Yggdrasil? It's where my mind went when listening to Gary Karr's album Bass Virtuoso. The sound was so natural and so good I wanted to know more about the actual double bass used in the recording. The first track on the album, Henry Eccles: Sonata, has such a realistic and organic sound one can get the illusion of smelling the rosin on the black hair of Gary Karr's bow. Rumor has it that black haired bows produce a rougher sound as opposed to smooth sounding white haired bows. The coarseness and the beautiful vibrations off the Spruce wood of the bass were almost palpable. Track seventeen o the same album, Alec Wilder: Sonata for String Bass & Piano Part I, starts with Gary plucking the double bass strings (pizzicato) followed by returning to the bow and accompanied by a piano in the right channel. The whole track had a beautiful, lush, and sweet sound through the Yggdrasil that can't be denied. I felt like I had a front row seat to this concert right in my listening room. The only thing that could have made this experience more realistic is if the Yggdrasil had a scratch-n-sniff option. Emanating the scent of freshly cut Spruce would have sent me over the edge.

     

    Readers actually interested in the Tree Ring Society's research can find it here -> PDF Link

     

    I briefly want to touch on a Classical piece of music that totally sucked me into listening to the entire one hour performance. Usually when I write about Classical, my lack of knowledge shines brighter than anything else I write, and I expect this to be no different. I put on Passacaglia, the sixth track on the Reference Recording album of Michael Stern and the Kansas City Symphony playing Britten's Orchestra. I usually don't get that enthusiastic about this track until it gets loud (crescendo) near the finish. However, the time I was thrown for a loop twenty seconds into the track. The sound of the cello as the cellist gently pushes and pulls the bow across the strings is incredible. Not only could I hear spacial queues and the surrounding environment, but I could figuratively see and feel the wood of the instrument and the texture of the strings. The sound just resonated from the body of the cello and into the entire concert space. My usual favorite parts of Passacaglia, the eerie sounds of the string section at 4:25 and the huge booms of the drums at 5:10 followed by a massive collection of deep horns (tuba?) at 5:46, all sounded spectacular. After listening to Passacaglia, I started the album from track one and listened to the entire thing start to finish. That's very unusual for me when listening to a Classical piece of music.

     

    The 2011 remaster of Jack Johnson's Brushfire Fairytales contains great music that sounds great, and also provides great material for evaluating audio components. Specifically, the second track titled Middle Man. At 0:11 into the track the percussionist Adam Topol hits a snare that sounds different through every DAC I've heard in my system. Some DACs produce an incredible amount of air around this snare while others make the snare sound completely dead. The Yggdrasil is the first DAC that has made me reconsider what this snare "should" sound like and question the large amount of air I previously thought was correct. Without being present at the recording, I admit that I have no reference for what is the correct sound of this snare. I can only use my judgement and my taste. Listening through my current reference DAC the Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC RS, there is a tremendous amount of air and space surrounding the snare in Middle Man. The drum head is hit and the sound seems to rise into the air and hang, reverberating around the recording space, before decaying. This is a wonderful sound that can really place the listener in the recording studio. Listening to this through the Schiit Audio Yggdrasil gave me a different perspective. The sound of the snare doesn't rise as high or hang in the air as long or give one the sense of a recording space quite as large. Perhaps the Yggdrasil isn't memorializing the transient event because it doesn't "feature" pre/post ringing. I'm not sure the cause, but I am sure of my listening impression. There is a difference in reproduced sound that may not even be correct in either DAC, but both are definitely capable of sound quality superior to that of much of the competition at all prices.

     

    One of my go-to albums for listening enjoyment and feeling a bit on the dark side, is Leonard Cohen's Old Ideas. The second track Amen is full of juxtaposition that's a delight for the ears. Of course Leonard's vocal performance is that of a dusty, coarse, baritone with a microphone seemingly placed behind his front teeth. The vocal is supported by a deep electric bass throughout the track. Through the Yggdrasil each bass note is clearly delineated as if the listener can visualize Roscoe Beck plucking the strings for each note. Many listeners may like this track for the bass and gravely vocal performance, but what really makes it special for me is the backing vocal and the violin performance from Bela Santelli and Robert "OBM" Koda. The saying that opposites attract is right on within this track. About one minute into the track the violin starts weeping in the background followed by a subtle backing vocal abut ten seconds later. Throughout the rest of the track the violin can be heard coming in and out as well as the soothing background vocalists taking a more prominent role. The Yggdrasil's ability to reproduce each instrument as a distinctly different entity, to separate each bass note, to let the violin weep and hang in the air, and to recreate a smooth backing vocal in the face of a coarse lead vocal, is absolutely wonderful.

     

    I could go on all day writing about the wonderfully organic and natural sound of Peter, Paul and Mary's In The Wind album, how great the harmonizing vocals of the trio sounded, the palpability of the acoustic guitar on the title track to Van Morrison's Astral Weeks, and how seductive Van's vocal on Into the Mystic through the Yggdrasil, but it's time to shake things up a bit. On August 25, 1993 Calvin Broadus was in a Jeep with his bodyguard McKinley Lee, when the men were threatened with a gun by Philip Woldemariam. McKinley Lee pulled out his own gun and shot Woldemariam, killing him. Lee and Broadus spent the next week on the lam, turning themselves in only after the MTV Music Video Awards. The two men were later acquitted of several crimes including murder. After the shooting Calvin Broadus created a song called Murder Was The Case and released it on his debut solo album called Doggystyle. The album was the first debut CD to enter the Billboard Pop charts at number 1. Astute Computer Audiophile readers may recognize the name Calvin Broadus as the rapper who goes by the name Snoop Dogg, or Snoop Lion, or Snoopadelic. Listening to Murder Was The Case through an audio system worth nearly $100,000, and specifically through the Schiit Audio Yggdrasil was a blast (no pun intended). The version of this track available on the soundtrack of the same name is actually better than the version on Doggystyle, thus that's the one to which I listen. The opening sound of the blades of a helicopter rotating followed by a booming drum echo should be experienced at higher volumes than normal listening. The high pitched synthesizer heard throughout much of the track is an essential yet annoying piece of the track. Nonetheless, Snoop gets my head bobbing with the infectious beat and his lyrical genius repeating "Murder, murder was the case that they gave me" with a bevy of backing vocalists. As Snoop raps, "My little homey Baby Boo took a pencil in his neck, And he probably won't make it to see twenty-two, I put that on my Momma; I'ma ride for you Baby Boo" the listener can't help but empathize with life in the LBC back in the mid-nineties. The Yggdrasil really bring out the emotion in the line, "No more indo, gin and juice, I'm on my way to Chino, rolling on the grey goose." Overall the sophisticated sound of the Yggdrasil's multibit architecture and its proprietary closed-forum filter really help Snoop's ode to a real life killing come through in a way many DACs simply can't manage. Note 1: The previous few sentences are to be read with an eye toward the humorous, keeping in mind that taking oneself too seriously can be detrimental to one's health. Note 2: Snoop's Doggystyle album was released three days after my eighteenth birthday in 1993. To say this album kept a few parties jumping in the ensuing years of my life would be an understatement.

     

     

     

     

    Conclusion

     

     

     

    cash@2x.pngWhen a pair of industry veterans get together to create excellent products for incredibly reasonable prices, consumers win. Schiit Audio's products range in price from $79 for the Fulla USB DAC / headphone amp to its flagship $2,299 Yggdrasil DAC. Based on my experience with countless DACs and after spending a couple months with the Yggdrasil, I can say without a doubt that this DAC is very special. It's one of my favorite DACs available today. In fact, I will happily mention the Yggdrasil in the same sentence as some of my other favorites, the Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC RS ($16,000) and the EMM Labs DAC2X ($15,500), when talking to fellow audio enthusiasts. The Yggdrasil is one of those products that subtly grabs hold of the listener, yet the listener is the one who can't let go. I couldn't stop listening through the Yggdrasil enough to write this review on time. The Yggdrasil is a musically addictive drug without the expense and potential repercussions. When something is this enjoyable and the consequences of continuing its use aren't dire, the result is a foregone conclusion. More listening. The Yggdrasil has a rare ability to reproduce acoustic music on a level with some of the best DACs I've heard. Resonating Spruce wood from a double bass sounding so realistic as to breathe new life into old music, is a characteristic of the Yggdrasil. The juxtaposition of a coarse bowed bass with a silky smooth violin playing out in front of the listener as the sound simply hangs in mid-air until it appropriately decays, is part of an experience readily available through this DAC. The Yggdrasil has a really solid yet simplistic build quality on the outside and very selective component use on the inside. However, I believe the Yggdrasil's performance has much more to do with intellectual property than any other factor. Any manufacturer can use identical hardware in a competing product, but only Schiit Audio has its closed-form filter. In addition, the amount of engineering expertise required to implement the Analog Devices AD5791BRUZ DACs in an audio product is more than many companies have or costs more time and money than they can afford. To say the Yggdrasil is a unique product that's equal to much more than the sum of its parts is an understatement. Great technology and engineering coming together to reproduce fantastic sound quality at prices unheard-of in this industry is characteristically Schiit Audio. The Yggdrasil is a disruptive product that I can't recommend enough to both new and experienced music aficionados. Add to cart and enjoy.

     

     

     

     

     

    Product Information:

     

    • Product - Schist Audio Yggdrasil DAC
    • Price - $2,299
    • Product Page - Link
    • User Manual - PDF Link
    • USB Drivers - Link

     

     

     

    Where To Buy: Schiit Audio

     

     

     

    Associated Music:

     

     

     

     

    Associated Equipment:

     

     

     




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Opinions have no place in a world where the progress of a scientific endeavor, such as High Fidelity reproduction, are dependent on measurement and proven blind testing. Opinions are strictly guesses.

     

    Nope.

     

    Only opinions matter when judging the "quality" of how something sounds. Measurements measure quantities, not quality. Measurements are useful and are an indication of quality, but they don't prove anything about quality. If you think they do, you have a serious hole in your understanding of both measurements and of science.

     

    If I happen to like the sound of a DSD version of a recording better than a PCM one, John Siau is irrelevant, and my "opinion" is every bit as valuable as his. My opinions about engineering aren't worth as much as his, because I don't have that knowledge; but we don't listen to engineering, we listen to audio. Blind testing can't "prove" that PCM is superior sounding to DSD, because that question isn't a scientific one. Again, if you think it is, you are the one who doesn't understand the limits of testing and science.

     

    High Fidelity is not a scientific endeavor, it's an engineering one. Not the same thing. A supposedly inferior technology can produce superior results - in hi fi, and in lots of other technical realms. Design and implementation make a difference.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Great post Firedog; Jud too.

    Aloha to all my CA friends.

    From a beach in Kauai, Hawaii,

    Alex C.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    well i noticed a $100 TOSlink sounds better than $500 coax. It is definitely blacker, warmer and sweeter. Rob from chord electronics also prefers Toslink for hugo. I have not tried the AES but i feel i will have to spend significant amount to beat a $100 TOSlink. Just wandering anyone have the same experience? Rob also mentioned toslink has a bad reputation as it carries less noise so the sweet sound is construed as less detail.

    Oh yeah and this DAC is fabulous.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    well i noticed a $100 TOSlink sounds better than $500 coax. It is definitely blacker, warmer and sweeter. Rob from chord electronics also prefers Toslink for hugo. I have not tried the AES but i feel i will have to spend significant amount to beat a $100 TOSlink. Just wandering anyone have the same experience? Rob also mentioned toslink has a bad reputation as it carries less noise so the sweet sound is construed as less detail.

    Oh yeah and this DAC is fabulous.

     

    Ain't this an interesting situation? :)

     

    I disgree with Barrows that you have to use an ST interface to get real quality, TosLink can be just fine. Optical connections over short distances are often not as picky as other, purely electrical, connections. (From experience.)

     

    Where Inthink TosLink falls down is the S/PDIF format of data on the line, with embedded timing. Ethernet packest just make so much more sense to me, as they eliminate timing issues for the music *in the transmission from source to DAC device*. Within the DAC you can still face all sorts of jitter and EMI type issues.

     

    I found that the Sonic difference between a $1.50 plastic TOSlink cable, and a $50-$100 glass cable was staggering. The difference between a $100 and a $300 TOSlink cable was inaudible. YMMV. :)

     

    P.S. Short distance for optical cable is anything under 30 meters to me, though I ghikmTOSlink is specced to a much shorter max distance.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Per Blue Jean Cable, custom terminated at $1.75 a foot.

    Personally I find it hard to believe a glass cable will sound any different than a plastic one when delivering a digital stream within it's spec'd length.

    [h=3]Optical Digital Audio Cable: Mitsubishi Eska POF[/h]When we have a choice, we prefer to run digital audio in coax; it's more robust over distance, and the cable is interchangeable with cable used for certain other applications (e.g., composite video). However, an increasing number of devices are coming onto the market with digital audio available only in optical form, following the TOSlink standard. For these applications, we build our optical cables using the finest high-performance Plastic Optical Fiber (POF), Mitsubishi's ESKA Fiber. While POF is in general rather lossy stuff compared to glass optical fiber, we prefer it for optical digital audio use because it's much more physically durable and because its aperture matches the spec for optical digital audio use, unlike glass fiber which is too small and must be used in bundles. Our fiber is encased first in a tough cladding layer and then, for added durability, a flexible outer PVC jacket similar in texture to the PVC on some of our high-flex Belden cables (e.g. Belden 1505F). In our own usage, we've tested these cables at lengths up to 50 feet and found them to perform perfectly even at those extended distances.

    We hand-cut and terminate each of these cables ourselves so we know they're done right and tested before they go out. We think you'll be impressed with their performance; but we also offer a simple and easy return policy. If for any reason you're not completely satisfied, just return the cables, undamaged, within 30 days and we'll refund your purchase price in full.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    "stating that DSD is inferior to PCM"

     

    If you believe that recording and mastering quality matters, how can DSD always be inferior to PCM, or vice versa? In the very, very rare case where exactly the same recording and mastering is used for both, by all means buy the one you prefer. But far more often one recording/mastering is audibly better than the other, and in that case it's nice to be able to buy and listen to the better one, no matter whether the product is put out as DSD or PCM.

     

    Whether that's best accomplished by a single DAC that can play both, or by one DAC for PCM and another for DSD, is up to you and your budget.

     

    +1

     

    All the rest is utter nonsense. (Differences between DSD/PCM are entirely swamped by the differences between masterings)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If Barry Diament produces in PCM, I buy that or if Cookie Marenco in DSD that, as examples, also the Analogue Productions remasterings. The "art" is in the mastering and ultimately that's what it's all about -- Merry Christmas!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Steve Hoffman & Co. do a lot of reissues on SACD and many happen to be the best available versions of the albums.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Agreed. Here might be a test:

     

    http://mackavenue.downloadsnow.net/one-love

     

    I've got this in PCM and listen converted to DSD using HQPlayer ... but Blue Coast offers as DSD: http://bluecoastmusic.com/newsletter

     

    So this would test Blue Coast's DSD conversion against HQPlayer's ... alternatively could use HQPlayer to convert the DSD version for use with the yggy and compare to the native PCM

     

    This recording is phenomenal so testing it out would be very enjoyable!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have the Ayre QB-9 DSD and am interested in the comparison with the Yggy as that's the other Dac I've contemplated. Please share.

    Does the lack of 'glare' mean it has less treble or treble detail??

    I have lived with the Ayre QB9 DSD for 2 years, and I'd say the Yggy is half way between the Ayre and the Vega, soundstage wise. Vega has a DEEP but more narrow soundstage, Ayre has a wide soundstage with a little less depth, and Yggy is in between. I don't detect glare on the Ayre, but I hear a more detailed, upfront presentation than the Vega and the Yggy in my system. I think each has their strength, and personal preference will be deciding factor on which one is chosen but the listener. I could keep any one of them and live happy until the next upgrade bug hits.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    well i noticed a $100 TOSlink sounds better than $500 coax. It is definitely blacker, warmer and sweeter. Rob from chord electronics also prefers Toslink for hugo. … Just wandering anyone have the same experience? Rob also mentioned toslink has a bad reputation as it carries less noise so the sweet sound is construed as less detail.

     

    I did have the same experience and I couldn't agree more with you. So far, I only tried a 20€ toslink cable on my Auralic Vega and Benchmark DAC2 (I'm about to receive a Sysconcept highdef toslink). On both of them, this simple toslink sounded much sweeter, detailed, natural and holographic than USB (haven't tried by coax or AES). So I stopped using the Macmini as transport. Instead I'm using a simple bluray player: less is more.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris and other Yggy Lovers,

     

    Thanks so much for the review and other comments. Based almost exclusively on your posts, I upgraded my Meridian Director to a Yggy a couple of weeks ago. I'm blown away by just how good it sounds and how well it captures the musicality, timbre and warmth of so much of my favorite music. Bettye Lavette's in my living room and Steely Dan hasn't sounded this good since 1977.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris and other Yggy Lovers,

     

    Thanks so much for the review and other comments. Based almost exclusively on your posts, I upgraded my Meridian Director to a Yggy a couple of weeks ago. I'm blown away by just how good it sounds and how well it captures the musicality, timbre and warmth of so much of my favorite music. Bettye Lavette's in my living room and Steely Dan hasn't sounded this good since 1977.

     

    Peter, I have a Director in my main system and have been mooting an upgrade to either Yggy or a Vega. Might I ask what other DACs you tried and what your input source for the Yggy is?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    well i noticed a $100 TOSlink sounds better than $500 coax. It is definitely blacker, warmer and sweeter.

     

    Sounds like something I heard tonight in the "People Vs O J Simpson" TV show. LOL

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have lived with the Ayre QB9 DSD for 2 years, and I'd say the Yggy is half way between the Ayre and the Vega, soundstage wise. Vega has a DEEP but more narrow soundstage, Ayre has a wide soundstage with a little less depth, and Yggy is in between. I don't detect glare on the Ayre, but I hear a more detailed, upfront presentation than the Vega and the Yggy in my system. I think each has their strength, and personal preference will be deciding factor on which one is chosen but the listener. I could keep any one of them and live happy until the next upgrade bug hits.

     

     

    Hello Gbar,

    I recently sold my Ayre after reading Chris' review. While I am sorting things out I am using a Mojo.

    Reading your feedback I am a tiny bit on the fence - is the Schiit not an order of magnitude "better" than the Ayre?

    What I mean is that like with every component, there is time when performance of different equipment is of the highest standards, and it become a question of preference/synergy. My understanding (and hope certainly) was that Yggy was plain "better", not "different".

    Maybe I am reading too much in your feedback? Could you elaborate - are you happy you switched? Thanks

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think each has their strength, and personal preference will be deciding factor on which one is chosen but the listener. I could keep any one of them and live happy until the next upgrade bug hits.

     

    +1

     

    I love the Iggy in my headphone system. Just flat out great with my old SinglePower Extreme tube amp and Sennheiser 650's.

     

    I liked it so much that I ordered another and sold off my Vega before the new Iggy even arrived. With plenty of hours on the Iggy in my speaker system I am still "on the fence" with it relative to my Vega. I think that I need to tweak a bit more to figure out if I like it in that system more than the Vega. The Vega is a very capable DAC. The Iggy excels at tone and nuance. The Vega is a bit more lively and less forward.

     

    This stuff is a lot more than cooking than science once you get to a certain level. I honestly think it comes down to system matching and preference.

     

    My next plan is to try the Mutec USB with the AES output. Hope springs eternal!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hello Gbar,

    I recently sold my Ayre after reading Chris' review. While I am sorting things out I am using a Mojo.

    Reading your feedback I am a tiny bit on the fence - is the Schiit not an order of magnitude "better" than the Ayre?

    What I mean is that like with every component, there is time when performance of different equipment is of the highest standards, and it become a question of preference/synergy. My understanding (and hope certainly) was that Yggy was plain "better", not "different".

    Maybe I am reading too much in your feedback? Could you elaborate - are you happy you switched? Thanks

     

    How is the Mojo compared to the Ayre?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    This stuff is a lot more than cooking than science once you get to a certain level. I honestly think it comes down to system matching and preference.

     

    Oops. Make that "a lot more LIKE cooking than science"

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    IMHO, the Yggy was not just plain better. In fact, I returned my Yggy within the 15 day return for refund - a minor handling costs. I must say the customer service with Schiit audio is excellent, among the best I've experienced.

    If I had the extra money, I would keep a Yggy around for the great sound it offers. Instead, I returned it and am now left with a Berkeley Alpha 2, which I think bests the Yggy overall, IMHO. There is so much equipment interplay involved that one really needs to listen to multiple DACs in their system to find THEIR favorite. Overall, no I didn't think the Yggy was superior to the Ayre. I may be in the minority, but I love the Ayre and the presentation it offers. The Ayre of course offered DSD- the Yggy and Berkeley don't. But the Berkeley can drive an amp directly, which Ayre and Yggy can't One needs to use the Dac that fits into their system.

    BTW, I did feel the Yggy sounded much better running it into the Berkeley Alpha USB interface, a point Chris made in a discussion on this post. As always, YMMV, and everyone needs to listen for themselves, as I don't profess to have golden ears. I do go to live music when possible, so I do know what live music sounds like. Hope this helps, but probably muddies the water more :)

    Hello Gbar,

    I recently sold my Ayre after reading Chris' review. While I am sorting things out I am using a Mojo.

    Reading your feedback I am a tiny bit on the fence - is the Schiit not an order of magnitude "better" than the Ayre?

    What I mean is that like with every component, there is time when performance of different equipment is of the highest standards, and it become a question of preference/synergy. My understanding (and hope certainly) was that Yggy was plain "better", not "different".

    Maybe I am reading too much in your feedback? Could you elaborate - are you happy you switched? Thanks

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    "Orkney shepherds in ecstatic union with their flock"

    Reading the review and thread only today. This made me laugh hard and loud!!! Is baldr one of the minds behind Shiit?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Reading the review and thread only today. This made me laugh hard and loud!!! Is baldr one of the minds behind Shiit?

     

    Yep, it's Mike Moffat, the designer of Schiit's DACs.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yep, it's Mike Moffat, the designer of Schiit's DACs.

    Thanks Jud. A few posts later that became clear. Has anyone played with a REGEN on the Yggy's usb input and compared to the AES/EBU? This little DAC has me wondering a little, since some of it's attributed qualities are exactly what I'll be trying to improve in my system: texture, color and tone. OTOH I really don't want to lose transients, detail and soundstage that I currently have (which are pretty awesome). Did you get a chance to play with it, Jud? Comparisons and opinions from others are appreciated. BTW, I just read through this whole thread, so I know what's been said until now.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Oops. Make that "a lot more LIKE cooking than science"

    I agree wholeheartedly. The Ayre in my Spectral system was great. I switched to Constellation, and the Ayre gave a more front row presentation, rather than the mid hall I was used to. One not better than the other, just different. Tried the Yggy, and it did indeed move the presentation back to more of what I was used to, and even quieter with the Berkeley USB interface. I felt I was losing some of the detail and transparency I was getting with the Ayre, but because I had already sold it, I could NOT do a back to back comparison. Given our auditory short term memory, it would be difficult to make a cross the board declaration, which is why I said one should definitely try any of these dacs in their system to see how it meshes with what they have. If I had the cash, I'd have a Yggy, Ayre, Berkeley, and several other dacs I've heard, each with attributes and strong points others don't have. Regarding an order of magnitiude difference between any of these dacs referred to in another thread, I personally don't believe anyone can declare that to be the case, as none are head and shoulders above the others, IMHO of course.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm not sure if I miss-read the thoughts behind the comment, but Mike Moffat designed the famous ADC used by MSFL (though now they don't use it any more). If you have ever listened to Muddy Waters' Folk Singer or Robin Trower's Bridge of Sighs, those are two albums off the top of my head that were digitised with it. So "again" is needed in your comment I reckon. Otherwise I totally agree! You're not the first person to suggest it. :)

     

    I have to say that Muddy Waters' album is spookily realistic sounding, which is amazing given the era of the original recording, and I'd always wondered what might be in the production chain that led there. Seriously spooky. First time I played it (my system has the Exasound e22 DAC, which is also pretty amazing with acoustic music and live albums) my dogs went insane looking for Muddy. A couple times I've played it when we had guests and every time they get quiet and wander off into the family room and stand slack jawed listening. Some other albums produce the same responses, but that one's completely otherworldly.

     

    Not a huge Trower fan but I'm going to hunt it down and check it out. I'm looking for a DAC for my studio and am a little annoyed at the Exasound's dependence on their own driver, so the Yggy was on my list.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I had forgotten about that. I do own Muddy Waters Folk Singer on MFSL gold CD. It's fantastic! How about Belafonte returns to Carnegie Hall? That MFSL reissue is a gem, too.

     

    This is one of the other reissues that's eerily, palpably live sounding. I'm going to go look up MFSL and see whether they're behind the short list of music that absolutely sparkles through my current system. If that "character" (for lack of a better term) is strongly related to the ADC chip and technical approach that MFSL uses for digitization, I'd bet that it works well on the other end of digitization.

     

    Chris' review, and this discussion, have done a pretty good job of coming up with comparisons and connections in this world where you can't go do a listen to gear locally.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now




×
×
  • Create New...