Annoying Yiggy Issue

[Dr Tone]

4 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

Something personal?

 

He doesn't like how they measure in comparison to cheaper DACs.

[manisandher]

6 hours ago, gmgraves said:

... I no longer consider the Yiggy as anything better than a 2nd rate DAC!

 

Glad you've finally seen the light.

 

Mani.

[crenca]

6 hours ago, gmgraves said:

Well, it’s not THAT BAD! My Yiggy is certainly a decent DAC. For instance, I’ve never heard a Delta-Sigma DAC that could hold a candle to the Schiit Yggdrasil, and that includes the latest ESS SaberDAC Pro based units. It’s just that the Chord unit works on an entirely different principle with its 49000+ filter taps! CDs, digital files of all bit depths and sample rates resolve details, that I didn’t even know were there! This includes my own recordings which I know intimately, or at least I thought I did.

 

As I understand it, Schiit's multibit design is the same basic design as the Chord  - that is, I closed form, high tap, linear reconstruction.  This is different than the more common SigmaDelta process found in ESS, AKM, TI, etc. chips.

 

The low level detail retrieval of these multi bit designs really does seem to be something that even the good SD chips can't quite match.  All that said as usual the "it's all in the implementation" caveat applies.  Lately I am usually listening to a Gungnir MB, but when I switch back to my iFi IDAC2 (Burr Brown SD) it's not like the delta between them is any more than a few percentage points, and the iFi has the advantage of a warmth/body to the "insides" of notes that the Gungnir does not.  This is probably coloration, but it sounds nice and "natural"...

[gmgraves]

On 5/27/2019 at 4:29 AM, AnotherSpin said:

 

I appreciate your opinion. However, comparing Gungnir with Chord Mojo I came to rather opposite conclusions. Yes, I fully understand the difference between entry level and more advanced item from Chord. There is also certain difference between two Schiit DACs. Still I could guess there is some specific sound signatures within particular approach. To me Gungnir sounds much more natural, fatigue-free, "analogue". Resolution my impress immensely in a short run, but long run impact seem to be more important to me.

Comparing the Mojo (<$500US) with the Hugo2 (~$2800) is comparing apples to oranges. They simply aren’t the same thing. Now, comparing the Chord Quetest (~$1900) with the Hugo2 is the same thing because the DAC portion of both units are exactly alike. The Quetest simply lacks the Hugo2’s portability and headphone amp section. The Schiit Gungnir is not as good as the Yiggy even though they share a common sound profile. The Yiggy is simply more refined, with a bit more resolution.

[gmgraves]

On 5/27/2019 at 5:22 AM, manisandher said:

 

Glad you've finally seen the light.

 

Mani.

There is no light to see. Nothing is perfect and everything can be bettered. Technology marches on. When I first tried the Yiggy, it was the best bang for the buck. I never considered it the best DAC in the world. The dCS Vivaldi or the uber expensive MSB DAC probably vie for that honor. Certainly the Chord Hugo2/Quetest holds the honor as the most revealing DACs under Five Grand (in my opinion, of course).

[AnotherSpin]

1 minute ago, gmgraves said:

There is no light to see. Nothing is perfect and everything can be bettered. Technology marches on. When I first tried the Yiggy, it was the best bang for the buck. I never considered it the best DAC in the world. The dCS Vivaldi or the uber expensive MSB DAC probably vie for that honor. Certainly the Chord Hugo2/Quetest holds the honor as the most revealing DACs under Five Grand (in my opinion, of course).

That's what I said - I fully understand the difference between entry level and more advanced item from Chord. Nevertheless, Mojo is very good small DAC for its price. 

[gmgraves]

27 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

That's what I said - I fully understand the difference between entry level and more advanced item from Chord. Nevertheless, Mojo is very good small DAC for its price. 

So is the Schiit Modi Multibit for $249, but I wouldn’t try to compare it to a Yggdrasil or a Chord Hugo2 either.

[AnotherSpin]

3 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

So is the Schiit Modi Multibit for $249, but I wouldn’t try to compare it to a Yggdrasil or a Chord Hugo2 either.

 

One would compare anything with anything. With results mostly influenced by one's expectation+imagination. What is even more important, immediate impression (and wow factor) most probably will vanish over certain and not very long period of time and listening perception will be more or less back to what it was before and ever. And which is more importantly depends on what one listens rather than how. Any decent DAC will perform sufficiently. "Everything can be bettered" is a dead-end idea, imho.

[sphinxsix]

1 hour ago, AnotherSpin said:

"Everything can be bettered" is a dead-end idea, imho.

Imagine what a dead end must be something that can't be bettered! 

[AnotherSpin]

33 minutes ago, sphinxsix said:

Imagine what a dead end must be something that can't be bettered! 

 

The problem is anything in material world could be bettered and you wouldn't see the end of it. What a joke.

[Ishmael Slapowitz]

If they were not so stubborn about DSD, I would be a DAC customer. 🤣

[manisandher]

3 hours ago, gmgraves said:

There is no light to see.

 

You were pretty smitten by it:

 

What an absolute cracker of a thread that turned out to be. Two of the Yggy's main proponents in that thread, @Speed Racer and @hornytoad, ended up being banned trolls who've returned to this site on multiple occasions under different user names, such as @diecaster and @johndean.

 

Interestingly, @diecaster also saw the light and moved from the Yggy to a PS Audio DAC, which he claimed was much better (not difficult, in my eyes/ears). Then he got himself banned by exposing himself as the already banned @Speed Racer.

 

You couldn't make this stuff up!

 

Mani.

[manisandher]

3 hours ago, gmgraves said:

When I first tried the Yiggy, it was the best bang for the buck. I never considered it the best DAC in the world.

 

Really?

 

On 4/11/2017 at 11:10 PM, gmgraves said:

It is the best DAC I've ever had in my system and certainly the best I've ever heard. And while I've never had a dCS Vivaldi in my system, I was able to compare the Yggy directly with an MSB Diamond V with the Femto 33 clock unit, and the Yggy sounded very similar...

 

And...

 

On 4/17/2017 at 3:08 AM, gmgraves said:

What kind of distortion lets the listener hear, for the first time, details in recordings that one has been listening to for many years (first as an LP and then as a CD) and have never heard before? I have two choral works  (so far) in my collection that no DAC except the Yggy has ever been able to play with so little distortion that I can now understand the lyrics they are singing.That includes The MSB Diamond V, the Benchmark DAC2, Auralic Vega, DragonFly Red, and many others over the years. If that's what distortion sounds like, then I'm all for it!

 

But now...

 

On 5/27/2019 at 6:45 AM, gmgraves said:

My main problem, at the moment, with the Yiggy, is that after I heard one of my own orchestral recordings (Ravel’s “Daphnis et Chloe”, the complete ballet) played through a Chord Hugo 2, I no longer consider the Yiggy as anything better than a 2nd rate DAC!

 

Yep, sounds like you've seen the light to me.

 

Mani.

[Miska]

On 5/27/2019 at 6:22 PM, crenca said:

As I understand it, Schiit's multibit design is the same basic design as the Chord  - that is, I closed form, high tap, linear reconstruction.  This is different than the more common SigmaDelta process found in ESS, AKM, TI, etc. chips.

 

The low level detail retrieval of these multi bit designs really does seem to be something that even the good SD chips can't quite match.

 

You are mixing digital filters with SD and R2R DACs... These are three distinct things.

1. Digital filters are used in/with practically all DACs, regardless how they convert digital to analog
2. SD process at DAC side is pure digital process and not directly tied to the D/A stage
3. There are different architectures how to convert digital to analog, not just two

And by the way, all Chord DACs are pure SD technology. And you can certainly run (1) and (2) in a computer, and have DAC do only (3). Which is what I'm doing all the time with my three Holo Audio DACs for example.

 

 

[gmgraves]

2 hours ago, manisandher said:

 

Really?

 

 

And...

 

 

But now...

 

 

Yep, sounds like you've seen the light to me.

 

Mani.

Show me where I said it was the best in the world. You can’t. Did (do) I like it, yes. Was I enthusiastic about it at the time? Absolutely! Was it the best DAC I had ever heard in 2017? Sure. But time marches on. Now I’ve heard significantly better, and I acknowledge that. Everything in audio (as it is with many technological products) is relative. What point are you trying to make?

[Ralf11]

George - what is the best DAC you've ever heard (to date)?

[manisandher]

6 hours ago, gmgraves said:

Show me where I said it was the best in the world. You can’t. Did (do) I like it, yes. Was I enthusiastic about it at the time? Absolutely! Was it the best DAC I had ever heard in 2017? Sure. But time marches on. Now I’ve heard significantly better, and I acknowledge that. Everything in audio (as it is with many technological products) is relative. What point are you trying to make?

 

What's my point? That going from "the best I'd ever heard" to "I no longer consider the Yiggy as anything better than a 2nd rate DAC!" qualifies as 'having seen the light'. That's all.

 

When I pointed out the flaws in the Yggy's sound (backed up with measurements) in your thread 2 years ago, you were vociferous in defending it. There was (still is?) a lot of hyperbole around the Yggy, and it's good that someone like you can now see it for what it is - a 2nd-rate DAC at best.

 

On 5/27/2019 at 9:12 AM, gmgraves said:

It’s just that the Chord unit works on an entirely different principle with its 49000+ filter taps! CDs, digital files of all bit depths and sample rates resolve details, that I didn’t even know were there! This includes my own recordings which I know intimately, or at least I thought I did.

 

Are you aware that you can apply a filter with 1,000,000 taps in HQPlayer with a click of a button and then feed it to whichever DAC you choose?

 

Mani.

[PeterSt]

Someone here just fails as a reviewer. That's all.

[AnotherSpin]

1 hour ago, manisandher said:

[...]

When I pointed out the flaws in the Yggy's sound (backed up with measurements) [...]

 

Measurements would support someone who has purely mechanical approach to things or life itself vs. ability of grasp life organically, beyond all measurements. Do you select your wine because your choice supported by measurements? Do you like your day because weather measures perfect? 

[PeterSt]

46 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

Measurements would support someone who has purely mechanical approach to things or life itself

 

Measurements take care of distortion being out of the way where distortion should not be. This is from the other thread I indirectly talked about the same:

 

Measurement is also about measuring THD of a 19Hz tone which should be inaudible because we human can not hear a frequency of 20Hz and lower. THD measurement can show the level of distortion. Now, coincidentally measuring a speaker for this sub-low output without audible distortion can be done by listening. It is a rare exception and it very convenient for understanding in general. So say that 

a. THD measurement shows 4% (of which we know it is audible and thus is regarded to be too much in the first place);

b. The 19Hz output is audible and thus shows 38Hz (2nd harmonic) or 57Hz (3rd).

 

Do you really think it helps to leave out #a hence don't measure or don't read the THD specs and think #b will be inaudible because of that ?

Unless you like distortion of course.

 

On a side note and FYI I was the one who measured the chip used in that Eggy 2 years before Schiit started to provide it per means of that DAC. It showed a THD (1000Hz) which was twice as bad (6dB) as it should be. Of course people claimed that the particular anomaly was for sure inaudible. Sure. Odd then that its special sound was a bit too special to some's liking and that the THD could be pointed out easily.

For those who were there: I don't think I provided my own THD measurements regarding this, because the glitching in order could be shown from the Yggdrasil the very same as my own scope output from the chip, which I *did* show.

 

Maybe it also tells something that some stupid like me designs around the chip in question, to 2 years later give up on the by then ready hardware. I suppose I could have sold it to you for a nice price ? (I still have the prototype DAC of it).

 

I hope this was a real life answer. Quite organic - both feet on the ground as well.

 

Things first have to measure well. If measurements are OK but next it doesn't sound well, then a. something is wrong with the measurements but b. then it fails and bad luck (this latter I never experienced, but alas).

If things measure poorly (which relates to references or (your own) standards), and next we'd claim it sounds well, we are just stupid. And that was the Yggy story. All it did was encouraging for responses like yours. They don't help a single soul, apart from maybe American chauvinism. And then ... in the end it was all about that. Can happen today too. No big deal. The French are better at "chauvinism" anyway. Haha.

But that doesn't make measurement unjustified.

 

[AnotherSpin]

12 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Measurements take care of distortion being out of the way where distortion should not be. This is from the other thread I indirectly talked about the same:

 

Measurement is also about measuring THD of a 19Hz tone which should be inaudible because we human can not hear a frequency of 20Hz and lower. THD measurement can show the level of distortion. Now, coincidentally measuring a speaker for this sub-low output without audible distortion can be done by listening. It is a rare exception and it very convenient for understanding in general. So say that 

a. THD measurement shows 4% (of which we know it is audible and thus is regarded to be too much in the first place);

b. The 19Hz output is audible and thus shows 38Hz (2nd harmonic) or 57Hz (3rd).

 

Do you really think it helps to leave out #a hence don't measure or don't read the THD specs and think #b will be inaudible because of that ?

Unless you like distortion of course.

 

On a side note and FYI I was the one who measured the chip used in that Eggy 2 years before Schiit started to provide it per means of that DAC. It showed a THD (1000Hz) which was twice as bad (6dB) as it should be. Of course people claimed that the particular anomaly was for sure inaudible. Sure. Odd then that its special sound was a bit too special to some's liking and that the THD could be pointed out easily.

For those who were there: I don't think I provided my own THD measurements regarding this, because the glitching in order could be shown from the Yggdrasil the very same as my own scope output from the chip, which I *did* show.

 

Maybe it also tells something that some stupid like me designs around the chip in question, to 2 years later give up on the by then ready hardware. I suppose I could have sold it to you for a nice price ? (I still have the prototype DAC of it).

 

I hope this was a real life answer. Quite organic - both feet on the ground as well.

 

Things first have to measure well. If measurements are OK but next it doesn't sound well, then a. something is wrong with the measurements but b. then it fails and bad luck (this latter I never experienced, but alas).

If things measure poorly (which relates to references or (your own) standards), and next we'd claim it sounds well, we are just stupid. And that was the Yggy story. All it did was encouraging for responses like yours. They don't help a single soul, apart from maybe American chauvinism. And then ... in the end it was all about that. Can happen today too. No big deal. The French are better at "chauvinism" anyway. Haha.

But that doesn't make measurement unjustified.

 

 

Thank you for very detailed reply. 'Measurements important' vs. 'measurements not important at all' is a philosophical question. And most arguments supporting both positions here would be viewed as a pure rhetoric from both sides. I live cold part of the year in India for years. This place would be considered as extremely "noisy" and even "distorted" if conventional Westerner's view, habits and value system taken into account. Still I personally prefer it over any Western country...)

[PeterSt]

3 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

I live cold part of the year in India for years. This place would be considered as extremely "noisy" and even "distorted"

 

I understand. But wouldn't it be even nicer for you if India was colder throughout the year ?

(with less sand dust on top of it )

 

In other words, what we should not forget is that there is a best of both or all worlds with net even better result: even less distortion by measurement and that unequivocally sounding better than with the distortion (and subjective ideas about SQ, but alas).

 

This is how I said in my previous post that I personally never rain into any situation that something which measured for the better, sounded for the worse. And oh, that can be so all right, but then something else came into the equation. This is all very hard to explain or elaborate upon because so many variables exist.

Fact is that all is about our references. Fact is sadly also that when something measures at best we can (measurement equipment limitation), beyond that are worlds of better best and worse. All unseen by measurement. And who tells that any given reference (with that optimal measurement) is that "best" situation already ? I have the answer: it never is. There is always something to improve upon which measurement (that we now of) can't show any more.

So the subject of the past few posts is about the other way around: when things measure worse, it is readily audible as sounding worse (or something not right, etc.).

 

Please be aware of the context, which is comparing with real life instruments. This is not subjective to "I like more bass better" etc. - only to our experience with the instrument in question. If I have a piano in the room, the piano through the speaker must sound the same (disregarding the piano builder/brand of course). If the piano sounds "nicely vibrant" it may be sounding nice to you and you possibly could like it for ever, but it is not how a piano should sound. The real art of this hobby (and manufacturer within that) of course is how to *and* make the piano sounding right *and* the drums *and* the copper instruments *and* the voices ... etc. I mean, it is so very easy to have a trumpet sounding screaming right, while Mark Knopfler screams to you as well.

Although I never heard it, it was told that the Yggy has/had a vibrant sound. This is a flavor. And flavors are never good to have in music reproduction.

[manisandher]

1 hour ago, AnotherSpin said:

Measurements would support someone who has purely mechanical approach to things or life itself vs. ability of grasp life organically, beyond all measurements. Do you select your wine because your choice supported by measurements? Do you like your day because weather measures perfect? 

 

You know nothing about me, so just stick to the topic at hand.

 

I had the Yggy (pre Gen 5 USB) here for an extended period of time and it sounded flawed to me - pretty awful actually. I looked into its measurements and found them wanting. I shared my thoughts here and the Schiit fanboys blew their fuses. At least two were banned... returned under new names... and were banned again. One of them has been banned at least three times, under different names. Says pretty much all you need to know about Schiit fanboys.

 

If you're happy with your Gungnir Multibit, that's great. I've never heard one, so can't/won't comment on it.

 

Mani.

[AnotherSpin]

10 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

I understand. But wouldn't it be even nicer for you if India was colder throughout the year ?

(with less sand dust on top of it )

 

 

I believe temperature or dust (measurable or quantifiable) has nothing to do with reasons to be there.

[AnotherSpin]

12 minutes ago, manisandher said:

 

You know nothing about me, so just stick to the topic at hand.

 

I had the Yggy (pre Gen 5 USB) here for an extended period of time and it sounded flawed to me - pretty awful actually. I looked into its measurements and found them wanting. I shared my thoughts here and the Schiit fanboys blew their fuses. At least two were banned... returned under new names... and were banned again. One of them has been banned at least three times, under different names. Says pretty much all you need to know about Schiit fanboys.

 

If you're happy with your Gungnir Multibit, that's great. I've never heard one, so can't/won't comment on it.

 

Mani.

 

I was not addressing you personally, hope you able to grasp this. But wait, it is not measurable, sorry...