The Gungnir is the bottleneck in the mid-tier Schiit stack IME. Look elsewhere if your headphone is more resolving than an LCD-2.
The Mjolnir / Gungnir is indeed extremely good - it´s just that when you listen to Gungnir with other amps (and other DACs with the Mjolnir) - it is pretty obvious that the Gungnir is a bit "coarse". I would compare the Gungnir to e.g. Hegel´s HD10 DAC. The latter has received accolades some time back.
I'll throw in my 2 cents here.
I've found the Gungnir to be competent when compared to other DACS in the $1-2k price poole.
I felt the Gungnir was better than IMO, overpriced NAD M51. And comparatively severely
behind the PWD2.
As far as the coarse/harsh comments, we all do hear differently and prefer different things.
I'm sure we've had this discussion before. You conceded the M51 was the better DAC but could not justify its expense over the Gungnir. Can't argue with how an individual justifies cost, but I will point out that in some parts of the globe the Gungnir is a $1k+ dac and the M51 can be had brand new for less than $1.4k. Even if it wasn't as feature rich, the NAD M51 is still a considerable improvement over the Gungnir.
There are aspects of SQ where the Gungnir may be close to the M51, but in terms of overall refinement and finesse there's no contest. The M51 extends just as far into the upper registers but is much smoother. It drops deeper into the low bass, images better and is considerably more coherent during busy passages. The Gungnir is "shouty", upfront and abrasive and imposes these qualities on material that don't even call for it. The NAD M51 is just as dynamic and vibrant, but it only imparts those things when required.
I find it incomprehensible that someone would find the Gungnir "better", especially if price is taken out of the equation.