Latest Thread Images

Schiit Mjolnir 2 Listening Impressions
Nov 1, 2016 at 7:28 PM Post #1,486 of 6,930
carcajou said:
  Schiit aren't fans of integrated Amp/DAC combos. Since technology for DACs evolves at a different pace than technology for Amps, their point is that you'd have to get rid of a perfectly good amp to upgrade your DAC to the newest technology. 
 
Their only full-sized Amp/DAC combo is the Jotunheim, and they made sure that the DAC module could be easily replaced. You should check it out if that's what you're looking for, I haven't listened to it but reviews are pretty good!
Click to expand...

 
While it is a good logic but why the DAC technology move so much faster than an AMP? Not to mentioned that you basically double your purchase costs.
 
Is there a substantial difference between separate set up like this or let's say Wao Audio WA7 AMP/DAC combo? I would imagine that the returns will be very minimal. 
 
Nov 1, 2016 at 8:40 PM Post #1,487 of 6,930
here2rock said:
While it is a good logic but why the DAC technology move so much faster than an AMP? Not to mentioned that you basically double your purchase costs.

Is there a substantial difference between separate set up like this or let's say Wao Audio WA7 AMP/DAC combo? I would imagine that the returns will be very minimal. 
Click to expand...


May be wrong, but I think it's because power amplifiers (and headphone amplifiers by extension) precede commercial digital music by about 60 years, so you could say it's more "mature" or developed as a technology, whereas high res digital audio in particular is a relatively recent thing. That and we are still very much in the midst of a digital revolution, where transistors continue to shrink and new technologies are constantly being developed.

That being said, I think a lot of the improvements over the past 10 years are incremental, given that the Benchmark DAC1 is still a respected DAC more than a decade after its release, so I don't think a good DAC will depreciate at the same rate as this year's iPhone.
 
Nov 1, 2016 at 9:11 PM Post #1,488 of 6,930
westermac said:
May be wrong, but I think it's because power amplifiers (and headphone amplifiers by extension) precede commercial digital music by about 60 years, so you could say it's more "mature" or developed as a technology, whereas high res digital audio in particular is a relatively recent thing. That and we are still very much in the midst of a digital revolution, where transistors continue to shrink and new technologies are constantly being developed.

That being said, I think a lot of the improvements over the past 10 years are incremental, given that the Benchmark DAC1 is still a respected DAC more than a decade after its release, so I don't think a good DAC will depreciate at the same rate as this year's iPhone.
Click to expand...


I agree with you, westermac. I too think that marginal returns of new technology are diminishing, dollar for dollar (speaking of DACs here).

Here2rock, I don't think you're really doubling the purchase costs. If you wanted an integrated Mjolnir2-Gungnir combo you'd be looking at a piece retailing for way more than $850. The components inside the DAC have an inherent value and so does the time required to assemble them. You'd basically be saving the cost of a chassis and a power supply (I'm oversimplifying but I think you get the point).
 
Nov 2, 2016 at 12:40 AM Post #1,489 of 6,930
There are vintage amps from the '70s that power current gear like the HE-6 or K1000 marvelously. 
 
Even Mike's stuff from Theta has been superseded by Yggdrasil, and USB technology is only improving. Thunderbolt Gen 3, which uses the same plug as USB-C and can also communicate the USB-3.1 standard, just appeared on the MacBook Pro (and within a year, I assume, will appear Apple's complete line). Unlike Thunderbolt 1/2, which needed a separate port, this port has the ability to be the new ubiquitous USB-A, with USB 3 and Thunderbolt 3 everywhere. I can't see a reason Apple's desktop competitors won't include it on their devices. I can't see why Apple's mobile competitors won't put on phones and tablets and tout it as a differentiating feature (they would be leaving money on the table not to do so: micro and mini USB ports are non-reversible).
 
The WA5 from a few years ago is still amazing, ditto DNA Stratus, BHSE, Liquid Lightning—I could go on.
 
Nov 2, 2016 at 12:59 AM Post #1,490 of 6,930
here2rock said:
   
While it is a good logic but why the DAC technology move so much faster than an AMP? 
Click to expand...

 
Because amplification within the power range needed by headphones is a solved problem.
 
There comes a point where further innovation is no longer necessary or gives diminishing returns.  Nobody (sane) wastes time trying to invent a better spoon.
 
The circlotron topology, used (but with transistors instead of tubes) in Schiit's best amps (Ragnarok and Mjolnir 2), dates back to the 1950s.
 
Have DACs also become a solved problem? It seems like we're approaching that point...
 
Nov 2, 2016 at 9:08 AM Post #1,491 of 6,930
westermac said:
May be wrong, but I think it's because power amplifiers (and headphone amplifiers by extension) precede commercial digital music by about 60 years, so you could say it's more "mature" or developed as a technology, whereas high res digital audio in particular is a relatively recent thing. That and we are still very much in the midst of a digital revolution, where transistors continue to shrink and new technologies are constantly being developed.

That being said, I think a lot of the improvements over the past 10 years are incremental, given that the Benchmark DAC1 is still a respected DAC more than a decade after its release, so I don't think a good DAC will depreciate at the same rate as this year's iPhone.
Click to expand...


I thought that DAC technology had been around since CD players, around 1982. That is a long time.

Apple's iPhone 7 has a DAC built into a $20 adapter cable, surely Schiit' s DAC costing $900 can't be that much different to demand such a premium over Apple.
 
Nov 2, 2016 at 9:19 AM Post #1,492 of 6,930
carcajou said:
I agree with you, westermac. I too think that marginal returns of new technology are diminishing, dollar for dollar (speaking of DACs here).

Here2rock, I don't think you're really doubling the purchase costs. If you wanted an integrated Mjolnir2-Gungnir combo you'd be looking at a piece retailing for way more than $850. The components inside the DAC have an inherent value and so does the time required to assemble them. You'd basically be saving the cost of a chassis and a power supply (I'm oversimplifying but I think you get the point).
Click to expand...


What I meant was that you could buy a decent AMP/ DAC for $1000. Separates would cost $850 x 2.

What is the equivalent or close enough to Mjolnir 2 in integrated amp/DAC form?
 
Nov 2, 2016 at 9:31 AM Post #1,493 of 6,930
watchnerd said:
Because amplification within the power range needed by headphones is a solved problem.

There comes a point where further innovation is no longer necessary or gives diminishing returns.  Nobody (sane) wastes time trying to invent a better spoon.

The circlotron topology, used (but with transistors instead of tubes) in Schiit's best amps (Ragnarok and Mjolnir 2), dates back to the 1950s.

Have DACs also become a solved problem? It seems like we're approaching that point...
Click to expand...


I thought that DAC would be a solved problem by now, how important is DAC? I thought DAC had a simple task of just converting the digital signal to analogue signal, what more does it feed to an Amp? I thought the Amp provided the dynamic range and other sound qualities to the music you are listening or is it the other way around?
 
Nov 2, 2016 at 10:55 AM Post #1,494 of 6,930
here2rock said:
Apple's iPhone 7 has a DAC built into a $20 adapter cable, surely Schiit' s DAC costing $900 can't be that much different to demand such a premium over Apple.
Click to expand...


Audition a multibit dac for yourself. Until then are claims cannot help your troll-ish skepticism. After that, they are redundant.
 
Nov 2, 2016 at 12:19 PM Post #1,495 of 6,930
here2rock said:
I thought that DAC technology had been around since CD players, around 1982. That is a long time.

Apple's iPhone 7 has a DAC built into a $20 adapter cable, surely Schiit' s DAC costing $900 can't be that much different to demand such a premium over Apple.
Click to expand...


Right, and audio amplifiers have been around since around 1910.
 
The Schiit DAC would absolutely be better, but whether it's $1000 better is purely subjective (maybe sometime you can hear one and decide for yourself)
 
At any rate... that was a fun rabbit hole but how about we go back to talking about the Mjolnir 2 
smily_headphones1.gif

 
What are everyone's favorite affordable tubes so far (by affordable I mean non-7308, CCa, Siemens, Valvo etc).
 
I recently got a pair of 5670/6N3 adapters and have been enjoying the 6N3P-E's as well as some black-plate GL-5670's (so far I prefer the 5670's by a slight margin). I have a batch of label-less small-o getter Amperex 6DJ8's coming as well that I'm looking forward to. Much as I like the idea of "Holy Grail" tubes I'd rather find something I enjoy which I can afford to have several pairs of and be set for the next decade or so.
 
Nov 7, 2016 at 11:38 PM Post #1,497 of 6,930
here2rock said:
I thought that DAC would be a solved problem by now, how important is DAC? I thought DAC had a simple task of just converting the digital signal to analogue signal, what more does it feed to an Amp? I thought the Amp provided the dynamic range and other sound qualities to the music you are listening or is it the other way around?
Click to expand...


I could ask this:
 
I thought an amp would be a solved problem by now, how important is an amp? I thought amps had a simple task of just amplifying the analog signal to an audible volume, what more does it feed to headphones? I thought the DAC provided the analog signal and other sound qualities to the music you are listening or is it the other way around?
 
But that would be smart allec. :)
 
On a serious note, neither the DAC or amp should color the sound artificially in my opinion. Both should be tasked with faithfully and accurately reproducing the original intent of the artist and producer. Some amps are better than others,  and some DACs are better than others. Sometimes you even get what you pay for. Sometimes you can't hear the difference (most of the time I can't). Transducers are the most important component. To me, second is amp. But many say otherwise. I won't argue, just get whatever makes you smile when you listen.
 
Nov 8, 2016 at 12:56 AM Post #1,498 of 6,930
rmoody said:
  Transducers are the most important component.
Click to expand...

 
I don't think anyone serious disagrees with this.
 
Transducers have orders of magnitude more measurable distortion.  Not a lot of speaker makers publish distortion specs, but here is one for an Eve Audio SC207 monitor:
 

 
Even above 200 Hz, distortion is in the .10-.20% range.  
 
Compare that to the bottom-of-the rung Schiit Magni 2:
 
THD: Less than 0.003%, 20Hz-20KHz, at 1V RMS

IMD: Less than 0.004%, CCIF

 
That makes the speaker 100x more distorted than even the cheapie Magni 2 (at 1 V).
 
 
 
 
Nov 13, 2016 at 12:34 PM Post #1,500 of 6,930
delayeed said:
  How "gimped" is the single-ended headphone out? Looks like I'm going to have to run it single-ended for a while when I get it next month. 
Click to expand...

 
I alternate between the SE and XLR headphone jacks depending on which headphones I"m using.
 
The tonal qualities are the same.  The XLR puts out more power, but it's waaaaaaaay more than I need for my phones. The SE jack has more than enough power for the cans I own.
 
TLDR: SE isn't gimped at all, same quality, just less power than the overkill of the XLR jacks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 9 (members: 0, guests: 9)
Back
Top