[Ableza]

Thanks...I appreciate your efforts to 'help me'.

Take a chill pill, dude.

 

[Jason Stoddard]

Okay, guys, enough discussion of marketing BS. As I've said before, this is a Schiit thread, not "any old manufacturers' thread." If you bring claims from another company, expect them to be dissected (exactly like our claims are). If you are dissecting, you need to add lots of caveats unless you have the circuit diagram right in front of you.
 
Because, the final word on "Class A" is this: about 98% of "Class A" claims are for amps that are not true Class A designs. 
 
To see what I mean, let's see what Schiit calls "Class A." Exactly ONE product is tagged as Class A: Asgard 2. Asgard 2 is, by any definition, Class A. It cannot ever leave Class A. Its single-MOSFET output stage is always 100% on. It's not handing off to an opposite polarity device, it's not sliding the bias around, it's not "biased into Class A a lot of the time," it is Class A. Period. End of statement.
 
"Buh, buh, buh, other guys say that their complementary-output amps are Class A, and other guys say their bias slides around to keep it in Class A, and other guys say their preamp circuitry is Class A, and other guys say they bias op-amps into Class A," you might be saying. 
 
And that's fine. They can say that. They can always find a way to make some tenuous connection to Class A, just like McNuggets are "Made with white meat." (Perhaps the single greatest marketing phrase of all time, as it says absolutely nothing. Think about it.)
 
Here's the reality: unless the circuit is a single output transistor biased to its highest operating point, it will not provide all the benefits of real Class A. And that's what Schiit defines as Class A. 
 
Why? Let's look a bit deeper:
 

1. Complementary output stages, with both N-channel and P-channel devices, can be biased such that they are running all the current they're ever expected to source, and called "Class A." However, these output stages CAN go out of Class A, so they are more properly called "high bias Class AB." They also have problems with transconductance doubling past the turn-on region and are hobbled by the fact that N and P devices are never really "complementary." Magni and Jotunheim use complementary output stages.
2. Sliding bias can keep the output stage nominally in Class A, but it cannot predict the demands of the music, so their sonics are dependent on their control system, and how finely it is tuned. Lyr uses a sliding bias output stage, we spent a lot of time tuning it. It does not sound like Class A.
3. Preamp circuitry being Class A? Well, I'd certainly hope so. There's no reason that it needs to be anything else.
4. Biasing op-amps into Class A? Yeah, you can do that. Sometimes it can make them sound better. Sometimes not. But again, it's a complementary output stage, with the limitations of that approach.

 
As a bonus, consider Mjolnir 2 and Ragnarok. They use a circlotron output stage. Circlotrons use same-type devices (all N-channel, for example), so they sidestep the "complement mismatch" problem. They are not inherently Class A, however. Both Mjolnir 2 and Ragnarok run high bias Class AB. Do we call it Class A? No. Because it's not.
 
And there you have it. Bottom line, the best thing to do, when comparing marketing claims, is simply to not do it at all.

 

[sam6550a]

  Okay, guys, enough discussion of marketing BS. As I've said before, this is a Schiit thread, not "any old manufacturers' thread." If you bring claims from another company, expect them to be dissected (exactly like our claims are). If you are dissecting, you need to add lots of caveats unless you have the circuit diagram right in front of you.
 
Because, the final word on "Class A" is this: about 98% of "Class A" claims are for amps that are not true Class A designs. 
 
To see what I mean, let's see what Schiit calls "Class A." Exactly ONE product is tagged as Class A: Asgard 2. Asgard 2 is, by any definition, Class A. It cannot ever leave Class A. Its single-MOSFET output stage is always 100% on. It's not handing off to an opposite polarity device, it's not sliding the bias around, it's not "biased into Class A a lot of the time," it is Class A. Period. End of statement.
 
"Buh, buh, buh, other guys say that their complementary-output amps are Class A, and other guys say their bias slides around to keep it in Class A, and other guys say their preamp circuitry is Class A, and other guys say they bias op-amps into Class A," you might be saying. 
 
And that's fine. They can say that. They can always find a way to make some tenuous connection to Class A, just like McNuggets are "Made with white meat." (Perhaps the single greatest marketing phrase of all time, as it says absolutely nothing. Think about it.)
 
Here's the reality: unless the circuit is a single output transistor biased to its highest operating point, it will not provide all the benefits of real Class A. And that's what Schiit defines as Class A. 
 
Why? Let's look a bit deeper:
 

1. Complementary output stages, with both N-channel and P-channel devices, can be biased such that they are running all the current they're ever expected to source, and called "Class A." However, these output stages CAN go out of Class A, so they are more properly called "high bias Class AB." They also have problems with transconductance doubling past the turn-on region and are hobbled by the fact that N and P devices are never really "complementary." Magni and Jotunheim use complementary output stages.
2. Sliding bias can keep the output stage nominally in Class A, but it cannot predict the demands of the music, so their sonics are dependent on their control system, and how finely it is tuned. Lyr uses a sliding bias output stage, we spent a lot of time tuning it. It does not sound like Class A.
3. Preamp circuitry being Class A? Well, I'd certainly hope so. There's no reason that it needs to be anything else.
4. Biasing op-amps into Class A? Yeah, you can do that. Sometimes it can make them sound better. Sometimes not. But again, it's a complementary output stage, with the limitations of that approach.

 
As a bonus, consider Mjolnir 2 and Ragnarok. They use a circlotron output stage. Circlotrons use same-type devices (all N-channel, for example), so they sidestep the "complement mismatch" problem. They are not inherently Class A, however. Both Mjolnir 2 and Ragnarok run high bias Class AB. Do we call it Class A? No. Because it's not.
 
And there you have it. Bottom line, the best thing to do, when comparing marketing claims, is simply to not do it at all.

Many, many years ago, in a place far away, we characterized amplifier classes by the % of time that the plate current [yeah, tubes] was flowing at the quiescent value: A= 100%,  B= 60-50%,  C [used for RF amplifiers]  < 50%. Engineering was so much simpler and straightforward then. Also, folks understood what was being published.

 

[darkarn]

I guess this is one of the few times where we should let our ears, not our eyes, do the judgment eh

 

[xuan87]

Sounds like it's time for a post about "degrees of class-a-ish-ness," because manufacturers will literally call ANYTHING class A. Maybe later today.

With respect to fringe auditory experiences, I think I can best summarize my position by relating a short conversation. Dave had come up with a tweak involving Ethernet cables. A very, very improbable tweak, from a scientific point of view. Mike heard it.

Later, David (not Dave) asked me: "have you tried the Dave tweak?"

"No," I told him.

"Why not?" He asked. "There's no fun in that."

"I know. But there's sanity."

And there you go. I don't prescribe, nor encourage, nor participate in, audio nervosa craziness. It makes my life much simpler, easier, calmer, and enjoyable. YMMV.

You also forgot much cheaper lol. All my reasons for not even getting exotic cables, just cables with the right plugs, and durable.

 

[landroni]

  Not arguing with you, and none of us heard what she heard. But, she did fairly quickly recognize my little impromptu test. All I'm saying is different people tune into different things, and just because it doesn't make sense to us doesn't mean it doesn't have a little reality behind it.

Run into similar arguments in the photo industry, where I've spent most of my adult life. I can tell you more about how a photo was taken and processed in 30 seconds of looking at than most people even know exists. But then again, that's my background and expertise. I don't expect people without my level of education and experience to be able to do that, or to even understand it. And even with that, due to changes in the photo industry and the economy, these days I spend all my time dealing with laser retinal scanners for ophthalmologists and optometrists. 
 

Reminds me of an incident I've had with a professional photographer, instants after she glanced upon my laptop screen.
 
 
I'm using a thing called redshift to notch some parts of the color spectrum (esp. blue) using gamma filtering, to make things easier on the eyes (long story, which I won't go into for fear of stirring "objectivists"). Usually when people sit in front of my computer don't notice anything in particular, and use it, then finish using it without ever noticing this. But she immediately pin-pointed that there was a yellowish dominant hue to the screen, which prompted me to disable redshift, at which point she was a much happier camper...

 

[Rowethren]

I don't supposed we could get any comment regarding the sizable price hike in the UK for almost all Schiit gear? I know the exchange rate has gone down but to have it end up mostly more £ than $ seems a bit insane to me... 

 

[Mr Rick]

  I don't supposed we could get any comment regarding the sizable price hike in the UK for almost all Schiit gear? I know the exchange rate has gone down but to have it end up mostly more £ than $ seems a bit insane to me... 

 
I buy watches from the UK. Their prices have gone down about the same amount as you describe. It's a great time to buy from the UK.

 

[DroidSkin]

I don't supposed we could get any comment regarding the sizable price hike in the UK for almost all Schiit gear? I know the exchange rate has gone down but to have it end up mostly more £ than $ seems a bit insane to me... 

VAT, shipping costs and distributors smallish profit would be my guess...

 

[peterzzz]

  I don't supposed we could get any comment regarding the sizable price hike in the UK for almost all Schiit gear? I know the exchange rate has gone down but to have it end up mostly more £ than $ seems a bit insane to me... 

Current rate seems to be 1 USD = 0.82 GBP, add the 20% VAT rate to it to obtain: 1 USD = (0.83*1.20) = 0.98GBP and then you've not covered import duties and shipping. So more GBP than USD seems legit.

 

[Faber65]

 
I don't supposed we could get any comment regarding the sizable price hike in the UK for almost all Schiit gear? I know the exchange rate has gone down but to have it end up mostly more £ than $ seems a bit insane to me... 

Current rate seems to be 1 USD = 0.82 GBP, add the 20% VAT rate to it to obtain: 1 USD = (0.83*1.20) = 0.98GBP and then you've not covered import duties and shipping. So more GBP than USD seems legit.

And the mark-up of the importer which has the coats of its own organization to bear, plus some profit to make it for living.
I don't see anything so scandalous in the European prices.

 

[USAudio]

Anyone see the Yggdrasil review in the latest issue (Feb 2017) of Stereophile?
 
The subjective reviewer loved it.  However with the objective reviewer who performs the technical measurements, the results were mixed.  He felt the analog circuitry is superbly well designed, but that its digital circuitry is not fully optimized and hoped this could be addressed with a firmware upgrade.
 
Opinions of Stereophile among many folks are less than favorable but should Schiit decide a firmware upgrade is desired, can the Yggdrasil be upgraded by users in the field or must it be sent back to Schiit?

 

[Rowethren]

  Anyone see the Yggdrasil review in the latest issue (Feb 2017) of Stereophile?
 
The subjective reviewer loved it.  However with the objective reviewer who performs the technical measurements, the results were mixed.  He felt the analog circuitry is superbly well designed, but that its digital circuitry is not fully optimized and hoped this could be addressed with a firmware upgrade.
 
Opinions of Stereophile among many folks are less than favorable but should Schiit decide a firmware upgrade is desired, can the Yggdrasil be upgraded by users in the field or must it be sent back to Schiit?

 
I think I remember Mike said he would have a look at their sample if/when they send it back to him to see if there was a fault with it. Could be miss remembering though.

 

[Brubacca]

Anyone see the Yggdrasil review in the latest issue (Feb 2017) of Stereophile?
 


The subjective reviewer loved it.  However with the objective reviewer who performs the technical measurements, the results were mixed.  He felt the analog circuitry is superbly well designed, but that its digital circuitry is not fully optimized and hoped this could be addressed with a firmware upgrade.
 


Opinions of Stereophile among many folks are less than favorable but should Schiit decide a firmware upgrade is desired, can the Yggdrasil be upgraded by users in the field or must it be sent back to Schiit?

Basically it sounds great and our oscilloscope didn't like it. Sorry to upset anyone, but...

Why does anyone care how it measures? As long as it isn't putting dangerous voltages where they shouldn't be, all that matters is how it sounds.

Am I missing something here?

 

[JohnnyCanuck]

Basically it sounds great and our oscilloscope didn't like it. Sorry to upset anyone, but...

Why does anyone care how it measures? As long as it isn't putting dangerous voltages where they shouldn't be, all that matters is how it sounds.

Am I missing something here?

 
Nope.  You've summed it up nicely.