[disastermouse]

Quote:

So after being to a meet, I have the HE-500's in mind for an upgrade in the distant future. Since the A2 is coming in, I'm wondering if it's a good investment for the HE-500's in the future, I'd love any impressions on those and/or the Mad Dogs (which I own). I'm aware that there are mixed opinions on the A1 for the HE-500's, though the power seems to be the same, I wonder if nevertheless there'll be improvements.

I can't tell you about the A2, but I just got the Magni and it's truly a night and day difference from the FiiO E9 and O2 (the O2 was abysmal with my chain).  It's the best $99 I ever spent and it gives me a great deal of confidence in Schiit, regardless of the opinion of them held by the O2 faithful.
 
What is the soundstage like on the Mad Dogs?  I thought that planars were just cursed to terrible sound stages until I got the Magni and heard my HE-500 expand in width and depth.  The HE-500 is my first and (so far) only planar headphone and so I have no idea how it compares to the Mad Dogs or LCD-2.2.  All I can say is that the amps were definitely the weakest link in my chain and the cheap (*ahem* inexpensive) Magni has produced a difference I would not have ever attributed to an amp.

 

[hodgjy]

Bit perfect shouldn't have any sound.  If it does, it's not bit perfect.
 
Quote:

I like the sound of an Apple but I find Windows 8 to have a more refined sound character. It sounds better for dubstep.

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

Bit perfect shouldn't have any sound.  If it does, it's not bit perfect.
 

Disagree completely. Amarra sounds different from Itunes, Foobar, PM, etc.
This is purely in stock form i.e. no EQ, etc.
 
All aforementioned players are capable of bit perfect playback.

 

[hodgjy]

Then it's not bit perfect.
 
The same dac should read the same 0s and 1s to make the same sound, regardless of the player.  If the player is coloring the sound, it's altering the 0s and 1s.  Not bit perfect.
 
Quote:

Disagree completely. Amarra sounds different from Itunes, Foobar, PM, etc.
This is purely in stock form i.e. no EQ, etc.
 
All aforementioned players are capable of bit perfect playback.

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

Then it's not bit perfect.
 
The same dac should read the same 0s and 1s to make the same sound, regardless of the player.  If the player is coloring the sound, it's altering the 0s and 1s.  Not bit perfect.
 

Then I've simply never experienced bit perfect playback because
all music players impart their own flavor of some sort.

 

[LarryKingsShoes]

Quote:

Bit perfect shouldn't have any sound.  If it does, it's not bit perfect.
 

 
I was kidding about Apple vs Windows 8; my ears aren't that good, no way I'd be able to hear differences in operating systems.

Truth be told, my experience with external DACs is rather limited but I'm looking forward to getting my hands on a Modi. JRiver Media Center looks to be extremely flexible with its output. I'm not sure what settings I'll need to use to get the best results but I'm sure there's information out there.

 

[MickeyVee]

Re-read your post.. please ignore. Rethinking the digital file to player output process..
Quote:

Then it's not bit perfect.
 
The same dac should read the same 0s and 1s to make the same sound, regardless of the player.  If the player is coloring the sound, it's altering the 0s and 1s.  Not bit perfect.
 

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

Whoah.. not true.. assuming that any decent DAC (or software) gets bit perfect in through the receiver to the actual DAC chip/program.. there's the DA conversion, how it processes the output, changes those bits to an actual analog wave... differences exist in how and how well software does the conversion.
 
And for DACs, all of the parts in the chain leading to the outputs.. take power supply for instance. Higher end DAC haver separate power supplies for the digital and analog sections to minimize interference/crosstalk/distortion, etc. Some use op-amps on the output while others are discrete components.  That's why a $100 DAC does not sound the same as a $1000 DAC. Bit perfect in does not mean the same output.
Otherwise, following your logic, Modi = Bifrost = Gungnir 

 

Even if, say, you're using 1 DAC, getting bit perfect. There's still differences between music players
when it comes to memory playback,dithered volume, digital attenuation, upsampling, buffering, throughput,output, etc
 
I don't understand how hodgjy ascertained that there aren't other/many factors when it comes to music playback.
However I won't argue with his findings, I just disagree. 
 
There are a lot of people that work on the software side of things that conclude that it comes down
to implementation just like anything else. in which, there's not really a 1 answer/solution to why different
music players impart their own sound Or even sound different. It's just rather a combination of many things.

 

[markm1]

Quote:

 
A DAC is all about "clocking".   How many times per second a source is sampled.
Note to readers: This is not a complete explanation.  Just trying to convey concepts.
 
When music is recorded there is a complimentary device called an ADC  "Analog to Digital Converter".
When the analog waves pulses from an instrument hit the microphone they go to the analog side of the ADC.
 
When you see frequency numbers like 44.1 kHz or 96kHz that is the clock rate or number or analog samples taken each second.
kHz is 1000 samples taken in one second.  Hence when you see a digital music file that is labeled 96 kHz that means that 96,000 "samples" (like free food at Costco) were taken every second and converted to bits and written to a music file.  If you are using iTunes, under songs list,  you can go to view options and click on "sample rate".
 
A DAC is the converse of an ADC.  It takes the digital file, un-samples it and turns it to an analog source for your amp to amplify.
 
Edit.  The quality of the music from a digital source has a lot to do with the specialized processor that performs the conversion, as well as the "stability" of the clock source and synchronization between the audio source (computer) and the DAC.  This "clock sync is done over the interface.  Optical Toslink or USB.   There is endless debate over which is better.
Edit2: That is what you are paying for in a DAC.
Edit3:  The quality of the recording / source music and how it gets to the ADC inn the studio is IMO the most important part of all.

Holy cow! I didn't realize that I needed to have a background in IT or be a sound engineer before buyiing a DAC!
 
Just kidding

 
 
From one tech challenged individual-your information is really very hefpful.
 
Thanks again.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Then it's not bit perfect.
 
The same dac should read the same 0s and 1s to make the same sound, regardless of the player.  If the player is coloring the sound, it's altering the 0s and 1s.  Not bit perfect.
 

 
You can have a DAC that alters the sound but is still bit-perfect. In addition to the quantized values of the samples, you also have the TIMING of those samples. If your timing is enough off, such as by way of jitter, you can alter the sound while remaining bit-perfect.
 
se

 

[hodgjy]

What you say is true.  But, if you have the same music file, two different players, same usb port, and same DAC, but they sound different, the only culprit left is the player.  One, or both, of the players is altering the music file.  So, that's not bit perfect.  
 
Quote:

 
You can have a DAC that alters the sound but is still bit-perfect. In addition to the quantized values of the samples, you also have the TIMING of those samples. If your timing is enough off, such as by way of jitter, you can alter the sound while remaining bit-perfect.
 
se

 

[Iamnothim]

My experience...

In September, before my HP's I bought a Cambridge Audio DAC Magic plus.
I thought it sounded great over my Thiel CS 1.2 and the in wall Paradigm speakers throughout the house..... Then it had a problem and I sent it back.

I discovered Schiit and HPs etc etc.....

When I replaced the $599 DacMagic Plus with a $349 Bifrost. It sounded like a $2000 upgrade. It was a "slap you in the face" difference.   

There are hundreds of components under the hood resister and capacitor values tolerances, circuit paths. Thousands of decisions go into these products.  Schiit builds a better product. IMO. 

 

[Bananaheadlin]

Asgard2 / Bifrost
Straight to the point.
Much better than Magni/Modi
A long way to go to Lyr / Bifrost

Very clear.
Musical
But I'm missing the soundstage that I get with my glass.
Crisp bass but overlapping

more....

ordinary....pedestrian 

Not sure if you still have both, but I've heard that the difference between the Modi and the Bifrost is much more pronounced than the difference between the Magni and the Asgard. Do you happen to still have both?

 

[vaed]

Hey guys,
 
I just got my bifrost in, and for some reason it won't play 24/192 on my PC. At first, Windows was telling me the device didn't support it. Upon restarting my computer, I was able to set it to 24/192, but then I get clicking noises from the bifrost and the test tones won't play through, and I get this very small distortion at the end of the playing tones. Can anyone help me out? I'm using an optical in/out.
 
EDIT: Now J.River is telling me that NONE of the output formats are supported... What is going on?

 

[Defiant00]

Quote:

Hey guys,
 
I just got my bifrost in, and for some reason it won't play 24/192. At first, Windows was telling me the device didn't support it. Upon restarting my computer, I was able to set it to 24/192, but then I get clicking noises from the bifrost and the test tones won't play through, and I get this very small distortion at the end of the tones. Can anyone help me out? I'm using an optical in/out.

 
If you're using optical then it's most likely an issue with whatever is outputting the optical signal. If you have anything else that can take an optical signal I'd first try that to narrow it down. I'd also try updating the drivers for your motherboard or sound card (whatever you're using to output).
 
As far as Windows telling you it doesn't support it, that actually has nothing to do with the Bifrost. Windows doesn't have any idea what (if anything) is hooked up to the other end of that optical cable, so if it was saying it was unsupported then what it's telling you is that it doesn't think your optical output supports 24/192. You may want to look up the specs for your motherboard or sound card and verify that it does, there are certainly a number of well-known computers (like most Macs) that don't go above 24/96 through optical.
 
I'd check that sort of information first, and if everything you can find seems to indicate that your motherboard / sound card should support 24/192 then just shoot Schiit an email, I'm sure they'll have more/better ideas.