[ecapsretliab]

Sometimes you don't appreciate what you have until it's gone... and then comes back again a month later.

 

[Hooster]

I am curious as to Chord DAC fans thoughts about this recent published review of a DAC. To avoid controversy, the name is removed. I struggle to believe that leaving it plugged in for a month would produce such a drastic difference. Here we have talked about adjustment for the brain with Hugo 2's output of increased data, but I am still relatively new to audiophile world. The use of hyperbole by the reviewer suggests much to me, but I am interested in the thoughts of others. The ***DAC is similar in price to H2. I almost wanted to leave a comment about "why not leave it plugged in for 2 months?" but I did not want to incur a storm. This is a small exert. underlining is mine. Thanks!

Although ***** warned me that the **DAC** wouldn’t sound good right out of the box, I gave it a quick listen anyway after an hour of warm-up. He was right; the ***DAC*** was hard, bright, forward, and flat. I checked in with it a couple of times over the next week and heard it improving somewhat, but it was still disappointing. I decided to let it sit in my rack, powered up, for a full month before revisiting it.

When I returned to the ****DAC*** I discovered a DAC that wasn’t superb. It wasn’t even good. And it certainly wasn’t “good for the money.” What I discovered, to my amazement, was a DAC that was stunningly great, period."

Let's just think about this for a second. Let's say that he purchased a high end TV and right out of the box the picture looked faded and flat. He checked it a couple of times over the next week and the image improved somewhat but it was still disappointing. He decided to let the TV sit in his rack, powered up for a full month before revisiting it. When he returned to the TV it was "stunningly great". Does this sound plausible? No, because I have never heard of a TV's picture improving due to a burn in effect. A TV is at it's best, right out of the box and after that a gradual deterioration sets in.

A DAC is no more or less of an electric appliance than a TV is. ("If brain space indicates the importance of a sense, then vision is the most important. Roughly 30 percent of neurons in the brain's cortex are devoted to vision, compared with 8 percent for touch, and 2 percent for hearing" http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/brain-games/articles/brain-games-watch-this-perception-facts/ ). If TVs really improved due to burn in we would be much more likely to notice it than if a component for audio reproduction improved through burn in. On the other hand it may be that our brain is more likely to take what we see at face value while it would be more prone to fill in gaps in auditory information with what it thinks it should be hearing, see McGurck effect, etc. My conclusion is that the brain is burning in, not the electronic component.

Chances are that the DAC is in fact objectively hard, bright, forward and flat. His brain got used to it, and after that the DAC was the best thing since baked beans.

 

[Whazzzup]

Mmmm beans

 

[Deftone]

this also interest me..i want to upgrade from my current focal alpha 50s to something more detailed, resolving still...but without busting the bank

Canali, your always looking to upgrade...

Just go for end game right now, save the time and money!

 

[musickid]

Rob has said H2 needs no burn in. if you can't trust the designer who can you trust. in the same way from what i recall schitt audio dac designers do recommend a burn in period as do designers of the metrum dacs who also state their dacs needs around 120 hours or so to sound their best. different dac topologies vary. again go with the designer not hearsay.

 

[Hooster]

Rob has said H2 needs no burn in. if you can't trust the designer who can you trust. in the same way from what i recall schitt audio dac designers do recommend a burn in period as do designers of the metrum dacs who also state their dacs needs around 120 hours or so to sound their best. different dac topologies vary. again go with the designer not hearsay.

If they would provide objective measurements that prove their burn in theory, then I would believe them. On the other hand I have little doubt that they actually think that they hear a difference after x number of hours. I am sure they are honest and believe they heard a difference. A difference which probably exists more in their own brain than in the component they are talking about. There is nothing magic about a dac, any more than there is about a TV, or a refrigerator or toaster for that matter.

 

[musickid]

I have no background in electronic engineering but i have read that there is a real physical acclimatisation period i.e. something going on within electronic components when new and how there can be gradual performance change with time. Schitt audio folk are experts on these things.

 

[HanyTheo]

all my Chord Dac's have sounded great from day one.....my Yiggy however sounded awful and needed tons of break in

Yggy is a different story for me, i think its even better than dave. It just sounded fuller, more dynamic n fun to listen to

 

[Hooster]

I have no background in electronic engineering but i have read that there is a real physical acclimatisation period i.e. something going on within electronic components when new and how there can be gradual performance change with time. Schitt audio folk are experts on these things.

Sorry for the OT, I have no idea how or why Schitt has filtered into the Hugo2 thread, but this has made me curious. I know Schiit is a maker of no nonsense cost effective equipment. That they are also experts on gradual change with time of audio components is news to me. How have they achieved this expertise? Tried various components like capacitors, resistors, transistors, etc. and investigated how they change over time?

According to Schiit: " we burn-in every product from Asgard 2 on up for a minimum of 1 day to help catch any early failures. (Ragnarok and Yggdrasil get 4 days each). We also keep very close tabs on any service and support needs, so you can rest assured of years of great sound." Not a word about burning in to improve sound quality. It is simply a form of QC.

So, what makes them "experts on these things". I am dying to know.

 

[musickid]

Just going on what i've read in the schitt audio forums where burn in and leaving dacs on 24/7 seems to be a big issue. mainly when i was weighing up gunjnir multibit vs hugo 2. hugo 2 won for me based on many different factors.

 

[iichigoz]

Super awesome case man! Love the leather smell!

 

[audi0nick128]

Where you got this from already? What did you pay? Or are you a tester?

Cheers

 

[Christer]

I am curious as to Chord DAC fans thoughts about this recent published review of a DAC. To avoid controversy, the name is removed. I struggle to believe that leaving it plugged in for a month would produce such a drastic difference. Here we have talked about adjustment for the brain with Hugo 2's output of increased data, but I am still relatively new to audiophile world. The use of hyperbole by the reviewer suggests much to me, but I am interested in the thoughts of others. The ***DAC is similar in price to H2. I almost wanted to leave a comment about "why not leave it plugged in for 2 months?" but I did not want to incur a storm. This is a small exert. underlining is mine. Thanks!


Although ***** warned me that the **DAC** wouldn’t sound good right out of the box, I gave it a quick listen anyway after an hour of warm-up. He was right; the ***DAC*** was hard, bright, forward, and flat. I checked in with it a couple of times over the next week and heard it improving somewhat, but it was still disappointing. I decided to let it sit in my rack, powered up, for a full month before revisiting it.

When I returned to the ****DAC*** I discovered a DAC that wasn’t superb. It wasn’t even good. And it certainly wasn’t “good for the money.” What I discovered, to my amazement, was a DAC that was stunningly great, period."

Interesting, there has been a lot of discussion around the Shiit Yggdrasil both here and elsewhere.
Some like it very much as in the really surprisingly raving review from "The Absolute Sound" you quote.
Others strongly argue against it and maintain that because of its measurable technical limitations it cannot be transparent.
All I can say is that after reading that same review I would want to audition it.
Either that reviewer has got thick cottonwads stuck deep into his ears?
Or could there possibly be a lot more factors at work than the usually quoted tech specs that matter in making a DAC a superior performer?
Some recent posts comparing TT and Hugo 2 also indicate that there might very well be a lot more at play than taps and filters .
It seems nobody here is terribly interested in my suggested comparison track Mozart live at the Proms from Prom 3 this year. But my own comparisons between HUGO 1 and the on paper technically less advanced DAC 2 ,are very clear: DAC 2 sounds clearly more realistic, fuller and warmer and more "musical"if you will, via HE1000V 2 to me.
I was hoping more people here than me were regular Prommers, but obviously not?
Anyway the main differences I hear even with lightly scored music like Mozart's 38th symphony and his 3rd Violin Concerto are better timbre and simply more real instrument sound via DAC 2 than HUGO which sounds too thin and lean and even a bit hard and "digital" with both massed tutti strings and the exposed solo violin in the concerto.
And when the Prommers in the Arena, start their foot-stamping in the interval, via HUGO it is all there, and very clear and detailed, but almost as heard from a distance or from "smaller feet" ,than the almost "being there" experience DAC 2 delivers.
The Royal Albert Hall acoustic is huge but sounds a bit smaller via HUGO than DAC 2.
Trust me, I have been there right on that floor more times than I can count.
And we are not even talking real hi res ,with if I am not wrong 16/48 streamed BBC Radio 3.
I will audition HUGO 2 as well in due time. And I will once again let my own ears be the judge using the comprehensive collection of live/ versus recorded reference material I have, instead of trusting too much what others with often very different references have to say about either of the two or several other HUGO 2 competitors.
Cheers Christer

 

[HanyTheo]

Super awesome case man! Love the leather smell!

Needs head 2 head with my DIY work hahaaa. But why the gap underneath?

 

[x RELIC x]

@Christer, are you referring to the iFi iDAC2, or the NAD DAC 2, or another DAC 2?