cws5
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2005
- Posts
- 47
- Likes
- 0
This thread is for those who prefer to use their Bifrost Multibit in NOS mode. I'd enjoy hearing about the experiences that led to your decision.
Reminder: Bifrost 1 (not BF2) is digital filterless (and non-oversampling) when fed 176.4kHz and 192kHz input sample rates. To avoid potential confusion: it's not NOS that aurally matters here; it's taking the digital filter out of the chain that aurally matters. Here's another way to put the same point: the digital filter (Schiit's proprietary 'megacomboburrito filter') is engaged on BF1 multibit if, and only if, BF1 oversamples, which it doesn't when fed input rates of 176.4khz or higher.
I prefer the BF1 multibit in NOS mode.
This could have to do largely with the kind of music I usually listen to -- symphonies, string quartets, non-electified jazz. Acoustic music recordings, unlike most rock, pop, etc., include complex instrument placement cues in the audio signal.
To appreciate what's going on here, consider a typical rock album, which will often be recorded one instrument at a time or more than one together but with instruments in isolation booths, with the signal for each instrument consisting mainly of a close mic, even when a room mike in the isolation booth is part of the mix. In contrast, some classical orchestral recordings are binaural. The whole orchestra, 75+ instruments, are recorded on only two microphones. One famous classical label - Decca - became well-known for the quality of its orchestral recordings, which use the famous 'decca tree', a weird rig of merely three mics.
For whatever reason, these complex instrument placement cues are more evident when in NOS mode. Fancy audiophiles will say 'there is more air to the sound'. I agree (though talking about air isn't all that helpful). In comparison, NOS mode does little for music not having such instrument placement cues in the recording. I'm not sure exactly what's going on here. My hypothesis is that the digital filter (not just Schiit's but anybody's) can somehow mess with the original signal, making the overall sound picture seem more coherent or smoother, etc., but at the cost of loss of details like these instrument placement cues.
Reminder: Bifrost 1 (not BF2) is digital filterless (and non-oversampling) when fed 176.4kHz and 192kHz input sample rates. To avoid potential confusion: it's not NOS that aurally matters here; it's taking the digital filter out of the chain that aurally matters. Here's another way to put the same point: the digital filter (Schiit's proprietary 'megacomboburrito filter') is engaged on BF1 multibit if, and only if, BF1 oversamples, which it doesn't when fed input rates of 176.4khz or higher.
I prefer the BF1 multibit in NOS mode.
This could have to do largely with the kind of music I usually listen to -- symphonies, string quartets, non-electified jazz. Acoustic music recordings, unlike most rock, pop, etc., include complex instrument placement cues in the audio signal.
To appreciate what's going on here, consider a typical rock album, which will often be recorded one instrument at a time or more than one together but with instruments in isolation booths, with the signal for each instrument consisting mainly of a close mic, even when a room mike in the isolation booth is part of the mix. In contrast, some classical orchestral recordings are binaural. The whole orchestra, 75+ instruments, are recorded on only two microphones. One famous classical label - Decca - became well-known for the quality of its orchestral recordings, which use the famous 'decca tree', a weird rig of merely three mics.
For whatever reason, these complex instrument placement cues are more evident when in NOS mode. Fancy audiophiles will say 'there is more air to the sound'. I agree (though talking about air isn't all that helpful). In comparison, NOS mode does little for music not having such instrument placement cues in the recording. I'm not sure exactly what's going on here. My hypothesis is that the digital filter (not just Schiit's but anybody's) can somehow mess with the original signal, making the overall sound picture seem more coherent or smoother, etc., but at the cost of loss of details like these instrument placement cues.
Last edited:
