[neogeosnk]

Finding Benchmark comparisons to Yggdrasil has been tough for me, or my googling skills need work outside of the 1-2 i might have found on review sights. Even harder are comparisons to the Auralic Vega which I almost picked up over the Yggdrasil.

I'm wondering what else they could really upgrade in USB with the new module theyre working on. I've seen a lot of comments putting USB Gen 5 on par with AES/Coax. Honestly the main thing keeping me from auditioning another DAC

I've had the Benchmark Dac3 and Yggy A2 at the same time. Switched back and forth between them for hours. No contest, Yggy 2 wins. However.. picked up the Matrix X-Sabre MQA and it beat both of them. My point? Don't bother with the Dac3, Yggy 2 is a good safe bet, but I prefer the Matrix x-sabre mqa for Sigma Delta duties. New Yggy usb module... is awesome!

 

[comzee]

picked up the Matrix X-Sabre MQA and it beat both of them.

I've found that the really good D/S dacs have a much blacker background, less fuzzy which give a greater sense of perceived detail vs the yggy-v2.
One downside to Yggy-v1 or v2 is grey background, slightly hazzy (in comparison to the best D/S dacs). I've found with extended listening tho that yggy-v2 apart form that represents better resolution and texture.
When it comes to high end stuff, I always try to stay away from the word "better". It's more like different, and fitting peoples listening preferences one way or the other.

 

[Deftone]

I've found that the really good D/S dacs have a much blacker background, less fuzzy which give a greater sense of perceived detail vs the yggy-v2.
One downside to Yggy-v1 or v2 is grey background, slightly hazzy (in comparison to the best D/S dacs). I've found with extended listening tho that yggy-v2 apart form that represents better resolution and texture.
When it comes to high end stuff, I always try to stay away from the word "better". It's more like different, and fitting peoples listening preferences one way or the other.

What causes the grey background on Yggdrasil? high noise floor?

 

[comzee]

What causes the grey background on Yggdrasil? high noise floor?

It's not a noise floor. I can only conjecture why it has a grey background, but if I had to put a bet on it, it's probably the output stage. Some might say it's the R2R ladder, but idk about that. I have a Master 7 (1704UK R2R) and it has a much blacker background than the yggy.
The thing is, it's only noticeable if you have it back to back against another high end dac A/B'ing them. For all intensive purposes it's a non issue.

 

[hifimckinney]

I've found that the really good D/S dacs have a much blacker background, less fuzzy which give a greater sense of perceived detail vs the yggy-v2.
One downside to Yggy-v1 or v2 is grey background, slightly hazzy (in comparison to the best D/S dacs). I've found with extended listening tho that yggy-v2 apart form that represents better resolution and texture.
When it comes to high end stuff, I always try to stay away from the word "better". It's more like different, and fitting peoples listening preferences one way or the other.

This has been my struggle too when I compare Yggdrasil with any good DS but I always end up liking Yggdrasil. For me, when I fail to understand, I find a reason to live with something. With this comparison, it is magic of Yggdrasil that tells me that if you like to listen to everything in the music, that comes with some additional baggage (some call it grey background) but with some other DS DAC, though I find them clean, feel something (magic in music) removed too.

 

[DrTone]

I have to agree that a good Sabre DAC has a blacker background and I’ll add more explosive bass. But the texture and timbre and feel just isn’t on par with the Yggdrasil A2. I also feel the Yggdrasil a little weaker with hi-res but bloody exceptional with red-book.

 

[YooperAudio]

I just completed a month-long comparison between a Chord Qutest and my Benchmark DAC3 HGC. For background, I use a full stack of Benchmark stuff: their HPA4 headphone/pre amp, two monoblocked AHB2 power amps, front-end feed from an ethernet-connected Bluesound Node 2 streaming TIDAL and Qobuz. No MQA here. Senn HD800S phones.

The gist of it: I was thinking early-on that I really preferred the Qutest over the DAC3 - at first I was going back and forth between them, but then settled on about a 3-week Qutest-only deep dive. At that point, I went back to A/B'ing the two DACs, and after all that, I unexpectedly discovered that I definitely preferred the DAC3 when it came to headphone listening. This kind of surprised me. The Qutest (using either of their Incisive filters) sounded a bit bloaty compared to the DAC3 - the bass was less defined, and it tended to cover up some of the finer details and clarity that I've come to value with the DAC3. For speaker listening, again, I now preferred the DAC3, but with not as wide of a margin over the Qutest as I experienced with the headphone listening tests. So I returned the Qutest. Maybe my conclusions had something to do with the notion of how the entire Benchmark stack synergizes with their components - not sure. But the difference - over time - was pretty noticeable for me, and I prefer the DAC3.

And I remain open to exploring other DACs in the under-$2500 category.

 

[neogeosnk]

I just completed a month-long comparison between a Chord Qutest and my Benchmark DAC3 HGC. For background, I use a full stack of Benchmark stuff: their HPA4 headphone/pre amp, two monoblocked AHB2 power amps, front-end feed from an ethernet-connected Bluesound Node 2 streaming TIDAL and Qobuz. No MQA here. Senn HD800S phones.

The gist of it: I was thinking early-on that I really preferred the Qutest over the DAC3 - at first I was going back and forth between them, but then settled on about a 3-week Qutest-only deep dive. At that point, I went back to A/B'ing the two DACs, and after all that, I unexpectedly discovered that I definitely preferred the DAC3 when it came to headphone listening. This kind of surprised me. The Qutest (using either of their Incisive filters) sounded a bit bloaty compared to the DAC3 - the bass was less defined, and it tended to cover up some of the finer details and clarity that I've come to value with the DAC3. For speaker listening, again, I now preferred the DAC3, but with not as wide of a margin over the Qutest as I experienced with the headphone listening tests. So I returned the Qutest. Maybe my conclusions had something to do with the notion of how the entire Benchmark stack synergizes with their components - not sure. But the difference - over time - was pretty noticeable for me, and I prefer the DAC3.

And I remain open to exploring other DACs in the under-$2500 category.

Matrix X-Sabre Pro or MQA best both. I have almost your exact same setup (HPA4) and prefer the Matrix over the Qutest and Dac3 which I owned all of them. I seriously don't get the DAC3 hype, yes I bought into it and had one for 6 months.

 

[YooperAudio]

Matrix X-Sabre Pro or MQA best both. I have almost your exact same setup (HPA4) and prefer the Matrix over the Qutest and Dac3 which I owned all of them. I seriously don't get the DAC3 hype, yes I bought into it and had one for 6 months.

I probably enjoy listening to the DAC3 more than you do (I'm not alone), but I'd be open to a trial of the Matrix DAC if I can have it for at least 2 weeks and not get stuck with some huge restocking fee. I'll check into it.

 

[Currawong]

I have a serious question. I see this is in the high end forum. I also see many people have high end components and also schiit items. I was wondering if schiit is actually considered high end?
I mean the stuff costs almost nothing. If cost is to be an indicator of high end. It does not have to be so I was wondering. I thought it was very entry level stuff? I see people here have asgard. I would be very interested in one if it is not just a very entry level amp? Again, I am being serious as I have no clue. Thank you

Something that needs to be seriously factored is that Schiit don't do two things that most manufacturers do. Firstly, they don't have a dealer network, so there's no big mark-up to RRP for the dealer profit. Secondly, they don't put expensive, shiny or sophisticated chassis on their components, so you don't end up paying for that. Collectively, it means they can sell the Yggy for far less (I'd bet on 1/3rd the price) of what it would cost if they did both those things.

Life after Yggdrasil... thinking about it now....
My current system is an Yggy v1 fed by a Singxer F1 + Taurus Mk2. I'm considering the Chord TT2 instead. My only concern is that it doesn't have an XLR4 output... the difference on the taurus between the 2 outputs was quite striking.

The TT2 is not a Taurus. Totally different design, so I'd say your concern about the lack of XLR4 is unwarranted. In fact, the Chord designs are optimised around a single-ended output, and are technically better from them, even when they have XLR outputs.

But the difference - over time - was pretty noticeable for me, and I prefer the DAC3.

I wonder if system synergy doesn't have something to do with that. While not quite the same thing, it has been interesting to compare the Hugo 2 direct to headphones, versus compared to other DACs when used through an amp. Sometimes my feelings about the Hugo have varied considerably.

 

[sonance]

Life after Yggdrasil... thinking about it now....
My current system is an Yggy v1 fed by a Singxer F1 + Taurus Mk2. I'm considering the Chord TT2 instead. My only concern is that it doesn't have an XLR4 output... the difference on the taurus between the 2 outputs was quite striking.
I've settled with the Elear since its release but am also considering upgrading to the Stellia, closed back being more suitable with a baby around
Thoughts on the upgrade avenues? headphone 1st or DAC+Amp? and if the latter, what DAC+amp combo should be considered if not a TT2 (within more or less the same budget)?
thanks!

Some balanced differential amps have significantly superior output on the XLR vs the TRSS for output - they are generally outputting higher voltage and current on those outputs and have a higher power rating, because they have separate amplifiers (generally 4) for XLR output + and - for each channel, to vastly simplify. Amps that are not balanced/differential, focus on standard amplification and can be just as good from a TRSS 1/4" jack. This is putting aside differences in channel separation, cabling and connector. I would think that a headphone like the Elear could be well driven by something like the TT2's 1/4" output.
I wouldn't read superior performance for XLR vs TRSS on a balanced amp to mean that it is inherently superior, just better on that type of amp.

It's not a noise floor. I can only conjecture why it has a grey background, but if I had to put a bet on it, it's probably the output stage. Some might say it's the R2R ladder, but idk about that. I have a Master 7 (1704UK R2R) and it has a much blacker background than the yggy.
The thing is, it's only noticeable if you have it back to back against another high end dac A/B'ing them. For all intensive purposes it's a non issue.

Again, I don't know for sure either, but one thing I've read / heard about the Yggy from technical analyses and from the designers is that the DAC chip is a very low output level DAC (not being originally intended for audio use) and the levels require significant amplification in the early gain stages. While there's no way to say for sure whether this has anything to do with the less black background, it may have something to do with it, IMHO. This also means that the temperature is important, hence the reports (all opinion based) of things sounding better after temperature stabilization 24+ hours (or weeks) later. Take all this as tea-leaf reading, wild speculation, etc, i.e. with a pinch of salt.

 

[quanghuy147]

Could anyone help me to compare Yggy A2 to Holo Spring 3?

I am using Yggy A1 and want to upgrade to either A2 or Spring 3.

Is it worth $550 to upgrade to A2?

Thank you.

 

[acguitar84]

I'm kind of in the same boat as the above poster deciding about Yggy upgrade (A1 to A2). I have two Yggy A1's on 2 of my desktop workstations. On the 3rd one, I'm using a Mimby/Jot combo. I'm trying to decide if it's even worth upgrading the two yggy's to A2 (or simply selling and replacing them with something else).

As for the 3rd desktop system (it's also my primary headphone rig now), I'm thinking of upgrading the DAC to the RME ADI-2 DAC fs.

I'd also like to try the Phonitor X. I was thinking I'd "upgrade" my headphone system from Mimby/Jot to RME/Phonitor X over the next year. If I really like that combo, sell the Yggy's and go with this combo on all 3 systems (eventually). So any comments from anyone on Yggy A1 vs A2 vs RME DAC would be welcome.

 

[Torq]

Could anyone help me to compare Yggy A2 to Holo Spring 3?

I'm not going to write a detailed comparison, since I've done that elsewhere, but when I had both I wound up using the Yggdrasil A2 more and more, until I got to the point where I wasn't listening to the Spring DAC KTE/L3 at all (except for a few DSD albums, which in the end didn't sound particularly different just being converted to PCM).

Is it worth $550 to upgrade to A2?

Yes.

If there's a most cost effective upgrade from an Yggdrasil A1 to anything else, I don't know what it is.

 

[eee1111]

Could anyone help me to compare Yggy A2 to Holo Spring 3?

I am using Yggy A1 and want to upgrade to either A2 or Spring 3.

Is it worth $550 to upgrade to A2?

Thank you.

Spring 3 gets my vote.
You need to use the singxer and i2s if you do.