New Schiit! Ragnarok and Yggdrasil

[Misterrogers]

I was fortunate enough to be selected for the beta and there's no way in $%^$# I'm sending this thing back. 

 

[commtrd]

I was fortunate enough to be selected for the beta and there's no way in $%^$# I'm sending this thing back. 

That says a lot right there. If the Rag is that good and much more favorable price, it's kinda not too smart not to consider that.

 

[purrin]

   
I understand that you personally didn't like the GS-X but your hyperbole makes your other opinions suspect.
 

 
I was hoping to be oblique; that by being oblique, I could avoid answering all together. My statement was not intended hyperbole, otherwise I would have said something like this: "sizzly etched analytical SS abomination" (not my statement BTW, just to be clear, but there is a grain of truth to that opinion, pun intended).
 
Allow me to be more direct without hyberbole so that my opinions will be "less suspect".
 
IMHO, FWIW, my 2 cents, the GS-X mk2 is not in the same class as the Rag. While I do think the GS-X mk2 is a good amp, I've never thought it was a great amp, especially considering the recent price increase. The quality and the beauty of the GSX2's construction is top notch. But that is a low priority for me. I'd rather pay for sound quality than sexy looks.
 
The GSX2's strengths are clarity and resolution, and even in that sense, it's not nearly as resolving as the Rag. The GSX2 is about on par with the Mjolnir in terms of resolving ability. Where I am disappointed with the GSX2 is its tonality and treble behavior. It is a lean sounding amp. Not necessarily bright, but rather lacking in bass, particularly with impact. The treble can be rather etched, edgy, with sheen, etc. some silbilance, no glare. The detail presentation is a little bit "in your face" (which I don't mind), but just pointing this out because the Rag is more resolving, yet much more subtle about it. The Rag has a better ability to distinguish different similar volumes of sound. It's more nuanced. Less "square" - to borrow a phrase from someone I know.
 
So in terms of bass, the Rag is still subtle in bass, yet still not as lean as the GSX2, but much much more muscular. The differences are immediately notable with something like a track from the recent Daft Punk record. Abyss from Rag is like "Ho Lee ***". GSX2 bass is like "hmmm, where's the beef?"
 
In terms of treble, we are talking about worlds apart. I've heard both Rag and GSX2 on M7 and MSB Analog DACs respectively (and also with a variety of mid-tier SABRE DACs. With the buttery-smooth sounding ladder DACs, the Rag is so smooth. I've said this so many times now. Like ice after the Zamboni. The GSX2, with the MSB Analog and neutralish headphones still exhibited that etched, edgy sheen. (BTW the Rag treble loses its smoothness with grainy DACs.) So what does that tell me? Which amp is more transparent? (I hate the pull the "transparency" card because nothing, nothing I've heard is transparent, and "tranparency" is such a weasel word, but the Rag is the closet amp to that.)
 
It's no surprise that the GSX2 is a horrible combination with the HD800. A pretty decent one with the LCD3 or HE-500. I like the GSX2 with the HE-500 the best. The HE-500 has a tendency for thick "one-note" bass where the GSX2 is a good antidote. With the LCD3, I found the relative lack of impact or balls in the bass troubling. The Abyss wasn't a good match either. Some treble issues and like the Audeze, the bass just wasn't up to par. I'm not sure how much power the GSX2 delivers, but I've found the Abyss to like lots of power for good bass control and impact.
 
The GSX2 has three gain positions. At the lowest gain position, the treble is much more controlled. However this position also seems to make the amp sound flatter - less lively. At the highest gain position, the amp comes alive, but at the cost of more uncontrolled very active treble. So it's like you can't win. I would have though much higher of the GSX2 if it could had the liveliness of the high position and the more stately treble of the lowest gain position. (In contrast, the Rag also has three gain positions. All gain positions sound the same.) Still the GSX2's thin tonality and lack of real resolution at that price point makes me balk.
 
As I said earlier, the GSX2 is not the same class of the Rag in terms of sound quality. So where does it fall? It's about in the same class of the Mjolnir. Both GSX2 and Mjolnir are amps which I consider to be good, but different sounding. Good equipment is not excellent, therefore "Good" stuff will have some flaws. Both the GSX2 and Mjolnir have flaws, different kinds of flaws. From a personal sonic priority point of view, I find the strengths and weaknesses of the Mjolnir more palatable to me, especially considering its price and flexibility (I used Mjolnir at one time to drive 8 ohm speakers). Others may find the GSX attributes more suitable to them. I would not hesitate to recommend the GSX2 to someone who I knew would like its sound.
 
What it comes down to is what do you like with your headphones.

 

[HeyWaj10]

Purrin...dude...freakin' fantastic write up. That might be the most informative review/AB/impressions I've read in a while. Thanks for that. This may open a lot of eyes to Rag instead of the GS-X, especially when considering price and wait times. Besides, I think the Rag runs circles around the GS-X in the looks department anyway. My .02

 

[goldendarko]

Yeah thanks Purring, never heard the gs-x but I've always wondered about it. I really think this Rag probably compares to amps of $3000 or more, like I said it blows my burson conductor out of the water and that cost me even more than the Rag, granted it also had a DAC but the tradeoff then was it didn't work with speakers

 

[magiccabbage]

   
 
It's no surprise that the GSX2 is a horrible combination with the HD800. 
 
 

From your memory what can you say the HD800 sounds like on the RAG when compared to DNA Stratus? Can the RAG push the performance of the HD800 to where it would be if driven by the Stratus or EC 445?

 

[snormal]

Hands down to Purrin...LoL
I always value purrin's review much...this should be one of the best comparison I have come across on head-fi...bravo man!

 

[purrin]

  From your memory what can you say the HD800 sounds like on the RAG when compared to DNA Stratus? Can the RAG push the performance of the HD800 to where it would be if driven by the Stratus or EC 445?

 
Stratus is warmer overall to Rag. 4-45 is sharper in treble to Rag. Other than the tonal differences, against Stratus, the Rag will have more taut, articulate, controlled, bass, but will also lose of the bloom and resolution and microdynamics of Stratus. Just a general statement because tube rolling on Stratus will change things. Bass tautness and control is not a strength of the Stratus. The recent upgrade helped, but still... hard to beat 0.01 ohm source impedance.

 

[bfreedma]

  
I understand that you personally didn't like the GS-X but your hyperbole makes your other opinions suspect.
 

 
I was hoping to be oblique; that by being oblique, I could avoid answering all together. My statement was not intended hyperbole, otherwise I would have said something like this: "sizzly etched analytical SS abomination" (not my statement BTW, just to be clear, but there is a grain of truth to that opinion, pun intended).
 
Allow me to be more direct without hyberbole so that my opinions will be "less suspect".
 
IMHO, FWIW, my 2 cents, the GS-X mk2 is not in the same class as the Rag. While I do think the GS-X mk2 is a good amp, I've never thought it was a great amp, especially considering the recent price increase. The quality and the beauty of the GSX2's construction is top notch. But that is a low priority for me. I'd rather pay for sound quality than sexy looks.
 
The GSX2's strengths are clarity and resolution, and even in that sense, it's not nearly as resolving as the Rag. The GSX2 is about on par with the Mjolnir in terms of resolving ability. Where I am disappointed with the GSX2 is its tonality and treble behavior. It is a lean sounding amp. Not necessarily bright, but rather lacking in bass, particularly with impact. The treble can be rather etched, edgy, with sheen, etc. some silbilance, no glare. The detail presentation is a little bit "in your face" (which I don't mind), but just pointing this out because the Rag is more resolving, yet much more subtle about it. The Rag has a better ability to distinguish different similar volumes of sound. It's more nuanced. Less "square" - to borrow a phrase from someone I know.
 
So in terms of bass, the Rag is still subtle in bass, yet still not as lean as the GSX2, but much much more muscular. The differences are immediately notable with something like a track from the recent Daft Punk record. Abyss from Rag is like "Ho Lee ***". GSX2 bass is like "hmmm, where's the beef?"
 
In terms of treble, we are talking about worlds apart. I've heard both Rag and GSX2 on M7 and MSB Analog DACs respectively (and also with a variety of mid-tier SABRE DACs. With the buttery-smooth sounding ladder DACs, the Rag is so smooth. I've said this so many times now. Like ice after the Zamboni. The GSX2, with the MSB Analog and neutralish headphones still exhibited that etched, edgy sheen. (BTW the Rag treble loses its smoothness with grainy DACs.) So what does that tell me? Which amp is more transparent? (I hate the pull the "transparency" card because nothing, nothing I've heard is transparent, and "tranparency" is such a weasel word, but the Rag is the closet amp to that.)
 
It's no surprise that the GSX2 is a horrible combination with the HD800. A pretty decent one with the LCD3 or HE-500. I like the GSX2 with the HE-500 the best. The HE-500 has a tendency for thick "one-note" bass where the GSX2 is a good antidote. With the LCD3, I found the relative lack of impact or balls in the bass troubling. The Abyss wasn't a good match either. Some treble issues and like the Audeze, the bass just wasn't up to par. I'm not sure how much power the GSX2 delivers, but I've found the Abyss to like lots of power for good bass control and impact.
 
The GSX2 has three gain positions. At the lowest gain position, the treble is much more controlled. However this position also seems to make the amp sound flatter - less lively. At the highest gain position, the amp comes alive, but at the cost of more uncontrolled very active treble. So it's like you can't win. I would have though much higher of the GSX2 if it could had the liveliness of the high position and the more stately treble of the lowest gain position. (In contrast, the Rag also has three gain positions. All gain positions sound the same.) Still the GSX2's thin tonality and lack of real resolution at that price point makes me balk.
 
As I said earlier, the GSX2 is not the same class of the Rag in terms of sound quality. So where does it fall? It's about in the same class of the Mjolnir. Both GSX2 and Mjolnir are amps which I consider to be good, but different sounding. Good equipment is not excellent, therefore "Good" stuff will have some flaws. Both the GSX2 and Mjolnir have flaws, different kinds of flaws. From a personal sonic priority point of view, I find the strengths and weaknesses of the Mjolnir more palatable to me, especially considering its price and flexibility (I used Mjolnir at one time to drive 8 ohm speakers). Others may find the GSX attributes more suitable to them. I would not hesitate to recommend the GSX2 to someone who I knew would like its sound.
 
What it comes down to is what do you like with your headphones.

We will have to agree to disagree about the GSX. I haven't heard the Rag so can't offer an opinion between the two, but I found the GSX outperformed the Mjolnir when I had them both for a few weeks.
Did you compare the Rag and the GSX at the same time, or are you working off memory?

 

[En_R]

   
I was hoping to be oblique; that by being oblique.....
 

Pretty much matches my experience with the GS-X. I still think the bass has nice impact and control, but not enough heft. Treble issues are annoying.

Any reason why I can't thumbs up this post?

 

[purrin]

We will have to agree to disagree about the GSX. I haven't heard the Rag so can't offer an opinion between the two, but I found the GSX outperformed the Mjolnir when I had them both for a few weeks.
Did you compare the Rag and the GSX at the same time, or are you working off memory?

 
Working off memory. No GSX2 here and probably no more in the future as a local guy I know sold his to get a SuSy Dynahi. We'll probably line those two up next.

 

[preproman]

We will have to agree to disagree about the GSX. I haven't heard the Rag so can't offer an opinion between the two, but I found the GSX outperformed the Mjolnir when I had them both for a few weeks.
Did you compare the Rag and the GSX at the same time, or are you working off memory?

 

All that has owned the GS-X mk2 for any amount of time as was able to do a proper side by side with any amp - knows good and well the bass on that amp is superb.  To be fair - the amp is clean, crystal clean and hits hard.  Depending on your source, yes the amp can be harsh on the treble.  That's what clear / clean amps do, garbage in garbage out.  Good clean information in, it will give you good clean information out.  
 
I thought the GS-X mk2 / Master 7 / HD800 was a pretty good match.  The Rag, GS-X mk2 , Master 9, and any other TOTL amp is going to be much closer together than really far apart in SQ. Most of the time you would have to be really splitting hairs to tell them apart.  I'm sure the Rag won't be any different.  
 
The GS-X mk2 sells out really fast for a reason.  It built it's rep. by living out in the wild for many years.  The Rag built it's rep. by marketing i.e. - it's not in production yet.  I don't own the GS-X mk2 anymore, I preferred the F1J to it for the HE-6, but it still was the most versatile / flexible amps I ever heard.  The Rag seems like it will follow suit with different gain settings.  
 
This talk about hum is one reason I like separate enclosures - There's no worry with transformer hum and being too close to the amp.  Of course some will get the hum and some will not.  Have to get it in house to see.

 

[zerodeefex]

The time I spent with the GSX MK2 had it thoroughly bested in power and resolution by my previously owned balanced dynahi. Given what I know of Purrin's experience, I don't doubt the Rag is a clear step up from the mk2.

Why is there such a huge amount of love for the Dynalo/Dynamid? It was great in 2001 but no amount of polish is going to take the Dynamid, even a slightly tweaked version, to the same level as the best of the best out there.

 

[preproman]

I read on this site where you said the Dynahi was grainy 

     Funny stuff

 

[zerodeefex]

I read on this site where you said the Dynahi was grainy       Funny stuff

My dynahi was grainy when compared against my 2a3 mkiv

It was less grainy than the gsx mk2 though. I'd have kept it if I was an he-6 man. Not for HD800s though.