New Schiit! Ragnarok and Yggdrasil

[cooperpwc]

Caps burn in. This will not affect all equipment equally. It depends on the influence of the capacitors in (or on) the signal path.

 

[Rem0o]

  Caps burn in. This will not affect all equipment equally. It depends on the influence of the capacitors in (or on) the signal path.

Might not be for the better though. Out of the factory, caps meet specs. After X hours+ heat, they might not meet specs.

 

[ogodei]

Yet no one will ever say that their gear sounds WORSE after burn-in.  Its always better.

 

[cooperpwc]

  Might not be for the better though. Out of the factory, caps meet specs. After X hours+ heat, they might not meet specs.

 
That would be poorly designed equipment though - as in choosing capacitors that perform worse with use.
 
ogodei is right. When you get past the theoretical, if there is any change in sound, well designed equipment sounds better when burned in.

 

[jacal01]

   
Rob Watts dedicated a lot of keystrokes to this aspect of the Hugo's design in the main Hugo thread - he is also adamant that all we are doing when we connect a dedicated headlamp is add unnecessary coloration to the sound and a few fanboys picked that up and ran with it.  That said, I'd like to know how many hours were on the Hugo units some here describe as 'thin' - that definitely isn't what i heard from either my Audeze phones or the Fidelio X1 - YMMV. The HD800 is an outlier, but this wouldn't be the first time a DAC/amp was found wanting when the Senns were plugged in. These phones need to be taken by the scruff of the neck and told who'll be calling the shots - any amp that can't do that, regardless of it's on-paper capabilities, will be found wanting.
 
If I could pen a wish list for a digital source, item 1 would be 'Sounds great straight out of the box with no significant changes over the first 100 hours'.  Reading that an AMR dealer insisted on 1000 hours burn-in for the DP-777 - a claim that I've seen before for other components on Head-FI - does absolutely nothing for me, but I'm curious re the burn-in requirements for Yggdrasil nonetheless. Roll on November.

 
Yeah, I'm familiar with the "straight wire with gain" argument around here, and I'm interested to know exactly what Rob is doing for gain.  The other night I scanned through the functional spec of the Xilinx XPS delta-sigma DAC chip that the Hugo uses, since I'd actually gotten the info that the amp function of the Hugo was also contained on that chip from someone else's post on HeadFi who sounded knowledgeable about it, and I wanted to verify it.  I didn't find any DAC analog output amp discussion in the spec, per se, so I still don't know if that's a true statement, if RW uses any external analog signal gain circuitry in the Hugo or not.
 
But, there's amp "color", which has negative connotations, and then there's "enhancement", which more falls under the connotation of further development of the audio signal to increase its euphonics.  Purrin is a big fanbody of tubes, which is lauded for their increased microdynamics, mids bloom and sonic texture/body, leading to perceived relatively more liveliness and listener engagement.  The "straight wire with gain" can by that measure be perceived as "analytical", with negative connotations of relative coldness and sterility.  And that may well be the source of the distractors' criticism.
 
As for a component "burn-in" period being real or imaginary, I personally have experience of that being empirically true, at least in some cases.  And that may well be the difference between purrin's criticism and Currawong's endorsement of the Hugo.  I also have discovered with my Bakoon HPA-21 amp that there also can be a warm-up period before the amp's output signal reaches full sonic maturity, since it runs off a battery and starts out each time from a cold off state.  That could well be also true of the battery powered portable Hugo, and may in turn be the source of the difference of opinion between Currawong and purrin, the length of time spent evaluating from a cold start.  There's a prevailing opinion around here that your audio gear sounds best if left on all the time, and that would tend to reinforce that theory.    

 

[smitty1110]

The idea of warm-up with electronics is really centered around the idea of the thermal operating point. Electronic characteristics of the components change with temperature, and gear is typically designed for stable operating at some specific temperature (well within the component tolerance, but usually warmer than room temperature). Until it warms up everything isn't working quite in sync, which can be audible to you. Heck, my Project Ember doesn't even let you start to listen until they're sure that the tube has reached it's optimum operating point.

 

[jacal01]

Yeah, it's a little more subtle with solid state, and I attributed it to an aspect of the current driven gain topology/components at the time.

 

[Clemmaster]

  [...]
That said, I'd like to know how many hours were on the Hugo units some here describe as 'thin' - that definitely isn't what i heard from either my Audeze phones or the Fidelio X1 - YMMV. 

 
Ah... There you go!
 
I always mentioned I was using brighter/airy headphones (Hifiman) and the pairing with the Hugo was thin. I also said Audeze would be much better candidate because of their dark and thick nature.
 
We actually don't disagree, we just have a different point of reference. Also, Hugo is thinner than QuteHD and that was my main disappointment when moving from one to the other.

 

[purrin]

 
But, there's amp "color", which has negative connotations, and then there's "enhancement", which more falls under the connotation of further development of the audio signal to increase its euphonics.  Purrin is a big fanbody of tubes, which is lauded for their increased microdynamics, mids bloom and sonic texture/body, leading to perceived relatively more liveliness and listener engagement.  The "straight wire with gain" can by that measure be perceived as "analytical", with negative connotations of relative coldness and sterility.  And that may well be the source of the distractors' criticism.

 
Tube amps, at least the best SE designs, and there are only a handful of them in the headphone world, are able to differentiate tiny differences in volume levels better than SS amps, aka "microdynamics". So in that sense, I believe that SS amps tend to commit more "sins of omission" than tube amps. While tube amps tend to "add stuff", SS amps tend to be "missing stuff" in addition to also "adding stuff" (see next paragraph)
 
"Wire with gain" (which I have never heard) should neither sound analytical / cold / sterile / flat or with bloomy / warm / lush. Many solid-state amps also commit "sins of commission", just that they are of a different nature from tubes' sins of commission. Etch, glare, stridency, typical of many SS amps should not be confused with "wire with gain".
 
Taking this conversation away from the Hugo, since this is a Rag/Yggy thread after all...
 
Let's take the Rag for example. The Rag has no hint of etch, glare, splashy treble of typical SS amps. The Rag is neither cold or sterile. Yet at the same time, it closes the "microdynamics" gap to the best tube amps more than any other SS amp that I have heard. It brings a huge portion of what tubes do well, but without artificial lushness or bloom. It brings precision and focus, especially in the bass, where tube amps are not capable. And it brings a ton of power.
 
So I wouldn't necessarily say that I prefer tube amps because I like tube bloom or body. (It should be noted that I tend to run more solid-state sounding tubes, and that I want to throw syrupy sounding tube amps like the Leben out the window.) It's just that in practically every case, I was not willing to sacrifice such huge sins of omission from the typical SS amp. The Rag happens to be a SS amp that minimizes the "missing stuff" aspect (in other words, very good resolution and microdynamics) and has very little in terms of "adding stuff". And this is why I feel it's special. It actually has a place sitting right next to my tube amp. It's the only SS amp (at reasonable cost) to have been given this honor.
 

 
There's a prevailing opinion around here that your audio gear sounds best if left on all the time, and that would tend to reinforce that theory.   

 
My observation is that gear stabilizes to a point the longer it is left on. I've heard gear that sounds worse the longer it gets left on and I've preferred some gear operating at lower temperatures. I'll leave stuff like DACs on all the time simply because it ensures consistency of sound; and also because people bitch telling me of the need to burn-in the a DAC for 200 hours. Telling people that I've left the DAC on for a week usual settles things down.
 
Sometimes it depends upon equipment. Tubes seem to require a few minutes. SS seems to take forever. The Rag does seem consistent. I chalk that up to the computer inside it.
 
In the end, if something really needs several hours to achieve 90% of its sonic capability, it was either designed badly or is broken.

 

[skeptic]

  The idea of warm-up with electronics is really centered around the idea of the thermal operating point. Electronic characteristics of the components change with temperature, and gear is typically designed for stable operating at some specific temperature (well within the component tolerance, but usually warmer than room temperature). Until it warms up everything isn't working quite in sync, which can be audible to you. Heck, my Project Ember doesn't even let you start to listen until they're sure that the tube has reached it's optimum operating point.

  Yeah, it's a little more subtle with solid state, and I attributed it to an aspect of the current driven gain topology/components at the time.

 
You hear the warm-up issue referenced a lot regarding tubes vs. solid state, but I was interested to see that both the NEETS (Navy EE Training Series) and AES, etc. state that transistors are actually far more sensitive to warm-up and thermal conditions than tubes.  
 
See, e.g., http://www.theaudioarchive.com/TAA_Resources_Tubes_versus_Solid_State.htm  In the list of disadvantages of solid state vs. tubes:
 

 

1. Device parameters vary considerably with temperature, complicating biasing and raising the possibility of thermal runaway
2. Cooling is less efficient than with tubes, because lower operating temperature is required for reliability

 

[smitty1110]

   
You hear the warm-up issue referenced a lot regarding tubes vs. solid state, but I was interested to see that both the NEETS (Navy EE Training Series) and AES, etc. state that transistors are actually far more sensitive to warm-up and thermal conditions than tubes.  
 
See, e.g., http://www.theaudioarchive.com/TAA_Resources_Tubes_versus_Solid_State.htm  In the list of disadvantages of solid state vs. tubes:
 

Huh, how about that. Then again, I'm a software engineer, I'm not exactly qualified to make statements about this stuff.
I should put a disclaimer in my posts or something.

 

[johnjen]

I am firmly in the breakin and warm up, change the sound of THE SYSTEM, at least my system anyway.
 
I have tracked these sorts of changes on a daily basis for years in a running log.  The patterns are easier to spot that way.
 
I also noticed that until my system reached a degree of resolution, much of the sonic attributes I heard due to break in and warm up could all to easily be masked by other aspects of THE SYSTEM.  
Think weakest link theory.
 
The counterpoint is, once a 'necessary' degree of resolution IS reached then EVERYTHING in THE SYSTEM can have an audible impact/influence on the sound of THE SYSTEM.  
And as these limitations (I call them choke points) are ameliorated, then THE SYSTEM's resolving power becomes greater and so it becomes even more apparent as things change.  
 
But this is a double edged sword of sorts in that usually these choke points aren't a simple black or white, good or bad change, but each has its own coloration.  Sometimes we like the changes while others are decidedly not acceptable in THE SYSTEM.
 
To those who can't hear any changes, you are fortunate in that having to deal with a level of resolution where everything changes the sound, which can be very frustrating especially as the changes themselves can be elusive and ethereal.  There can be a lack of consistency which for some can be maddening, to say the least.
 
But then there is the situation where you combine a compatible set of equipment and ancillary gear along with suitable situational circumstances, where THE SYSTEM 'clicks'.  This is when the magic happens.
 
Also, in another sense there are kinda 2 camps of audiophools.
#1. We figure which gear to buy then hook it up to determine if it performs to your satisfaction.  If not, sell it, trade it, get other gear that does work better, repeat as needed/desired/the budget will allow.
 
#2. We figure which gear to buy then hook it up to determine if it performs to our satisfaction.  Then change the operating environment of THE SYSTEM to see if the new gear can scale well, can help to eliminate a choke point, i.e. does it enable THE SYSTEM over time, to resolve with greater amounts of sonic information which can yield to increased satisfaction. Then continue to explore how other influences change THE SYSTEM's response due to the addition of the new gear.
 
#1. is far easier, though most often the most expensive.  And it takes far less time to make a determination.
 
#2. is more involved in that it takes much more personal involvement in seeking to remove choke points to achieve as desirebale a balance that meets (or hopefully exceeds) one's expectations. IOW experimentation and a willingness to challenge ones assumptions with first hand experience, will, if pursued with sufficient acumen and persistence result in gains due to scaleability as the resolution of THE SYSTEM continues to improve (or not).
 
Break in and warm up seem to be a given for me, and always have been.   That is one reason I don't turn off the mojo nor the pwd very often, because it takes too long for a complete heat soak to get re-established.  And eliminating or reducing the number of variables in any system usually results in a more stable and consistent operating environment, one in which those remaining variables are much easier to 'deal with', or at least 'play with' so to speak.
 
JJ

 

[estreeter]

If Yggy sounds as good as it's ever going to sound straight from the box or after 30 or so minutes, then thats fantastic - the source I'm listening to atm didn't and it may well have been that it's taken this long for my brain to adjust to this much detail being dredged from music that I thought I knew. I also wanted to ensure that the caps in the output stage had enough hot-cold cycles to settle down - I believe I've now reached a point where both caps and grey matter are reasonably stable - others may disagree on the last  
 
If the burn-in requirement does nothing else, it may minimise the number of folk who feel the need to dash to their keyboards every half hour to report on the 'changes' in their Yggy - my personal fave is when a component sounded great in the morning but not-so-great later that day. Great stuff in a chat room - not so much in a 200-page thread. 
 
Several of the regulars on AK claim they leave as much of their gear on 24/7 as possible - with the obvious exception of tube amps, the one component which most admit requires significant warm-up. Head-Fiers familiar with the collected works of Arthur Salvatore may be aware that he summarily fired his digital 'associates' after several of their high-priced Esoteric recommendations proved to have less-than-reliable internals, but they made some interesting claims before being banished to the cyber abyss:
 
- any change to the system, including cables, meant starting a new burn-in regime
- any power outtage or movement of any of the equipment in question required a week before critical listening could resume
 
300 hours seems to be the 'magic' number with these folks, and I can only imagine they must have greeted the arrival of a thunderstorm with the kind of dread normally reserved for hurricanes and tornadoes - personally I'd rather just turn on my gear and enjoy some music. Even if it is a U2 album the critics didn't particularly care for and one I didn't ask for ..... 
 
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/oct/15/u2-bono-issues-apology-for-apple-itunes-album-download

 

[sandab]

Capacitors change over time, and most ratings are min/max based, like loss angle, rated ripple current, and leakage current.  Some are completely unspecified, like parasitic inductance when placed in an EM field, and resistivity.  Some can have their dielectric restored with standard heating procedure (basically put it in an oven).  For instance, this data sheet (which I just pulled up as the first I could find): http://www.nichicon.co.jp/english/products/pdfs/e-mw.pdf says for Shelf Life: After storing the capacitors under no load at 85˚C for 1000 hours and then performing voltage treatment based on JIS C5101-4 clause 4.1 at 20°C, they shall meet the specified values for the endurance characteristics listed above.   I don't have that JIS (and don't feel like paying $80+ for it) so don't know what the voltage treatment entails, but a good guess is that once they're put to use for a while they will return to spec and the particular treatment referred to is simply operating them normally (defining normally) in a circuit.

 

[sandab]

  Might not be for the better though. Out of the factory, caps meet specs. After X hours+ heat, they might not meet specs.

You don't get caps out of the factory.  They will sit for months or years in warehouses and shipping containers.