Schiit Audio Bifrost 2

[tameral]

I agree that it's best to find out for yourself if the 2/64 is an upgrade or not.

I found out that in my setup (LCD-X 2021, Atticus - through Jot 2) - I strongly preferred the OG Bifrost 2. (The new card has its strengths and a majority may come to prefer it...it's very different)

Regardless of burn in time, I too found the 2/64 a bit sharp / bright, less musical. Overall, the more I listened the more the more I was getting fatigued quickly in a listening session.

The OG Bifrost 2 seems to be the positive culmination of a lot of Schiit and I'm not rushing to change it out after this experiment.

 

[Ripper2860]

I'm sitting pat with OG on my HP rig -- it really is dialed in to my liking. The upgrade will be for my 2-channel rig to see if it can bring out a tad more detail and soundstage. Counting the weeks until it arrives. Perhaps it can be an early Christmas present!

 

[cgb3]

There seems to a lot of personal opinion absolutes regarding this card.

I'm into day 9 of my 14 day try period.

Still sounds good to me, after multiple tube changes (with my Lyr 3, acting as preamp) and various headphones.

I changed a day or so into my trial to "exclusive mode (with Schiit Bifrost)".

I intend to install the original card on Friday. I'm betting the old card will be replaced within 2 hours?

 

[Friskyseal]

Something to consider when you try and A/B the cards is that you are taking out a hot card and replacing it with a cold card. It's been reported extensively that Bifrost sounds best after some warm-up time, so it might not be a fair comparison. We kind of have to wait an hour or so before we can listen fairly, and by then our memory of the first card will be even worse. I think those that have two units side-by-side will be in a much better position to compare the two cards fairly.

I myself am having some minor trepidation regarding the new card. I think it is all a question of synergy. I never before thought the Focal Elex was harsh, but now I am getting some winces here and there. But maybe when I am able to save up for the smoother Utopia, I will appreciate the better resolution and soundstage of the new card. So even if I put back in the old card, it doesn't mean I would intend to return or sell the other.

 

[WaveTheory]

I've been fortunate to have an OG BF2 on loan from a friend so I could do direct A/B with my personal upgraded unit. I'll flesh this out more in my upcoming review but the results have been fascinating. I think I agree with Stoddard that the 2/64 is an unambiguous upgrade. So far I have found it technically superior on every signal chain I have tried, but every signal chain reacts differently. The patterns of change are mostly the same but the magnitudes of the reactions isn't correlated with price of gear either. My 6xx + Cayin HA-1AMK2, curiously, has revealed the largest difference so far. The V281 + HekV2 reveals the same differences, but not to the same extent. I definitely can see why some who have built a signal chain around OG BF2 and its sound might have gear that experiences differences in the right (wrong?) areas with their gear that make the 2/64 less enjoyable. Again, I'll flesh this out much more in my upcoming full review.

 

[tinariwen]

Are there any reviews out for the new card yet? I held off ordering one when I saw the firmware issues and now the wait time is pretty lengthy.

Also, from what I’m seeing it sounds like a Hugo 2 / Qutest. Brighter, more detailed, bigger stage, less musical…
Does that sound right?

 

[theveterans]

Are there any reviews out for the new card yet? I held off ordering one when I saw the firmware issues and now the wait time is pretty lengthy.

Also, from what I’m seeing it sounds like a Hugo 2 / Qutest. Brighter, more detailed, bigger stage, less musical…
Does that sound right?

Only Hugo 2 that’s brighter. Qutest is definitely warmer than Hugo 2 with just as much resolution from my A/B a month ago. Both still have the Chord transient signature around the note edges that highlights their detail retrieval and that accurate tonality. I prefer Schiit’s staging and that smooth tonality though compared to the more vivid Chord signature

 

[tinariwen]

Only Hugo 2 that’s brighter. Qutest is definitely warmer than Hugo 2 with just as much resolution from my A/B a month ago. Both still have the Chord transient signature around the note edges that highlights their detail retrieval and that accurate tonality. I prefer Schiit’s staging and that smooth tonality though compared to the more vivid Chord signature

Is that still the case with the new card in the BF2? It sounds as though it’s being described as brighter and less smooth, with more detail emphasis.

 

[theveterans]

Is that still the case with the new card in the BF2? It sounds as though it’s being described as brighter and less smooth, with more detail emphasis.

I haven’t demoed the 2/64 card and only run the OG. To me though I’m thoroughly happy with the way my audio chain sounds even after hearing higher end gears (a lot of them aren’t being utilized to their fullest in the demo shows since the tonality felt off to my tastes IMO). I just believe that a synergistic system should not sacrifice the tonality that I find lifelike sounding for that extra resolution. If I upgrade my DAC, now I have to update my other chain, find that combination that would work for my tonality tastes without taking away the extra resolution and that’s a lot of punching holes on my wallet. My biggest issue with Yggdrasil is that I felt I’ll have that GAS OCD of going fully balanced especially after A/Bing Gungnir MB’s Bal and SE out at Schiitr and of course to utilize the best analog stage of the DAC, but my chain is 100% SE after the DAC unfortunately

 

[WaveTheory]

Is that still the case with the new card in the BF2? It sounds as though it’s being described as brighter and less smooth, with more detail emphasis.

To my ear the 2/64 is slightly brighter than the OG BF2 but as compared to other DACs I would not classify it as bright. I think its signature has basically become closer to true neutral rather than the neutral-warm sig the OG has. To my ear it has not become detail-forward. The improved resolution is still presented in a smooth, laidback way. I haven't A/B'd it against my Hugo 2 and honestly didn't plan to because I don't think there will be very many trying to decide between those 2 given their differences in price and approach. My educated guess is the H2 is still going to be more resolving with more accurate spatial imaging & separation than the BF2/64. I say this because the H2 was the first DAC where I noticed that recreating the space surrounding the soundstage was possible. For live recordings in concert halls in particular, the Hugo 2 can present the music on the stage in a spatially convincing way, then it can recreate a sense that the stage is existing within a larger space. There is just enough room reverb and such resolved that gives it a more 'your-butt-is-in-the-seating-area' kind of feel that I have yet to notice with the BF2/64. IME, it's not realistic to expect an <$1k DAC to do that and the Chords have been the entry point for hearing that. From a preference standpoint though, the Chord sound, especially with their cheaper units (which yeah, it's crazy but the $2k Qutest and $2.5k Hugo 2 are the cheaper Chords), is a bit tonally lean. The BF2/64 mostly maintains the OG BF2's thicker 'meat on the bone' kind of sound.

 

[SirIppo]

Just got my new bifrost 2/64 unit today, first time using a dac over $250, only other experience is with the topping e30,e50 and the creative g6. It sounds really good so far. Just got my monolith amt headphone as well and first tired them with the e50. It didn't sound good at all and sounded off, then I opened up the bifrost 2/64 box and tried that and it actually made those headphones sound pretty good. Its like it brought life into it. I was kind of neutral in the whole measurements vs measurements don't tell the whole story, since I really only used delta sigma dacs and I don't know anything else. It wasn't as subtle change, I mean the sound sounded off with the e50 and I simply changed to the bifrost 2 dac and it sounded alot better not just a little better. If I only used the monolith amt's with the e50 I would of just had a bad impression.

 

[theveterans]

To my ear the 2/64 is slightly brighter than the OG BF2 but as compared to other DACs I would not classify it as bright. I think its signature has basically become closer to true neutral rather than the neutral-warm sig the OG has. To my ear it has not become detail-forward. The improved resolution is still presented in a smooth, laidback way. I haven't A/B'd it against my Hugo 2 and honestly didn't plan to because I don't think there will be very many trying to decide between those 2 given their differences in price and approach. My educated guess is the H2 is still going to be more resolving with more accurate spatial imaging & separation than the BF2/64. I say this because the H2 was the first DAC where I noticed that recreating the space surrounding the soundstage was possible. For live recordings in concert halls in particular, the Hugo 2 can present the music on the stage in a spatially convincing way, then it can recreate a sense that the stage is existing within a larger space. There is just enough room reverb and such resolved that gives it a more 'your-butt-is-in-the-seating-area' kind of feel that I have yet to notice with the BF2/64. IME, it's not realistic to expect an <$1k DAC to do that and the Chords have been the entry point for hearing that. From a preference standpoint though, the Chord sound, especially with their cheaper units (which yeah, it's crazy but the $2k Qutest and $2.5k Hugo 2 are the cheaper Chords), is a bit tonally lean. The BF2/64 mostly maintains the OG BF2's thicker 'meat on the bone' kind of sound.

This is my opinion but after watching Rob Watts presentation, I would say that his very high oversampling approach to counter jitter effects that Bifrost 2 lacks. Schiit’s approach is with the use of VCXO reclocker as reference clock for Yggdrasil (this is different than the reclocker from Unison USB) since PCM can only be up to 24/192 across all inputs for Schiit while Rob watts WTA’s final stages runs at 104MHz PWM.

For BF2, its clock is dependent on the Unison USB (asynchronous, but the old gen5 card is isochronous) and the SPDIF’s clock is dependent on the source (synchronous) thus you need a good source/streamer with femtosecond clocks on top of BF2 if you want to elevate its resolution via SPDIF. The SP2000 DAP that I use as transport for BF2 at home via Toslink (it has 200 femtosecond oscillator) elevates BF2’s sense of space (pretty noticeable improvement) and arguably better resolution compared to Unison USB. Tonality remains the same of course across USB and Toslink.

 

[WaveTheory]

This is my opinion but after watching Rob Watts presentation, I would say that his very high oversampling approach to counter jitter effects that Bifrost 2 lacks. Schiit’s approach is with the use of VCXO reclocker as reference clock for Yggdrasil (this is different than the reclocker from Unison USB) since PCM can only be up to 24/192 across all inputs for Schiit while Rob watts WTA’s final stages runs at 104MHz PWM.

For BF2, its clock is dependent on the Unison USB (asynchronous, but the old gen5 card is isochronous) and the SPDIF’s clock is dependent on the source (synchronous) thus you need a good source/streamer with femtosecond clocks on top of BF2 if you want to elevate its resolution via SPDIF. The SP2000 DAP that I use as transport for BF2 at home via Toslink (it has 200 femtosecond oscillator) elevates BF2’s sense of space (pretty noticeable improvement) and arguably better resolution compared to Unison USB. Tonality remains the same of course across USB and Toslink.

Gotcha. The comparisons of which I spoke of H2 v OG BF2 would have happened using USB v USB or coax v coax with a Singxer SU-2 DDC. The H2 outperforms BF2 across the board but its USB implementation is the thing that needs the most work for the next generation. The use of the SU-2 should have removed any clock handling differences between the 2 units.

 

[Alcophone]

This is my opinion but after watching Rob Watts presentation, I would say that his very high oversampling approach to counter jitter effects that Bifrost 2 lacks. Schiit’s approach is with the use of VCXO reclocker as reference clock for Yggdrasil (this is different than the reclocker from Unison USB) since PCM can only be up to 24/192 across all inputs for Schiit while Rob watts WTA’s final stages runs at 104MHz PWM.

You can feed 16/44.1 to a Chord DAC as well, the input sample rate isn't really an issue. Internally, the Yggdrasil resamples everything to 352.8/384 kHz, that would be the rate to compare, if anything.

For BF2, its clock is dependent on the Unison USB (asynchronous, but the old gen5 card is isochronous)

USB gen 5 is also asynchronous:

Source

 

[theveterans]

You can feed 16/44.1 to a Chord DAC as well, the input sample rate isn't really an issue. Internally, the Yggdrasil resamples everything to 352.8/384 kHz, that would be the rate to compare, if anything.


USB gen 5 is also asynchronous:

Source

Agreed. PCM oversampling with the Yggdrasil is still far lower than the PWM sampling rate of the Chord DAC hence the help of a better internal reference oscillator/wordclock that's common across all inputs that's lacking on middle line to lowest end of Schiit DACs. Chord DACs always produce exceptional jitter performance despite lacking an oscillator in their DACs and purely relying on the WTA filter and PWM with the Pulse Array discrete DAC. On the other end of the scale, we have NOS DACs like the MSB Select DAC with their Femto33 reclocker approach to reduce jitter to lowest possible level