[MacMan31]

You hold in the input button until it slow pulses, but I thought the new 2/64 card was required for that, maybe not.

The lights are slow pulsing now. Do they just do that continuously until I hit the input button again? I don't hear any change in the sound.

 

[chriseggroll]

Yes, that is how you toggle NOS on and off, pulse is NOS, no pulse regular. It's just whether the digital filter is on vs off. The firmware just fixed a glitch with certain sampling rates, the real audio difference is using the new 2/64 card. The filter toggle is really subtle

 

[theveterans]

The lights are slow pulsing now. Do they just do that continuously until I hit the input button again? I don't hear any change in the sound.

YMMV. On the OG BF2, the mids and vocals are more upfront and the imaging more rounded (more front to back depth but staging is primarily front and center) rather than pushed backed to the farther end of the stage compared to OS mode. Also, NOS mode has more microdetails than OS mode on my system (at the cost of very slight microdynamics penalty)

 

[Sam Lord]

YMMV. On the OG BF2, the mids and vocals are more upfront and the imaging more rounded (more front to back depth but staging is primarily front and center) rather than pushed backed to the farther end of the stage compared to OS mode. Also, NOS mode has more microdetails than OS mode on my system (at the cost of very slight microdynamics penalty).

Why would _anyone_ use a DAC without a digital filter??? The _sound_ of the NOS mode without a digital filter is _distorted_ because the circuit requires a filtered input!!! The whole reason for the NOS setting is to try _alternatives_ to Schiit’s filter! That’s why nearly every high end DAC has a switchable NOS mode. Sorry for yelling, but when people buy an $800 DAC they deserve correct advice about how to use it.

Why doesn’t Schiit tell you this? Because Mike Moffatt considers his closed-form filter to be good enough. He dislikes the notion that external filters housed in servers might sound better, even though they can have much greater processing resources. I’m still waiting for a review of HQPlayer’s filter choices played on the BF 2 64. (I used to have an MB Bifrost and really liked it.)

 

[theveterans]

Why would _anyone_ use a DAC without a digital filter??? The _sound_ of the NOS mode without a digital filter is _distorted_ because the circuit requires a filtered input!!!

Implementation on the analog stage negates the never ending aliasing oscillation from NOS. That’s why on the right system, NOS Does NOT sound distorted, fake heck some of the best DACs I’ve heard are actually NOS DACs and they’re typically paired with a tube preamplifier or tube power amp since tubes typically have a rolled off bandwidth and has far less energy at the ultrasonic regions than SS amps. Because of that, it makes tubes an ideal low pass filter for the NOS DAC

 

[Pappi Daa Hobo]

I have an issue on my Bifrost 2/64 where if I leave and come back hours later the DAC has that terrible sounding compression issue. This does not happen when I'm switching sample rates or in exclusive mode. Only when I leave for a few hours and come back. switching to NOS mode and back to OS fixes it for that entire listening session.
I received the unit last week and assumed it came with lates firmware however just in case I updated it to the latest firmware and the problem still persists. Working with Schiit now.


As far as sound goes, I've had the Bifrost 2 Unison, D90SE, Holo Spring 3 KTE, and a few others. This 2/64 is a massive upgrade from the previous Bifrost in my opinion. The previous version was good, but to my ears the 2/64 is a TRUE middle ground between full R2R and Delta Sigma options. and for many I can see this being end game.

Comparisons (I am terrible at this, but I will try my best)

These are all using an iFi iCAN pro signature amp with HE1000SE headphones mainly. I have used other headphones, but the comparisons were used with 1000SE

Comparing the Holo Spring 3 and the 2/64 - This probably is not a fair comparison, but i was actually impressed how the 2/64 stood its ground against the spring 3. There is slightly more treble energy in the 2/64 but the spring 3 is superior when it comes to treble control and tonality. The spring 3 has better weight with its notes and reaches further down into sub bass, has better sound stage and imaging but has a more relaxed nature. The 2/64 has a way of showing you micro details with a slightly more in your face presentation to the natural presentation of the spring 3. Both are good at depth in the soundstage but the spring 3 presents everything with a natural holographic stage. the 2/64 has good separation but less space in between instruments. There were some songs i preferred the dynamics from the Bifrost especially with electronic/bass music.

Bifrost 2 Unison vs 2/64 - In my opinion the 2/64 version is just better at everything than the old version. More space, More dynamic, more depth, better subbass and texture. the 64 does have a slightly more thin mid range when compared to the older Bifrost 2. With the old version things could sound a bit too warm. (To some this may be a benefit) The new version still has a slight warm tilt but not to the extent of the Bifrost 2 unison. I could see some people liking the old version if they have a very bright chain.

D90SE VS 2/64 - this is an easy one if you like pure resolution and a very intimate presentation the D90SE is for you. It is more resolving than the 2/64 but the tradeoff is everything sounded very digital to me on the D90. The 2/64 has way better stage size/depth and way better subbass performance and a more organic signature.

EF400 VS 2/64 - Let me preface this one by saying that i think the EF-400 is very good value for the money considering its a dac/amp for less than the Bifrost, but just in case anyone was wondering.... i hooked it up to the iCAN pro via SE output to use just the DAC stage. Well...... the Bifrost is better in every single way EXCEPT the HE400 is just super smooth. I would only prefer the EF-400 if I was listening to like Lo-Fi study music. The Bifrost is in a completely different league here.

Sorry if my ramblings make no sense this is just my opinion but i am impressed with the 2/64 version. one of the best DACS I've heard sub $1,500

 

[Sam Lord]

Implementation on the analog stage negates the never ending aliasing oscillation from NOS. That’s why on the right system, NOS Does NOT sound distorted, fake heck some of the best DACs I’ve heard are actually NOS DACs and they’re typically paired with a tube preamplifier or tube power amp since tubes typically have a rolled off bandwidth and has far less energy at the ultrasonic regions than SS amps. Because of that, it makes tubes an ideal low pass filter for the NOS DAC

Analog filters take care of the worst problems, and on _some_ circuits do the job just fine. But the DAC chips in Schiit’s multibit products run very slowly and need digital filters to minimize their distortion. The ones in the BF 2 64 run somewhat faster at 192kHz, so they don’t suffer as badly without digital filtering as the earlier ones like uin the OG Yggdrasil. Now, all of these choices involve compromise, and I have no grounds to question your preference. But if you haven’t tried external filters on your unit, you can’t know what benefit they bring. One major benefit of NOS is getting the digital filtering hardware out of the chassis (or turning off their operation in the chassis). Schiit at least has it off the chip, which removes most of the processor noise. But it’s really better to do as much computation as possible out of the chassis. Why not try HQP or some alternatives? They can make a huge sonic difference for a small investment. Thanks for your input.

 

[Sam Lord]

I have an issue on my Bifrost 2/64 where if I leave and come back hours later the DAC has that terrible sounding compression issue. This does not happen when I'm switching sample rates or in exclusive mode. Only when I leave for a few hours and come back. switching to NOS mode and back to OS fixes it for that entire listening session.
I received the unit last week and assumed it came with lates firmware however just in case I updated it to the latest firmware and the problem still persists. Working with Schiit now.


As far as sound goes, I've had the Bifrost 2 Unison, D90SE, Holo Spring 3 KTE, and a few others. This 2/64 is a massive upgrade from the previous Bifrost in my opinion. The previous version was good, but to my ears the 2/64 is a TRUE middle ground between full R2R and Delta Sigma options. and for many I can see this being end game.

Comparisons (I am terrible at this, but I will try my best)

These are all using an iFi iCAN pro signature amp with HE1000SE headphones mainly. I have used other headphones, but the comparisons were used with 1000SE

Comparing the Holo Spring 3 and the 2/64 - This probably is not a fair comparison, but i was actually impressed how the 2/64 stood its ground against the spring 3. There is slightly more treble energy in the 2/64 but the spring 3 is superior when it comes to treble control and tonality. The spring 3 has better weight with its notes and reaches further down into sub bass, has better sound stage and imaging but has a more relaxed nature. The 2/64 has a way of showing you micro details with a slightly more in your face presentation to the natural presentation of the spring 3. Both are good at depth in the soundstage but the spring 3 presents everything with a natural holographic stage. the 2/64 has good separation but less space in between instruments. There were some songs i preferred the dynamics from the Bifrost especially with electronic/bass music.

Bifrost 2 Unison vs 2/64 - In my opinion the 2/64 version is just better at everything than the old version. More space, More dynamic, more depth, better subbass and texture. the 64 does have a slightly more thin mid range when compared to the older Bifrost 2. With the old version things could sound a bit too warm. (To some this may be a benefit) The new version still has a slight warm tilt but not to the extent of the Bifrost 2 unison. I could see some people liking the old version if they have a very bright chain.

D90SE VS 2/64 - this is an easy one if you like pure resolution and a very intimate presentation the D90SE is for you. It is more resolving than the 2/64 but the tradeoff is everything sounded very digital to me on the D90. The 2/64 has way better stage size/depth and way better subbass performance and a more organic signature.

EF400 VS 2/64 - Let me preface this one by saying that i think the EF-400 is very good value for the money considering its a dac/amp for less than the Bifrost, but just in case anyone was wondering.... i hooked it up to the iCAN pro via SE output to use just the DAC stage. Well...... the Bifrost is better in every single way EXCEPT the HE400 is just super smooth. I would only prefer the EF-400 if I was listening to like Lo-Fi study music. The Bifrost is in a completely different league here.

Sorry if my ramblings make no sense this is just my opinion but i am impressed with the 2/64 version. one of the best DACS I've heard sub $1,500

What filter(s) did you use with the Holo Spring? They really need to be run on external filters (NOS) to come to life.

 

[FellowTraveller]

I have an issue on my Bifrost 2/64 where if I leave and come back hours later the DAC has that terrible sounding compression issue. This does not happen when I'm switching sample rates or in exclusive mode. Only when I leave for a few hours and come back. switching to NOS mode and back to OS fixes it for that entire listening session.
I received the unit last week and assumed it came with lates firmware however just in case I updated it to the latest firmware and the problem still persists. Working with Schiit now.


As far as sound goes, I've had the Bifrost 2 Unison, D90SE, Holo Spring 3 KTE, and a few others. This 2/64 is a massive upgrade from the previous Bifrost in my opinion. The previous version was good, but to my ears the 2/64 is a TRUE middle ground between full R2R and Delta Sigma options. and for many I can see this being end game.

Comparisons (I am terrible at this, but I will try my best)

These are all using an iFi iCAN pro signature amp with HE1000SE headphones mainly. I have used other headphones, but the comparisons were used with 1000SE

Comparing the Holo Spring 3 and the 2/64 - This probably is not a fair comparison, but i was actually impressed how the 2/64 stood its ground against the spring 3. There is slightly more treble energy in the 2/64 but the spring 3 is superior when it comes to treble control and tonality. The spring 3 has better weight with its notes and reaches further down into sub bass, has better sound stage and imaging but has a more relaxed nature. The 2/64 has a way of showing you micro details with a slightly more in your face presentation to the natural presentation of the spring 3. Both are good at depth in the soundstage but the spring 3 presents everything with a natural holographic stage. the 2/64 has good separation but less space in between instruments. There were some songs i preferred the dynamics from the Bifrost especially with electronic/bass music.

Bifrost 2 Unison vs 2/64 - In my opinion the 2/64 version is just better at everything than the old version. More space, More dynamic, more depth, better subbass and texture. the 64 does have a slightly more thin mid range when compared to the older Bifrost 2. With the old version things could sound a bit too warm. (To some this may be a benefit) The new version still has a slight warm tilt but not to the extent of the Bifrost 2 unison. I could see some people liking the old version if they have a very bright chain.

D90SE VS 2/64 - this is an easy one if you like pure resolution and a very intimate presentation the D90SE is for you. It is more resolving than the 2/64 but the tradeoff is everything sounded very digital to me on the D90. The 2/64 has way better stage size/depth and way better subbass performance and a more organic signature.

EF400 VS 2/64 - Let me preface this one by saying that i think the EF-400 is very good value for the money considering its a dac/amp for less than the Bifrost, but just in case anyone was wondering.... i hooked it up to the iCAN pro via SE output to use just the DAC stage. Well...... the Bifrost is better in every single way EXCEPT the HE400 is just super smooth. I would only prefer the EF-400 if I was listening to like Lo-Fi study music. The Bifrost is in a completely different league here.

Sorry if my ramblings make no sense this is just my opinion but i am impressed with the 2/64 version. one of the best DACS I've heard sub $1,500

Thanks! Your comparisons and observations are very helpful! I have the 2/64 card in hand now, but have to wait to return to my home in Thailand before I can hook it up and hear it. I like comparisons with DACs from different price categories. That the BF 2/64 can hold up in many ways, or come close, to the Holo Spring 3 is good news, considering that the latter is around $3,000 USD if I'm not mistaken, which amounts to the good part of a scholarship for one of my students. So I'll never be going there. Thanks again!

 

[rivonlol]

Will be putting a basically brand new Bifrost 2/64 up for sale soon if anyone is interested.
Amazing DAC, was just using it to compare with others and have decided on going full R2R

 

[TheFrator]

Will be putting a basically brand new Bifrost 2/64 up for sale soon if anyone is interested.
Amazing DAC, was just using it to compare with others and have decided on going full R2R

What DAC are you going to over it?

 

[rivonlol]

Currently have the Spring 3 KTE. The Bifrost does a lot of what the spring does compared to standard delta sigma that I have heard. The spring just adds more smoothness to the high end which I enjoy. Currently in process of getting a May KTE.

 

[chriseggroll]

There's some pretty good info on NOS vs Oversampling here: https://samplerateconverter.com/educational/nos-dac

Personally, I would only use NOS on a DAC designed around it like the Holo Spring or May, but it was an easy option for them to add in case some people want to do something else. I think their filter is good and more Schitty sounding, if that is a phrase.

 

[decooney]

Implementation on the analog stage negates the never ending aliasing oscillation from NOS. That’s why on the right system, NOS Does NOT sound distorted, fake heck some of the best DACs I’ve heard are actually NOS DACs and they’re typically paired with a tube preamplifier or tube power amp since tubes typically have a rolled off bandwidth and has far less energy at the ultrasonic regions than SS amps. Because of that, it makes tubes an ideal low pass filter for the NOS DAC

Analog filters take care of the worst problems, and on _some_ circuits do the job just fine. But the DAC chips in Schiit’s multibit products run very slowly and need digital filters to minimize their distortion. The ones in the BF 2 64 run somewhat faster at 192kHz, so they don’t suffer as badly without digital filtering as the earlier ones like uin the OG Yggdrasil. Now, all of these choices involve compromise, and I have no grounds to question your preference. But if you haven’t tried external filters on your unit, you can’t know what benefit they bring. One major benefit of NOS is getting the digital filtering hardware out of the chassis (or turning off their operation in the chassis). Schiit at least has it off the chip, which removes most of the processor noise. But it’s really better to do as much computation as possible out of the chassis. Why not try HQP or some alternatives? They can make a huge sonic difference for a small investment. Thanks for your input.

+1 @theveterans What he said. Until you've heard NOS mode on the Bifrost 2/64 dac with the right tube preamplifier and tube amplifier behind it, also with speakers, you don't know what you are missing out on. Sure, we've tried the internal MCB digital filter. In my particular tube system, the MCB filter can sound a little boosted, bloated, bassy, slightly grainy, oversamply, and a bit more forward. NOS is bliss on my tube system with large in-home speakers. Have to hear it to understand it. Same result with my other NOS tube dac too. Its been fun to compare this BF264 dac with its NOS and MCB filter modes. Depth, more musical and more engaging. Not even close. Hands down, enjoy NOS the most. Your experience may vary on solid state preamplification and amplification and/or headphones.

 

[Sam Lord]

+1 @theveterans What he said. Until you've heard NOS mode on the Bifrost 2/64 dac with the right tube preamplifier and tube amplifier behind it, also with speakers, you don't know what you are missing out on. Sure, we've tried the internal MCB digital filter. In my particular tube system, the MCB filter can sound a little boosted, bloated, bassy, slightly grainy, oversamply, and a bit more forward. NOS is bliss on my tube system with large in-home speakers. Have to hear it to understand it. Same result with my other NOS tube dac too. Its been fun to compare this BF264 dac with its NOS and MCB filter modes. Depth, more musical and more engaging. Not even close. Hands down, enjoy NOS the most. Your experience may vary on solid state preamplification and amplification and/or headphones.

But apparently neither of you have used NOS as it was intended. It’s great that you like the BF 2 64 in pure NOS mode, but that’s no substitute for a powerful filter. Roon, JRiver, Audirvana, and HQPlayer have them. The last costs around $200 and has closed form filters like MCB and many other types with vastly more power than can be put in a DAC chassis. I used HQP for years and often got fed up with the interface, but the sound was worth it.