[RCBinTN]

Right.  The original Gungnir uses the AKM AK4399 chips, but the GMB uses the AD5781BRUZ chips.  Straight off their site...FWIW friends.
 
http://schiit.com/products/gungnir-multibit
 
Anyway, my GMB sounds quite sublime to my ears.  Highly recommended!
 
Cheers,
RCB

 

[watchnerd]

   
in post 3910, the poster was referring to the gumby.  it doesn't use the 4399 -- it uses Analog Devices AD5781BRUZ. 

 
Okay, but in post #3906, I was asking about the DS version.

 

[joebobbilly]

Any Canadians who have gone through the upgrade process? I just wanna get some info for how hard this is gonna hit my wallet after shipping, customs/duty (if it did happen).
 
PM me if you are willing to share your final total cost (in CAD or USD is fine)! Just need to know how much I gotta save/set aside realistically for this to happen... cause it is GONNA HAPPEN

... just a matter of when I can scrap the cash together.

 

[XenHeadFi]

   
Okay, but in post #3906, I was asking about the DS version.

Well, since the rest of their DS DACs appear to be AKM4490's, I think eventually they will update since they can just buy one DS DAC instead of maintaining 2. Gungnir DS's probably are not moving very well especially with Jotunheim Balanced DS at $499.

 

[Mediahound]

I guess here's a good reason to leave any DAC on all the time:
 
http://www.audioquest.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Phase-Noise-Jitter-Report-0317-14.pdf
 
AudioQuest found that there is increased jitter and phase issues for the first 24 hours of warm up.

 

[AudioBear]

Disclaimer:  I never turn my Gumby off and I am not expert on jitter.  I am very happy with my Gumby.
 
I don''t want to start the old audible jitter threshold argument all over but I am not sure I could hear the reported jitter or phase effects.  The amplitude of the effect is small and if i am reading the graph correctly is largest at low frequencies that my Senn 800S are unlikely to be reproducing.  Call me insensitive.
 
Am I missing something?  

 

[watchnerd]

  Disclaimer:  I never turn my Gumby off and I am not expert on jitter.  I am very happy with my Gumby.
 
I don''t want to start the old audible jitter threshold argument all over but I am not sure I could hear the reported jitter or phase effects.  The amplitude of the effect is small and if i am reading the graph correctly is largest at low frequencies that my Senn 800S are unlikely to be reproducing.  Call me insensitive.
 
Am I missing something?  

 
I don't think you're missing anything.
 
I think you're correct -- the graph shows jitter above 100 Hz as being -130 dB.  This is below the noise floor of pretty much all electronics.

 

[Mediahound]

But we can perceive even beyond what is measurable apparently, at least according to:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/784602/chord-mojo-dac-amp-faq-in-3rd-post/26295#post_13030847
 

   
Unfortunately the ear/brain is very sensitive to this issue - noise floor modulation makes things sound bright, hard and aggressive. But actually we can hear levels well below the measuring limits of the best test gear; I have had digital FFT's with noise floor of -200 dB modulating to -190dB - something you would never be able to measure as it would be swamped by analogue noise - but removing the noise floor modulation results in the SQ becoming warmer and smoother.
 

 

[AudioBear]

OK, I'll say it.  I own a Mojo and I think Robb did a great job with it.  That notwithstanding, I'm not sure I buy his claim without a lot more data/information.   I won't doubt that he heard a difference, but it's tempting to speculate that it was not caused by the noise-floor modulation to which he attributes it. Unless it produces a secondary or indirect effect which is much larger that results in an audible signal it's inaudible. I am operating under the assumption that for a signal to sound warmer there must be changes in the amplitude of something that are within audibility-- say less than 60-70dB down. If nothing else this claim demonstrates that what we measure may not be the right parameters, or at least the ones that cause the differences we are hearing.  I'll grant Robb that much.

 

[shapeshifter44]

Quick Question: Should the DAC be connected to Mac (which supports 192k optical) via USB or optical? Is one dominant over the other?
Thanks a lot.

 

[watchnerd]

  But we can perceive even beyond what is measurable apparently, at least according to:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/784602/chord-mojo-dac-amp-faq-in-3rd-post/26295#post_13030847
 

 
Sorry, but I don't take an undocumented, data-less post on an internet forum as some kind of evidence of proof.

 

[Mediahound]

Sorry, but I don't take an undocumented, data-less post on an internet forum as some kind of evidence of proof.

Rob watts is the dac designer for Chord, and knows what he's talking about. Believe what you will.

Schiit themselves say in the manual of the Yggy to leave it on all the time so there is a basis for the reasoning.

 

[watchnerd]

Rob watts is the dac designer for Chord, and knows what he's talking about. Believe what you will.
 

 
I know who he is.  That doesn't make him immune to peer review.  Science and engineering don't advance just on say-so.  There are standards of evidence.
 
As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Claiming something at -190 to -200 dB as audible is an extraordinary claim.

 

[Mediahound]

   
I know who he is.  That doesn't make him immune to peer review.  Science and engineering don't advance just on say-so.  There are standards of evidence.
 
As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Claiming something at -190 to -200 dB as audible is an extraordinary claim.

There is interaction with the ear & brain that simply cannot be measured. Because we don't know how to measure it does not mean there is no audible difference. 
 
In this scenario your 'standards of evidence' would be your own listening tests and that of others confirming your findings. 

 

[watchnerd]

 
There is interaction with the ear & brain that simply cannot be measured. Because we don't know how to measure it does not mean there is no audible difference. 
 
In this scenario your 'standards of evidence' would be your own listening tests and that of others confirming your findings. 

 
Which is why we have ABX tests -- to make sure we're actually hearing something, and not just "hearing" a placebo.
 
When Chord presents a paper at an AES conference in which they conducted a statistically significant double blind test of this theory, then we'll have extraordinary evidence to back up the extraordinary claims.  Until then, all we have is a pseudo-hypothesis.
 
That being said, I leave all my electronics on all the time, cause it can't hurt and I'm lazy.