[Sean_MR]

There are NOS R2R DACs out there, but their manufacturers make it a point to write that down very clearly as that's a big selling point for some people so NOS DACs are always explicitly marketed as such.

Sorry, I meant as in asking if one could assume all of the current R2R dacs out on the market have the proper filters/tech so as not to blow amp (going back to my original comment). Sorry this is probably such a dumb question you misinterpreted!

 

[433521]

If it is a b-stock Texas Modi it has never been used beyond our quality assurance processes. The b-stock would have been due to a minor cosmetic defect. California is handling customer service and returns. Texas is 100% focused on building, testing, and shipping. Right now we are handling all three Magni variants, Modi 3+, Fulla 4, Hel 2, Loki Mini+, SYS, and Modius. We anticipate adding Magnius to our list in about 10 days.

 

[433521]

I love my new Freya+!

 

[StimpyWan]

I love my new Freya+!

Fess up. Details. Plus, how hot does it run in tube mode? Some same it's really HOT, and not in a good way. Curious about this, but not really concerned. A little heat is a good thing. Thanks.

 

[Ableza]

I'll bring Tyr. Still green board prototype, but red board production is here...at least you can see why this is totally, totally insane.

Watched most of the show (nice job as usual) and to me Tyr was the star. Man, I don't *NEED* a couple of big mono amps, but as a sucker for big iron amplifiers I *WANT* some. I'd just have to find a way to use them. Hmm. Maybe time to DIY some 85db sensitivity floor standers or something...

 

[StimpyWan]

Watched most of the show (nice job as usual) and to me Tyr was the star. Man, I don't *NEED* a couple of big mono amps, but as a sucker for big iron amplifiers I *WANT* some. I'd just have to find a way to use them. Hmm. Maybe time to DIY some 85db sensitivity floor standers or something...

A pair of mono Tyr's would work well on both my Martin Logan ESL's and my vintage (and restored) Acoustic Research AR-90s. It's only money...!

 

[Ableza]

A pair of mono Tyr's would work well on both my Martin Logan ESL's and my vintage (and restored) Acoustic Research AR-90s. It's only money...!

AR-90 was a pretty good sounding system. By "restored" I assume you mean woofers re-foamed? Was the Xover updated?

 

[438555]

Watched most of the show (nice job as usual) and to me Tyr was the star. Man, I don't *NEED* a couple of big mono amps, but as a sucker for big iron amplifiers I *WANT* some. I'd just have to find a way to use them. Hmm. Maybe time to DIY some 85db sensitivity floor standers or something...

I’d love to try a pair of Tyrs out with my Magnepans. Then I guess I’d just have to get some rear channel speakers and a processor and I’d be most of the way to a surround system, using the Vidars for the rear.

 

[StimpyWan]

AR-90 was a pretty good sounding system. By "restored" I assume you mean woofers re-foamed? Was the Xover updated?

Yup, all drivers refoamed, and the crossovers were upgraded. I added Mills resistors and various Mundorf poly film caps. A dramatic improvement in sound.

 

[Crowbar44]

@Jason Stoddard...here's an idea for when the blind testing begins again.

I'm a physician and cancer researcher - I think it would be fascinating for us to collect some real data on blind listening results. If you collect the data, I'd be happy to do the statistical analysis and write up the results (you can be first author). I suspect we could get the results published in a peer reviewed journal, perhaps one of the otology or sensory rags. I'm not aware of anyone who has published this kind of work, and I think it would be fascinating. Data collection could also happen at one of the headphone meets, perhaps a CanJam...

First question we'd have to answer is how large the sample size should be, and how much of a difference we'd want to detect. I'd defer to you on this one...if only 5% of people can detect a difference between two pieces of gear, we'd need a much larger sample size than if 50% can determine the difference. You would know better than I where that number sits.

Second, what you would want to test? Headphones? DACs? Amps? All three? Again your call. Probably best to test something more easy to detect like tubes vs. solid state amps as opposed to cables or even DACs. Headphones would be a good subject as well - though not as relevant to you at Schiit.

It's probably cleanest to just test whether each individual can detect a difference between two pieces of gear, as opposed to whether they can identify a specific piece of gear, though you could probably collect both sets of data and look at everything.

Who would participate? "Golden Ears" only? General population? Schitt gear owners only? Again your call.

How rigorous would you want to be? If we're shooting for publication, we'd need to keep the data very clean, which means controlling for all variables, cables, source material, bitrate, etc.

We'll then do a very basic statistical analysis, get a p-value, and have an answer whether the differences detected are due to chance or whether they are real.

PM me if you're interested - happy to help out in any way needed.

 

[KoshNaranek]

@Jason Stoddard...here's an idea for when the blind testing begins again.

I'm a physician and cancer researcher - I think it would be fascinating for us to collect some real data on blind listening results. If you collect the data, I'd be happy to do the statistical analysis and write up the results (you can be first author). I suspect we could get the results published in a peer reviewed journal, perhaps one of the otology or sensory rags. I'm not aware of anyone who has published this kind of work, and I think it would be fascinating. Data collection could also happen at one of the headphone meets, perhaps a CanJam...

First question we'd have to answer is how large the sample size should be, and how much of a difference we'd want to detect. I'd defer to you on this one...if only 5% of people can detect a difference between two pieces of gear, we'd need a much larger sample size than if 50% can determine the difference. You would know better than I where that number sits.

Second, what you would want to test? Headphones? DACs? Amps? All three? Again your call. Probably best to test something more easy to detect like tubes vs. solid state amps as opposed to cables or even DACs. Headphones would be a good subject as well - though not as relevant to you at Schiit.

It's probably cleanest to just test whether each individual can detect a difference between two pieces of gear, as opposed to whether they can identify a specific piece of gear, though you could probably collect both sets of data and look at everything.

Who would participate? "Golden Ears" only? General population? Schitt gear owners only? Again your call.

How rigorous would you want to be? If we're shooting for publication, we'd need to keep the data very clean, which means controlling for all variables, cables, source material, bitrate, etc.

We'll then do a very basic statistical analysis, get a p-value, and have an answer whether the differences detected are due to chance or whether they are real.

PM me if you're interested - happy to help out in any way needed.

Welcome to Head Fi

I would love to see real science behind listening tests and appreciate your generous offer to help Jason but respectfully feel that Jason already has the math chops to do any study he desires.

That said, perhaps this will get the flywheel turning

 

[judson_w]

Got the email today saying that my Hel 2 is being shipped. Much sooner than expected, but I am not complaining on that. Now to wait and keep refreshing the tracking info.

 

[Mike-WI]

@Jason Stoddard...here's an idea for when the blind testing begins again.

I'm a physician and cancer researcher - I think it would be fascinating for us to collect some real data on blind listening results. If you collect the data, I'd be happy to do the statistical analysis and write up the results (you can be first author). I suspect we could get the results published in a peer reviewed journal, perhaps one of the otology or sensory rags. I'm not aware of anyone who has published this kind of work, and I think it would be fascinating. Data collection could also happen at one of the headphone meets, perhaps a CanJam...

First question we'd have to answer is how large the sample size should be, and how much of a difference we'd want to detect. I'd defer to you on this one...if only 5% of people can detect a difference between two pieces of gear, we'd need a much larger sample size than if 50% can determine the difference. You would know better than I where that number sits.

Second, what you would want to test? Headphones? DACs? Amps? All three? Again your call. Probably best to test something more easy to detect like tubes vs. solid state amps as opposed to cables or even DACs. Headphones would be a good subject as well - though not as relevant to you at Schiit.

It's probably cleanest to just test whether each individual can detect a difference between two pieces of gear, as opposed to whether they can identify a specific piece of gear, though you could probably collect both sets of data and look at everything.

Who would participate? "Golden Ears" only? General population? Schitt gear owners only? Again your call.

How rigorous would you want to be? If we're shooting for publication, we'd need to keep the data very clean, which means controlling for all variables, cables, source material, bitrate, etc.

We'll then do a very basic statistical analysis, get a p-value, and have an answer whether the differences detected are due to chance or whether they are real.

PM me if you're interested - happy to help out in any way needed.

Will you apply for (central) IRB exemption?


Where in TX?

 

[wout31]

A dramatic improvement in sound

A dramatic CHANGE in sound.

 

[StimpyWan]

A dramatic CHANGE in sound.

A dramatic improvement in sound. Each speaker recapped one at a time, and compared to each other, and to stock crossovers. Easy to do, since I had spare stock crossovers. I could also compare the recapped AR-90s to my AR58S speakers, which still had stock Unison capacitors, and which use the same tweeters and dome mids, as the 90s.

The original electrolytic caps were so degraded, the differences weren't subtle. The originals were rolled off, dark, muddy, and distorted. The recapped speakers were clear, open and transparent, with better dynamics and frequency response. No contest.