[DigitalFrontEnd]

The Schiit-powers-that-be made it very clear they want to stay away from computers (which is what streamers are) as far as possible. If you read forums that discuss streamers, Roon, and the like, you'll recognize their wisdom.

Well, that is a shame. But then again, maybe smart not introduce a me too solution with so many superb file players and network streamers on the market.

 

[Charente]

  As far as I can see, the main thing that such a box does is to (try to) keep various kinds of electrical noise that travel down the USB wire away from the DAC. The physical layer of USB was designed to carry the digital signal correctly and to achieve basic safety regarding DC and mains AC. But those criteria can be met and still have a very noisy connection that interferes with what the DAC (which after all is just a big stack of electronic parts) puts out. If you brought the circuitry of the "magic box" inside the DAC, you'd have to make sure stray noise from the USB side would be contained. Doing it outside the DAC may decrease that potential noise leakage. 

I guess that this is addressed (to some extent) by the microRendu/UltraCap solution that we both use. So, some equivalent (or even better) external solution for direct PC to DAC would seem to make sense (without all the networking/computer stuff that is the mR). 

 

[wink]

   
Bless your little pea pickin' heart. "Cowboys" is one of my favorites. That, and "Beer For My Horses."

 
"(You Dun Stomped) On My Heart"
 
I told you that I loved you, you said that is so good.
I called you my darling, I thought I always would.
But now you've gone and left me, I don't know what to do.
So my little darling, I write these words to you.

You dun stomped on my heart and you mashed that sucker flat.
You just sorta stomped on my aorta.
You started going out with guys. I felt us drift apart.
And every step you took was a stomp on my heart.

I only hope that someday, you get them low down blues.
In some smoky honky-tonk you'll look down at your shoes.
You'll think about that tender heart that you crushed beneath them soles.
With your cold busting stompers, you left my heart so full of holes.

You dun stomped on my heart and you mashed that sucker flat.
You just sorta stomped on my aorta.
You started going out with guys. I felt us drift apart.
And every step you took was a stomp on my heart.
And every step you took was a stomp on my heart.

 

[KoshNaranek]

"the tube manufacturing process is one of those rare processes that is impervious to CI methodologies."  

An interesting thought.  Can you please explain how the process can't be improved?  Thanks.

As a SSBB, I've never seen a process that could not be improved via CI / DMAIC process improvement methods...

All the best -
RCBinTN

I don't think that it is not possible for modern tube manufacturers to make a superior product now. The only materials that are going to be off limits are lead and mercury. Neither is used in the tube itself. Mercury is used in the purification and processing of Tungsten for the heaters, but that should not be an issue. Vapor deposition is a process undreamed of in the tube heyday and I am sure that would be useful now if engineers put their minds to it.

 

[Charente]

I don't think that it is not possible for modern tube manufacturers to make a superior product now. The only materials that are going to be off limits are lead and mercury. Neither is used in the tube itself. Mercury is used in the purification and processing of Tungsten for the heaters, but that should not be an issue. Vapor deposition is a process undreamed of in the tube heyday and I am sure that would be useful now if engineers put their minds to it.

I agree that it should be eminently possible to re-produce that 'vintage sound'...it's not as if there was some magic pixie dust involved. Modern techniques could trounce the old ones, IF the economics made sense. But I think there's the rub...it probably doesn't... I'm guessing that the vintage tube manufacturers did not set out to make near-perfect 'audiophile' tubes...they just happen to be so. A stroke of luck...in hindsight.

 

[Pietro Cozzi Tinin]

Now I am giving my imagination a huge spin.
Could the MP/Gadget or Eitr be a LISST like device which can be put in tube sockets to influence the sound directly?

 

[Letmebefrank]

That would be neat but it would be too specialized for what they have described so far, they wouldn't want to limit those products to people with tubes.

 

[Pietro Cozzi Tinin]

Well maybe you are right.
On the other hand, they where the first and only to come with the LISST. (as far as I know)

 

[HumanFly]

  Now I am giving my imagination a huge spin.
Could the MP/Gadget or Eitr be a LISST like device which can be put in tube sockets to influence the sound directly?

That`s why they needed a coder in the team!
It is a LISST tube like device with a build in microphone that corrects for speakers AND your room - so everyone can hear excactly what the artist intended in the studio.
It will be known as  Mike`s Quality Apparatus.
boom tssssh

 

[Pietro Cozzi Tinin]

I don't know if its even possible.
Rumour has it the coder is the only one knowing how to use the micro wave oven.

 

[schneller]

What of Eitr isn't a separate box but an upgrade on the input side? Something for Yiggy/Gumby/Bimby? I am thinking Yiggy may get upgrades to both input and output stages. Bimby will get something that elevates it away from Mimby. Gumby would also benefit, obviously. But whatever happens to Yiggy it will still be a good leap beyond the rest.

I did a straight A/B of Bimby and Mimby last weekend. Both being fed by the same source, USB>Optical converter, into the same tube amp and Focal Utopia headphones. I struggled to discern them. Slight differences in favor of Bimby were there but man did I have to concentrate to hear them.

 

[MOFOfunk]

Almost certainly not, as it violates several Schiit self-imposed rules:

1. They rarely combine functions into single boxes.
2. It's over-specialized -- it only works with Yggy in their product line
3. At the same time, ethernet and bluetooth require software configuration, and Jason and Mike's statements on software user-interfaces are pretty clear.

I agree with your interpretation of the holy schiistory. But i think you may have misread my post. My bad, shouldn't have used those stupid icons. It should've read a combined product launch.
I might be wrong, but see it as a one function box. A "pre-dac"/DDC Which I hope will decrappify the signals in the process. Hopefully it provides the convenience of several inputs: USB, Ethernet cable, wifi/Bluetooth receiver.
My proposed digital outs designed for audio were : Spdif AND Aes/Ebu. Because these are the proclaimed favourites and would connect with all dacs except the Jotunheim board.
As far as I know a Bluetooth receiver only need a firmware on it. No user interface and no drivers. Maybe I'm just to used to mac OS.

I also suggested that they might upgrade their dacs to have AES/EBU, but I'm not sure that would be possible or even make sense.

 

[sam6550a]

  I agree that it should be eminently possible to re-produce that 'vintage sound'...it's not as if there was some magic pixie dust involved. Modern techniques could trounce the old ones, IF the economics made sense. But I think there's the rub...it probably doesn't... I'm guessing that the vintage tube manufacturers did not set out to make near-perfect 'audiophile' tubes...they just happen to be so. A stroke of luck...in hindsight.

Well, there was a LOT of pixie dust involved in producing vacuum tubes. A large part of the assembly process was performed by craftsman utilizing minimal production tooling, but relying on skills, experience, and knowledge. Remember, in the tube era, labor was cheaper than the cost of developing sophisticated tooling, but the operators were highly skilled. In addition, changes in the manufacturing process were often implemented "on the floor" by verbal agreement and minimal documentation. Sometimes these changes were made to improve the product, but many were made due to material availability, ease of assembly, or cost reduction.This is well demonstrated by the same tube made by the same company but at a different time, or from a different factory sounding like silk or like crap. Could we automate the process, find why tube 'A' sounds better than 'B', incorporate these findings into the production process and build Red Base 6SN7s again? Sure could, but you would NEVER, EVER recoup the megabucks required to fund the tasks. There simply is not a volume market that could support such a venture. Perhaps, if Apple put vacuum tubes in iPhones-------!

 

[AviP]

  Mike`s Quality Apparatus.

I see what you did there 

 

[sam6550a]

  Well maybe you are right.
On the other hand, they where the first and only to come with the LISST. (as far as I know)

Solid state plug-in tube 'equivalents' have been around since the 1960s, but their performance was dependent upon the application. Schiit designed LISST specifically for use in their products only---that is why they work well in that application.