[rsbrsvp]

A few comments on the beginning of my 10th day of burn-in.
 
1.  The resolution is very good but not necessarily THE factor which distinguishes this dac from the rest.
2.  Better than the resolution is the transparency.  It is the cleanest sound I ever heard to my memory.
3.  It is somewhat sterile sounding to my ears.  However even though this sounds the opposite of musical- somehow it is musical as well, just not in the classic way we normally define musical.  It is not a lush organic rounded type of sound we are used to-  but rather a kind of clinical sound that somehow draws me into the music.  By the way-   It does have a convincingly weighty sound as well.
4.  It does not sound like vinyl/analogue at all.  In fact it sounds more digital than any dac I ever heard.  The sound could be described in another way as “metallic".  Again, I know this sounds negative but it is in fact positive.
 
This dac makes no sense.  A digital metallic sterile sound- that somehow sounds so real and provides fantastic musical pleasure.  This goes against everything I thought I understood.  I cannot yet explain this contradiction- but it is happening.   All of this is IMHO.
 
Considering I am using the LCD-3F headphones which are known for their organic, full, creamy sound, I can’t help but wonder how the HD800- which is known to be sterile as well would mate with this dac. Would it be to much of a good thing which would result in unacceptable levels of truth?  I would appreciate some insights.
 
By the way- to bring the very best out in the yggy I found i-tunes and Fidelia are the best transports as they are less colored than the rest and result in the cleanest sonics.  To round things out a bit and add a bit of analogue presence I recommend A+ or Amarra in playlist mode only.  Pure music from playlist mode- somewhere in the middle.  So far- I am sold on plain i-tunes or Fidelia (without memory play) for the yggy as it is provides the absolutely purest results- but it could be because I already have some analogue warmth from my LCD-3F to create balance.  

 

[TheAttorney]

Yggy fans may be interested in my Yggy/DAVE comparison posted on the DAVE thread: http://www.head-fi.org/t/766517/chord-electronics-dave/1605#post_12311535.
 
Whilst happy enough with my Yggy, I was curious how DAVE would compare. Although 4x the price, I do like the concept of a very compact design that contains, allegedly, a world beating DAC, preamp and headphone amp. I reckon you could fit almost 3 DAVEs inside Yggy's volume. Oh, and it comes in black as well as silver and has quite a few extra features like remote control, a cute display, cross-feed and filter options and a low power consumption standby feature.
 
Anyway, my initial impressions went somewhat against the grain of the other rave DAVE reviews, and I seemed to (unintentionally) ruffle a few feathers by concluding that, in my particular circumstance, the Yggy came very close to DAVE's performance.
 
But what particularly surprised me was how crucial the digital interconnect was in this comparison. If you remember my cable impressions a few weeks back, you'll know that my preconceptions of what is right and what is possible was turned completely upside down, and I ended up with a strong preference for optical connection to my Nagra CDC. And subsequently, I borrowed an Audioquest Vodka optical cable along with the DAVE, that made me question what it was I really comparing when switching between DAVE and Yggy. When I returned the DAVE, I kept the cable and asked to try the much pricier Diamond model. 
 
Long story short is that the Vodka cable is going back, and the Diamond isn't. With the usual proviso that all cable (and DAC) differences simply must be objectively small, the subjective musical enjoyment impact of Diamond optical over my best RCA coax cable was like Yggy transformed into a different DAC - which I'm enjoying more than either of the DACs I was comparing a couple of weeks before.
 
The fact that nobody else is raving over this cable effect could be because such cable differences are highly system dependent, or maybe not many have tried optical? Maybe those that love their Yggy have always had this better sound, but a different system synergy meant they are getting it with different cable types? Maybe disappointed users like rsbrsvp are just using the wrong cable (and stock power cord)?
 
I'm still going to give the DAVE another try in a week or two, in a fairer test after it's had a proper burn-in period, because I like its concept very much. But in the meantime, I'm having fun rediscovering my music collection with "Diamond Yggy" all over again.

 

[landroni]

  A few comments on the beginning of my 10th day of burn-in.

 
1.  The resolution is very good but not necessarily THE factor which distinguishes this dac from the rest.
2.  Better than the resolution is the transparency.  It is the cleanest sound I ever heard to my memory.
3.  It is somewhat sterile sounding to my ears.  However even though this sounds the opposite of musical- somehow it is musical as well, just not in the classic way we normally define musical.  It is not a lush organic rounded type of sound we are used to-  but rather a kind of clinical sound that somehow draws me into the music.  By the way-   It does have a convincingly weighty sound as well.
4.  It does not sound like vinyl/analogue at all.  In fact it sounds more digital than any dac I ever heard.  The sound could be described in another way as “metallic".  Again, I know this sounds negative but it is in fact positive.

 
This dac makes no sense.  A digital metallic sterile sound- that somehow sounds so real and provides fantastic musical pleasure.  This goes against everything I thought I understood.  I cannot yet explain this contradiction- but it is happening.   All of this is IMHO.
 

 
It has been suggested on several occasions that going from Bifrost MB to Gungnir MB to Yggy you get increasing transparency, whereas the other way around you get a more euphonic presentation. Yggy seems more suited if studio-like transparency is needed, whereas Bifrost/Gungnir MB for more casual listening... YMMV, etc.

 

[Currawong]

In the various Chord threads, the general thought is that optical doesn't pass through any electrical noise, hence can be better performing (since jitter isn't an issue). I've found that input quality makes a difference with the Yggy too.

 

[GUTB]

The main issue with TOSLink (optical SPDI/F) is jitter and data errors. In order to transmit a fully intact clock, the entire TOSLink chain has to be able to handle at least 11 Mhz for a 48 KHz audio stream, but the cheap plastic components and cables can only manage 5-6 MHz. A good DAC will have the ability to re-clock the stream. High quality transmitters and glass conductors have necessary bandwidth, but these components are honestly rare in the consumer market. The other major problem which can't be easily solved is data errors -- the LED light doesn't travel across the fiber in as straight line like an electrical impulse going down a conductor would; instead, light bounces around inside the fiber, refracting, before reaching the receiver. Again, cheap, thick plastic fiber cores suffer from a lot of data errors; for best results, the fiber should be of a high grade glass of an extremely fine diameter to minimize this damage.
 
The current logic with TOSLink is that it is only preferable over USB if the USB is subject to a lot of noise from the source. With the introduction of USB re-generators (Wyrd, Regen, etc), though, it's hard to make a case for TOSLink at all.

 

[AudioBear]

  In the various Chord threads, the general thought is that optical doesn't pass through any electrical noise, hence can be better performing (since jitter isn't an issue). I've found that input quality makes a difference with the Yggy too.

it doesn't make a very good antenna either

 

[murphythecat]

so the dac is not analog sounding and natural? how can this be a good thing?

 

[Argo Duck]

rsbrsvp seems to be saying it is 'digital sounding and natural' ("...real and provides fantastic musical pleasure...".

 

[Ali-Pacha]

Oxymoron contest, round one 

Ali

 

[Jamiee]

I have said it before and I'll say it again..... Yggy is all kinds of resolving (READ: transparent as all getup). 
It DOES NOT hide your source components in the least. If the source gear isn't up to snuff - you'll hear it through the Yggy for sure...
 
I've heard my Yggdrasil sound anywhere from - Well... Just Okay, to STUNNINGLY GOOD! depending on the chain of equipment placed in front of it (Yes this includes cables and other tweaky items...)
 
At the end of the day it's all about system synergy, but a truly good DAC should impart little (if any) of it's own sonic character within the audio chain. Something the Yggdrasil excels at IMO.

 

[wink]

Get a YGGY, and then upgrade all that horrible mid-fi stuff to hi-fi and bask in the sonic splendour of your now mellifluous music. 

 

[Earalf]

I replaced the fuse in mine with a HiFi Supreme. Soon after that I switched sample rates mid song and the clocks started having trouble getting a lock. Sometimes it would not play at all and sometimes it would only use the lower precision clock. This went away after a two or three days.

 

[comzee]

@jcx I saw some people talk about the 21bit vs 24bit or w/e here. Saw some replies from you.
The technical details laid forth confuse me. Not taking either side, because I don't know what the two sides are 

 
This is my ELI5, maybe I'm wrong, idk. I'm basing this off an article and a few videos from the same guy.
 
What he says is that the bit depth is (ELI5) just the noise floor. When Schiit is saying it's a true 21bit DAC, are they not just saying it can extract details up to that specific point in the noise floor...? 
 
If the input is 24bit, the DAC is running 24bit, simple. What is meant by (I could be wrong) the 21bit, again is that it can resolve detail up to that noise floor point.
 

EDIT:
After reading some of @jcx posts, I'm not adding anything to his discussion.
I'm going to leave my post up as an ELI5 for anybody else. 

 

[jcx]

Monty is well educated in EE, well read in the Psychoacoustic literature and put it to work in his codec development - lots of directly relevant experience
 
still, other people like James Johnston aren't as doctrinaire on the sample rate issue - but the evidence is still iffy for requiring above 20 kHz for reproduced music enjoyment
 
 
for dither you can listen to the 8-bit files at Lukin's site to hear a very exaggerated example of the difference in the musical fades - although Lukin only gives the worst case truncation example instead of rounding
 
it should be possible to find rounding vs dither(s) examples elsewhere on the web - but you can diy for free with Audacity too if you really want to learn the tech
 
by 16 bits even without dither most music, any that was mastered on 60's classic studio magnetic tape, will have large enough noise from the recording that the difference is masked
 
with music CD at 16/44 being produced from today's common 24/96 studio ADC almost everyone does use dither in the production process and final mastering for CD, and there are arguments over when and what type is most appropriate for 16 bits and how to distribute the dither small added noise over frequency so as to be least objectionable
 
 
when you give higher resolution 24 bit music, to a DAC that has less than the full 24 bit DAC chip inside then the DAC has to reduce the word length internally
 
I pointed out that dither is still considered technically "better" than rounding and that the audible noise "cost" in upsampling applications like Schiit's R2R DACs can be very minimal
 
for the yggy the 20 bit DAC chip resolution makes the difference in correlated quantization noise of rounding vs dither practically irrelevant
 
 
for 16 bit DAC chips, I believe some exceptional 24 bit source, unusual listing situations could make dither vs rounding audible
 
of course in my perspective that would be way more significant than most "issues" audiophiles obsess over - for instance there is a factor of 100x between the peer reviewed published human listening test threshold for jitter and "audiophile required" ~100 picosecond jitter

 

[gad1]

galvanic isolation:
 
Anyone know for sure if Yggy is galvanically isolated, and if
not anyone concerned?   Reason I ask is there are some
usb regenerators, reclockers, decrapifiers etc. etc. that
tout galvanic isolation; supposedly less noise.  I dread the
cost and mental fatigue of auditioning these products.
If Yggy is not galvanically isolated the Norse god's probably
had their reasons.