[mourip]

IMO. AES vs USB Gen5 is just flavouring to match the rest of your system. USB Gen 5 is a little more focused and precise. AES a little more relaxed and slightly rounder.

Both coming out of my Aries G2.

Yup. System matching and personal preference will always be the final determinants.

 

[SeaWo|f]

IMO. AES vs USB Gen5 is just flavouring to match the rest of your system. USB Gen 5 is a little more focused and precise. AES a little more relaxed and slightly rounder.

Both coming out of my Aries G2.

To an extent I think this is probably true, when you are talking about high quality dedicated players. But if the choice is usb from a PC directly vs going through a dedicated digital to digital converter I am not so sure.

Be interesting if people tested this.

Edit also the differences you are seeing might be a property of that particular player and not the yggy.

 

[neogeosnk]

Is the consensus that Yggy blows away the Hugo 2 or different flavor?

 

[B1ll]

Most DAC's are just changing flavors, +- fullness/richness in tonality.

 

[SeaWo|f]

I have read reviews of the a1 that go either way vs Hugo 2.

 

[johnzz4]

To an extent I think this is probably true, when you are talking about high quality dedicated players. But if the choice is usb from a PC directly vs going through a dedicated digital to digital converter I am not so sure.

Be interesting if people tested this.

Edit also the differences you are seeing might be a property of that particular player and not the yggy.

The same is true for my first generation Aries.

 

[theveterans]

Is the consensus that Yggy blows away the Hugo 2 or different flavor?

Just different flavor like always with high end DACs IMO. On the Chord Camp, some says Hugo 1 or 2Qute is better than any Schiit DACs while on the Schiit camp, it’s the other way around except for Chord DAVE.

 

[B1ll]

Just different flavor like always with high end DACs IMO. On the Chord Camp, some says Hugo 1 or 2Qute is better than any Schiit DACs while on the Schiit camp, it’s the other way around except for Chord DAVE.

High end DAC differences are splitting hairs IMO, even with DAVE, it's really about that last 2-3% of achievable performance (or even smaller, who knows). What really matters is the amplification and the actual speakers.

 

[johnjen]

In my experience the differences we perceive between dacs, amps, etc is dependent upon the rest of the system.

When using gear that is pushing the boundary of the SotA, the best gear isn't the limiting factor.
The weakest link, or biggest choke point(s), in the rest of system, coupled with the expectations of the owner, these are the deciding factors.

IOW just because you have one or more piece(s) of SotA gear (i.e. the Jggy) doesn't mean you're hearing all that it can deliver.
The rest of the entire system will have a greater impact in terms of being able to deliver all of what the best pieces of gear are able to deliver.

This explains, at least in part to me, why some prefer certain gear over other gear, because of the interaction between all of the pieces of their existing setup, coupled with their experience and expectations/desires etc.

Yeah there is more to this, but if the rest of the system is made up of mid-fi gear, then any SotA gear will have it's 'best', limited by the rest of the system.

This also plays into the scalability of the entire system as those weakest links/ choke points are ameliorated, which then allows more of the SotA gear's 'best' to be heard.

JJ

 

[SeaWo|f]

I think for many with high-end dacs - amp - headphone combos the weakest link continues to be the source. Which is why people continue to be amazed at how a relatively inexpensive cd player can increase the fidelity.

 

[LouS]

In my experience the differences we perceive between dacs, amps, etc is dependent upon the rest of the system.

When using gear that is pushing the boundary of the SotA, the best gear isn't the limiting factor.
The weakest link, or biggest choke point(s), in the rest of system, coupled with the expectations of the owner, these are the deciding factors.

IOW just because you have one or more piece(s) of SotA gear (i.e. the Jggy) doesn't mean you're hearing all that it can deliver.
The rest of the entire system will have a greater impact in terms of being able to deliver all of what the best pieces of gear are able to deliver.

This explains, at least in part to me, why some prefer certain gear over other gear, because of the interaction between all of the pieces of their existing setup, coupled with their experience and expectations/desires etc.

Yeah there is more to this, but if the rest of the system is made up of mid-fi gear, then any SotA gear will have it's 'best', limited by the rest of the system.

This also plays into the scalability of the entire system as those weakest links/ choke points are ameliorated, which then allows more of the SotA gear's 'best' to be heard.

JJ

While true, if the mid-fi equipment is at least reasonably neutral, than the Yggdrasil will still be a tremendous add. I think neutrality is central to higher end gear sounding better, or not, in a system. I know as I was working my way up the ladder bright gear or say Vandersteen dull gear was problematic. IOW, if you are running Vandersteen 2CE's, but want detail, you are going to want bright gear to try to overcome the 3 crappy caps in series in the tweeter circuit. I'm not sure you can get to detail with Vandersteen tweeters, which is a real shame because they are nice speakers otherwise for the money. Anyway, a Yggdrasil being neutral just won't sound very detailed with Vandersteens, at least not the 1's, 2's, and 3's which I have heard. Then again, some hear detail and think that the system is not musical, so gear plus taste come into play, IME. I was at a fellow's home once where he had Vandersteen 3A Signatures set up with what ever the SOTA Sony SACD player was at the time, and he also had an Electrocompaniet DAC. The Electrocompaniet had far better detail and over all sound than the Sony, due to it's crappy opamps in the I/V and output stage, but he couldn't decide which sounded better... So musical priorities certainly play a big role in what sounds good to whom. BTW, my CDP is a Sony with lots of bypassed and many Black Gate caps, discrete circuits for the I/V conversion, and about the only musical opamps I have heard in the O/P stage. Sony makes some really nice machines, or at least they did, I am not current on them, but their outputs sucked. Then again, I don't really use the Sony now, and if I did, it would feed the Yggdrasil anyway. My point being that Sony's are not junk, many have used them as a platform for modification and have done well with them, stock they need help though.

 

[koven]

Got a new coffee table for my gear... the Yggy tucks in perfectly!

 

[mourip]

I think for many with high-end dacs - amp - headphone combos the weakest link continues to be the source. Which is why people continue to be amazed at how a relatively inexpensive cd player can increase the fidelity.

I definitely agree that most folks underestimate what a good source can do. As they say: "Garbage in, garbage out".

Regarding CD players, I guess that if you go from a inexpensive one to well engineered one you will be happier. Personally I do not think that even an expensive player can top a really good music server run from an LPS with a good DDC, whether USB to AES/SPDIF or ethernet to AES/SPDIF, and into a good DAC.

Here I am just talking about the CD player used as transport only with digital out to a DAC. In the case of one that has an internal DAC and analog out it is not even close.

This of course is not a budget friendly solution

...and is just my own opinion and experience.

 

[SeaWo|f]

Yea I was talking about a inexpensive CD transport vs moderately expensive music servers. I feel like music server can be better but at this point in time you have to spend a good deal of money to get one that wont easily be topped by a CD transport.

 

[johnjen]

Another aspect that seems to be misunderstood is that the "weakest link, or biggest choke point(s)" aren't solely about any limitation to the bandwidth of the freq response.
It's more about the inner details, the degree of focus, the overall acoustic presentation, the stability and dimensionality of the soundstage, the leading edge impact, the ability to hear into the music vs. just listening to the music, etc.

These traits (and more) are much more complex and involve more than mere freq response.

And I also agree that the source is more important than most give it credit for, but if the downstream gear limits or chokes those aspects mentioned above, then experiencing them to the fullest will be curtailed.

There are countless examples of people getting SotA gear and not being happy with it, right from the start, (HD800's come to mind).
I attribute this to the rest of their system being suitable for their old gear and with the introduction of 'better' gear, that doesn't match up well, the end results are less than expected.
Because the new more unforgiving SotA gear more or less forces them hear their Choke Points (CP's), which were less apparent with their previous setup.

This masking and its acoustic consequences becomes more and more of an issue as more SotA gear is introduced into the system, which in turn reveals more CP's which in turn are often attributed to the SotA gear itself.

Case in point, the absolute worse sounding systems I have heard were after a high end SotA piece of gear was added to an existing system with atrocious (as in dull razor blades to the ears) results.

IOW as we progress up the ladder of 'Better' more and more weak links are exposed and will be more and more evident.
Which in turn necessitates amelioration (or not) based upon priorities and skill levels and willingness to explore solutions.
And as these veils are lowered, which in turn allows more and more of these treasured details to be heard, we can then hear what our SotA gear is truly capable of.

This sequence of dialing in the rest of the system after the introduction of 'Better' gear is usually (or can be) a long term aspect to our hobby and is a major contributor to the overall addictive aspect and $$$$$ spent over time.

But for those who do continue to pursue these goals, the results can be truly stupendous.

JJ