Schiit Yggdrasil Impressions thread
Jul 17, 2018 at 11:33 PM Post #8,851 of 12,201
You are wise to have paid attention to those experts. Here is an example (using a Keysight / Agilent / HP 6.5 digit DMM, properly warmed up prior to observations) to observe a 50 ohm metal film resistor undergoing changes as it warms up.



It is still settling in after an hour. Now think about thousands of components which need to play nice together.

Thanks, I can tell people, but a picture is worth a thousand words! I used to believe that X made no difference. I was pretty much taught that any 2 electrolytic capacitors with the same specs were completely interchangeable. Live and learn!
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 3:57 AM Post #8,852 of 12,201
It turned out that a hospital grade isolation transformer cleared up the issue.
Intresting you should mention isolation transfomeers. Someone tried to help amir by recommending iso and that his faulty results may be caused by a dirty environment. amir, of course, knows better than all, and would have none of that discussed in his presence.
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 4:04 AM Post #8,853 of 12,201
Ya know…
this is a dup
JJ
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 5:35 AM Post #8,854 of 12,201
Intresting you should mention isolation transfomeers. Someone tried to help amir by recommending iso and that his faulty results may be caused by a dirty environment. amir, of course, knows better than all, and would have none of that discussed in his presence.

I didn't want to be an apologist for Amir, but that certainly could help explain things.
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 6:00 AM Post #8,855 of 12,201
We all know the the meaning of the acronym of YMMV. But if you cannot hear any difference between a cold and warmed up Yggy, then I don't trust your opinion for anything. Get another hobby. You are wasting your money.

Very intelligent.

If one who lives near zip 11520 wishes to demo - blind - their ability to hear a difference between cold/warm - which my system is rather capable of discerning (or not) - contact me via PM. Call it a good old fashion and friendly wager. We can work out the particulars.
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 6:02 AM Post #8,856 of 12,201
Very intelligent.

If one who lives near zip 11520 wishes to demo - blind - their ability to hear a difference between cold/warm - which my system is rather capable of discerning (or not) - contact me via PM. Call it a good old fashion and friendly wager. We can work out the particulars.

I can do the same for Yggdrasil owners near S.W. Ohio.
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 7:20 AM Post #8,857 of 12,201
..............It is still settling in after an hour. Now think about thousands of components which need to play nice together.

I don't think anyone would dispute that at a "micro level", the electronics are undergoing some kind of change (given temperature and age from one second to the next, etc.) In fact, we can throw in the phase of the moon for good measure, to account for any gravimetric anomalies that might occur as it moves to/from the earth and also have an effect. But are these things truly audible to the naked (head phones okay) human ear? I say no. By truly, this means it can be reliably detected in a proper blind test.

Hi gdhal,

Actually the inverse is true. Anyone who works in an industrial environment knows that every time you shut down, startups are a real gamble......

This is certainly one "school of thought", which I've heard, read and understand. Truth is, the "optimum" scenario for sound quality may not be the same optimum scenario where the health of the electronic components are concerned. In all likelihood, leaving on continuously or turning on/off each has a positive and negative effect. But are these things truly audible to the naked (head phones okay) human ear? I say no. By truly, this means it can be reliably detected in a proper blind test.
 
Last edited:
Jul 18, 2018 at 8:33 AM Post #8,858 of 12,201
Someone pointed me to a discussion at @amirm's site where the Benchmark DAC3 was measured. Among the measurements posted was this one (Fig.1):

upload_2018-7-18_7-25-49.png

Fig.1 @amirm's plot of the Benchmark DAC3 jitter versus the RME ADI-2 DAC.

Later in the thread, John Siau from Benchmark said this (regarding the measurements posted in that thread):

John Siau at AudioScienceReview said:
Amirm,

The sidebands shown in the above test are due to the use of ASIO4All. This "ASIO" driver is not a true ASIO driver and is not a Benchmark product nor is it recommend by Benchmark. Unlike a true ASIO driver, ASIO4ALL does not bypass the operating system's audio system. Software-based sample rate conversion is the cause of the sidebands. They are not being produced by the DAC3.

Benchmark provides a downloadable driver, but this Benchmark driver is not needed with Apple operating systems nor is it needed with newer versions of Windows 10.

The driver is available here:

https://benchmarkmedia.com/pages/drivers

Unfortunately the ASIO4ALL driver has corrupted many of the measurements in this review. The tests should be rerun without using ASIO4ALL.


ADDED 2018-07-18 0949 EDT: I noticed that @amirm also got similar sidebands when using the DAC3's optical digital input, which should have zero to do with any USB driver issues. Here's what he posted:

@amirm at AudioScienceReview said:
Here is the comparison of unbalanced output with USB vs Toslink. Sadly the same spikes remain:

This was his measurement using the optical input (48 khz):

index.php

Fig.1A @amirm's plot of the Benchmark DAC3 jitter, using both USB and optical digital inputs (analog output was unbalaned).

As you can see, @amirm is getting similar jitter sidebands from both inputs. You can compare this measurement (Fig.1A above) to my measurement (Fig.12 below).



@amirm posted a couple of responses affirming his measurements are fine, concluding "So until John comes back with different measurements, there is no conflict to resolve."

I decided to do some jitter measurements on the Benchmark DAC3. (Benchmark Media is not a Head-Fi sponsor or advertiser.)

I started with the J-test stimulus via USB. I used the Benchmark ASIO driver with the analyzer:

Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 8.05.53 AM.png


This is the FFT spectrum plot from the Benchmark DAC3, using the J-test stimulus, 48 kHz, USB digital input, unbalanced analog output (Fig.2 below):

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi USB out_ana unbal in_48k.jpg

Fig.2 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 48 kHz, USB digital input, unbalanced analog output.

As you can see, the measurement above does not show the sidebands that @amirm's measurement is showing.

I also decided to run the APx J-Test (Jitter) Measurement Utility downloadable at Audio Precision's website. This test (and its accompanying project file) is pre-configured by Audio Precision. You hook up the DAC (using its various inputs/outputs) and then simply choose which input/output and sample rate you want to test with, and then run the test. (The utility chooses the appropriate J-test stimulus based on the chosen sample rate.)

Because the APx J-Test (Jitter) Measurement Utility does not support USB, I used the DAC3's unbalanced and optical digital inputs, and both unbalanced and balanced analog outputs.

Here are the results:

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi unbal out_ana unbal_in_44.1k_36.8ps.jpg

Fig.3 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 44.1 kHz, unbalanced digital input, unbalanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 36.8 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi unbal out_ana unbal_in_48k_32.7ps.jpg

Fig.4 Fig.2 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 48 kHz, unbalanced digital input, unbalanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 32.7 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi unbal out_ana unbal_in_96k_23.4ps.jpg

Fig.5 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 96 kHz, unbalanced digital input, unbalanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 23.4 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi unbal out_ana unbal_in_192k_17.0ps.jpg

Fig.6 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 192 kHz, unbalanced digital input, unbalanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 17.0 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi unbal out_ana bal_in_44.1k_27.9ps.jpg

Fig.7 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 44.1 kHz, unbalanced digital input, balanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 27.9 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi unbal out_ana bal_in_48k_25.6ps.jpg

Fig.8 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 48 kHz, unbalanced digital input, balanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 25.6 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi unbal out_ana bal_in_96k_18.6ps.jpg

Fig.9 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 96 kHz, unbalanced digital input, balanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 18.6 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi unbal out_ana bal_in_192k_16.4ps.jpg

Fig.10 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 192 kHz, unbalanced digital input, balanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 16.4 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana unbal in_44.1k_36.0ps.jpg

Fig.11 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 44.1 kHz, optical digital input, unbalanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 36.0 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana unbal in_48k_32.4ps.jpg

Fig.12 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 48 kHz, optical digital input, unbalanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 32.4 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana unbal in_96k_24.0ps.jpg

Fig.13 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 96 kHz, optical digital input, unbalanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 24.0 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana bal_in_44.1k_34.8ps.jpg

Fig.14 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 44.1 kHz, optical digital input, balanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 34.8 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana bal in_48k_33.4ps.jpg

Fig.14 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 48 kHz, optical digital input, balanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 33.4 ps.

FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana bal in_96k_21.3ps.jpg

Fig.15 Benchmark DAC3 J-test (jitter), 96 kHz, optical digital input, balanced analog output. The measured jitter result was 21.3 ps.

Because the Benchmark DAC3's optical digital input is rated to 96 khz, I did not include 192 kHz for optical digital input.

I haven't seen Benchmark's measurements of the DAC3. However, in terms of the jitter measurement, it appears @amirm and I are getting different results.

NOTE: I know, because this is a Benchmark DAC3, this is a bit off-topic with respect to the title of this thread. That said, I think it's relevant in the context of the current discussion. I'll post these and other DAC3 measurements sometime after I get back from CanJam London in an appropriate thread about the Benchmark DAC3.

EDIT 2018-07-18 0949 EDT: I added the @amirm's optical (toslink) jitter plot above (Fig.1A). You can compare that to my plot in Fig.12 above.
 

Attachments

  • FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana bal in_192k_16.8us.jpg
    FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana bal in_192k_16.8us.jpg
    290.7 KB · Views: 0
  • FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana unbal in_192k_19.3us.jpg
    FFT Spectrum_DAC3_digi opt out_ana unbal in_192k_19.3us.jpg
    284 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Jul 18, 2018 at 9:24 AM Post #8,859 of 12,201
Someone pointed me to a discussion at @amirm's site where the Benchmark DAC3 was measured.........
..............I haven't seen Benchmark's measurements of the DAC3. However, in terms of the jitter measurement, it appears @amirm and I are getting different results.

NOTE: I know, because this is a Benchmark DAC3, this is a bit off-topic with respect to the title of this thread. That said, I think it's relevant in the context of the current discussion. I'll post these and other DAC3 measurements sometime after I get back from CanJam London in an appropriate thread about the Benchmark DAC3.

@jude That is an outstanding post on your part. And I agree with you, I believe it is relevant where Amir and his data (all data for all DACs) are concerned. Thank you!
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 9:56 AM Post #8,860 of 12,201
I don't think anyone would dispute that at a "micro level", the electronics are undergoing some kind of change (given temperature and age from one second to the next, etc.) In fact, we can throw in the phase of the moon for good measure, to account for any gravimetric anomalies that might occur as it moves to/from the earth and also have an effect. But are these things truly audible to the naked (head phones okay) human ear? I say no. By truly, this means it can be reliably detected in a proper blind test.



This is certainly one "school of thought", which I've heard, read and understand. Truth is, the "optimum" scenario for sound quality may not be the same optimum scenario where the health of the electronic components are concerned. In all likelihood, leaving on continuously or turning on/off each has a positive and negative effect. But are these things truly audible to the naked (head phones okay) human ear? I say no. By truly, this means it can be reliably detected in a proper blind test.

If you live near Dayton or Cincinnati bring your Yggdrasil over and we can remove all your doubts. There's audio equipment and then there is audio equipment, and in some cases then there is modified audio equipment. The quality of equipment has gone up, so currently the only modified equipment that I am using are my amps, and DVD player which I practically don't even use anymore. Anyway, if you had some high end Stax headphones driven by high end equipment I doubt that this would be an issue.
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 10:22 AM Post #8,863 of 12,201
I don't think anyone would dispute that at a "micro level", the electronics are undergoing some kind of change (given temperature and age from one second to the next, etc.) In fact, we can throw in the phase of the moon for good measure, to account for any gravimetric anomalies that might occur as it moves to/from the earth and also have an effect. But are these things truly audible to the naked (head phones okay) human ear? I say no. By truly, this means it can be reliably detected in a proper blind test.
You keep mentioning blind testing and assuming one does it. In my lab we regularly perform AB and ABX testing. Here is a picture of a Gungnir MB and Bifrost MB in ABX testing:

20170226 Bifrost MB - Gungnir MB - RN D16 ABX - The Educator - small.jpg


The problems involved with ABX testing are many. Level matching, removing distractions, consistent setups, equal cabling both for AC mains and signal, etc. Then there is the listener skill level. If one doesn't know that for which to listen, the listener is guaranteed to fail ABX testing. With auditory training discriminatory ability improves. This is no different than putting green ears in front of the mix console in a recording studio. They have no idea what they are doing. Examples of listening skill training include (but not limited to):

Dave Moulton Golden Ears training
http://www.moultonlabs.com/full/product01

Harman's How To Listen (Dr. Sean Olive and crew responsible, thank-you)
http://harmanhowtolisten.blogspot.com/

And yes, those two DACs were distinguishable 8/8 over 7 different trial sessions.
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 10:27 AM Post #8,864 of 12,201
And, have you confirmed your experience in a blind test? I'm not speaking of A1 vs A2, which I agree their difference can be discerned in a blind test. I'm speaking of A1 cold vs A1 warm or A2 cold vs A2 warm.
I own three resistor array DACs: Yggy (A2 currently), chip-based; Holo Spring, discrete R2R ladder; Soekris, discrete R2R ladder. All of them need significant warm-up periods to sound their best. Which is totally obvious if you care to study the relationship between resistance and temperature. I've had these differences checked by my wife, who does not know or care what gear is on for how long. Are these lab tests? No. But life is way too short to go down a rabbit hole of testing just because someone on the internet needs reassurance.
 
Jul 18, 2018 at 10:35 AM Post #8,865 of 12,201
So my question is are you just being a troll or are you one of those insecure young men who "must be right", or are you maybe just a narcissistic ass who loves the attention of being engaged by experts who know more than you do? Whatever it is, please stop you are just being annoying now.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Back
    Top