[Xcalibur255]

I wonder if mine got more post-installation burn-in which accelerated things a bit for me.

 

[billerb1]

I wonder if mine got more post-installation burn-in which accelerated things a bit for me.

I would imagine I am just more neurotic than you are.

 

[Xcalibur255]

I would imagine I am just more neurotic than you are.

It's basically a pre-requisite for this hobby.

I'm very much the same. That's why I was surprised at how decent mine sounded out of the box. The only time I turned Yggy off and allowed it to get cold it sounded baaaaad for a full week after, and that was just thermal stability not break-in. I won't complain about my unit sounding good sooner than expected though. A lot of other people have reported a similar experience of A2 getting up to speed faster than A1 did so nothing seems afoot.

 

[johnjen]

To those who maintain that the changes heard by some as a result of 'extended settling in time' or 'burn in' or 'thermal stability' is balderdash, well for you, and those who agree with you, that is absolutely correct.
Which is usually based upon personal experience and understanding and expectation.

But the error in stating this is, expressing this opinion as fact and as a universal statement of fact as well.
Statements such as these can be classed in the group known as logical fallacies in that they are logically unsupportable, by definition.

There are many who HAVE and continue to hear changes and improvements thru time, myself included.
And by the rules of Aristotelian logic (which is the very foundation and basis of the scientific method, ie empirical method) all it takes is one example to invalidate such an assertion as being universally true.

And for myself it isn't a thermal, nor a matter of burn in, etc.
For me, after much consideration and examination, it is a matter of all of the individual components themselves getting used to being what they have been created to be, and are now operating as.

Before being inserted and then operating in a circuit as a resistor or capacitor or IC etc, the constituent parts (the various metals, wire, ceramic, plastic etc) were just that and not resistors nor wire nor insulation etc.

They then become a single component in a larger assembly that begins to operate as the designer intended for the very first time in their existence.
These new parts are then subjected to specific operational electrical, electronic, thermal, magnetic, electrostatic, (and a few more) aspects, all in unique combinations, that these newly created parts, and indeed the entire circuit as well, never operated in, never were subjected to before.

And as for the 'needing to' run music thru the Jggy, of course not.
BUT–
Adding those actual operating voltages (the digital and audio signals themselves, which is how the dac operates, by running a signal thru it,) means ALL components are exposed to ALL of the signal/voltages/currents as the dac is actually used.

I figure this is a min path way (as in the fastest way of reaching the full SQ peak and operational stability) of any method I could use.
This way ALL of the components 'settle in' together.
This technique is one that has proven itself to me over and over again over decades and applies to automotive, motorcycle, electronics, electrical (lighting) and many variations of audio systems as well.

And there is evidence, as in measurements taken by atomicbob, that after ≈400hrs the Jggy's jitter plot did improve and remarkably so.
The measured noise floor dropped by ≈4.4db down to -158.28dBFS and the inferred jitter improved by ≈37%.
Which by the way is a reading that is bumping up against the resolution limits of the measurement gear used to take them.
This isn't a matter of thermal settling in, not at 408hrs of continuous 'on' time.

And I have been tracking the SQ shift and change as the hrs accumulated after a shutdown and my JggyB went 'cold'.
Right now, as I type this, I've accumulated ≈390hrs of continual on time and the SQ has improved steadily and has nearly reached it previous peak (before going cold) and that peak took over 1500hrs to reach the pinnacle of its peak after the v.2 upgrade.

But ALL of this applies to me and I don't claim this is universal, because clearly that isn't the case.
BUT–
In MY system when I listen to music I am VERY familiar with, and hear new nuances, new aspects to tracks and specific 'voices' I am VERY familiar with, this tells me the SQ HAS changed, again for me, and I am but one of many who report such experiences.

In short when there is 'enough' evidence to logically invalidate presumed universal 'truths', then the variability returns to each listeners experiences as a valid experience.
And for me and all the others who DO hear SQ changes there is more than "'enough' evidence" to know both the Jggy and JggyB do improve as the hrs add up.

Like right now, listening to Joe Satriani and hearing new additional nuances to his many guitar 'voices'.

A true delight for me for sure.

JJ
ps and I'm not specifically aiming this AT anyone in particular, nor any group, but I have this personal problem with logical fallacies, in that they can instigate and evoke relatively long diatribes.
And I do hope there is a cure, so someday they won't trigger me into writing these novella's. hahahahahahahahaahahaha

JJ

 

[the finisher]

And I do hope there is a cure, so someday they won't trigger me into writing these novella's.

Well at least it kept me from writing one, I think I'll write one about speaker cables, thought not here.

 

[Aurion]

@johnjen , many years ago I worked for a solid state power supply company, and was involved with product development and testing. MTBF studies were performed with thermocouples strategically placed within the chassis. In addition, after each test the chassis was rotated through various loads, and horizontal and vertical planes. As I recall, no test procedure lasted more than a day or two for the power supply to reach thermal stability, as measured with a suitably sensitive voltmeter.
I would imagine that a few thermocouples placed within any Schiit dac would reveal when thermal stability is achieved. With a well refined ear one might determine if the point of thermal stability occurred simultaneously with end point fidelity. Just a thought for someone inclined to experiment.......

 

[US Blues]

There are many who HAVE and continue to hear changes and improvements thru time, myself included.
And by the rules of Aristotelian logic (which is the very foundation and basis of the scientific method, ie empirical method) all it takes is one example to invalidate such an assertion as being universally true.

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle...

Sorry, couldn't resist quoting Monty Python. In all seriousness, this is a deeply thought out post that brings to mind some new and interesting ideas regarding the real world functionality, and attendant changes in SQ, in new or "cold" gear. Thank you for sharing this.

 

[earnmyturns]

For me, after much consideration and examination, it is a matter of all of the individual components themselves getting used to being what they have been created to be, and are now operating as.

So here's a puzzle regarding this hypothesis: how can a designer possibly design such a system if its ultimate properties are not settled until the system has been operating in the wild for a while? Calculations from nominal component properties, or measurement from short-term lab assemblies, would not carry to the long-term-in-the-wild setting. In other words, think of a design as represented by a point in very high-dimensional space, and a particular performance measurement (eg. SNR) as a function from that high-dimensional space to real numbers for which you only have a few evaluated points (those for your lab measurements). According to your hypothesis, the point representing the system will drift from its design position to somewhere else. How can the designer extrapolate from the few design/lab values they have to the value of the measurement wherever the system drifts to? There's something here that I can't figure out, even though I have some sympathy for your hypothesis.

 

[johnjen]

Say there earnmyturns, good question, thanks for asking…!

The answer that comes to mind is that these newly created components 'settle into' their final operational parameters as they 'age' within the tolerances they were designed for.
But during this 'aging' process they will change both individually and collectively and this changing behavior along with the collective changes of all the other components is where I figure we hear this morphing SQ behavior during 'break in' originating from.

As for the designer knowing what values are needed/will actually occur in the circuit, that is usually a matter of the design and dialing in process as well, which implies the individual components will have aged 'sufficiently' during the design process.

And really with today's ability to manufacture components with 0.5% tolerances (and in some cases MUCH less) the final 'target' values will be met because the manufacturer builds them to meet this spec as they operate in the circuit, which means that after 'settling in' they will remain in that tolerance window by their inherent design.

But really it's not just the individual components themselves but their collective dynamic (as in changing) behavior, especially as they settle in/age/stabilize etc, which is the sum total of ALL these influences and changes.
IOW the specific collection of parts will morph during this 'aging'/settling in, and if the designer is 'sharp' it will morph INTO the sweet spot, because that has been taken into account by the design itself.
We see this in the JggyB as it ages and the SQ becomes all the more compelling and delightful.

And design, while it obviously must include the individual values of the component parts that are used, is more focused upon the arrangement of these parts, aka the circuit design itself.
The actual values are 'variables' in this larger 'equation'.
And these values can be and are changed during the design and dialing in process based upon what the design goals entail.
So if a component 'ages' into a value that doesn't meet the design spec it can be changed or the design itself can be altered etc, to hit the intended sweet spot.

And lastly, these aging/settling in/stabilizing behaviors are usually only apparent in systems capable of resolving these changes where these SQ shifts are able to be heard, such as the JggyB and other gear.
This in turn supposes that the entire audio system is capable of delivering this same ability to resolve these finer details etc, that the specific SotA gear used in the system is capable of.
IOW, that the system as a whole is capable of, and actually does, deliver a sufficient level of SQ resolution.
I call this process of being able to let all of the detail the system is capable of, actually be heard, as 'getting the system out of it's own way', and involves ALL of the components in the system, not just the SotA gear.

Think weakest link theory, or as I call it removing choke points within the entire system itself.

JJ

 

[johnjen]

@johnjen , many years ago I worked for a solid state power supply company, and was involved with product development and testing. MTBF studies were performed with thermocouples strategically placed within the chassis. In addition, after each test the chassis was rotated through various loads, and horizontal and vertical planes. As I recall, no test procedure lasted more than a day or two for the power supply to reach thermal stability, as measured with a suitably sensitive voltmeter.
I would imagine that a few thermocouples placed within any Schiit dac would reveal when thermal stability is achieved. With a well refined ear one might determine if the point of thermal stability occurred simultaneously with end point fidelity. Just a thought for someone inclined to experiment.......

Say there Aurion.

Full thermal stability seems to happen in just a few hrs of operation, depending upon the design and environment etc.

So yes a couple of days should be more than sufficient to reach thermal stability and anyone with a thermal imaging scanner will be able to 'map out' the heat as it reaches 'saturation' in all components, ie thermal equilibrium.

We, in these cases, require MUCH more time to reach the peak of the SQ the gear is capable of, and I can't see it as simply a thermal stability issue, other than it is a necessary aspect in the overall big picture.

JJ

 

[johnjen]

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle...

Sorry, couldn't resist quoting Monty Python. In all seriousness, this is a deeply thought out post that brings to mind some new and interesting ideas regarding the real world functionality, and attendant changes in SQ, in new or "cold" gear. Thank you for sharing this.

Say there US Blues.
Monty Python is ALWAYS appreciated.

Yeah these sorts of conceptual perspectives are thought provoking for sure.
And I have been working on an explanation as to why this behavioral phenomenon even exists in the 1st place for quite some time now.
And along with why cables and fuses, and a host of other aspects are even able to contribute in a meaningful way to the SQ in a desirable way, at all.

I mean it shouldn't be that big of a deal, except that as my system becomes all the more resolving, the more these observations of the SQ morphing as it 'settles in', not only take longer to fully stabilize, but result in ever greater acoustically beneficial results as well.

All are ongoing research projects of which there are plenty to choose from.

JJ

 

[bacobits]

Just a quicky for what it's worth............mine has been on for 25 days. I think it fully changed after 7-10 days where I did not detect anything different.
It did not sound terrible when first turned on and got it back. Mine was an upgrade from a 2 year old machine if it matters. I don't like obsessing over an anticipating change coming.Just listen to the music,already.
This is with my speakers which are very revealing. This is a fine sounding DAC!
I also did a tube change in my Cronus MAG II, OMG! It rocks!!!!!
You can say I love the upgrade.

 

[gdhal]

So here's a puzzle regarding this hypothesis: how can a designer possibly design such a system if its ultimate properties are not settled until the system has been operating in the wild for a while? Calculations from nominal component properties, or measurement from short-term lab assemblies, would not carry to the long-term-in-the-wild setting. In other words, think of a design as represented by a point in very high-dimensional space, and a particular performance measurement (eg. SNR) as a function from that high-dimensional space to real numbers for which you only have a few evaluated points (those for your lab measurements). According to your hypothesis, the point representing the system will drift from its design position to somewhere else. How can the designer extrapolate from the few design/lab values they have to the value of the measurement wherever the system drifts to? There's something here that I can't figure out, even though I have some sympathy for your hypothesis.

No puzzle at all. There is no meaningful (i.e. audible by naked ear) change from design stage on paper to fully operation in the wild. If there is a change, the design stage has some kind of flaw (IMO). However, that stated, ones "mind" (thoughts, etc.), hearing capability, beliefs, and so on are rather dynamic and can change from moment to moment. Combine that with other real-life changes (temperature, magnetism, etc.) and can one really ever be able or expected to pin point the true reason for any perceived audio change with their yggdrasil?

EDIT: I've always stated that if someone is at least honest (with themself) and can detect a change given a proper (not necessarily scientific, but accurate and compelling nevertheless) "blind" test (i.e. where you cannot see or have prior knowledge to what if anything has changed) then that is very meaningful. Anything else is essentially placebo.

 

[earnmyturns]

No puzzle at all. There is no meaningful (i.e. audible by naked ear) change from design stage on paper to fully operation in the wild. However, that stated, ones "mind" (thoughts, etc.), hearing capability, beliefs, and so on are rather dynamic and can change from moment to moment. Combine that with other real-life changes (temperature, magnetism, etc.) and can one really ever be able or expected to pin point the true reason for any perceived audio change with their yggdrasil?

So why would that drift always sound better at the end, unless it's user habituation rather than convergence to an operational target that as I argued would be very hard to design for? I can understand that some components might take some time to converge to their design specs. For example, new vacuum tubes. But I'm rather skeptical that a complex design will magically drift into a performance optimum just from mutual nudges between components drifting out of spec.

 

[gdhal]

So why would that drift always sound better at the end, unless it's user habituation rather than convergence to an operational target that as I argued would be very hard to design for? I can understand that some components might take some time to converge to their design specs. For example, new vacuum tubes. But I'm rather skeptical that a complex design will magically drift into a performance optimum just from mutual nudges between components drifting out of spec.

I'm not sure what you mean, therefore, I'm unable to answer to your question.