Schiit Yggdrasil Impressions thread

[ciphercomplete]

 All of those fantastic 1704K DACs seem to have suddenly become poor by comparison which is, frankly, not that credible. But let's wait a bit, as the Yggdrasil is pleasing some.

 
 
Not poor, it's relative of course.  The Master 7 is still a great dac (although it makes no sense to buy one at the current price when you can get the Yggy).  I have owned my share of 1704 dacs from Lite Audio's flagship, to audio gd to monarchy, the Yggy effortlessly gets things right in areas where those dacs struggled.  

 

[DACLadder]

I think next week I will fire up my dormant Master 7 for a sound check.  In many ways the M7 sound is directly opposed to the Yggy so should be interesting.   Also at 3.5 weeks my Yggy is still slowly evolving.   The Yggy's prominent upper mid-range/ trebles/ abundant detail is more in check and less exaggerated as during the first couple of weeks.  More meat on the bone in the lower mid-range where vocals, electric guitars, and wood instruments hide.  The Yggy's nimble bass has more authority.  So onward with the clock...

 

[evillamer]

The thing about master 7 is its variability. Some are using i2s, some are using USB, some are using ACSS for connecting to amp. Also master 7 can operate on NOS mode and filter adjustments

 

[jimmypowder]

I have a Gungnir . I like it and it seems to have a more analog feel than the sabre chip dacs I have like the Audiolab Mdac.

It does lack some resolution that a Benchmark dac2 hgc has but I like the sound better .

Will the Yggy have better resolution than the Gungnir but not have that treble coarseness I hate with some of the sabre dacs?

 

[jfoxvol]

I have a Gungnir . I like it and it seems to have a more analog feel than the sabre chip dacs I have like the Audiolab Mdac.

It does lack some resolution that a Benchmark dac2 hgc has but I like the sound better .

Will the Yggy have better resolution than the Gungnir but not have that treble coarseness I hate with some of the sabre dacs?

Yes. I have a Gungnir. It does sound slightly warmer than the Yggdrasil. I love the way they both sound. The Yggy doesn't have that weird hash in the upper end but has a clearer treble. The music does sound much more natural.

 

[jimmypowder]

Yes. I have a Gungnir. It does sound slightly warmer than the Yggdrasil. I love the way they both sound. The Yggy doesn't have that weird hash in the upper end but has a clearer treble. The music does sound much more natural.

Thanks for your reply . That's good to know .

I am considering buying a Yggy and am really not a fan of the treble harshness I hear with several sabre dacs .

Quite a few sabre dacs don't sound natural ,particularly on the high end . And I have a pair of Kef Ls 50's that have some treble brightness on the high end but has subsided significantly as they have broken in .

Well I just might pull the trigger on the Yggy !

 

[jfoxvol]

Thanks for your reply . That's good to know .

I am considering buying a Yggy and am really not a fan of the treble harshness I hear with several sabre dacs .

Quite a few sabre dacs don't sound natural ,particularly on the high end . And I have a pair of Kef Ls 50's that have some treble brightness on the high end but has subsided significantly as they have broken in .

Well I just might pull the trigger on the Yggy !

You bet. Make sure to give it several days to a week before you decide. It's quite harsh at first. There are some real precision devices in this baby that need time to settle for it to be accurate. I did notice that some of my amps sound brighter but that is relative since they were being fed from the Gungnir. It's all relative. What I have not just blows me away. It's so real and live sounding. I've never heard any other higher end DACs so I can't speak for them, but this was a notable and worthwhile upgrade for me.

 

[jusbe]

   
 
Not poor, it's relative of course.  The Master 7 is still a great dac (although it makes no sense to buy one at the current price when you can get the Yggy).  I have owned my share of 1704 dacs from Lite Audio's flagship, to audio gd to monarchy, the Yggy effortlessly gets things right in areas where those dacs struggled.  

Well, that's some claim. I've tried to follow your experiences since you've got 1704K experience similar to mine. Since I currently use Lite's DAC83, could you indicate what differences struck you as most notable, if you're willing?

 

[amalgamist]

Slightly off topic but, what would be the best way to have the Yggy feed two separate balanced amps(Ragnarok & WA22) ? I'm growing tired of having to swap cables over when I want to use one or the other.
 
Would a standard "Y" splitter be ok or would that somehow degrade the sound quality ?
 

 
Or maybe something like this ? 
 

 

[ciphercomplete]

  Well, that's some claim. I've tried to follow your experiences since you've got 1704K experience similar to mine. Since I currently use Lite's DAC83, could you indicate what differences struck you as most notable, if you're willing?

 
If you want a direct comparison I'm afraid I can't give it since I last owned the Lite over three almost 4 years ago.  Also in that time I have changed my speakers 5 times.  What I can say is that I mistakenly sold the Monarchy NM24 in favor of the Wyred 4 Sound DAC2.  I then purchased two midrange Audio GD 1704 dacs. First the DAC19 and later the Ref 5. I later purchased the Lite after reading that it was a 1704 dac that leaned more toward detail and resolution. Lastly I bought the Audio GD NFB1ES.  All of this was over a little more than a year and I never had all 4 of these in house at once.  For whatever reason the NFB1ES was the ultimate winner out of that group and I sold the Lite.  I chalk this up to me deciding that between tonality and detail/resolution I wanted the later.  The audio GDs and the Lite were not bad in any sense but at the time I wanted detail and resolution and thought I could live without tonality (wrong).  The Master 7 was the first DAC that gave me enough of both tonality and detail/resolution.  I thought the M7 was the last DAC I would own especially after modding it to have I2s input with DACLadder's hdmi card.  
 
Generally speaking I found the 1704 dacs I have owned to have less detailed bass.  The M7 via I2S got pretty close to what I wanted - full powerful bass without unnatural roundness and loss of detail.  But having heard more detailed bass (albeit drier and unnaturally colder) from the likes of Sabre dacs I knew there was more detail be had.  The Yggy doesn't leave me wanting anything bass related.  It is more detailed than the Sabre dacs I have owned (they left out tonality, warmth realism) and betters the M7 in all areas on the low end.  If I continue up the frequency range my comments will be the same, the Yggy does it better than M7 and by extension the NFB1ES and on down.  

 

[IndieGradoFan]

Slightly off topic but, what would be the best way to have the Yggy feed two separate balanced amps(Ragnarok & WA22) ? I'm growing tired of having to swap cables over when I want to use one or the other.
 
Would a standard "Y" splitter be ok or would that somehow degrade the sound quality ?

 
The XLR splitter is fine -- I ran my Gungnir > (WA22, Mjolnir) that way for a long time. I asked Schiit the same question and they said there'd be no issue splitting the output in that way.

 

[skeptic]

   
I would be interested to learn your opinion on more extended listening. So far, this has been the most useful commentary on this DAC. Most of the others I have read seem excessively breathless is praise and lacking in context and meaningful comparison. They are far from convincing and I suspect more than a few listeners (music-lovers) may be slightly underwhelmed. Just my opinion though.
 
Over the years, I've come to notice that extensive talk of 'neutrality', 'honesty', 'coloured' this and that, and ridiculously long break-in periods presage short-term audio relationships. But we'll see what happens. All of those fantastic 1704K DACs seem to have suddenly become poor by comparison which is, frankly, not that credible. But let's wait a bit, as the Yggdrasil is pleasing some.

 
I think you will better understand the descriptors many of us have used once you have actually heard a yggy and have some real basis on which to express opinions about it.
 
I can't compare it to any high end 1704 dacs, although I note this chip was used in various Yamaha HTR receivers, so I think a lot of people have probably heard its general voicing without ever realizing it.  No doubt, it is a good sounding chip, and I would enjoy hearing the implementation in the dac83 some day.  
 
Here's the striking thing about the yggy though, at least as heard in my rig, it manages to maintain beautifully natural timbre while presenting just an incredible amount of detail, and always in a way that sounds refined and lifelike rather than overemphasized.  I'm not sure what your metric is for determining who is or is not a "music-lover," but I joined my first choir at two years of age and went on to perform in multiple operas with LA Opera, on several big budget film scores as a member of SAG, in countless cathedrals on various international choir tours and competitions, first as a boy soprano soloist and later in life as a bass, and I also played horn in an orchestra that played, among other venues, the Sydney Opera House.  I haven't heard a msb or totaldac, but yggy is definitely the best digital source I have heard in terms of making real instruments and voices sound true to life.  Its handling of well recorded complex multi-voice recordings (mass strings, bluegrass bands etc.) is also consistently impressive, clean and precise.  I'm sure it is not the be all end all for everyone, but I suspect the vast majority of "music-lovers" actually will find that it warrants the enthusiasm shared by many of us who got in on the first couple of runs.
 
In so far as my comments pertain to resolution and detail though, the matched gear also has to be capable of displaying it.  For example, I really like the crack -> hd650 combo you have listed in your signature and listen to mine more days than not in my office.  I wouldn't buy a yggy to hook up to that system though because you just aren't going to hear what the yggy can really do, at least in my opinion, ymmv and all that.  Crack is an enjoyable amp and more detailed than the Woo OTL's, but it is no mainline, L-2, zana, etc.  With the mainline and hd800's by contrast, the yggy is superb.

 

[jusbe]

   
If you want a direct comparison I'm afraid I can't give it since I last owned the Lite over three almost 4 years ago.  Also in that time I have changed my speakers 5 times.  What I can say is that I mistakenly sold the Monarchy NM24 in favor of the Wyred 4 Sound DAC2.  I then purchased two midrange Audio GD 1704 dacs. First the DAC19 and later the Ref 5. I later purchased the Lite after reading that it was a 1704 dac that leaned more toward detail and resolution. Lastly I bought the Audio GD NFB1ES.  All of this was over a little more than a year and I never had all 4 of these in house at once.  For whatever reason the NFB1ES was the ultimate winner out of that group and I sold the Lite.  I chalk this up to me deciding that between tonality and detail/resolution I wanted the later.  The audio GDs and the Lite were not bad in any sense but at the time I wanted detail and resolution and thought I could live without tonality (wrong).  The Master 7 was the first DAC that gave me enough of both tonality and detail/resolution.  I thought the M7 was the last DAC I would own especially after modding it to have I2s input with DACLadder's hdmi card.  
 
Generally speaking I found the 1704 dacs I have owned to have less detailed bass.  The M7 via I2S got pretty close to what I wanted - full powerful bass without unnatural roundness and loss of detail.  But having heard more detailed bass (albeit drier and unnaturally colder) from the likes of Sabre dacs I knew there was more detail be had.  The Yggy doesn't leave me wanting anything bass related.  It is more detailed than the Sabre dacs I have owned (they left out tonality, warmth realism) and betters the M7 in all areas on the low end.  If I continue up the frequency range my comments will be the same, the Yggy does it better than M7 and by extension the NFB1ES and on down.  

 
Cipher, that's a fantastic reply. And greatly appreciated.
 
In your opinion, when the Yggdrasil is 'on song', does it still supply similar (or better) levels of tone density as the 1704 DACs? Understanding that the Yggdrasil produces bass frequencies with more realism and would appear to offer greater insight and resolution elsewhere (if that's right).

 

[jusbe]

   
I think you will better understand the descriptors many of us have used once you have actually heard a yggy and have some real basis on which to express opinions about it.
 
I can't compare it to any high end 1704 dacs, although I note this chip was used in various Yamaha HTR receivers, so I think a lot of people have probably heard its general voicing without ever realizing it.  No doubt, it is a good sounding chip, and I would enjoy hearing the implementation in the dac83 some day.  
 
Here's the striking thing about the yggy though, at least as heard in my rig, it manages to maintain beautifully natural timbre while presenting just an incredible amount of detail, and always in a way that sounds refined and lifelike rather than overemphasized.  I'm not sure what your metric is for determining who is or is not a "music-lover," but I joined my first choir at two years of age and went on to perform in multiple operas with LA Opera, on several big budget film scores as a member of SAG, in countless cathedrals on various international choir tours and competitions, first as a boy soprano soloist and later in life as a bass, and I also played horn in an orchestra that played, among other venues, the Sydney Opera House.  I haven't heard a msb or totaldac, but yggy is definitely the best digital source I have heard in terms of making real instruments and voices sound true to life.  Its handling of well recorded complex multi-voice recordings (mass strings, bluegrass bands etc.) is also consistently impressive, clean and precise.  I'm sure it is not the be all end all for everyone, but I suspect the vast majority of "music-lovers" actually will find that it warrants the enthusiasm shared by many of us who got in on the first couple of runs.
 
In so far as my comments pertain to resolution and detail though, the matched gear also has to be capable of displaying it.  For example, I really like the crack -> hd650 combo you have listed in your signature and listen to mine more days than not in my office.  I wouldn't buy a yggy to hook up to that system though because you just aren't going to hear what the yggy can really do, at least in my opinion, ymmv and all that.  Crack is an enjoyable amp and more detailed than the Woo OTL's, but it is no mainline, L-2, zana, etc.  With the mainline and hd800's by contrast, the yggy is superb.

 
Thanks, skeptic. I think that's a perfectly fair point. Hopefully it was easy to see that I was attempting to 'gently goad' more experienced listeners who own the Yggdrasil to address a wider audience! The Yggdrasil is very interesting for lots of reasons: R2R DACs, implementation of a different type of filter when many R2R designers are abandoning both digital and analogue filters, and so on. 
 
In the past, DACs offering greater resolution have seemingly done so at the expense of other musical traits. The interest here, for me at least, is whether this design manages to keep it all. Really good DACs, no matter the design, simply sound like music and the performance, the sound so well-put together that realism and verisimilitude shines through. Examples of the Yggdrasil aren't readily available here in New Zealand to hear (unless there is someone in Auckland who has one and wants to invite guests around?). Probably not anywhere but the US and EU yet.
 
Music lovers know who they are! They don't need me to identify them. For my part, while not attempting to start my musical career at 2, I did start violin (Emanuel Hurvitz, Adrian Levine, Diana Cummings, Derek Collier being teachers) and piano at 4, finished all my grades appropriately by 12 (violin), led every youth orchestra I played in, studied at the Royal Academy of music, was a chorister at Westminster Cathedral under Stephen Cleobury, recorded on Decca, played at all the major concert halls of London (Albert Hall, St John's Smith's Sq, all the South Bank auditoria, etc) as well as at the Proms. But none of this is terribly relevant, unless it means that - like you - I may have a well-trained ear and some ability.
 
For more involved listening sessions, I don't use headphones at all - so your point on our headphone rig is taken. We use our Audio Innovations L2 (CIFTE 12AU7s, Brimar EZ80), Beam Echo DL7 35 (with KT77s, NOS Mullard GZ34s, Valvo EF86s and Tesla frame-grid 12AX7s, Gresham iron) into stacked Quads (57s). I think we do just fine for resolution so we'd be eager to hear the Yggdrasil, should it prove compelling enough to try. 

 

 

[TheAttorney]

  Keep up with the comparisons.

 
The Yggy has left the building! On its way to the next home trial.
 
Concluding Impressions:
 
The good news is that the slight (and it was slight) brightness of the Yggy had gone by the time it reached 8 days warm-up - I was out for a couple of days, so can't be more specific than that. The not so good news is that I didn't experience any sudden jump to magic land after 158 hours, or thereabouts . The Iggy merely got better and, based on other recent comments, may well continue to improve slightly with even more time.
 
So, bottom line comparison against my Nagra CDC:
 
 The Yggy is more open, detailed, dynamic, focussed. In particular, it creates a larger, more 3-dimensional  "headstage", where each image is more clearly defined. Despite the extra openness and detail, it is also slightly less fatiguing than the Nagra - by virtue of the Yggy being able to more clearly separate out complex sounds. I felt that these improvements were across the frequency spectrum - I didn't notice that the alleged Moffat Bass was any more Moffaty than the Moffat Mid or Moffat Treble. But then I don't specifically listen out for individual sounds when  comparing - I just enjoy the music and decide which one better gives me the "you are there!" feeling.
 
However, the differences are not huge: Going back to the Nagra is not at all unpleasant. It just sounds a little bit softer, thicker, mushier, but still a very good sound overall. So, considering the huge price difference, a very good result for the Yggy, tempered by a slight disappointment of not hearing that 158-hour-magic-boost.
 
Diversions
 
The TOTL Tellurium Q balanced cables really complicated this comparison. They were my intended partner for the Yggy, so I had no option but to burn them in concurrently. The TQs had similar characteristics to the Yggy as above, and in combination brought a substantial lift in these areas compared to either my SE cables or a sensibly priced XLR cable (Sommer "pro" microphone cable, excellent vfm btw if you don't believe in fancy cables). Moving the TQs to the Nagra gave it an Yggy-style boost, but not to full-blown Yggy level. Switching around SE/Balanced/Posh/Sensibly-Priced cables soon gave me comparison fatigue, so I stopped doing it.
 
Computer source impressions
 
I briefly tried the Yggy USB with my Windows 8.1, JRiver and Yggy ASIO driver. I was getting comparison fatigue by then, so all I could register was that the SQ was in the same ballpark as the Nagra CD transport, and I'll think about the details another time.
 
To buy or not to buy?
 
I'm going ahead with my Yggy order, presumably to arrive sometime in July. Had it cost 4 times as much, I may have thought harder about it. But it doesn't, so I won't. When my actual Yggy arrives, I'll make use of my posh Power Conditioner, fuses, etc, so it should get better still ) 
 
Final Question
 
How come, even after 8 days, my Yggy's case temperature never got higher than lukewarm? Even Schiit's website describes it as getting "hot".