[Torq]

Isn't Coax with galvanic isolation also free of noise issues? Or will it depend on specific implementations, i.e. how much noise is being picked up and passed downstream the audio chain?

Good question!

Excepting radiated noise/shielding issues, fundamentally, yes.

Galvanic isolation, whether via a transformer (as originally specified for the transmitter for S/PDIF over coax but rarely implemented in cheaper products) or through an opto-coupler, will eliminate ground-loop issues between source and DAC as well as provide isolation from other power-supply related noise issues in the source.

There can still be noise/interference induced in the connecting wire, though coax is pretty resilient there. Using a balanced digital connection, with galvanic isolation (e.g. AES/EBU XLR) gets around that problem.

With the gear I've used, AES/EBU XLR sounds the best to me. It is not available on all gear and is pretty much non-existent on computer sources. TOSLINK is more prevalent, ditches all these issues (though certainly has its own) and is cheap and simple.

 

[landroni]

ECC is generally concerned with errors in the data, not its clocking.

Correcting a flipped bit requires a means to detect it (e.g. a checksum) and redundant data (or a retransmission-capable protocol). S/PDIF and USB Audio have neither, so there no possibility of deterministic error correction. HDMI Audio includes both - so as long as there are enough parity bits to correct the number of bit errors in your stream, you're golden.
 

[...] No non-HDMI consumer DACs do error correction on the data stream as they simply don't have a way to detect it in the first place.

Is error correction at all possible in real-time streaming applications (e.g. listening to music)? I mean, if there is no buffering at the DAC-end, does it matter if there is a checksum and a flipped bit is being detected --- will there be enough time to request the affected package and receive it in time? It seems to me that ECC can only work if there is a buffer on the other end...

 

[deuter]

Do we have anyone that has compared this DAC to PS Audio Directstream.

 

[Torq]

Is error correction at all possible in real-time streaming applications (e.g. listening to music)? I mean, if there is no buffering at the DAC-end, does it matter if there is a checksum and a flipped bit is being detected --- will there be enough time to request the affected package and receive it in time? It seems to me that ECC can only work if there is a buffer on the other end...

If we take the strictest possible definition of "real time", then no. But, unless we have to account for an infinitely high sample rate, for practical purposes, yes!

There is always, effectively, at least a 1-sample buffer at work.

As long as you can perform your error detection and correction faster than twice your sampling frequency, which isn't very challenging at current PCM audio sample/data rates, we can preserve the appearance of "real time" even with a buffer length of 1 sample.

We are not limited to retransmission for error correction either. We can include redundant data (a simple scheme involves parity data) and the checksum needed to detect an error in the first place, in the raw stream. This increases the required bandwidth of the connection, but decreases the latency imposed on the correction process. And this works in a pure-transmit (uni-directional) scheme ... so it can be a "pure stream".

Now, why don't we do this?

Unless we're playing "silly buggers" with the length or routing of our cables, bit-level errors are rare and, for audio, likely inaudible. They're also statistically random. And even 100 bit-level errors per second is only an error rate of 0.4%. In other words, it's not worth it!

 

[Torq]

Do we have anyone that has compared this DAC to PS Audio Directstream.

Can't speak for the present, or anyone else, but I plan to in the very near future.

 

[Torq]

While I think about it, maybe we should take the technical discussion to PM or another thread. Very much enjoying the discourse, but it's not very Yggdrasil specific.

 

[TheAttorney]

I had a loan Directstream (and DAVE) for a while as potential upgrades to my Yggy, posted in the DAVE thread a few weeks ago.
Bottom line was that I preferred Yggy sound quality to the Directstream, although the latter looked more "high end".
It's possible the 6 hour warm up time for the Directstream was insufficient after its travels, and it's possible I could have adjusted more parameters to improve the Directstream, but I didn't bother going any further because the big price increase didn't justify the effort.
 
In the end I ordered the DAVE. I felt its SQ wasn't that much better than Yggy (much to the annoyance of some DAVE fans), but it's the total package I went for:
Tiny size, lots of functions, built-in headphone amp. Oh, and I could get it in black, Yes, folks, it is not rocket science to have a black finish option. 
 
As I had posted before, in my particular setup the digital interconnect was CRITICAL to how the Yggy performed against its much higher priced competitors.   

 

[DarknightDK]

 
As I had posted before, in my particular setup the digital interconnect was CRITICAL to how the Yggy performed against its much higher priced competitors.   

 
Would you share the digital interconnect used? I'd be keen to know your findings re comparisons of digital interconnects and audible differences. 

 

[Sauntere]

  I had a loan Directstream (and DAVE) for a while as potential upgrades to my Yggy, posted in the DAVE thread a few weeks ago.
Bottom line was that I preferred Yggy sound quality to the Directstream, although the latter looked more "high end".
It's possible the 6 hour warm up time for the Directstream was insufficient after its travels, and it's possible I could have adjusted more parameters to improve the Directstream, but I didn't bother going any further because the big price increase didn't justify the effort.
 
In the end I ordered the DAVE. I felt its SQ wasn't that much better than Yggy (much to the annoyance of some DAVE fans), but it's the total package I went for:
Tiny size, lots of functions, built-in headphone amp. Oh, and I could get it in black, Yes, folks, it is not rocket science to have a black finish option. 
 
As I had posted before, in my particular setup the digital interconnect was CRITICAL to how the Yggy performed against its much higher priced competitors.   

 
In what way was the Dave's sound better than the Yggdrasil's ?   I am researching various dac options now so this is of particular interest.
Also in relation to this what are the characteristics of your set up other than dac ? Is it solid state or tube ? Ultra revealing and detailed or "musical" ?
 
Perhaps you could link to your comments in the Dave thread.
 
Thanks heaps

 

[essentiale]

I finally put my order in for the Yggdrasil in an effort to improve my system. I think I'll be running them through the Oppo HA-1 till I manage to sell the Oppo off. am currently thinking of getting the Simaudio Moon Neo 430, have read so much good about it. I am using a Ether C. any thoughts or advice about the synergy?

 

[JohnBal]

I finally put my order in for the Yggdrasil in an effort to improve my system. I think I'll be running them through the Oppo HA-1 till I manage to sell the Oppo off. am currently thinking of getting the Simaudio Moon Neo 430, have read so much good about it. I am using a Ether C. any thoughts or advice about the synergy?

Congrats on the Yggy! Just curious why you would consider the Simaudio Moon Neo 430. I has a monster amp, right, but also has a very substantial DAC in it as well. Why have 2 DAC's? Probably no need for it after having the Yggy as well. I would just concentrate on an amp without features I wouldn't use. That's just me of course...

 

[essentiale]

Congrats on the Yggy! Just curious why you would consider the Simaudio Moon Neo 430. I has a monster amp, right, but also has a very substantial DAC in it as well. Why have 2 DAC's? Probably no need for it after having the Yggy as well. I would just concentrate on an amp without features I wouldn't use. That's just me of course...

Yup I was intending on the moon neo 430 without the DAC

 

[ETanner]

Has anyone used the Yggy with the Valhalla 2? I'll be adding pieces to my Bimby, V2, HD600 until I get two complete rooms outfitted. Anyone take a similar path to upgrades? Final hp will likely be the HD800S.

 

[rnros]

Has anyone used the Yggy with the Valhalla 2? I'll be adding pieces to my Bimby, V2, HD600 until I get two complete rooms outfitted. Anyone take a similar path to upgrades? Final hp will likely be the HD800S.

I think the Valh2 will be very happy with the Yggy
Don't have the Yggy (yet) but have used my Gumby with the Valh2 and it's really, really good. I bought the Gumby to feed the MJ2, but I still enjoy the Valh2 a lot, and the Gumby just makes it better.

 

[SeanS]

 
There is no error correction on the commonly implemented audio interfaces.

This is true.  My statement was technically incorrect.  However, there is no reason why an asynchronous USB interface "has" to be unidirectional--although I believe all or nearly all are unidirectional for audio purposes.
 
But I think we agree on the point that the audibility of noise that can get directly into the output signal from myriad components in and around the signal path is real.  And that some DACs deal with this better than others.  When they don't, we can try additional means such as isolation transformers, shielding, etc.  And that all of this is separate from the arguments about how well the DAC is converting and producing an accurate output waveform.