[LouS]

And I have another question about cables. Basically, I'm not a believer that cables make a lot of difference, but just for the peace of mind and aestetics I intent to get better cables.

You are mistaken about cables. It is nearly impossible to beat Deulund cables, and they are VERY inexpensive. You can get a set from ebay, lots of people are making them, or if you can solder you can make your own. AQ completely unimpresses me, Cardas high end is nice, but I prefer Duelund ICs. Don't know about USB as I use coax, I have not yet heard a difference in coax.

https://www.partsconnexion.com/DUELUND-81388.html

 

[hifimckinney]

Option 3:

Something else?

I would say relax, take a deep breath think, rethink, read and re-reread about Dante (as Gefski suggested) go straight to this if you like to save time and money. This is the real stuff in my opinion unless experimenting provides pleasure.

And, yes, AES is better than USB that will be clearly distinguishable with V281.

 

[Les Strat]

Once I upgraded my network players (to Sonore Ultrarendu) I found the Gen 5 USB input to sound the best on Yggdrasil. I still use AES for mty CD transport but am using it less and less these days. YMMV.

I have Yggy A2 with USB Gen 5 upgrade.

I was also thinking of upgrading my network player from a Logitech Transporter , possibly to an Auralic Aries G1/G2, so I was interested in Ableza's findings on USB.
(I have also read good things about the Sonore Ultrarendu).

I have no experience of using USB input with Yggy, but having tried AES, RCA and BNC, my clear preference is BNC.

I am fairly sceptical about fancy cables, but I bought a DH Labs Silver Sonic D-750 BNC to BNC cable. I got a deal on eBay

I know many prefer AES, but on my system, it sounds slightly 'thin' compared with BNC, with a bit more high frequency bias. I occasionally switch from BNC to AES if a recording is a bit 'muddy'...

Apologies for lapsing into audiophool terminology, but I hope it makes sense.

I had the USB upgrade done at the same time as the Analogue 2, as it made sense to do both while Mark Dolbear at Electromod ( UK Schiit distributor) had the unit open.

It seems that Mike is reaching the point where USB may even become the preferred connection!

I will get a Schiit CD transport as soon as it becomes available, and Mike has said this will definitely have a USB output.

I have a lot of faith in him getting it right.

 

[NDonchev]

Hi guys. I decided I'll go for the AES input of the Yggy, so I'm waiting for my PI2AES transport to arrive soon. Thanks for suggesting the AES input. Additionally I bought Grimm TPR XLR cables which I currently use as interconnects for the Yggy A2 => V281 connection with HD800S. I'm really happy with this setup. It sounds amazing. I will probably share my detailed impressions of the Yggy after PI2AES arrives. So far I can say it's definitely one of the best DACs I have heard, if not the best. to my big surprise the Grimm TPR XLR cables improved the sound even more. Here are my impressions of the cables with the Yggy.

Impressions of the Grimm TPR XLR cables
First, let me say that I was very skeptical that cables will make a difference. Well, that has changed.

From the first moment I plugged the new cables I noticed it's better. Today I made some switching between the 2 sets of cables for additional comparison. There is a definite, easily audible improvement on my system with the Grimm TPR XLR cables over my cheap XLR interconnects (the sssnake SK233-0,5 XLR Patch). Here are the main differences:
- Better and more pronounced spacial cues, more air around instruments
- More juicy sound, smoother and easier to listen to
- Better realism and more tangible sound. Improved "being there" feeling (or sounds "being here" feeling)
- More clarity and better detail retrieval
- Overall more cohesive presentation, more musical sound and a great improvement in enjoyment

I know this is a big statement, but I would say that the improvement from the new Grimm TPR XLR interconnects is similar to that of buying a better DAC. I still feel like I'm missing aspects of how the sound improved. I wouldn't hesitate to say that this was a transformation of my system. I know these are not the best cables in the world, but judging from the review it seems they perform similarly to a much pricier cables. I payed 3 x 51 euro for them and I find this to be great value for money.

Now I'll have to wait a bit more for the PI2AES to arrive so that I could hook it to the Yggdrasil via the third Grimm TPR XLR cable I have. I expect things to improve even more when that happens.

 

[465176]

You are mistaken about cables.

https://www.partsconnexion.com/DUELUND-81388.html

No, as it happens he’s dead right....

 

[SilverEars]

As one who fiddled with too many USB cleaners & decrapifiers for years, I know that I never had pristine file delivery until I abandoned USB completely and went with Dante Ethernet/AES into Yggy. But I wouldn't recommend that from scratch to anyone now (too much $ and other issues to resolve) until Schiit's (Unison?) USB is released and evaluated.

Interesting. I was digging around for an AES/EBU solution to try out and they seem costly solutions (streamers, Lynx cards, etc..) just for an interface, but it's the first time I've heard of Dante. I looked into it and it seems to run off of POE. How do you deal with the problem of POE requirement? Also, do you stream Tidal through it? Wondering how you go about doing so.

 

[johnjen]

Dante itself is mostly s/w since it’s the dedicated network protocols that uses the ethernet 'backbone' (hardware) to send the digital audio from point to point where hardware (like the rednet boxes) convert it to the audio stream (SPDIF, AES, USB) and pass it along to the dac etc.

We call this h/w & s/w combination AOIP (Analog Over Internet Protocol), which functions as a way to send the audio stream out of the computer/music server etc, using the ethernet port(s), instead of using USB or having to use specialized h/w (cards inside the computer).

So any player that can direct it's audio stream to specific 'ports' (both real and virtual) can use AOIP instead of USB etc.

And so far we have found that this method of 'transport' has greater SQ than any other, and significantly so.

JJ

 

[gefski]

Interesting. I was digging around for an AES/EBU solution to try out and they seem costly solutions (streamers, Lynx cards, etc..) just for an interface, but it's the first time I've heard of Dante. I looked into it and it seems to run off of POE. How do you deal with the problem of POE requirement? Also, do you stream Tidal through it? Wondering how you go about doing so.

First, be aware that Dante does not follow sample rate changes. That doesn't matter to me since I'm all in on Yggy's performance with undamaged Redbook files. All my rips and Tidal are 16/44.

My rig is iMac -- Audirvana/Tidal -- Ethernet -- Atterotech unDAES-O -- AES -- Yggy. The unDAES-O costs $600ish and comes with a 24v outboard wall wart PS. I've upgraded that to an Acopian Gold Box A linear supply. Since I did that setup in 2016, RDL has come out with a simpler 2 channel Dante to AES box that is more affordable and uses POE power. I don't know how to configure POE, but in our Seattle group, @atomicbob has done most of the Dante interfaces, including RDL, and I'm sure would be a good source if you PM him.

 

[bfreedma]

Dante itself is mostly s/w since it’s the dedicated network protocols that uses the ethernet 'backbone' (hardware) to send the digital audio from point to point where hardware (like the rednet boxes) convert it to the audio stream (SPDIF, AES, USB) and pass it along to the dac etc.

We call this h/w & s/w combination AOIP (Analog Over Internet Protocol), which functions as a way to send the audio stream out of the computer/music server etc, using the ethernet port(s), instead of using USB or having to use specialized h/w (cards inside the computer).

So any player that can direct it's audio stream to specific 'ports' (both real and virtual) can use AOIP instead of USB etc.

And so far we have found that this method of 'transport' has greater SQ than any other, and significantly so.

JJ

AIOP is Audio Over Internet Protocol. Throwing the word "Analog" in there is going to confuse a lot of people - there isn't anything analog occurring - it's all digital.

 

[SilverEars]

AIOP is Audio Over Internet Protocol. Throwing the word "Analog" in there is going to confuse a lot of people - there isn't anything analog occurring - it's all digital.

The way he was putting it, I thought it was like VOIP. I was wondering if it was just sampling of analog because through the network, data is sent, which is digital. I got confused when 'analog' was mentioned and I'm looking to send Tidal digital stream. I lack networking background, but the wording was hard for me to grasp due to the abstract statements. If we are communicating with people asking questions, it's best to avoid abstract as people unfamiliar will likely ask questions, and experience is built up in concrete (and then once something is understand to a level, people that is familiar can communicate in simpler way by abstract).

First, be aware that Dante does not follow sample rate changes. That doesn't matter to me since I'm all in on Yggy's performance with undamaged Redbook files. All my rips and Tidal are 16/44.

I wish I can get some concrete example for our particular usage cases. Like a video or demonstration to get what has to be done. What I understand of ip devices are they work as a node controllable with an ip address to identify each of them, and you can access them through a browser.

Dante seems a bit different as it works on a 'virtual soundcard' concept? I'm wondering if there is a virtual sound card gets recognized in Windows, and selectable under Tidal sound settings.

I find that Windows WASAPI or 'exclusive mode' that changes samping automatically is different from using Windows OS to control sampling. I'm wondering if Dante adapter is getting the original sampling data (untouched) if it doesn't cause the DAC to switch sampling automatically? The whole point of WASAPI is to send the data untouched by anything straight to the DAC, and thus the DAC automatically changes the sampling due to this.

 

[gefski]

The way he was putting it, I thought it was like VOIP. I was wondering if it was just sampling of analog because through the network, data is sent, which is digital. I got confused when 'analog' was mentioned and I'm looking to send Tidal digital stream. I lack networking background, but the wording was hard for me to grasp due to the abstract statements. If we are communicating with people asking questions, it's best to avoid abstract as people unfamiliar will likely ask questions, and experience is built up in concrete (and then once something is understand to a level, people that is familiar can communicate in simpler way by abstract).

I wish I can get some concrete example for our particular usage cases. Like a video or demonstration to get what has to be done. What I understand of ip devices are they work as a node controllable with an ip address to identify each of them, and you can access them through a browser.

Dante seems a bit different as it works on a 'virtual soundcard' concept? I'm wondering if there is a virtual sound card gets recognized in Windows, and selectable under Tidal sound settings.

I find that Windows WASAPI or 'exclusive mode' that changes samping automatically is different from using Windows OS to control sampling. I'm wondering if Dante adapter is getting the original sampling data (untouched) if it doesn't cause the DAC to switch sampling automatically? The whole point of WASAPI is to send the data untouched by anything straight to the DAC, and thus the DAC automatically changes the sampling due to this.

Sorry, I didn't describe the use of the Dante software.

Load onto Mac or PC Dante Virtual Soundcard ($30) and Dante Controller (free). Now the Mac or PC "becomes" a Dante device will communicate with any Dante devices. Now you have LAN (local area network). Yes, Dante is selected in Windows and in whatever player you're using. (Audirvana in my case).
Dante does not change any sample rate selected, and will not pass data of different rates without selecting a new rate. So it's not practical for use with lots of different sample rate music files.

 

[bfreedma]

The way he was putting it, I thought it was like VOIP. I was wondering if it was just sampling of analog because through the network, data is sent, which is digital. I got confused when 'analog' was mentioned and I'm looking to send Tidal digital stream. I lack networking background, but the wording was hard for me to grasp due to the abstract statements. If we are communicating with people asking questions, it's best to avoid abstract as people unfamiliar will likely ask questions, and experience is built up in concrete (and then once something is understand to a level, people that is familiar can communicate in simpler way by abstract).

I wish I can get some concrete example for our particular usage cases. Like a video or demonstration to get what has to be done. What I understand of ip devices are they work as a node controllable with an ip address to identify each of them, and you can access them through a browser.

Dante seems a bit different as it works on a 'virtual soundcard' concept? I'm wondering if there is a virtual sound card gets recognized in Windows, and selectable under Tidal sound settings.

I find that Windows WASAPI or 'exclusive mode' that changes samping automatically is different from using Windows OS to control sampling. I'm wondering if Dante adapter is getting the original sampling data (untouched) if it doesn't cause the DAC to switch sampling automatically? The whole point of WASAPI is to send the data untouched by anything straight to the DAC, and thus the DAC automatically changes the sampling due to this.

AOIP is nothing more than a standard data format developed by the European Broadcasting Union and the hardware manufacturers to provide a standard packet format enabling diverse endpoints to communicate over the internet. While it does offer reduction of signal degradation and added capacity compared to traditional lines, those improvements are only relevant over large distances and/or high signal traffic volume.

Claims that AOIP is audibly better than other technologies in a home setting are subjective and don’t bear out when the actual digital data is examined. Claims that it is “significantly better” are wholly unsubstantiated. Nothing wrong with using AOIP in a home environment, but it adds complexity with no established value. Home users aren’t sending multiple broadcast signals or thousands of voice calls over thousands of miles of copper. For anyone not familiar with networking, there’s a reasonably good chance you could create more problems than you solve.

Unless you need to send the signal across your network because your DAC and data/music are in separate physical locations, there are much simpler options,

 

[hifimckinney]

AOIP is nothing more than a standard data format developed by the European Broadcasting Union and the hardware manufacturers to provide a standard packet format enabling diverse endpoints to communicate over the internet. While it does offer reduction of signal degradation and added capacity compared to traditional lines, those improvements are only relevant over large distances and/or high signal traffic volume.

Claims that AOIP is audibly better than other technologies in a home setting are subjective and don’t bear out when the actual digital data is examined. Claims that it is “significantly better” are wholly unsubstantiated. Nothing wrong with using AOIP in a home environment, but it adds complexity with no established value. Home users aren’t sending multiple broadcast signals or thousands of voice calls over thousands of miles of copper. For anyone not familiar with networking, there’s a reasonably good chance you could create more problems than you solve.

Unless you need to send the signal across your network because your DAC and data/music are in separate physical locations, there are much simpler options,

Not to argue but have you tried Dante for yourself? If yes, I will keep quiet but if you have not, I would encourage that you try. For me, it was like day and night kind of difference in experience. I felt as if the other players in the same area are not sure what they are doing.

A big statement from a small enthusiast like me but I can claim with great degree of confidence that all these reviews on the internet where DACs have been evaluated based on USB are kind of false impression and all those DACs are much more capable than how they have been projected had they been fed with proper signal such as Dante.

 

[earnmyturns]

I can claim with great degree of confidence that all these reviews on the internet where DACs have been evaluated based on USB are kind of false impression and all those DACs are much more capable than how they have been projected had they been fed with proper signal such as Dante

Some DACs have meh USB receivers. I've owned some (Holo Spring, Metrum Onyx, pre-Unison Schiit DACs). But: 1) high-quality (that does not mean super-expensive, just done right) coax or AES sources will bring those DACs to a different level; 2) some DACs (eg. Soekris dac1541, Schiit DACs with Unison) do very well with USB, competitively with any other source I've tried (not AIOP, though, my library requires sample rate switching); 3) many of the AIOP comparisons around are in a PC context, and (most) PCs are notorious electrical noise sources. It is not great advice to send Yggdrasil owners to the cost and complexity of AIOP at this point when Unison upgrade boards are around the corner.

 

[bfreedma]

Not to argue but have you tried Dante for yourself? If yes, I will keep quiet but if you have not, I would encourage that you try. For me, it was like day and night kind of difference in experience. I felt as if the other players in the same area are not sure what they are doing.

A big statement from a small enthusiast like me but I can claim with great degree of confidence that all these reviews on the internet where DACs have been evaluated based on USB are kind of false impression and all those DACs are much more capable than how they have been projected had they been fed with proper signal such as Dante.

Haven’t tried Dante specifically, but have tested numerous other IP (and other interface) based solutions and have many decades of experience in both IP and other data protocols/I/O hardware. The testing I’ve done via various direct packet and data analysis and shows the obvious - data packets don’t change based on the transport layer or interface type in a home situation at a rate that would be audible. The differential is so small that it’s orders of magnitude below audibility.

Of course, it’s possible for individual solutions to be significantly enough borked to be audibly different, but I don’t think there are really that many broken data interfaces in the wild. For some reason, people want to believe that transporting audio data is far more complex and fraught with peril than it really is. Interfaces that can’t reliably transport data from two close proximity endpoints haven’t been an issue since the Serial bus became legacy technology in the mid 80s.