[johnjen]

Why playing 24/7? Surely once it's been run-in with music for the first few weeks, it's then enough just to leave it powered on with no music playing?

It's a carry over from my 24/7 process of tracking how the SQ shifts and changes as the hours add up.
Once things reach a certain point in settling in I suppose I could stop playing music but the equipment will stay on regardless.

And as I noted earlier, it took 1500hrs+ for my JggyB to fully settle in and reach the pinnacle of it's peak.

Just like currently I'm seeing how many hrs it takes to 'fully recover' from being powered and cooled down.
Right now I have ≈ 4.5 days and it is rapidly settling in with the old familiar SQ that I find so compelling, but still has a ways to go.
But the JggyB magic is fully in evidence, just not quite yet fully polished and finely focused.

And that isn't to say it is lacking nor a disappointment in any way, but I've been calibrated by this system and have become rather familiar with its character.

JJ

 

[Don Quichotte]

My Yggy B has been cooking (with and without music playing) since I received it 8/25 and I’ve been comparing it, almost daily, to my Yggy A which is 2 years old.

What about the so-called grayish noise floor? Do you concur with the assertion that the A2 has a blacker background than the A1? (assuming that you do perceive this small issue at all...)

 

[FLTWS]

What about the so-called grayish noise floor? Do you concur with the assertion that the A2 has a blacker background than the A1? (assuming that you do perceive this small issue at all...)

"Grayish noise floor" in the A board? Grayish is not a term I identify with as a sound character in my audio descriptive vocabulary. Grayish as in veiled?
Grainy?

As I re-read both my post and your post searching for a possible commonality that you and I just happen to describe differently, what comes to mind is these comments in my post;

..."the B (new) board’s sound is more transparent which allows for a boost to low level clarity and detail reveal."

"The (old) A board generates more air and warmth around the sound of instruments and within the halls acoustic. This may very well be some distortion artifact(s) the B board doesn’t have,..."

Perhaps my A board air, which could be a distortion component in the sound, is your grayish noise floor.
and,
Perhaps, the increase I hear in transparency with the B board is a result of the removal of some of that "air" / "distortion" from the A board with the consequence that some very low level noise is reduced giving an impression of a "blacker background".

It may boil down to how we individually interpret what we hear and how much importance we assign this characteristic or that characteristic in the sound.

LOL, I'm not sure I've answered your question. But of all the possible points to compare between the new and old boards its not bass, midrange, treble, inner detail, etc., etc., parameters that caught my ears, it's the increase in overall transparency in the B board over the A board that is most apparent to my ears and is easiest for me to notice when listening for the ambient clues of a recordings venue. To the extent that the increased / improved transparency contributes to differences that extend to hearing improvements in the sound of the bass, midrange, treble, frequencies,inner detail, etc., etc., I wouldn't argue against that, makes sense that it should. But the A board is still very listenable and ultimate transparency isn't always a good match up to less than well recorded material. May not be the fault of the new board that it might expose more shortcomings in a given recording, its just way things are. But I've heard very transparent systems that sterilize the sound to the point of bland and that didn't engage my interest. The B board doesn't have that problem to my ears. I'm always listening for the best compromises with the music I listen to most.

And like I said, I wouldn't sell the B unit and keep the A unit. I feel the B unit is an improvement overall in almost all characteristics. Maybe I'll upgrade the A at some point, maybe I'll hold out for the C unit.

 

[earnmyturns]

Perhaps, the increase I hear in transparency with the B board is a result of the removal of some of that "air" / "distortion" from the A board with the consequence that some very low level noise is reduced giving an impression of a "blacker background".

As I went from Yggy A to B sequentially on my speaker system, so I could not do side-by-side comparisons. But I have had always my Holo Spring on my headphone system. I run the Spring in NOS mode, and music emerges from background quiet especially cleanly (a NOS feature, I'm told, but I've not heard any other NOS DACs -- will be listening to a borrowed Metrum Onyx soon). I find the B Yggy closer to that fast rise from silence than the A Yggy was. Yggy A and Spring were different, neither totally beating the other for me. Yggy B dominates Spring technically in almost all situations, although the Spring is still very enjoyable and pairs especially well with a tube amp like the Lyr 3. We'll see with the Onyx...

 

[KoshNaranek]

I have been playing with with HiFiBerry Digi Pro using SPDIF vs Pi2Design 502DAC using the AES output for the past several days. The quick impression is that note sustain and decay are better with the 502. The overall feeling that the soundstage, which had moved forward compared to the Logitech Transporter, now becomes deeper. The "fullness" of the sound give more body to the musical piece. If I was eating a fruit, the description would be: more juicy. This is not to say that the effect is very dramatic. My internal conversation while listening to it may be of interest:

HiFiBerry: Sounds Great

502: Hmm, I think it sounds a bit better. Difficult to disprove to myself that this is not just expectation bias though....After listening for a while, I switch back to the HiFiBerry

HiFiBerry: Goodness! What a let down! Where did the room acoustics go? I want to go back to the 502. After listening for a while: This sounds great. I must have been imagining the loss when switching from the 502.

502: See? This was not much better. I don't know why I was getting so worked up about the whole difference thing. Then I listen for a while and switch back to the HiFiberry

HiFiBerry: What was I thinking? I am switching back to the 502!


To put things in perspective, I would like to tell you about the two recent tweaks to the system that made a larger difference:
1. Changing tubes in Freya
2. Adjusting the Toe in on the speakers. Sounds simple, but there was a great deal of resistance on this change from my wife. She thinks they look stupid this way, right next to the TV.


Test System:
HiFiBerry Digi Pro running picoreplayer 3.5.0 with Blue Jeans Cable SPDIF
Pi2Design 502 DAC running picoreplayer 4.0.0 with Blue Jeans Cable AES
Yiggy B
Freya with Raytheon VT-231 tubes
Twin Vidar
Martin Logan Aerius
Audioquest Topaz interconnects
Monster Basic speaker cable

 

[FLTWS]

There was, within the past week, a post with a video (60 mins.) interviewing the head designer at Elac discussing whether or not to toe based on frequency dispersion patterns of the speakers in use.
Maybe it was the Freya thread but I can't remember exactly.

 

[JoeWhip]

To augment my last posting, the analog B board is a significant upgrade across the board on an already great DAC. Tremendous low level detail. Deep bass, pace, air, wide and deep soundstage. Piano reproduction is sensational along with drum kits. All my listening is on speakers in a dedicated room. Awesome upgrade.

 

[billerb1]

This just showed up on my email:

Schiit Audio <orders@schiit.com>

Wed 9/26/2018, 12:09 pm

Dear Bill,

Your upgrade is complete, and the product is on its way back to you.

We hope our service has been great!

Shipping Carrier: FedEx

Thanks again for the order, and we hope you enjoy your upgrade!

All the best,
Schiit Audio


THERE IS A GOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[sahmen]

This review indicates you can get the Ambre to take other stre itaming sources if you are willing to tinker with its software (it's just open-source Pi audio software after all).

My ambre arrived today, and I've got it hooked up to the Onyx and a Liquid Carbon MK 1, and boy are they making my Hifiman He K sing like it has never before to my ears! The Ambre and Onyx are both practically fresh out of the box, and have not seen much "burn in," but so far detail retrieval, smoothness, musicality, sound stage, blackness of background, and extension at both ends of the spectrum : they all sound phenomenal... I also haven't installed the I2s module on the Onyx yet, which I shall do in about a week from now, so expect more to come...

I can say that this combo is giving my other rig with the Ultrarendu/LPS-1.2 ==>> stello U3/AES ==>> Yggy ==>> Violectric V281 a serious run for its money, although I am hesitant to pronounce a final verdict since the YGGY2 too is still in its break-in period... Besides, if some shootout might be interesting, it cannot simply be a Yggy2 vs Onyx shootout, it is also going to have to be an "ambre vs Ultrarendu/LPS 1.2 shootout, a headphone amps shootout (Violectric vs Cavalli), not to mention a shootout involving several interconnects, and power supplies, if one wants to know what performance to attribute more fairly and accurately to each separate component... As you can probably tell, I would not normally relish spending my time doing all these potentially tedious, sophisticated and multi-layered comparisons, as I imagine them to be too tedious to be appealing, and I would rather devote that time to enjoying the music itself... One thing I can say for sure, even this early in the "burn-in" game, is that the ambre + Onyx combo offers nothing to be remorseful about... Quite the contrary... It seems to be matching the Yggy2 rig pound for pound in all the areas that count, and that is very good news indeed. In fact, I can already say that the combo is a winner.

I'd be quite curious how Ambre stacks up vs Aries. I use Aries with Yggy and am pretty happy, but still curious.

Regarding the ambre vs Aries comparo, here's what a Computer Audiophile member told me in private e-mail (His first language is Dutch, not English, and that is easy to tell, although he expresses himself clearly enough) :

*****************
"Before the Ambre i had an Auralic Aries (femto with SBooster Power Supply) just used with roon.

I compared the AES output of the Ambre with the I2S one Time (my Adagio can use both, i used a Vovox Textura AES)

Found, there is just a very little difference, I2S had a little more 3D effect (room information) for my taste. But this was a very small difference. I stayed with I2S

With AES, i found the Ambre even better, than my Aries before. (where i hab USB and a HydraZ Reclocker in the chain)

So no fair comparison, but the Ambre is the more musical for me in my chain. (again just a little)

I do not know how it beats against SOTM with Power Supply, but i think in the end, you have nearly same Prices.

The Ambre is worth a test, two friends of mine bought one after they heard mine and replaced their Auralics.

Ambre is very stable too, starting fast, and i had no problem with it since i have it (first charge from Metrum)"

*******************
The same user also posted the following on the Roon community forums :

**************
"i use my Metrum Ambre for a week now and i am very enthusiastic about the sound.
It`s connected via I2S to my Metrum DAC
My former USB streamer (Aries) and my USB reclocker (Hydra-Z) are sold now.

On a short test the Ambre AES/EBU connection was very good too, but I2S brought a little more room information on my system.

I can recommend the Metrum Ambre, espacially with the I2S output
*********

I have personally not owned any Auralic products before, and these are not my opinions, but I do find the impressions of this guy convincing, and I hope you find them helpful...

 

[earnmyturns]

My ambre arrived today, and I've got it hooked up to the Onyx and a Liquid Carbon MK 1, and boy are they making my Hifiman He K sing like it has never before to my ears! The Ambre and Onyx are both practically fresh out of the box, and have not seen much "burn in," but so far detail retrieval, smoothness, musicality, sound stage, blackness of background, and extension at both ends of the spectrum : they all sound phenomenal... I also haven't installed the I2s module on the Onyx yet, which I shall do in about a week from now, so expect more to come...

I can say that this combo is giving my other rig with the Ultrarendu/LPS-1.2 ==>> stello U3/AES ==>> Yggy ==>> Violectric V281 a serious run for its money, although I am hesitant to pronounce a final verdict since the YGGY2 too is still in its break-in period... Besides, if some shootout might be interesting, it cannot simply be a Yggy2 vs Onyx shootout, it is also going to have to be an "ambre vs Ultrarendu/LPS 1.2 shootout, a headphone amps shootout (Violectric vs Cavalli), not to mention a shootout involving several interconnects, and power supplies, if one wants to know what performance to attribute more fairly and accurately to each separate component... As you can probably tell, I would not normally relish spending my time doing all these potentially tedious, sophisticated and multi-layered comparisons, as I imagine them to be too tedious to be appealing, and I would rather devote that time to enjoying the music itself... One thing I can say for sure, even this early in the "burn-in" game, is that the ambre + Onyx combo offers nothing to be remorseful about... Quite the contrary... It seems to be matching the Yggy2 rig pound for pound in all the areas that count, and that is very good news indeed. In fact, I can already say that the combo is a winner.



Regarding the ambre vs Aries comparo, here's what a Computer Audiophile member told me in private e-mail (His first language is Dutch, not English, and that is easy to tell, although he expresses himself clearly enough) :

*****************
"Before the Ambre i had an Auralic Aries (femto with SBooster Power Supply) just used with roon.

I compared the AES output of the Ambre with the I2S one Time (my Adagio can use both, i used a Vovox Textura AES)

Found, there is just a very little difference, I2S had a little more 3D effect (room information) for my taste. But this was a very small difference. I stayed with I2S

With AES, i found the Ambre even better, than my Aries before. (where i hab USB and a HydraZ Reclocker in the chain)

So no fair comparison, but the Ambre is the more musical for me in my chain. (again just a little)

I do not know how it beats against SOTM with Power Supply, but i think in the end, you have nearly same Prices.

The Ambre is worth a test, two friends of mine bought one after they heard mine and replaced their Auralics.

Ambre is very stable too, starting fast, and i had no problem with it since i have it (first charge from Metrum)"

*******************
The same user also posted the following on the Roon community forums :

**************
"i use my Metrum Ambre for a week now and i am very enthusiastic about the sound.
It`s connected via I2S to my Metrum DAC
My former USB streamer (Aries) and my USB reclocker (Hydra-Z) are sold now.

On a short test the Ambre AES/EBU connection was very good too, but I2S brought a little more room information on my system.

I can recommend the Metrum Ambre, espacially with the I2S output
*********

I have personally not owned any Auralic products before, and these are not my opinions, but I do find the impressions of this guy convincing, and I hope you find them helpful...

I have the Ambre now, but I'm still waiting for a working solution to feed its I2S output to my Holo Spring DAC. In the meanwhile, Metrum will be lending me a Onyx + I2S to evaluate, which could be a tempting NOS alternative to the Holo Spring. I haven't yet tried Ambre vs Auralic Aries femto AES3 into my Yggy2, will try this weekend. I love the NOS DAC sound of the Holo Spring together with a Lyr 3 headamp, very involving and decisive, but I prefer the Yggy2's realism (relative to my frequent live music experiences) with my speaker system.

 

[sahmen]

I have the Ambre now, but I'm still waiting for a working solution to feed its I2S output to my Holo Spring DAC. In the meanwhile, Metrum will be lending me a Onyx + I2S to evaluate, which could be a tempting NOS alternative to the Holo Spring. I haven't yet tried Ambre vs Auralic Aries femto AES3 into my Yggy2, will try this weekend. I love the NOS DAC sound of the Holo Spring together with a Lyr 3 headamp, very involving and decisive, but I prefer the Yggy2's realism (relative to my frequent live music experiences) with my speaker system.

I would like to know what your impressions are after the various tests you have mentioned, so I hope you wouldn't mind sharing... I have only tested the Onyx with the Hifiman He-1000 so far, and not tried it on speakers yet, so there is more to come surely... My Yggy2 sounds great with speakers, as the Yggy 1 did. I also liked how my old Metrum Hex sounded with my speaker rigs, but I do not have that one anymore.

 

[johnjen]

So over the last 24hrs (I'm now at 8.5 days since the re-start) the SQ has taken a decided step up.
The inner details, the ability to deliver those subtle cues which adds to the experience, that 'you are there', has come back.

Last night the SQ was so-so, as in just ok.
Now however SDSG (SuperDuperSuperGlue, where I can't take my headphones off, as in, they are glued to my head) has returned with a vengeance, as has tLFF (the Listener Fatigue Factor) been significantly reduced.

And it still has a ways to go.
The sub-sonic bass has yet to fully couple, and when this happens LEDI (Leading Edge Dynamic Impact) takes a mother may I step up.
This is where REALNESS kicks into overdrive+, and then the listening experience gets REAL interesting.

JJ

 

[billerb1]

Yggy 2 arrived. Plugged in. Working. Sounding pretty uninspired...and will be for quite awhile. Been thru this drill before. I'll check back in a couple of weeks. Excited !!!

 

[Les Strat]

"Grayish noise floor" in the A board? Grayish is not a term I identify with as a sound character in my audio descriptive vocabulary. Grayish as in veiled?
Grainy?

As I re-read both my post and your post searching for a possible commonality that you and I just happen to describe differently, what comes to mind is these comments in my post;

..."the B (new) board’s sound is more transparent which allows for a boost to low level clarity and detail reveal."

"The (old) A board generates more air and warmth around the sound of instruments and within the halls acoustic. This may very well be some distortion artifact(s) the B board doesn’t have,..."

Perhaps my A board air, which could be a distortion component in the sound, is your grayish noise floor.
and,
Perhaps, the increase I hear in transparency with the B board is a result of the removal of some of that "air" / "distortion" from the A board with the consequence that some very low level noise is reduced giving an impression of a "blacker background".

It may boil down to how we individually interpret what we hear and how much importance we assign this characteristic or that characteristic in the sound.

LOL, I'm not sure I've answered your question. But of all the possible points to compare between the new and old boards its not bass, midrange, treble, inner detail, etc., etc., parameters that caught my ears, it's the increase in overall transparency in the B board over the A board that is most apparent to my ears and is easiest for me to notice when listening for the ambient clues of a recordings venue. To the extent that the increased / improved transparency contributes to differences that extend to hearing improvements in the sound of the bass, midrange, treble, frequencies,inner detail, etc., etc., I wouldn't argue against that, makes sense that it should. But the A board is still very listenable and ultimate transparency isn't always a good match up to less than well recorded material. May not be the fault of the new board that it might expose more shortcomings in a given recording, its just way things are. But I've heard very transparent systems that sterilize the sound to the point of bland and that didn't engage my interest. The B board doesn't have that problem to my ears. I'm always listening for the best compromises with the music I listen to most.

And like I said, I wouldn't sell the B unit and keep the A unit. I feel the B unit is an improvement overall in almost all characteristics. Maybe I'll upgrade the A at some point, maybe I'll hold out for the C unit.

Thanks for a valiant attempt to make sense of some of the 'audiophile' terms used to describe music played on different audio gear.
Personally, I have never understood expressions such as 'grey', 'grainy', 'black', 'wet' and many other words bandied about!
All I care about is that recorded music sounds as realistic as is possible when played at home. I am sure that all audio systems, however much they cost, are a compromise, and my Yggy is one compromise I am very happy with
Looking back, I gained more enjoyment from my first Hi-Fi system ( Pioneer Turntable, NAD amp and Celestion speakers) as I did from later CD- based systems.
For a while, I even stopped playing many old CDs as they sounded so poor compared with my recollection of the old vinyl versions.
The Yggy has fixed that.
I have no idea whether my Transporter-> Yggy -> ATC SCM 100 ASL set up is 'transparent', 'black', 'grey' or 'wet'.....but it certainly sounds like music whether it be subtle acoustic, or heavy rock.

 

[FLTWS]

First Hi-Fi systems that capture our imagination are like first girl friends; clouded by time, nostalgic yearnings, the inability to accurately repeat the experience, or divine what could / would have been.

I remember early on in my audiophile career going through a long period of being told by experienced audio folks (both retailers and hobbyists); "this is much more transparent", "has much better bass", "sweeter, more extended highs", "imaging", "dynamics", and on and on and added those comments into my knowledge base believing they were absolutes and would definitely improve my listening experiences. But I hadn't quantified for myself what it was about the sound quality of my first rig that was so alluring and so I contracted "upgrade-itis" believing there was always something better to acquire that would give me that "first" experience again. A constant Grail quest. But things are never that simple.I was completely out of hi-end audio from 2004 to 2016. When I returned, and over the past 2 years and 9 months my "better" has become "different" in many cases. And my audio life became easier and more enjoyable as I found I could enjoy a lot of different approaches and varieties of sound. I have my preferences and different degrees of acceptance but there is no one and only for me when it comes to reproduced sound and so I tend not to be dogmatic or feel the need to defend my equipment choices or denigrate the choices others make.