[BassDigger]

On top of that our ears are more sensitive to certain frequencies;
There is a peak about 2-4khz - center of [COLOR=333333]human voice[/COLOR]




Looks like Bassheads are doing a lot more damage to their ears ...

...or less, because they're more sensitive to those higher frequencies; hence the desire for more bass.

 

[catspaw]

 
On top of that our ears are more sensitive to certain frequencies;
There is a peak about 2-4khz - center of human voice
 

 
Looks like Bassheads are doing a lot more damage to their ears ...

We are all gonna die anyway so why not go with a BASS? .
 
But I do have to say that Bass is only nice for me if its tight and controlled. I was at a cousins home and they were listening to loud, HEAVY distorted bass in small car speakers.
I felt like they were from another planet because they seemed to like it.

 

[StefanJK]

 
yep:
10db > 

Barely audible​

20db > ​

Whisper, rustling leaves
40db > Library, bird calls (44 dB) > 

One-eighth as loud as 70 dB.​

70db > 

Upper 70s are annoyingly loud to some people.​

80db > Garbage disposal, dishwasher, average factory, freight train (at 15 meters). > 

Possible damage in 8 hr exposure​

100db > Jet take-off (at 305 meters), use of outboard motor, power lawn mower, motorcycle > 

Serious damage possible in 8 hr exposure​

110db > 

Average human pain threshold. 16 times as loud as 70 dB.​

 
 
given all that 16bit should be more then enough!

What I never get with this type of statement is that this seems to conflate dynamic range and resolution.  They are not the same thing.  The sequence  1.01, 1.02, 1.04, 1.01, etc has less dynamic range than the sequence 2, 1, 2, etc, but you need more resolution to represent it.  There's still the question of what you can hear, but the two things aren't the same.  May be good to take this back to the original thread...but that was locked last time I checked...

 

[magiccabbage]

 

MUCH RESPECT GOING OUT TO THE YGGDRASIL:​

 ​

 ​

 
This is not a review, just a few impressions of how I hear the gear I have, specifically the Yggdrasil and the TotalDac., so YMMV.
 
The Yggdrasil landed at my home on Monday May 4th.  I plugged it in and had music playing through it from Monday May 4^th through Tuesday May 12^tn continuously. 
 
The TotalDac landed at my home on that Tuesday May 12^th.  I had music playing through it all of two days.  Vincent – the TotalDac creator said to give the Dac 8 hours to stabilize  - Yes, 8 hours – that’s it.
 
I used the Abyss, LCD-3F and the HE-6 headphones.  My HD800s are out on loan.
The amp used is the Pass Labs INT-30A.
 
I used all kinds of music:  From Hard Core Rap to Classical to Jazz to EDM to Rock.
 
Again YMMV.
 
First up the Yggdrasil. 
 
I’ve been one of the skeptics of this DAC as soon as “Captain Hype a lot” and the “Hype Master” started ranting a raving about this DAC. 
 
Hype Twins:
“I can hear things I never heard before”
 
Me:
Yeah Right – the same ole cliché.
 
Hype Twins:
“I can hear the band members farting at each other” 
 
Me:
Get the F%^ outta hear. 
 
Lots of red flags went up and the "BS" meter went crazy.  All the technical talk about bits, burrito filters and Delta-Sigma vs. Ladder DAC chips don’t really concern me. 
 
How does the damn thing sound?
 
Well, I’ll be the first to say, “Pass me a slice of that crow pie”
 
While I can honestly say I don’t hear band members farting at each other -  but yeah, this is a DAMN good DAC.  It’s good at reproducing music in a sort of natural kind of way.  It has very good dynamics, the bass hits hard when it’s suppose to.  This puts “some” of my previous DACs to shame.  I wish this DAC were around a few years ago.  I may have never gone on the DAC hunt I did. 
 
A few things I don’t quite like about the Yggdrasil:
 
I find the tone a little lean.  It doesn’t have that magic with female vocals like the AMR did.  However, it beats the AMR in just about everything else. 
 
Will sound bright / analytical with the wrong amp.
 
Background is not ink, pitch or midnight black. 
 
Midrange does not pop
 
To my ears it sacrifices natural instrumental timbre for resolution.
 
Not as engaging as I would like.
 
I‘m experiencing a clicking noise after each sample rate change.  About 1 second is cut off the start of each track after each sample rate change. 
 
Things I do like about the Yggdrasil:
 
Price / Performance – you really can’t beat it nowhere in the audio industry.
 
The edges are nice and sharp, very good dynamics, good soundstage depth, fast bass that hits hard and very resolving. 
 
Next up the TotalDac (TD). 
 
When listening to the Yggdrasil before the TD came, I was all ready to send it back.  The Yggdrasil had me thinking like yeah – this is it, those F$%&ers was right - better than all my other DACs in just about every way, but I was missing the midrange of the AMR. 
 
One great thing off the bat was Vincent said the TD only needed 8 hours to become stable.  He had no issues with turning the DAC on and off.  
 
What I don’t like about the TD:
 
Price
 
Edges not as sharp as the Yggdrasil.
 
Soundstage width is not very expansive
 
 
Things I like about the TotalDac:
 
Tonality - An obvious difference between the TotalDac and the Yggdrasil is a richer tonality in favor of the TotalDac.
 
Deep bass that’s fast, agile, hefty and hits hard when asked
 
It’s deep black, midnight background.  Maybe because of the separate PSU
 
This DAC has an amazing timbre and sounds extremely fluid
 
The TD has an organic and natural treble presentation.
 
The 3D presentation compared to the flat 2D presentation of the Yggdrasil
 
 
Rapping this thing up:
 
I never heard a more realistic sounding DAC that’s highly resolving – airy, intimate, effortless and very engaging. (Other than the Audio Note 5 Signature)
 
If you like the sound of female vocals – the TotalDac D1-Dual is the DAC for you.
 
I prefer the Total DAC for its more lifelike approach. This DACs biggest advantage to me and why I like it so much seems to be its vivid tone. It has amazing timbre and sounds extremely fluid. It doesn’t sacrifice resolution for natural instrumental timbre it gives you both.


 


 
 
 

sweet, thanks for the impressions. I cant weight for the London meet in august so I can hopefully hear the Yggy
 
Well done Prep - which one are you sending back?

 

[negura]

^ Is there really a need for full block text quoting?

 

[ginetto61]

Originally Posted by preproman 

... the flat 2D presentation of the Yggdrasil ...    

 
 

 
 

 

[ccschua]

no one seems to compare Yggd to the Directstream. The DS is also the R2R and wonder if falls short in comparison to Yggd ?

 

[xxxfbsxxx]

   
It depends what you mean by natural - what amps, what transports, and what transducers. Master 7 was thicker sounding, more lush with female vocals, more body with cello, etc. However, this effect, while pleasing, felt unrealistic to me in the longer term.

thanks so much, this gonna save me fortune )
imo, even the master 7 is not thick and smooth enough, i prefer more intimate, thicker, mid centric and lush voice, which i think agd old products offer, eg ref7.1 or audiogd sa series.  
I sold the master 7 and I was waiting for yggy but it seem the sound does not really suit my taste T_T

 

[arnaud]

What I never get with this type of statement is that this seems to conflate dynamic range and resolution.  They are not the same thing.  The sequence  1.01, 1.02, 1.04, 1.01, etc has less dynamic range than the sequence 2, 1, 2, etc, but you need more resolution to represent it.  There's still the question of what you can hear, but the two things aren't the same.  May be good to take this back to the original thread...but that was locked last time I checked...

That's the point, the actual value doesn't matter, any ladder dac can have 24bits of "resolution" as you name it. The effective dynamic range is this enob thing (the largest range the dac can effectively resolve between a given bit depth and a lower value until the highest bit precision biases the result). Intuitively, you'd think simply the precision of the resistors in the ladder define that but it may not be as simple (see for instance noise shaping techniques).

In any case, we are a few with the opinion that an effective dynamic range of 80dB (that's <14bits) is likely fine for most recordings (that often rely on some varied levels of compression), listening conditions (background noise vs. peak loudness) and let's not forget the linearity of the rest of chain starting with the transducers...

The only people I read who affirm you need more than that are Purrin and Mike Moffatt, as they apparently did some listening tests with "calibrated" recordings using a DAC that could effectively hit >18bit enob (aka the iggy for instance).
I don't refute the findings (our hearing does have >100dB of usable dynamic range after all) but, I wonder if that's really THE dominant parameter driving perceived resolution.

 

[icebear]

There is a thread about the new MQA format from Meridian over in the Sound science forum...
Amoung other things they point to the impulse representation and the interval between pre and post ringing. Optimizing this interval down to max 10 micro sec. seems to do something. In analog tape recordings there is a pre impulse bump that is caused by the width of the tape head slot that is magnetizing the tape. Logically higher speed e.g. 30ips vs 15ips will minimize the length of that bump. I have no clue why there is something similar with DACs like this analog bump which is now pre-ringing before an impulse signal builds up.
 
Maybe it's something like inertia of the electrical components which determines the max. slew rate at which an impulse signal can rise -and fall?
 
I guess the ability of the DAC to recreate the natural impression of the impulse without any pre- / post artefacts which are simply not there when you hear live music, this is much more important than the number of bits (16, 20,21, 24,32, 33.1/3 etc) or theoretical max. dynamic range.

 

[magiccabbage]

  ^ Is there really a need for full block text quoting?

I don't know how to hide the text ..... maybe you can show me 

 

[magiccabbage]

 

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

I don't know how to hide the text ..... maybe you can show me 

 

so now i know

 

[mikoss]

Hey guys, just got the Angstrom 200 in... it's been plugged in for a couple of days, and I just started listening to some stuff last night. First impressions, just using the analog input because I'm waiting on a Gustard U12 - extremely clear, detailed sound. The level of detail being presented is quite nice. I'm hearing a clarity in vocals where there seemed to be a bit of smear before, and also just an overall refinement across the board. I'll give more impressions once I'm running a digital signal into it. So far it's a keeper.

 

[AudioBear]

Glad you like the Angstrom. Our experience is the same.  When I bought one new in the 90s the first thing that struck me when I turned on a DVD to watch a movie was the voices.  They were so so real and present.  I look forward to your impressions.  BTW, back in those days we didn't burn processors in for 100 hrs or keep them on all the time and they still sounded pretty good right out of the box. 

 

[frenchbat]

  BTW, back in those days we didn't burn processors in for 100 hrs or keep them on all the time and they still sounded pretty good right out of the box. 

Want me to send you a scan of the Theta DSPro manual ? It's written 5 day minimum. Just sayin' ...