New Yggdrasil - First (and second) Impressions

I recall when the Benchmark DAC1 came out. I could hear a significant difference between the DAC and other gear but a friend of mine could not. It was on my system so I think I had an advantage being familiar with the sound. Subsequently he got a hearing aid and I felt very bad for him as he loves music. I just hope my ears don’t go too fast and I can still enjoy the sound!

Another thing I have found is that if you run things through the same preamp then to a certain extent much of the benefits of a higher grade DAC are completely lost. A lot of the A+ sound is from the lower noise power supply and higher quality analog output stage in an A+ DAC - so the same chip on a Class B product may not sound as good as that on an A+.

My Benchmark DAC3 can output about 18 volts!!! A far cry from 1 to 2 volts that most consumer grade devices put out. So as you can imagine, connecting this DAC to a preamp that is limited to 1 or 2 volts is seriously compromising the major benefits of a Class A+ device.

@bcgator

Your previous post is well stated. I appreciate your sincerity, and I am rather inclined to agree with you. Fortunately, and in my particular case, while the expenditure certainly isn't something I would want to just "piss away", this particular cost of $2400 or so is well within my means. I prefer it sitting on my salamander audio rack as opposed to sitting in a long term CD at 3% or thereabouts.

That said, I am also taking into consideration the many folks who suggest more time is needed.

Yet another avenue I am exploring is to enlist the listening ears of some other audio aficionados. Stay tuned....

@bacobits1 

Thanks for your encouraging post. I have heard and read so much about having to leave it on continually and the fact that the break in period is many hours/days/weeks after initially powered on. I am hopeful it works out for me the way you describe.

As to why I am not hearing a difference already, I attribute this to two things. One, I already have good digital. Many folks here have confirmed it is difficult to distinguish among good digital. Second, my own hearing *could* be inadequate to discern the particular subtleties involved.

Unless a real metamorphosis takes place I can't understand at this early juncture what all the hype over this piece is. However, and as I've stated before, I am open to theoretical advantage. Meaning, if this multibit DAC truly is bit perfect (or closer to perfect than delta sigma) with redbook, that in itself should equate to "better quality sound", irrespective of whether or not I can "hear" or perceive it as such. 

I'll also add that I intentionally stopped well short of purchasing the myriad of DACs that are available in excess of 10K for this reason. I knew the expenditure was to some extent, a "gamble". Since it cost a lot to win, and even more to lose, you and me bound to spend some time wondering what to choose.

Greetings and congrats on the Yggy. About "burn in". It is not a generic term used by audiophiles for a few different things. In this case it is the leaving the DAC on that is wanted.I have a Gungnir (bought per-owned) btw. The reason has nothing to do with heat or keeping it warm. The on state keeps the capacitors fully "formed" and the power supply section stable. Other components like IC chips, resistors, etc. are also at their ready operating state. I had been using the DAC in the BlueSound Node2. Everyone who has heard the comparison reports the new DAC preferred. However you will not have an AHA..OMG awakening. What I think you will find is after 10 hours or so you will realize that everything sounds more musical and enjoyable. At these levels of performance things are very incremental.

I have the Oppo 105D player.  Frankly, I don’t understand why anyone would regard Oppo in the same class as the Schiit.
The Oppo is one dimensional compared to my Gungnir Multibit.
In every dimension the Gungy blows away the Oppo. It’s not a small difference by any standard.
Maybe the new Oppo player is better.
I stupidly opted to buy the 105D used at a high price when the newer Oppo was available.

@jerroldls - thank you.

@rvpiano - the new Oppo UDP-205 is purportedly better than the 105D, as reported by numerous owners (of both) on the AVS forum. The "dimensionality" aspect you refer too is also something ghosthouse mentioned and I am focusing my evaluation listening so as to concentrate on that. I appreciate your feedback.

Anybody who has had both the Oppo 105D and the UDP-205 care to comment on the differences. (So I can beat myself up further.)

fact that the Yggy is mulitbit R2R ladder technology, whereas the other DACs I have are all Delta-Sigma. Further, the buzz is such that it leads one to believe mulitbit is "audibly better".

This is correct, when both are trying to convert pcm, cd, 16/44 or 24/96 or dxd. As Multibit is "bit perfect" converting these files, where Delta-Sigma can only give a facsimile of them.

Quote MoJo Music:
" When a PCM file is played on a (Delta Sigma), DSD or Bit Stream converter, the DAC chip has to convert the PCM to DSD in real time. This is one of the major reasons people claim DSD (Delta Sigma) sounds better than PCM, when in fact, it is just that the chip in most modern single-bit (Delta Sigma) DACs do a poor job of decoding PCM."

Cheers George

@georgehifi

Mojo is right in one sense but they neglect to mention that ladder DACs do a poor job of maintaining linearity.

Basically a ladder R2R DAC has poor linearity but low noise and converts PCM natively.

A single delta sigma DAC has perfect linearity but has high noise and requires PCM conversion to DSD.

I think the current best solution is a hybrid style DAC like the ESS Sabre 9028 chip set. It has a massive amount of 1 bit sigma delta converters that can be summed to create an R2R equivalent up to 9 bits in some implementations.This could be called a massive ladder DAC with only 1 bit steps. The beauty is that by random selection of the choice of 1 bit signs deltas used in conversion this chip can ALSO achieve great linearity as well as low noise.

In essence the ESS 9028 chip is a true ladder DAC and not like a traditional R2R with just a few oddly spaced steps of 1, 2, 4, 8 , 16 , 32, 64 etc. but with a massive amount of 1 and 1, 1, 1..... ... 1,1 and 1. ( up to 512 1’s in some implementations with 4 chips)

This hybrid style chip is bringing the best of both worlds - high linearity and low noise! It appears to be the latest way forward and appears in several DACs already since late last year. Obviously further improvements will come but in all honesty R2R ladder DACs ran into a performance brick wall over a decade ago - stuck by the production limitations of accurately building resistors to such an impossible degree of accuracy (the lower resistor in a 24 bit ladder DAC must be EXACTLY 1/16,777,216th of the highest resistor and so on and so forth with ALL the resistors require impossible extreme accuracy in order to maintain linearity)

Basically a ladder R2R DAC has poor linearity but low noise and converts PCM natively.

 The use of basically is correct that haven't been done well, this is why I've always stipulated "well implemented" when saying this, but saying this I'd rather have not perfect linearity compared to a Delta Sigma dac that only giving a facsimile of the real thing with pcm. Even old school TDA1541's "well implemented" sound better to me doing PCM than Delta Sigma (even the highly rated Bricasti M1) can do.    

Cheers George

I think the current best solution is a hybrid style DAC like the ESS Sabre 9028 chip set.

Maybe this is why my Oppo UDP-205 sounds so good. It uses an ESS Sabre 90 *38* chip set.

EDIT: Or why I cannot discern the difference between the Oppo and Yggy. Still working some angles on that though.....

All -

I consider my concern/inquiry regarding NOT hearing any difference when using the Yggy *phase inversion button* resolved.

Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_phase  "Some audiophiles claim that reversing the polarities of all the channels simultaneously makes a subtle perceptible difference in the reproduced sound, even though the relative phases of all the channels are preserved. ... In practice, the absolute phase of an audio system can be assumed to be inaudible."

The broader and more important question as to why I do not hear a difference when compared to the Oppo UDP-205 still remains though.

"Some audiophiles claim that reversing the polarities of all the channels simultaneously makes a subtle perceptible difference in the reproduced sound

Yes I believe it can, I’ve heard the difference using dynamic speakers especially in the bass, but less so using planer,esl, types.

It’s sound it makes with dynamic speakers in that initial movement of the cone is out into the room (pushing) rather than backward (sucking), this pushing of the air on the eardrum has a more discernible sound rather than the sucking of the air, and gives a more leading edge to the start of the bass note.

Cheers George

@georgehifi 

I appreciate your contributions to this particular thread, because I know by reading elsewhere on the forum (within the past 18 months or so) that you are a proponent of the Yggdrasil. And, from what I can glean, you are a proponent not merely because you own/use the product, but because you truly believe or absolutely know with certainty that (a) multi-bit ladder R2R is superior to delta sigma and perhaps more importantly (b) that Schiit's *implementation* is exemplary.

So, are you able to recommend a musical or sound passage - that can be downloaded freely in lossless format via the Internet - and indicate the time index (from-to) and specific nuance to listen to, in order to unequivocally state that multi-bit sounds better - as in readily audible - than delta sigma, or an Oppo UDP-205 specifically?

@georgehifi

My point was that the newer ESS style converters use massively parallel one bit sigma deltas and is similar to a ladder DAC only with hundreds of smaller 1 bit ladder steps. So the latest ESS chip technology has converged away from high noise DSD style single 1 bit sigma delta conversion (what you dislike) towards a solution which is more akin to an R2R ladder DAC (which you like).

In fact a ladder R2R DAC is NOT a ladder at all - it jumps 1 to 2 to 4 to 8 to 16 etc. which would hardly work to access your roof eavestroughs like a regular 32 foot ladder because if the first step was one foot then the last step would be an impassable 16 feet!!!!

FWIW I agree with you in principle. I don’t like DSD and SACD - I think the technology brings no overall benefit - all it does is provide unsurpassed linearity at the expense of massive amounts of ultra HF noise (all the noise has to be filtered out). Frankly, as a format I think it brings absolutely nothing to the table over PCM. I prefer PCM as a format!! However I do not see the absolute requirement for native conversion of PCM as in fact I do like oversampling - as oversampling really helps linearize DAC non-linearities by randomizing linearity errors much in the same way dithering improves quantization noise.

It is the pinnacle of irony that George, whom has spent so much time and energy ridiculing those that steadfastly insist that they hear discernable, and even profound, differences with boutique fuses is now in the exact opposite place trying to defend the sonic superiority of his favorite DAC vs the Oppo. He knows with absolute certainty that the Yggdrasil makes a big improvement to his ears and in his system but experiences total futility in convincing someone that claims they cannot hear the same. It is so easy to hear; how can they not hear it??? Frustrating, ain’t it George?

The fact is that there is no way to understand these different/contrary perceptions produced in completely unfamiliar rooms with completely unfamiliar gear pairings on a web forum, let alone convince anyone of anything that they are skeptical toward. Why don’t we just stop trying?

No ridicule or offense intended toward you gdhal, or to George either for that matter.

Dave

You guys need to listen to the new discrete R2R Multibit flagship converters from the like of Total Dac, MSB and such, converting PCM 24/96 then listen to the same from whatever the best is from ESS.

I remember a lengthy PR video by designer and CEO ESS’s Martin Mallison in where he states somewhere through it, that they have finally bought Delta Sigma conversion close to the performance of the last of the Burr Brown PCM1704 multibit chip. Sad that 1704 was stopped being made because of the cost of the manufacturing process.

But now the likes of Total Dac, MSB and quite a few others have taken R2R Multibit far ahead of that last manufactured PCM1704.
You got to ask yourself why are they bothering with discrete when a $10 ESS Sabre is as good??

Cheers George

@georgehifi 

So, are you able to recommend a musical or sound passage - that can be downloaded freely in lossless format via the Internet - and indicate the time index (from-to) and specific nuance to listen to, in order to unequivocally state that multi-bit sounds better - as in readily audible - than delta sigma, or an Oppo UDP-205 specifically?

that can be downloaded freely in lossless format via the Internet

I don't do downloads, I find them inferior with every a/b we've done at our audio society meetings, maybe it's the hardware or the downloads themselves?? But it's enough to put me off them.

Cheers George 

+1 for bcgator

I don't do downloads, I find them inferior with every a/b we've done at our audio society meetings, maybe it's the hardware or the downloads themselves?? But it's enough to put me off them.

@georgehifi 

Seriously? 

Okay, forget the "that can be downloaded freely in lossless format via the Internet" portion of my question. 

So, are you able to recommend a musical or sound passage, and indicate the time index (from-to) and specific nuance to listen to, in order to unequivocally state that multi-bit sounds better - as in readily audible - than delta sigma, or an Oppo UDP-205 specifically?

You can prove it to your self, just listen to the discrete R2R Multibit offerings from the ones I pointed out and compare them to you delta sigma Oppo ESS unit using the same PCM material, if you still can;t hear any difference it's time to throw in the hifi towel.

Cheers George

You can prove it to your self, just listen to the discrete R2R Multibit offerings from the ones I pointed out and compare them to you delta sigma Oppo ESS unit using the same PCM material, if you still can;t hear any difference it’s time to throw in the hifi towel.

@georgehifi

With all do respect, your replies to date to my questions (within this thread) are rather evasive. It’s almost as if you are obstinate.

I’m on your side, remember? I too have the Yggdrasil and have embraced (for now) multibit R2R.

Presumably, you too have performed a side-by-side Yggy comparison to delta sigma. Perhaps my questioning needs to be more targeted. What music - SPECIFIC ARTIST AND SPECIFIC TRACK/SONG - can you recommend, and WHAT QUALITY (cymbal, bass, spacing, separation, imaging, etc.) within that track should I - or anyone else wishing to compare multibit and delta sigma - listen, or attempt to listen for?

Edit:

CHEERS

I don't own a Yaggy, but from all reports it is a well done Multibit, and to me should be discernable for the better over an Oppo DS using the same PCM source material, try feeding both a CD from a proper transport, maybe it the download junk that doing a great equalising job on both for you.

Cheers George 

I don't own a Yaggy, but from all reports it is a well done Multibit, and to me should be discernable for the better over an Oppo DS using the same PCM source material, try feeding both a CD from a proper transport, maybe it the download junk that doing a great equalising job on both for you.

Is something from here download junk? I think not.
http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html

I can play the majority of those files from a USB flash drive connected to the Oppo. Pick one, please.

Then, let me know which one you picked, and at what time index within the track you exclaim "WOW, AHA, I GET IT, THIS SOUNDS SO MUCH BETTER THAN DELTA SIGMA BECAUSE..."

I’m also curious about George’s recommendations.

I’d suggest a few recordings with which you are very familiar. If you’ve had some that you ever thought to yourself sounded particularly thin/metallic/digital, maybe try those. As cheesy as they are, Chesky’s "Ultimate Demonstration Disc" and the "World’s Greatest Audiophile Vocal Recordings." I believe both include the obligatory Rebecca Pidgeon Spanish Harlem. I’ve found both to be good test-type discs for comparisons...just skip the narrator on the demonstration disc.

edit--agree with George on trying the actual CDs on a decent transport.

@stfoth

I’m very appreciative of your reply. Thank you.

To your points:

Would you suggest then listening to this source of Rebecca Pidgeon Spanish Harlem?
http://hostuje.net/file.php?id=474eb0e4c6a97d2ab1e0ffcfd9d53fda

Secondly, with regard to using a CD, while I’m of the opinion that wouldn’t and shouldn’t matter (in lieu of same from USB), I have two CDs that can act as transport. An Oppo UDP-205 and an Emotiva ERC-3. So, are we saying that if I have a recording on CD and play from one of those players, I should (or might) expect different results than if I play the same (ripped from CD) file on a USB stick from the Oppo?

The fact that you are having to jump through so many hoops just to maybe hear a slight difference between the DACs speaks to the quality and consistency of digital sound.  I have tried similar comparisons and had the same experience as you.  Once you get into the territory of listening to music you are not familiar with or may not even like, and will unlikely ever listen to again, just to "test" equipment you have moved into an area of over thinking and under enjoying your music.  I agree with a previous poster who suggested that you just listen to it for an extended period with music you are familiar with...and like.  You will no doubt be enjoying a fine product that will give you many years of enjoyment.  If you decide to continue to compare it to the Oppo and over time you still cannot hear a difference then you could always sell one.  Either would probably have good value on the used market.

gdhal,
My experience with the Jolida DAC, Gungnir (only run in for 2 weeks) and the Channel Islands Audio CD player with external power supply to the sound of the Oppo straight into my preamp.  The difference in sound was non-existant.   Lots of folks on this forum say the Schiit DAC's need a long time to sound their best, but you only have 15 days to audition it or you own it.  

I am confounded by the SQ differences folks hear with external DACs with Oppo CD players.  My suggestion is that if the use of the Schiit doesn't bring about a perceptible improvement in the sound of your very fine system, send it back for a refund.   Others have suggested that you would need to spend $3K-$5K to get the sort of improvement in sound that you likely have in mind.  Don't overthink the matter, my friend.  

@randyhat  - understood and your advice is sound (no pun intended)

but wait!....

@stfoth -

Using the source I found of Rebecca Pidgeon Spanish Harlem (thank you for that recommendation, and which windows reports a bit rate of 2967kbps and the Yggy LEDs indicate 48 and x2, so that is hi-rez), I have listened to random sequences of about 15 seconds or so, and low and behold, I may (I'd like to try this blind, unable to do so at the moment) have "found the difference"! Mind you, all I need/want is some iota of evidence that there is an "improvement". But what I've discovered may be more than an iota, and instead just my own increased understanding as to what to listen for. 

Within the track, from time segment 1:55 remaining to 1:45 remaining (albeit 10 seconds), there is bass, violin, and a maracas. Through the Yggy, the bass is definitely more pronounced, more "authentic" sounding, and it vibrates or "lingers on" just a hair longer than when played via the Oppo. The violin too appears a tad bit more authentic; and that is fine, if in fact it is a more accurate reproduction. I'm still "testing", but I *think* I'm beginning to hear a quality difference.

Again, I appreciate the test track recommendation.

It was also suggested by a friend of mine to specifically listen for "cymbal decay". I am able to download samples here https://freesound.org/, and will listen to that too.

By the way everyone, I received a reply on the head-fi forum, *supposedly* from Mike Moffat himself (I have asked for confirmation of that) regarding my question about the phase inversion button. His response:

"....I can state that the absolute phase is a holdover from the Theta DACs I designed some 40 years ago. In that era, the greater majority of systems were two channel. The effect in time domain accurate speakers with better mastered material is difference in image size. In the wrong position, the image collapses between the speakers. The difference is that in one absolute phase, the music "blows" relatively speaking - in the other it "sucks"."

@georgehifi  - yes, I realize you too mentioned (paraphrasing) this in your 10-18-2017 7:24pm post.

@stfoth

I remain appreciative of your recommendations regarding music. So you should know, I am not completely blind in this regard. I have at my disposal the following, in optical format, and I tend to use the following. 

1) Sportin Life (all tracks) by Weather Report. This disk was used in the 80's by Leonard Radio (Manhattan NY) to demo all their equipment at the time. They sold rather high-end and pricey items. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportin%27_Life_(Weather_Report_album)

2) Denon Audio Technical CD. It has a number of tracks with sample music that covers the entire gamut of frequency range, dynamic range, imaging subtleties, etc. http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/pid/1526639/a/denon+audio+technical+cd.htm

3) Sony Music Super Audio CD Sampler http://www.amazon.com/Music-Super-Audio-Sampler-Players/dp/B003UQ4CXC

@whitestix

Thank you. I appreciate the good advice *not* to overthink this. As you point out, the Schiit audition window is only 15 days (compared to Benchmark which I was told is 30) and *supposedly* the unit needs longer than that to break in. So, it is a dilemma of sorts. I’m honestly trying to give the product every bit of whatever doubt I might have. Fortunately, I wasn’t expecting a "night-and-day" difference relative to the sound I had/have without the Yggy. If there were, something would be amiss. I would be content and pleased with marginal, subtle improvement. However, I want and need my own ears to provide evidence of said improvement. Like the Rolling Stones would say, "I’m just sittin’ on a fence. You can say I got no sense" :)

I believe the gdhal is interested in hearing better sound. I didn’t see a list of his components. IMHO a worthwhile improvement should be immediately recognizable. I suggest returning the Yggy immediately and use the funds to buy a used Equitech 2Q. Unless you are already using balanced power I think you will “immediately” notice a “significant” improvement to your 205. 

@randyhat - I understand your point and its well taken. I'm beginning to become a believer in the Yggy though, relative to the sound from my Oppo. While I'm still in the honeymoon/experimental stage, I can share that as I write this, I do NOT believe I will be returning it. That said, yes, comparison is difficult. However, I'm also starting to realize that comparison isn't quite as difficult if you know or are told exactly what to listen for, and in this regard I'm getting a rapid education.

@stereo5 - nice of you to chime in here. Yes, I am enjoying the T Refs very much. They truly are incredible, especially when *value* enters into the equation. You'll recall I contacted you to inquire about the Sony HAP-Z1ES. That was on my radar (to purchase instead of the Yggy) during my early decision making process. I believe this is the Sony music server you are speaking of. I checked into the Sony thoroughly, but didn't like the fact that it uses "a Direct Stream Digital (DSD) Re-mastering Engine" and that it "converts analog to digital at 24 bit / 96 Hz". Also didn't like that it *seemingly* isn't plug and play (when connecting a USB it copies to its hard drive). I have no clue how it sounds, however, I understand from the few posts I've read from owners that it does sound good. It's also at the same price point as the Yggy. Nevertheless, I wanted multibit R2R. I only listen to redbook CD and higher rez PCM, so in my particular case I'm confident in the Yggy. Nice to read from you that you feel the Esoteric, which is R2R, sounds noticeably better. Many other people also claim R2R sounds better, which was a major reason I chose to buy one.

I believe the gdhal is interested in hearing better sound. I didn’t see a list of his components. IMHO a worthwhile improvement should be immediately recognizable. I suggest returning the Yggy immediately and use the funds to buy a used Equitech 2Q. Unless you are already using balanced power I think you will “immediately” notice a “significant” improvement to your 205.

@ptss

The first post in this thread lists my gear. I already have great sound, even without the Yggy. I could be content without the Yggy, any external DAC, or any other component change. Generally speaking, all of my gear has exceptional *value* (price, quality, performance ratio). I’m simply looking (but may have found it courtesy of the Yggy) for an incremental upgrade. I’m not using balanced power, but I’m pretty sure that wouldn’t provide an “immediate” and “significant” improvement to the sound I already have.

Gdhal:

My Gungnir Multibit has improved substantially with break in time since I last posted.
Hopefully, yours should do the same.
Although the Oppo 105D is not at all bad on my system, the Gungy continues to distance itself from it.

@rvpiano

Appreciate the update. I'm hopeful to have a known (much) better set of ears than mine musician friend stop over later, specifically to "lend me his ears". Go John Lennon :)

Some changes are hard to hear. I had that experience with speaker cables, years ago. While many components need to have been powered up for awhile to sound there best, I’m personally skeptical of a break-in phenomenon with a piece of electronics. Having recently changed speakers, my experience may be of some value. The new speakers KEF LS-50s, have a slightly more extended top end than the Joseph Audio RM-7si Signatures they replaced. But the difference goes beyond that. I’ve decided that one of the qualities one pays for in better equipment is that the good stuff faithfully reproduces the really small stuff that lesser equipment simply swallows up, kind of the way a “noise gate” operates in a recording setup.  Some people call this “resolution,” others call it “micro dynamics” (which actually is a different quality that depends, in part, on the transmission of those really smal signals. Anyway, the LS-50s seem to do better at the little stuff than their predecessors.
so, the question is whether the rest of the elements in your reproduction chain are good enough at reproducing the little stuff to show the difference made by your new DAC (assuming there is one).
Regarding ptss’s suggestion of balanced power: don’t be so quick to dismiss it. I bought an Equitec 1.5kva balanced power system some time ago. It made an immediate and dramatic difference in the SQ of the Stereophile Class B CD player that I was using at the time. Much to my surprise it made an equally large difference in the quality of my now old, but “Class A” Sony SACD player, which was a far more expensive unit. Run straight out of the wall, the sound was somewhat two dimensional and suffered a problem typical of digital, “dirty” high frequency transients evident in the reproduction of such things as crash cymbals. There are technical explanations for this, which I won’t go into. I would think, at some price point, a digital product would not benefit from balanced power, but I don’t know where that point is. I’m generally skeptical of power tweaks, especially devices that feature all sorts of clever scientific-sounding names for their “features,” but balanced power is the real deal. The “derived ground” that balanced power provides seems especially important to digital systems, and the magnetic energy stored in the massive BPS transformer (80 lbs.) seems to be particularly helpful to the power supplies of subwoofers, that don’t use big, expensive electrolytics in their power supplies, giving them better transient performance and subjectively greater extension.
Final question: do you have a friend with a good system that you could use to do your comparison?

bcgator,
Anticipating an audition of the low-end Denafrips DAC on Monday, the Ares, and having followed this post with much interest given the varied opinions of adding the Yiggz to a system with OP's Oppo 205CD player, I think your take is spot on:  "if you haven't had your "wow" moment already [with the addition of the DAC], it's not going to happen."  I will admit that my Spatial Audio open baffle speakers took a very long time to break in, and we all understand the physical break in process of drivers, but I remain dubious of the "need" to breaking in DAC's or most electronics for longer than maybe a week or two.

I admit that my frame of reference, to your point, is that if I don't hear a perceptible benefit in SQ with new electronics within a pretty short period of time -- either from the first measure of music played ... to a week or so -- then it isn't going to happen.  

The Denafrips Ares I am getting on Monday is well broken in so I can forget about the "run-in" issue.  I will share my impressions on a new thread on AG.  

I have come to two conclusions on this discussion.  First, the Oppo variants are astounding musical CD players for not much coin of the realm.  My Oppo 103D was immediately more musical than my far more expensive Consonance tube DAC -- it was a "wow" moment from the first note of the music.  Forget about "run in", right out of the box, it was clearly more music.  Second, I think that to significantly improve on the sound of the Oppo 205D using an external DAC, you probably will have to spend $3K-$5K to get there.  However, for me, to spend an amount of money for this improvement in my ~$10K system is not in my view worthwhile... the Law of Diminishing Returns sets in.   

To reiterate, I think the Oppo CD's players are simply astounding in their ability to reproduce digital music and perhaps are the best price/performance audio components extant.     

To reiterate, I think the Oppo CD's players are simply astounding in their ability to reproduce digital music and perhaps are the best price/performance audio components extant.  

@whitestix 


Agreed, the Oppo's are "simply astounding in their ability to reproduce digital music and perhaps are the best price/performance audio components...."

However, overall I would give whatever edge *in sound* to the Yggy relative to Oppo 205, using its default mini phase fast filter setting. However the "edge" in overall value clearly goes to the Oppo. 

@dc_bruce

You’re post is rather informative, especially coming from a person whose only made two of them.

Yes, I have an acquaintance with a good system. There isn’t a need to go that route at the moment as I *can* discern a difference. Blind A/B testing though is inconclusive at the moment. I’ve enlisted the ears of  my (bass guitar musician) friend and we have listened together for about 4 hours. I need to digest his feedback, our overall preference, etc. But we can discern a difference with certainty *if not blind*. To your point of derived benefit of balance, I would agree. However, I’m not interested in exploring that aspect at the moment.

@whitestix
Yes, you and I are on the same page regarding speakers vs. dacs.  I agree that that is where you hear the biggest differences, that's where I've had my "wow" moments, both good and bad.    Get the speakers right for your room and listening tastes - and assuming you have an amp capable of driving them properly - and there's a pretty good chance you'll be happy with your system.

**** THE YGGY STAYS ****

So I’ve had the Yggy for 9 days, and my return trial ends in 6 as of this writing.

I’d first like to mention that my system objective is of course to sound great, but within the monetary confines of the best that $50K all in can achieve. Further, I wish to remain digital/solid state, yet "tweak" the sound as much as practical to introduce an analog “flavor”. At the same time it should be (sound) genre neutral, despite my primarily listening to rock. In a sense, I’d like it to sound the best that digital can sound, and I am of the opinion that digital can sound superior to analog. I am also not interested in multi-channel, however, my two channels should also sound good when and if called upon to reproduce home heater. I also believe that a system synergy can exist, and the combined effect of all components and accessories play a role. I attempt and desire to hear a more “technically correct” sound as opposed to merely a “sound preference”.

For Grateful Dead heads such as myself, the Yggy really *isn’t* necessary. In fact, for any casual listening, I think one can do without the Yggdrasil. If one desires every note to be as faithful as possible, the Yggy can add value relative to my other components.

I’ve run a plethora of music at it in order to sample, however, the overwhelming majority is 16/44 and not high rez. That said, I have discovered source material that accentuates all of my finding and unequivocally proves the Yggy, at a minimum, is “different” than my CD, Blue Ray Universal and Cable Box players.

Namely, Elegant Gypsy by American jazz fusion guitarist Al Di Meola.

Any 20 second passage on any track can be used to reveal differences between the Yggy and any other of my sources when played direct to amp. In fact, one of my conclusions is that the Yggy is “best” when used for Jazz recordings. Further, the Yggy’s usefulness increases as the “density” of the instruments increase and the overall quality of the recording is increased. In other words, it doesn’t add benefit unless the source itself is very good to begin with.

Yggy balanced XLR connection is noticeably better than SE/RCA, but all A/B testing was performed using SE/RCA. While imaging is best at my PLP, A/B sampling was performed at various points throughout the room, all in front (standing and seated) of the equipment/speakers.

Testing included blind where person A toggles input and then has person B choose a preference. Testing including blind where person B had advanced knowledge of the playback device and then person A toggles input and has person B try and recognize the playback device. Testing included hand holding remote and toggling input between two playback devices after listening to “loop” passages between 5 and 25 seconds. Blind testing has proven inconclusive to date, however, non-blind testing can be used to achieve results that can be reproduced.

Easily audible given the right track, the Yggy produces richer bass, a more "evolving" mid-range and tighter treble with respect to my other gear. The treble on the Oppo and all other devices beside the Yggy is more “tinny”, “bright” and not as “under control". I’m splitting hairs and by all accounts a $2300 Yggy really isn’t "necessary" unless the type of music you listen to plays into its strength. The recording itself plays a major factor and must be more "dense", "fuller", etc. to take advantage of what the Yggy can offer.

The Yggy has superior mid-bass and stays out of its own way. By this I mean, it *never sounded any worse* than another component. It’s as if the Yggy adds benefit on its own terms, when and if the source music can provide the Yggy what it needs to do its “thing”.

While I’ll keep the Yggy, I do understand there isn’t as much benefit to it with Grateful Dead type music as there is other types, like jazz. Also, I’ve considered other alternatives, and I think in the grand scheme of things I should keep it.

On tap for the next round of testing includes using the Yggy from a cold start-up. While the unit is designed to sound best when left on continually, I don’t like paying a recurring electrical cost. Granted, this is nickel and diming, but I’m going on principal here. Again, this is to test whatever difference leaving it on brings to the table.

My sincere thanks to all of you for disseminating your knowledge, opinions and wisdom.

Very good review gdhal. It has been fun to follow this progression and it seems clear, at least to me, that you have invested enough time and energy to grasp what the Yggy or other up-scale DAC offers vs the very good Oppos. Good job all around. Well done.

I certainly learned a few things about giving recommendations to folks moving up from the lower ranks of hi-end to next step or two and I really appreciate that enlightenment.

First, I considered recording quality a given. I listen to about anything on my hi-end rig AS LONG AS IT IS RECORDED WELL and maintain a second vinyl-based vintage system for listening to the rock of the 60s/70s/80s and most blues. And radio. I love listening to this stuff on that system. It’s a whole different experience than listening to well recorded music on my hi-end rig, but every bit as satisfying IMO. Two different worlds. It never occurred to me that someone would think that a better DAC would improve poor recordings. It won’t. Quite the opposite IME. This was an oversight in my thinking in prior posts not to be more specific about the sensitivity of better equipment to recording quality and even music genre.

Second, two or more peoples’ perception of "significant gains" in sound quality can be quite different. Your description of the differences/improvements you heard with the Yggy vs your other sources is well into what I consider to be "significant gains" territory. I learned that short blurbs on an audio forum about relative differences between equipment really need to be defined by describing more precise observations about the improvements, lest we set up someone we are trying to help for failure by misleading them on expectations.

Trying the Yggy cold is a complete waste of time to my thinking; again, it would never occur to me, but maybe I will learn more.

Again, great job gdhal.

Dave