Review and Measurements of Schiit Yggdrasil V2 DAC

[Alcophone]

I'm at odds with their QC. It's relatively minor and nitpicky stuff, but it bugged me on both items I own.

I've had similar issues. The power plug cover on my Vidar can pop out a little bit when you unplug the cord. Which I haven't done in a long time, and otherwise it's flawless.
The SYS I got with it has a crooked volume knob.
One of the Jotunheims I got had a light scratch on the volume pot.
Well, and there's the Jotunheim's grounding issue, though that never caused problems in regular use. Unless that's the cause of my speaker hum when using it as a preamp. I'll find out soon.

So Schiit certainly has room for improvement. But they definitely did improve over time, they are always working on changing things for the better. They will never be perfect, of course, and it's something to take into account when considering their products. Value isn't free, I suppose.

 

[amirm]

This is the third installment of my response to Schiit Yggdrasil measurements of the unit I tested.

Here, I try to replicate their measurements with exactly the same parameters, contrasting them with what Topping DX7s does. First up is 1 kHz FFT:

We see all the problems I reported originally in my review of Schiit Yggdrasil. There is fair bit of mains leakage causing those harmonics to the left of our 1 kHz tone. And a spray of harmonic and inharmonic distortion piling on top of each other. If audible, these clearly mask low-level detail in music, not enhance it.

In contrast the Topping DX7s at nearly 1/6 the cost of Yggdrasil, has far cleaner output. No mains contributions. And worst case harmonic spike that is around -100 dB (as opposed to -80 dB in Yggdrasil DAC).

Now, some people say, "well, multibit DACs don't measure as well as delta sigma." Let's look at the Soekris multibit DAC I recently measured:

Once again we see that Schiit Yggdrasil is the only DAC that spits out all of those extra inharmonic distortion spikes.

Sadly from here on, the tests that Schiit ran were different than mine. Without access to Yggdrasil, I had to use their pdf report for reference. And I had to run new tests on Topping DX7s. Again, all parameters were replicated 1:1 from Schiit report.

First CCIF IMD test versus level (I use SMPTE IMD test in my reviews):

We see that the intermodulation distortion is much lower in Topping DX7s. At higher output levels of say, -5 dB, the gap is as much as 30 dB!!!

Folks, getting 5 or 6 dB improvement is a big deal in DAC. But here, the cheaper DAC by far has a whopping 30 dB advantage!

Intermodulation distortion causes distortion spikes to appear before and after our main music tones. The ones before clearly do not occur "in nature" as the argument goes so they are not musical in nature. No way a case can be made that this kind of distortion increase is a good thing or explanation for any preference for Schiit Yggdrasil.

Same test can be run but this time sweeping the frequencies:

We see that as frequencies increase, the intermodulation distortion worsens in Schiit Yggdrasil. Faster switching between levels due to higher frequencies is accentuating switching errors in the multibit DAC.

Once again we have a massive competitive DAC with Topping DX7s pulling ahead by some 25 dB at higher frequencies.

Conclusions
Using Schiit's own measurement of owner's Yggdrasil DAC, we see that the performance is not at all competitive with even modestly priced chinese DACs. No way can this performance be called excellent or even very good. Yet these were the very labels put on the measurements of the DAC by others such as this by Atomicbob:

Yggdrasil DAC's performance not only lags delta sigma DACs but also other R2R DACs in the FFT test. There is no reason or excuse for a DAC to spit out tons of distortion products that are not even harmonically related to the music tones it is told to play.

Such conclusions only come out and become readily visible when we put the data in context. We show it against competing products. The fastest way to get them ignored is to put out chart after chart without such comparisons. Unfortunately that is what others seem to be doing and in the process, fully confusing customers into thinking the data is better than it is.

This is a design that had not benefited from proper verification. It was released with fair bit of flaws. This is evident in not only my testing, but I have shown it to be true when measured by other fans of the company and its products. Anyone who claims otherwise loves to have his head in the sand.

All of these measurements -- no matter how has done it -- supports the conclusions that I wrote in my multiple reviews of this DAC. To any engineer who looks at a DAC's job as translating digital samples into equivalent analog voltages, the outcome would have been the same.

The cloud of smoke created around my competence or reliability of the measurements is a disservice to the audiophile community which should aspire to see independent verification of manufacturers claims. That they continue to do so against a mountain of evidence I have put forward using the other side's data, is just remarkable. Folks are just blinded by emotion and improper subjective listening tests.

 

[garbulky]

If the Yggdrasil sounds better to you than the DX7s, then this is probably just the placebo effect.

Or...not? Clearly since he has been on this forum and by even admission of the cretors of the Yggy the Ygdrassil measures worse than DS DACs.
So since he has comparing numbers showing the DX7s does better in a number of ways, how would you say that it was placebo?

You seem to be insinuating that the measurements magically do not matter

He doesn't have to imply that. He is saying his experience with the gear matters - to him.

instead of saying that they are wrong, so yes, that would make you a subjectivist, which is not a good thing to be. It is synonymous with ignoramus.

Come on, now... that's a bit harsh. I'm a subjectivist and I don't consider that making me an ignoramus, (though I assume you do). I find this type of name calling to be unnecessary.

 

[amirm]

As for placebo effect - I think the better term is bias. By the way - how did you determine that Alcophone's perception was a result of bias?

I will answer.

Prior to getting Alcophone's unit, I asked him specifically what he liked about Yggdrasil's sound versus Topping DX7s. And which music he used to determine that. I then queued up the exact same content on Yggdrasil DAC and Topping DX7s and performed an AB test. There is absolutely no sign of any difference he is describing. At full level, the two sound very similar.

The only way he would walk away thinking Yggdrasil is different is due to improper sighted testing. What label you put on it is immaterial.

 

[Grave]

Not sure there was any great conspiracy, but it is a shame that Schitt did not test prior.

But why attack someone's opinion? That seems like a very subjective reaction. Human perception is not black and white and is not really something that can be measured like a physical property. Do you like the taste of Pepsi or Coke. Pepsi has 150 calories per 12 fl oz, Coke has 140. Coke objectively measures better in terms of calories. If you like Pepsi, you must be an ignoramus ... (full disclosure, I am a recovering diet Coke addict - I have been diet Coke free for nearly 7 months - and in the non-diet realm I prefer the taste of Coke over Pepsi)

As for placebo effect - I think the better term is bias. By the way - how did you determine that Alcophone's perception was a result of bias? That seems like a very subjective assessment.

DAC/amps are not subjective.

 

[amirm]

Or...not? Clearly since he has been on this forum and by even admission of the cretors of the Yggy the Ygdrassil measures worse than DS DACs.

No, the Schiit folks tell people that the Yggdrasil is heaven's gift to man and it is more accurate than anything else. Remember the bit exact claims?

Everyone who buys one of these DACs is thinking he is getting a more accurate DAC. No way are they going in thinking, "I am getting a DAC that measures poorly but somehow it is supposed to sound wonderful." Indeed there is no talk of "sound" on Schiit website.

They have very nicely conditioned people to think getting this DAC gives them nirvana as far as accuracy. Combine that with "Topping is made in China so can't be good" and the owner most definitely goes into every comparison biased to like Yggdrasil better. Heck, the fact that he spent nearly $2,500 on it, is reason enough to want it to sound good.

 

[Grave]

Or...not? Clearly since he has been on this forum and by even admission of the cretors of the Yggy the Ygdrassil measures worse than DS DACs.
So since he has comparing numbers showing the DX7s does better in a number of ways, how would you say that it was placebo?

He doesn't have to imply that. He is saying his experience with the gear matters - to him.
Come on, now... that's a bit harsh. I'm a subjectivist and I don't consider that making me an ignoramus, (though I assume you do). I find this type of name calling to be unnecessary.

If it was not the placebo effect, then he likes the sound of audible distortion in his DAC's. Either way it makes no sense based on the measurements, which are not subjective.

His statements mean either "I prefer the sound of this DAC because it has audible distortion" or "I prefer this DAC even though neither have audible distortion."

 

[Wombat]

Not sure there was any great conspiracy, but it is a shame that Schitt did not test prior.

But why attack someone's opinion? That seems like a very subjective reaction. Human perception is not black and white and is not really something that can be measured like a physical property. Do you like the taste of Pepsi or Coke. Pepsi has 150 calories per 12 fl oz, Coke has 140. Coke objectively measures better in terms of calories. If you like Pepsi, you must be an ignoramus ... (full disclosure, I am a recovering diet Coke addict - I have been diet Coke free for nearly 7 months - and in the non-diet realm I prefer the taste of Coke over Pepsi)

As for placebo effect - I think the better term is bias. By the way - how did you determine that Alcophone's perception was a result of bias? That seems like a very subjective assessment.

Bias. How about 43 of 46 of his posts are in specifically Schiit threads?

 

[March Audio]

Or...not? Clearly since he has been on this forum and by even admission of the cretors of the Yggy the Ygdrassil measures worse than DS DACs.
So since he has comparing numbers showing the DX7s does better in a number of ways, how would you say that it was placebo?

He doesn't have to imply that. He is saying his experience with the gear matters - to him.
Come on, now... that's a bit harsh. I'm a subjectivist and I don't consider that making me an ignoramus, (though I assume you do). I find this type of name calling to be unnecessary.

It doesn't make you or anyone else an ignoramus, but it does make your judgement and opinions regarding equipment extremely suspect. Without controls they simply can't be trusted and are of little value.

I do find it interesting that many audiophiles are totally unwilling to take the step into controlled comparisons however. That they would rather trust their known biased and faulty conclusions.

 

[garbulky]

His statements mean either "I prefer the sound of this DAC because it has audible distortion" or "I prefer this DAC even though neither have audible distortion."

How I see it is he prefers the sound of that dac because he does.

 

[amirm]

How I see it is he prefers the sound of that dac because he does.

The way I see it is that sound of the DAC has little to do with his conclusions. He needs to do a proper test where all that is being evaluated is the sound and nothing else.

He was supposed to do a blind test. I am not seen the results of that.

 

[garbulky]

No, the Schiit folks tell people that the Yggdrasil is heaven's gift to man and it is more accurate than anything else. Remember the bit exact claims?

View attachment 14633

Everyone who buys one of these DACs is thinking he is getting a more accurate DAC. No way are they going in thinking, "I am getting a DAC that measures poorly but somehow it is supposed to sound wonderful." Indeed there is no talk of "sound" on Schiit website.

They have very nicely conditioned people to think getting this DAC gives them nirvana as far as accuracy. Combine that with "Topping is made in China so can't be good" and the owner most definitely goes into every comparison biased to like Yggdrasil better. Heck, the fact that he spent nearly $2,500 on it, is reason enough to want it to sound good.

I've mentioned that on head-fi too. The implication is that the Yggy provides some seriously good (measured) performance. Especially compared to the current DACs. And I don't think the measurements show that their measurements beat high performance dacs.

However the wording is carefully done. They are talking about their proprietary filter and (supposed) improvement of temporal resolution and not using approximation and attempting to keep the digital samples the same. Most of their "precision" comments have to do with the digital processing.
The 21 bits resolution is probably taken from an ENOB calculation using SNR.

Either way, I think the thing is their stuff doesn't measure with the best of the current DS crop especially in linearity. But saying "it sounds better to us" isn't as impressive ad-wise.
As for bias, I still don't see how one could be biased. Chinese gear? My Emotiva XPA-1 monoblocks are chinese made and gives me no indication of poor quality. The biggest thing against the yggy is that there are measurements and the creators acknowledging that they don't match up measurement wise to the DS dacs. So I would say there should be a higher bias towards the topping rather than the Yggy. Especially from someone who clearly WAS interested in the measurements.

 

[Wombat]

How I see it is he prefers the sound of that dac because he does.

If only he kept it at that.

 

[amirm]

As for bias, I still don't see how one could be biased. Chinese gear? My Emotiva XPA-1 monoblocks are chinese made and gives me no indication of poor quality. The biggest thing against the yggy is that there are measurements and the creators acknowledging that they don't match up measurement wise to the DS dacs. So I would say there should be a higher bias towards the topping rather than the Yggy. Especially from someone who clearly WAS interested in the measurements.

The owner has bought a $2,500 DAC. Why do you think he would be anxious to think that a $400 DAC would be better?

Regardless, even absence of bias doesn't make subjective tests correct. I do a ton of AB tests with no stake in the outcome and I still get trapped in sighted, uncontrolled tests. There is a reason we have proper protocols here. Your brain does not evaluate audio correctly. Its recollection of fidelity is very poor.

 

[Wombat]

 

[n2it]

Your post is nonsensical so I do not know how to respond to it.

I will answer.

Prior to getting Alcophone's unit, I asked him specifically what he liked about Yggdrasil's sound versus Topping DX7s. And which music he used to determine that. I then queued up the exact same content on Yggdrasil DAC and Topping DX7s and performed an AB test. There is absolutely no sign of any difference he is describing. At full level, the two sound very similar.

The only way he would walk away thinking Yggdrasil is different is due to improper sighted testing. What label you put on it is immaterial.

Thanks for providing more context. I certainly have not read everything that was written by Alcophone (either on this thread of some other site)

The problem that I see is that there is a tendency for "objectivists" to be very subjective. What makes a good test? If it is something that can be physically measured, a controlled environment, a measurement instrument with sufficient precision and accuracy, repeatable if performed under the same conditions elsewhere.

What about something that can't be physically measured - e.g. whether I prefer A or B? What makes a good "test"? A controlled environment, a (statistically) sufficient sample size, etc. Are the results of this ever absolute? No - and that is properly represented as a confidence level for a given confidence interval. At a sample size of 1, the confidence level is so low - might as well be opinions - certainly not something as an objectivist in which I would put any stock. Does your listening test prove anything? Does Alcophone's listening test prove anything? Only to each of you, and individually. Can we extrapolate anything from these listening test ... not really.

 

[Alcophone]

Well, to be more specific, I heard a deeper sound stage with the Yggdrasil into a Gustard H20 with two Sparkos SS3602 opamps, using the MrSpeakers Ether C Flow. I do not hear that deep sound stage with the DX7s using any of its filters (though I seemed to like #4 the best - super subtle differences) and otherwise using the same setup. Mind you, I also don't hear that deep sound stage with the Yggdrasil into a Jotunheim.
That really came as a surprise to me since I auditioned quite a few headphones with the Jotunheim + internal original DS DAC, and the HD 800 did have a lovely sound stage with that one, bigger than anything else I've heard. I didn't think the closed Ether C Flow can even have a sound stage worth mentioning, but then I got the Gustard H20. It was pretty uncanny. I could make it flat by switching to the DX7s and restore the depth after switching back to the Yggy. It takes a few seconds to restore/destroy the sound stage impression, which is even weirder to me. It's like the brain is caught by surprise that the room changed slightly despite nothing obvious having changed, and eventually picks up on the subtle cues again.
I don't have other decent amps to compare with at the moment. End of October I hope to receive the Massdrop x THX AAA™ 789. I'm assuming you guys approve, since it's cheap and measures well.

I did a few rounds of blind A/B with the DX7s and the Yggy, both after being powered down over the weekend and being turned on simultaneously minutes before the first round. USB into DX7s, its coax out via a splitter into both the DX7s and the Yggy, both DACs set to Coax in. Identical cables everywhere, using the balanced outs and ins.
Perfect volume matching wasn't possible without introducing (and buying) more devices, and the DX7s also fades in its volume after regaining signal lock, which would give it away. So instead I diligently lowered the volume all the way before switching, restarted the song, waited a few seconds, then increased the volume until comfortable, and restarted the song again. That should randomize it sufficiently to rule out as a factor. A friend switched the cables (or not) and covered them up with a towel so I wouldn't know what was connected to what. I was on a different floor with two heavy doors in between when he did that.

First round: within 5s I was sure I'm listening to the Yggdrasil. I switched back and forth numerous times (as described above) with various songs I know well, and then checked, and I was right.
Second round: same as above
Third round: I got cocky and played a song I had never heard before, but I was still shooting for something acoustic - with most electronic music, the two DACs are quite close indeed. I was right again.
Forth round: I got too cocky, called it too quickly and was wrong, after listening to another new song for a little bit on both inputs. So in future rounds I'll give it at least three songs, with at least one of them well known, before calling it.

I'll do more rounds when I can. 3/4 is too close to 2/4 (i.e. chance) to be definitive. Also, somehow the random number generator my friend used always instructed him to not switch the cables, it turned out. In the forth round I was sure they had been swapped, though.

It also took me quite a while to even notice any difference to what I was used to when I first got the Yggdrasil. It's hard when you don't know what to look for. The Yggdrasil also has a meatier sound to my ears, which I can easily see as being the result of distortion. Since I can't just turn off the distortion, I don't know for sure. But none of the measurements would tell me that recorded instruments sound more natural with the Yggdrasil, yet that is a huge part of the pleasure. It kind of ruined most of my other DACs for me, but the Yggy is also the only truly expensive DAC I ever owned.
Now I still had fun with the DX7s as a DAC/preamp into my speaker system in combination with the Niagara 1000, I have to say. The DX7s is probably the best delta sigma DAC I have, certainly in terms of features and connectivity options. I do like the sound of the iFi micro iDSD (as a DAC + amp) better, though - after it has warmed up for a few minutes.

 

[Grave]

"I don't think this going anywhere, though. So this will be my last post on the subject. I hope you find a way to move on."

 

[n2it]

Your post is nonsensical so I do not know how to respond to it.

My point was that your argument against subjectivists was pretty subjective.

 

[Grave]

My point was that your argument against subjectivists was pretty subjective.

No, it isn't.