However, neither Mike nor Jason are convinced that maximization of measurements over every other metric is what makes a product superior
What could those metrics be?
However, neither Mike nor Jason are convinced that maximization of measurements over every other metric is what makes a product superior
you need to read the original post for the image
''There the main reason for this is the sample-and-hold circuit. The short of it is that during the hold state the output will begin to move in a non-linear fashion if the R2R side of the DAC is greater than ~0.6V of the output. This due to some limitations of the design. Basically, if a sample to sample step is greater than 0.6V you will see this, which results in some greater harmonics and some other spikes. This hurts THD+N.
As the sample rate is constant, the sample-to-sample voltage step increases at higher frequencies. Reducing the output amplitude reduces the sample-to-sample voltage step, which then reduces the THD. A higher sample rate will improve this further until you reach the part where the device has trouble settling. I wish the system was a bit more capable so I could setup 384kSPS and 768kSPS. ''
Since Mike's interview, which was quoted on this thread, I am unsure if Amir is interested in testing our gear.
That is possible though right?
Price, aesthetic, usability, options, subjective audio preference to name a few.What could those metrics be?
Price, aesthetic, usability, options, subjective audio preference to name a few.
Perhaps Mike could have found a way to say, "measurements over every other metric is not our philosophy" without going out of his way to explicitly be a d*** to the owner of this site - which site is the very place where Schiit got easy - and free - access to measurements that helped you eliminate the engineering errors of your Modi 2 DAC and the early Yggdrasil.
It's one thing to express oneself in a passionate, individualistic manner. It's another to posture in a way that makes one a complete hypocrite.
If I were you, I'd focus less on whether or not @amirm will measure Schiit products, and more on how consumers like me, who are considering purchase of a Freya S or other product, will be impacted in our purchasing decisions by the fact that the product's designer goes out of his way to antagonize and dismiss our approach to this hobby.
I know better than that. Apologies. I was being sloppy and colloquial and must be precise with language. Measurements need not be the only factor when determining the superiority of a product. All of those previously stated would fall under that statement.Except for the price maybe, the rest aren’t really metrics, are they?
I do feel that measurements can be important for example in production test to find faults in various products.
I will leave that up to the patrons here. I imagine if enough people request a review, he will reach out. We are always willing to send out a unit for review.
In AP reports on their website, balanced:
Less is More: THD+N 0.001177% & 0.001762% average 0.001470% (SINAD 97).
More is Less: THD+N 0.000126% & 0.000117% average 0.000122% (SINAD 118).
OG: THD+N 0.002588% & 0.002539% average 0.002564% (SINAD 92).
This may seem slightly nitpicking but that way you pulled that quote makes it seem as if it is my words. I pulled that from Mike's interview and you removed that context.So testing is good to make sure there is no deviation / float in production values vs the R&D values but not actually in the R&D?
So you R&D a product, get a 1.0, then measure that and make sure production hit's those marks?
Again, I am not here to speak for Mike Moffat. I am speaking about this company and what we actually do, not what Mika Moffat says. For over a decade we have constantly tried to improve. Taking the criticism that we receive on this forum has been part of that improvement, something I have stated many times here. Our actions as a company speak louder than an interview. If you look at the history of the company, all of our units measure significantly better than they used to. We have pushed for better quality in production, higher quality materials while keeping the price as low as we can. You can criticize an individual for an inappropriate comment but it clearly is not reflective of our actions as a company.
I am not focused on whether or not Amir reviews our gear. That is his decision. If he has a problem with Mike for his comments and does not want to review our gear, that's his right on his forum. I was developing a rapport with Amir and it's sad that we have arrived at this place. I hope that relationship can be repaired in the future but sadly it is not for me to decide. Buy our products if you like them. Don't buy them if you don't. Either way, we are still going to produce the products we enjoy and try to give our customers the best experience we can.
This may seem slightly nitpicking but that way you pulled that quote makes it seem as if it is my words. I pulled that from Mike's interview and you removed that context.
Honestly, it depends on the product. There are products where testing equipment is intimately involved in the R&D process. Others are less so.
Oh my clarification was so that others didn't read what you quoted as my own words.I know who said that. I'm just making sure I understand that Schiit's approach is ready, fire!, aim. It's the way I interpreted what he said. If that's not correct then I wouldn't mind clarification.
After going to all the trouble of setting up the blind switching it would have been nice if Chris had managed to do some simple tests to demonstrate that he could actually distinguish between the different DACs. Unfortunately he doesn't provide any data on this. If "these differences are very easy to spot" then it should have been easy to reach statistical significance on a simple ABX test.And Chris Connaker blind listening subjective results here:
https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/bits-and-bytes/new-schiit-yggdrasil-blind-listening-comparison-r1045/
Oh my clarification was so that others didn't read what you quoted as my own words.
No. APx555 is always part of our R&D but depending on the product sometimes more sometimes less. We make things with tubes.
I don't mind anyone having a preference for one thing over another. I just like knowing what that looks like from an instrumented approach.
We know what many tubed products look like from a instrumentation view. People like what they like.
We plan on doing more tests just like this in the future that are more rigorous. Covid threw a wrench into the plans but stay tuned. We are genuinely interested in ABX tests because of the papers I have read I haven't been overly impressed.After going to all the trouble of setting up the blind switching it would have been nice if Chris had managed to do some simple tests to demonstrate that he could actually distinguish between the different DACs. Unfortunately he doesn't provide any data on this. If "these differences are very easy to spot" then it should have been easy to reach statistical significance on a simple ABX test.