Yes, I realize the gain in signal-to-noise ratio when you combine the converter chips that way, but it's still an 18-bit part and will only decode 18 bits worth of data. This thread discussion is beginning to read a lot like this one :) https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/schiit-yggdrasil-21-bit/post?highlight=2097152&postid=148... |
"Read this from MoJo Music: 'When a Redbook PCM file is played on a native DSD delta sigma single-bit converter, the single-bit DAC chip has to convert the PCM to DSD in real-time. This is one of the major reasons people claim DSD 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.'" I have seen this quote touted before and I really have no dog in this fight, but Mojo is hardly an objective observer as it sells a $7600 DAC based upon AD1862 R-2R ladder DAC chips. I'm sure it sounds fine, but it is not the only way to build a fine DAC. There are also several outstanding DACS built around the newest delta sigma chips. It has become commonplace to bad mouth DS chips these days, possibly because older generations of them were not top performers. Also, they are easier to implement and therefore ubiquitous. So they are built into DACs with a greater variety of SQ. |
This thread discussion is beginning to read a lot like this one :) Yeah... ha! However there is an important point to reiterate here. Using two DAC chips in a hardware balanced configuration doesn't increase the number of possible output levels (unlike what you implied above and as mentioned in the other thread) but it does double the output signal level relative to the noise level. When you then use that fact in the formula for signal-to-noise ratio, 20*log(S/N), you get a 6 dB increase, which is equivalent to one bit. All this isn't to say that the Gungnir isn't a good DAC. I just think it's rather silly to claim you're "preserving the original samples" when it's clearly not the case for 24-bit source material. |
I just think it's rather silly to claim you're "preserving the original samples" when it's clearly not the case for 24-bit source material. Are you referring to the Yggdrasil or Gungnir? I think you are referring to the Yggdrasil, as I do not read the "preserving" text elsewhere. In the case of the Yggdrasil, Schiit addresses the 24 bit issue. From their web sites FAQ page. --------------- If your 24 bit recordings actually have 24 bits of resolution, we’ll eat a hat. And those "32-bit" DACs? Well, they have this measurement known as “equivalent number of bits.” This means, in English, how many bits of resolution they really have. And that number, for most of them, is about 19.5. And 21 is better than 19.5, in all the math books we know. -------------- So I'm not sure it is "clearly not the case". Moreover, I've played plenty of 24 bit material at various sample rates and it sounds really, really, good to my ears. :) Bottom line though is that Schiit gear isn't for everyone. It's akin to what Jerry has to say about the Grateful Dead. “We're like licorice. Not everybody likes licorice, but the people who like licorice really like licorice.” |
