New Yggdrasil - First (and second) Impressions


Okay, so I’ve finally (on order over 2 months) received my Schiit Yggdrasil. The unit arrived in exactly perfect condition (i.e. well packaged).

Upon first (and second) listening through all sources/inputs, I would need a stethoscope to discern any difference among my current components and connectivity. I also cannot detect any difference using the phase inversion button.

I suppose the aforementioned is a testament to how good my current system (before/without Yggy) already sounds. :)

I can easily A-B test because the Yggy is hooked in via balanced and my other components are also hooked directly to amp via RCA or USB.

Also, obviously I have NOT let the unit "burn in" for days because I just got it, however, it has come to full operational temperature after being powered on continuously over 24 hours.

System configuration: (Yggdrasil > XLR > Musical Fidelity M6si integrated amplifier > Golden Ear Triton Reference speakers )
all cables blue jeans cables "best" offering

Emotiva ERC-3 CD player > AES/EBU > Yggdrasil
Oppo UDP-205 blue ray player > coax > Yggdrasil
Samsung SMT-C5320 cable box > optical > Yggdrasil
Gateway NV79 Windows 10 64-bit computer > USB > Yggdrasil

I’ll be patient, but if there are any suggestions to "try" in order to hear *some* audible difference, that would be great. Appreciate any feedback you have.

Thanks.
128x128gdhal
parsons - ....the resulting PACE gives the impression of just the slightest, but very noticeable, perception of "slowing down" of a song that you know very well....
I heard (or believe I did) the subtlest of timing difference once in a Rolling Stones song when I first compared my Oppo to Yggy.  That would be the timing between the Oppo vs Yggy, and it was during a vocal passage. At that time the Yggy wasn't broken-in by the standard of days/hours many state is required to sound optimum. My point is I understand what you're referring to regarding perception of timing (slow or fast) which is likely milliseconds and can only be perceived from tunes that your mind is accustomed to hearing many times throughout the years.

It seems reasonable to me that these types of tunes that one is accustomed to hearing for years would be studio recordings. In my case I listen to new (I haven't heard it even once) live recordings, which makes it impossible to detect the type timing anomalies that could result from break-in or DAC to DAC comparison. 
Hi, Hal. Timing is timing. It's obvious when it is off. It's obvious in live performances when one musician is 'off.' Nothing subtle about it.

To @parsons point, timing issues are common during break in, and his post made a relevant and a very good point. I have found the same to be true during component break in.

However, 'timing' is not limited to components being broken in. There are components that (when fully broken in) handle timing better than other components. A live recording or studio recording doesn't change that.
@david_ten 

Is the timing you are speaking of something entirely different than what can be caused by jitter?
Hi Hal. I thought I was being clear in my two previous posts. I'm copying a couple of sections, since you ask (and I don't want to assume, in any way) [repeat, I don't want to assume]. Best, - David.

From Wikipedia: "Timing in music refers to the ability to "keep time" accurately and to synchronise to an ensemble,[1] as well as to expressive timing—subtle adjustment of note or beat duration, or of tempo, for aesthetic effect.

Research in music cognition has shown that time as a subjective structuring of events in music differs from the concept of time in physics.[2] Listeners to music do not perceive rhythm on a continuous scale, but recognise rhythmic categories that function as a reference relative to which the deviations in timing can be appreciated.[3][4] In fact temporal patterns in music combine two different time scales—rhythmic durations such as half and quarter notes on the one hand, and on the other, the continuous timing variations that characterize an expressive musical performance."


From: https://www.musical-u.com/learn/how-to-improve-your-rhythm-and-timing/

"Having a reliable sense of rhythm is a hallmark of any good musician and it’s one of the things which can immediately distinguish an amateur from a pro.

HIGHLIGHTING >>>: Our sensitivity to rhythm when listening to music is subtle but powerful, and any inaccuracies quickly give the listener and uneasy sense that things aren’t working quite right.

In music rhythm is widely considered as the regulated succession of strong and weak elements, or of opposite or different conditions, whereas “timing” refers to the ability to keep accurately to the regular beat and synchronize with an ensemble. With such a fundamental and broad definition, hopefully you can see why having a strong sense of rhythm isn’t just for the drummers!"

@david_ten

Hi David. As always, I remain grateful for your thoughtful feedback. Given your last response, it would seem to me that the answer to the question I posed 4-22-2018 1:31pm is "yes".

And, as we are essentially speaking of a songs rhythm, I certainly agree with you that one should be able to detect if something is amiss irrespective of it being a song that one has listened to for years, or for the first time.

Then, back to parsons point about burn-in, I remain confident in my assessment that there hasn’t been any change in the Yggy’s "rendition" of a musical passage, where the emphasis of the assessment would be on the rhythmic portion of the piece. This is to say, the Yggy’s rhythmic rendition is "exactly perfect". :)