Comparison: Schiit Yggdrasil DAC vs. Berkeley Alpha DAC 2

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
This thread will be about a comparison of two DACs:

1. Schiit Yggdrasil DAC
2. Berkeley Alpha DAC 2

Both were heard by several WBF members in my system whose impressions will be posted below.

The Schiit Yggdrasil DAC ('Yggy') with fixed output was run through a Pass B1 buffered passive preamp to my amps. The Berkeley Alpha DAC 2 was either run via its digital volume control directly to the amps as I always had done for years before purchasing the Yggy, or through the Pass B1 with fixed output set, per factory recommendation, at level 54 out of a max. of 60 (-6 dB from max.). Ack noticed a slight improvement of micro-dynamics and transients by running the Berkeley through the Pass B1, but the differences as heard in my system are small enough as to not significantly change the overall character of the presentation.

You will read the description of rather pronounced differences between the DACs. My first impressions of the Yggy, reported on the Schiit thread, had been that it sounded surprisingly alike to the Berkeley, even though there were some features that I found different and that I liked. Yet now also I hear profound differences. There are two possibilities:

a) I was too focused on the similarities in sound to not being able to properly hear differences
b) the sound of the Yggy changed dramatically during break-in

I assume it is probably a combination of both. That the sound of Schiit DACs changes a lot during break-in has also been reported by others. Peter A. was the first to hear the Yggy in my system, when it had broken in about one and a half weeks playing 24/7 and when I also started to hear major differences between the DACs.

According to my and many others' experience, it is imperative to never compare cold DACs. Both DACs were fully warmed up at all times (no interruption of AC supply for several days).

Data source was a Simaudio Moon 260 DT CD transport, feeding the DACs via an MIT Proline digital cable through the AES/EBU connection. This connection is considered superior by many manufacturers of digital equipment.
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
Thanks Al for starting this thread. I've been anxious to post my impressions since I heard your system ten days ago or so. Here is the list of the music we played:

1. Wolves and Blizzards (the 'cave painting' song), from Dibrujo, Dibrujo, Dibrujo... by Positive Catastrophe
2. Petteri Iivonen: Art of the Violin (Yarlung Records),
a) Bach, Violin Partita No 2. in D Minor,
Sarabande (slow mvmt.) and Gigue (sharper transients), tracks 16 and 17
b) Isaye, Violin Sonata in E Minor, Allemanda (track 9)
3. Shostakovich, Symphony No. 9, movements 1 and 2 - Mariss Jansons, Oslo Philharmonic Orchestra
4. John Mc Laughlin and the 4th Dimension "To The One", Recovery (track 5).
5. Sonny Rollins, Way Out West

The two DACs sounded surprisingly different. I knew that Al’s intention was to start a thread discussing these DACs, so as soon as I got home after the listening session, I wrote down some quick notes and sent him an email detailing my impressions. Here is a list of the differences I heard:

Schiit:
1. Greater emphasis on the lower midrange, bass frequencies
2. More forward sounding
3. slightly better body/weight
4. slightly dull sounding
5. a bit heavy, thick
6. slight coloration, timbre not as realistic
7. Good rhythm

Berkeley:
1. Tonal balance toward the mid/highs
2. Greater sense of air
3. Better low level resolution
4. More present
5. More alive, more energy
6. Better soundstage, layering, more depth
7. Better room-fill
8. Better, more accurate timbre
9. Good rhythm
10. Better texture, tonal color, shading
11. Better decay, harmonics, hall information
12. Broader tonal balance, more complete sounding
13. Less restricted, more headroom, more effortless sound

Those are the basics. That evening I told Al that I could make the following analogy about the Schiit DAC: it is like an inefficient speaker being driven by a not quite powerful enough amp. It was just a tad sluggish sounding, heavy and thick. The Berkeley was more engaging, with more energy, life and excitement. There was little noticeable fatigue/glare/digital artifacts with either one.
 
Last edited:

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
Thanks a lot, Peter, for posting your impressions.

Here is a summary from what Ian (Madfloyd) and I observed when he visited for a comparison of the two DACs, with some thoughts on my own added (Ian agrees with my representation of his views). At first we played diverse music through the Yggy, so that Ian could get a feel for the sound of the DAC. Upon listening to Shostakovich 7, the slow 3rd movement (Janssons/ Leningrad Symphony Orchestra), Ian commented on how good and incredibly clean the orchestral strings sounded. He also loved the orchestral violin sound on Bernard Hermann's Vertigo (a modern re-recording of the music). He thought the sound of the solo violin on the Yarlung CD "The Art of the Violin" had incredible resolution.

After listening to those and other pieces on the Yggy, we performed the Yggy/Berkeley comparison. We started with the first mvmt. of Shostakovich 9 (Janssons) and here we did not find that much difference between the DACs. However, I asked Ian to specifically listen to the fortissimo violins in the last 30 seconds, and he agreed that they sounded softer in texture on the Yggy. I had noticed before that on the Berkeley the violins were hardening up too much when they went from playing at lower volume to fortissimo, which I interpret as a typical digital artifact, an artifact absent on the Yggy.

Upon listening again to Shostakovich 7, the slow 3rd movement, Ian thought that the violins that are played in high register had more body on the Berkeley, and I found the same thing. Yet on the violins played in middle register in Shostakovich 9 that had not been the case. In a solo trumpet piece (Stockhausen, "Harmonien") Ian noticed that the Berkeley also here was more midrangey, thus the sound seemed to have more body. Yet he thought the trumpet clearly sounded more realistic on the Yggy because it had better bite in the initial attack transient, and more energy in the upper midrange; in comparison the Berkeley sounded 'softer'. In my view this characterization, which I might not have realized on my own in this manner, is spot on. I had already thought the trumpet sounded more realistic on the Yggy (I had heard the piece live in NYC at a Stockhausen festival last year), but had more attributed this to an overall better tone rather than to specifics like these.

I agree that in the beginning of the piece, where we both made the comparison, the Berkeley seemed to have more body, but I also noticed that in the lower midrange of the trumpet, which is used later in the piece and which I should have played as well, the Yggy has more body. There seems to be more distinction in sound on the Yggy between the registers of the trumpet, which would correlate with Ian's finding that the Berkeley is more midrangey. We then played a Dorian CD of the brass ensemble Proteus 7, "For Your Ears Only", track 5 with the James Bond theme, and track 17 with lots of tuba and trombone. Ian and I both noticed that the low brass had the same great body with Yggy and Berkeley, but again there was considerably more bite of the trumpets with the Yggy.

Ian preferred the Berkeley on Schubert's Winterreise with baritone Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau because the piano (Jörg Demus) had more sparkle. We agreed that both the piano and the voice had more body on the Yggy.

We both strongly preferred the Yggy on Art Blakey's 'Freedom Rider' (a 7 minute solo percussion piece) because it had more bass weight, the drums seemed to be hit harder (faster transients) and there was more blackness between notes. The Berkeley sounded muddy in comparison, but Ian also thought that, because there was overall more spatiality and decay on the Berkeley, perhaps what we hear as muddiness is really just longer sustained notes. So there is a debate to be had. Still, we both clearly thought the Yggy sounded much better on that piece. I also thought the rhythm was much better and more incisive on the Yggy (it made my foot tapping), the Berkeley sounded slow and 'confused' in comparison (while otherwise overall I have few complaints on its rhythm & timing).
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,467
11,363
4,410
as Spock would say......"Fascinating."

I read the feedback from all three of you and I try to view it considering each of your references to connect the dots. and I do appreciate the kind of effort this stuff takes. thank you.

Peter is analog all the way, and adjusts each pressing for VTA.....clearly preferred the Berkeley

Ian uses the Vivaldi dac as his digital reference.

Al is mostly little silver discs.

they leaned toward the Yiggy.

I know I'm over-simplifying, but these are somewhat dominant influences.

it's hard to rationalize the disparity between Peter's viewpoint, and Ian and Al. radically different takes.

my question is; "is this type of conflicting views typical for you three?"

do you hear differently?

spock.jpg
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
as Spock would say......"Fascinating."

I read the feedback from all three of you and I try to view it considering each of your references to connect the dots.

Peter is analog all the way, and adjusts each pressing for VTA.

Ian uses the Vivaldi dac as his digital reference.

Al is mostly little silver discs.

I know I'm over-simplifying, but these are somewhat dominant influences.

it's hard to rationalize the disparity between Peter's viewpoint, and Ian and Al. radically different takes.

my question is; "is this type of conflicting views typical for you three?"

do you hear differently?

No, I think the three of us usually agree more or less, most of the time. The Berkeley sounds to me more like my analog system in terms of dynamics, tone and presence, but it lacks the body/weight and resolution of my vinyl. The Schiit had the body/weight but not the resolution.

Perhaps more interesting from my perspective, Mike, is that the other listener, Ack, heard things more or less the way I did. Ack and I have fairly different systems, and tastes, and we have heard things quite differently in the past. That we mostly agreed on these two DACs really surprised me. Perhaps he will share his impressions with the forum soon.

Mike, your comment raised my eyebrow and gave me a chuckle. I actually adjust VTA for each pressing, not the other way around, but I know what you meant.

After reading Al's comments, all I can conclude is that he listened to different music on different nights with each of the three of us. I wonder if impressions would be different if all four of us were in the room listening to the same music at the same time. As it is, Ian, I and perhaps Ack, are simply sharing three short term impressions. By contrast, Al is listening long term and comparing the two DACs over an extended period with a greater variety of music.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
as Spock would say......"Fascinating."

I read the feedback from all three of you and I try to view it considering each of your references to connect the dots.

Peter is analog all the way, and adjusts each pressing for VTA.

Ian uses the Vivaldi dac as his digital reference.

Al is mostly little silver discs.

I know I'm over-simplifying, but these are somewhat dominant influences.

it's hard to rationalize the disparity between Peter's viewpoint, and Ian and Al. radically different takes.

my question is; "is this type of conflicting views typical for you three?"

do you hear differently?

Yes, it is fascinating, isn't it, Mike? Such widely divergent views are not that common among us, but this is a distinct split of opinions.

I'll discuss small differences in our listening conditions later, but maybe a siginificant difference is the level of burn-in. Peter heard the Yggy after one and a half weeks 24/7 burn-in, Ian heard it after 3 weeks burn-in.

Yet perhaps also, or potentially even more, significant is another change that I remembered only this morning as I was preparing for this discussion.

A few days ago I turned the stacks of corner tube traps from their absorptive side to a position where the diffusive sides of the tube traps face one another (a 45 degree angle from full exposure of the diffusive sides out into the room), a configuration that also Peter has in his room. I preferred this with the Yggy and the current "summer" acoustics that are a bit warmer (no pun intended) due to the heating up of the wooden house walls and perhaps an influence of the heat on the speakers' sound (my room is not air conditioned, only the house in general is).

So Peter heard the DACs with tube traps on their absorptive side, Ian and I report impressions with a somewhat brighter acoustic balance of the room.

***

Regardless, while this may explain some of the differences in opinion, it hardly can account for everything. It is clear that personal taste and experience/memory of live music plays a role, but certainly, some differences in system/room circumstances may affect the outcome of comparisons. So it is always useful to never take any opinions as an absolute. The high end is a personal and system-dependent thing.
 

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
I doubt it reached full potential when Peter heard it, 1.5 weeks isn't enough time, imo this can make all the difference.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
I doubt it reached full potential when Peter heard it, 1.5 weeks isn't enough time, imo this can make all the difference.

Sure, that is possible. But, Ack heard it at least a week after I did and more or less agreed with my list of differences. He may post his impressions later. I have told Al that I would like to come back to hear them again. My impressions may or may not change. I will bring some of my own CDs next time to hear more familiar music. Remember, the Schiit sound is also influenced by the addition of the Pass B1 and an extra cable. The different volume controls and imprecise level matching may also have an effect. These were sighted, not controlled listening sessions.
 

mauidan

Member Sponsor
Aug 2, 2010
1,512
11
36
Pukalani, HI
Thanks a lot, Peter, for posting your impressions.

Here is a summary from what Ian (Madfloyd) and I observed when he visited for a comparison of the two DACs, with some thoughts on my own added (Ian agrees with my representation of his views). At first we played diverse music through the Yggy, so that Ian could get a feel for the sound of the DAC. Upon listening to Shostakovich 7, the slow 3rd movement (Janssons/ Leningrad Symphony Orchestra), Ian commented on how good and incredibly clean the orchestral strings sounded. He also loved the orchestral violin sound on Bernard Hermann's Vertigo (a modern re-recording of the music). He thought the sound of the solo violin on the Yarlung CD "The Art of the Violin" had incredible resolution.

After listening to those and other pieces on the Yggy, we performed the Yggy/Berkeley comparison. We started with the first mvmt. of Shostakovich 9 (Janssons) and here we did not find that much difference between the DACs. However, I asked Ian to specifically listen to the fortissimo violins in the last 30 seconds, and he agreed that they sounded softer in texture on the Yggy. I had noticed before that on the Berkeley the violins were hardening up too much when they went from playing at lower volume to fortissimo, which I interpret as a typical digital artifact, an artifact absent on the Yggy.

Upon listening again to Shostakovich 7, the slow 3rd movement, Ian thought that the violins that are played in high register had more body on the Berkeley, and I found the same thing. Yet on the violins played in middle register in Shostakovich 9 that had not been the case. In a solo trumpet piece (Stockhausen, "Harmonien") Ian noticed that the Berkeley also here was more midrangey, thus the sound seemed to have more body. Yet he thought the trumpet clearly sounded more realistic on the Yggy because it had better bite in the initial attack transient, and more energy in the upper midrange; in comparison the Berkeley sounded 'softer'. In my view this characterization, which I might not have realized on my own in this manner, is spot on. I had already thought the trumpet sounded more realistic on the Yggy (I had heard the piece live in NYC at a Stockhausen festival last year), but had more attributed this to an overall better tone rather than to specifics like these.

I agree that in the beginning of the piece, where we both made the comparison, the Berkeley seemed to have more body, but I also noticed that in the lower midrange of the trumpet, which is used later in the piece and which I should have played as well, the Yggy has more body. There seems to be more distinction in sound on the Yggy between the registers of the trumpet, which would correlate with Ian's finding that the Berkeley is more midrangey. We then played a Dorian CD of the brass ensemble Proteus 7, "For Your Ears Only", track 5 with the James Bond theme, and track 17 with lots of tuba and trombone. Ian and I both noticed that the low brass had the same great body with Yggy and Berkeley, but again there was considerably more bite of the trumpets with the Yggy.

Ian preferred the Berkeley on Schubert's Winterreise with baritone Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau because the piano (Jörg Demus) had more sparkle. We agreed that both the piano and the voice had more body on the Yggy.

We both strongly preferred the Yggy on Art Blakey's 'Freedom Rider' (a 7 minute solo percussion piece) because it had more bass weight, the drums seemed to be hit harder (faster transients) and there was more blackness between notes. The Berkeley sounded muddy in comparison, but Ian also thought that, because there was overall more spatiality and decay on the Berkeley, perhaps what we hear as muddiness is really just longer sustained notes. So there is a debate to be had. Still, we both clearly thought the Yggy sounded much better on that piece. I also thought the rhythm was much better and more incisive on the Yggy (it made my foot tapping), the Berkeley sounded slow and 'confused' in comparison (while otherwise overall I have few complaints on its rhythm & timing).

So, to understand this comparison, doesn’t Ian (Madfloyd) wear a hearing aid and suffer from Tinnitus?
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
I doubt it reached full potential when Peter heard it, 1.5 weeks isn't enough time, imo this can make all the difference.

Possibly, Dave. It will be interesting to see if Peter's opinion changes in the future, or not.

In any case, here are the main reasons why I like the Yggy better as I currently hear it (some of them already discussed above):

1. more liveliness and incisiveness of sound, more effortless sound *)
2. very convincing sound on tenor and baritone sax (significantly better than the Berkeley), which is really important to me; sax sound has been a general weakness of digital but is great on the Yggy and some very high-end DACs, like the dCS Rossini where I heard great sax from digital for the very first time
3. more wooden sound on violin
4. better sound on orchestral (massed) violins, no hardening of sound when instruments play loudly (lack of digital artifact)
5. more realistic sound on trumpet
6. more body and weight in many instances
7. great on stand-up/electric bass and drums
8. even better rhythm and timing than the already excellent Berkeley
9. spatiality of presentation seems to be more real and preferable

On that last point, I am not sure if the extra 'air' through the Berkeley corresponds to my typical live experiences; I feel more at home in that respect with the acoustically 'drier' sound of the Yggy. Also, the Yggy presents just as much spatial depth on some recordings, thus showing good spatial capabilities as well, but is not always as recessed as the Berkeley, which I prefer. Also, on many pop vocals I find the Berkeley somewhat too recessed, with the Yggy it''s better (when you have a room/system capable of great depth portrayal, then this becomes an issue).

***

I should mention the prices of the DACs:

Schiit Yggdrasil: $ 2,300 (excl. shipping)
Berkeley Alpha DAC 2: $ 5,000 (excl. tax)

_________________

*) yes, I know, all this fully contradicts Peter's impressions, but perhaps a debate can be had about the meaning of 'liveliness', even though usually Peter and I agree if we call something lively or not
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
So, to understand this comparison, doesn’t Ian (Madfloyd) wear a hearing aid and suffer from Tinnitus?

No, he doesn't wear a hearing aid, and I am not aware that he would suffer from tinnitus either.
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,467
11,363
4,410
you guys don't need me to tell you how to compare gear. but I do have a suggestion.

pick 4 or 5 piano recordings mic'd in particular ways and see where that takes you. likely one of them will allow you to find some common ground of reference.

I find that sustain/decay, harmonic texture, pluck/strike, scale/power/bloom and especially continuousness on piano seems to separate the men from the boys. it exposes the inner view to the music. and it's hard to hear these specific things differently. and these things seem to relate to the humanity and naturalness of a dac.

if a dac 'blurs' or 'smears' things it jumps out.....

I did not read any piano references in your descriptions.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
Remember, the Schiit sound is also influenced by the addition of the Pass B1 and an extra cable.

Yes, but the influence of the Pass B1 and cable is minimal. If anything, the Pass B1 helps somewhat (see my opening post); in both sessions reported the Berkeley ran via digital volume control.

The different volume controls and imprecise level matching may also have an effect.

True, even though I made sure as much as I could to match volume since I know how important that is (I had pre-checked all the settings with an SPL meter).

These were sighted, not controlled listening sessions.

Yes, which could be of influence.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
you guys don't need me to tell you how to compare gear. but I do have a suggestion.

pick 4 or 5 piano recordings mic'd in particular ways and see where that takes you. likely one of them will allow you to find some common ground of reference.

I find that sustain/decay, harmonic texture, pluck/strike, scale/power/bloom and especially continuousness on piano seems to separate the men from the boys. it exposes the inner view to the music. and it's hard to hear these specific things differently. and these things seem to relate to the humanity and naturalness of a dac.

if a dac 'blurs' or 'smears' things it jumps out.....

I did not read any piano references in your descriptions.

I gave one, even though in this case my preference was different from Ian's. But your suggestion of focusing detailed attention on piano is well taken.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
Yes, but the influence of the Pass B1 and cable is minimal. If anything, the Pass B1 helps somewhat (see my opening post); in both sessions reported the Berkeley ran via digital volume control.



True, even though I made sure as much as I could to match volume since I know how important that is (I had pre-checked all the settings with an SPL meter).



Yes, which could be of influence.

Didn't we try the Pass B1 on the Berkeley also? That is how I heard its effect. It, the extra cable, or the combination of the two, decreased the transparency of the Berkeley, as I recall, and I remember at the time thinking that that lack of transparency seemed to carry over to the sound of the Schiit/Pass/cable combination. Also, when I was there, the level matching was quite casual. We listened for a bit, and then agreed the volume wasn't the same, adjusted it, and listened some more. I would not want to read Amir's criticism of that process, but who cares? We listened, had fun, formed opinions, and learned something.

It was a casual back and forth direct comparison with knowledge of the DACs being tested. And it was one DAC versus the other DAC + Pass B1 + cable. So, in the strictest sense, it was comparing two source "systems", one with variable output, one without. This was a "real world" comparison because one would have to listen to the Schiit with some kind of preamp or external volume control anyway. So when quoting prices, those should be factored in, which does make them closer in price "as tested".

Given Al's enthusiasm for the Schiit, I do feel I owe it to myself to listen again to see if my impressions change. They certainly have in the past.
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,467
11,363
4,410
Yes, it is fascinating, isn't it, Mike? Such widely divergent views are not that common among us, but this is a distinct split of opinions.

I'll discuss small differences in our listening conditions later, but maybe a siginificant difference is the level of burn-in. Peter heard the Yggy after one and a half weeks 24/7 burn-in, Ian heard it after 3 weeks burn-in.

Yet perhaps also, or potentially even more, significant is another change that I remembered only this morning as I was preparing for this discussion.

A few days ago I turned the stacks of corner tube traps from their absorptive side to a position where the diffusive sides of the tube traps face one another (a 45 degree angle from full exposure of the diffusive sides out into the room), a configuration that also Peter has in his room. I preferred this with the Yggy and the current "summer" acoustics that are a bit warmer (no pun intended) due to the heating up of the wooden house walls and perhaps an influence of the heat on the speakers' sound (my room is not air conditioned, only the house in general is).

So Peter heard the DACs with tube traps on their absorptive side, Ian and I report impressions with a somewhat brighter acoustic balance of the room.

***

Regardless, while this may explain some of the differences in opinion, it hardly can account for everything. It is clear that personal taste and experience/memory of live music plays a role, but certainly, some differences in system/room circumstances may affect the outcome of comparisons. So it is always useful to never take any opinions as an absolute. The high end is a personal and system-dependent thing.

I know for myself, I like to come back a few times on different days and run the same tracks just to get my sense comfortable. that way I can enjoy the music and let it come to me, and not get all stressed. I become at ease with my opinion.

but if a visitor is a bit under the gun and cannot do it another time, then the mind has less opportunity to self check. there is an additional degree of stress introduced to the equation. it does not mean it's wrong, just less certain and more determined with urgency. that you guys are both familiar with each other and each other's systems minimizes this but it still is part of the picture.

with gross differences this is not a big deal; but with two quality solid state RTR ladder dacs this gets a bit dicey......as it's almost in 'cable' territory. you are trying hard to hear a difference, let alone choosing better or why. so this is why finding an instrument which shows most clear differences makes it easiest.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
Didn't we try the Pass B1 on the Berkeley also? That is how I heard its effect. It, the extra cable, or the combination of the two, decreased the transparency of the Berkeley, as I recall, and I remember at the time thinking that that lack of transparency seemed to carry over to the sound of the Schiit/Pass/cable combination.

Yes you are right, we did listen to the Berkeley through the Pass for 5 minutes or so. I am not sure how much we thought the Pass B1 decreased the transparency, Tasos thought it was pretty transparent I think, and said it helped in some respects (micro-dynamics, transients), but perhaps he can further comment on that.

Also, when I was there, the level matching was quite casual. We listened for a bit, and then agreed the volume wasn't the same, adjusted it, and listened some more. I would not want to read Amir's criticism of that process, but who cares? We listened, had fun, formed opinions, and learned something.

I think the greatest uncertainty was on the Sonny Rollins which I hadn't known the volume settings for. Here we adjusted quite a bit.

And it was one DAC versus the other DAC + Pass B1 + cable. So, in the strictest sense, it was comparing two source "systems", one with variable output, one without. This was a "real world" comparison because one would have to listen to the Schiit with some kind of preamp or external volume control anyway. So when quoting prices, those should be factored in, which does make them closer in price "as tested".

True, but the Schiit would still be cheaper.

Given Al's enthusiasm for the Schiit, I do feel I owe it to myself to listen again to see if my impressions change. They certainly have in the past.

You're welcome to listen again of course. I may change my opinions somewhat too, who knows. And Tasos' modifications of the Berkeley may be yet another ball game.
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,601
5,411
1,278
E. England
I think you guys missed a trick by not extending the trial to include Aqua La Voce Mk2
About same price as Yggy (in the UK) and maybe a sweeter voicing from what I can surmise
I ask because I'm looking at an option to include a streamer like Innuous Zenith Mk2 and a similarly priced dac, and for me the obvious shortlist is the Yggy and Aqua
 

Blue58

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2013
890
675
1,155
London, UK
I think you guys missed a trick by not extending the trial to include Aqua La Voce Mk2
About same price as Yggy (in the UK) and maybe a sweeter voicing from what I can surmise
I ask because I'm looking at an option to include a streamer like Innuous Zenith Mk2 and a similarly priced dac, and for me the obvious shortlist is the Yggy and Aqua

Don't forget the Holo Spring Dac Level 3, coupled with an Auralic Aries would be a great entry into streaming, intuitive GUI and could better your Eera Tentation.
https://kitsunehifi.com/product/springdacgreen/

Cheers
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,676
4,465
963
Greater Boston
I think you guys missed a trick by not extending the trial to include Aqua La Voce Mk2
About same price as Yggy (in the UK) and maybe a sweeter voicing from what I can surmise
I ask because I'm looking at an option to include a streamer like Innuous Zenith Mk2 and a similarly priced dac, and for me the obvious shortlist is the Yggy and Aqua

This was not a sampling of DACs. I bought the Yggy, for several reasons, and a comparison with the Berkeley DAC that I own is the obvious thing.

I don't care about a 'sweeter voicing', in fact, hearing that term makes me wary and suspicious. I care about a realistic tone. I know you are looking for tonal density and weight, so the Yggy might be for you.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing