nuttinbutair

My Schiit is a Bimby, but I expect the response to A+ settings to be similar. My goal was to prevent A+ from applying filters, and let the Burrito filter do its thing. The high Nyquist cut-off frequency and no up sampling should be the keys. I have not played with the settings since Maybe there are better settings, but I have not been motivated to experiment.

What I noticed with A+ 1.5.10 when I set "Direct Mode" to be unchecked and "Integer Mode" checked, is a focus that I cannot seem to achieve when using "Direct Mode" checked. Maybe it is my iZotope settings, or hardware or mood. Who knows? Another hobby of mine is amateur astronomy. When using "Direct Mode" in 1.5.10 it seems just like having a telescope that I cannot quite bring into focus on a star. There is just a small blur that I cannot seem to tune out, despite my fiddling with the controls. I think that Jud is on a similar track to my thinking, this is a timing issue that I was trying to adjust with pre-ringing. The combination if Mavericks, A+ 1.5.10 and "Direct Mode" unchecked and "Integer Mode" checked just seems to work for me. One other note. I listen almost exclusively using iTunes integrated mode. No issues using A+ 1.5.10 with iTunes 11.1.2 Superdad (Alex). I cannot comment on iTunes 10.7 in comparison though. Since Superdad listens almost exclusively to playlist mode, I thought that I would try that too. There is a difference in the sound, more than I remembered from the last time I tried playlist mode. I think that "Direct Mode" unchecked and "Integer Mode" checked was a little to much in this mode. The sound seemed slightly plastic and over done. But using "Direct Mode" was not quite 'right' for me either. So, I'll go back to enjoying my porridge with Goldie Locks, using iTunes integrated and no direct mode. I am not sure why it works for me, but as Roch has written, its a matter of taste. Use what you like most!

I have installed Mavericks on my 2011 mini with 8GB RAM, and there were no issues. The mini is driving an Audio-GD DI-V3S & DI-PSU that feeds a Schiit Uber Bifrost > SRM-1/MK-2 > SR-X MK-3. Also, I have to agree with Roch, my setup sounds better using A+ 1.5.10 with "Direct Mode" unchecked and "Integer Mode" checked. I have not gone back to 1.5.9 yet. Enjoying the current configuration too much.

That is Emo's super secret, next generation integrated DAC and speaker power amp. Er, OK, its really a sign that I should be sleeping more rather than posting... The hardware I intended to point toward was my XPA-3.

Thanks. That gives me a much better feel for the XDA-1/DAC-iT/Uber sound comparisons. I have an XDA-3 as well, and like it. Some day I'll have to try the DI-V3/Uber with it to see what comes out. Could be fun, but I'll have to wait until I can get the room to myself...

islandraider, I have not tried either USB input so hopefully someone else can help. maximum kahuna, Interesting. Thanks for the reference point. I have not heard a DAC-iT, but would have guessed that it would have been more tuned for "air" than the Uber Bifrost. So what does the hyper-detailed output from the Peachtree sound like? I assumed that its tuning would be more tilted to favor the high frequencies. Is its detailed sound more complex than that, like lacking smoothness? I have been trying to understand "detail" and "air" myself. The latest rabbit hole for me has been tinkering with the A+ http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/izotope-src-15352/ filter. The settings these folks have been playing with do make a difference for me. Now I prefer Mode 2 over Mode 1, but I am still playing around with the settings. When I get something that I liked from the tuning, I would think that the sound had more "detail" or "air", but I guess that I had not parsed the difference between the two descriptors "detail" and "air" to assign one or the other to what I am hearing. So, I checked around and found this: Sounds Like? An Audio Glossary Glossary: A | Stereophile.com Using that definition I would say that the Izotope filtering adjusts the airiness of the sound, since it seems to affect the high frequencies sharpness/smoothness balance.

As promised, here is Part 2 of my review. At this point, I think there are over 300 hours on the Bifrost and Uber upgrade. I don't think it changed much since the 120 hour mark I commented on last. A business trip provided the opportunity for a long break-in run. Now that I can listen again I am having a lot of fun with the upgrade. The good aspects of the Bifrost were maintained with the Uber upgrade while clear improvements to the sound were apparent from the top to the bottom of the frequency range. I know that others have made that conclusion before me, but I think that it is an appropriate summary. The midrange richness is still present, but the presentation is now clearer and the sound is more filled out. Vocals and guitar are definitely more lifelike. The bass goes deep and runs clean. The occasional muddiness from before the Uber upgrade is now gone. It seems that songs with a strongly recorded bass play exactly that. The bass response does not sound artificially enhanced, nor attenuated (it sounded somewhat attenuated at the lowest frequencies before the upgrade). Now it slightly surpasses the XDA-1's bass in fullness, but both sound fast and clean at the bottom end. As was stated by SonicDefender on another forum about the Gungnir, the high, mid and low frequency ranges seem to be in balance with one another. The frequency balance permits the ranges to compliment one another, rather than one range being dominant over the others. Between this and the improved transient response, the music is now more lifelike. The transient response that I seem to key on is how the snap of your fingers or clap of your hands sounds, also the plucking of a string, tap on the cymbals, or the whack on a drum. There is a sharp acoustic rise that is either followed by silence or a ringing. To me, that transient is a key part of the sound's realism. The quick transients are present across the frequency range, whether it is a bass string pluck or slamming against the fingerboard, the thump from a kick drum, the pluck of an acoustic guitar string, the enunciation of a sharp consonant, or the a tap on a triangle or cymbal. In this respect, the Uber is far better than my memory of the standard Bifrost, at least on recordings where a little care was taken to preserve these details. I think nearly all of the music that I have listened to sounds better with the Uber than before the upgrade. So far only one song, that was a poor recording, stood out as being less enjoyable than before the upgrade. The better recorded music seems to benefit the most from the Uber, and poorer recordings the least. Also, I think that good live recordings really standout for realism from the Uber. Set-up Same as my 5-25-2013 post. Though I have been very temped to update the DI-V3 firmware from what I have read. I think that I am using firmware #4 for what it is worth. The only difference since 5-25 is the Uber board in the Bifrost Impressions in no particular order from comparing the Uber upgraded Bifrost and Emotiva XDA-1, again just written while listening: Crash Test Dummies, God Shuffled His Feet, Psychic – 16/44 ALAC – XDA-1 sounds neutral, very nice presentation. The Uber Bifrost sounds similar, but sounds fuller. As before the upgrade, the room and instrument reverberation linger a little longer with the Uber compared to the XDA-1. Now I clearly prefer the Uber though. I think it is the crisper presentation of the Uber combined with its well controlled rich sound. Sound stage may be slightly wider with the Uber than the XDA. ​ Amber Rubarth, Sessions from the 17th Ward, Novacain – 24/96 ALAC – This is a very good Chesky binaural recording with a wide soundstage, and both DACs reproduced the width and clear placement of the players. Although the comparison is not as close as before the upgrade. The Ubered Bifrost's richness in the lower and mid ranges sounded as if Amber took a step closer to the microphone. That richness and deft handling of transients from string plucks and drumming made the presentation more realistic from the Uber. The upgraded Bifrost lost that occasional muddiness, and is now very clear throughout the frequency range. On this song, I again preferred the Ubered Bifrost over the XDA. Buckwheat Zydeco, Jackpot !, Buck's Going To Trenchtown (Album Version) – 16/44 ALAC – A song with strong deep bass. The two DACs are very close to sounding the same on this one. The bass and midrange is a little stronger in the Uber. The Clancy Brothers, Bob Dylan: The 30th Anniversary Concert Celebration, When The Ship Comes In – 16/44 ALAC – This song is a live performance with all acoustic instruments and a good mix of vocals. Its presentation from the XDA-1 is nice, clear, but missing the feeling that I get with the Ubered Bifrost. From the Uber the recording sounds as though the listener is on stage with the Clancy Brothers. From the twang of the stringed instruments, to the fullness of the vocals, and the placement of the singers and instruments, the Uber produces an enjoyable, musical, and convincing rendering. Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble, Texas Flood, Lenny – 24/88 ALAC – The cymbals sounded crisp and clear in both DACs now. As before the Uber, Stevie sounded slightly stronger in the Bifrost. Pick a favorite…Now its the Ubered Bifrost! I could go on with comparisons using other songs, but the repletion would probably bore many readers. One final note, listening to the Ubered Bifrost with the DI-V3, or straight from the Mac Mini using the Toslink, seemed like less of a change to the sound than the Uber upgrade made. So if funds are limited get the Uber first!

One day I'll remember how to spell Gungnir.

Well, now that you mention it... Looking closely at the front panel of Yggdrasil there are a few interesting features to note. First, it will handle both 44.1 & 48kHz, of course. Also notice it will play up to "8x" which should mean 352.8kHz & 384kHz. On the right side of the large button it looks like there are 5 different digital input formats. The Gungar has 4 of the same symbols. The fifth appears to be AES/EBU, but no HDMI or RJ45. Then at the far right there is one more symbol. It might be a selectable filter... Hey wkhanna, wouldn't that require more switches?

maximum kahuna, I hope you enjoy the upgrades. Are you planning to compare the DACiT to the Uber'ed Bifrost, once the Bifrost is broken in? I have not heard a DACiT before, but I have read that some people like its sound more than the standard Bifrost. So I would be curious to know how the Uber and DACiT compare.

So far the Ubered Bifrost has about 120 hours on it. Like Garf, I am happier. The improvements in tone and clarity are very nice. It seems that the sound stage has increased. Vocals sound more like I am in the room with the artists. One of the songs that showed that each DAC was challenged was: Jack Johnson, Brushfire Fairytales, Middle Man – 24/48 ALAC – The Uber is a bit like the FrankenDAC taking the best parts of both prior DACs. The transients are much better in the Uber than the standard Bifrost. The high frequencies are more present and crisp than the standard Bifrost. The sound is also much fuller than the XDA-1 in the lower and mid ranges. That fuller low end is coming through without sounding muddy or over done. More breaking in to go...

Today I upgraded the Bifrost, that I have owned for a year now, to an Uber analog board. Liking it so far, but I will let it burn in before part two of this review is written. Reasoning for my approach: I like to have an understanding of what I buy from other owners of a product. So, I usually read a lot before I buy. With audio hardware, the purchase is a little tougher without auditioning the product. I prefer to consider comparisons to other audio hardware to understand the how the character of one item might sound compared to others. I thought that it may be helpful to others on the forum to have a before and after reference of this upgrade. This is the first of a two part review. The idea is this: Since I can't compare the pre-Uber to the post directly, I thought that I could use another similar sounding DAC as a reference, and compare the pre and post Uber against it. So, below are some thoughts on the unmodified Bifrost. Set-up Mac Mini 2011, 8GB RAM, feeding Audirvana Plus 1.4.9.10 from iTunes 11.0.3 in integrated mode. Audirvana in integer mode 1, power of 2 oversampling so all music to the DACs is either 24/176 or 24/192. Music on a Netgear Duo NAS. Audio-GD's DI-V3S & DI-PSU used for USB input and SPDIF coax output. DACs: Emotiva XDA-1 (early version with linear volume), Schiit Bifrost with no USB and baseline output card for this first part of the review. Cables are a basic low buck random assortment Old but wonderful Stax SRD-X and SR-X Mk-3 I think the reason there have only been a few comparisons between these two DACs is that the sound is very close between both. Tonally they are similar tending toward neutral, in my opinion, with the Bifrost favoring the lower midrange. The XDA-1 produces a cleaner and more distinct cymbal strike, and seems better at high frequency transients. Neither sound metallic, or make me brace for the next drum/cymbal hit or hiss into the microphone. Both have a similarly cast image width. Had to switch back and forth during the playing of a song to hear the differences more clearly. The front-to-back stereo image placement tends toward the middle of my head for both, Bifrost a bit more to the rear than the XDA. For most songs either DAC makes me very happy. I favor one or the other on only a few songs. Impressions in no particular order, just written while listening: Crash Test Dummies, God Shuffled His Feet, Psychic – 16/44 ALAC – Both were similar, but the Schiit showed more of the reverberation and a slightly richer midrange. Amber Rubarth, Sessions from the 17th Ward, Novacain – 24/96 ALAC – Damn close... Drumming showed more of the high frequency whack with the XDA-1, but more of the body of the drum (size of the box being hit?) in the Bifrost. Bifrost seemed slightly muddy on the low end compared to the XDA-1. Bifrost brought the vocals and guitar out a little more. Andres Shcoll, Vivaldi: Nisi Dominus, Salve Regina Etc., Sicut Erat In Principio – 16/44 ALAC –Was there a difference? The Bifrost may have had a little more chestiness to vocals... Buckwheat Zydeco, Jackpot !, Buck's Going To Trenchtown (Album Version) – 16/44 ALAC – XDA-1 sounded cleaner by articulating the deep bass together with vocals a little better. Bifrost was slightly muddy. Buena Vista Social Club, Buena Vista Social Club, Dos Gardenias – 16/44 ALAC – Bifrost was better at pulling out the piano in the background, and combined with the stronger rendering of the vocals was a bit more engaging. Jack Johnson, Brushfire Fairytales, Middle Man – 24/48 ALAC – The Bifrost's downward shift in midrange was fuller but a bit too round. XDA-1 is a bit flatter, but the midrange is a bit dry. Stevie Wonder, Stevie Wonder's OriginalMusiquarium 1, Superstition – 16/44 ALAC – I'm sorry, XDA who? The horns, vocals and guitar were all much more musical in the Bifrost. Love the way this song sounds. Michael Franks, Dragonfly Summer, I love Lucy – 16/44 ALAC – The Bifrost portrayed its stronger midrange, but the XDA sounded cleaner with the string plucks coming out clearly. Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble, Texas Flood, Lenny – 24/88 ALAC – The cymbals sounded crisp and clear in the XDA, but a bit smoothed over in the Bifrost. Stevie sounded slightly stronger in the Bifrost. Pick a favorite...NO Way! As another point of reference, when I purchased the Bifrost for the Stax rig (the XDA-1 normally lives in the family room stereo) I was using optical SPDIF to connect to either the Bifrost or the XDA. With optical I clearly preferred the Bifrost for two aspects: the bass was cleaner than the XDA-1 even though it was slightly less, and the Bifrost had better timing (temporal coherence is the way Srajan Ebaen described it). The better timing produced a more engaging stereo sound. With the DI-V3 now in the mix, the timing was no longer a difference between DACs, and the XDA-1 bass was clean and strong. With the DI-V3 the differences were much smaller. The DI-V3 improved the music's focus over the direct SPDIF from the Mini. The edges of transients were more defined, cymbal and drum strikes sounded sharper, bass notes had more snap. What I wrote to Kingwa was: First, I noticed that the sound is more analog and smoother. Even some older 1980's era CD music sounds better on my Stax SR-X Mk 3 headphones than it ever had. Also I think that there is a little more detail in the music across all frequencies. As I have read before, but did not expect being a bit doubtful, the bass response is better. The bass may be slightly stronger than before, but I think that the biggest impact is the snap and tightness that the bass and drums have.

Lee, Thanks for your input. Glad the screeching is solved. Your perspective of the Uber'ed Bifrost against other references is very helpful.

Thanks maximum kahuna, I checked out the other forum's reviews. That helped but didn't provide as much comparative review as I was hoping for. So, I did the same as you, and ordered the upgrade... It seems like the combination will be close to the Gungnir's single ended performance, but the reviews are pretty thin on details.

My experience is like most others. My 2011 mini barely breaks a sweat while listening to A+. Here is a screen shot of a file loading into memory (on the left side) and typical CPU load while playing (on the right side). As you can see, A+ is minor load in comparison to the other programs that I am running simultaneously. It works great on my modest head phone rig with all the other processes running. Though now that I think about it... maybe I need to knock off all of the other processes for the stand alone difference to really shine. So far, that difference has not been as huge for me as it seems to be for others here.