[JoelT]

   
I much prefer to have a DAC and headphone amp stack rather than having the headphone amp built into the DAC.

Generally speaking, I completely agree with you. That said, there are a few potential benefits to an integrated DAC - for example: Less initial up-front cost if one doesn't already own a DAC, a smaller footprint, the ability to use the combo as a secondary listening device in another room, a simpler entry point in to head-fi if one doesn't already own a DAC. Obviously a major downside is that integrated DAC's are generally not great performers. For example, the integrated in my WA7 is about on par with the Audioquest Dragonfly. The Gungnir is in a different league, no question or dispute there.  

 

[amnesiac75]

I also have questions about jriver 19 settings for my gungnir. Currently I am using ASIO with no boxes checked, buffering set to 50ms and in ASIO control panel I have bit depth set to 32/32 bits and latency set to 10 ms. For the first month or so with the gungnir I was using WASAPI with bit depth set to automatic (32 bits) and buffering set to 100 ms and it sounded fine but going back and forth tonight I prefer ASIO not a huge difference but better sounding to my ears. I would love it if anyone else could compare these two settings and see what they think or maybe suggest something better.

 

[OICWUTUDIDTHAR]

Okay so, using FLAC files and WASAPI with foobar 2000, I cannot tell a difference between my modi and gungnir, is something broken?

 

[Barry S]

Okay so, using FLAC files and WASAPI with foobar 2000, I cannot tell a difference between my modi and gungnir, is something broken?

Can you describe your setup ( amp, headphones) and configuration? The Modi is pretty good and from my own A/B testing with the Gungnir, it may be hard to tell them apart with some amp/headphone combinations.

 

[OICWUTUDIDTHAR]

asgard 2 amp, headphones ive used are the dt990 600ohm, he500, he400, hd650

 

[Defiant00]

I'd expect you to hear a difference, but it's also rather music-dependent whether you actually do.

 

[OICWUTUDIDTHAR]

  I'd expect you to hear a difference, but it's also rather music-dependent whether you actually do.

 
hmm, what type of music exactly? Im not even doing blind testing, just switching the sound output right in front of my eyes and I still can't hear a difference. Maybe I just don't have the golden ear? Seems like if the DAC is well engineered and neutrally transparent any difference is negligible. I found the same thing with amps, I honestly can't tell a difference between two well engineer amps (magni,o2, etc) The only I difference I can tell is there power output and gain, which is why i went the asgard 2, i like how much driving power it has as well as the gain switch. That being said, I honestly can't tell them apart from the o2,magni or even the burson soloist. I am also considering getting a valhalla 2 since it pushes almost 400mw in 600ohms, thats gotta be beautiful.
 
It seems to me like a lot of the folks on here has expectation bias and make things up in their own head to justice there purchases, or whos knows, maybe my ears are just broken lol.

 

[Defiant00]

   
hmm, what type of music exactly? Im not even doing blind testing, just switching the sound output right in front of my eyes and I still can't hear a difference. Maybe I just don't have the golden ear? Seems like if the DAC is well engineered and neutrally transparent any difference is negligible. I found the same thing with amps, I honestly can't tell a difference between two well engineer amps (magni,o2, etc) The only I difference I can tell is there power output and gain, which is why i went the asgard 2, i like how much driving power it has as well as the gain switch. I am also considering getting a valhalla 2 since it pushes almost 400mw in 600ohms, thats gotta be beautiful.
 
It seems to me like a lot of the folks on here has expectation bias and make things up in their own head to justice there purchases, or whos knows, maybe my ears are just broken lol.

 
Personally I have a hard time hearing a difference between any reasonable quality DAC as well, so you won't get any argument about that from me. With that said, I'd just suspect in general that it might be easier to hear differences on well-mastered music.

 

[OICWUTUDIDTHAR]

   
Personally I have a hard time hearing a difference between any reasonable quality DAC as well, so you won't get any argument about that from me. With that said, I'd just suspect in general that it might be easier to hear differences on well-mastered music.

 
Yes I agree, the main issue now is a lot of the music is poorly mastered, espeicially the mainstream stuff.
 
That being said, when changing headphones, I can hear a dramatic difference as opposed to switching amps,dacs.

 

[madwolfa]

I also have questions about jriver 19 settings for my gungnir. Currently I am using ASIO with no boxes checked, buffering set to 50ms and in ASIO control panel I have bit depth set to 32/32 bits and latency set to 10 ms. For the first month or so with the gungnir I was using WASAPI with bit depth set to automatic (32 bits) and buffering set to 100 ms and it sounded fine but going back and forth tonight I prefer ASIO not a huge difference but better sounding to my ears. I would love it if anyone else could compare these two settings and see what they think or maybe suggest something better.

 
There shouldn't be any difference, both are bit-perfect.

 

[madwolfa]

  Yes I agree, the main issue now is a lot of the music is poorly mastered, espeicially the mainstream stuff.

 
And that's why people think vinyl is superior to CD when in fact it's NOT. It's just the recordings are mastered much better for vinyl.
But yeah, nowadays I have to download vinyl rips mostly, because 90% of CDs are garbage. Which is a bummer, really.

 

[OICWUTUDIDTHAR]

   
There shouldn't be any difference, both are bit-perfect.

 
 
I don't think I can tell a difference between bitperfect and not bitperfect windows audio manger does a really good job of sample rate conversion to the point where nothing is distorted.
 

   
And that's why people think vinyl is superior to CD when in fact it's NOT. It's just the recordings are mastered much better for vinyl.
But yeah, nowadays I have to download vinyl rips mostly, because 90% of CDs are garbage. Which is a bummer, really.

 
sadly a lot of the vinyl really isnt really vinyl, its still a digital master transfered on to vinyl

 

[madwolfa]

 
sadly a lot of the vinyl really isnt really vinyl, its still a digital master transfered on to vinyl

 
I don't have anything against a good digital master. My point is they're usually prepared much better for vinyl (no compression/much higher dynamic range).
 
Bad compression artifacts/loudness war is not an inherent issue of digital mastering. It's an issue of sound engineers and recording companies.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

 

[OICWUTUDIDTHAR]

   
I don't have anything against a good digital master. My point is they're usually prepared much better for vinyl (no compression/much higher dynamic range).
 
Bad compression artifacts/loudness war is not an inherent issue of digital mastering. It's an issue of sound engineers and recording companies.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

 
ya I agree but what im saying is a poorly mastered digital track transfered onto vinyl isnt going to fix it.

 

[madwolfa]

   
ya I agree but what im saying is a poorly mastered digital track transfered onto vinyl isnt going to fix it.

 
Of course not, but they usually don't do that. Vinyl guys normally have much better equipment to start with, so the engineers orient on much higher common denominator.
 
Also it's naturally much harder to cut something very loud and compressed onto the master lacquer. It's physically hard for playback too.
So the media itself is more demanding on the mastering quality, whereas CD would allow putting any garbage on it without any physical limitations....