Schiit Gungnir and Bifrost Multibit Comparison (And HQPlayer Closed-Form Filter Comparison)

I really like the new Schiit multibit DACs. While I've only heard the Yggdrasil at meets or at Big Sound (read: unfamiliar setups), I have had a wonderful chance to compare the Bifrost and Gungnir multibit DACs at home for a while now, which I'll continue to refer to as the Bifrost Multibit and Gungnir Multibit. While I like both for different reasons, you might be wondering how they really compare and which is better for your budget.

Gear (skip if not concerned, though note use of SPDIF converter for all tests - no straight USB)

Laptop/Tablet - Win10 tablet, 8", quad-core, full USB out OR Acer Cloudbook 11" Whatever w/ BunsenLabs Linux + Liquorix kernel
Player - Primarily JRiver Media Center or HQPlayer for upsampling filter tests
Other Source - CI Audio Transient Mk2 without LPSU - always used this for both DACs, never straight USB or other inputs
Amp - EC Super 7
Headphone - Modded HD650
Cables - Have no balanced-capable amp, so had to use SE. Make note of this, given balanced input is known to be better out of Gungnir Multibit. I did not have a XLR->RCA transformer converter box thing to try.
Warm up - Both had it. Lots of it. Days worth, at least.

UPDATE 1/31/2016 - See bottom of post for direct USB vs. USB->SPDIF comparisons.

Bifrost Multibit vs. Gungnir Multibit Listening Tests

- Most readily apparent difference is the relative lack of extension on the Bifrost Multibit, mostly in bass. It doesn't reach as low as the Gungnir Multibit.

- Bifrost Multibit sounds softer in terms of bass impact, slam, power, and as said before, extension. Despite this, it still has shares some of the traits in terms of bass tautness that seem inherent to the Schiit multibit + digital filter combo. Sure, it's not as tight as Gungnir Multibit and is woolier, but I'm just saying you can hear some of that magic still.

- Bifrost Multibit has less micro and macro dynamics. My notes say "dynamics sound more grey on Bifrost Multibit," whatever that means. I don't remember why I wrote that, but, eh, OK!

- Bifrost Multibit sounds a bit more midrange focused than Gungnir Multibit. In particular, Bifrost Multibit has this sort of upper-mid, lower-treble emphasis that makes it sound more grating and less mature and refined than Gungnir Multibit. This is another very important difference in my mind.

- In relation to above, Bifrost Multibit sounds a bit grainier and more strained that Gungnir Multibit. Gungnir Multibit just puts out music like it's not even trying.

- Despite everyone saying the Gungnir Multibit is noticeably more neutral than Bifrost Multibit, I actually hear them as both being slightly warm. Very, very similar. I am curious if this has something to do with most people using straight USB, where as I find the Transient Mk2 to offer consistently better performance than almost all built-in USB solutions. I am too lazy to try straight USB now. And, no, the Transient is not what I'd call a warm converter. Anyway...

- The Gungnir Multibit is actually easier to listen to for me because the response seems smoother and better integrated from top to bottom, where as the Bifrost Multibit can get a bit shouty. Yes, I know, you can't measure stuff like that.

- Gungnir Multibit sounds thicker and more powerful than Bifrost Multibit yet clearer, smoother, and more taut from top to bottom.

- Gungnir Multibit has a much more interesting (or better, or moar) soundstage presentation, separation, air...you name it. It feels more holographic and large. Bifrost Multibit has a smaller, more in-your-face stage that doesn't always mix well with the grainier, shoutier characteristics.

- It's odd, but on some tracks, the Bifrost Multibit sounds faux-clearer than the Gungnir Multibit, as if the Gungnir Multibit has a very, very, very slightly smokey quality to it. On the other hand, the Gungnir Multibit is consistently more detailed and makes it easier to hear what's going on. I assume this is due to the different output stages. Bifrost Multibit is ultimately less transparent and trips over itself more.

- Gungnir Multibit is simply more resolving. On 16-bit material, it can be a bit less evident. But when you feed it good 24-bit material, even with SE output, it simply gives you more. Really subtle stuff like someone pushing piano pedals or the dampers lifting off the keys sound noticeably clearer on the Gungnir Multibit. I still find the Bifrost Multibit nicely detailed and resolving, though, and this is not an area I'm too concerned about. Others will care more.

- Gungnir Multibit also does really well with cymbals. Much easier to differentiate them and hear them in an almost 3D way. Very cool. Bifrost Multibit makes them sound more like the mishmashed chh, shh, tshh, ding dong sound, though that's an exaggeration, since it still has some of that magic.

- Gungnir Multibit is just better through and through and more enjoyable to listen to regardless of one's tastes (I'd think, anyway).

Summary of Subjective Comparisons

In summary, the Gungnir Multibit is the real deal. OK, well, I mean, the Yggdrasil is the real real deal, but it's almost twice the price. The Gungnir Multibit seems to get you 90% of the way there, at least, and has a slightly warmer tone to make it a bit more pleasing or euphonic to listen to (depending on one's tastes).

Gungnir Multibit is just a wonderful DAC from top to bottom. It has excellent dynamics, wonderful bass tautness and slam, a very even sounding tone from top to bottom, no digital sounding nasties (i.e. smooth, lack of grain, etc.), excellent staging, very resolving. Damn, really tough to beat this. It just gets out of the way without being super-duper analytically neutral or whatever.

Bifrost Multibit is something like 70-80% of the Gungnir Multibit, depending on what you're looking for and what you feed it. It sounds softer and less powerful than the Gungnir Multibit. It is grainier and has a sort of shouty quality to the tone that actually makes it harder to listen to than the Gungnir Multibit. Still, it's better than the vast majority of DACs out there and gives you a lot of that multibit, Schiit MegaBurrito digital filter magic for a surprisingly low price. And keep in mind that these comparisons are all relative. Just because the Bifrost Multibit is grainy relative to the Gungnir Multibit doesn't mean the Bifrost Multibit is a grainy DAC.

Which Should You Buy?

I still stand by my statements that the Bifrost Multibit is an excellent place to stop with DACs. I should have made it clear that I was thinking more of the broad audience that would even begin to consider buying any type of external DAC north of $200. I think there is a large portion of the market that wants to get their feet wet with truly good gear but doesn't want to, and never will, spend the big bucks like many crazies on this site. The Bifrost Multibit is an excellent place to reach for right away and then stop for that market segment. I still consider the Bifrost Multibit an excellent achievement for the few hundred bucks it costs.

For those that have more money to burn and want to burn it, the Gungnir Multibit is the better place to stop. I find it a more appropriate long-term, ideal DAC solution for the sorts of people on this site. And to say that for a DAC costing less than $1.5K is pretty damn impressive, considering some of you had no qualms about dumping $2.3K on the Yggdrasil...or $7K on the EC Studio. From a truly high-end, not ridiculously priced, excellent sounding, one-stop-solution, the Gungnir Multibit is a f'ing awesome DAC through and through.

What About Those Upsampling Filter Comparisons?

Oh, yeah, that. HQPlayer has recently introduced some form of closed-form filter meant to emulate what Schiit offers. Seeing as though you can upsample to 4X via software and "bypass" the Bifrost Multibit's 4X oversampling filter, this made for an excellent opportunity to compare how HQPlayer's closed-form filter stacks up.

Well, the software filter definitely shares some traits with Schiit's solution. Hard to put it into words. It's easier to focus on differences. For one, the HQPlayer filter seems a bit cooler in tone and a bit harder and more artificial with timbre. The Bifrost Multibit has a more in-your-face sort of sound and stage, but the HQPlayer filter seems to both widen the stage and flatten it. The Bifrost Multibit's native filter sounds a bit more harmonically rich and seems to keep reverb alive a bit longer. The Bifrost Multibit is more pleasing and easier to listen to via its native filter.

It really comes down to this: The HQPlayer closed-form filter sounds like an imitation, which is exactly what you'd expect from someone that's not directly involved with Schiit and can only try to make a closed-form filter based on what Schiit has said publicly. However, given some inherent similarities and that they're close enough in many ways to drive one crazy trying to compare, that could be seen as somewhat impressive. I'm also exaggerating differences for comparison's sake.

At the end of the day, though, and I'm getting into crazy audiophile territory, I simply don't like how the HQPlayer software sounds in general. JRiver Media Center sounds more natural. HQPlayer sounds more digital, cool, and hard. Same reason I don't use Foobar2000, actually. So, not only do I prefer the native Schiit filter, I prefer the sound of a different audio player regardless of filters. But it's still cool to play around with HQPlayer and worth trying yourself. I have yet to find an audio player with so many upsampling filter options!

In Closing

I don't want to compare DACs or upsampling filters for a good long while, as interesting as this was and as much as I really enjoy the Gungnir Multibit.

UPDATE 1/31/2016 - Direct USB vs. USB->SPDIF Converter into BNC on Gungnir Multibit

I was expecting this comparison to be a slog, given the Gen 2 USB input on the Schiit DACs is pretty good. It actually turned out to be one of the most noticeable source comparison tests I've done, and I've even had a couple beers tonight!

For tonight, I only compared a direct USB connection, no defuckifiers or reclockers (still waiting on Bill-P to send me back my Wyrd as of writing this), vs. the CIAudio Transient Mk2. The Transient was running off the USB power. No LPSU, though that might have made things almost too unfair. But, in many ways, the Transient does what a good defuckifier does, just that it outputs an SPDIF signal out a 75 ohm jack vs spitting out another USB connection. Would the differences be closer if I had a defuckifier on the USB line? Probably. If I don't have the send the Gungnir Multibit back before I can try that, I'll be sure to check.

Long story short, I can't think of a way the direct USB connection was better. It was literally like stepping the Gungnir Multibit up another tier. I'd have tested the Bifrost Multibit too if I still had it, but I imagine the results would have been relatively the same.

The direct USB connection definitely had a warmer, thicker sound vs the BNC input fed from the Transient Mk2. The Transient made the Gungnir Multibit sound relatively neutral and with better extension on both ends. I can see now why folks hear the Gungnir Multibit as warm and the Bifrost Multibit warmer still. My theory is the Transient made both DACs sound more tonally neutral in a good way, while still keeping some of their inherent traits.

Despite the warmer, thicker sound from direct USB, the Transient had noticeably tighter and well defined bass. To make things better, the bass had more impact and slam from the Transient. Transient made bass sound more visceral due to extra slam and tautness, where as USB was softer, more rounded, and a bit tubbier. Transient really brings out that Moffat bass.

Micro and macro dynamics improved on the Transient over direct USB. Improved sense of rhythm.

The Transient had a smoother sound overall, in a good way. Nothing was lost, just most of the grain over USB was removed. Slight bit of nasal quality on direct USB went away with Transient.

The staging was much, much larger from the Transient. I'm talking the difference of the USB being akin to having the left and ride sides of the stage extend just next to your ears (made HD650 sound like a planar with hard left/right wall of sound), with the Transient pushing that out like you had moved your hands out at least a good foot from your head AND giving the edges a less defined boundary. Depth similarly improved, as did layering capabilities. Height stayed about the same.

In other words, live music from the Transient sounded like live music in a real venue. USB made it seem like you were listening inside one of the grungy, very small, indoor venues that you used to go to all the time as a high schooler. Everything got cramped.

Tied with the staging, the direct USB connection sounding noticeably congested vs the Transient. Think of the congestion as a combination of the extra warmth, extra grain, much smaller stage, and tighter layers from the direct USB connection.

Detail retrieval was close between the two, with the Transient edging out direct USB in terms of focus and clarity. Transient in general just sounds clearer and cleaner with a slightly blacker background.

Perhaps the only thing I might give to the direct USB connection is that the Transient has the slightest hint of brightness to it, which actually works in the Gungnir Multibit's favor. And, even then, the Transient made for a more pleasant listen due to the fact it improved the sound so much over direct USB. My guess is this is due to running it off the USB cable and not yet having the LPSU to power it.

Gen 3 USB implementation is probably much more competitive...but I can't shake this feeling that it's hard to beat some of the TOTL USB->SPDIF converters when it comes to sound quality unless you totally find a way around USB. And yes, the few that have heard the Transient Mk2 compare it very favorably even to something like the Off Ramp, though I'll have to take their word for it having not heard the OR myself. I'm also curious how the Gungnir Multibit might do with a defuckifier in place, but not only at the USB input, but also with the USB->SPDIF converter.

So, yeah, I pulled out the typical audiophile terms and essentially rated the Transient Mk2 as "moar betterer" than direct USB across the board on the Gungnir Multibit, but that's just the fact of how I heard it.

 

Damn. If I knew you were going to do this epic and informative a comparison, I would have sent you a Yggdrasil too.

If I had one to send that is. Great job.

 

A) Yes, nothing better than listening for yourself. That ain't no surprise. If you find another person you often agree with or understand, then their thoughts may be useful. If you can't mesh with them, then move on. But still isn't as good as listening yourself. This is an implied rule that never needs to be stated.

B) Don't ask me how various software might sound different, if it really even does at all. Could be fooling myself. But if I'm not, then I'd say I prefer JRMC's sound.

 

XXHighEnd has, by far, the most unfriendly and ugly UI. Seriously, it's worth trying just for the laughs. Though I do recall it sounding good, and the filter is at least interesting in concept.

 

If $1300 is a goal you're able and patient enough to work your way up to through savings, and if the thought of spending that much on a DAC doesn't bother you (some are adverse to spending that much regardless of whether or not they can comfortable afford or save up to it), the Gungnir Multibit is worth considering. Yes, even if you still only use SE out. If that's too far out of reach, Bifrost Multibit is still an excellent option. It will come down to the individual to decide which is the best option for them.