Schiit Wyrd USB Power Isolator Review

  • Thread starter Thread starter mauidan
  • Start date Start date
Hard to say from afar what happened, but I think it was someone getting slightly too emotional and not calming down before taking to the keyboard. You can probably mingle with this business pressures too I guess. Unfortunately, things stick around on the net and I think it reflects badly on the Wyrd manufacturer...

Yeah, your probably at least partly correct for sure and I think part of the problem was bad form by the reviewer as well, in my opinion.

None of us know the inside of either company well enough to dig in on any one side and certainly not well enough to fan the flames of whatever is going on. It's best to let them work it out. I don't know why Mr. Moffat wrote what he did exactly, but the door was opened by the review so he chose to write in. On one hand one really can't blame the guy. On the other, perhaps it would have been better to not take it public.
 
Yeah, your probably at least partly correct for sure and I think part of the problem was bad form by the reviewer as well, in my opinion.

None of us know the inside of either company well enough to dig in on any one side and certainly not well enough to fan the flames of whatever is going on. It's best to let them work it out. I don't know why Mr. Moffat wrote what he did exactly, but the door was opened by the review so he chose to write in. On one hand one really can't blame the guy. On the other, perhaps it would have been better to not take it public.

I think your assessment is correct. But then again, in reviews, we usually like to hear about similar devices for similar purposes, and seeing that Michael is preparing the series of articles to culminate with the combinations thereof, I don't think he was wrong in making the mention - he sure will have to mention at least these two together again.

I think it might be the ugly side of business we're seeing, seen it a lot elsewhere and audio is no different.

Alex from Uptone responded quite well I thought. He's a cool guy.
 
I think your assessment is correct. But then again, in reviews, we usually like to hear about similar devices for similar purposes, and seeing that Michael is preparing the series of articles to culminate with the combinations thereof, I don't think he was wrong in making the mention - he sure will have to mention at least these two together again.

I think it might be the ugly side of business we're seeing, seen it a lot elsewhere and audio is no different.

Alex from Uptone responded quite well I thought. He's a cool guy.

I still think it's poor form, but I'm not a reviewer. I think it should be up to us the reader or consumer to note similar devices.

I don't know Alex and Uptone, but I agree that his response was well thought, cordial and polite and he even mentioned that he admires Schiit, what more could one want? There are many very nice manufactures in audio including Schiit (they are one that I have spoken with a few times). That's why I was 1) surprised somewhat at Mr. Moffat's response and 2) I still say the door was held open by the way the review was done.

None of this changes my opinion of Schiit because I can see beyond it, but the problem is that many folks can not (at least without great struggle) in this day and age and that is the by-product that hurts the industry.
 
Personally, it changed my perception of Moffat and his team to the negative. These are quite serious accusations.

I don't think I'll ever consider their products.

The Regen is however high on my wish list if I stick to USB (which is not a given).
 
Norman,

You missed my intent. I was not weighing in on whether Uptone or Wyre is the fibber, I was pointing at you given the preposterous nature of another one of your claims.

So Norman says: "Uptone are the only experts in this very specialist emerging area."

I respond by calling BS.

Norman provides the following statement by Alex at Uptone in support of his claim.

The REGEN/Wyrd overlap is simply a case of great minds thinking alike.
Sincerely,
Alex Crespi
UpTone Audio LLC"

So Uptone "are the only experts" but when Uptone is commenting about why another product is so very similar to the Regen, Uptone themselves admit "great mids think a like." Hmmmm so that might imply the other great mind might also know a little bit about digital connections??? Do you think?? Before you start with the marketing babble about Uptone's unique focus on impedance and SI (as if other designers have no idea what that means and do not consider it in there architecture) why don't you try telling this to Larry Gullman, Andreas Koch, Michael Pflaumer, Gordon Rankin and Mike Moffat or any of the other myriad of designers that live and breath digital signal paths every day.
 
Personally, it changed my perception of Moffat and his team to the negative. These are quite serious accusations.

I don't think I'll ever consider their products.

The Regen is however high on my wish list if I stick to USB (which is not a given).

I don't think Mr.Moffat is going lose any sleep.
 
Larry Gullman, Andreas Koch, Michael Pflaumer, Gordon Rankin and Mike Moffat or any of the other myriad of designers that live and breath digital signal paths every day.

Who of these have specifically frequency optimised the PDN around their USB Receiver PHY?
 
Personally, it changed my perception of Moffat and his team to the negative. These are quite serious accusations.

I don't think I'll ever consider their products.

The Regen is however high on my wish list if I stick to USB (which is not a given).

This is exactly what I am talking about.
No, I'm not yelling at you or anything of course, but have you ever spoken to anyone at Schiit? Have you even so much as looked at the website? Do you know anything about their products? Or are you basing your opinion on this one confusing event?

Mr. Moffats "accusations" or not, are separate from the products and service and the rest of the team at Schiit. I don't think what has happened with this has any reflection on the products. Even Alex from Uptone is purchasing one of Schiit's pricier items for his own use as he stated in his response. This leads me to believe that perhaps the hatchet will soon be buried. I would not think that Mr. Moffat would refuse Alex's money, if he does than that only shows him to be a fool, but has no reflection on the products.

Naturally, it's your choice alone as to what to consider and I don't fault you as it is the same for all of us. I'm just pointing out what the decision is based on. If Schiit had crappy service or were pushy or had questionable product, I would not consider them either. However, none of that is the case.
Same for any company, even if I knew the money I paid for something only solely went to some evil twat or political organization or politician, I would not do business with that company. Again, not the case with this one nor with Uptone, I'm sure.
How would I know? Easy, it all rolls downhill, if you have some messed up person leading a company it will show in the service, employees and how they interact and probably the product as well.
 
Originally Posted by wisnon
Wow, what interesting talk about i2s and Signal integrity. Let's see this dates back to...Aug, 2013!
that cant be right now, can it?
Q&A with John Swenson. Part 2: Are Bits Just Bits?
Next let’s look at the other inputs to the DAC chip, such as the I2S signals. Those signals might have quite a bit of jitter depending on where they come from. Even though the main clock is supposed to be the arbiter of timing, these other inputs can also affect the internal timing. Each one of those signals has a return current back to wherever it came from, creating ground plane noise to the DAC chip. They also create noise on the internal chip traces from the transistors receiving those signals. All of this creates noise the chip sees whose spectrum is related to the spectrum of the jitter on the I2S signals. So not only is jitter on the master clock important, but so is jitter on the I2S signals. This is important to realize, jitter on ALL input signals to the DAC chip can modify the timing internal to the chip.
So in order to fix this jitter on the I2S signals we “reclock” them with a flip flop clocked by the master clock. BUT the signals going into the flop also cause ground plane noise with a spectrum related to the jitter on the inputs, AND some of the transistors inside the flop are also switching based on the input signals, adding to the ground plane noise correlated to the “jittery” inputs. So why bother reclocking? It DOES decrease jitter, it just doesn’t eliminate it. If the I2S signals have quite a bit of jitter, the reclocking can cut it down by quite a bit, but there is STILL jitter on the output that is correlated to the input jitter AND there is noise on the ground plane related to the input signals that can influence the clock, clock mux, and DAC chip. So while reclocking can help, it is not a panacea.
So now the crux of the matter, how can what goes into the USB receiver affect any of this? In several ways: packet jitter, edge jitter, PLLs. I’ll go over each of these.
Packet jitter is the difference in the arrival time of packets to the receiver chip. USB packets are transmitted over the bus at either 1000 per second (full speed mode) or 8000 per second (high speed mode). Every time one of those packets hits the receiver a lot of activity happens inside the receiver chip.

Here we go again with the non-sequiturs. Norman, JS is talking about how usb packet jitter impacts the I2S used in the internal feed to the chip!! Our discussion was about asynchronous connections between a source and the dac input. Specifically the fact that I2S when used for these purposes is not riddled with all of the incumbent problems from packet noise like a usb connection. Why would you refer to the internal dac chip connection with regard to this discussion?? Just because the preferred approach for chip connection is i2s? Surely you see the irrelevance of this argument. And by the way, of course anything made of copper is going to be impacted by jitter when the it is fed with jitter. This is not an outgrowth of the I2s protocol like packet noise is with usb. I2S's excellent performance in its role in feeding chips is why it is the standard for internal chip feeds. Or are you now going to argue chips should be fed with something else?
 
Have you even so much as looked at the website? Do you know anything about their products? Or are you basing your opinion on this one confusing event?

I know quite a few things about their products and was even considering one of their products at one point in time, wrote to them asking whether they would support double DSD at the time they released a DSD64 only DAC.

Since I now own a DAC capable of Quad DSD native, I don't need their product. I went with iFi and I'm rather happy about the products and how the team at iFi treats me as a customer.

Even Alex from Uptone is purchasing one of Schiit's pricier items for his own use as he stated in his response.

He mentioned he was considering one.

This leads me to believe that perhaps the hatchet will soon be buried.

Let's hope so.

Same for any company, even if I knew the money I paid for something only solely went to some evil twat or political organization or politician, I would not do business with that company.

The allegations were serious enough for me, but that's my opinion as I already mentioned above.
 
Who of these have specifically frequency optimised the PDN around their USB Receiver PHY?

None. I did not claim they did; but I can tell you they generally do not spill the internal design parameters of their devices all over the computer audiophile site (for obvious reasons) and IMO many feel they make usb, usb to glass, usb to spidf and i2s connections with SQ that is reference level. That said, I would never, ever make the statement that they are the "only experts" in the digital connection category as a whole or as it relates to a subset of the category, in this case "impedance matching and phy clean-up." No one could possibly make such a statement with a straight face because no one could know such a thing. Now if you want to make the statement that Uptone is the only one using "optimized PDN around their USB Receiver PHY" in their marketing spin then I agree 100%.
 
I know quite a few things about their products and was even considering one of their products at one point in time, wrote to them asking whether they would support double DSD at the time they released a DSD64 only DAC.

Since I now own a DAC capable of Quad DSD native, I don't need their product. I went with iFi and I'm rather happy about the products and how the team at iFi treats me as a customer.

Well, that's fair enough for me anyway.
Yes, but isn;t iFi iFi?:lol: Just messing around, couldn't resist the pun. I actually know nothing about iFi or that is I think I don't. I may know of them and not realize it.
 
Now if you want to make the statement that Uptone is the only one using "optimized PDN around their USB Receiver PHY" in their marketing spin then I agree 100%.

That's what Wisnon was talking about except it isn't 'spin'.
 
Well, that's fair enough for me anyway.
Yes, but isn;t iFi iFi?:lol: Just messing around, couldn't resist the pun. I actually know nothing about iFi or that is I think I don't. I may know of them and not realize it.

iFi is a very interesting company and there's actually a very cool strategy behind it. Not sure you're acquainted with Thorsten Loesch, but if you have done some DIY research you may come across him at TNT audio. He also posts on audioasylum to this day. I consider him one of the most knowledgeable person in the audiophile field. He is one of the main persons behind the iFi designs.

Now, iFi is even more interesting because it is a budget arm of a thoroughly forward-thinking audiophile company, AMR (Abbingdon Music Research), who make some very fine DACs and other products way, way above iFi in terms of price.

What they did was launch a series of very affordable products but with careful design and even better, trickle-down technology from proven successful implementation from the AMR products.

To give you an example of how iFi operates: they launched, a couple of years ago I believe, the most affordable and DSD128 capable little DAC, the iFi iDSD Nano.

At that time, DSD128 capability in native DSD was very rare (it still is relatively), but what they did after that is even more interesting:

They released a firmware update, which brought native DSD256 capability to that little DAC...

...for free.

The DAC itself, which uses a spectacular Burr Brown chip, is only $190.

This is incredible vision. To me, they changed the industry completely (but I have to admit those of us who like DSD greater than 64 are a niche within a niche within a niche).

For a good overview of what they packaged in $190 that comes from the bigger AMR products, the official website page of the Nano gives a good overview. The reviews around provide a good outlook on what it does. The more recent products are certainly better.

I don't see iFi and Uptone lobbing worthless accusations against competitors.
 
None. I did not claim they did

That settles it, at least for me, but you could always take the Regen, stick it in front of their DAC and see if there's an improvement with the USB input. Maybe there are people who already did that and who shared their listening impressions over at computeraudiophile.com.
 
Indeed Uptone and John are the only ones who did a rather thorough investigation, analysis, prototyping and marketing of a product which specifically deals with frequency optimisation of the PDN noise profile by focusing first and foremost on signal integrity.

The Wyrd doesn't do that at all.

The Regen does have some common parts, like the USB Hub chip, but that chip doesn't by itself resolve the frequency optimisation of the PDN in the USB receiver around the PHY.

The Regen is meant to be used near the DAC, but also has an internal noise profile (less than usual) at its PHY and PDN, so it is susceptible to the SI you feed it, and hence you could even consider feeding the Wyrd (upstream, near the computer) into the Regen to probable good effect.

Aspects of re-clocking and re-generation and clean power have been around a long time.

It is only John whom I've seen explicitly talk about the USB PHY PDN frequency optimisation, and that dates from quite a while as well over at computeraudiophile.com.

The Regen isn't claimed to solve everything (in particular, it isn't itself impervious to SI issues prior to it, it isn't claimed to do full galvanic isolation, it isn't claimed to resolve the remaining issues inherent to the USB Protocol).

But what is does is resolve something which John found to be rather large (in both formal measurements and perceived SQ) when SI is lacking and with the existing USB Receiver PHYs and PDNs. Frequency optimisation of PDNs is a known process: it's already used for high-speed network devices. However, no-one really thought of using the same in audiophile land for USB in consumer-level equipment.

In that sense, this is a very worthwhile innovation.

I2S and other stuff are not relevant to these devices.

That's what Wisnon was talking about except it isn't 'spin'.

Oops, I am sorry what I said was was, in fact, confusing and maybe wrong. Please allow me to clarify. I said they ("Uptone") are the only ones referencing optimized PDN optimization in there "marketing spin." I will explain why I used the word spin later, but for now assume I meant their "marketing jargon" or "marketing terminology," etc. I did not mean to imply that proper grounding, clean power, re-clocking, impedance matching, and PDN isolation schemes at the dac interface aren't extremely effective. That would be nonsense. As I have said, I think John Swenson's work is exceptional for the price. I just can't fathom he is the only game in town. As such, my focus was on Norman's (and now your) comments that Uptone is the "only" digital designer doing such things.

My point is that just because Uptone has decided to "market" this element of their design all over the internet and no one else does (for obvious reasons) this type of "marketing" in no way, shape, or form is evidence that other designers of reference digital interfaces don't understand these simple issues and optimize their designs accordingly.

Ergo, stating that "Uptone are the only experts as it relates to this area" is IMO absurd. No one could know this to be true. If I had to bet, I would bet a lot , the designers of products like the MSB Quad Rate DSD USB2 Interface, Playback Designs USB-X, Berkeley Alpha USB etc. etc etc. understand old school high speed network architecture and more importantly the importance of impedance and cleaning up the SI by all means at the PC, along the way to the DAC, at the DAC interface, across the PDN, Phy etc.etc.

So to be clear, can you now confirm that you recognize Uptone is the only company publicly "marketing" this angle or can you categorically state you have evidence that no other digital designer has ever addressed this matter. These two concepts are very different things. If you have such evidence, may I ask how you got it from each and every digital designer?

Now regarding use of the term spin, I may have been wrong to do so. I used it because I consider a marketing plan that is not based on accuracy to fall into this category. I am not aware that Uptone has made the claim that they are the"only" ones addressing SI this way (only you and Norman have afaik) so I may have been out of line.

Finally, sorry to confuse things by referencing my prior discussion about I2S and usb from another thread. Of course this has nothing to do with the device inquestion
 
Norman,

You missed my intent. I was not weighing in on whether Uptone or Wyre is the fibber, I was pointing at you given the preposterous nature of another one of your claims.

So Norman says: "Uptone are the only experts in this very specialist emerging area."

I respond by calling BS.

Norman provides the following statement by Alex at Uptone in support of his claim.



So Uptone "are the only experts" but when Uptone is commenting about why another product is so very similar to the Regen, Uptone themselves admit "great mids think a like." Hmmmm so that might imply the other great mind might also know a little bit about digital connections??? Do you think?? Before you start with the marketing babble about Uptone's unique focus on impedance and SI (as if other designers have no idea what that means and do not consider it in there architecture) why don't you try telling this to Larry Gullman, Andreas Koch, Michael Pflaumer, Gordon Rankin and Mike Moffat or any of the other myriad of designers that live and breath digital signal paths every day.
I dont bother responding to you anymore for several reasons. You never quite seem to understand and you tend to twist things. You show ZERO gratitutude and really have no desire to learn.

I tell you one thing and you argue…a day later someone else tells you the same thing and you thank them for it.

It is clear that we are better off giving each other a wide berth. Please enjoy you MSB which is perfect in your mind and stop trying to understand anything more. You cant improve on perfection.
 
Back
Top