Gumby v Yggy Analog 2
 

Gumby (early November 2017, starts with B) vs Yggy Analog 2 (late August 2018)

Its Yggy for me at this point. YMMV. I can see people preferring Gumby. I am not experienced with lots of DACs and have definitely lost hearing.

On Yggy break-in. I’m at about 375 hours this morning-- the pressure/fatigue is receding and the teenager falsettos are gone. Various people say 500-800 hours to reach stable performance, and I believe it will get there now and am not as concerned about passing the return window. This is similar to my experience with Gumby. Why post now before reaching at least 500? Well, I exhaust all my patience at work. As impressive as the first few notes were, it would have gone back if it hadn’t begun to smooth (or burned a few more db off my hearing). I left it playing the whole time so far, only listening on the weekends. It certainly doesn't have the delta sigma haze. I might have to reconsider if it doesn't keep mellowing in its highs. I'm still being careful with the volume (not cranking as high as with Gumby); the dog hasn't been spending as much time in the room with me.

Differences:
Additional detail, clarity and depth. Its just a little more, but that little seems to be enough shadowing to add more dimension to the painting. 3D like everyone says.

Bass has more. (Tubas on Prokofiev’s Dance of the Knights have deeper umph and slight tingling)

Stage: my room got longer/deeper, maybe a smidge wider or not. The instruments/singers moved back a bit from each other (more air), and there seemed to be more height differences (soft guitar seemed to move higher to the right on Bowie’s Somebody Up There). Think of a cone. The first two thirds from the listener seemed equivalent between the two. But the last third was deeper with the Yggy, I heard further into the room.

Singers seemed more alive. You heard just a little more of them and sounds they make—like a little more of a quiver in their voice that you may not have noticed as clearly on Gumby (Nina Simone I put a spell on you, or Andy Gibb Desire). The Gumby has more soul (Zapp and Roger, Heard it through the Grapevine), I don’t know if this will change as more hours accrue, I hope it does (I can't smell the sweat just yet).

Music that has more dynamics suffer in comparison once hearing on Yggy you dont want to go back (Prince, Erotic City).

Clarity really helps everything from understanding lyrics to guitar plucks, even bass guitars seem more to have more decay on notes (Angelo Badalamenti, The Nightingale).

Definitely a quieter background (Depeche Mode, Personal Jesus 7”). I can almost see a different smoothing curve as I listen between the two.
The Gumby is softer as it smooths things with a little less detail and punch and likely better for harsher recordings and some styles of music as others note. I haven't compared them with the MC275 yet.

Reviewers say the Yggy demands more attention. The detail can be distracting. I suspect I will get use to that (is it a soft music in the background kind of DAC). I had a spacey walk at the dog park after listening all day (my brain getting reprogrammed).

Great thoughts.

In your write up, you mention you could see some people preferring the Gumby.

In the case of the Gumby, what do you think folks that would prefer the Gumby would have as reasons they’d like the Gumby over the Yggy?

Liking a more casual sound. For example, I listened to B&W 803D3 and the XR100s together. The 803s had more resolution and oomph, but were too forward for me and caused them to seem a bit less tuneful (and they cost more). Longer term background music (resolution is distracting). Older recordings (although Yggy does better with well recorded ones).

Other reasons I need to wait a few hundred more hours to answer.

You might need to think about the MEN220 if in path.

That makes sense - more laid back.

What do you mean about thinking about the MEN220 if it is in the path? (In my case, I do have an MEN220 between the preamp and the amp-)

Well... my Delta Sigma hypochondria led me to trade in my MEN220 on the theory that it was introducing DS back into the path. Listening with the Gumby, overall I preferred it without the MEN220– tonally/sharpness. Spatially, it sounded better with the MEN220. It could have been in my head. I had also changed axis of the room and added treatment so the MEN220 added less than it had. If there were an R2R version I’d be sorely tempted.

You’d need to consult more knowledgeable people here to see if they think there could be any signature added by the MEN220 A-D-A conversion. 24 bits is a lot of resolution.

That makes sense.

I don't think I'd be without the MEN220 as I have a really tough room (and I need the active crossover for dual subs)...but food for thought.

Is it true that one of the Schiit founders prefers the Gumby over the Yiggy?

It was, Jason is listening to Bifrost 2 of late. Its supposed to be close Yggy in performance; he says Bifrost to is "Bifrost 2 is damn near a desktop Yggdrasil for $699, plus it has super-easy upgrading for the future. Plus, it sounds friggin' amazing." Jason tends to prefer a slightly warmer rather than perfectly neutral presentation, which why he preferred (Bifost &) Gumby to Yggy. He also likes tube amplification for the same reason.

I have two Gumbys, one in home theater, and one in my main system for steaming Amazon music.

They are on the warm side and that is what I desire in sound playback.

Could not be happier.

I concur on the MEN220 with Schiit. I demoed it with system below--better transients/bass (which is probably what you describe as "spatially.."), but lost sparkle on the high end (your "tonality/sharpness"). I returned it without buying