ASR seems to be entirely about numbers and measurements... which I kind of understand as those are the kinds of things that at least without actually hearing the gear are the only real basis for comparison, at least as far as sound quality goes. I have to wonder if there's been much in the way of studies which show preferences of various kinds of audio architecture that don't conform to measurements? To put it simply, are there any really good studies that objectively show folks' subjective preferences for gear that isn't objectively better (which doesn't measure better)? In blindfold A/B testing would a majority of folks always choose gear that rates high on ASR's tests?
Tube users.
<nomex suit ON>
I've got nothing against measurements, but I always advocate that people should listen first, then measure. Knowing the measurements ahead of time can influence your opinion of the sound, but your listening impressions are not going to change the numbers.
Apparently, at ASR they not only measure first, they often don't listen at all. They really should be called ESR - Engineering Science Review. "Audio" involves sound and, if you don't listen to the sound, it's not audio. They might just as well be measuring microwave ovens.
A few years ago, I bought a cheap (~$50 shipped) SS Chinese preamp purely because it had remote control for volume with mute, channel switching and Bluetooth. Totally for convenience, in other words.
I had to laugh when I read a review on ASR which said it had way too much distortion - 0.0032%! The unit they recommended as an alternative cost almost 3x more and measured only 0.0005%. They conveniently ignored the fact that nobody can actually hear the difference.
Not only that, but the "better" unit was a "passive preamp", so not really a preamp at all, just a volume control with the same switching abilities. Geez, you mean a volume control has less distortion than something that involves an actual circuit? Who would've guessed?
The cheap SS Chinese unit with the remote control sounds fine and I still use it in one system, although I much prefer the sound of the "Boogie Factor" 1626 tube preamp I built.
https://www.audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/1626-preamp-build.931276/
I have no way to measure it but I wouldn't be surprised if it has 100x the distortion (probably more!) of my cheap Chinese preamp.
But even then, it doesn't matter.
When equipment is used to measure distortion, it's generally done at a single, steady, fixed frequency. It turns out that people are also more sensitive to distortion when a single frequency is used. But distortion,
when listening to music, has to be quite high in order for a person to hear it.
Here's a summary, from an article I read recently, of people's audible perception of distortion:
"
. . . our tests indicated that very small amounts of distortion (0.15 per cent) are perceptible if the program material is sufficiently simple—for example, a single pure, steady tone. Mixing two tones dramatically raised the threshold of perception to over 2 per cent. Three simultaneous tones, representing increasingly complex program material, resulted in a perception level of a surprising 4 per cent. With normally complex music, it was necessary to increase distortion to a full 6 per cent before it became just [barely]
perceptible. . . . at 6 per cent we just began to detect a "strained" quality in the singer's voice. However, even at 6 per cent, distortion was not evident on the percussive instruments. It was only at 12 per cent that distortion began to affect the sound of the guitar and cymbals. Higher [than 12%]
distortion levels caused an obvious "fuzziness" in the sound. To test the relationship of volume level to the ear's ability to detect distortion, we played the music at a very loud level with peaks exceeding 100 dB. There was no difference: distortion was again just barely audible at 12 per cent."
BTW, and FWIW, the listeners in that test were well known professional audio writers and equipment reviewers from some elite high end audio magazines. So they're likely used to listening more critically than most folks. Since I don't read those magazines I wasn't familiar with most of them. The only name I recognized was Julian Hirsch.
Just so I'm not accused of derailing the thread . . . I do have one piece of Schiit gear, a Modi Multibit DAC, which I've had for about a year now. It took so long to arrive that I almost forgot I had ordered it.
While I was waiting I ordered a Loxjie D30, since I was eager to experience some type of stand-alone DAC. This Loxjie is an earlier version than the one they now sell, although the model number is the same. The new one has that MQA technology (or whatever it's called) and costs considerably more. Sadly, the older, more basic, version is no longer offered.
The Schiit is very basic, no controls, no different filter settings, just signal in and signal out. It sounds fine, nice and smooth, but not any better or significantly different from the built in DACs in the CD players I use or the old Apple Airport Express that I sometimes stream to. BTW, the Airport Express has both analog and digital output so it can be used to stream (via Wi-Fi) to a stand-alone DAC, which is handy because the Modi doesn't have Bluetooth. Nothing wrong with the Modi, but I found it to be pretty unremarkable.
The Loxjie, which cost over $100 less, has a preamp function with remote, several filter settings, and all the same inputs as the Modi plus Bluetooth. Though I don't use headphones, it also has a headphone amp. And, to me, it sounds better. YMMV, of course.
So I'd say the Multi-bit version of the Modi is overpriced for what you get. The regular version, which is just as basic, is considerably cheaper but the Topping E30 is about the same price and has features similar to my Loxjie. It also uses the same chip as the Loxjie, so I imagine the sound is quite similar.
I probably would have returned the Modi if it actually sounded bad but they charge a 15% (?) restocking fee and you have to pay for return shipping so I figured I'd just keep it since I waited about 7 or 8 months for it to arrive.
I've never heard the Schiit preamps, but I think they used to offer a less expensive model that actually used the tubes to produce gain. The newer Saga+ ($400) is a passive preamp (just a volume control) and the tubes are used only as buffers, which is only helpful if you have a SS or Class D amp that needs a low impedance preamp. From the user reports I've read, the tubes don't alter the sound much, if at all, when you switch them in. I've heard others say the same about tube buffers in general. I think I'd just as soon use my little ~$50 Chinese SS pre, which also has low output impedance, remote control with mute, channel switching and, unlike the Saga+, Bluetooth.
It looks like their only current model whose tubes actually do pre-amplify is the Freya+, which costs $850 plus shipping. It has some nice features and it looks very sleek but, given my experience with the Modi, I think I'd look around to see if there are alternatives that offer better value.
I've heard good things about the Frenzel SPX72. It's not sleek looking at all and I don't think it has remote control, but it might be worth a look. It may even have a phono stage. I think I also read that it's point to point wired instead of using a circuit board so if anything ever needs repair it's easy to do.
If a tiny surface mounted part goes bad on a circuit board they're almost impossible to replace. I don't know, maybe techs all have microscopes now, but I think standard practice is to just toss the whole board and replace it. But if the board gets damaged there's no guarantee that a replacement will be available. To many people that's not a concern though, just toss the whole thing and buy something else. YMMV, as always.