State-of-the-Art Digital

[Al M.]

Al, I think you are referring to the concert you attended with me and my father. Yes, that was a great experience and a wonderful concert. I wonder if the "metallic overlay of timbre" to the baritone's voice was the effect of the reflection from that huge glass front wall behind the singer affording the audience a spectacular view of the ocean beyond. I have been conflicted watching the sunset while trying to listen to a string quartet in that hall. I have heard concerts there, some with the curtain drawn, others with the glass exposed, and the sonics can be quite different.

Of course, this does not change your observation of the quality of his voice as heard in that space. I would only suggest that it is unusual to have such a large wall of glass behind the performers in a concert hall. Great for the visuals, not so great for the sonics. Even though his voice sounded as it did, I would not expect many recordings to sound like that.

The challenge is identified in what you wrote, highlighted in bold.

Yes, that was the concert, Peter! It was indeed wonderful, and they timed it perfectly, so that it started with sunlight and ended with the sun setting over the ocean. I bought the CD of Winterreise with the same singer (different pianist), eventually listened to it more recently and enjoy it very much. The singer does have a somewhat cool but interesting timbre at times, interpretation is great.

 

[morricab]

Al, I think you are referring to the concert you attended with me and my father. Yes, that was a great experience and a wonderful concert. I wonder if the "metallic overlay of timbre" to the baritone's voice was the effect of the reflection from that huge glass front wall behind the singer affording the audience a spectacular view of the ocean beyond. I have been conflicted watching the sunset while trying to listen to a string quartet in that hall. I have heard concerts there, some with the curtain drawn, others with the glass exposed, and the sonics can be quite different.

Of course, this does not change your observation of the quality of his voice as heard in that space. I would only suggest that it is unusual to have such a large wall of glass behind the performers in a concert hall. Great for the visuals, not so great for the sonics. Even though his voice sounded as it did, I would not expect many recordings to sound like that.

The challenge is identified in what you wrote, highlighted in bold.

Are you sure there wasn’t hidden amplification? Brightness from a reflection is one thing but a metallic overlay on unamplified voice is not something I have ever heard before.

 

[Al M.]

Are you sure there wasn’t hidden amplification? Brightness from a reflection is one thing but a metallic overlay on unamplified voice is not something I have ever heard before.

Acousticsguru confirmed the same experience:

I used to be a more avid concertgoer than nowadays (needless to say, there aren't any concerts these days), but know exactly what you're referring to, a metallic "bite" in voices which I'm hearing even more as singers grow older, certain pianos etc.

 

[morricab]

I used to be a more avid concertgoer than nowadays (needless to say, there aren't any concerts these days), but know exactly what you're referring to, a metallic "bite" in voices which I'm hearing even more as singers grow older, certain pianos etc. That's got nothing to do with what I meant when I mentioned digital artifacts such as grain, hash, and the resulting modulations onto the signal. As a matter of fact, said quality of hearing a metallic sound will soften or broaden sonically with low-level noise/distortion based modulation, resulting in less of a "ping" as I call it.

A system that manages to conceal actual digital artifacts will no doubt conceal more than just those. I couldn't live with the resulting loss of differentiation. Having said that, I've heard beautifully-sounding source components using (at this this stage of their evolution) sufficiently resolving chip sets, but e.g. output tube stages that add a moderate amount of harmonic distortion, which on balance achieve exactly what you're saying without the addition of any nasties. As I alluded to earlier, I wouldn't want to compare interpretations of a Piano or Violin Concerto using a DAC like that, as one is effectively differentiating subtleties that have a lesser impact on the specific sound of an instrument or voice or sound of nature than e.g. tube rolling. But since that's not what the respective owners do (some are posting here and may read this, so I'm being careful in my choice of words), the definition of "real beauty of sound" becomes a moving target, that's all.

For the most part, my definition of what it means to me is the same as yours. But I could easily, and may in fact as I grow older, add such a source component to my system - for some types of music, some qualities of recordings, not to mention mood and purpose. One problem I have with highly resolving, natural-sounding gear is I find it distractive in the sense that my attention is inevitably drawn into the music, so much so I've turned off playback as I'm typing these words. It's very much the same as when I go to a concert where it wouldn't cross my mind to pull out my smart phone and check my mails. One might say it's what one does out of respect for the musicians, and others in the audience, but the truth is, I wouldn't be an audiophile if I were one to enjoy a state of divided attention.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

The problem I have with many so called SOTA digital products is that while the resolution lets you hear arguably everything on the recording, there is a subtle overlay that still screams “synthetic “. Tone is rarely on target compared to what is heard live. Could be the recording but there is often a sameness that is a giveaway. Having the ease and naturalness of live (unamplified I am referring to) but not quite the resolution is the kind of trade off I willingly make...a Living Voice/Kondo system is one that gives the listener the sensation and immersion of live without microscopic resolution of details...or are they missing?? The absence of artifacts leads to greater realism than the presence of more “detail” “information “.

 

[morricab]

Acousticsguru confirmed the same experience:

I doubt he was at your concert in Boston as I know he lives in Switzerland.

 

[Al M.]

I doubt he was at your concert in Boston as I know he lives in Switzerland.

That was not the point. He confirms that in general voices can sound that way in a live concert, depending on the circumstances.

 

[spiritofmusic]

The problem I have with many so called SOTA digital products is that while the resolution lets you hear arguably everything on the recording, there is a subtle overlay that still screams “synthetic “. Tone is rarely on target compared to what is heard live. Could be the recording but there is often a sameness that is a giveaway. Having the ease and naturalness of live (unamplified I am referring to) but not quite the resolution is the kind of trade off I willingly make...a Living Voice/Kondo system is one that gives the listener the sensation and immersion of live without microscopic resolution of details...or are they missing?? The absence of artifacts leads to greater realism than the presence of more “detail” “information “.

Brad, I don't know what the French put in their cooking, but their digital is up there, and has the least synthetic tone of any non analog source I've heard. Ked and Dave love the Neodio, I was all set to go Audiomeca Mephisto in late 2000s, I love YBA, and JackD201, RBLNR and myself are slaves to 5" silver discs re Eera.
I can assure you that 6 yrs straight Eera Tentation cdp listening, and there is not the merest hint of sheen, glare, iceiness, over analysis, resolution for resolution sake. My Eera totally nails the closest SS digital you're gonna get to what analog excels at.

 

[morricab]

I doubt he was at your concert

That was not the point. He confirms that in general voices can sound that way in a live concert, depending on the circumstances.

And all I said was that I have not heard unamplified voices sound metallic in concert and it is irrelevant if David agreed with (not sure why you are appealing to his authority...perhaps his WBF name?) you.

 

[morricab]

Brad, I don't know what the French put in their cooking, but their digital is up there, and has the least synthetic tone of any non analog source I've heard. Ked and Dave love the Neodio, I was all set to go Audiomeca Mephisto in late 2000s, I love YBA, and JackD201, RBLNR and myself are slaves to 5" silver discs re Eera.
I can assure you that 6 yrs straight Eera Tentation cdp listening, and there is not the merest hint of sheen, glare, iceiness, over analysis, resolution for resolution sake. My Eera totally nails the closest SS digital you're gonna get to what analog excels at.

Yes, I also found the Neodio to sound good as well as the Audio Aero La Source. That said, I think the Kondo DAC sounded better than Neodio in the big LV system.

 

[Al M.]

And all I said was that I have not heard unamplified voices sound metallic in concert and it is irrelevant if David agreed with (not sure why you are appealing to his authority...perhaps his WBF name?) you.

Oh, I just used his WBF name, not appealing to any authority. Funny how you assume things.

If your concert experiences and perceptions differ, fine. Obviously not everyone shares your experiences and perceptions.

 

[morricab]

Oh, I just used his WBF name, not appealing to any authority. Funny how you assume things.

If your concert experiences and perceptions differ, fine. Obviously not everyone shares your experiences and perceptions.

Oh but you did use his post to bolster your assertion that live, unamplified voices can sound metallic. You can play word games if you like but that is what you in fact did.

 

[Al M.]

Oh but you did use his post to bolster your assertion that live, unamplified voices can sound metallic. You can play word games if you like but that is what you in fact did.

I just pointed out that there are more people who have other experiences and perceptions than you do, that's all.

 

[morricab]

Brad, I don't know what the French put in their cooking, but their digital is up there, and has the least synthetic tone of any non analog source I've heard. Ked and Dave love the Neodio, I was all set to go Audiomeca Mephisto in late 2000s, I love YBA, and JackD201, RBLNR and myself are slaves to 5" silver discs re Eera.
I can assure you that 6 yrs straight Eera Tentation cdp listening, and there is not the merest hint of sheen, glare, iceiness, over analysis, resolution for resolution sake. My Eera totally nails the closest SS digital you're gonna get to what analog excels at.

I had an interesting experience one year at the Munich show (maybe 10 years ago...maybe a bit less) where there were a number of good sounding rooms with a wide variety of gear and then I went back to those rooms and looked closer and noted that most of the ones that were running digital that sounded good were using the Audio Aero La Source or La Fontaine (slightly less expensive version but with the same basic guts). Coincidence? Not sure about that but at that time these Audio Aero sources were a bit of a hit despite (for that time) being rather expensive. Good sound definitely starts at the source...the one thing Linn was right about...not necessarily their TT (although it definitely had it's charms). The problem with Linn was that they thought it was ONLY the source that mattered it seems (their amps were awful IMO).

 

[acousticsguru]

The problem I have with many so called SOTA digital products is that while the resolution lets you hear arguably everything on the recording, there is a subtle overlay that still screams “synthetic “.

Synthetic sound is a possible shortcoming of digital playback. So far we're in agreement. But I fail to understand what your definition of "SOTA" is if what you're saying is that those are the DACs that suffer from it more than others? Personally, I've yet to hear the perfect source component. SOTA to me is a snapshot in time, digital (and for that matter: any!) audio still very much work in progress. In my understanding, the DAC that sounds most neutral, has the highest resolution, lets you hear everything on the recording, sounds the most lifelike etc. & etc., would by necessity have to be one that sounds least synthetic, or else there's a contradiction - can't have one without the other. To put it in a nutshell: I'd prefer not call a product such as the one you're describing SOTA. There are plenty of synthetic-sounding digital components out there, no use denying the obvious.

Tone is rarely on target compared to what is heard live. Could be the recording but there is often a sameness that is a giveaway. Having the ease and naturalness of live (unamplified I am referring to) but not quite the resolution is the kind of trade off I willingly make...a Living Voice/Kondo system is one that gives the listener the sensation and immersion of live without microscopic resolution of details...or are they missing?? The absence of artifacts leads to greater realism than the presence of more “detail” “information “.

That's very much what I was trying to convey: to me, what's a legitimate choice in professional audio (where one tries to avoid compensating for a component-specific sound or flaw) isn't necessarily in a home system. Taking that road can lead to frustration, as a truly neutral source component is going to lay open any flaws elsewhere in system. I seem to remember I said I'd not recommend it, but then it's as if one told the Knight in Arthurian legend not to take the thorny path, which incidentally happens to be the right one that leads to the Holy Grail.

Needless to say, digital artifacts are what cause "the subtle overlay that still screams synthetic" you mentioned above, and clearly, sameness regardless of the recording being played back is the ultimate giveaway. No amount of chocolate sauce an output stage, amp, loudspeaker, cable etc. may pour over digital artifacts is ever going to solve the problem. Ironically of course, if the synthetic sound is on (part of) the recording, the chocolate sauce may be thought of as a last resort solution to at least be able and enjoy it at its relative best. That's one of the reasons why I wouldn't mind owning several DACs: to cater for every eventuality. That doesn't mean I wouldn't at least want to own a DAC that tries to be transparent to the source.

As to the Living Voice Vox Olympian/Kondo system, you'll remember what I told Kevin Scott and wife in Munich, after occupying a seat in their demo room for another one and a half hours the second or third day round: that I want to be buried in there.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[morricab]

Synthetic sound is a possible shortcoming of digital playback. So far we're in agreement. But I fail to understand what your definition of "SOTA" is if what you're saying is that those are the DACs that suffer from it more than others? Personally, I've yet to hear the perfect source component. SOTA to me is a snapshot in time, digital (and for that matter: any!) audio still very much work in progress. In my understanding, the DAC that sounds most neutral, has the highest resolution, lets you hear everything on the recording, sounds the most lifelike etc. & etc., would by necessity have to be one that sounds least synthetic, or else there's a contradiction - can't have one without the other. To put it in a nutshell: I'd prefer not call a product such as the one you're describing SOTA. There are plenty of synthetic-sounding digital components out there, no use denying the obvious.



That's very much what I was trying to convey: to me, what's a legitimate choice in professional audio (where one tries to avoid compensating for a component-specific sound or flaw) isn't necessarily in a home system. Taking that road can lead to frustration, as a truly neutral source component is going to lay open any flaws elsewhere in system. I seem to remember I said I'd not recommend it, but then it's as if one told the Knight in Arthurian legend not to take the thorny path, which incidentally happens to be the right one that leads to the Holy Grail.

Needless to say, digital artifacts are what cause "the subtle overlay that still screams synthetic" you mentioned above, and clearly, sameness regardless of the recording being played back is the ultimate giveaway. No amount of chocolate sauce an output stage, amp, loudspeaker, cable etc. may pour over digital artifacts is ever going to solve the problem. Ironically of course, if the synthetic sound is on (part of) the recording, the chocolate sauce may be thought of as a last resort solution to at least be able and enjoy it at its relative best. That's one of the reasons why I wouldn't mind owning several DACs: to cater for every eventuality. That doesn't mean I wouldn't at least want to own a DAC that tries to be transparent to the source.

As to the Living Voice Vox Olympian/Kondo system, you'll remember what I told Kevin Scott and wife in Munich, after occupying a seat in their demo room for another one and a half hours the second or third day round: that I want to be buried in there.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

Hi,
Please note I used the qualifier “so-called”, meaning it’s not me referring to it as SOTA but perhaps knighted so in reviews or in forums, such as this one.

 

[acousticsguru]

Hi,
Please note I used the qualifier “so-called”, meaning it’s not me referring to it as SOTA but perhaps knighted so in reviews or in forums, such as this one.

My apologies!

In all fairness, I may not pay enough attention to such claims, and if it weren't for the current situation, I'd hardly have the time to refer to or post on forums, but I'll say that among the usual suspects that I do know, none has struck me as either perfect nor synthetic-sounding, with the exception of all the ones that use one popular chip set (actually, a family of chip sets that come in several price categories) that's apparently responsible for the kind of "sameness" you alluded to earlier in all the DACs that use them. But then, it wouldn't cross my mind to refer to DACs that use that brand of chip set as SOTA. Not surprisingly, the ones I refer to as the usual suspects, for the most part, are by manufacturers who do not rely on off-the-shelf chip sets, but discreet designs of their own.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[LL21]

I had an interesting experience one year at the Munich show (maybe 10 years ago...maybe a bit less) where there were a number of good sounding rooms with a wide variety of gear and then I went back to those rooms and looked closer and noted that most of the ones that were running digital that sounded good were using the Audio Aero La Source or La Fontaine (slightly less expensive version but with the same basic guts). Coincidence? Not sure about that but at that time these Audio Aero sources were a bit of a hit despite (for that time) being rather expensive. Good sound definitely starts at the source...the one thing Linn was right about...not necessarily their TT (although it definitely had it's charms). The problem with Linn was that they thought it was ONLY the source that mattered it seems (their amps were awful IMO).

Interesting...I had the Audio Aero La Source at our house...if you liked it, i think you would like the Zanden which had a very similar sound quality. At quick listen, it was hard to tell them apart if using a 3rd party transport. I [personally] found the Zanden became superior and better at what it did well with its own matching transport, but again the sound qualities were of similar family.

 

[acousticsguru]

And all I said was that I have not heard unamplified voices sound metallic in concert and it is irrelevant if David agreed with (not sure why you are appealing to his authority...perhaps his WBF name?) you.

I'm not going to apologize for the moniker which, back in the era when I built loudspeakers with time alignment and phase-coherent filters of my own design, I got from the head designer of an FFT analyzer company whom I called daily for as long as I needed to get them to improve and update their product so it could be used to locate and position the acoustic centre of a driver (or a whole axis of drivers) to within a millimeter, something that to my surprise, I appear to have been the first customer to ask of them.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[Al M.]

I'm not going to apologize for the moniker which, back in the era when I built loudspeakers with time alignment and phase-coherent filters of my own design, I got from the head designer of an FFT analyzer company whom I called daily for as long as I needed to get them to improve and update their product so it could be used to locate and position the acoustic centre of a driver (or a whole axis of drivers) to within a millimeter, something that to my surprise, I appear to have been the first customer to ask of them.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

Interesting story. What's in a name? I didn't think much about it, frankly. Funny that it seems to be upsetting to some .

I was more interested in what you have to say.

 

[morricab]

I'm not going to apologize for the moniker which, back in the era when I built loudspeakers with time alignment and phase-coherent filters of my own design, I got from the head designer of an FFT analyzer company whom I called daily for as long as I needed to get them to improve and update their product so it could be used to locate and position the acoustic centre of a driver (or a whole axis of drivers) to within a millimeter, something that to my surprise, I appear to have been the first customer to ask of them.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

I wasn't asking you to apologize for your moniker...I was making a comment on appeal to authority and that perhaps (tongue-in-cheek of course) Al M. was subliminally influenced to consider you an authority based on your Moniker having the word "guru" in it.