Convergence of sound

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
20
0
Everyone who read my little blog about the RMAF show knows what I said. And what I said was that in every single room I went into that had both digital and analog to play back, the analog always sounded better-and better by a large margin.

I have to confess that at my house, in my room, with my system, the difference between the sound of analog and digital is smaller in comparison to what I heard at the show. Since I jettisoned my Counterpoint SA-5.1 preamp for the simply dynamite Yamaha C2a preamp (which is soon to be replaced by the Krell KBL), there has been a convergence of sound between digital and analog. Not 100% mind you, but closer than what I would have believed prior to the Y2a. Why this is so is a matter of speculation of course.

When I was using the Counterpoint 5.1, the difference between the sound of my music server and my turntable or R2R was very much like what I heard at the RMAF. The D/A converter I’m using is the Creative Labs E-MU 0404. Larry Toy gave this thing rave reviews and Steve backed up what Larry said because Steve heard the DAC in his house. I took the small plunge and bought it to go with the server I built. I never liked the damn thing when I was using it with the 5.1 preamp. It sounded like digital always sounded to me-cold, uninvolving, and amusical. I even sent Steve an email and asked him if he really listened to the 0404 because I couldn’t believe he had anything good to say about it based on what I was hearing. Steve assured me he had listened to it and it really was good.

Fast forward to the 5.1 being sent to Mike Elliott for the last round of upgrades and my purchase of the C2a to tide me over during the long wait. I lashed up the system with the C2a and hit play on Foo Bar to let things start cooking. I quickly realized that the sound I was now hearing from my digits was not the same sound I had been hearing. I don’t want to make the digit lovers cringe, but it sounded more like analog. The Y2a was simply resolving more information from the server than the 5.1 was able to. An example would be a cut from Jennifer Warnes album “The Well.” Cut 7, “The Panther” sounded like an entirely new song. And this is just the redbook version of this album. There was so much high frequency information flying around the room through the Y2a I was just astonished. After the 5.1 returned to me and I played this cut again, I knew I was in trouble. And by in trouble, I mean I was financially wedded to the 5.1 with having over $5K invested in all of the upgrades including what I paid for it. I knew there was no way I would come close to selling it for what I had in it. I had to settle for $2700 which was a beat down.

I only had the KBL in my system briefly before it went down for the count, but what I heard in that short period of time was enough to excite me. As good as I think the Y2a is (and trust me, this preamp kicks major butt and is just stupid good for the money. The phono section alone sounded better than my ARC PH-3SE which sold for $2595), the KBL is better still. There is another level of refinement, elegance, and elevated sound quality with the KBL. The digital divide didn’t expand or contract with the KBL in my system if memory serves me correctly.

Back to my main point: Why is there more convergence of the sound between digital and analog at my house than what I heard at the show? Surely I don’t have more resolving power with my digits than the high-priced spread I heard in room after room. Were the preamps at the show so “good” they weren’t good (like my 5.1)? I doubt that too as I heard some really top-notch gear. The easy way out would be to say that the gear at the show is simply more resolving than my system (amp, preamp, speakers, etc.) and hell, maybe that’s right. But maybe not. I can promise you that when I returned home from the show and listened to my system, I didn’t need a box of tissues to dry my tears because I was so sad because of the difference in sound quality from the show to my house. I was very happy actually if not conflicted.
 
Mark in my system the main difference is in the size or scale of the music,regardless of the recording. The analog is more relaxed and sounds more saturated. But that is not to degrade digital because there are some recordings that close the gap to almost say who gives a damn.

I listened to a cd of Dmitry Shostakovich #8 on Telarc, that recording is so big and dynamic,if they all sounded that good, I might prefer digital. That is not the case though now. As for the convergence? Could be cables,but that's just a guess.

I might add that the cable that made the biggest difference in my system was the SPDIF digital cable.
 
Hi

I will make sure that I will be at the RMAF next year. Seems to have been a lot of fun. I appreciate your honesty mep and humility. You say it as you see it and you make a conscious effort to wean yourself of your biases and prejudices. This somewhat rare in our hobby... Kudos.
I, thus, believe your observations about the analogue sounding better than the digital. My questions: Were they playing the same cuts? At the same level? Were the mastering the same? I would go with Peter Aczel on this...The recording has a lot to do with what you hear...
Now on your point about convergence. I was an analog fan. Analog sounded systematically better than digital to my ears or so I thought. I had an excellent turntable and digital gear. I was always listening to LP more than digital... I found myself listening to more digital than LP once I got the Burmester DAC and Transport combo. The TT was gathering the figurative dust... I changed cartridges from Koetsu to Lyra back to Koetsu... yet I did find myself listening to more digital than LPs. Admittedly my Burmester digital gears were as good as they get but I would have thought that the TT would be better rather consistently .. Well it became clear that there was something going on. The better digital recordings although different from their analog counterparts (The basis of my comparisons were varied but I had both Mercury Living Presence LPs and CDs and Reference Recordings LP and CDs) were not worse, only different. I had an R2R , actually 2 R2R, I did not have access to master copies but I had a few commercial tapes and although they were very good , they were not better to my ears than what digital from the Burmester was doing. I will add that I never compared same material, just an overall impression. I began to question my deep-seated belief on the inferiority of digital then but still held that analog was superior, privately and publicly... Then someone told me about HRx.. I went to a friend with an excellent system and heard HRx. OMG!! The power from what I heard was unbelievable ... The performance was altogether forgettable but what I heard was the closest I have heard an orchestra in a room...
Then I want back to listen to my Mercury CDs and I keep remembering Wilma Cozart Fine view on the CD medium. I had some Mercury LPs and frankly the CDs were more enjoyable in the vast majority, at least on the Burmester DAC and Transport ...
I then decided not to look back. Digital can be as good as analog, can be better IME. I don't think CD is as superior to the best analog still, an opinion that may change with future auditions, but Hi-Rez is to me the superior medium and it will continue to get better.
We can assign preferences to what we perceive from the best analog. We can find R2R denser and frankly the best R2R tapes are “dense”... I would say that digital can replicate this “density”. I am waiting for someone to conduct an honest, blind comparison between the best tapes and the best digital has to offer both from the same master. Would like the evaluation to be blind, from the same Master, auditioned on the best sources and platforms from both worlds, level-matched within 0.1 dB. The convergence is real… There is no going back … We may but it a Quixotic endeavor. The Convergence is real .., Enjoy the Music
 
I can count on two hands the material I have in both LP and CD so I can't really make comparisons. I have however reached a point where I can switch back and forth between LP and CD and not be bothered all too much. I still prefer LP and I still prefer the treble and midrange of tubes. Being a bit younger than you guys ;) I came into the hobby in earnest as LP was dying and CD was on the store shelves en masse. My first CD player was a godsend. Heresy! Let's take a look at the context though. I didn't have a good turntable, used crappy MM carts and worst of all didn't even own an alignment protractor. Now it makes sense that my cheap-O CD player sounded so good to me. So my bias was reversed. I was a digital zealot until I heard a well set up turntable playing well cared for vinyl. What ticks and pops and other assorted surface noise? Ironically, with the CD itself in decline, we get these players and dacs that deal with the problems my cheap-O player obviously had. We're now at a point where both technologies are mature so I figure that's the reason the gap has closed or as Mark puts it, there's a convergence.

As to why Mark feels the convergence is closer at home than elsewhere, my hunch is that he's tuned his turntable to his liking and he's selected his digital gear to cater to the very same liking. Whether this was a conscious thing doesn't really matter right? What matters was he was crying tears of joy :)
 
While I value my participation at shows, there is one huge problem that is difficult to overcome. A system set up less than 24 hours before showtime starts. There is NO WAY that we can stabilize it in time. That's why shows will never be able to replace a dealer as a place to audition. Before the system has had a chance to settle down and perform its best, it's already time to break down and go home.

The preamp I used was a prototype and had its last solder joint put in just 3 days before the show, and then overnighted to Denver for the show. The turntable was the same, with a new bearing overnighted to us from the UK and installed on Friday night. I ran in the DAC for 3 weeks before hand-carrying it (so that it wouldn't be subject to the cold in the luggage hold), and still when I hooked it up, it sounded thin and cold.

IMO digital takes a longer time to run in after being off for a while than analog - that's why as the show progressed, in my room anyway, the performance of the digital system crept up to the analog. Some digital takes way longer than others. There's a DAC that I absolutely love, but I can't own it because it takes at least a week to get to listenable, and nearly 14 days before its quality really shows.

And may be that's why Mark found that in his home system the convergence between analog and digital.

As we showed with the comparisons of the different pressings of Tea for the Tillerman, the mastering makes a huge difference. Comparisons between digital and analog are invalid if they are made from different masters. When we digitized LPs, most of the audience couldn't tell the difference.
 
IMO digital takes a longer time to run in after being off for a while than analog - that's why as the show progressed, in my room anyway, the performance of the digital system crept up to the analog. Some digital takes way longer than others. There's a DAC that I absolutely love, but I can't own it because it takes at least a week to get to listenable, and nearly 14 days before its quality really shows.
Agree, my battleship Yamaha player, from 1986, which I still have, always took 3 days to come good. Once I let it cool down fully I had to repeat the exercise, so even now (a year or so ago) it was always on 24/7. It also hated the remote, that knocked the SQ badly, and I always paused it for 30 secs after starting a CD, to let the digital control and drive electronics settle down. It can be a nightmare world if you take SQ in digital seriously ...

Frank
 
It also hated the remote, that knocked the SQ badly, and I always paused it for 30 secs after starting a CD, to let the digital control and drive electronics settle down. It can be a nightmare world if you take SQ in digital seriously ...

Yes - that is always a problem when you inject digital circuits into an analog circuit. In the SMc Audio VRE-1C, the digital circuits go back to sleep a second after the remote is used. The digital circuits also have a completely separate power supply, and they even use a different power umbilical. Even though digital and analog share the same transformer, they use different windings.

It's quite a lot of work to make digital and analog circuits in the same box co-exist and still have great SQ.
 
While I value my participation at shows, there is one huge problem that is difficult to overcome. A system set up less than 24 hours before showtime starts. There is NO WAY that we can stabilize it in time. That's why shows will never be able to replace a dealer as a place to audition. Before the system has had a chance to settle down and perform its best, it's already time to break down and go home.

The preamp I used was a prototype and had its last solder joint put in just 3 days before the show, and then overnighted to Denver for the show. The turntable was the same, with a new bearing overnighted to us from the UK and installed on Friday night. I ran in the DAC for 3 weeks before hand-carrying it (so that it wouldn't be subject to the cold in the luggage hold), and still when I hooked it up, it sounded thin and cold.

IMO digital takes a longer time to run in after being off for a while than analog - that's why as the show progressed, in my room anyway, the performance of the digital system crept up to the analog. Some digital takes way longer than others. There's a DAC that I absolutely love, but I can't own it because it takes at least a week to get to listenable, and nearly 14 days before its quality really shows.

And may be that's why Mark found that in his home system the convergence between analog and digital.

As we showed with the comparisons of the different pressings of Tea for the Tillerman, the mastering makes a huge difference. Comparisons between digital and analog are invalid if they are made from different masters. When we digitized LPs, most of the audience couldn't tell the difference.

Gary,

I think you hit the nail on the head. Sometimes it takes 50 to 100 hours for a system to stabalise. I marvel at the most minute detail can effect sound. I added 3 snap ferrites to pc's and I was surprised at how long it took to stabilise my system. It's been a long time since I have been to a audio show and it's great to see all the new equipment,but you have to wonder if your really hearing everything at it's peak.
 
Gary,

I think you hit the nail on the head. Sometimes it takes 50 to 100 hours for a system to stabalise. I marvel at the most minute detail can effect sound. I added 3 snap ferrites to pc's and I was surprised at how long it took to stabilise my system. It's been a long time since I have been to a audio show and it's great to see all the new equipment,but you have to wonder if your really hearing everything at it's peak.

My guess is that you are not hearing the gear at its peak. Probably far from it. First of all, it's a damn hotel room and it's a miracle the gear sounds good at all. I firmly believe the longer gear is left on, the better it sounds-specially SS. I never turn my SS/digital gear off, but I won't be able to say that once the KSA-250 arrives. No way I'm leaving that utility meter spinning beast on 24/7. And I hear that it takes a minimum of 3 hours for it to come alive from turn on.
 
My guess is that you are not hearing the gear at its peak. Probably far from it. First of all, it's a damn hotel room and it's a miracle the gear sounds good at all. I firmly believe the longer gear is left on, the better it sounds-specially SS. I never turn my SS/digital gear off, but I won't be able to say that once the KSA-250 arrives. No way I'm leaving that utility meter spinning beast on 24/7. And I hear that it takes a minimum of 3 hours for it to come alive from turn on.


Mark

I agree with you about leaving SS gear on and that was your plan with the KSA-250

I remember when I had 3 Krell 750 Mcx which were left in "standby" as was my Krell TAS. There was a thread many years ago in another forum suggesting how much power was consumed in standby. I turned the 4 amps and only warmed them up a few hours before use. The decrease in my electric bill was significant
 
My guess is that you are not hearing the gear at its peak. Probably far from it. First of all, it's a damn hotel room and it's a miracle the gear sounds good at all. I firmly believe the longer gear is left on, the better it sounds-specially SS. I never turn my SS/digital gear off, but I won't be able to say that once the KSA-250 arrives. No way I'm leaving that utility meter spinning beast on 24/7. And I hear that it takes a minimum of 3 hours for it to come alive from turn on.

Mark a tech friend worked on a customers KSA-250,that was the biggest amp I have ever seen,a behemoth of a power supply. As far as wasting energy my VAC 140's are hard to top,16 300B's,who needs to turn the furnace on with those burning in the winter time,not me.

I'm excited for you! There is no substitute for unlimited power.
 
While I value my participation at shows, there is one huge problem that is difficult to overcome. A system set up less than 24 hours before showtime starts. There is NO WAY that we can stabilize it in time. That's why shows will never be able to replace a dealer as a place to audition. Before the system has had a chance to settle down and perform its best, it's already time to break down and go home.

The preamp I used was a prototype and had its last solder joint put in just 3 days before the show, and then overnighted to Denver for the show. The turntable was the same, with a new bearing overnighted to us from the UK and installed on Friday night. I ran in the DAC for 3 weeks before hand-carrying it (so that it wouldn't be subject to the cold in the luggage hold), and still when I hooked it up, it sounded thin and cold.

IMO digital takes a longer time to run in after being off for a while than analog - that's why as the show progressed, in my room anyway, the performance of the digital system crept up to the analog. Some digital takes way longer than others. There's a DAC that I absolutely love, but I can't own it because it takes at least a week to get to listenable, and nearly 14 days before its quality really shows.

And may be that's why Mark found that in his home system the convergence between analog and digital.

As we showed with the comparisons of the different pressings of Tea for the Tillerman, the mastering makes a huge difference. Comparisons between digital and analog are invalid if they are made from different masters. When we digitized LPs, most of the audience couldn't tell the difference.

I totally agree with you vis a vis digital Gary! Heard that for years.
 
I turned the 4 amps and only warmed them up a few hours before use.

A few hours? I'd have to have my wife turn them on in the afternoon while I was at work. Is there any engineering or scientific explanation for such a warm-up time?

Tim
 
While I value my participation at shows, there is one huge problem that is difficult to overcome. A system set up less than 24 hours before showtime starts. There is NO WAY that we can stabilize it in time. That's why shows will never be able to replace a dealer as a place to audition. Before the system has had a chance to settle down and perform its best, it's already time to break down and go home.

So why not get there a few days early, set it up ahead of time, and get it right? You guys (audio companies) are selling very expensive gear, and I am amazed that everyone has the same excuse. As you well know, a few bad or even lukewarm comments on the internet can haunt a company for a long, long time!
 
So why not get there a few days early, set it up ahead of time, and get it right? You guys (audio companies) are selling very expensive gear, and I am amazed that everyone has the same excuse. As you well know, a few bad or even lukewarm comments on the internet can haunt a company for a long, long time!

Because the show organizers won't do it. It costs more, and everybody will complain. Because of the way the freight is staged, I couldn't pay extra for the room and get my room a couple of days earlier. I wouldn't be able to get my gear ahead of everybody else.

Many of years ago, the set-up day for RMAF was one day earlier, but very few of the rooms took advantage of that extra day to set up. I'm usually there at the front desk of the hotel the minute that they will let me have the key to the room.
 
The issue is as I understand it is that the hotel is booked up during the week for business in the tech center. But it empties out on weekends ergo making a 21/2 day audio show possible. What does happen with some shows is that manufacturers/dealers can keep the same room and hopefully hone the sound each year. But then you have the proverbial monkey wrench thrown in last year at CES (as Gary described) where all of a sudden, exhibitors were forced to use a current limiting device on their gear. So rooms that sounded great the year before sounded like dog doo doo last year. And it was a mystery to many why. In fact, many still don't know what happened.
 
A few hours? I'd have to have my wife turn them on in the afternoon while I was at work. Is there any engineering or scientific explanation for such a warm-up time?

Tim

I think it all depends. For solid state amps that run in pure Class A, it's matter of them getting up to the required operating temperature at the required bias. For Pass Labs (XA) series, they start to sound good after 1/2 hour warm up and are pretty much at optimal operating temperature after an hour.

Form their manual:

The heat sinks on the side of the amplifier run hot to the touch – about 25 to 30 degrees C. above ambient, so you can expect 50 to 55 degrees C. temperatures on the heat sinks.

When not actually intending to play music the amplifier should be left in standby mode, where it draws only a few watts of bias on the output stage. If you wish to reduce the power draw to 0, you can shut the amplifier off via the rear panel switch, however we recommend that for minimum noise this switch should be toggled in stand-by mode.

This generation of amplifiers warms up faster and is more bias-stable during warm up than previous versions, but we still recommend an hour for critical listening. At the factory we adjust the bias and offset values initially and then after warm-up and then again after 48 hours,
If necessary. The “sweet spot” is a sink temperature between 50 and 55 degrees C., but this is not critical, and will vary with your room temperature. You should be able to put your hands on the heat sinks without undue discomfort for 5 seconds or so.
 
I think it all depends. For solid state amps that run in pure Class A, it's matter of them getting up to the required operating temperature at the required bias. For Pass Labs (XA) series, they start to sound good after 1/2 hour warm up and are pretty much at optimal operating temperature after an hour.

Form their manual:

1/2 hr to an hour seems reasonable for tubes or class A SS. Anything more than that is an inconvenience I'd say calls for the designer to go back to the drawing board and solve the problem.


Tim
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu