Entreq devices are floating "sinks", the Tripoint Troy uses the ground path of a mains cable in an high impedance mode, RogerD uses an extremely low resistance classical ground star scheme. IMHO these are the main differences. The choice of chassis or signal ground will also depend probably on the internal grounding characteristics of equipment.
MSB Select II arrival
- Thread starter Mike Lavigne
- Start date
Entreq devices are floating "sinks", the Tripoint Troy uses the ground path of a mains cable in an high impedance mode, RogerD uses an extremely low resistance classical ground star scheme. IMHO these are the main differences. The choice of chassis or signal ground will also depend probably on the internal grounding characteristics of equipment.
But is was not definitively my point!
Audio equipment designers are centered on their pieces, but seldom have a system approach, typical of tweak practices and usage. The influence of low amplitude EMI , RF noise and mains perturbations is still an unknown in high-end stereo.
Mike
You can take this with a grain of salt..but the biggest SQ improvements were my two mono blocks and digital circuits. This is my opinion,but your Darts will have a big impact when chassis grounded. No matter how well designed the internal scheme or shielding is, those toroidal transformers will benefit from the grounding.
But is was not definitively my point!
These devices have been around for a decade and I don't think there are too many unknowns in power delivery and noise by now. There are plenty of manufacturers that use power conditioning and other products.
coming home tonight and sitting down I notice that.........with 48 hours of break-in and settling of the 2nd Thor SE Master Ref grounding cable.........we have stepped up another notch into the 'suspension of disbelief'.
the other night I was hearing/noticing pieces and parts of the music come alive, now it's a sense of the 'whole musical flow' with no part prominent. the music just jumps out........an overall experiential thing. have I changed? are my ears now more attuned to what is happening? like analog? like music? maybe more like tape than vinyl? it has that big meaty 'tape' authority.
this morning I recall vividly my perceptions of the track I was playing. it's now it's just more right here.
the Select II is just pulling so much musical reality from these files.
the other night I was hearing/noticing pieces and parts of the music come alive, now it's a sense of the 'whole musical flow' with no part prominent. the music just jumps out........an overall experiential thing. have I changed? are my ears now more attuned to what is happening? like analog? like music? maybe more like tape than vinyl? it has that big meaty 'tape' authority.
this morning I recall vividly my perceptions of the track I was playing. it's now it's just more right here.
the Select II is just pulling so much musical reality from these files.
Hello Mike,
Sorry for swaying this thread again. But I read how you described your latest impression on your Select II and I think I feel you. Yesterday was the first time I listened to digital and thought it was sounding surprisingly good. Michael of Zellaton came to my place to demo his devices. He brought along a cd of recordings he familiar with and produced by himself. With this cd, we played through the JMF and Formula dac. It was my "suspense of disbelief" that the music jump out in almost similar manner when I had my first tape experience. My tape player is the same Studer as yours. Disbelief because i never prefer digital. I am not creditting this to my digital fronts. Instead I think it is the software...the cd he brought and also, to be fair, his devices that were demoing in my room. I really wanted to get him drunk and forgot to take the cd back.
I dont know how the digital (or analog) sounds in your room, but now I am starting to understand how good it could possibly sound in your room.
Kind regards,
Tang
hello Tang,
i'm sure you do.
this whole retreat of the sense of the reproduction chain, and rise of musical essence and touch, is what we all just love. when our systems get close to this threshold, and then we do this or that to cross the line.....words have limitations but we recognize it in others efforts to relate. our analog can walk that walk more predictably, but when we can get the digital to do that it opens up such a wide world of music and ease of use. with the Select II i'm living there more and more.
tape has this way of breaking through to that sense of reality so easily. when we hear that from digital it jumps out. your tweaks somehow boosted the system and source to another level. neat deal. the Formula dac and SGM in my system flirted with that feeling from time to time too.
kind regards,
Mike
hello Tang,
i'm sure you do.
this whole retreat of the sense of the reproduction chain, and rise of musical essence and touch, is what we all just love. when our systems get close to this threshold, and then we do this or that to cross the line.....words have limitations but we recognize it in others efforts to relate. our analog can walk that walk more predictably, but when we can get the digital to do that it opens up such a wide world of music and ease of use. with the Select II i'm living there more and more.
tape has this way of breaking through to that sense of reality so easily. when we hear that from digital it jumps out. your tweaks somehow boosted the system and source to another level. neat deal. the Formula dac and SGM in my system flirted with that feeling from time to time too.
kind regards,
Mike
Yes, digital can let us walk through this feeling of absence of sound reproduction artifacts and ease. My main concern has always been how to have it systematically, not only sporadically. But it is not enough to have great pieces of equipment, the critical part also happens at the so called tweak level, power cables and power devices having the power of helping or ruining the whole system. I have found that in this aspect, digital is much more sensitive than analog.
BTW, did you try disconnecting just the wire of the Thor Master Ref grounding cable for a short time to listen to the difference? The difference is something you feel immediately or more in the medium/long term?
wow!!!
listening to the first cut (on Tidal) now. very vivid, dynamic, and raw (in the most positive sense). projects so much power. overtones go on forever...............
thank you!!
agree that for whatever reason, tweaks (or steps up in performance) seem to push digital more clearly than the analog. I think it is that delineation between real and reproduced is just more evident and crossing over more profound. maybe it's a phase thing, or the whole space and separation thing, or textural detail thing. but tweaks that improve the reality of digital are addictive. maybe good analog stays on the 'right' side of that line so the effect is less.
as the effect builds over time, I am reluctant to unplug the Thor(s). but I have done it in the past with the single Thor and it's like a light switch. but then reconnecting I have to wait as some effect is immediate but takes time again to fully come back.
This Forcione cd is one of my "go to" recordings to really test a component or change.
Glad to see it getting some love.
Agreed re digital able to shine when impediments of noise, hash and other assocd gremlins reduced or eliminated.
My simple $10k cdp is playing on analog's hallowed turf re texture and density.
However IMHO digital still cannot touch analog for sheer palpability and jump factor, I believe what Robert Koda sums up as "dynamic noise floor".
Combine this w analog's usually more sympathetic non cliff edge mastering, and absence of digital brick walling, and my vote still goes w vinyl every time.
Glad to see it getting some love.
Agreed re digital able to shine when impediments of noise, hash and other assocd gremlins reduced or eliminated.
My simple $10k cdp is playing on analog's hallowed turf re texture and density.
However IMHO digital still cannot touch analog for sheer palpability and jump factor, I believe what Robert Koda sums up as "dynamic noise floor".
Combine this w analog's usually more sympathetic non cliff edge mastering, and absence of digital brick walling, and my vote still goes w vinyl every time.
Always a pleasure Mike! ALRainbow put me on to it.
Christoph put us both on to Moçha Flor album...another gem.
Dunno 'bout that.
I have a special, not commercially available RCA digital cable, that brings a LOT of jump factor to the table. Made of ultra thin "nano gauge" copper strands. Also a great Server with proper use of HQP, etc can do wonders to cut the gap. Tape is the 800lb gorrilla to me, more so that vinyl.
I also have no Dac chip to worry about...
Last edited:
Looked up Robert Koda & "dynamic noise floor" & like a lot of what he says. It occurs to me that this is the same thing as the noise modulation Opus102 has been talking about for quite some time.
What particularly stayed with me were these quotes
And in an interview from here
It strikes me that one of the difficulties that digital is fostered with is the reliance of sigma delta processing on noise shaping. The result of not being perfectly consistent moment to moment, in this manipulation of noise, could well be at the heart of the DNF problems of digital audio & why analogue can often be perceived as having better palpability & jump factor?
Although, I believe that digital audio, done properly can excel in palpability & jump factor as is being realised more & more in recent times.
What done properly means is the attention to this "stability" - stability in the reference ground seems to be what it all boils down to - this simple goal hides a lot of detail that needs to be attended to before such stability begins to produce the realism that is being spoken of here
Mike's DAC as well as mine (Yggdrasil) are multibit ladder. They should not be affected by the noise shaping problems of sigma delta. Or does the ADC side carry through?
As for jump factor and palpability, that is also system dependent of course, not just a matter of digital or analog source. With my DAC in my system, these attributes are on a very high level. My system has weaknesses, but nothing significant in these areas. In a system less designed around jump factor, my DAC will seem to perform less well in this area.
Last edited:
Sure Al
So in 2017, there are no performance shortfalls digital with respect to analog?
We're all on a level playing field, any differences in format presentation are system synergy or mastering quality dependent?
I would agree w you up to a major point
But not completely
So in 2017, there are no performance shortfalls digital with respect to analog?
We're all on a level playing field, any differences in format presentation are system synergy or mastering quality dependent?
I would agree w you up to a major point
But not completely
Similar threads
