State-of-the-Art Digital

[Al M.]

We are living in the golden age of audio.

+ 1000 !!!!!

 

[PeterA]

Have you had a chance to demo all of those in the same system? I'm asking this because, same as everyone who has an opinion on everything, I have never had the chance to listen to the Select II in a system I know, so my initial positive impression is hardly less superficial than that of the "No tubes? Let's move on!" troupers I travelled with last time I'd have had a chance. To make matters worse, components like these are often used in systems that, to put it bluntly, I'd not want my stuff to be represented in if I were the manufacturer.

The Spectral CD-player is something else, though, apart from the fact that it'll only play back redbook discs. At the Munich trade show, in a system that sounded like a dead duck playing back high-resolution PCM and DSD files via a popular brand DAC fed by a popular brand server, after the official part of the demonstration and people were leaving the room, the sales person changed inputs on the Spectral preamp and put in a CD. The sound! I swear, the difference would have been enough to convince the uninitiated that high-resolution sucks…

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

Some of the DACs I've heard were in friend's familiar systems. Some were at dealers. None in my own system. I make few conclusions because I simply have not lived with digital. The most useful experiences have been when I have directly compared two or more DACs in the same system, but those are just snapshots. I really can't add anything to what those with much more digital experience can offer. I was just agreeing with you about the unease I hear, the discomfort, with some, not all, digital systems, in an attempt to explain that I can relate to your experience.

 

[PeterA]

I don't think audiophiles posting in a "SOTA" thread are ones who are much concerned with the past.


I wish that were the truth but I don't believe it is.
There are many stereotypes and antiquated thoughts consistently espoused in these threads. We are living in the golden age of audio yet many still want to listen to the same old same old from the previous century.

I'm only referring to recent digital that I have heard. Perhaps it is not SOTA but it is good. The mid level MSB, the dCS Rossini and Vivaldi, the latest Berkeley Ref DAC. One of my friends bought the Yggy DAC. He then replaced it with the Yggy 2. Now three friends have the Yggy2 and one of them replaced his Vivaldi and the other prefers it to his highly modified Berkeley Ref DAC. These are not 20-30 year old designs by any stretch.

I never listened to digital until about 2000, and only very little then, and it did not bother me at all. It is more recent digital to which I am referring. And I'm not saying the discomfort I hear is the DAC itself. It may be the interaction of the particular DAC with the rest of the system in a particular room. You keep mentioning audiophiles referring to the past. I am certainly not doing so.

We may or may not be in the Golden Age of Audio. Let's revisit that in a year from now. There are certainly lots of choices at the moment. Hopefully that will continue.

 

[Al M.]

You are definitely the exception, not the rule regarding this. It's refreshing. Very few audiophiles are willing to go through what you have. They are more prone to cover up the problems or return the pieces that uncovered them, even worse.

Thank you, Steve.

One thing that I learned to appreciate is the importance of room acoustics *), and of course there are many audiophiles who do too. Yet those who do not appreciate it, and whose systems are pushing against the limits of what their room will allow in terms of sound quality, are, to paraphrase ASC's Art Noxon, stuck in getting at best a different sound each time when they change components, not a better sound. Certainly, some get lucky and have a room that needs minimal care and acoustic treatment, but I think that is the exception.

Room acoustics have often held me back, and only further improving them has made me fully appreciate better components, including those that uncovered problems. This also predates the things that I described in my post.

It amazes me how many audiophiles have poor preamps that are a the crux of the problem or cables that should be thrown in the trash. Or they are used to so much jitter that they consider it euphonic. Very few are aware that more detail and more dynamics is usually the right track, not the garden path. They choose the garden path instead so much of the time, it's irritating. Particularly when you sold them the component that is delivering all of the detail and they just end-up returning it.

This must be frustrating, when you know that it's their system/room situation by which they cannot appreciate what you have to offer.

I am sure your Overdrive DAC would sound fine in my system, and my room would allow soundstage prowess, which appears to be a hallmark of the DAC, to shine (my audiophile friends like my soundstage quite a bit ). It would also be in the price range that I maximally would consider. Now would not be the time for me, but perhaps when this pandemic is over. I also got interested in trying it because of what you said about jitter and recently, about power supplies for DACs (don't remember on which thread). One thing that I also like is that your DAC concentrates just on PCM playback. I am not at all interested in DSD, and would not like a DAC that spends costly resources on the format; my Yggdrasil DAC fortunately doesn't either. And yeah, I like detail resolution and dynamics, the more the better.

__________________

*) I had an epiphany about 10 years ago, when a friend in Austria moved his system to another room with much better acoustics. Things regarding my own system developed from there.

 

[Empirical Audio]

Unfortunately, DSD is one of those checkboxes that many Audiophiles have to check, so my newest DAC design will likely support it, but no sacrifices made for this capability. It's less expensive than the Overdrive with no XLR outputs.l

The nice thing about the Overdrive is it's ability to make a 44.1 sound like hi-res. This is particularly interesting if you want to stream mostly.

 

[Al M.]

The nice thing about the Overdrive is it's ability to make a 44.1 sound like hi-res. This is particularly interesting if you want to stream mostly.

Or play CD like I do. According to the Shannon-Nyquist sampling theorem 44.1 should sound like hi-res, but practical implementation has been lagging behind theory for several decades, hence the technical crutch of higher sampling rates. So if eventually it can actually be the case in practice, it shouldn't be surprising.

 

[acousticsguru]

We are living in the golden age of audio

Anyone else afraid this may be true? I mean in the sense that I'm secretly hoping for something better to come along. And also, the DAC blind tests we did in Zürich and that I posted about some time ago have made a strong impression on me, which is that digital audio hasn't improved as much as advertising wants to make us believe. Those night and day differences, in true, matched level blind tests, were gradual in reality. Sufficient to tell DACs apart for the most part (the number one criteria of blind test, the sine qua non, so to speak). Of course I agree with Brad (morricab) that there's a difference between SOTA and so-called SOTA, just saying, once one is free from the expectation bias that one is going to hear an improvement and starts listening for actual differences, it turns out it's difficult, and sometimes disappointing. In particular the engineer among us (not me) saw his innate if not professional expectation in continuous development dashed to some extent. But even the audiophiles among us ended up feeling a bit sobered after a number of sessions over a few weeks (veteran audiophiles tend to be a bit more realistic when it comes to their ability to "perform" in blind tests - I'm personally doing well, yet wouldn't ever bet a dime).

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[acousticsguru]

Some of the DACs I've heard were in friend's familiar systems. Some were at dealers. None in my own system. I make few conclusions because I simply have not lived with digital. The most useful experiences have been when I have directly compared two or more DACs in the same system, but those are just snapshots. I really can't add anything to what those with much more digital experience can offer. I was just agreeing with you about the unease I hear, the discomfort, with some, not all, digital systems, in an attempt to explain that I can relate to your experience.

Thank you! It's nonetheless quite a list, and I for one would be curious to hear about your impressions in more detail.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[acousticsguru]

Anyone else afraid this may be true? I mean in the sense that I'm secretly hoping for something better to come along. And also, the DAC blind tests we in Zürich and that I posted about some time ago have made a strong impression on me, which is that digital audio hasn't improved as much as advertising wants to make us believe. Those day and night differences, in true, matched level blind tests, were gradual in reality. Sufficient to tell DACs apart for the most part (the number one criteria of blind test, the sine qua non, so to speak). Of course I agree with Brad (morricab) that there's a difference between SOTA and so-called SOTA, just saying, once one is free from the expectation bias that one is going to hear an improvement and starts listening for actual differences, it turns out it's difficult, and sometimes disappointing. In particular the engineer among us (not me) saw his innate if not professional expectation in continuous development dashed to some extent. But even the audiophiles among us ended up feeling a bit sobered after a number of sessions over a few weeks (veteran audiophiles tend to be a bit more realistic when it comes to their ability to "perform" in blind tests - I'm personally doing well, yet wouldn't ever bet a dime).

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

Note I'm not saying I'm disillusioned, but since I'm not into comparing gear to gear but real life music, I see potential for improvement. That won't keep me from thinking of SOTA what it really is, if only the current best we can do.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[howiebrou]

Anyone else afraid this may be true? I mean in the sense that I'm secretly hoping for something better to come along. And also, the DAC blind tests we in Zürich and that I posted about some time ago have made a strong impression on me, which is that digital audio hasn't improved as much as advertising wants to make us believe. Those day and night differences, in true, matched level blind tests, were gradual in reality. Sufficient to tell DACs apart for the most part (the number one criteria of blind test, the sine qua non, so to speak). Of course I agree with Brad (morricab) that there's a difference between SOTA and so-called SOTA, just saying, once one is free from the expectation bias that one is going to hear an improvement and starts listening for actual differences, it turns out it's difficult, and sometimes disappointing. In particular the engineer among us (not me) saw his innate if not professional expectation in continuous development dashed to some extent. But even the audiophiles among us ended up feeling a bit sobered after a number of sessions over a few weeks (veteran audiophiles tend to be a bit more realistic when it comes to their ability to "perform" in blind tests - I'm personally doing well, yet wouldn't ever bet a dime).

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

I have recently begun re-listening to music from the 80`s when I was in high school and it sounds shockingly good compared to what I remember. Yes it might not just be the digital improvement from back then but the rest of the system but it`s a bit uncanny hearing these songs with today`s quality. I've a lot to troll back through!

 

[Rhapsody]

I have recently begun re-listening to music from the 80`s when I was in high school and it sounds shockingly good compared to what I remember. Yes it might not just be the digital improvement from back then but the rest of the system but it`s a bit uncanny hearing these songs with today`s quality. I've a lot to troll back through!

Howie, Welcome to the "time machine".

More important to me is how my systems sound with 50's, 60's, 70's pop/rock that I grew up with.

With great recordings, for me, they usually sound good on ANY system and if I want to listen to that music the quality is never an issue. Of course great recordings can reach great heights on a top performing system.

With the old pop/recordings when I play an album that I was in love with at 13 or 17 years old, my visual memory snaps right back to a few snapshot from that time period. I never in a million years would have the very clear, distinct memory "blast from the past" that materializes when I hear specific tracks or albums.

I was on a kick like that last night. I listened all the way through two Temtpations albums and a full #1 hits album by the Supremes. Then Abandoned Luncheonette by Hall and Oats.

Without a doubt I get 200% more enjoyment when I am in the mood and take a stroll down "memory lane" with full room encompassing sound playing the oldies vs. playing new, great recorded music which I really do enjoy, although the emotional connection trumps every time.

This is one reason why I love streaming so much. I don't have these thousands of old songs/albums at my fingertips with any of the other available formats. I still really enjoy vinyl, cd's, R2R as well. All depends on my mood.

 

[howiebrou]

Howie, Welcome to the "time machine".

More important to me is how my systems sound with 50's, 60's, 70's pop/rock that I grew up with.

With great recordings, for me, they usually sound good on ANY system and if I want to listen to that music the quality is never an issue. Of course great recordings can reach great heights on a top performing system.

With the old pop/recordings when I play an album that I was in love with at 13 or 17 years old, my visual memory snaps right back to a few snapshot from that time period. I never in a million years would have the very clear, distinct memory "blast from the past" that materializes when I hear specific tracks or albums.

I was on a kick like the last night. I listened all the way through two Temtpations albums and a full #1 hits album by the Supremes. Then Abandoned Luncheonette by Hall and Oats.

Without at doubt I get 200% more enjoyment when I am in the mood and take a stroll down "memory lane" with full room encompassing sound playing the oldies vs. playing new, great recorded music which I really do enjoy, although the emotional connection trumps every time.

This is one reason why I love streaming so much. I don't have these thousands of old songs/albums at my fingertips with any of the other available formats. I still really enjoy vinyl, cd's, R2R as well. All depends on my mood.

The Time Machine. Perfect.

 

[Al M.]

Anyone else afraid this may be true? I mean in the sense that I'm secretly hoping for something better to come along. And also, the DAC blind tests we in Zürich and that I posted about some time ago have made a strong impression on me, which is that digital audio hasn't improved as much as advertising wants to make us believe. Those day and night differences, in true, matched level blind tests, were gradual in reality. Sufficient to tell DACs apart for the most part (the number one criteria of blind test, the sine qua non, so to speak). Of course I agree with Brad (morricab) that there's a difference between SOTA and so-called SOTA, just saying, once one is free from the expectation bias that one is going to hear an improvement and starts listening for actual differences, it turns out it's difficult, and sometimes disappointing. In particular the engineer among us (not me) saw his innate if not professional expectation in continuous development dashed to some extent. But even the audiophiles among us ended up feeling a bit sobered after a number of sessions over a few weeks (veteran audiophiles tend to be a bit more realistic when it comes to their ability to "perform" in blind tests - I'm personally doing well, yet wouldn't ever bet a dime).

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

I never took the statement "we are living in the golden age of audio" to mean "this is the best we can achieve", but rather "this is the best we've ever had it". And I also don't see it limited to DACs, but extended to amplification, speakers etc.

As I have made clear , I wholeheartedly agree with the statement.

 

[microstrip]

(...) . Certainly, some get lucky and have a room that needs minimal care and acoustic treatment, but I think that is the exception.
(...)

I think you are too pessimist. F. Toole reports in his book a statistical study of common room characteristics and found most of them are quite acceptable for audio playback.
My listening room only needed a very limited acoustic treatment when I inserted the XLF because of its very extended bass or the SoundLabs excessive back radiation. For more common speakers the carpet , furniture, chairs, sofas, bookshelves, a lot of equipment and paintings were enough.

IMHO the more common problem of most users sharing the room is that they are not allowed to place the speakers at the best positions.

 

[Al M.]

I think you are too pessimist. F. Toole reports in his book a statistical study of common room characteristics and found most of them are quite acceptable for audio playback.

That's the problem. "Quite acceptable" is not good enough for the best playback.

IMHO the more common problem of most users sharing the room is that they are not allowed to place the speakers at the best positions.

Agreed, that's problematic, too.

 

[PeterA]

I have never heard a SOTA audio system or been in an SOTA dedicated listening room. The vast majority of audiophiles I have met or spoken to live in the realm of “quite acceptable”. The simple truth of the matter is that very few people have the dedication and resources to pursue the SOTA or what we would describe as “the best“.

 

[Al M.]

Howie, Welcome to the "time machine".

More important to me is how my systems sound with 50's, 60's, 70's pop/rock that I grew up with.

With great recordings, for me, they usually sound good on ANY system and if I want to listen to that music the quality is never an issue. Of course great recordings can reach great heights on a top performing system.

With the old pop/recordings when I play an album that I was in love with at 13 or 17 years old, my visual memory snaps right back to a few snapshot from that time period. I never in a million years would have the very clear, distinct memory "blast from the past" that materializes when I hear specific tracks or albums.

I was on a kick like that last night. I listened all the way through two Temtpations albums and a full #1 hits album by the Supremes. Then Abandoned Luncheonette by Hall and Oats.

Without a doubt I get 200% more enjoyment when I am in the mood and take a stroll down "memory lane" with full room encompassing sound playing the oldies vs. playing new, great recorded music which I really do enjoy, although the emotional connection trumps every time.

This is one reason why I love streaming so much. I don't have these thousands of old songs/albums at my fingertips with any of the other available formats. I still really enjoy vinyl, cd's, R2R as well. All depends on my mood.

Sometimes I also listen to those old pop/rock albums; just yesterday I enjoyed how good "But Seriously, Folks..." (1978) by Joe Walsh sounded on my system.

But I have mostly ventured into very different music than in my youth, classical, modern classical avantgarde, jazz (classical and avantgarde).

Sure, it still doesn't sound like the real thing, but I just cannot get over how seriously believable a string quartet can sound on my system (and those of friends) these days, with all the intricate micro detail of timbre and shading of bowing transients. It's almost like a miracle to me that it's even possible, and I could not have dreamed of this a few years ago.

The golden age of audio, indeed.

 

[Rhapsody]

Sometimes I also listen to those old pop/rock albums; just yesterday I enjoyed how good "But Seriously, Folks..." (1978) by Joe Walsh sounded on my system.

But I have mostly ventured into very different music than in my youth, classical, modern classical avantgarde, jazz (classical and avantgarde).

Sure, it still doesn't sound like the real thing, but I just cannot get over how seriously believable a string quartet can sound on my system (and those of friends) these days, with all the intricate micro detail of timbre and shading of bowing transients. It's almost like a miracle to me that it's even possible, and I could not have dreamed of this a few years ago.

The golden age of audio, indeed.

Agreed. I have also ventured into "you name it" genres. Not now with the virus, but I normally have guests from around the globe visiting on a weekly basis. They all have their favorites which exposes me to everything out there.

I do listen to classical for around 6 hours a day. And then I love old 50's and 60's jazz. Indian music can be mystical and magical. There are so many great genres and I enjoy them all. BUT I would never have been exposed to all of this plethora of different music if it wasn't for streaming. That has been the key to me discovering and enjoying everything from Opera, to Country and oh I forgot Hip-Hop. I love the Mac Miller "Circles" album.
.
Just don't want to give the impression that I only listen to the old pop/rock stuff even though I really am mesmerized by it when I do.

 

[Rhapsody]

Agreed. I have also ventured into "you name it" genres. Not now with the virus, but I normally have guests from around the globe visiting on a weekly basis. They all have their favorites which exposes me to everything out there.

I do listen to classical for around 6 hours a day. And then I love old 50's and 60's jazz. Indian music can be mystical and magical. There are so many great genres and I enjoy them all. BUT I would never have been exposed to all of this plethora of different music if it wasn't for streaming. That has been the key to me discovering and enjoying everything from Opera, to Country and oh I forgot Hip-Hop. I love the Mac Miller "Circles" album.
.
Just don't want to give the impression that I only listen to the old pop/rock stuff even though I really am mesmerized by it when I do.

Al,

Thinking about it, it's a different experience for me when I listen to the "all genres" and great recordings from those genres. I would say that is the majority of my listening which is basically "all over the place". BUT this listening is getting goosebumps, enjoying the music, REALLY enjoying the sonics etc, BUT with all of this listening I don't get the vivid emotional flashabacks (sort of like tripping without the LSD) that I do as when I hear tracks that were so influential in my youth.

I also think that growing up literally in a BAR in the 50's in Pennsylvania (imagine the" Deer Hunter" movie environment) with a BIG Wurlitzer Juke Box and then as a teenager in the late 60's, well, that all left a HEAVY imprint on my psyche and the music of those times are the key to my very enjoyable "flashbacks".

LOVE MUSIC!!!!

 

[Empirical Audio]

Or play CD like I do. According to the Shannon-Nyquist sampling theorem 44.1 should sound like hi-res, but practical implementation has been lagging behind theory for several decades, hence the technical crutch of higher sampling rates. So if eventually it can actually be the case in practice, it shouldn't be surprising.

The only thing holding 44.1 back IME is the DIGITAL FILTERING. Eliminate that for all practical purposes and you have hi-res. The Yggdrasil does do custom Digital Filtering, so it should improve this.