State-of-the-Art Digital

[acousticsguru]

I also have a lot of music, however, there are some albums from my past that have one good track on them, so I don't have those albums on disk. The advantage of streaming is that you can put together playlists that include all of those great one-off tracks. There is also a lot of really old music, some from the 1940's and 1950's that I have in my streaming library. These playlists have been great for when I'm working with my hands. I don't do that much "critical listening" for pleasure anyway.

I listen primarily to classical music, i.e. whole albums mostly, or at least complete works. But what you're saying makes great sense. I applaud your discipline compiling playlists, though, I'm afraid I'd be too lazy for that…

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

P.S.
Recently been discussing your white paper regarding reflections in S/PDIF cables, by the way, and the resulting preference for a minimum cable length. The white paper itself no longer appears to be online, though?

 

[Empirical Audio]

I listen primarily to classical music, i.e. whole albums mostly, or at least complete works. But what you're saying makes great sense. I applaud your discipline compiling playlists, though, I'm afraid I'd be too lazy for that…

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

P.S.
Recently been discussing your white paper regarding reflections in S/PDIF cables, by the way, and the resulting preference for a minimum cable length. The white paper itself no longer appears to be online, though?

It's still there:

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue14/spdif.htm

Most CD transports and even server S/PDIF outputs have very slow risetimes, between 2 and 20 nsec, so this makes this cable length critical. This is intentional by many manufacturers so that even with the worst coax cable and mis-termination, they will pass FCC emissions testing. I don't design my S/PDIF outputs this way. They get emissions tested with good low-reflection BNC-terminated S/PDIF cables and they still pass even though they have risetimes in the 700psec range. This happens because the impedance matching is precise, which minimizes the reflections that cause unwanted emissions. I generally insist on using my cable on the output of my S/PDIF devices. Faster edge-rates results in less jitter.

 

[acousticsguru]

It's still there:

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue14/spdif.htm

Thank you! The question we had was this: is this relevant for 75?-clocking cables (external master clocks), too, or just S/PDIF?

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[morricab]

Makes great sense to me. It is, however, the reason I do not use streaming - I'm wondering at times if I'll ever manage to listen to all the music I have in form of files? To give an example, you've just now reminded me I have the high-resolution download of Awase, meant to listen to it, and never have. Just put it on now. As to the discussion which sounds better, analogue or digital, I guess that depends on the respective analogue and digital rig (in absolute terms, neither is perfect as far as I am concerned). I certainly see no reason why a good high-resolution digital master shouldn't sound good cut to LP. I love ECM, always have since my analogue days, except a couple recent Keith Jarrett live recordings appear to be suffering from dynamic compression. The first tracks of Awase sound great, a digital recording with impact, timbre, body and enormous warmth, can't say the different analogue setups I owned (no longer do, growing lazy with age) sounded more "analogue".

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

Check out Nik Baertsch's Mobile album Continuum...that is really great stuff and an outstanding recording as well as Llyria (from 2010)...actually his whole ECM catalog is phenomenal.

 

[Empirical Audio]

Thank you! The question we had was this: is this relevant for 75?-clocking cables (external master clocks), too, or just S/PDIF?

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

It would seem to not be as big an issue with clocking cables, because the reflections would be a constant, with every edge getting the same time offset. However, because reflections can cause the edges to appear slower, this makes the receiver more likely to detect the edges at different times rather than at the same time for each edge. This is jitter. I would still use a really short cable, like 8 inches or a minimum of 1 meter, nothing in-between, just to be safe. If one knows the signal risetime, then you can predict what length would be safe.

 

[acousticsguru]

Check out Nik Baertsch's Mobile album Continuum...that is really great stuff and an outstanding recording as well as Llyria (from 2010)...actually his whole ECM catalog is phenomenal.

Thanks! Awase appears to be the only album of his I have so far.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[morricab]

Blue Maqams was one the first Hirez downloads I bought. First because of music and later found that is has excellent sonics. Do you think that there is any valid reason to motivate people owning top DACs to get such digital recordings in LP?

I can't speak for others in that regard but that is what I like to do and I own a very high level DAC and also a very good sounding TT system. They don't sound the same as I am sure you know from your own experience. Of course the mastering for vinyl is somewhat different usually than for cd and maybe that has something to do with the somewhat different sonics...not to mention the playback itself introduces a completely different set of distortions than the digital hardware and despite the so-called SOTA those distortions are IMO of a more synthetic nature than analog distortions and therefore less tolerable and less relaxing to listen to. So is not so much that it is a digital recording, IMO, it is the way of playing it back and the two processes are so different that it is easy to see how one would potentially have a preference. Really good digital sounds great and when listening I don't opine for analog; however, really good analog digs deeper into your psyche (I won't use the word soul since I don't believe in one).

I think that most tape machines (except for expensive rebuilds or perhaps refurbished tube studio machines) don't sound as good as good analog because their output circuitry is inferior to a good phonostage and causes damage to the sound in a third way from digital or vinyl analog...but generally less synthetic sounding compared to nearly all digital.

 

[morricab]

Thanks! Awase appears to be the only album of his I have so far.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

IMO, its good but not their best. I prefer Continuum, Stoa and Llyra.

 

[acousticsguru]

It would seem to not be as big an issue with clocking cables, because the reflections would be a constant, with every edge getting the same time offset. However, because reflections can cause the edges to appear slower, this makes the receiver more likely to detect the edges at different times rather than at the same time for each edge. This is jitter. I would still use a really short cable, like 8 inches or a minimum of 1 meter, nothing in-between, just to be safe. If one knows the signal risetime, then you can predict what length would be safe.

Thanks! The difference in clocking between 44k and 48k has no effect on these considerations, I guess?

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[morricab]

It's still there:

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue14/spdif.htm

Most CD transports and even server S/PDIF outputs have very slow risetimes, between 2 and 20 nsec, so this makes this cable length critical. This is intentional by many manufacturers so that even with the worst coax cable and mis-termination, they will pass FCC emissions testing. I don't design my S/PDIF outputs this way. They get emissions tested with good low-reflection BNC-terminated S/PDIF cables and they still pass even though they have risetimes in the 700psec range. This happens because the impedance matching is precise, which minimizes the reflections that cause unwanted emissions. I generally insist on using my cable on the output of my S/PDIF devices. Faster edge-rates results in less jitter.

I worked during my Ph.D to minimize cable reflections in Mass Spectrometric detectors. Since we were dealing with frequencies > 300MHz we had to deal with impedance mismatches that caused our signal to ring (reflections that were timed based on the length of our cables). We had the issue because we had two floating detectors (>10KV), which required special high voltage dividers and capacitors to isolate the detectors and this lead to a horrible impedance mismatch, which we finally solved by changing the geometry of the arrangment of the circuits. Ultimately, we could suppress the ringing by more than 30db, which was good enough for our work. I can imagine how this poor match with digital interfaces could also impact timing due to reflections.

 

[the sound of Tao]

Reread how you wrote and you will see what I mean I think. You were drawing some rather clear lines around groups of people that sounded (especially for you) somewhat simplistic.

Why would we need to put our systems up against each other? At least one of your systems (the PAP one) seems pretty interesting to me. The oher two not so much but if they all give you the same level of musical satisfaction then it's all good.

You are perhaps reading way too much into my original comment Brad is what I’m trying to say. It was a simple observation. It wasn’t the sum of all evaluation. It was non judgemental and non critical.

We all come at this in our own ways and as part of that we shape and at varying levels concretise our realties.

I genuinely believe we would all benefit if we took some time and wrote a system approach philosophy that captured our aims and priorities in system design. They would all read differently I hope (and believe).

I appreciate where others come from and where they are going and that some are more divergent from each of us and that we also all correlate in some ways.

We all have preferences and they are really only specifically relevant to ourselves... and while change rate may vary we are clearly not static.

At this point my assessment parameters are at their most broad and fluid, and my system philosophy at its most simple and defined. I’ve pared back to the first question and the summative final question being simply in an assessment of ultimate musical engagement. The actuality that this is still very much related to and also requires (but not in any linear exactness) for me also very high levels of system sonic performance.

The overwhelming essential connection and also fine nuance (and so the conveyance of music and artistry) that a proper highly resolving natural resolution of the sound imparts is enmeshed then within the quality of musical connection and engagement. But for me that sonic achievement is a means to a musical end, a phase of assessment that is certainly a critical part of the equation but not the essential end goal for me. So when faced with evaluating a change and making a choice based in sonic outcomes (where we are evaluating the many parts) I find that the summative holistic evaluation, how does this change the quality of my musical engagement and connection to be the deciding factor.

The initial question on this is out of unconscious awareness and the final summative question aims to also include a conscious understanding of the effect. So out of the dark and up into the light before then letting go into the fading of the daylight and so to plunge back again into the music. I start with music and feeling and I learn and I end with music and feeling. The starting point always then defines the end in any cycle.

For others this can be likewise or just different... and realising that is a big step forward in realising that therefore there is no one universal best for all.

My system is modest compared to some and extravagant compared to others, it performs the way I want it to and in that it reflects and defines my goals which is why it is important we appreciate diversity as we can then also learn from it. It isn’t about right or wrong and the position of others offers us challenging perspectives and keeps our self review alive and a great mirror unto ourselves. By relating to the preferences of others it is another way that we can see our own position and that ultimately balances us within the whole.

My original statement grew out of a realisation that for some things like the digital or analogue subsets are boxes that some choose to set themselves within wholly into in their search for system development, or valve or ss or speaker typology... and as I said that’s all good. But that doesn’t limit the value I see in the way others can experience and value any other quality garnered in this journey.

I could happily build a musical system out of either source and actually have. My hunger to explore more music and my budget set me into my pathway. Sonics are always a critical parameter but for me in relationship with musical engagement I see the relationship as a nested model (one exists within the other) with sonics as a part of musical engagement rather than a Venn diagram where these things are both interlinked but also then valuably separate as outcomes and then also in ways distinct. These are just different frameworks but both can contain exactly the same number and outcomes in values.

We all build our own rooms into which we then grow to become ourselves.

 

[Empirical Audio]

Thanks! The difference in clocking between 44k and 48k has no effect on these considerations, I guess?

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

No, only the edge-rates, risetimes, falltimes.

 

[Empirical Audio]

I worked during my Ph.D to minimize cable reflections in Mass Spectrometric detectors. Since we were dealing with frequencies > 300MHz we had to deal with impedance mismatches that caused our signal to ring (reflections that were timed based on the length of our cables). We had the issue because we had two floating detectors (>10KV), which required special high voltage dividers and capacitors to isolate the detectors and this lead to a horrible impedance mismatch, which we finally solved by changing the geometry of the arrangment of the circuits. Ultimately, we could suppress the ringing by more than 30db, which was good enough for our work. I can imagine how this poor match with digital interfaces could also impact timing due to reflections.

There are a lot of ways to terminate clock signals, including series termination, parallel termination, combination series and parallel (S/PDIF), split termination, active termination and R/C termination. I've used them all. Only a couple of these can be used effectively with dynamically changing signals.

 

[spiritofmusic]

You are perhaps reading way too much into my original comment Brad is what I’m trying to say. It was a simple observation. It wasn’t the sum of all evaluation. It was non judgemental and non critical.

We all come at this in our own ways and as part of that we shape and at varying levels concretise our realties.

I genuinely believe we would all benefit if we took some time and wrote a system approach philosophy that captured our aims and priorities in system design. They would all read differently I hope (and believe).

I appreciate where others come from and where they are going and that some are more divergent from each of us and that we also all correlate in some ways.

We all have preferences and they are really only specifically relevant to ourselves... and while change rate may vary we are clearly not static.

At this point my assessment parameters are at their most broad and fluid, and my system philosophy at its most simple and defined. I’ve pared back to the first question and the summative final question being simply in an assessment of ultimate musical engagement. The actuality that this is still very much related to and also requires (but not in any linear exactness) for me also very high levels of system sonic performance.

The overwhelming essential connection and also fine nuance (and so the conveyance of music and artistry) that a proper highly resolving natural resolution of the sound imparts is enmeshed then within the quality of musical connection and engagement. But for me that sonic achievement is a means to a musical end, a phase of assessment that is certainly a critical part of the equation but not the essential end goal for me. So when faced with evaluating a change and making a choice based in sonic outcomes (where we are evaluating the many parts) I find that the summative holistic evaluation, how does this change the quality of my musical engagement and connection to be the deciding factor.

The initial question on this is out of unconscious awareness and the final summative question aims to also include a conscious understanding of the effect. So out of the dark and up into the light before then letting go into the fading of the daylight and so to plunge back again into the music. I start with music and feeling and I learn and I end with music and feeling. The starting point always then defines the end in any cycle.

For others this can be likewise or just different... and realising that is a big step forward in realising that therefore there is no one universal best for all.

My system is modest compared to some and extravagant compared to others, it performs the way I want it to and in that it reflects and defines my goals which is why it is important we appreciate diversity as we can then also learn from it. It isn’t about right or wrong and the position of others offers us challenging perspectives and keeps our self review alive and a great mirror unto ourselves. By relating to the preferences of others it is another way that we can see our own position and that ultimately balances us within the whole.

My original statement grew out of a realisation that for some things like the digital or analogue subsets are boxes that some choose to set themselves within wholly into in their search for system development, or valve or ss or speaker typology... and as I said that’s all good. But that doesn’t limit the value I see in the way others can experience and value any other quality garnered in this journey.

I could happily build a musical system out of either source and actually have. My hunger to explore more music and my budget set me into my pathway. Sonics are always a critical parameter but for me in relationship with musical engagement I see the relationship as a nested model (one exists within the other) with sonics as a part of musical engagement rather than a Venn diagram where these things are both interlinked but also then valuably separate as outcomes and then also in ways distinct. These are just different frameworks but both can contain exactly the same number and outcomes in values.

We all build our own rooms into which we then grow to become ourselves.

Well Graham, when I read comments of a recently introduced second in line model of a brand of spkrs very visible on WBF atm at c$200k as being "more affordable" it's taking truisms to their furthest limits Lol.
So me and you have more "modest" systems...again stretching a truism when I tell those relying on IPods or Soundbars how pricey some of my tweaks are.
For me, I would quite like a choice on streamer and dac for the same price as my cdp to hit the ground running. If I can get a self effacing and immersive sound off Tidal or Qobuz on day one, I'll be more than happy.
Will that then naturally steer me to more and more choice/compulsion to investigate streamed music? I'm hoping my ego invested in being a vinylphile first and foremost, and close behind a closet cd fan, won't deter me.

 

[the sound of Tao]

G’day Marc,
We are caught somewhere betwixt and between both the extravagance and the affordable. Is streaming worthwhile, tonight I focussed just on the incomparable Sarah Vaughn. There were 169 albums of her albums to choose from, I spent the night by starting going through sampling for performance and sound quality. I learnt how extraordinary Sarah Vaughn was in that incredible rendering and investment in every performance of her artistry... there was a surprisingly high quality across many of her recordings and I learnt so many things by accessing an extraordinary amount of her body of work that I simply couldn’t know from owning just a half a dozen of her recordings prior to accessing her near entire body of work via streaming.

Most every day I launch into learning more about musicians by going through much of their available recordings. In the last months I’ve added so much of the available great 50’s and 60’s jazz recordings from musicians like Donald Byrd, Dexter Gordon, Ornette Coleman, Jackie McLean, Herbie Hancock, Sonny Rollins, Thelonius Monk, Bud Powell, Miles Davis, Fats Navarro, Grant Green, Wayne Shorter, John Coltrane, Charles Mingus, Eric Dolphy, Charlie Parker, Art Blakey, Gill Evans, Paul Chambers, Ray Brown, Rhasaan Roland Kirk, Jimmy Smith, Horace Silver, Ahmed Jamal, Oscar Peterson, Joe Henderson, Art Pepper, Kenny Burrell, Freddy Hubbard, McCoy Tyner, Andrew Hill, Cecil Taylor, Johnny Coles, Milt Jackson, Duke Ellington and many more... and some of these artists may have had from dozens and up to 100’s of albums in their body of available work... I might have had a few or even a dozen albums of many of these musos before streaming. I’ve easily accessed more than this again of jazz musicians since the 80’s and discovered just as many again in contemporary jazz artists... and that’s just jazz alone, add even more for classical music with extraordinary performances from the very greatest of classical musicians of the last 80 years and just as many again in so many other genres. All at redbook minimum but a fair bit of it at studio master quality as well.

Many, many, many thousands of albums explored and enjoyed. A priceless experience worth completely investing in properly to access the riches and of the recorded musical history with a high quality streaming setup for sure.

 

[wil]

G’day Marc,
We are caught somewhere betwixt and between both the extravagance and the affordable. Is streaming worthwhile, tonight I focussed just on the incomparable Sarah Vaughn. There were 169 albums of her albums to choose from, I spent the night by starting going through sampling for performance and sound quality. I learnt how extraordinary Sarah Vaughn was in that incredible rendering and investment in every performance of her artistry... there was a surprisingly high quality across many of her recordings and I learnt so many things by accessing an extraordinary amount of her body of work that I simply couldn’t know from owning just a half a dozen of her recordings prior to accessing her near entire body of work via streaming.

Most every day I launch into learning more about musicians by going through much of their available recordings. In the last months I’ve added so much of the available great 50’s and 60’s jazz recordings from musicians like Donald Byrd, Dexter Gordon, Ornette Coleman, Jackie McLean, Herbie Hancock, Sonny Rollins, Thelonius Monk, Bud Powell, Miles Davis, Fats Navarro, Wayne Shorter, John Coltrane, Charles Mingus, Eric Dolphy, Charlie Parker, Art Blakey, Gill Evans, Paul Chambers, Ray Brown, Rhasaan Roland Kirk, Jimmy Smith, Horace Silver, Ahmed Jamal, Oscar Peterson, Joe Henderson, Art Pepper, Kenny Burrell, Freddy Hubbard, McCoy Tyner, Andrew Hill, Cecil Taylor, Johnny Coke’s, Milt Jackson, Duke Ellington and many more... and some of these artists may have had from dozens and up to 100’s of albums in their body of available work... I’ve easily accessed more than this again of jazz musicians since the 80’s and discovered just as many again of contemporary jazz artists, and that’s just jazz alone, add even more classical performances from the greatest of classical performers over the last 80 years of making phenomenal music and then just as many again in so many other genres.

Many, many thousands of albums explored and enjoyed. A priceless experience worth completely investing in properly to access with a good streaming setup for sure.

This is the great opportunity streaming opens for us-- to dig deep into particular artists and then explore all the branches. Sometimes I feel like a research musicologist. On good recordings, of which their are many-- particularly with jazz-- the sonics are rich, detailed, dynamic and as involving as recorded music can be. This is why I've been throwing all my efforts on the path of optimizing network audio. I don't have any desire to own the object (cd or lp). Music can be an intellectual and spiritual quest and and there is an almost infinite library waiting in the Cloud.

I do plan to start paying for downloads on some touchstone albums -- not only because it pays the artists more than streaming can, but for the possible sound quality benefits.

 

[the sound of Tao]

This is the great opportunity streaming opens for us-- to dig deep into particular artists and then explore all the branches. Sometimes I feel like a research musicologist. On good recordings, of which their are many-- particularly with jazz-- the sonics are rich, detailed, dynamic and as involving as recorded music can be. This is why I've been throwing all my efforts on the path of optimizing network audio. I don't have any desire to own the object (cd or lp). Music can be an intellectual and spiritual quest and and there is an almost infinite library waiting in the Cloud.

I do plan to start paying for downloads on some touchstone albums -- not only because it pays the artists more than streaming can, but for the possible sound quality benefits.

I also continue to buy albums, I have maybe 4tb of albums I’ve bought as downloads over the years and continue to add more as I go. Just mainly those that I listen to and will want to return to these days.

The horizon for musical discovery is almost seemingly infinite in many ways. But resilience is born of change and growing musically can come of launching into the stream. Traditionally there was only live performance... the notion that we just largely get stuck in a loop only of known and familiar recordings may not perhaps be the best thing for us musically I’m thinking. Music of the past, the present and also the promise of the future... it never seemed quite so alive as it all seems to me now. Streaming has definitely re-energised my musical horizons.

 

[morricab]

I also continue to buy albums, I have maybe 4tb of albums I’ve bought as downloads over the years and continue to add more as I go. Just mainly those that I listen to and will want to return to these days.

The horizon for musical discovery is almost seemingly infinite in many ways. But resilience is born of change and growing musically can come of launching into the stream. Traditionally there was only live performance... the notion that we just largely get stuck in a loop only of known and familiar recordings may not perhaps be the best thing for us musically I’m thinking. Music of the past, the present and also the promise of the future... it never seemed quite so alive as it all seems to me now. Streaming has definitely re-energised my musical horizons.

I still buy albums but only on vinyl now...

 

[Ron Resnick]

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. . . .

This is interesting to me, and puzzling. As much as I love a lot of garden-variety 1980s rock and pop songs musically and lyrically I think of those recordings as being shockingly poor sonically in terms of multi-track synthetic unnaturalness and early CD digititis.

Do you mean that listening to those recordings on your high-end audio system now sounds better than how you recall they sounded when you listened to them then on a CD Walkman?

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . .

We all build our own rooms into which we then grow to become ourselves.

Have you been talking to Northstar?