To be honest, I cannot hear a difference between Concert and Discovery. I am curious as well about user scenarios where one mode should be preferred to the other and why, perhaps @Taiko Audio can clarify here.
Taiko Audio SGM Extreme : the Crème de la Crème
- Thread starter CKKeung
- Start date
To be honest, I cannot hear a difference between Concert and Discovery. I am curious as well about user scenarios where one mode should be preferred to the other and why, perhaps @Taiko Audio can clarify here.
Yes they are different now and will evolve differently.
Before discovery mode would download (cache) then play tracks one by one, so each track would be separated by the time it would take to download the track. Concert mode would download all tracks in the queue so you would have a longer wait time before playback starts but less between tracks. Why there’s still a gap even in concert mode I’ll explain later.
Right now discovery mode still employs the same scheme but concert mode now starts after the first track is downloaded and preloads the sub-sequential track(s) during playback. The goal is to achieve this without a loss in sound quality, which can be verified by performing A/B comparisons, between the 2 playback modes.
In the future, we’ll either achieve concert mode to be truly gapless without any degradation to sound quality, in which case discovery mode can either be removed OR changed into a non caching playback mode OR a playback with a small buffer like Roon for fast music discovery / less critical listening. Or perhaps we’ll manage to make this type of playback identical sounding to full cache tracking in which case the only advantage of concert mode would be to have stable playback on unstable internet connections.
It could also eventually lead to just having a cached/non cached checkbox in stead of 2 playback modes.
But we cannot know how this is going to end up as there’s a lot of coding and development evolved with each step, and we do want to be able to verify sound quality implications of each step to the previous, so although this makes it a much longer road to travel, it’s one that provides us with the best night’s rest knowing we left no stone unturned.
Now to circle back to why there’s that gap in the first place, even in the initial concert mode playback scheme, there’s more to it then just downloading / caching the track, the track is also processed by an engine we have to think up a fancy name for, which was an @EuroDriver morning shower idea on why bit identical files can sound different when downloaded from different sources, locations or media. This has been a controversial topic of discussion since the early days of digital file playback starting with different methods of CD ripping, where CD rips were considered to sound different depending on the ripping software used, the ripping drive used, power supplies used while ripping, etc. Nowadays this more or less moved to local file playback versus play from NAS or stream from online sources, where you can even have a preference for Tidal or Qobuz. This engine/process is a vital part of XDMS and not only provides a significant boost in sound quality but also aims at making the actual “source of bits” irrelevant.
the new v221110 version of xdms is simply extraordinary, pure emotion.
Well that is a very positive development on the road to gapless playback while retaining maximum SQ.
It would indeed interact with the below surface and hence there’s no universal best.
On Artesania moving the supporting footers outward tend to creater a fuller/slower/warmer sound while moving them inward tightens/speeds things up which seems to oppose your own experiences.
I think it is system dependent. Simorag, Do you have your speakers "out into the room"? Say 6' or 8' off of the back wall? Also if you are listening on LS3 5a (Great speakers) then you are going to have different results vs listening to speakers that go down into the 20HZ regions and speakers that are "out into the room".
If your speakers are close to the back wall I don't think you will hear a difference between discovery and concert. I've tried on three sets of speakers/systems (speakers out 8' into the room from the back wall) and concert mode is more holographic, with more resolution and layering in the soundstage vs discovery mode.
Also you said there is <1 sec gap with streaming Qobuz between tracks. This is definitely not the case. Are you sure you are not listening to a file? Which is <1sec gap between tracks.
Hi, I confirm I am getting very short gap with Qobuz, around 1s or less. I have spent the good part of this morning listening to streamed albums (16/44, Concert mode) and that has consistently been the case.
I am mostly using headphones, and for critical listening I normally use the Abyss 1266TC, i.e. the most resolving ones I own. I was not able to detect a difference between Discovery and Concert, possibly my ears are not resolving enough
By the way, my understanding is that Discovery could in principle sound better, not vice versa...
That is amazing that you are getting <1 gap with Qobuz streaming. We need to get Ed to peek into your system and see what is different with your system vs. everyone else.Hi, I confirm I am getting very short gap with Qobuz, around 1s or less. I have spent the good part of this morning listening to streamed albums (16/44, Concert mode) and that has consistently been the case.
I am mostly using headphones, and for critical listening I normally use the Abyss 1266TC, i.e. the most resolving ones I own. I was not able to detect a difference between Discovery and Concert, possibly my ears are not resolving enough
By the way, my understanding is that Discovery could in principle sound better, not vice versa...
I believe with HP's there would not be much of a difference. I noticed the difference as I said with more of a holographic sound with instruments spread out on the soundstage with space around each voice and instruments.
Talk to Ed about Discovery vs Concert. Yesterday he said Concert could have a slight sonic advantage. In my set ups it definitely does.
Like I said all system and user dependent. But I would suggest to have Ed look at how you are getting <1 sec gap which is gapless via streaming Qobuz when no one else is. That's a great thing.
ED- Why not see how Simorag is getting <1 sec gaps with streaming?
Great question! And how exactly sounds a good or excellent SSD? I have been reading and testing myself (mainly for OS) and that is still going on : Samsung 970PRO, Intel 760P, Intel 665P, Intel Optane10M, Sabrent rocket 4 plus and also SLC types SSD.
SSD memory (and also RAM for that matter) whether it be for OS or music files do not sound the same and selecting one specific model could be to your advantage.
Following you will find a link and a chart if you like to read more. The spider chart shows the strongest points of a few NVMe SSDs that where compared by Zzyzx against their Revelation Audio SSD. I am not sure about the absolute values (1 to 10) but the comparison between sound character of SSD alternatives divided in eight different sound categories can be very insightful and it will give you an idea what to listen for and also try to understand why a specific SSD is recommended.
I would think a certain balance of these characteristics could be more beneficial, so an excellent SSD for your system does not necessarily need to score 10 out of 10 in each category:
- Transparency (high 10)
- Imaging (focus 10)
- Sound stage (big 10)
- Holographic (most 3D 10)
- Sound character (cold-warm 10)
- Representation (digital - analog 10)
- Naturalness (most 10)
- Vibrant (most 10)
My personal findings confirm that some audio characteristics will stand out more than others on each SSD so which one to choose is a matter of personal taste. Also I did not take special care for grounding or EMI shielding and unfortunately I could not find a way to externally power a NVMe M.2 SSD. But it is definitely worth comparing SSDs to find the best for your setup.
- - -
NVMe SSD designed for audiophiles
Almost a year in the making, the world's only NVMe M2 SSD designed for audiophiles and music lovers. Designed from ground up, co-develop with controller manufacturer using 3D NAND flash with pseudo SLC mode, external clock oscillator, 200% more PCB copper isolation, milspec PCB stiffness, 300% gr...
audiophilestyle.com
Revelation Femto SSD | Zzyzx
Femto NVMe M2 SSD designed for audiophiles and music lovers
Image taken from zzyzxphile.com
Last edited:
As I move on with re-discovering my favorite albums with XDMS, and occasionally reverting back to Roon for A/B comparisons, there are two things that consistently present themselves witth XDMS.
One is easy to define, and it is that the recordings sound much more different from each other compared to Roon, which tends to smoothen out the difference. Samplers show this sound signature adaptive change quite effectively. Tonal balance (bright to dark), and speed & dynamics are more even with Roon, while XDMS highlights the trait of a single recording more starkingly.
This album, possibly one of the very best Bartók piano concertos renditions available on record, has extreme, violent dynamic changes, which are way more startling with XDMS.
This one is more on the opposite end, with much longer decay timing (minimalistic recording in a church), and this is very well shown by XDMS, which provides a rich, warm, diffused presentation, which however still allow to retrieve nuances, small spatial cues, microdynamics events, as opposed to a more smeared display from Roon.
The other characteristic of XDMS I am more and more noticing (and attracted to), is quite elusive to put in words, and it is how 'alive' the music sounds. This applies equally to vocals-dominated content and to instrumental compositions. There seem to be a certain glowing-from-within to the sound, and the timing is always animated by a motoric, engaging energy.
This one for example is irresistible!
One is easy to define, and it is that the recordings sound much more different from each other compared to Roon, which tends to smoothen out the difference. Samplers show this sound signature adaptive change quite effectively. Tonal balance (bright to dark), and speed & dynamics are more even with Roon, while XDMS highlights the trait of a single recording more starkingly.
This album, possibly one of the very best Bartók piano concertos renditions available on record, has extreme, violent dynamic changes, which are way more startling with XDMS.
This one is more on the opposite end, with much longer decay timing (minimalistic recording in a church), and this is very well shown by XDMS, which provides a rich, warm, diffused presentation, which however still allow to retrieve nuances, small spatial cues, microdynamics events, as opposed to a more smeared display from Roon.
The other characteristic of XDMS I am more and more noticing (and attracted to), is quite elusive to put in words, and it is how 'alive' the music sounds. This applies equally to vocals-dominated content and to instrumental compositions. There seem to be a certain glowing-from-within to the sound, and the timing is always animated by a motoric, engaging energy.
This one for example is irresistible!
Generally what I’ve noticed is the nearer the centre the footers are, the more of the footer’s effect and sound you’re going to get. So if you like your rack a lot put the footers nearer the edge; if you like your footers a lot put them nearer the center.
Wow!
Ahmad Jamal „live in Marciac“ sounds great even with roon, thx for the recommendation!
Further fussing with footers:
In the beginning I had footers under the Taiko somewhere where they, all four, had good contact to the floor, where the Taiko‘s weight was resting on all four of them.
Bringing just one footer close to the edge sounded wrong.
Now I tried all four footers close to the edge: pretty good!
I am afraid I need to fool around more …
Ahmad Jamal „live in Marciac“ sounds great even with roon, thx for the recommendation!
Further fussing with footers:
In the beginning I had footers under the Taiko somewhere where they, all four, had good contact to the floor, where the Taiko‘s weight was resting on all four of them.
Bringing just one footer close to the edge sounded wrong.
Now I tried all four footers close to the edge: pretty good!
I am afraid I need to fool around more …
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
well once again , if one uses Center Stage footers, the positioning under the Extreme is where I showed mine are
This is very interesting. Thanks for educational and scientific way of presenting it !Great question! And what exactly makes a good or excellent SSD? I have been reading and testing myself (mainly for OS) and that is still going on : Samsung 970PRO, Intel 760P, Intel 665P, Intel Optane10M, Sabrent rocket 4 plus and also SLC types SSD.
SSD's (and RAM for that matter) whether it be for OS or music files do not sound the same and selecting one specific model could be to your advantage.
Following a link and a chart if you like to read more. The spider chart shows the strongest points of a few NVMe SSDs that where compared by Zzyzx against the Revelation Audio SSD. I am not sure about the absolute values but the comparison between SSD alternatives sound character divided in eight different sound categories can be very helpful and it will give you an idea what to listen for. Does an excellent SSD score 10 out of 10 for each characteristic or is there a sytem dependend balance you are looing for and some categories should not be 10 out of 10?
SSD sound categories used below:
- Transparency (high 10)
- Imaging (focus 10)
- Sound stage (big 10)
- Holographic (most 3D 10)
- Sound character (cold-warm 10)
- Representation (digital - analog 10)
- Naturalness (most 10)
- Vibrant (most 10)
Interesting is that Revelation Audio SSD can be externally powered. That has pushed the Revelation Audio SSD to the top according to various users. Revelation is about 5 times the price of the lower priced NVMe types (so I did not compare).
My personal findings confirm that some audio characteristics will stand out more than other on each SSD so it will become a matter of personal taste which one to choose. Note that I did not take special care for grounding, EMI shielding and unfortunately I could not find a way to externally power a NVMe M.2 SSD. But is definitely worth comparing yourself.
- - -
NVMe SSD designed for audiophiles
Almost a year in the making, the world's only NVMe M2 SSD designed for audiophiles and music lovers. Designed from ground up, co-develop with controller manufacturer using 3D NAND flash with pseudo SLC mode, external clock oscillator, 200% more PCB copper isolation, milspec PCB stiffness, 300% gr...Revelation Femto SSD | Zzyzx
Femto NVMe M2 SSD designed for audiophiles and music loverszzyzxphile.com
View attachment 100268
Image taken from zzyzxphile.com
View attachment 100269
I understand we have Optane in Extreme ,
What about the nvme memory for internal files ? Are those Samsung ?
Is there a way to add a separate power supply to each or that will not meke e difference ?
Ahmad Jamal sounds great anywhere! Anytime. Even on a car radio.
For music storage it’s less critical as those drives read a track in less then a second and then shut down. For the OS drive it’s indeed Optane, which we’re unfortunately are going to need to replace as it went out of production, we have managed to secure a sizeable stock but those will eventually run out. We have a new OS drive solution design scheduled but I don’t think we can realistically launch that before July/August 2023 as we have the network card and switch launching start of January, then 2 other new products/upgrades in March (to be announced soon) and the BPS in May.
This sounds great .
Thank you Emile and Taiko Team for doing all of this for us with your unlimited passion.
We will help find new chapters to open, just like the extreme was going to be resistent to the network
twicks and now we are getting very close to get Taiko card and Taiko switch.
The best thing is this journey will never end !
my experience is that there is a huge difference between local and qobuz. for example, listening to the 50th anniversary deluxe release of Sgt. Pepper, with a local WAV file the album starts with a huge wide soundstage, and that just doesn't happen with streaming the same album.
in the past, i have found that the streaming sound was close to the local version of a flac file, both of which were way below the local WAV file. i will have to revisit local WAV v. FLAC with xdms, but the xdms delta in SQ between local WAV v. qobuz (which is of course flac) is obvious here.
@Taiko: can you shed any light on the flac vs. wav issue?
update: i created a new set of comparisons with WAV vs. uncompressed flac, all local files, and there is clearly a difference. why???????
my amplifiers are being changed, so all listening for the near term will be on stax sr-009 which are very revealing of both sound stage and detail.
Last edited:
Yes, I knew about the RAM caches - even CD players used it. But in this case the needed encryption adds another layer of complexity to the process. Are you using this encryption process to improve sound quality in any way?
