MSB Select II arrival

[spiritofmusic]

Sorry Brad, I can only call it as I heard it
To show I'm not totally biased, my fave digital piece of all time is the multibit Marantz CD12/DA12 from late 80s

 

[KeithR]

I'm going to side step the whole digital vinyl question for now; I don't have my arms sufficiently around the answer (if there is an answer). and honestly I'm enjoying the music too much to get into it.

I respect that, Mike. I hope you will revisit at some point this year. As a somewhat frustrated/hassled analog owner, something like a MSB Reference has much appeal.

 

[Al M.]

There are a lot of good DACs from the late 80s and early 90s (before the abandoning of R2Rs) that completely unlike this stereotype you have put forward...it is like a collective amnesia settled over everyone once we moved to 24/192 and now DSD that 16 bit PCM with a 18 or 20 bit DAC sounded bad. Try a STAX X1-T or Sonic Frontiers SFD-2MKII, a Mark Levinson No. 30.5 or a Theta Gen V and tell me they sound like you are describing. They don't at all sound like that.

You can hear this isn't true when you listen to a top Audio Note DAC (AD1865N), Aries Cerat DAC (AD1865N), Audio GD DAC (BB PCM1704) or even a lowly Monarchy M24 DAC (BB PCM63 or PCM1704). These all use chips from the past and don't sound at all like you describe.

Or a Schiit Yggdrasil R2R DAC. I mention it only because you had a Theta Gen V in your list, which is from the same designer (Mike Moffat). The Yggy also has "only" 20-bit DACs, since 20-bit resolution is the maximum possible resolution at the output of a DAC anyway (even the best power supplies have a noise floor that does not allow for greater resolution; the same obviously holds for amps etc.).

 

[Mike Lavigne]

So, I remain (reasonably LOL) confident that however stellar the Select II is (and I have no doubts it is very stellar), Mike won't come online to say it now is the king of those areas that analog has always IMHO triumphed on, and what makes lp (and tape) listening so visceral, and attention demanding, and all encompassing

And at the exalted Select II cost no object price, upward trajectory of digital engineering for over three decades now, and maturation of analog and no major technological leaps for decades now, I stick to my opinion that it's encumbent on the Select II to be doing more than just getting close to best analog

why?

things don't work that way. I'm not obsessed with bettering vinyl with digital. it's a fun thing to talk about but not my main thing. and I have no issue discussing it.

I am obsessed with being in love with the music from my digital. and it's fair for anyone to expect that for the exalted price. but somehow suggesting a negative if it does not exceed my vinyl makes a competition more significant than the experience. I am not in that mind set.

if you've read my posts in this thread you will note that my narrative is that the Select II is doing something not exactly top level vinyl, but not exactly digital as we've known it either. and that is where my head is now. is there other digital that can do this same thing or a similar thing? I've not heard that yet.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Sure Mike, just trying to read the runes/read between the lines
Like you, I'm pretty content w my digital, and realise analog and digital are in different horse races
But I remain intrigued that there are big areas of analog superiority even after nearly four decades of digital evolution (I believe pre-production cdp's were about in the late 70s?)

 

[bonzo75]

Sure Mike, just trying to read the runes/read between the lines
Like you, I'm pretty content w my digital, and realise analog and digital are in different horse races
But I remain intrigued that there are big areas of analog superiority even after nearly four decades of digital evolution (I believe pre-production cdp's were about in the late 70s?)

I think you should be posting insistently about analog superiority on micro's thread, not Mike's

 

[spiritofmusic]

That's very considerate of you Ked, I'm sure Mike was just being too polite to tell me the same thing
However he has top analog and class leading digital, and has always been happy to relate the lay of the land re the evolution of both formats in his system over the years, and with Mike so excited about a likely final destination digital piece, I don't feel it's TOO presumptive to really try and get a definitive comparison
If that's ok w you, Ked?

 

[Legolas]

if you've read my posts in this thread you will note that my narrative is that the Select II is doing something not exactly top level vinyl, but not exactly digital as we've known it either. and that is where my head is now. is there other digital that can do this same thing or a similar thing? I've not heard that yet.

Interesting. My take (in my smaller exposure to DACs, (about 12 above £10K, 20 below £10K) is what floats my boat and seems a constant is NOS, R-2R and filterless. YMMV but I wonder if going PCM - DSD in some DACs is a route to avoid the filtering? And some DACs that don't upsample or filter seem to get to the truth? This is NOT rocket science, in fact it is going back 20 years TBH.

Anyway, my road so far. Money situation has stopped my progress, but I am content with where I am at. If I had a bundle somewhere, I would love to hear the Kassandre as the tube output and design of that DAC is interesting to me. MSB never did it for me, not on the Analogue, or the Platinum IV, but I can imagine things have moved since then. Tastes come into this of course.

Quite possibly there are various routes to ultimate digital sound, the whole discrete DAC scene has exploded with the Soekris, Ares, Holo Spring DAC all under 3K. The next step is those manufactures to push a bit more and IMO the best digital sound could be available to all and under 10K. That is my opinion on digital right now. There is no magic sauce going on, pretty much all these designs are heading / converging to one place. YMMV and this is IMO.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Astro, a topic for another thread, but I do believe you're right that dacs under $3k seem to be the sweet spot in many ways
I've just come across one I'd never heard of out of NL but reports are stellar re it's analog-like sensibility, the EC Designs Mosaic T (and successor UV Mosaic), at under €1.5k
I'm wondering if something like this plus an Innuous Zenith streamer, or the forthcoming Roon streamer for 4-5k to incl good quality USB is the place to look
For me, I'm looking for a high performing/uber VFM streaming/dac option, and this is getting my curiosity
Now back to the scheduled programme, and Mike's Select II...

 

[Legolas]

I think you should be posting insistently about analog superiority on micro's thread, not Mike's

Maybe, but we need a constant to compare, and vinyl seems the target. Not enough folk have Reel to Reel to use that. I wonder if the old 44.1 can ever level to vinyl, is there enough resolution on the file to do that? If the studio master is in digital but super high res, then in theory a digital file at near the original bit depth should beat vinyl, if the DAC is up to it. Or is the RIAA system doing something to the sound to make our ears prefer that presentation? RIAA was designed for tubes, so it makes sense it will sound better on tube amps. Is digital just too revealing in the treble region, and loosing density, weight and timbre in the midrange? I have no idea, just saying out loud what I have heard on a good vinyl rig.

A super test would be, play an original recording as reel to reel in the same system v vinyl copy v digital copy (at the highest bit depth possible) then see how it compares. If vinyl is different to the reel to reel, what is different about it. Is it the RIAA that is making its sound more pleasing to the ear?

 

[microstrip]

I think you should be posting insistently about analog superiority on micro's thread, not Mike's

Why? Spiritofmusic knows that I consider that both have reached a stage where there are no absolute winners, there is system synergy and user preference.

BTW, in this moment I am anti-vinyl - emptying all my listening space to get rid of a very light, but residual pesty smoke smell that was brought in by a an excellent large LP collection that belonged to an heavy smoker ... I have removed the collection a few weeks ago, but the most problematic items are the RPG abffusors and the fiberglass corner bass traps.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Astro, a fun expt, and maybe one Mike has thought of doing, since he certainly has the gear to make it happen
If I have read the runes correctly, there's no need to do all this
Analog in the form of 15ips tape remains pre eminent, and digital is coming up fast on the heels of vinyl
But analog and digital do things their own way and won't ever necessarily converge, or coalesce
I liken it to totally different races when that first cdp came out in 1983, no points of commonality at all (I believe Ken Kessler was ready to jack it all in when he heard "the future" back then)
Now nearly four decades later, the races are still seperate, but converged and in parallel
The best of modern tts are more linear and neutral than the euphonically warm LP12s of old, moving into the best of what digital has to offer, and now the best dacs like the Select II convey more authentically the flow and density of the best analog
However this doesn't really mean they're meeting in the middle
It means both formats are better than ever w maybe more of a jump upwards in digital, not suprisingly since analog has been a mature tech for a few decades, and both are simply more enjoyable than ever
But won't ever be mistaken for each other

 

[Folsom]

So does this new DAC make albums all sound different in character to reflect their studio/mastering/mics etc? That is something that keeps me more with vinyl than digital. (I have both but don't use the digital hardly ever)

 

[spiritofmusic]

Micro, Ked knows, and you know, and I know
...we all know what our preferences are
If WBF can't be a place for provoking thought experiments and strong opinions, there'd be no point taking part
So I just thought that Mike w cutting edge digital, and vinyl and tape as good as it gets, could gently LOL be pushed to being more decisive
I guess he's more of a diplomat than I am
And I do sympathise w his argument that it's about what's best in digital playback that he's gone Select II, not any pecking order w analog
But I still remain curious

 

[Legolas]

I think you should be posting insistently about analog superiority on micro's thread, not Mike's

Respect bonzo75, and respect to Mike's huge experience, but a forum is for all posters and nobody 'owns' a thread. A person may start a thread or subject, but it is then open to all for comments and experiences to reflect that topic?.
It isn't owned by anyone, not controlled or moderated by the OP or run by the OP. Or overly pushing a certain make either. In my mind it needs to be open or we all need to go home and close our doors.

 

[bonzo75]

Respect bonzo75, and respect to Mike's huge experience, but a forum is for all posters and nobody 'owns' a thread. A person may start a thread or subject, but it is then open to all for comments and experiences to reflect that topic?.
It isn't owned by anyone, not controlled or moderated by the OP or run by the OP. Or overly pushing a certain make either. In my mind it needs to be open or we all need to go home and close our doors.

Sorry I am just bantering with Marc and micro...

 

[Al M.]

So does this new DAC make albums all sound different in character to reflect their studio/mastering/mics etc? That is something that keeps me more with vinyl than digital. (I have both but don't use the digital hardly ever)

Any really good DAC does that. Some do color into sameness, that's true.

 

[bonzo75]

Maybe, but we need a constant to compare, and vinyl seems the target. Not enough folk have Reel to Reel to use that. I wonder if the old 44.1 can ever level to vinyl, is there enough resolution on the file to do that? If the studio master is in digital but super high res, then in theory a digital file at near the original bit depth should beat vinyl, if the DAC is up to it. Or is the RIAA system doing something to the sound to make our ears prefer that presentation? RIAA was designed for tubes, so it makes sense it will sound better on tube amps. Is digital just too revealing in the treble region, and loosing density, weight and timbre in the midrange? I have no idea, just saying out loud what I have heard on a good vinyl rig.

A super test would be, play an original recording as reel to reel in the same system v vinyl copy v digital copy (at the highest bit depth possible) then see how it compares. If vinyl is different to the reel to reel, what is different about it. Is it the RIAA that is making its sound more pleasing to the ear?

Actually, I have liked SS phono stages. I have liked tubed too.

 

[microstrip]

(...)
But I still remain curious

It is not only you - be assured most of us are curious. Unfortunately the answers are not easy, and IMHO most simple experiments can be misleading.

For example, most people own great LPs from the 60's that were cut when the mastertapes were fresh and we now have digital transcriptions made forty or fifty years later - it is not fair comparing them. For many reasons, it is not possible to recreate again the conditions existing in the great recordings of the fifties - forget about it. So we will not have opponents to the masterpieces often used for listening. It is why I use mostly modern recordings of smaller scale music for my digital evaluations . BTW, did you get the "Les routes de l'esclavage"? http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?23072-My-curent-reference-Les-routes-de-l%B4esclavage-(Jordi-Savall) I have never seem a vinyl recording of comparable exigence, particularly in the last track.

 

[microstrip]

Sorry I am just bantering with Marc and micro...

And yes, we really enjoy it!