Visit to Alma Music and Audio

bazelio · Sep 2, 2018

A thoroughly enjoyable write-up as always, Ron. Thank you very much, Ron!

And congrats to Keith on the new acquisition. Many hours of enjoyment - and convenience - will it bring!!

Al M. · Sep 2, 2018

bazelio said:
A thoroughly enjoyable write-up as always, Ron. Thank you very much, Ron!

And congrats to Keith on the new acquisition. Many hours of enjoyment - and convenience - will it bring!!

+ 1!

DaveyF · Sep 2, 2018

Alex can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe he has had a customer(s) who has traded in their very high end turntable and records to go all digital with the MSB Select 11 DAC, they liked it that much! I’m not sure that is anything that I personally would consider, but it certainly says a lot for the SQ of the MSB DAC. I think we also forget that vinyl can be a real hassle to maintain and to acquire. With digital, it’s as easy as typing on your tablet or placing a little disc into a drawer...assuming of course it has been set up correctly. Nonetheless, the convenience factor is way more than vinyl...with all its idiosyncrasies.

Thieliste · Sep 2, 2018

Ron Resnick said:
First Alex played the Premier. It sounded very good, natural and non-fatiguing. But how could that be? It’s digital! Where was the brightness, the harshness, the digititis, the sensation of ragged dry ice particles dripping on you in the shower? Those traditional digital characteristics were totally missing, and were replaced by an analog-like sense of smoothness and relaxedness and ease. The horrifying thought that today’s experience with digital, completely unexpectedly, could upend my entire audio world view suddenly flashed across my mind -- and we started the session by listening to the less expensive MSB model!

Alex switched to the Reference DAC. The Reference was a little bit more transparent and provided a little bit more information than did the Premier. There was less “gauze” and more clean air, clarity, quietness and “blackness” between and among the instruments.

I leaned over to Keith and I asked him if he could very roughly quantify the incremental improvement in sound. I thought the improvement was 10% to 20%. Keith agreed, and later confirmed he felt that the Reference was noticeably better than the Premier, but not more than 20% better than the Premier for twice the price.

I was relieved because I was now more comfortable that the LP sound I heard from this track at Steve’s and Jeff’s was noticeably more transparent and more present and more believably “in the room” than what I was hearing now. But these MSB DACs change entirely the substance of the analog versus digital conversation. The conversation is no longer “can I stand to listen to digital”; the conversation now is “what are we still hearing in analog that remains a little bit better than digital? Buy what increment is analog sounding superior to digital?”

The MSB DACs sounded inexplicably good, but they did not have quite the in-the-room-real sensation that I heard at both Steve’s house and at Jeff’s house. I leaned over to Keith and I said “I wonder what will you think of this same track on LP,” now feeling confident that analog was holding the winning hand in the Alma Audio sonic card game yesterday.

When Alex put on the LP (admittedly a $100,000 analog front-end versus $20,000 and $40,000 DACs) I was relieved to hear the incredible transparency and presence of Neil Young’s voice which I heard at Steve’s and Jeff’s but which I did not hear, in its full realism, from MSB. (But, again, the fact that MSB instantly changed the conversation for me from “can I stand to stay and listen to this longer?” to “am I sure am analog is still better than digital”? is a dramatic and revolutionary change of mentality and orientation. Nonetheless digital playback, through MSB DACs anyway, is without doubt a legitimate high-end medium of music reproduction. It was by far the most enjoyable and analog-like reproduction of music I have ever heard from digital.

Alex, Keith and I all agreed that the LP was at least slightly more transparent in the voice (I thought it was significantly more transparent in the voice) and significantly more realistic in reproducing the sound of piano. Alex then played a high-resolution remastering of “After the Goldrush” and the LP’s margin of superiority narrowed considerably.

Nonetheless I was greatly relieved to hear and to have confirmed (to me, anyway) that analog is not in any serious danger of truly being bested buy digital any time soon. (Yes, I am aware that MikeL is reporting that the fully-optioned out MSB Select further narrows the gap between digital and analog.)

I'd be great to make a shootout between the MSB Reference DAC and the brand new Totaldac Twelve mk2.
My guess is the Totaldac still has a better price/performance ratio.

PeterA · Sep 2, 2018

Alpinist said:
Ron,

If you have the opportunity, I would highly recommend at least giving the Select II DAC an audition to hear how far digital has come. In my opinion, it is right there with the top vinyl systems I have ever listened to. To my ears, it is also significantly more lifelike sounding than the Reference DAC.

Best,
Ken

I think that Ron had that opportunity when he visited MikeL a short time ago.

Ron Resnick · Sep 2, 2018

KeithR said:
Thanks for the great summary of our day, Ron!

A Select 2 wasn't available, but probably would have equalled the vinyl rig in my estimation. That said, I absolutely loved that Bergmann table - anyone considering a high end TT should put it on their demo list. There definitely was more space and a more realistic depiction of piano on the analog rig (that was several times the cost as Ron mentioned)

I will also mention that we took home the Premier Dac and, once installed, sounds utterly spectacular in my system - there is an analog quality to the new MSB dacs that I have never heard before.

I, too, loved the Bergmann set-up.

I didn’t not want to mention the purchase, Keith, until you did, but I want to congratulate you on the purchase of the Premier! I think you made a fantastic decision! The Premier is definitely at a sweet spot on the MSB value for dollar curve.

I know you’re going to have many hours of enjoyable listening with that device!

PS: I was honored to help you set it up! (But I guess I should’ve warned you just how bad my lens-corrected eyes are at reading small print in dim light.)

Ron Resnick · Sep 2, 2018

rockitman said:
Did you listen to what appears to be the Dagastino Phono ? That and CH Precision's are the two SS phono's I may consider for my third in service unit.

Yes, we listened to the D’Agostino phono.

Ron Resnick · Sep 2, 2018

PeterA said:
I think that Ron had that opportunity when he visited MikeL a short time ago.

Yes, Mike offered me the opportunity to listen to his top-of-the-line Select II set-up. Even after my experience yesterday if I were to visit Mike tomorrow for the first time for two days I still would politely decline to listen to the DAC.

My explicit mission profile at Mike’s was about vinyl and tape, about comparing vinyl and tape, about seeing and understanding Mike’s room for the first time, about comparing three different state-of-the-art tube amplifiers and about getting to know and spending quality time with Mike. I felt that all of that already was a very ambitious agenda for just two days.

If I am ever invited back to Mike’s I am sure I will inquire about the MSB at that time.

PeterA · Sep 2, 2018

NIce write up Ron. I especially appreciate the photos. They add a lot of context to the report. I wonder how Alex would describe the difference between the Bergmann table and the Select II. You describe the vinyl set up as $100,000. Could you break down the cost per item? I know the Opus 1 is around $15K, but am clueless about the rest of the vinyl gear.

ashandger · Sep 2, 2018

Ron, many thanks for a great report. I appreciate it was probably a totally unfamiliar system that you listened to but wondering if you formed any impressions of the Ref 160M amps given the overall sound you heard via vinyl and digital? I have also heard great reports about the Ypsilon DAC in case you ever got a chance to hear it. Cheers

Ron Resnick · Sep 2, 2018

PeterA said:
NIce write up Ron. I especially appreciate the photos. They add a lot of context to the report. I wonder how Alex would describe the difference between the Bergmann table and the Select II. You describe the vinyl set up as $100,000. Could you break down the cost per item? I know the Opus 1 is around $15K, but am clueless about the rest of the vinyl gear.

Thank you, Peter. I will defer that question to Alex. I do not know the cost of the ARC REF 10.

DaveyF · Sep 2, 2018

Keith, big congrats on your new DAC...very nice piece. Also great that you supported the lads at ALMA. Enjoy the music.

microstrip · Sep 2, 2018

Ron Resnick said:
First Alex played the Premier. It sounded very good, natural and non-fatiguing. But how could that be? It’s digital! Where was the brightness, the harshness, the digititis, the sensation of ragged dry ice particles dripping on you in the shower? Those traditional digital characteristics were totally missing, and were replaced by an analog-like sense of smoothness and relaxedness and ease. The horrifying thought that today’s experience with digital, completely unexpectedly, could upend my entire audio world view suddenly flashed across my mind -- and we started the session by listening to the less expensive MSB model!

Alex switched to the Reference DAC. The Reference was a little bit more transparent and provided a little bit more information than did the Premier. There was less “gauze” and more clean air, clarity, quietness and “blackness” between and among the instruments.

I leaned over to Keith and I asked him if he could very roughly quantify the incremental improvement in sound. I thought the improvement was 10% to 20%. Keith agreed, and later confirmed he felt that the Reference was noticeably better than the Premier, but not more than 20% better than the Premier for twice the price.

I was relieved because I was now more comfortable that the LP sound I heard from this track at Steve’s and Jeff’s was noticeably more transparent and more present and more believably “in the room” than what I was hearing now. But these MSB DACs change entirely the substance of the analog versus digital conversation. The conversation is no longer “can I stand to listen to digital”; the conversation now is “what are we still hearing in analog that remains a little bit better than digital? Buy what increment is analog sounding superior to digital?”

The MSB DACs sounded inexplicably good, but they did not have quite the in-the-room-real sensation that I heard at both Steve’s house and at Jeff’s house. I leaned over to Keith and I said “I wonder what will you think of this same track on LP,” now feeling confident that analog was holding the winning hand in the Alma Audio sonic card game yesterday.

When Alex put on the LP (admittedly a $100,000 analog front-end versus $20,000 and $40,000 DACs) I was relieved to hear the incredible transparency and presence of Neil Young’s voice which I heard at Steve’s and Jeff’s but which I did not hear, in its full realism, from MSB. (But, again, the fact that MSB instantly changed the conversation for me from “can I stand to stay and listen to this longer?” to “am I sure am analog is still better than digital”? is a dramatic and revolutionary change of mentality and orientation. Nonetheless digital playback, through MSB DACs anyway, is without doubt a legitimate high-end medium of music reproduction. It was by far the most enjoyable and analog-like reproduction of music I have ever heard from digital.

Alex, Keith and I all agreed that the LP was at least slightly more transparent in the voice (I thought it was significantly more transparent in the voice) and significantly more realistic in reproducing the sound of piano. Alex then played a high-resolution remastering of “After the Goldrush” and the LP’s margin of superiority narrowed considerably.

Nonetheless I was greatly relieved to hear and to have confirmed (to me, anyway) that analog is not in any serious danger of truly being bested buy digital any time soon. (Yes, I am aware that MikeL is reporting that the fully-optioned out MSB Select further narrows the gap between digital and analog.)

Ron,

Sorry to say, but your analysis suffers from the most profound anti-digital bias - listening to digital through the analog perspective. It shows from the choice of the recording and from the methodology.

I am the first to say that if I listened only to 60's recordings I would listen in vinyl or tape. These recordings were recorded and mastered to sound good in vinyl, by great experts that knew about the limitations of the media an use them to their benefit. It is a joy that today great systems allow them to show their full quality for our enjoyment. But they will never allow digital to show its best.

And sorry to say, saying that "the LP was at least slightly more transparent in the voice (I thought it was significantly more transparent in the voice) and significantly more realistic in reproducing the sound of piano" when we can't be sure if both recordings come from the same masters is meaningless. Since long it is known that this type of comparisons - isolated LP versus CD - are misleading.

IMHO when you say that " Alex then played a high-resolution remastering of “After the Goldrush” and the LP’s margin of superiority narrowed considerably you say it all - IMHO you were also listening to mastering differences.

I do not have fears of any media besting any other. I know that there is enough space in the grey area of stereo reproduction - that area that must be filled by our experience and preferences - to be sure that we can pick any one as our winner. Fortunately in this case we are is the jury and judge.

The only test analog people can fear is someone recording in DXD or DSD2 the output of their great vinyl source and showing that they can not separate the source from the original in the long term - but this is very improbable to happen.

Anyway, thanks, I am really enjoying your writings on Alex great room and system!

Ron Resnick · Sep 2, 2018

What

ashandger said:
. . . I appreciate it was probably a totally unfamiliar system that you listened to but wondering if you formed any impressions of the Ref 160M amps given the overall sound you heard via vinyl and digital? I have also heard great reports about the Ypsilon DAC in case you ever got a chance to hear it. Cheers

It was not possible for me to form any opinion yesterday about the 160M amplifiers in isolation. My opinion is based largely on circumstantial triangulation, but I know I like those amplifiers very much! I would say the same thing about the whole new generation of ARC amplifiers. While traditionally I have agreed with the critics of the sonic attributes of ARC amps ("illuminated" sound, kind of a "white-ish" character) the new generation of amps goes in a new direction, a direction I very much like, with greater sonic "saturation" and deeper "colors."

My opinion about the 160M amplifiers is very high. This opinion comes not from formal auditioning and A/B comparisons (and so my opinion on this must be discounted) but from 1) my experience listening to KeithR's system several times with his Reference 75 SE, 2) Don Salzman's review in The Absolute Sound of the Reference 250 SE (I have learned that Don and I have virtually the same tastes in sound and in components. We have had a significant number of the exact same components over the last 20 years, including, without limitation, Magnepan loudspeakers, VTL MB-750 amplifiers, Benz-Micro Ruby 2 cartridge, all-tube electronics, Aesthetix Io, REL subwoofers -- a pretty long list) and 3) enjoying every system which has been anchored by the latest generation of ARC amplifiers, including the system at Alma.

Ron Resnick · Sep 2, 2018

microstrip said:
Ron,

Sorry to say, but your analysis suffers from the most profound anti-digital bias - listening to digital through the analog perspective. It shows from the choice of the recording and from the methodology.

I am the first to say that if I listened only to 60's recordings I would listen in vinyl or tape. These recordings were recorded and mastered to sound good in vinyl, by great experts that knew about the limitations of the media an use them to their benefit. It is a joy that today great systems allow them to show their full quality for our enjoyment. But they will never allow digital to show its best.

And sorry to say, saying that "the LP was at least slightly more transparent in the voice (I thought it was significantly more transparent in the voice) and significantly more realistic in reproducing the sound of piano" when we can't be sure if both recordings come from the same masters is meaningless. Since long it is known that this type of comparisons - isolated LP versus CD - are misleading.

IMHO when you say that " Alex then played a high-resolution remastering of “After the Goldrush” and the LP’s margin of superiority narrowed considerably you say it all - IMHO you were also listening to mastering differences.

I do not have fears of any media besting any other. I know that there is enough space in the grey area of stereo reproduction - that area that must be filled by our experience and preferences - to be sure that we can pick any one as our winner. Fortunately in this case we are is the jury and judge. The only test analog people can fear is someone recording in DXD or DSD2 the output of their great vinyl source and showing that they can not separate the source from the original in the long term - but this is very improbable to happen.

Anyway, thanks, I am really enjoying your writings on Alex great room and system!

Thank you for your post. I always appreciate constructive criticism. Yesterday was far from a methodologically valid comparison. I was a guest of Keith's and we both were guests of Alex.

Considering how revolutionary was my experience with digital yesterday, and despite my life-long ideological and practical opposition to, and bias against, digital, why not appreciate how instantly what my ears were telling me trumped my long-standing ideology? Why not just "declare victory" (that I have come so far in one day in that I finally can enjoy and appreciate digital (at least from MSB)) and "go home"? ("Go home" not being rude or sarcastic in any way and, in this context, merely being an expression that after you achieve a win, you can stop playing for a while and go home and relax)?

ashandger · Sep 2, 2018

Ron Resnick said:
What

It was not possible for me to form any opinion yesterday about the 160M amplifiers in isolation. My opinion is based largely on circumstantial triangulation, but I know I like those amplifiers very much! I would say the same thing about the whole new generation of ARC amplifiers. While traditionally I have agreed with the critics of the sonic attributes of ARC amps ("illuminated" sound, kind of a "white-ish" character) the new generation of amps goes in a new direction, a direction I very much like, with greater sonic "saturation" and deeper "colors."

My opinion about the 160M amplifiers is very high. This opinion comes not from formal auditioning and A/B comparisons (and so my opinion on this must be discounted) but from 1) my experience listening to KeithR's system several times with his Reference 75 SE, 2) Don Salzman's review in The Absolute Sound of the Reference 250 SE (I have learned that Don and I have virtually the same tastes in sound and in components. We have had a significant number of the exact same components over the last 20 years, including, without limitation, Magnepan loudspeakers, VTL MB-750 amplifiers, Benz-Micro Ruby 2 cartridge, all-tube electronics, Aesthetix Io, REL subwoofers -- a pretty long list) and 3) enjoying every system which has been anchored by the latest generation of ARC amplifiers, including the system at Alma.

Many thanks for the feedback.

c1ferrari · Sep 2, 2018

Sounds like a good time was enjoyed by all. Glad you had the opportunity to visit Alma.
My spouse and I had visited, once, before the new location -- some terrific gear!

RogerD · Sep 2, 2018

Ron Resnick said:
Thank you for your post. I always appreciate constructive criticism. Yesterday was far from a methodologically valid comparison. I was a guest of Keith's and we both were guests of Alex.

Considering how revolutionary was my experience with digital yesterday, and despite my life-long ideological and practical opposition to, and bias against, digital, why not appreciate how instantly what my ears were telling me trumped my long-standing ideology? Why not just "declare victory" (that I have come so far in one day in that I finally can enjoy and appreciate digital (at least from MSB)) and "go home"? ("Go home" not being rude or sarcastic in any way and, in this context, merely being an expression that after you achieve a win, you can stop playing for a while and go home and relax)?

Great write up Ron and congrats on having a open mind on digital,even if it did take the best. I assure
you it will get better and does. Digital has surpassed analog, just so few have heard what it is capable of.

KeithR · Sep 2, 2018

rockitman said:
how does it sound ?

Christian, I’ve never compared it with anything so don’t really know. I defer to Alex...

Ron Resnick · Sep 2, 2018

RogerD said:
. . . Digital has surpassed analog . . .

Thank you, Roger, but I consider this statement false. Since you own tape machines I am baffled that you would make such a blanket assertion.

Visit to Alma Music and Audio

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor

VIP/Donor

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Similar threads