Visit to Alma Music and Audio

[morricab]

There’s a old term of art in the law...False in one False in all. But at this level of reproduction it’s the exact opposite. Not only is time and space conveyed exactly, the lack of compression and congestion gives the illusion of being at the microphone. Everything is revealed. Digital has no mechanics to deal with unlike a studio deck or turntable. Just the audio signal which can be easily dealt with if you understand what effects it negatively which I have talked about for years ad nauseum

No, but it has a lot of other artifacts that even at very low levels can be highly disturbing to the human ear/brain with regard to the illusion of the real thing.

 

[Blue58]

No, but it has a lot of other artifacts that even at very low levels can be highly disturbing to the human ear/brain with regard to the illusion of the real thing.

A great example is my preference for linear phase filters over minimum phase. Apparently pre-ringing doesn’t bother me as much as poor timing and yet both are minuscule variations.

 

[Al M.]

Of course 16/44 can do convincing piano, that's not what I said.

Which is why I used the phrase "as you already seem to imply".

What drove me to try a different version of that song, which happened to be hi-res, was Tidal, not 16/44. Tidal sounds fine for the most part, but I've found the lack of information regarding provenance problematic, specially when you're trying to do critical listening and comparisons. Because of that, I don't use Tidal for that purpose anymore, unless requested. If I like a track/album Tidal enough, I purchase, rip it, and use that instead. Many times over I've obtained clearly better results than just streaming the standard (non-MQA) Tidal version.

That's not quite surprising to me. There is also the issue of audible watermarking by record companies for streaming.

 

[Al M.]

A great example is my preference for linear phase filters over minimum phase. Apparently pre-ringing doesn’t bother me as much as poor timing and yet both are minuscule variations.

Pre-ringing usually does not occur with real world musical signals. It's an artifact that shows up under artificial measurement conditions. I don't quite know why people get hung up on this issue as much as they do.

Timing on the other hand is crucially important, I agree.

 

[ack]

Pre-ringing [snip] It's an artifact that shows up under artificial measurement conditions.

???!?!?!?!?!??

 

[RogerD]

No, but it has a lot of other artifacts that even at very low levels can be highly disturbing to the human ear/brain with regard to the illusion of the real thing.

Over complicating details that do effect the audio signal for some reason is rampant. Any good electrician or studio engineer electrician understands that that all leakage needs to go back to ground. A concept most audiophiles just can’t seem to grasp...it can’t possibly be that simple,but it is.
Getting back to Ron’s experience with digital. The vast majority of AAD recordings are from the master tape...even lp’s are not as direct. You remove the current leakage from the DAC and transport and you are in fact hearing the master tape. You also have to do this system wide to achieve that level of SQ....very doable.

 

[microstrip]

You hit a nerve with Micro when you mentioned DCS as sounding "digital". It does to my ears as well but he will just argue that you haven't heard it when the whole system is built in support of it or some other claim. Most of the people I know who had DCS digital moved away from that sound.

I would argue that if you want to hear digital that is even LESS digital sounding than MSB you have to look at something like Aries Cerat or Lampizator...or even an inexpensive Monarchy Audio NM24 dac...which might not have quite hte resolution (it won't be nearly as far behind as you think) but it will have the holography, tone and dynamics closer to the good analog you love.

Fortunately I did not hit any nerve with Ron and he did not hit any nerve with me - he is a gentleman and we are both here just for the pleasure of debating audio. And although I feel honored you try to reproduce my ideas concerning the DCS Vivaldi and thank you for that, I will add I feel natural that some people do not like DCS. It happens with all brands. DCS sells plenty of equipment, some people will move out from time to time - many audiophiles like to change - I would not mind listening to a MSB Select II in my system sometime. Or even Audax, that is now represented in my country.

And yes, I dislike referring to digital to exemplify the sound of early or poor digital . The same way I object to referring to tube sound when referring to the mushy or mellow sound of some tube amplifiers of the 60's.

BTW, the best promotion of Vivaldi's are the many happy users - Vivaldi dealers or distributors do not go in debates in audio forums. Their international representative is a very kind and nice man. I had the pleasure of having dinner with him more than once, after presentations at our distributor , even before I decided to spend such crazy amount in digital. We debated music, travels, food and drinks. And concerning DCS he told me just one thing - we are happy when people are happy with our products.

 

[bonzo75]

I have consciously tried to hit a nerve with Ron in private conversations just to wind him up and never succeeded

 

[Steve Williams]

I have consciously tried to hit a nerve with Ron in private conversations just to wind him up and never succeeded

The best way to get him going is with hyperbole and/or misplacement of the apostrophe

 

[bazelio]

Pre-ringing usually does not occur with real world musical signals. It's an artifact that shows up under artificial measurement conditions. I don't quite know why people get hung up on this issue as much as they do.

Probably because it's a problem with all linear phase algorithms, it audibly smears transients, and it's more noticeable than post ringing effects from minimum phase algorithms. That it is exaggerated for measurements doesn't mean it won't occur outside of measurement conditions. It's dependent upon the content and it is a function of the exact nature of the linear phase algorithm in use.

There are many linear phase vs minimum phase audio samples available. I can usually hear differences through my phone, let alone through a high end DAC and HiFi system.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/att...es-snare_200hz_q20_minus6db_minimum_phase.wav

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/att...les-snare_200hz_q20_minus6db_linear_phase.wav

 

[PeterA]

I'll need some more time with the Bergmann Galder, as I just got back to the store last week. But my initial reaction was extremely favorable, and so were our long time client's, who have heard a lot of the stuff that we've had over the years. I'm more familiar with the "baby" of the line, the Magne. It's extremely quiet and precise, like an instrument. In comparison with the Technics SP-10R, I thought the Magne lacked a bit of weight, but the Galder does not. It's fast, punchy, weighty.

I don't like comparing digital to analog, it's always a losing game. Unless someone really wants to ditch one for the other, the point is quite moot. I've always preached for coexistence.

Like any test, it can be skewed to favor this side or the other. It's just a matter of using the wrong source material, with the wrong provenance... Let's take the example of Ron's Neil Young LP. I assume he brought a standard US issue, from sometime in the 70s.
All the digital listening was done on the $20k MSB Premier.
First, we played the Tidal stream, and it was OK, but the piano sounded wrong, like a toy piano. I assumed that was a crappy ol' 70s rock recording, and left it at that. But then we did the LP on the Bergmann. The voice popped right out, clearer, sharper, and the piano sounded...like a piano! Imagine that!
Upon hearing that, and realizing that we had played the Tidal digital before, I located the hi-res digital version of the same album, that I have on my server, and that I know was properly transferred and mastered for hi-res by Neil Young himself.
So, queue the hi-res... And the gap closes significantly! The voice has pop, the piano is nice and full, like a piano...
All that on a $20k DAC that's nowhere close to a SELECT. Would the hi-res beat the vinyl on a SELECT? Who knows? Who cares?

For completeness' sake, the set up was

Bergmann Galder Turntable
Bergmann Odin Tonearm
Air Tight Opus 1 cart
D'Agostino Momentum phono
Audio Research REF 10 preamp
Audio Research REF 160M monos
Kubala-Sosna cabling (Realization/Sensation lines)

Thanks Alex,

I was not really interested in which source sounds BEST to you because as you write, "Who cares"? There are too many factors like recording and preferences. What I was hoping you were willing to share, is how you think the two sources sound DIFFERENT from each other. There must surely be differences. And these differences may lead, along with convenience, cost, collections and other factors, to a client preferring one to the other for his own needs.

But, I understand your response, and also why you may not want to list retail prices. I just was curious about the cost of the Select II versus the cost of the vinyl front end which Ron mentioned was about $100K.

 

[PeterA]

The best way to get him going is with hyperbole and/or misplacement of the apostrophe

Post of the day. I'm still chuckling.

 

[bonzo75]

The best way to get him going is with hyperbole and/or misplacement of the apostrophe

Hahaha.

 

[bazelio]

The best way to get him going is with hyperbole and/or misplacement of the apostrophe

LOL. Thats' a good one!

 

[MadFloyd]

LOL. Thats' a good one!

I see what you did there.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I have consciously tried to hit a nerve with Ron in private conversations just to wind him up and never succeeded

Hahaha!

I have my analytical framework; I do my research; I read about other people‘s experiences and component combinations and impressions thereof; I do my own listening and comparisons; I entertain other audiophiles’ suggestions and recommendations; I add some theoretical triangulation (Kedar dislikes this element of my process); and I make my decision.

While I like asking questions and receiving a lot of input from many different people and hearing about their various experiences as additional data points as part of my research after I make a decision I really simply don’t care what anybody else thinks or what anybody else buys instead of what I bought.

The only customer I really care about in the context of my own purchasing decisions for my own system is me. I will spend a lot of time and do a lot of analysis and auditioning to figure out what I like, but I really don’t care if others are going to like the sound I achieve or not.

For example, if 10 audiophiles conducted very careful auditions of 10 different phono stages, and if the Io were one of the contenders, and if none of the 10 people bought an Io, I would be curious and puzzled, but I really wouldn’t care. It would not make me second-guess my decision to purchase an Io.

No component is perfect for all listeners. I probably can argue the negatives of the components I like better than can the detractors of those components.

Putting it another way I simply have no ego or self-esteem wrapped up in whether other people like the components I buy.

So all this, I think, explains why it is very hard, if not impossible, to “wind me up.”

 

[KeithR]

I should note for the peanut gang- this wasn't intended to be an analog vs digital audition.

The main reason for the visit was to determine which dac would be a better purchase for my system and in what configuration. Since Ron is an analog stalwart, I was curious to his opinion as I relayed to him that I believe MSB's latest work doesn't sound digital. As it pertains to analog vs digital, I had been eyeing a move to a bigger digital rig mainly because of my usage patterns - those that don't know me may not realize that my paralysis adds to my analog frustration as quite frankly, its a total PITA (even moreso than for able-bodied audiophiles). To put a record on, I have to transfer from sofa to wheelchair, roll to the table and flip the record, and return to where I have to transfer again to the sofa. I have a Brinkmann Bardo/10.5 so not exactly chump change but probably only use it 20% of the time.

MSB has come out with dacs that I feel justify the premium which previously I would never have spent on *any* digital. For instance, I have never wanted or even entertained the idea of dCS or Berkeley Reference et al. Over the next few months, I will decide what to do with the Brinkmann - but I'm wagering that I will downsize significantly.

I'm also of the opinion now (jeffrey_t and I have discussed this extensively) that you really need to go all in on one format unless you have unlimited funds. For me, that's digital. For Ron and him, that's analog. There is no right or wrong answer and I think Alex stated the digital/analog preference eloquently.

Cheers!

 

[bonzo75]

One does not need to go all in on analog at all. A well set up analog rig with good recordings sounds great, does not have to be priced WBF style. Of course you can get better, especially in analog, the more you spend, but it is not required.

 

[Ron Resnick]

The best way to get him going is with hyperbole and/or misplacement of the apostrophe

Hahaha! Very true!

An unecessary apostrophe on a plural noun (e.g., “I like amplifier’s”) makes me feel how I would feel if I saw an ant crawling on a vanilla cream-filled donut! Yuck!

 

[microstrip]

The best way to get him going is with hyperbole (...)

Lately he became very tolerant concerning hyperbole, except for fuses!