Snowmass 3.0.5 vs. 3.0.6

Here is a poll that was opened back in May. SMv3.0.6 is the favorite, but SMv3.0.0 has its adherents (including myself).

1 Like

My first post in this forum. It was plenty of text to read… Sorry, that´s pretty late, but maybe I can help… I come here to the sad story of mtakedamaia-eonet-ne-jp. Your post 380 and others- that was a déjà-vu for me … It was the same case with my DS Sr. several months ago which stopped the playback in USB modus after few minutes. That was solved (not) quickly: I had erroneously connected the usb cable to usb 3.0 output to the computer. USB 3.0 is not compatible with USB 2.0 input of the DAC. Anyway not in this case. After proper connection everything was fine. Maybe you should check, where did you connect the cable.

1 Like

I would like an update on the NEW code for DS. The inquiries seem to have stopped and PSA is quiet on the subject. Whassup?

I’ve gone back and forth between the very first Snowmass and 3.06 the last few weeks.

I like the first version very much, but in too many instances there’s a recessed treble that I just can’t get around. Bass is glorious and seems to enhance the midrange but . . . ultimately I go back to 3.06. I can tune my system around that and get great bass AND the treble is there where I like it, which makes for better sound staging, especially in the center.

So I’m very happy with 3.06 but will enjoy experimenting with the next “peak”. . . .

It’s coming but probably won’t be ready for another month or two.

6 Likes

Have you seen the Upcoming DS release thread?
I’m not taking any requests for more FPGA changes but PS Audio will let me know if there are any sound quality issues and I’ll look at them. As Paul mentioned it will still take a while to get the release ready.

6 Likes

Paul und Ted: these are good news! Concluding to the discussion about the differences in releases … I am cautious and rather skeptical. You can seriously compare this if there were two DS next to each other with both versions on the same system line, with the same wiring. The same not too long music fragments should be played on both DS. Our music memory of these small differences is not reliable enough to compare without these measures, my opinion.

1 Like

Listening to classical this Sunday morning and it sounds absolutely magnificent with Snowmass. How do you keep pulling out more aces when you have no shirt sleeves.?

5 Likes

i think Ted might really be the (multi-limbed) Indian God (of Audio Pleasure) in disguise as a PSA guru…amen.

I share your skepticism. Only controlled, double blind, ABX testing can reveal meaningful information comparing the subtle (or even un-subtle) differences in these f/w versions. In the absence of such tests, all of these subjective reports are unreliable.

1 Like

I own and use two “fully functioning” DS- boxes and the differences between firmware’s is far from subtle… No firmware loading / booting / settling down time. Easy to hear simply switching between DS-boxes in real time.

14 Likes

If the differences one hears are so minute as to be reliably identified only with controlled, double-blind, ABX testing, there is no reason to upgrade to new firmware.

Stay with whatever you are running; you are not going to listen to music in a controlled, double-blind, ABX fashion.

7 Likes

You may well be hearing better sound with different f/w updates. I’m not disputing that. I’m just saying it’s subjective until double blind testing confirms it.

All a double blind test does is confirm if a difference can be heard. It does not confirm if that difference is actually better or worse. That usually takes longer listening sessions to fully flesh out. This is why double blind tests are a waste of time for most situations. The only way to know if one release of Snowmass is better than another to your ears is to listen to each release for at least a few days.

7 Likes

It is subjective even after double blind testing confirms it.

1 Like

IMO the issue of Double Blind testing in home audio is a bit of a ruse. Nobody does double blind testing on their systems, in fact mastering engineers and gear designers generally only use blind tests. Double blinds are used in science or the pharmaceutical industry, and if your criteria whether something is audible is if it was established with a double blind, that rules out pretty much all of audio. The insistence here seems to serve an ideological purpose of undermining the epistemology of home and pro audio, and not a practical one.

5 Likes

That is such a good word and use of it. Thanks!

I actually agree that the kind of controlled testing I’m talking about is not practical in most home audio situations but, given the very well established phenomena of perceptual bias and expectation bias, I’m just saying there is a lot of justification for a very healthy amount of skepticism when it comes to all these gear owners reports about what they’re hearing from one f/w update to the next.

1 Like

Quick question… I have a new (to me Jr). It has Snowmass 2.0.0. I see there is a 2.2 on the site. The subject of this thread obviously is 3.x. Is Jr going to lag or eventually not be supported? I did a search for this data to no avail. Just wondering what my best options are. (Perhaps there is no lag, Jr - 2.2 current?) Love the Jr and eventually will trade up I imagine… Thank you.

Snowmass is the name of the dac software, so they are both the same. Sub numbers relate to changes to pic code that controls the hardware, which is the difference between the jnr and snr so do not correlate. E.g. you can’t compare oranges to apples