Snowmass 3.0.5 vs. 3.0.6

[dvorak]

Just want to say that with 3.0.6 settled in I’m finding a greater amount of joy and engagement with the music I play, than in recent weeks and months on 3.0.0.

Though my tinnitus is worsening and my ears don’t hear as high as they used to, I still find myself caring a great deal about the highest frequencies I can hear. Since getting new speakers late last year I have been a bit troubled in this regard and I had been considering an expensive crossover upgrade as a way to get back the clarity and purity I’d enjoyed on my previous set (thinking that the Duelund VSF capacitor magic is what I was missing).

With 3.0.6 the roughness at the top of the spectrum seems to have been relieved. I’m getting pulled into the music again. Tonal balance is fine for me – any sense of change in that regard is much less than I get from just moving my head a couple of feet. I’ve said this before, but if such tiny changes in the code that runs on a non-audio support component can produce this much effect on the experience of listening, it’s going to be incredibly interesting to have a listen to the TSS which doesn’t have any such things in the analog box.

[lonson]

I have to agree, 3.0.6 has a high frequency clarity that has improved my system sound as well. I like 3.0.0–no denying it, and I went back and forth for a few days, but when 3.0.0 settles in, I find myself missing elements of 3.0.6, and I don’t miss elements of 3.0.0 when 3.0.6 settles in.

[Vmax]

I found changing speaker wires and ICs cleared up high frequency issues most for me. Might not be the easiest or cheapest solution. But very effective. Type of copper is also a player. Recommend checking out Iconoclast thread.

[berlin]

I have wireworld equinox copper. Should be pretty decent. But I do try out the f/w versions especially with songs that are harsh in my system. Should a dac be able to be forgiven for those songs, or should a dac be designed to get the best out of the best recorded songs I do not know. I had a marantz sa11 in the past which did the first.

[lonson]

I too don’t think my interconnects are holding me back.

[Vmax]

I hear no difference turning off screen either. The dimmer adjustment is heard at every step up or down.

[Vmax]

I used to have issues on bad sources with highs until going to UPOCC interconnects. Silver plated speaker wire helped but interconnect made the difference.

[lonson]

My interconnects use UPOCC and silver wire, I think they are phenomenal with frequency balance. I think it’s fascinating how we can hear these differences with operating systems, and many are not subtle.

[RonP]

After a lot of back and forth, I can hear a difference between 3.0 V1 and 3.06.
The only description I can use for 3.06 is bright. i hear additional brightness, which is either diminishing the mid range fullness or it’s fooling my ears into that perception.
Regardless, i’m back to V1 and happily settled in until Mr Smith comes up with something new.

[audiobill]

Must be system dependent. With my Maggie 3.6/R speakers C-J et5 preamp and C-J Premier 140s, 3.00 sounds a little drab…but 3.06 wakes things up without being harsh. Maggies and C-J not known for being “bright”.

[B.Gelinas]

Based on Ted reply’s, I would contend that we cannot (and should not) judge the revealing quality of a sound system based on it’s ability at controlling the tone using screen dimming scale adjustment. There is no relationship between the two. A system whose tonality is affected by screen dimming adjustment is only indicative of a system that is pervious to RF noise, nothing more.

Based on Ted reply’s, we found that the screen is a big RF radiator (i.e. the screen emits radio frequencies, typically in the MHz range) , with the screen refresh rate being somewhere in the audio bandwidth.
Typically, a Radio station will modulate (AM, FM, PM) the broadcast audio signal onto a high carrier frequency: at the receiver end, the RF signal received by an antenna is demodulated in order to filter out (extract) the audio signal from the carrier frequency.
So, in the case of the DSD DAC, the carrier frequency is the RF emitted by the screen and the audio signal modulated onto the carrier frequency is the rate noise.

Therefore, if any part of your system acts as an antenna (which could be anything: interconnect cables, electronics components inside your amp, speaker wires, …), there is a risk that the RF be captured and then demodulated by your system circuitry (a simple low pass filter is sufficient to demodulate AM signal like the crossovers inside a speaker for example) thus mixing the audible rate noise to the music signal, which can affect the tone.

In my opinion this would mean that if someone owns a system whose tonality is affected by the DSD DAC dimming setting, then it means that some piece in the system is pervious to RF frequencies.

So, if your system remains unaffected by screen dimming adjustment, it is a good thing - no need to worry about the “sensitivity” of your system.
Otherwise, your system has a weak link allowing RF to come-in, and additional shielding is required to fix the problem.

In my case, I added two years ago two sheets of MuMetal 0.010" thick x 8" x 12" underneath my DSD DAC in hope of shielding it from the magnetic field generated by the integrated amplifier located on the shelf below as recommended by PS Audio Scott Schroeder. I would also suspect that the MuMetal sheets also provide shielding to my integrated amplifier from the RF generated by the DSD DAC.
I also have an ifi AC iPurifier plugged into the power outlet of my sound system.
My integrated amplifier has a large thick metal casing that must be providing very good shielding against RF, and the description says that the power amplifier topology keeps out external noise interference.
Lastly, I have Audience speaker cables, which are well shielded/insulated.

By the way, I have found to my hearing (this is only my opinion, not a verifiable fact) that copper wires offer a more natural sound as opposed to silver based (or coated) wires that seem to add an edginess in the highs which I cannot tolerate (listening fatigue).

Hope this help.

[Vmax]

How does the Mu Metal ground to the plane of the DAC? When talking EMI issues large opening and Faraday cages with tie into ground planes are most effective. I don’t see openings an bottom of DSD. Curious how a Mu sheet is providing a shield unless their is gaps being covered.

As for silver in wires. Read what Galen Garis says about it. He pays attention to silver plating for skin effect thickness picking depth of silver He argues silver is not bright. Perhaps you are hearing phases coherency?

Not sure I can connect the dots with your interpretation of Ted’s comments. To me they support generated noise by the DSD screen.

[Paul]

Mu Metal doesn’t depend on grounding to work its magic. It is a natural barrier against radiated magnetic fields. Place a sheet of it between a transformer and sensitive electronics and bingo! Lower hum.

[berlin]

Old trick seems to tame the brightness issue in 3.06: slight toe out of my speakers, only rotated them 4 mm, was enough. Should have done that earlier. Almost all the software upgrades needed a slight adjustment…

[kcleveland123]

Could someone return to the title of this thread and compare 3.05 to 3.06? Very dubious that there are audible differences given the PIC-only changes unless someone has better ears and a more revealing system.

[B.Gelinas]

I did not ground my MUMetal sheets – they just lay underneath my DSD DAC. After doing that, the faint hummm I was hearing in my speakers stopped.

Your point is interesting even though Paul says the MuMetal sheets do not need to be grounded.
However, assuming you wanted to ground them, it should not be difficult to find a connector where one extremity would be attached to the MuMetal sheets and the other extremity (banana connector termination) could be inserted into an ifi AC iPurifier if you choose to buy one: this great little device is cheep and provides a 4mm Earth connector in the front where you can attach connector to get a ground signal for the purpose of grounding items in your system.

As for hearing phases coherency with silver wiring? May be.
But like I said, my statement is only an opinion, not a verifiable fact.
In the end, I keep updating my system to eliminate all traces of listening fatigue and found to my hearing that the few silver cables I tried did not work for me.
After talking to my Codell Audio dealer (4.9 stars rating from a multitude of customers), he suggested Audience cables (the people at my dealer are very knowledgeable and tried many kind of wires over the many years they have been in service).
The instant I tried he Audience cable, that was it - case closed.
May be there are silver cables out there that would work me, but I have no intention to explore and spend any more money&time since I am fully satisfied with my current cables.

Finally, my interpretation of Ted’s comment - thread entry # 290:

• the screen is a big RF radiator modulated by the pixels.
• there’s the work the PIC has to do to drive the screen, especially the screen refresh rate, that rate, unfortunately is somewhere in the audio bandwidth.

So, what I get from Ted’s comment is that the DSD DAC emits RF via the screen, and that RF may most likely carry the audible noise signal generated by the screen refresh rate, which is somewhere in the audio bandwidth.

A property of an RF (a high frequency) signal is the ability to carry a lower frequency signal (in the audio bandwidth) over long distances. With relatively simple electronic components, it is possible to extract the audio bandwidth signal from the RF carrier.

If any element of your system behaves like an antenna&receiver, then there is a possibility that the audio bandwidth screen refresh rate signal (i.e. noise) carried by the RF signal may find its way into your system without adequate shielding.

I hope my explanation is clearer now.

By the way Vmax, if you are using a computer to stream your music, this is where I would start as the primary suspect for collecting the RF noise. I used to stream music using a laptop and these devices are notoriously noisy (CPU, memory, power supply). After investigating faint noise in my speakers, I found out it came from the living room lamp dimmer going through the mains reaching the laptop and into the DAC via the USB cable. I eventually bought an Intona USB industrial isolator to correct the problem.
Once I replaced the laptop by an Innuos Zen MKII music server, all the noise was gone and the music quality really went up in a big step.
So, if you are using a computer, you may want to consider replacing it with a high quality music server.
Incidentally, PS Audio is apparently developing it own music server: the Octave.

[Gary_M]

I compared 3.05 to 3.06. To me, 3.05 sounded close to 3.0, whereas 3.06 had greater resolution all the way around, with more detail on the top end, but lost some of the mid-range fullness and magic. As much as I’d liked 3.06, I couldn’t live without the vocals sounding right to me.

[highstream]

My qualms about 3.0.6, and I think those of just about everyone who has commented critically, are not that it is harsh, but it comes across tonally elevated, or pitch elevated if you prefer. The balance toward upper midrange and higher end energy largely obliterates the lower mid range/upper bass. I used the example of Miles Davis’ trumpet, where the lower half of the trumpet’s range is pretty much gone. I think with 3.0.6 one has to balance that shift against the great gains in clarity, articulation, delicacy of notes and sense of “live” that the upper end energy brings. I find 3.0.0 much more accurate tonally, but notes are a bit fuzzy compared to 3.0.6.

[kcleveland123]

At the risk of being called a smartass here’s my take on FW 0.00 AKA analog-only playback. Ha!

Sounds smoother than all previous releases.

[aangen]

I was/am a huge fan of 3.0.5. Since updating to 3.0.6 I have stayed there. It’s a noticeable change. It’s not subtle. I have been tempted to try 3.0.5 again but I can’t seem to make myself do it. 3.0.6 is right on the edge of something, and I seem to have developed a taste for the edge.

For months now I have been upgrading my system focusing on the digital side. I bought a DSD Jr., then a DSD Sr. moving the Jr. to another system in my home. I added a Matrix and an LPS 1.2 power supply to the mix as well as many Wireworld cables. Then I bought a P20. It all sounds grand.

Tonight I put an LP on my Rega RP10 with a Soundsmith Zephyr MIMC Star Cartridge and quickly realized that my digital gear is getting closer to my analog setup every day. Closer, but it’s not there yet. No. The occasional LP noise, what little there is doesn’t kill it for me. The room just sounds better. Thankfully I can forget this when I am listening to digital. LOL.