Couldn’t agree more. Windom achieves a whole new level of musicality, that Snowmass only hinted at. Everything is more fleshed out and real sounding, including the acoustical space the performance was recorded in.
11 Likes
Well, I’ve made a whole lot of changes in my system lately, all improvements, none of which I would describe as distracting. So there’s that aspect, which I don’t discount, and is why I’ve largely avoided commenting on Windom up to this point. The feeling I get from WIndom reminds me of if you were to demo some new speakers at home and decided they were too revealing for your taste/with your associated gear.
Sure - there’s the possibility those speakers are in fact or some folks opinion “better”, and if you “just” upgraded your front end, you would Reach the Higher Ground.
I will reiterate that one wild card here could be the new-ish DSD (maybe we just write “DSD” or “DSJ”?), no idea how many hours on it - that may not be fully run in.
It will be fun to do this process with the 2nd System with DSJ and see if I feel the same about that.
I think this is largely an issue of synergy.
EDIT: See top of thread
2 Likes
An interesting reaction/experience.
It is - as is often noted with these upgrades, “like a different DAC”. This one perhaps more so than average. At this point I’m saying, “Wow - impressive DAC. I like mine as it is though.” Uh…unless Ted can “split the difference” ; )
It is for me also a difference in “feel”. Windom is more of an “above the neck” sound experience for me/IMS, and when I hear real music, my rational thought processes are typically, blissfully not involved.
EDIT: See top of thread
“Is this different from any other notable change in the sound of your system? I find any improvement initially a bit distracting.”
I can relate to this (new and different being “distracting”) – and I would be willing to guess, @badbeef is experiencing something similar to the following –
One of my evaluation go-to’s when making a change to my system (including DSD firmware updates) is “North Dakota” by Lyle Lovett, from the Joshua Judges Ruth CD (ripped to my iMac).
Two things, in particular that I like to listen to/for on this track:
-
There is some really light, subtle cymbal work at the beginning (barely audible unless the system is revealing) and at various points throughout the song. If this cymbal work is not evident and does not achieve the desired effect, then I feel like something is off. Some of this magic was lost when I went from Redcloud to Snowmass 3.0 (more volume was needed to get things “right”) and, so far, Windom does not address this nuance as well as Redcloud did. I still have to increase the volume with Windom, but I think there is a skosh more clarity to the work.
-
And, more to the point, toward the end of the song Ricky Lee Jones joins Lovett for some harmonizing. This has to sound GREAT for me to like how the kit, firmware, speaker position or other change sounds in my system. With Windom, Ms. Jones and Mr. Lovett are clearly distinct voices joining together. Its different from my recalled experience with all previous DSD firmware. Before Windom, the voices were pleasantly blended in harmony. With Windom they are pleasantly separate, easily discernible as separate voices but no longer “blended”. I could easily agree with anyone that would listen to this subtlety and declare that they preferred the smoothly blended sound of the harmonizing as opposed to the two voices singing together. It is “pronounced enough” to be noticeably different. Some might find that distracting or dissonant.
Which is more musical? Which is more accurate? Is one experience closer to the “absolute sound.” I think the answers depend upon one’s own preference.
FWIW.
2 Likes
I think that’s to the point. There’s something Very Hi Fi going on here that is not necessarily Musical, IMO. I certainly don’t claim to have all the answers, and…stuff changes, and…I don’t think anyone needs to care about my experience more than anyone else’s - especially their own, the only thing that matters.
I have noticed that Windom is uncanny with regard to realism - from another room. That is a test of the coherence of a Mix for mixing engineers. If you go into an adjoining room while it is playing, and it sounds “off”, something is…off. The more it sounds like someone/ a group playing in the other room, that’s a clue you’re on the right track.
This could be that in another room, this separation that @scotte1 is noting is blending together like separate singers would.
So - realize that sounds contradictory. Just stating observations.
EDIT: (one I should go back and put on Every Dang Post I did in this thread prior to Oct. 19). I WAS WORKING WITH A BAD LOAD…
4 Likes
I think we would have to vehemently disagree here. I find the dCS sound a lot more musical than the DS one - Windom or Snowmass.
In fact a lot of folk you have seen list their DS for sale switched to the Bartok.
I’ll take your Rossini off you anyday if you are selling it at a steep discount. If I could afford one I would have bought it a long time ago, running the internal Network Bridge and eschewing the need for separate streamer, power cord for streamer, a USB fixer, power supply for fixer, USB tail for fixer and extra power cord. With the CD transport built in, one can also do away with a separate CD transport, digital cable and another power cord.
On another note, Windom has settled in now. The bright highs have ameliorated even though it still sounds crispy on some material. Mids are full, clear and open sounding, although I would like more sweetness and warmth. Bass is still the best improvement so far.
1 Like
If a “blend” of voices is due to the equipment’s inability to keep them separate - as they appear on the recording - this is a form of distortion. A better DAC will present them as separate.
Live unamplified voices remain separate, even though they work together. I am recording a soprano and baritone singing Weil, etc. today accompanied by full orchestra. Great timing for this discussion.
2 Likes
One man’s “distortion” might be another’s “resolution” (as in resolving prowess) no?
To your point though (assuming I got it right), I am leaning toward my observations so far with regard to Windom best being summed up as: Once again, Ted and PSA are getting us closer to what’s on the recording and removing the noise, distortion, etc. that stands between what is recorded and what we hear (in sufficiently “revealing” systems).
1 Like
No. The job of a DAC is to accurately present what is on the disk, nothing more or less.
I would certainly tend to agree with that, with the possible exception of the mix engineer feeling that it presents them as more separate than intended, much as mixing with different gear, in a different room, etc. will lead to different mix decisions. So the Absolute Sound question scotte poses is not simply “which reveals more”, but which communicates the mix and/or the performance as observed by someone at some optimal listening distance, which is not necessarily standing onstage between the performers.
EDIT: See top of thread
1 Like
Thanks for splitting this up. This is so much better.
1 Like
I’m still liking windom more and more. I really don’t have a lot of bad recordings. I made mention of The Nightfly -Donald fagen and how it was always a hot recording leaning digititus but also very clean. Windom helps the digititus - keeps the clean - and seems to give layers to the sound/ music.
Last night put on rainbow people - Eric Bibb. Just a remarkable recording and windom did everything better. Acoustic guitar / vocals in ‘lead me guide me’ acapella choir are simply phenomenal. SRV Tin Pan Alley - the bass notes just go lower in windom and this is easily a/b’d.
Vocals in windom - no grain - come from a really black background. I can understand folks that hear this as no air or no life. I happen to enjoy it.
I would qualify every piece of my chain as ‘musical’ as a qualifier here. Nothing in my chain is hot / over detailed / digital in nature. My system would be a smidge on the warm side but that’s how I want it. If your system leans the other way a bit - maybe different results.
2 Likes
But is this not a problem with the mix or other equipment, not the DAC, if the DAC is completely accurate?
I do not want the DAC making judgments as to what it thinks I want to hear.
In any event I can pretty much guarantee when I listen to my recording from today’s session it will sound different than I intended. 
We are probably vehemently agreeing, but I think I need to understand your definition of “distortion” to be sure.
Regardless, I am certainly in the camp of preferring that the DAC accurately present what is on a [recording].
Unfortunately, that means “we” sometimes have to live with the fact that music that was once enjoyed at a certain level is no longer quite as enjoyable due to the improvement in a piece of equipment’s accuracy to the source.
Cheers.
1 Like
Right - talking in gear absolutes, yes - and assuming that what we’re getting is “completely accurate”. I would think that is an endless moving target.
My “problem” with what I’m hearing, if you can call it that, is this sounds more like what I consider “clinical” sorts of DACs. Lots of them from different manufacturers at widely different price points. Many the most highly prized and priced, for the reasons you state. It is always argued that they are “more accurate”. Many leave me cold.
I am distracted by the SOUND of Windom. Its Really Good. Its Amazing. It seems to engage my gear-analyzing brain, which is blissfully shut off when I attend even what would be considered a “crappy-sounding” concert. Sure - it is fun in that sense, and revealing of detail I hadn’t heard and so on, but there’s a line that is easy to cross with digital detail that turns into something I don’t consider realistic in its presentation, seems less musical and tends to lead to fatigue and track-hopping to get your next fix of “amazingness”.
It appeals to my audiophile/analytical mind and misses my heart and gut in some way.
Any number of reasons that this could be happening for me. One not insignificant one is that I’ve been involved in the development of a phono stage over the past year, and listen to a lot of vinyl. Though my cart has very good channel separation - somewhere upwards of 40-50dB - that is nothing compared with digital.
Been listening to variants of that Sound twice as long as I’ve been listening to digital. There’s a reason “in the groove” came to have meaning in other contexts. Its about Feel. Does it Feel Right? That was a question that often came up in listening sessions, and informed the sound of the Pre. If it didn’t communicate “below the neck”, it wasn’t happening.
If two singers are onstage, are they (and any accompaniment) coming out of two separate boxes, with awesome channel separation?
EDIT: See top of thread
1 Like
I have always been amused at how some people say the differences between releases are huge like having a whole new DAC. I have always perceived the changes from release to release to be quite subtle or minor. I have verified this to myself by loading up Yale and listening for a while. There is not a huge difference between Yale and Windom and much less difference between Snowmass and Windom. With all the releases I have tried, I never felt like I had an all new DAC since the overall sound signature of the DirectStream was still there. This, by the way, is in no way a dig on the DirectStream or the work that Ted does. I am quite impressed with Ted and how is able to continually refine the DirectStream.
When I loaded up Windom, I certainly heard subtle differences right away. I had to listen for many hours to determine if those differences were positive and to verify that what I thought I was hearing was what I was actually hearing. Those subtle differences certainly improve my listening experience and I am grateful for that.
4 Likes
An excellent point. Subjective enjoyment can be a moving target.
I understand. I would argue however they are not accurate, unless the CD itself contains clinical sounding music.
A good analog is an amp with vanishing levels of THD achieved through lots of negative feedback. These amps can sound very cold. While THD is low, my bet is there is some other parameter (which we know how to measure or not) which is way out of whack.
Exactly. Darren started out with the uber-multi-decimal-place low distortion design. Sounded like crap. Would’ve been a home run over at the measurement sites, especially those that never buy or listen to the gear measured ; )
1 Like