Right. I was in a nice place of balance last year, and it has tilted to and fro some in between, now coming back into balance with SPP and Windom working.
Of course there are loads of recordings that are not live in the usual/audiophile/classical sense. So rather than live, you’re going for the best reproduction of the sound of the Master.
Absolutely! For being able to play back or record like live sound, the producer of the microphones must have reached this goal first etc.
For classical music at least, ambient noise is usually an integral feature of the recording, and sound engineers take care to make recordings of this for use in the editing to provide continuity in the gaps between tracks. I remember writing a letter to the Gramophone magazine several years ago bemoaning the common practice of fading down the ambient noise to zero between tracks, which simply makes the noise that much more obvious and annoying when faded back up. BIS CDs at the time were an honorable exception, and they even added a very long (20 seconds or so) stretch of ambient noise at the very end of the CD.
This is very true for live concert recordings. I make certain to record stretches of ambient sound in the performance space when on-site. I then have nice stretches of relatively quiet (no HVAC noises, no audience noises, etc.) to use between movements, etc. if the actual sound between pieces or movements is distracting.
A great annoyance is good quality programs. When moved, pages turned, they make little clicks which sound like a digital error.
I finally got a good Windom load (fully reformatted SD cards and fresh downloads from the PSA site). I created Yale, SM306 and Windom cards.
I find Windom to be much more analytical than anything that’s preceded it. Unfortunately some recordings are much flatter between the speakers and are no longer a really good listen. However, I played some electronic music - I urge people with a good room and a streamer to find a couple of tracks by Felix Laband (my album is called Dark Days Exit - the tracks are Red Handed and Minka) - they are superb - I’d love to know what others of you think. Dan.
This has been my experience as well. With lush, electronic recordings Windom is amazing. And the added details are eye opening. I find Windom to fall short on nearly every jazz recording I’ve played on a horn solo, it’s just flat compared to Snowmass’ sweeter mid range. My system and room lean in the bright direction, meaning I always have to be on guard for brightness. In that regard, Snowmass is a better match for me even though I appreciate Windom’s level of detail that can tend analytical at times. For me, Snowmass is overall more enjoyable.
Which firmware update do find sounds the most like vinyl?
As he said the quietest one: i.e. Windom.
I read at as him saying that with each more quiet update it sounds better, but less like vinyl 
Hence my question 
Wow that’s really the opposite of what others like myself hear…so if you don’t have bad loads, setups seem to be so different in reaction…
Yes, it’s seems a minority of us are having a very different experience. I’ve done every load voodoo posted here across 20+ loads, and they all sound about the same. So I’m ruling out a bad load, and @paul has declared our experience as statistically unimportant forum wackiness, so I’m assuming what I have with Windom is what it is.
I speculate the rest of our systems, rooms and personal taste account for the difference. Snowmass is as far down the low noise revealing path I care to go 
I’m having a similar experience. I’ve been compromised into a less than optimal room setup and Snowmass I was able to get just right in time. Windom I’ve really had to work hard to do so now that I believe I have a proper “load.” I found it to fall short on nearly every jazz recording as well before I set to work, and I’m experiencing that brightness. And I mostly listen to jazz so it’s been tough going.
I made the most drastic speaker placement changes that I can, and I’ve increased the value of the resistors leading to my ribbon tweeters and I’ve moved to a particular voltage regulation tube for my output tubes and played around with gain between my components and I’m getting a very nice sound, at last. Some recordings are still problematic but that’s to be expected from a revealing software. Whew! Now hopefully things will stabilize and remain as they are and I can get back to just spinning discs and relaxing into the music. . . .
Lon
I wonder what all those changes would have done for Snowmass?
Those songs sound great here, thanks for mentioning them!
For me, I can’t change the room much. I’d have to do a total cable overhaul, which is expensive and could be a wild goose chase.
Yesterday I tested Charles Lloyd’s “The Water Is Wide” (PCM), Ben Webster’s “Gentle Ben” (DSD), Stan Getz “The Girl From Ipanema: The Bossa Nova Years” (PCM, disc 1), and Time Out (DSD) and Kind of Blue DSD.
Snowmass was way better on the horns, without fail. So I if I’m thrilled with it, if it ain’t broke, why not just relax with Snowmass and let it be?
Question for Ted (or anyone else who could answer):
I have been going back through all my recordings to appreciate the new found delight in listening to music through Windom.
And I came upon my high res album Magnificat from Nidarosdomens jentekor & TrondheimSolistene, for which I have two versions: 192KHz and 96KHz.
After listening to the 192KHz version, I thought there was an annoying digital high pitch artifact noise (like a high pitch SSSSHHHHH) that was giving an unnatural tonality to the highs (which are plenty on this album).
Then, I decided to play the 96KHz version and found that the highs were more natural and pleasant (much less high pitch artifact noise), so much so, that I decided to keep the 96KHz version on my Innuos Zenith MK3 and get rid of the 192KHz version.
How do you explain that?
Almost. 
I find each firmware update sounds better than the last, but it does not sound more like vinyl.
Vinyl has its own type of sound, but no better than digital.
I’ll have to look at them in, say, Adobe Audition. 2L usually does a great job so I suspect that it’s something else, but the source is where to start.
I didn’t need to do this level of tuning for Snowmass 3.00 and then 3.06! I moved my speakers a little bit and rolled a few tubes, coming back to the same complement with some gain changes between components, but Snowmass 3.06 did not.
I’m afraid to reload Snowmass 3.06 and imperil this “good load” (I guess, who can know for sure?) of Windom to see what these changes may have wrought to Snowmass 3.06. I bet it would sound darker and thicker, which Windom needed.
Both versions (96 & 192) are in the process of being sent via WeTransfer.