New audio player by Mark Levinson's "Daniel Hertz"- Master Class

[Paul R]

$660 + $55 = $715. So far as I can determine, one cannot run the software without a dongle, and cannot obtain a dongle without paying shipping. The shipping is an integral cost.

 

And since you bring it up, many people refuse to use a dongle, as almost all software companies have learned these days. It does not give an air of exclusivity or "high end" - it gives nothing more than an air of distrust. Software license keys are generally an effective protection for IP, and a much more acceptable solution to consumers.

 

A slight correction/explanation on the price. Master Class is CHF 600 (USD 660) plus CHF 50 for shipping (USD 55). Thanks for discussing Daniel Hertz Master Class on this blog. Available at Daniel Hertz . Note that a dongle is necessary for operation, shipped to you when you order. The program is emailed to you, with instructions. Mac OS 10.8 or higher is required.

[marklevinson]

Hi Barry,

I see that you make recordings. I have been making recordings for 50+ years which have generally been well-received for content and sound quality. I developed mastering software for my mastering to bridge the gap between analog and PCM digital, and now offer a version called Daniel Hertz Master Class for those who seek the same sonic refinements. (I founded Daniel Hertz in 2007 in Switzerland.) Like all my products since 1974, Master Class is not a gimmick. What it does, nothing else does. This becomes obvious when you use it. The improvements are of course not just EQ, although this EQ is not available elsewhere. The combination of the player quality, A+ and EQ is what is important. You can turn each function on and off separately so you can understand each component of Master Class by clicking it on or off.

 

The EQ was developed by my first electronics mentor, Richard S. Burwen, over 40 years of careful listening, and recording live music. Master Class is only slightly different from the original version used in the Cello Audio Palette I developed, in production for 15 continuous years (1985 - 2000). Used AP's can cost $15,000 - 20,000 today. If EQ were enough, we would all know it by now. A+ and EQ is what does it, plus the player quality. Anyone can hear the difference. Like pro audio EQ, Master Class has 0.1dB resolution, so you can dial in the most subtle corrections or the most dramatic, whatever is required to fine tune the tonal balance.

 

A+ makes it all work, although when you turn A+ on and off, the sonic change is very subtle. You can save and load presets, and render and save AIFF files in 1-2 seconds. For anyone who likes the sound and feeling of high speed analog tape, LP, and pure DSD (SACD), Master Class is very exciting. You need to hear it to appreciate what it makes possible. We won't get rich by selling it but we hope to get our development expenses back at least. There will soon be a list of recordings on Daniel Hertz made with Master Class, and the option of buying them. We will soon offer some original files, and the Master Class versions, for free download. This is all new, and we are moving as fast as possible. People who heard our demos at the T.H.E. Show (CES 2014) agreed that the sound was amazing, even from iTunes downloads, and some of them purchased MC at the show as a result of what they heard. The world does not need another ordinary music payer. Skepticism is natural, but I would suggest that people hear what Master Class can do before passing judgement. Thanks for discussing it here!

[marklevinson]

$660 + $55 = $715. So far as I can determine, one cannot run the software without a dongle, and cannot obtain a dongle without paying shipping. The shipping is an integral cost.

 

And since you bring it up, many people refuse to use a dongle, as almost all software companies have learned these days. It does not give an air of exclusivity or "high end" - it gives nothing more than an air of distrust. Software license keys are generally an effective protection for IP, and a much more acceptable solution to consumers.

 

I understand and share your feelings about dongles in general. Maybe someday, we will use a dongle-less system. But for now, it is the most secure copy protection method, so we use it. Everything else can be cracked so far. I think that if/when you try MC, you will forgive the dongle until/if we find a good non-dongle solution. I appreciate your fast reply and interest!

[Freann]

@marklevinson Great to see your participation on this forum. Can you elaborate a bit on the A+ feature? What does it do?

[marklevinson]

Your question is appropriate and appreciated. So far, the WIBU dongle is the best copy protection security so we use it. In principle, I believe in people paying for what they get, not stealing it. It took me a good chunk of my life to come up with Master Class, and I would like to be paid for my work. I hope that in the future, we can find a good non-dongle solution, as I agree that dongles are basically a pain. I hope you try it and feel that the benefits of MC are worth it. The advantage to the consumer is that as we get paid, we can develop more good stuff that is really useful. When software is stolen, it takes away the incentive to invest in its development. MC is real engineering, not a gimmick, and deserves to be protected. Thanks again for your interest!

[Musicophile]

Your question is appropriate and appreciated. So far, the WIBU dongle is the best copy protection security so we use it. In principle, I believe in people paying for what they get, not stealing it. It took me a good chunk of my life to come up with Master Class, and I would like to be paid for my work. I hope that in the future, we can find a good non-dongle solution, as I agree that dongles are basically a pain. I hope you try it and feel that the benefits of MC are worth it. The advantage to the consumer is that as we get paid, we can develop more good stuff that is really useful. When software is stolen, it takes away the incentive to invest in its development. MC is real engineering, not a gimmick, and deserves to be protected. Thanks again for your interest!

I think the question may not have been directed towards the Dongle (although most other players manage with other protection mechanisms e.g. activation codes) but towards the A+ Technology, which together with the EQ seems to be your major differetiation factor of your player from existing competition.

[marklevinson]

Nice to have your interest and fast reply. A+ is a process that is very subtle when you click it on and off, but it changes the listening experience as you will see. Think of the difference between a PCM copy of an analog master tape, and a pure DSD copy made with the best converters, or high speed analog tape. The difference with PCM is a signature that results in listening fatigue, possibly headaches or irritation leading to turning off the music. A+ makes it possible for the brain to respond without the stress response. This will be clearly explained, documented and presented in the near future. Best to let people see what they can do with MC, and have open communication about it.

 

One very important issue is that music systems do not reproduce music, they reproduce recordings of music. Recordings are mastered on systems that vary up to +/- 12dB in frequency response because the playback systems they are mastered on do. You can't make that go away by changing equipment. But EQ without A+ is not going to work. If it did, we would all know about it by now. Dick Burwen and I developed Burwen Bobcat, a system for Windows, with somewhat of the same intention, but MC is quite different, and exactly what I want to use myself in my mastering and personal listening. Sometimes, only A+ is enough, but there are almost no recordings that can't benefit from some EQ, sometimes only a few tenths of a dB, but clearly audible. Without A+, in my opinion, just EQ is not a real solution to optimizing sonic quality.

[marklevinson]

Sorry I missed that. Please see my reply to Freann below, and please ask any questions.

[Musicophile]

Nice to have your interest and fast reply. A+ is a process that is very subtle when you click it on and off, but it changes the listening experience as you will see. Think of the difference between a PCM copy of an analog master tape, and a pure DSD copy made with the best converters, or high speed analog tape. The difference with PCM is a signature that results in listening fatigue, possibly headaches or irritation leading to turning off the music. A+ makes it possible for the brain to respond without the stress response. This will be clearly explained, documented and presented in the near future. Best to let people see what they can do with MC, and have open communication about it.

 

One very important issue is that music systems do not reproduce music, they reproduce recordings of music. Recordings are mastered on systems that vary up to +/- 12dB in frequency response because the playback systems they are mastered on do. You can't make that go away by changing equipment. But EQ without A+ is not going to work. If it did, we would all know about it by now. Dick Burwen and I developed Burwen Bobcat, a system for Windows, with somewhat of the same intention, but MC is quite different, and exactly what I want to use myself in my mastering and personal listening. Sometimes, only A+ is enough, but there are almost no recordings that can't benefit from some EQ, sometimes only a few tenths of a dB, but clearly audible. Without A+, in my opinion, just EQ is not a real solution to optimizing sonic quality.

Thanks for sharing your insight and looking forward to more detail on the technology.

 

Just a recommendation: most other software players offer free trial periods of 2 weeks. I understand your concern about piracy, but your player would certainly benefit from offering a similar demo mode, as not everybody may be willing to spend this amount of money blindly.

[Le Concombre Masqué]

Interesting.

Looks like an equalizer plug-in set to similar (but not the same) turnover frequencies as the Cello Audio Palette (the best hardware EQ I ever heard).

I would guess it uses similar slopes for the filters too but they don't provide this information so that might not be correct.

Neither is there any info on how wide the data paths are.

 

Who knows? (I don't as I haven't tried it.) I could be wonderful.

But right now, I think I'll stick with ChannelStrip.

$130 and far more transparent than any other EQ in my experience. By a good long country mile.

One can even apply the *exact* frequencies and slopes of the Audio Palette if desired.

Use it in real time with a server application that allows for plug-ins. Or insert it as a plug-in in a DAW (digital audio workstation) like Reaper ($60!) and you can "apply the EQ" and save a file at State of the Art sonic quality.

That is (in my experience) as good as it gets, price no object, for under $200.

 

Incidentally, to my knowledge (always subject to modification of course), the Audio Palette was based on a design by Richard Burwen and turned into a product by the great Tom Colangelo (R.I.P.). No one else.

(Tom was one of the few genuine geniuses I've have the very good fortune to meet. I once spent an afternoon talking details about the Audio Palette with him. And he spoke to me as if *he* was the one who was learning. An amazing man. Gentle, humble, incredibly intelligent.)

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

 

I'm happy with Alloy 2 ; do you suggest I reconsider ?

[VandyMan]

Mr. Levinson,

Although I'm not a fan of the type of marketing you are expert at, I do have a huge amount of respect for the equipment your companies have produced. One of the finest sounding systems I've heard featured all Levinson equipment (from the era when you owned it).

 

I think you are doing yourself and computer audio in general a disservice by calling your technology "A+". A+ is what most of us call Audirvana+. It competes in the same space as your new product and is an established leader. Further, it is a one man shop, not some big company. Whether deliberate or accidental, your use of the A+ name is already causing consumer confusion (see early in this topic) and makes many of us distrust your motives.

 

Thanks for listening. Welcome to C.A.

[Paul R]

Ah, but one cannot try MC without first buying it.

 

If you published a 30 day version of it, then it would be a different story. So far as I can tell, and I might be wrong, there is no offer of a time limited demo version at all.

 

I think I own at least one copy of all the top software players at this point - Pure Music, Amarra, Fidelia+, Audirvana+, Bitperfect, JRMC, and others. I don't mind buying another one - especially since it is Mac software. At the same cost as a Mac Mini, it requires more careful evaluation. Part of that is to be sure it runs without issue, and can be easily controlled in a chosen environment. For example, controlled by the REMOTE.app on an iPad or iPhone. Something similar.

 

In any case, I wish you great success with it. I would note that any dongle can apparently be broken without much effort - there are hackers out there that do it for a reasonable fee. Also of note, Audiophiles - the target market for this software - are, as a group, much less likely to pirate IP than other groups. They tend to spend more and steal less than many other groups. A dongle is just a hindrance.

 

I am minded to just buy a copy, but I would be most annoyed if I did and then found I could not use it for some reason or another.

 

Yours,

-Paul

 

 

P.S. You might want to talk with the people at Amarra - they dropped the dongle idea after a few years. And Amarra was much more expensive than MC, initially. Now they are roughly comparable in price I believe.

 

 

I understand and share your feelings about dongles in general. Maybe someday, we will use a dongle-less system. But for now, it is the most secure copy protection method, so we use it. Everything else can be cracked so far. I think that if/when you try MC, you will forgive the dongle until/if we find a good non-dongle solution. I appreciate your fast reply and interest!

[DigiPete]

Mr. Levinson

 

What is a dongle?

Where does it go?

How does it provide value to the costumer?

Is it compatible with all external equipment?

 

Thanks

 

 

Any Info?

Any Comments?

[Musicophile]

Mr. Levinson

 

What is a dongle?

 

Thanks

LMGIFY:

 

Dongle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The others, I'll leave the answer to Mr. Levinson.

[elcorso]

Any Info?

Any Comments?

 

Since I remember, when Amarra began you have to use a "dongle". Is an USB key that goes in the USB port, that is checked by the program when you load it. I had, some years ago, a Windows "Tree & Shrubs Botanical Database" that come with this dongle also. It was of very common use on very expensive software.

 

I do agree, I would no buy and expensive music player if I can't not test it before I buy, even if published by the Pope in Rome, the Dalai Lama or whoever famous in this world.

 

Roch

[DigiPete]

LMGIFY:

 

Dongle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia . . .

 

 

How would anybody today know what to expect???

Last time I used a dongle, it plugged in to and monopolised a port I haven't seen on a computer for more than a decade.

I have no idea what to expect from a dongle today, but I have a ton of bad experiences with parallel and serial ports versions in the '90's.

[Priaptor]

How would anybody today know what to expect???

Last time I used a dongle, it plugged in to and monopolised a port I haven't seen on a computer for more than a decade.

I have no idea what to expect from a dongle today, but I have a ton of bad experiences with parallel and serial ports versions in the '90's.

 

DigiPete,

 

I don't have an issue with the dongle-incidentally, don't discount how the dongle may indeed "enhance" the sound signature of the player.

 

My problem is that coming from "Mark Levinson" I refuse to buy the product unless they charge at least 5x the price they are so we know it truly has the Mark Levinson signature!

[bdiament]

Hi Le Concombre Masqué,

 

I'm happy with Alloy 2 ; do you suggest I reconsider ?

 

As I often say, what is "best" (or "good") depends very much on exactly what one seeks.

May folks like certain color in the sound and Alloy has those filters that emulate the classic Pultec sound. If that is the type of sound being sought, I think it is an excellent choice. (I use some other products from iZotope and think they're wonderful.)

 

My own goals are to avoid any "sound" at all and let the musicians determine any sonic "colors". Even when I'm mastering a project I did not record or mix, I want to use the tools to bring out what is in the recording rather than "add" something to it. To this end, I've not heard anything that "gets out of the way" better than the MIOStrip which is part of the MIO Console software packaged with Metric Halo's hardware devices. As a separate plug-in, I find ChannelStrip is my "gets out of the way" first choice. (If I wanted "colors", I'd use one or more of the "Character" options in the MIO Console software.)

 

So, what I'd suggest is that if you are at all interested in EQ that does *not* add a sound, classic or otherwise, check out ChannelStrip.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

[Le Concombre Masqué]

Hi Le Concombre Masqué,

 

 

 

As I often say, what is "best" (or "good") depends very much on exactly what one seeks.

May folks like certain color in the sound and Alloy has those filters that emulate the classic Pultec sound. If that is the type of sound being sought, I think it is an excellent choice. (I use some other products from iZotope and think they're wonderful.)

 

My own goals are to avoid any "sound" at all and let the musicians determine any sonic "colors". Even when I'm mastering a project I did not record or mix, I want to use the tools to bring out what is in the recording rather than "add" something to it. To this end, I've not heard anything that "gets out of the way" better than the MIOStrip which is part of the MIO Console software packaged with Metric Halo's hardware devices. As a separate plug-in, I find ChannelStrip is my "gets out of the way" first choice. (If I wanted "colors", I'd use one or more of the "Character" options in the MIO Console software.)

 

So, what I'd suggest is that if you are at all interested in EQ that does *not* add a sound, classic or otherwise, check out ChannelStrip.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

 

Thank you Barry, here are my room measurement and EQ setting. I don't think I've chosen any coloring option.

 

I have another reason for posting those here : What would I do with MC's eq ? I understand it mimics Audio Palette's and aims at corrupting mastering options rather than room ; I'm not sure I could mimic my Alloy settings that seem (?) a good answer to my room and taste (it's not too dissimilar to Amarra's "classical" EQ setting...

[marklevinson]

Just to mention, with Master Class, during the free trial, you will be able to print AIFF files that can be evaluated in the future (obviously no time limit).

[marklevinson]

Thanks for the recommendation. You are 100% right. The Wibu dongle system allows for free trials and we are organizing this now.

[bdiament]

Hi Le Concombre Masqué,

 

Thank you Barry, here are my room measurement and EQ setting. I don't think I've chosen any coloring option.

 

I have another reason for posting those here : What would I do with MC's eq ? I understand it mimics Audio Palette's and aims at corrupting mastering options rather than room ; I'm not sure I could mimic my Alloy settings that seem (?) a good answer to my room and taste (it's not too dissimilar to Amarra's "classical" EQ setting...[ATTACH=CONFIG]10125[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]10126[/ATTACH]

 

If you like the results you are getting now, you may already have your best answer.

 

I've found it educational to take a number of different EQ (and other) plug-ins and apply them -- at the exact same settings -- to different copies of a few different sample files. In my experience, this is a great way to hear what (if any) "colors" a given plug-in is applying that are separate from what one hopes to achieve with the dialed in settings.

 

I can't speak to the use of EQ on rooms as I believe in "correcting" rooms at the source of the problem (which tend to be time-based issues and are located in the room itself) rather than by changing the frequency response of the loudspeakers. But that is just my personal preference. I've heard many different "room correction" algorithms and while each makes for very obvious *changes*, I've never felt the results to be positive -- to my ears.

 

Again, if you like what you have now, you may have found your best path.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

[Freann]

Personally I would like to see the EQ functionalty packaged as plugin that can be used with existing player software.

 

 

One question: Save with EQ

EQ presets are fine, but why would I optimize/re-master my own files for my current hifi setup? What if I buy new speakers?

[marklevinson]

Daniel Hertz Master Class is a program equalizer designed to make frequency response corrections to recordings of music. The A+ is designed to eliminate the listening fatigue of PCM digital audio formats. In my experience, room EQ is not a real solution because it is amplitude-based, whereas the problem is in the time domain. Resonances and reflections don't go away with EQ, you just fight them. The measured response of a room may be improved but if you move the mic (your head) an inch or two, the response changes dramatically. Not practical to put your head in a vise for listening. For rooms, I suggest making sure your system has natural tonal balance to begin with (most don't), and if really necessary, use acoustic treatment (not normally required with Daniel Hertz systems. If a musician can come to your home and play, and it sounds ok, then your room is probably fine. At least, that is my experience.

[Le Concombre Masqué]

Hi Le Concombre Masqué,

 

 

 

If you like the results you are getting now, you may already have your best answer.

 

I've found it educational to take a number of different EQ (and other) plug-ins and apply them -- at the exact same settings -- to different copies of a few different sample files. In my experience, this is a great way to hear what (if any) "colors" a given plug-in is applying that are separate from what one hopes to achieve with the dialed in settings.

 

I can't speak to the use of EQ on rooms as I believe in "correcting" rooms at the source of the problem (which tend to be time-based issues and are located in the room itself) rather than by changing the frequency response of the loudspeakers. But that is just my personal preference. I've heard many different "room correction" algorithms and while each makes for very obvious *changes*, I've never felt the results to be positive -- to my ears.

 

Again, if you like what you have now, you may have found your best path.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

Thank you Barry,

 

I will try ChannelStrip. One thing that I detailed in http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/breaking-bad-18774/#post285074 puzzles me : I came to prefer DSD played straight (at least for acoustic music), then no EQ, while I definitely prefer my PCM EQed and Amarra processed : my room might be quite fine (but even with LPs I'm sometimes disturbed by the bump around 800 Hz) but I feel like processing PCM : might give MC with its disturbingly so called A+ gimmick a try if such thing becomes available