Can Bad Recordings sound Good?

[beerandmusic]

28 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

I will be interested to hear your thoughts.

 

Initial thoughts were that I finally have a solution that i can be content with (FOR my everyday windows pc), which is probably more important (to me) than my critical listening system, because I use it more often (I intend to combine them at some point).  I don't think my feelings will change, that there are more dynamics playing DSD over ENET for most critical listening, but it is now for the first time, in 8 years (after trying a dozen different dacs) "close" and certainly acceptable for my everyday pc....i strongly believe that Mike Moffat has "finally" created a well designed dac that doesn't need usb toys. (not saying his previous generations weren't good for the money, just that it has always been my contention that a DAC should be designed such that a noisy usb should not be in the equation).  Most DIY'ers were content to find other methods to compensate using fancy cables, fancy power supplies, regenrators, reclockers, isolators etc....but i have been literally screaming for years that the DAC design needs to fix this....

 

My opinions will likely never fit anyone elses desires though because, I am not a DIY'er, I have a very cheap budget, and gear I have used is likely much different ideas than anyone else.  I don't even consider myself an audiophile anymore, because I am content having "good enough", and have no desire in spending countless hours of time and money in trying to get that 5% better, although i have taken many lazy steps in my attempts in the past.    I was yelling at people to try streaming DSD over used SONY BLURAY players before DSD gained popularity and before usb toys existed...solutions i use today, most people would laugh at, so any opinion i have is really meaningless, so I wouldn't wait too long (grin)....but i have ALEXA (smile), and thanks to Computeraudiophile(Chris), i now have CIFS working too....i also have some ATC mid domes now in my man cave (smile).

 

[Confused]

In an attempt to nudge this thread back on topic, I thought I would have listen to some of sample recordings that have been posted recently.

 

The Art Tatum track (post #293) clearly has lost of issues with noise, crackling, hiss etc. so is clearly not in the "good" category.  I tried on both a moderately cheap pair of headphones on a PC set up, and on my main system.  Perfectly listenable on both, although the recording issues are there and clear.  One thing that interested me was that listening on my main system there was a slightly disturbing "rumble" in the track, which was not apparent on the cheap headphones.  A simple case of the main system being truly full range down to very low frequencies, and hence reproducing the rumble, the headphones simply could not reproduce it.  So for the cheap headphones, a case of garbage in, not garbage out.  So in some specific cases, maybe a bad system can improve poor recordings a touch.  (I could probably have cut the bass on the main system for a similar effect)

 

Regarding the Eva Cassidy tracks posted by @beerandmusic (from post #259) I have to be honest and say that this is not the kind of material that I normally listen to.  Not quite that simple though, at no point did I pick on anything that I felt was a "shrilling moment", and I found each of the tracks perfectly listenable.  I think that technically they are not the best recordings, but perhaps the only thing that bugged me slightly was the "close mic" type vocals at some points.  The thing is, I got to the Fields of Gold track, and I was completely mesmerized by it, quite superb.  As I mentioned above, this is not the kind of material that I normally listen to, but I really did enjoy listening to this track.  I tried it later on the cheap headphones, and yes, maybe there were a couple of "shrilling" moments.  So however we decide to categorise the Fields of Gold track as a recording, I would say to my ears a decent system made an enormous difference in this case.  On the cheap headphones, not much, the kind of music that does not interest me, on the main system, I was completely pulled in and mesmerized.  Thanks for posting beer, I will probably be checking out more of here material.  Actually, that is more than a probably, I am listening to (and rather enjoying) "Wade in the Water" as I write this post.

 

I also found a copy of the remastered (30th Anniversary Edition) of Outre Risque Locomotive that @Rexp mentioned in post #206.  This drifts into personal preference I think, I can see why Rexp states the remastered version sounds worse, it has lost something.  To me, the remastered version effectively mitigates the rather bright synthesized snare sound that drove me bonkers in the original recording, so despite the drawbacks, I found the remastered version far more listenable.

[gmgraves]

10 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

+1...imho, it is the first dac i have had that sounds decent out my noisy everyday windows pc....

i think it's the first well designed usb input for a dac (in this price range)....about time!

 

Not quite convinced it beats the dynamics of what is possible with a quieter player via ethernet, but it is very close ....i have to do more critical listening....(too many other projects right now).

 

The Chord Hugo 2 still sounds better than the latest Yiggy, but it’s a lot closer than before.

[beerandmusic]

7 hours ago, gmgraves said:

The Chord Hugo 2 still sounds better than the latest Yiggy, but it’s a lot closer than before.

Is it possible that the yiggy sounds better with some recordings and the hugo sounds better with other recordings?

That has always been my experience in comparing different dacs....never owned a chord though, which is why I am most eager to try....i have the feeling that it will not be a "wow moment" though...i haven't ever had a "wow moment" with a DAC.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

Is it possible that the yiggy sounds better with some recordings and the hugo sounds better with other recordings?

That has always been my experience in comparing different dacs....

 

Absolutely

 

1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

never owned a chord though, which is why I am most eager to try....i have the feeling that it will not be a "wow moment" though...i haven't ever had a "wow moment" with a DAC.

 

Like with many (not all) things, wow moments and awe, come with better quality. DACS are in that category. Go and listen to the top MSB DACS and tell me if you feel the same. IMO a little too much WOW (which can get in the road of the music). Yes, expensive but trickle down effects make their way eventually to value and budget gear.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

16 hours ago, Confused said:

Regarding the Eva Cassidy tracks posted by @beerandmusic (from post #259) I have to be honest and say that this is not the kind of material that I normally listen to.  Not quite that simple though, at no point did I pick on anything that I felt was a "shrilling moment", and I found each of the tracks perfectly listenable. 

 

Typically I find Eva Cassidy an appealing songstress but cannot cope with the shrill moments, as described by Beery. Don't know whether its the need to "have a moment" and go from tenderness to "belting" too close to the mic. I think many of the reality singing contest shows starting with idol sadly shaped this kind of style. You have to have a moment of anguished screaming to express emotion, not. Compression then exacerbates the problem.

 

Then again, IMHO there are very few female artists that can get away with "belting". Streisand or Garland couldn't and yet they have arguably angelic voices. Shirley Bassey could ! Wowzer!

 

Those that seem to understand their craft seem to slide up to the note and pull back a little from the mic so as to not overdrive it. The engineers probably also allow more headroom in the recording, not skimming along at -1dB.

 

 

[beerandmusic]

30 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Absolutely

Like with many (not all) things, wow moments and awe, come with better quality. DACS are in that category. Go and listen to the top MSB DACS and tell me if you feel the same. IMO a little too much WOW (which can get in the road of the music). Yes, expensive but trickle down effects make their way eventually to value and budget gear.

 

I have heard wow moments with speakers but never with dacs.  Probably the best dac i have had was a gungnir mb, and I think the bifrost with unison sounds better, and I have had no less than a dozen different dsd dacs...but again, i just don't want to put the effort into building a "high end" special use pc just to see if i can equal what i can get by streaming dsd via dlna...i guess I just can't fathom it getting any better without spending big bucks.  I have been to my share of shows, and been to audiophile music groups with some pretty elaborate setups, but none really wowed me with exception of some very high end stuff (e.g. $300K speakers and the like)...and it was always the speakers...i have been "wowed" with speakers with people playing from very cheap front ends.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

6 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

.i have been "wowed" with speakers with people playing from very cheap front ends.

 

That's not been my experience.

[beerandmusic]

10 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

That's not been my experience.

between san diego and las vegas i have been to probably about 8 shows and have seen them use relatively inexpensive front ends more often than not....i did see SAE power presentation using a moffat theta though....but many use cheap apple front ends, unless they actually are selling front ends, e.g. naim, lumin, etc..  that has been my experience.  I have seen many highend front ends as well...i would guess it was about 50/50, but in all likelihood it has always been the speakers that made the impression on me....example, it didnt seem to matter what they use as amplifier or front end, i am always impressed when the speakers were focal, atc, magico, etc...

[Teresa]

15 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

i have been "wowed" with speakers with people playing from very cheap front ends.

 

8 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

That's not been my experience.

 

I guess one person's wow is another person's bow wow. 🤷‍♀️

[beerandmusic]

I was trying to think if i could recall any front end really standing out to me besides the theta, and one i could think of was when  DSD was first gaining popularity...was the zodiac antelope with its external clock, and they were teaming up with amphion speakers....sounded phenomenal...that was a wow moment for me...it was the best sounding small speaker I have ever heard, and i am sure the zodiac had something to do with it, but i likely would have been wowed with it being played from an iphone as well.

 

Sure, i have seen them all, the aurenders, lumins, naims, etc, but if they weren't paired with a "wow" speaker, they may have sounded very good, but no wow moment.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

17 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

but if they weren't paired with a "wow" speaker, they may have sounded very good, but no wow moment.

 

My experience is quality speakers need to be driven with quality front ends and amps to get the best from them. It is an interesting side note to this thread in that there is something of a parallel to GIGO - bad recordings sounding good.

 

Many will agree that the speaker has the greatest overall impact on 'the sound', second only to the recording. Others will argue for room acoustics.So it is a matter of opinion of relative weighting. My experience is simply, it all comes together when everything in the mix is at its best ( and best is yes subjective).

 

[gmgraves]

3 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

Is it possible that the yiggy sounds better with some recordings and the hugo sounds better with other recordings?

That has always been my experience in comparing different dacs....never owned a chord though, which is why I am most eager to try....i have the feeling that it will not be a "wow moment" though...i haven't ever had a "wow moment" with a DAC.

I haven’t noticed that. My experience is that the Hugo2 just lets me “hear” more deeply into the music. Of course, the Hugo2 does not reside with me, it belongs to a buddy, so my experience with it is transitory. But on direct comparison, on those occasions when I had access to both, the Hugo was better on everything I threw at it.

[beerandmusic]

7 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

I haven’t noticed that. My experience is that the Hugo2 just lets me “hear” more deeply into the music. Of course, the Hugo2 does not reside with me, it belongs to a buddy, so my experience with it is transitory. But on direct comparison, on those occasions when I had access to both, the Hugo was better on everything I threw at it.

maybe the qutest is worth consideration....hmmm....

do you have a "fancy pc" with "fancy ps"?

 

I guess that is part of the reason i am reluctant to try yet another dac, that if i don't experience a "wow" moment, it will likely be that i need a special built computer and fancy power supply, and really do not want to go down that path.

[gmgraves]

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

maybe the qutest is worth consideration....hmmm....

do you have a "fancy pc" with "fancy ps"?

The Qutest, while advertised as having the same “guts” (minus the headphone and battery stuff) as does the Hugo2, does not even sound close to the Hugo2 - even when the Qutest is battery powered!

I do have a “fancy pc” it’s a Mac Pro.

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I guess that is part of the reason i am reluctant to try yet another dac, that if i don't experience a "wow" moment, it will likely be that i need a special built computer and fancy power supply, and really do not want to go down that path.

Believe me, it won’t do any good. Stick with what you’ve got, computer wise as it applies to digital audio. Of course if you just need, or want a new computer for other reasons...

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

18 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Believe me, it won’t do any good. Stick with what you’ve got, computer wise as it applies to digital audio. Of course if you just need, or want a new computer for other reasons...

 

Let's say, as a thought experiment, Taiko were selling "The extreme" at $2,000 would you bother to audition it?

[beerandmusic]

1 hour ago, gmgraves said:

Believe me, it won’t do any good. Stick with what you’ve got,

figured as much...

[beerandmusic]

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Let's say, as a thought experiment, Taiko were selling "The extreme" at $2,000 would you bother to audition it?

for me, if it was an easy return with just paying shipping costs, i would probably try anything where it was suggested try this solution and it included the source and dac for under 3k i would try it....i just am skeptical of anything beating what i am using currently by more than 5%.

[gmgraves]

2 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Let's say, as a thought experiment, Taiko were selling "The extreme" at $2,000 would you bother to audition it?

Possibly. 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

9 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

2 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Let's say, as a thought experiment, Taiko were selling "The extreme" at $2,000 would you bother to audition it?

Possibly. 

 

It's not a trap George, I am sure you can see where I am heading.

 

So moving forwards in time I (presumptuously) anticipate your reply "possibly" might mean only a slight revision of

Believe me, it won’t do any good. Stick with what you’ve got, computer wise as it applies to digital audio.

 

...to something like it probably won't do much good but you would be curious to have a listen to The Extreme nonetheless.

 

Something that piqued my interest was the quote by Miska Point is that the analog output from both DACs is not the same, it is massively different.
I thought one of the major tenets of digital domain accuracy  -> all sounding the same (or not much different) was in fact that there was NO measurable difference at the DAC output? IIRC wasn't that issue raised in the Red Pill/ Blue Pill thread?

 

 

[gmgraves]

30 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

It's not a trap George, I am sure you can see where I am heading.

 

So moving forwards in time I (presumptuously) anticipate your reply "possibly" might mean only a slight revision of

 

 

...to something like it probably won't do much good but you would be curious to have a listen to The Extreme nonetheless.

 

Something that piqued my interest was the quote by Miska Point is that the analog output from both DACs is not the same, it is massively different.
I thought one of the major tenets of digital domain accuracy  -> all sounding the same (or not much different) was in fact that there was NO measurable difference at the DAC output? IIRC wasn't that issue raised in the Red Pill/ Blue Pill thread?

 

 

If a DAC were purely digital, then possibly they would all sound the same. Unfortunately, DACs have power supplies, and analog output circuits. Those two alone will guarantee differences in sound. I have access to a Benchmark DAC 3 and I own an Oppo UDP- 205 “media player”. Both use Similar ESS SabreDAC Pro chips. When compared side by side from the same source (CDs played on the Oppo), the Oppo and the Benchmark sound very different from one another. I was quite taken aback by that result (both outputs were fed to a pair of Stax SR-009S electrostatic headphones powered by the Stax SRM-700T

amplifier/energizer). Yeah, the Power supplies and analog sections of a DAC cause DACs to sound different even if it could be proven that all different brands, models, and types of DAC would sound the same when all else was equal (I’m not saying that they would, mind you, I’m just saying that the actual D/A conversion is just one part of that process).

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

17 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

If a DAC were purely digital, then possibly they would all sound the same. Unfortunately, DACs have power supplies, and analog output circuits. Those two alone will guarantee differences in sound. I have access to a Benchmark DAC 3 and I own an Oppo UDP- 205 “media player”. Both use Similar ESS SabreDAC Pro chips. When compared side by side from the same source (CDs played on the Oppo), the Oppo and the Benchmark sound very different from one another. I was quite taken aback by that result (both outputs were fed to a pair of Stax SR-009S electrostatic headphones powered by the Stax SRM-700T

amplifier/energizer). Yeah, the Power supplies and analog sections of a DAC cause DACs to sound different even if it could be proven that all different brands, models, and types of DAC would sound the same when all else was equal (I’m not saying that they would, mind you, I’m just saying that the actual D/A conversion is just one part of that process).

 

Okay, so the server/ pc transport has no analog output circuits but the transported signal is nonetheless an analog modulation. The server/pc transport also has (many) power supplies. Couldn't such things influence the sound of the DAC (and maybe measured at its output) ?

[gmgraves]

13 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Okay, so the server/ pc transport has no analog output circuits but the transported signal is nonetheless an analog modulation. The server/pc transport also has (many) power supplies. Couldn't such things influence the sound of the DAC (and maybe measured at its output) ?

While you are technically correct about the ones and zeros being “analog” in nature, the way digital works, all the circuitry is interested in are the transitions. That’s why digital is able to ignore analog noise and interference. Noise is not a digital signal. However, digital clock noise from a PC can be interpreted as a false one or zero, but that’s what error correction is supposed to prevent. Of course there are limits to how big of an error the correction algorithm can handle, so, yes, these things could influence the DAC’s ability to correctly interpret the digital signal.

[bernardl]

Interesting topic!

 

I have personally found that playing volume is a parameter one can play with to reduce the negative impacts of a subpar recording. I will typically play well recorded music at higher volumes and poorly recorded ones at lower volume.

 

I also find that poor recording sound exponentially bad when there are issues with the system, such as non burned in components, poor speaker positioning, phase issues,...

 

But above all, I find that not all systems sound great with all kinds of music. The advice of Steve Gutenberg to monitor what kind of music your systems takes you towards and to conclude that it may not be a good match with your real taste if it takes you towards music that are not really your preferred one is one of the best advice I have heard.

 

It is sometimes easier to blame on poor recording an inability of one's system to sound good with certain types of music, say hard rock. The ability of the system to render electric guitares hissing sounds in a pleasant way while sounding realistic is not obvious at all. Many a high end amp/speaker sound better with jazz than with other types of music.

 

I am lucky enough to now have a system that is sounding pretty great with most types of music, but it was not always the case.

 

Cheers.

Bernard

 

[John Dyson]

About digital-circuitry sourced noise getting into an analog signal, and perhaps analog sourced noise leaking into 'analog' cicutiry past a digital intermediary, this happens often because of (in this order) 1) conducted noise (most often ground reference problems), 2) coupled noise, 3) radiated noise.   What is sometimes misunderstood as CD clock noise leaking into an analog output after a digital intermediary -- that almost always happens because of an inadequate ground reference or other conduction problem.  DIGITAL BITS DO NOT LEAK NOISE.  Digital bits can be in error or not, digital binary bits don't have an 'inbetween' or secret side-channel noise path.

 

Digital circuitry and  mixed digital/analog circuitry can easily leak the current surges from a digital transistion into the analog portion of the circuitry.   The path for noise leakage into analog IS analog, but can result from poor grounding associated with a digital/analog interface.

 

Most all engineers/pseudo engineers know about the voltage 'spike' being generated from a current change through an inductance (or piece of wire), along with another component of the voltage being an image of the current flowing through resistance.   These 'current surges' that invariably happen from digital circuitry transitions, then map directly to ground/power current surges, then into voltage surges in grounds/power, power supplies and perhaps even coupled into signal lines.   This 'mapping' of the current surges into noise can be blocked (well, magnificently mitigated)  by using engineering knowledge, know-how and design.

 

So, a lot of analog background noise can come from ground/power/maybe-coupled noise generated by nearby digital circuitry, but can most often be mitigated or remedied by proper design and LAYOUT techniques.  For the case of very high quality audio being mixed with digital circuitry, the needed layout discipline as at the level required by greater than 100MHz signals.  If proper discipline and actual layout DESIGN isn't done, then the result will certainly seem to be more of an 'art', which doesn't bode well for consistency in the apparent product quality..   When analog/digital design in the current technology starts being an 'ART', instead of 'ENGINEERING', then there is a competency gap somewhere.

 

Nowadays, a mixed analog/digital layout is tantamout to an RF layout, and needs to be taken seriously as a part of the base design.

 

John