A sounds better than it did. I still prefer B. On my MacBook via its speakers.

“Remember the process is designed to create audiophile versions of existing masters that for whatever reason sound congested, dry, perhaps a little flat, or cold, or hard. Hard is the worse one.  Basically, designed to make less than perfect recordings sound better. So that obviously leads one to wonder what will happen if it's applied to recordings that don't need any help, or are otherwise unimproveable?”  SD

This unbelievably good recording sounds like a Stradivarius and a small Steinway being played by highly skilled artists, which is exactly what it is.  Steve, you are indeed a brave man to start with such an outstanding recording.  I, too, am looking forward to hearing the results of your process  on some dry, flat, cold, hard recordings.

Me either. But my vote hasn't changed. . . . It might if I could listen to it on my main system but that's not possible for me.

Whoops, I knew I wouldn't get that right the first time...  I have removed all the past votes prior to yesterday so those who voted before should be able to vote now.  I tried to do that yesterday but failed.

Steve

I find it very interesting reading all the comments on the violin sounds in these samples.

One thing, most audiophiles likely don’t realize is every violin has very different sound characteristics which also varies with each violinist. In fact, even a piano will “sound” very different depending on the pianist. (I’ve heard Steve say before, “I didn’t recognize that piano as the piano in another tape…” Sound production on a piano is completely dependent on the artist’s touch, speed of attack and weight.

With violins, the differences are even greater. What’s most important is how is that violin setup? Is the violinist a soloist who plays concertos in large halls? If so, they want a very bright powerful sound which can project to the back of the hall. A sweet pleasant violin sound is not the most powerful and will not project. For the violinist, something pleasing to their ears is not strong enough in a large hall. Very often a bright harsh sound, in their ears, sounds perfect in the concert and projects to the back of the hall.

So sometimes, when you hear a hard bright sound, it maybe true! (But that kind of bright, will not bother you like a thin/bright digital sound.) Also violins have enormous dynamics which you will not hear on most recordings...

Since I record in a relatively small space (my pool is 40’x50’ with 25’ ceiling at one end, tapering to about 15’ at the end) I must be very sensitive to the power of that violin and what overtones are being produced. Most audiophiles want to hear a warm sweet violin sound, which is a sensitive balance between direct and reflected sound (reverb).

In these 2 samples of the Tchaikovsky Concerto, the violin is a 1729 Stradivari. Steve also has the tape of Alena Baeva playing the Mendelssohn Concerto on a 1738 Guarneri del Gesu. These are the two greatest violin makers of all time. These 2 violins have very different sound characteristics & I will let Steve talk about the differences he heard on these 2 tapes…

Ed

So Ed,

Let say my wife and I were seated in the middle of your pool enjoying a glass of wine after a fine prime rib dinner while listening to you performing from the shallow end. Would it sound like B?
Now at the appropriate time with my nod, you come to serenade us. Would we hear A?

John

Ed,
I would be more than happy to chime in.  Life has been insane on my end these past TWO years, but man...  that trip to Toronto to come see Narek at your concert/recording venue was a trip never to be forgotten!  I will make it back to your neck of the woods some day.  It is a music lover's AND audiophile's Mecca!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I agree with everything that Ed wrote in his last post because it aligns perfectly with my personal experience witnessing the live concert my wife and I attended in May 2018 performed by Narek Hakhnazaryan and Ben Smith.  This was no ordinary experience.  Ed invited me to his place a day prior to the concert to tour his recording studio and listening room.  I can honestly say that Ed reset my reference for what I consider "no compromise."  The extremes that Ed and Tony Ma go to in order to capture the closest thing humanly possible to "LIVE" is beyond compare.  Of course it is hard to appreciate what I am saying because so many claim other worldly things these days, but Ed Pong has achieved something that I personally can attest to as being like nothing else.  

That "preview" day at Ed's place was eye opening.  I saw what was a seemingly endless supply of custom gear that he and Tony designed or modified as part of the recording or playback systems responsible for the UltraAnalogue tape products.  I lost count of how many vintage Western Digital 300B tubes Ed had in his system! I could go on and on about the recording chain in place from the mic's to the tape recorder but I could never do it justice.  

His pool room (concert venue) was something to marvel.  Upon first glance I thought, how can this room sound good?  Lots of hard surfaces and glass.  The ceiling is really tall at the stage area and it tapers down toward the back of the venue.  Once I heard the performance, the venue disappeared.  
I got to meet Narek and Ben that day and was treated to a sneak preview as they were rehearsing.  Ed and I moved around the venue to allow me to pick my seats for the concert the next day.  This was amazing because I literally heard how the musicians sounded at every seating area.  First off, there was NO bad seat.  Like Ed mentioned, there were distinct differences from the front row compared to the last row, but I would have had an equally amazing time in any of the available seats.  There were three areas that made my Top list, but it felt like splitting hairs.  The acoustics in that room just work.  

Long story short, the concert was phenomenal! The venue is small so you can hear absolutely everything human and instrumental.  It was intimate and raw with no adulteration.  And guess what, Ed sent me the three master tapes that I purchased from that very concert I attended and his methodology and equipment array created the most true-to-life, realistic reproduction of a concert I have ever experienced.  This was a unique and rare opportunity I understand.  But having been at a concert at Ed's place, and now owning the live recordings of that concert on open reel, the level and volume of information captured and then presented on these UltraAnalogue tapes is astonishing.  He pushes the envelope when it comes to recording levels but this is intentional.  He wants to elevate the low level details so they can be heard in the recording and the only way to do that is to raise the level of the entire recording.  It is in this low level detail that the magic resides and Ed has an uncanny ability to recreate a live experience by revealing this information in his tapes.  This is a product of his custom ALL analogue recording equipment and process, mic positioning, venue, and the work of several experienced and talented professionals who help capture that live concert and recreate it on tape.  

What you hear in these UltraAnalogue hi-res digital recordings and open reel tapes is what you would hear if you were sitting in any one of the seats at the UltraAnalogue concert venue.  My wife and I had an amazing time.  Ed and his wife Amy were the most gracious hosts and I look forward to seeing them both again at another UA concert in the future.  

Cheers,
Jeff

1/23/21.
I voted sample B after the first 2 listening sessions but after 2 more sessions I find myself changing my mind and preferring sample A. There is a hiss that is persistent in sample B that after some extra time listening to both I find aggravating.

Here are the results of the second a/b test:



For the final test, I have created another Sample B. This time I used the tape Ed sent to me instead of the digital file and took the time to use all silver cables and replaced one of the tubes. There is no noise, hiss or hum in this recording that wasn't on the original so far as I can tell. That comes from both listening to it, and looking at the waveform under magnification.

While the realness and boldness of the tape comes off almost hard on anything but stellar playback gear, this last Sample B is designed to demonstrate the effect of the process as good as I can make it short of getting out the all tube playback deck. That said, the target recordings for this are not perfect recordings from Ed, but primarily digital masters that could benefit from a slight untwisting which is what this process can easily do.

The beauty of using Ed's sample is that it lets you actually hear the mellowing effect of the process itself, whereas with lesser recordings that seem to need help it would be more difficult. Hopefully this one will be a little more transparent. It's now pretty easy to hear the truck drive by outside on the highway not that far from the venue right in the middle of the recording.

Here is a link to the samples:  https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/18Eg5hAy-PX5X0SWgDtSxbHxJpnYkRo3p?usp=sha...

The file is called "LastsampleB.wav"

I have cleared the votes off again, so everyone can vote fresh for a third and final time.

Steve

Android with SOL EX cans downloaded file.

Last Sample B compared to New Sample A.

LSB is fuller leaning to bloat. Lower piano octave gives a sense of realism. Breaths sounds thru the nose.

NSA is leaner. Busy passages seem clearer. Breaths sounds thru teeth.

Not sure how a truck sound is distinguished.  Just sounded like a swish - like tires on wet pavement being picked up through an open window.

For some reason I did not download the first set of samples for these polls but did so for the last two!

LSB gets my vote of all. My room is in disarray right now and streamer on a different system. My preference could change listening in the Chariot. It was that close!

John

Fun stuff Steve!

My sense is your B is better than before... however, the pulse, rhythm & drive of the music is still more realistic in A. The sound is much "quicker" & the notes literally fly off the strings in A (as in real life)

In B, the sound is slower, more bloated, maybe warmer, more rounded & some or many may prefer that sound...

But A is still closer to the actual live sound...(one has to actually hear it live to understand what live really sounds like...) my 2c

I think your system will make harsh unlistenable recordings sound much better!

Ed

New Sample B is really good.  
I couldn't even get thru Sample A after hearing it first.

By far the biggest difference to my ears.

I preferred A all 3 times now. LastsampleB is better than NewsampleB, but A still wins. I think LsB is how people *wish* a violin sounded, but I believe most who've heard a violin played live by an accomplished player will say A sounds more like a real violin in a real room.

That said, many may like LsB, because we don't always prefer what may be more real. LsB takes just a bit of the leading edge off, which may be just the ticket on a harsh recording or a sibilant system.

I'm excited to see what HFSL can do for lousy recordings, especially if it can do it in real time.

I find sample 1 is very impressive at first, but I have never heard a violin nor a piano sounding razor sharp like this in the real life. Sample B to me is more soothing and has a more natural sound quality to it.

I like newsampleA as a more realistic sound, you can hear the hammers in the piano and the zing of the resin on the bow. That is a magnificent fiddle played by a master. Last sample B sounded like some eq had been added, you could definitely listen to that longer but the transient response seemed like it had been dulled a tiny bit. That said, the last B sample did place the piano better in the soundstage. In last sample A I thought I could hear more of the room.
iPad with Sony 7506 headphones.