Does good technology guarantees musicality?


Nowadays many audiophiles think that if you DIY a state-of-the-art DAC with the implementation of the right technology and with the use of the best parts money can buy, then you will automatically get a good (and musical) sounding DAC. I personally think that this way you can get a (technically) good sounding DAC, but it is still questionable if it would sound musical too. I mean technically perfect is not synonimous with musicality. Many people are able to build a technically flawless DAC, but only a few are able to build a musical sounding DAC. Do you agree with this?

Chris
dazzdax
i think taste or preference, trumps technology.

Because music is art - this will always be an issue - the most perfect technology may NOT be what people prefer to hear - people who pay 10K for an item probably do NOT want it to sound just like a $200 item - only a bit cleaner and with better S/N and better dynamics. They want some distinctive coloration for all that extra money. Hugh Padgham prefers Analog. He loves digital for ease of use (pro tools) but still prefers to record to analog multitrack tape. You can listen to an interview if you are interested. This engineer is responsible for the sound of Police/Sting and several famous albums. As everyone knows analog tape is much more forgiving when overdriven and can be used as a compressor that will not sound harsh - this saves time and money in a studio that will not need to re-record a badly placed mike or if the drummer gets over energeticon a particular take. Real insturments have such amazing dynamic range.....
I would go further by saying that digital sound reproduction has not been evolving since 1992. In that particular year four companies introduced their reference digital units: Wadia with the 7/9, Krell with the MD-10 transport and Reference 64 DAC, Goldmund with the Mimesis 10P and Accuphase with the DP-90/DC-91. After these efforts: no news actually. What was their secret? Meticulous enginering and implementation of technology and superior design of the analog section. You might not agree with this statement, but you have to concur that those were the days.

Chris
1992 is a "bit" dated in digital. By 1990, Jitter was just surfacing as an accepted major concern which many manufacturers had not yet fully addressed.
Shadorne: you are right, but even without the current knowledge about jitter those manufacturers managed to produce very musical sounding machines, that are still very good compared to today's best efforts. You should admit that :)

Chris
Reproduced music....can it be musical...you bet...can digital reproduce...big beautiful tonaly involving sound..well if it can't my system is a one of. A single component won't do it...can't. It takes a lot of work and a great deal of listening to get a educated ear and some luck.