DS firmware - what is the lastest on the most musical one?

[tokenbrit]

Still looking for a copy of the 4.19.789 beta build for Klimax Renew - thanks.

[Music Lover]

Still looking for a copy of the 4.19.789 beta build for Klimax Renew - thanks.

Is it same firmware for KDS and KDS Renew? (same circuit board)
I have Davaar 4.19.799 för KDS...
If ok, send a PM with your mail and I send it.

[tokenbrit]

Thanks Music Lover. I have 4.19.799 - that was the official release for Davaar 19; I'm hoping for a copy of Davaar 19 Beta Build 789 (4.19.789)
The zip file from Linn should contain firmware for Klimax DS & Klimax Renew DS - for Beta Build 789 the file name would be something like: KlimaxDs_4.19.789.beta.zip

[kampak]

I have KlimaxDs_4.19.797.beta, maybe worth a try?!
If you want to, pm your mail adress.
KR, KP

[lunch]

I've got the 19.789 beta for KSDM and ADSM in case anyone is interested. It's better than .799 IMO.

PM your email if interested.

[SaltyDog]

I'm out of town right now. I likely have it on my NAS.

Have you checked Cymbiosis's website? Peter used to have many versions available there. I may well be behind the times though. Let me know if you still need it next week.

[tokenbrit]

Thanks Salty - no hurry. Nothing on Pete's site since 4.11.4 beta, that I can see...

I don't think the DSM versions will work for a DS, but appreciate the offer, lunch.

I might try 797 beta if I can't get a copy of 789 beta, thanks kampak. It's the 789 beta version that is supposed to be 'special', tho', hence my interest in that version specifically...

[lunch]

I don't think the DSM versions will work for a DS, but appreciate the offer, lunch.
..

You're right, they won't. I just put it out there in case someone with a dsm fancied a try.

[SaltyDog]

Turns out I do not have a copy of the requested firmware.

[donuk]

It's interesting that we have had nine pages or so of discussion on this topic. It seems that most folk who subscribe to this forum perceive differences in sound between different issues of firmware.

Those who peruse the Linn forum may have noticed a specific question I directed to Linn staff (in the Development section) about this issue over a week ago, and in spite of reminders from myself and others, there has been no answer.

I have no grudge against Linn, and have owned a lot of their kit in the past, and have been to their factory, where Richard was charming to my wife and myself.

But I find their being so unhelpful, and not being able to even suggest why I and many others think we can hear differences, is to say the least, disappointing. Until now I have been willing to download and try each beta firmware as an honest endeavour to be helpful.

As I have pointed out, Linn has been able to be dogmatic in their statements about preamplifiers being not needed. But on this issue they have left the issue wide open. I would have much more respect for them if they said they were aware of reported differences, but could not understand them in terms of conventional digital electronics. On this forum we are used to respecting and recognising phenomena which cannot be fully explained or predicted, e.g. cable sounds, torque settings, equipment stands - you will each have your own list.

It would be unkind of me perhaps to view this as a further instance of Linn becoming further detached from its customer base. Does anyone else have any ideas why this is such a forbidden issue? Am I being unreasonably critical?

It may be no coincidence that the Linn forum, in my opinion, has itself become less tolerant of suggestions and experiences which cannot be rigorously scientific proven. The calculator is more important than the ear! In my experience this is not the way progress has been progress has been made in hifi design.

Donuk beautiful downtown York

[cortina]

No proof or even sufficient empirical tests but I am leaning towards that perhaps they are somehow tweaking the software to counteract the mixing of today's releases that I feel often are rather boring. Especially when comparing 80's or earlier hard rock on CD with current releases in the same genre. I think the early cd versions were more musical, genuine and had less "loudness" boomy mixing.
Thinking that perhaps Linn in the different software versions is descretly trying to counteract that decelopment coming through as more musical versions. That however would not exactly come through as Exakt(ly) what the producer intended, hence the silence.

[tokenbrit]

If that's for real, Cortina, they should allow the customer to decide and offer flat/off as well rather than impose with the firmware as some / many systems and listening preferences may well not require it.

My thought is that Linn are at a loss to explain, or know that they would be on a loser, if they acknowledge that can of digital worms, as it contradicts their stance om lossless and that a preamp is not necessary: to undermine that is to question their whole marketing direction and product line, except the LP12, and that exception will be removed when Linn's phono stages go digital, and existing, analogue ones go the same way as their preamps. Some in Linn used to state that there was an audible difference between wav & flac, but that openess has been closed off. Lossless is lossless don't you know. Sad.

[Music Lover]

I would have much more respect for them if they said they were aware of reported differences, but could not understand them in terms of conventional digital electronics.

Agree but what can they say?
If they recognise the differences but can't explain them, it raise a few questions.
- why can't they explain them?
- why releasing new SW that is less musical?

Stating "no difference", avoid the need addressing these questions.

It would be unkind of me perhaps to view this as a further instance of Linn becoming further detached from its customer base.

Unkind or not, that is already a fact - unfortunately.

It may be no coincidence that the Linn forum, in my opinion, has itself become less tolerant of suggestions and experiences which cannot be rigorously scientific proven.

Sadly you are correct.

[cortina]

Well whatever the reason I understand that they do not comment. A comment such as: We do not know does not build confidence among many customer groups. Neither does: We do make minor changes but all for the best. (Big difference compared to the times when tone controls were banned and keeping the 1s and 0s all the way to the speaker and would uppser many of us who remember old Linn) Or: We provide you with a choise of what you prefer. If a customer pays big money for the best, many probably expect Linn to have concluded already which setting is the best.
But of course there may be other reasons as well.

[macrotech2]

I don't think the DSM versions will work for a DS, but appreciate the offer, lunch.
..

You're right, they won't. I just put it out there in case someone with a dsm fancied a try.

If you download the configuration file manually you will see it's just a zip file. There are separate downloads for Klimax DSM and Klimax DS (so you might be able to download software for a different model and try installing it. However this would be risky and decently written code should check the model before installing.

Looking inside the DS version is interesting. There are separate folders (in release 31) for Klimax DS mk1, mk2 and mk3 (so you can't install older software on a DS/2 if there isn't a specific folder for it).

If you look in each model folder you will see the same set of files, which includes a set of filter algorithm files and an FPGA file. In release 31 the filter files are identical for all 3 models. The FPGA files are the same for the DS/0 and DS/1, but different for the DS/2. I assume this may be related to Exakt or different components ( though the cynic in me wonders whether this is part of the DS/2 improvement)

Lots of scope here for investigation and comparison between versions!

[matss]

I hardly believe Linn would tamper with the actual musical signal in their software. How would they know how to remix any specific track to sound better, if they don't know exactly what music tracks their customers are listening to at each specific moment? To me that seems unrealistic.

I also understand Linn's standpoint of the lossless digital domain. You have to be a truly reckless digital engineer to loose information in the digital domain. Digital in theory is lossless as Linn say. I see nothing wrong with how Linn communicates this.

But losses are introduced in the analog/digital and digital/analog conversions. This is where I believe we might be able to actually hear differences between software versions or NAS set ups, digital cables etc. Different digital signal processing will introduce different types of noise, jitter and other artifacts which might very well affect the sensitive analog signal at the beginning or end of the chain.

Linn are open about the sensitivity of the analog/digital conversions. But might be considered a bit blurry by some of us on how the digital signal processing actually affect this performance level in their products. And I really don't blame them. Admitting that changing digital code would affect the sound, will in essence tie the hands behind their backs for any freedom in adding functionality or exchanging parts of the software code as they might like for other reasons than just improving sound quality.

My unqualified guess (not being on the Linn software development payroll) is they actually do their best to maintain best possible sound quality in each Davaar release, without limiting their freedom to add appreciated functionality to their portfolio. They seem to communicate sound quality enhancements when they change stuff directly influencing A/D-D/A conversion, like for instance the recent DS/2 clocking upgrade. But not intermediate functionality/bug fixing releases.

To me Linn might not be as painstakingly into each single miniscule sound impacting detail any longer, like Fredrik seems to be in his Lejonklou products. I guess we just have to come to terms with that, continue to help each other to find uncommunicated local maximas or aim for other brands. I still like their product performance well enough, and for example appreciate the possibility to listen to new music through Tidal/Qobuz more than any small impact that might have on absolute sound quality. I'm simply just too curious to find and listen to great music nowadays.

/mats

[Erik]

I hardly believe Linn would tamper with the actual musical signal in their software. How would they know how to remix any specific track to sound better, if they don't know exactly what music tracks their customers are listening to at each specific moment? To me that seems unrealistic.

I also understand Linn's standpoint of the lossless digital domain. You have to be a truly reckless digital engineer to loose information in the digital domain. Digital in theory is lossless as Linn say. I see nothing wrong with how Linn communicates this.

........

/mats

From my point of view it has nothing to do with lossless or not. The LS-NAS only feeds the DS-player without loosing or adding anything, but still proves to be superior to a standard NAS.
To me, different DS firmware sounds different. Sometimes marginally but sometimes dramatically, and for me the latest ones incorporating TIDAL isn't good enough.

I fully understand LINN as a company not discussing this but I hope( but I might be wrong) they are aware of it.

/Erik

[matss]

From my point of view it has nothing to do with lossless or not. The LS-NAS only feeds the DS-player without loosing or adding anything, but still proves to be superior to a standard NAS.
To me, different DS firmware sounds different. Sometimes marginally but sometimes dramatically, and for me the latest ones incorporating TIDAL isn't good enough.

I fully understand LINN as a company not discussing this but I hope( but I might be wrong) they are aware of it.

/Erik

I was trying to get this across in my post, and I can understand you point of view. But for the record the digital side of the system is lossless by design, if not completely f-d up. My take on this is instead that the LS-NAS and different DS firmwares do put different strains on the analog part of the DS - like noise, jitter and other artifacts. Which in turn might very well affect the sound.

Linn are hopefully aware of this, and I wish they try to make the analog side of their electronics as immune to these disturbances as possible - with design topology, power supply management, signal isolations, grounding etc. Then I believe they let themselves go ahead and add new functionality to their product as they see fit, according to their beliefs and market expectations. Even though it might affect the last little percent of absolute sound quality. Hopefully they will be able to fix that in future firmware or hardware upgrades.

BR, mats

[Music Lover]

And half a year later - what is the most musical firmware today?

[David Neel]

I've not spent much time with DS lately, after the latest LP12 upgrades.....

But for what it's worth I've tried 32 and 33 to experiment with SO, and have now gone back to 4.22.1006. This, to my ears, has most of the benefits of earlier favourites, but notably tighter bass. So I'm not saying it's necessarily the all-time great, but it suits me, and I spent too little time streaming to worry any further.

I was at one point sufficiently interested in maximising my streaming via ADS/1 to build an LSNAS (now running on Debian which eliminates the regular Windows crashes - it was running fine after not being accessed for six months), but I have now become disillusioned as the musicality of digital is nowhere near my LP12 or Kremlin.

[kct]

quite enjoying the latest beta 35, sounds very musical to me and no fatigue
Is there a way to download to keep ?

[David Neel]

Current beta versions are located here (if the page is blank that means there is no current beta):

http://products.linn.co.uk/VersionInfo/Downloads/Beta/

Released versions are here:

http://products.linn.co.uk/VersionInfo/ ... /Releases/

[donuk]

Yes, ktc, I must agree that the 35 beta does sound fresh and tuneful.
I always tell myself I will stick to the same firmware and not get involved with the risks of beta testing. But always kid myself that the next one that comes along will sound incredible.
But this is not bad. Anyone else tried it?
Donuk damp downtown York

[tokenbrit]

Which beta version of 35? Latest appears to be .1521 - is this the fresh & tuneful beta release, or was that an earlier beta version of Davaar 35?

[kallesprätt]

I tried 4.35.1521.beta on my Krds/1 and didn't like it, to me 4.19.799 is the best one with 4.32.1283 on second place.