Direct Stream Digital - The New Addiction

venkatcr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
7,253
Points
113
Location
Chennai
Welcome to Digital Audio Stream - the 'SACD' of computer based audio. This article is published as is with the kind permission of it's owner - Mr. Andreas Koch. Hifivision and I are indebted to him for giving me permission so quickly. If there are any questions please post them here, and I will see how I can get answers from Andreas.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
DSD the new Addiction

By Andreas Koch​

Abstract
A new drug no, but a new cant-be-without-it-anymore audio format bursting into our listening rooms. Direct Stream Digital (DSD) actually has been around for a while already, but it has been so married to a physical media, SACD, that it has yet to receive the attention from audiophiles that it deserves. It is only recently with the growing interest in downloading high resolution audio via the internet that DSD surged to the surface of news coverage. What were compelling reasons to use this encoding scheme for SACD over 10 years ago are now becoming convenient truths for the new era of high resolution internet audio. This paper explains the background and nature of DSD and what might happen to it in the near future.

What is DSD?
The term Direct Stream Digital (DSD) was coined by Sony and Philips when they jointly launched the SACD format. It is nothing else than processed Delta-Sigma modulation first developed by Philips in the 1970s. Its first wide market entry was not until later in the 1980s when it was used as an intermediate format inside A/D and D/A converter chips.

dsdfig01.jpg

Fig. 1​

Figure 1 shows how an analog source is converted to digital PCM through the A/D converter and then back again to analog via the D/A converter. The A/D internally contains 2 distinct processes:
  1. Delta-Sigma modulation: the analog signal is converted directly to DSD with a very high sampling rate. Various algorithms are in use depending on the application and required fidelity. They can generate 1-bit DSD or multibit DSD oversampled at 64x or 128x compared to regular CD rate.
  2. Decimation filter: the DSD signal from the previous step is downsampled and converted to PCM. Word length is increased (for instance 16 or 24 bits) and sample rate reduced to CD rate or a low multiple of it for high resolution PCM formats.
The D/A process is very similar where:
  1. the PCM signal is upconverted to a much higher sample rate.
  2. then converted to DSD via the Delta-Sigma modulator (to reduce word length)
  3. then converted to analog.
This technology was chosen because of its improved linearity and consistent quality behavior across physical components, as most of the heavy duty signal processing was shifted to the digital domain where it was not susceptible to variability of electronic components. It was quickly adopted in most converter systems and we can say that since about the late 1980s we have been listening to some form of DSD without even knowing it.

As science progressed as well as our experience with digital audio, we started to realize that the algorithms for the DSD-to-PCM and PCM-to-DSD conversions can have a profound impact on the sonic performance when they are developed according to classic formulas. These are relatively complicated algorithms and they introduced a new phenomenon that we describe as digital sound or ringing effects. Hence the motivation by the engineering teams of Sony and Philips to remove these steps altogether from the conversions between analog and digital. This simplified DSD path that bypasses the PCM path is shown in Fig. 1 above. As is usually the case most simplifications in the signal path lead to sonic improvements and so it didnt come as a surprise when first listening tests were so astonishing that this format was considered as an archiving format for recording studios. That alone says something about its sonic fidelity. At the time no recording studio was even considering using any PCM format to archive its analog recordings.

The proliferation of the new DVD disc format happened around the same time and its owners immediately raised the question if it was time to use it as replacement for the aging Redbook CD format. The license holders of CD (Sony and Philips) were very concerned about that, of course, and were quick to suggest a competing audio disc that would use the DSD encoding scheme to better address the music industrys requirements. A full fledged format war started raging between SACD and DVD-Audio. Luckily SACD won and through that victory DSD has been used in digital recording studios around the world. Meanwhile a large library of DSD recordings exists today and many of these recordings have only been published as PCM conversions.

While DSD is used at a sample rate of 2.8224MHz (64 x 44.1kHz) mostly for SACD production, recording equipment has also been used at double that rate at 5.6448MHz (128 x 44.1kHz). Often studios use this format to archive their library of analog recordings. Recording equipment for this double rate DSD is available relatively inexpensively at great quality so that consumers can use it to archive their beloved vinyl and tape recordings onto a digital format and then play that back directly via an audiophile grade D/A converter (such as any Playback Designs product) in the comfort of their own listening room.

DSD as a high resolution audio format
The theoretical frequency bandwidth of a DSD signal with a sample rate of 2.8224MHz (64 x 44.1kHz) is 1.4112MHz. Compare this to a 96kHz PCM signal which has a theoretical bandwidth of 48kHz, or 192kHz PCM signal with a bandwidth of 96kHz. However, this wide bandwidth comes at a price: pure Delta-Sigma signals are quantized to 1 bit and, therefore, do not have a great dynamic range by themselves. That is why Delta-Sigma converters need to incorporate a process called noise shaping that increases the dynamic range in the usable audio range (0-20kHz) and then slowly decreases it over higher frequencies. It is this noise-shaped delta sigma signal that is then called DSD. Fig.2 below shows the typical dynamic range of a DSD signal sampled at 2.8224MHz which can be greater than 150db in the audio band below 20kHz. The slowly rising noise floor at higher frequencies also follows to some degree our hearing threshold for transient signals that have been proven to be audible up to 100kHz.

Of course, DSD at double the rate (5.6448MHz) has an extended audio range of 0-40kHz above where the noise floor then starts to rise gently.

Fig.2 also shows the theoretical dynamic ranges of high resolution PCM signals at various sample rates. Note the steep brickwalls that PCM signals typically have. It is those brickwalls that can generate very audible side-effects such as pre-ringing, if not processed with special algorithms (such as in all Playback Designs products). By design DSD signals do not generate these side effects.

dsdfig02.jpg

Fig. 2​

As we can see from this, DSD is characterized by the following:
  • great dynamic range in the audio band (0-20kHz)
  • slowly rising noise floor in higher frequencies (no brickwalls)
  • extended frequency range into MHz
This makes DSD a serious contender in the choices of high resolution audio formats. Sometimes DSD is criticized for its high frequency content (as shown in Fig.2). But all DACs limit the amount of noise that actually gets through to the analog side. This noise is generally not correlated to the music signal and therefore is easy for our psychoacoustic hearing system to filter out, but most listeners do not even hear it. Double rate DSD addresses this problem by pushing the ramp of the rising noise floor up on the frequency axis by about 20kHz thus reducing the absolute noise floor in the higher frequencies quite dramatically.

Internet Download Bottleneck
Clearly, packaged media is slowly on its way out. It has limited the evolution of audio formats for too long. As the computer platform does not favor one particular format over another, it is becoming an artistic decision for the recording engineer and producer which format to use for which application and market. With fewer and fewer disc pressing plants in the world the era of high resolution downloads to computer has already started. When combined with an external DAC and configured for high quality playback the computer can be a formidable audio platform.

The various high resolution formats that are currently in use can have very different bit rates, which impacts the time it takes to download the files from the internet. Fig. 3 lists different formats along with their files sizes for a 3 minute song and download times assuming a 5Mb/sec internet connection.

dsdfig03.jpg


As the sample rate is increased beyond 96kHz PCM formats create relatively large files that take quite long to download. The file size and download time for DSD on the other side are comparable to 24/96kHz PCM, yet offer greater performance as we saw in Fig.2. Often the DXD format is compared to DSD in terms of sonic quality, but as we see from this table DSD is about 3 times more bit efficient. This comes from the fact that DSD doesnt have a flat frequency response as seen in Fig.2, but rather adjusts resolution in very high frequencies where our hearing only has very limited resolution as well. For this reason and the fact that a large library of DSD recordings already exists, DSD may become the dominant format for high resolution downloads.

Playing DSD Files
The computer is a very good platform for reading files, shuffling bits from one place to another and it offers various possibilities for user control, local and/or remote. Hardly any other machine can offer the amount of storage, upgradeability, ease of use and controlability via tablet PC or even smart phone, at least not for the price of standard computers today. However, the computer is generally not a good platform to combine with analog audio signals there are too many fans, disk drives, CPUs, auxiliary processors generating mechanical and electrical noises and running on asynchronous clock signals. This all would have a very negative impact on the analog audio signal, if it was too close to this noisy environment. Fortunately, this can be solved quite easily by moving the critical element, the DAC, outside and away from the computer. This raises the question, of course, of what the best link between computer and external DAC should be. Ideally the requirements for such a link should be:
  • no limitation on audio format
  • no limitation on sample rate
  • single cable to allow the DAC to be clock master (computer does not generate audio clock)
  • standard on most common computers
  • long cable lengths
The most common audio links that we already know, such as Coax, AES/EBU or Toslink all have some limitations. None of them support DSD and none of them can handle sample frequencies beyond 192kHz or clock master setups without adding a second cable. Fortunately, a few audio companies got together with a couple of large software companies in the late 90s to define a flexible audio link protocol that could be implemented on top of the standard USB interface. This protocol has almost no limitation on format, sample rate or clock setup other than what the transmission rate of the underlying USB protocol allows. It is standard on all computers, even the lowest end versions, and there are numerous USB extenders available that allow cable runs well beyond the basic USB limitation of 15 feet. Seems like a winner and so it is not surprising to see an increasing number of DACs becoming available with the USB interface. If you want the most future proof audio system it seems clear that a standard computer with an external USB DAC should be in your budget.

There are several DSD file standards and they have all their history and reason to be there:
  • .dff: introduced by Philips in 2000.
  • .wsd: introduced by 1-bit-Audio-Consortium in 2002 composed mostly of Japanese companies.
  • .dsf: introduced by Sony in 2005. This format is very similar to .dff, but has more flexibility for including meta data such as graphics for liner art etc. that can be used to display visual information while playing the related song. This format is used on DSD Discs, which are recordable DVD media playable on Sonys Playstation, some PCs and some SACD players. Because of its additional capacity for meta data this format will most likely become predominant.

All 3 formats are currently in use, but most playback software available today for computers support all 3 of them. That is the beauty of a software based platform, it usually takes the software developer only a few trivial tasks to support an additional file format and so we dont have to be too concerned about these multiple file formats. And if it ever should be then Korgs free Audiogate software allows you to convert files from any format to any format. Various manufacturers already offer playback software that supports any PCM sample rate, DSD and double rate DSD.

Once the playback software reads the DSD file it sends the data to the USB driver where it then gets rearranged into containers ready for transmission via USB. Both Windows and Apple OS operating systems have implemented drivers with partial support for the USB Audio specification:

  • Windows implements USB Audio very poorly and cannot support more than 24/96kHz PCM. No support for DSD. In other words without a 3rd party driver Windows by itself is useless for high resolution audio. Luckily the professional audio company Steinberg created a high level audio interface driver (ASIO) that not only supports any sample rate for PCM, but also for DSD. It is widely used by many manufacturers that it became a de-facto standard in the professional audio industry. It is also gaining acceptance in the audiophile industry.
  • Apple OS has native support for any PCM format. Sadly though it does not support DSD and in its most recent release of OS 10.7 removed a special mode (integer mode) that before could be used to transmit DSD safely without the danger of any involved software confusing it with PCM. Because Apple creates very closed systems, unlike the PC / Windows platform, the only choice at this moment to play DSD files natively to an external DAC is to stuff the DSD bits into PCM containers so that the operating system thinks it is PCM. It is then up to the software developer and DAC manufacturer to implement enough safe guards that no confusion can ever happen (which could possibly teach your speakers flying lessons if a confusion would ever happen). Several manufacturers have been working as a team to standardize a common method for this so DSD could be played natively via normal PCM paths without any conversion from DSD to PCM and back again. The advantage of this is that no additional driver software is required. The Apple native USB Audio driver would be able to support PCM and DSD at any rate. The Playback Designs products already implement this solution.

The Linux platform is used for music servers also, but unless the user is computer savvy they are not so easy to configure and software and driver support is not as massive as for the Windows and Apple platforms. To my knowledge no playback software and no driver with DSD support is available for this operating system at this time.

Conclusion
While DSD continues being used on every SACD, it may also have an additional new growth life as a separate download format. Its sonic performance makes it competitive with any high resolution PCM format, many listeners would argue it is even superior. Its bit efficiency alone almost guarantees a success in that application. Yesterday any audio format was strongly married to some type of hardware carrier (i.e. vinyl, CD, SACD etc.) and that hindered the evolution of the encoding formats, be that in PCM or DSD. But today we are entering an era where the hardware does not impose the same limitations. It is becoming flexible and upgradeable thanks to software control and computer platforms. This is not only true for storage, processing, simple playback functionality, but also for physical links (i.e. USB) all the way to the place where music is made, in the DAC. When yesterday the encoding format had to adapt to the hardware carrier (packaged media), today the table is being turned: the hardware adapts to the encoding format. In other words todays computer technology can grow with whatever format we may choose for today or tomorrow. Today it may be a combination of high rate PCM and DSD, tomorrow it may be mostly DSD.

Resources
As of this writing the following manufacturers are offering playback software supporting native playback of DSD files:

ChannelD Puremusic: CHANNEL D - Professional and Audiophile Quality Software for Vinyl, iTunes, and commercial applications. Supports DSD and double rate DSD on Apple Mac.
Audirvana: Audirvana | The Sound of Your Dreams. Supports DSD on Apple Mac.
JRiver Media Center 17: JRiver Media Center software. Supports DSD and double rate DSD on Windows PC.
Merging Technologies Emotion: Merging Technologies. Supports DSD and double rate DSD on Windows PC. Release planned for early 2012.

The following labels and artists offer DSD files for download (many more are in preparation):
If you are interested in archiving your analog recordings (tape or vinyl) to the highest quality digital format, double rate DSD @ 5.6448MHz sample rate, then you can use Korgs professional MR-2000s recorder to generate the digital files that then can played back directly with any of the above mentioned playback software:

D/A converters that can directly play DSD data from a computer are offered by:
Playback Designs: Playback Designs. Every product supports DSD, double rate DSD and PCM up to 384kHz via USB.
dCS: dCS: Only The Music. Support for DSD and PCM up to 192kHz via USB.
Mytek Digital: MYTEK DIGITAL USA. for DSD and PCM up to 192kHz via USB and Firewire.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
About the author:
[IMG2]http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/9962/dsdfig04.jpg[/IMG2]Andreas Koch has been involved in the creation of SACD from the beginning while working at Sony. He was leading a team of engineers designing the worlds first multichannel DSD recorder and editor for professional recording (Sonoma workstation), worlds first multichannel DSD converters (ADC and DAC) and participated in various standardization committees world-wide for SACD. Later he went on as a consultant to design a number of proprietary DSD processing algorithms for converting PCM to DSD and DSD to PCM, and other technologies for D/A conversion and clock jitter control in DACs. In 2008 he co-founded Playback Designs to bring to market his exceptional experience and know-how in DSD in form of D/A converters and CD/SACD players. Earlier he was part of an engineering team at Studer in Switzerland designing one of the worlds first digital tape recorders, then lead a team of engineers working on a multichannel hard disk recorder, and a 3-year stint at Dolby as the companys first digital design engineer gave him a well rounded foundation of audio know-how and experience. He can be reached at [email protected].
 
About ten years ago I heard DSD sound at one of the stereophile shows. The sound was simply superb. Thank you for this informative article. As of now only Mytek Digital DACs are affordable. Hope to see more labels doing DSD in the future.
 
Pretty informative article about DSD technology.

But I'll take it's "Crystal-Ball" gazing predictions about DSD format adoption in the future with a huge grain of salt.

DSD's weakness (at least for most of its existance) is its umblical cord with SACD. Unlike standard Redbook Audio CDs which can be easily ripped to a PC, there is no easy way to get digital data out of SACD. In addition, SACD players were never budget priced. In contrast, for Rs. 1000 you'll get a DVD writer for PCs that is well capable of ripping Audio CDs. From just a look at the catalogue of music available on CD vs SACD, CD has won out.

Also consider that you'll have a hard time finding any software to playback DSD audio, while practically every player supports PCM (WAV & FLAC).

I see the future of HD audio with Hi-Res PCM, with 24/96 most likely to win out. DSD is dying, and won't be able to stem the tide againt PCM.

I do wonder though how it would have panned out if SACD wasn't crippled with respect to ripping.
 
Last edited:
can sacd players like oppo play these downloaded files? I can then take analog to amp, bypassing a computer and a dac.
 
I think DSD has lost the train. Too many restrictions hardware and software wise. There are formats like flac, which are files with various resolutions, compressed yet lossless. Flac is way more versatile and can be played on various devices including PCs, media players etc.

If DSD has to take off, it needs to open up quite a bit first. But then, it already has competition from various other Hi-Rez formats. What's worse is those competing Hi-Rez formats already have a big head start. In this av industry, better format does not always gets widespread acceptance. Versatility will win it. CD vs SACD, cassettes vs other tape formats, VHS vs betamax, MP3 etc are the examples of it.
 
FYI:Method for transferring DSD Audio over PCM Frames

DoP Open Standard | AudioStream

The "DoP" methodology seems to be about transmitting DSD data over PCM packets on USB. However it doesn't address the main problem, which is extracting the DSD data from SACD in the first place. I believe that the data stream from SACD is DRM protected. I've seen mentions on some sites about extracting DSD, but it involves some custom hardware, costing in terms of 1000's of USD. Not exactly "user friendly" :lol:

can sacd players like oppo play these downloaded files? I can then take analog to amp, bypassing a computer and a dac.
The DoP methodology mentioned above is an ad-hoc 'standard' for transmitting DSD via PCM on USB. It is yet to be adopted as a formal standard by the standards organization (USB Forum), and its doubtable whether it'll go that far since I don't think any of the adoptors are associated with the USB body.

Right now, it appears that both, sender and receiver need modifications to transmit DSD via PCM on USB packets.

I don't even see Oppo listed among those ready to adopt this 'standard'. It's highly doubtable that any current SACD players would be able to handle "DoP", even if they allowed USB input.
 
Last edited:
^^An early gen modded PS3 can make 1:1 decrypted copy of an SACD.

@manoj.p: There's no comparison. DSD is a "format", whereas FLAC is simply a "container", much like the popular MKV in video. You do see people using these terms interchangeably, but it's incorrect. You compare FLAC to WAV/ALAC/AIFF etc., not DSD.
 
Kumarb:

There is a difference - mkv is just a container, FLAC is both a container as well as codec. mkv uses avi, h.264, x.264 etc as codec and saves the files in .mkv format. FLAC uses its own codec.

Also, FLAC is a lossless codec. Just like winzip or a zip format. It uses its own algorithm, but no matter what, you get the file exactly as encoded after decoding. What's versatile is it can take any format. Now, if the file being encoded with FLAC is already compressed, then you will get the same compressed data. Its GIGO. But as long as input files are same (no of channels, same recording, same data rate, SNR etc) for DSD or FLAC, the results will be ultimately same and there is no difference in quality.

People compare FLAC to wav and other formats because most of time that is the input to FLAC encoder. But if one takes the same input to DSD and FLAC, the results will be same.
 
Kumarb:

There is a difference - mkv is just a container, FLAC is both a container as well as codec. mkv uses avi, h.264, x.264 etc as codec and saves the files in .mkv format. FLAC uses its own codec.

Also, FLAC is a lossless codec. Just like winzip or a zip format. It uses its own algorithm, but no matter what, you get the file exactly as encoded after decoding. What's versatile is it can take any format. Now, if the file being encoded with FLAC is already compressed, then you will get the same compressed data. Its GIGO. But as long as input files are same (no of channels, same recording, same data rate, SNR etc) for DSD or FLAC, the results will be ultimately same and there is no difference in quality.

People compare FLAC to wav and other formats because most of time that is the input to FLAC encoder. But if one takes the same input to DSD and FLAC, the results will be same.

You just can't compare DSD to FLAC. Both are entirely different things.

DSD is an alternative to PCM. These are ways digital data is presented to a dac. It has nothing to do with how the data is stored on a hard drive. PCM aka WAV or AIFF is an uncompressed representation of the digital signal and so is DSD. You could probably apply similar compression algorithms over DSD like you apply FLAC over PCM data.

In theory, DSD is superior to PCM. However PCM has won the war simply because of all the copyright and patent baggage that DSD carries.
 
In theory, DSD is superior to PCM. However PCM has won the war simply because of all the copyright and patent baggage that DSD carries.

With DSD's x64 sampling rate of audio CD's 44.1 kHz, it better be superior:)

By the way, last night I was rummaging through my CDs and found out for the first time that Steely Dan's Gaucho album that I have on SACD has 3 different contents - SACD Stereo, SACD Surround and CD stereo. I bought it thinking, "SACD version of Gaucho, huh? Must be good." Sometimes I wish I have an SACD player just to hear the superiority.
 
Last edited:
You just can't compare DSD to FLAC. Both are entirely different things.

DSD is an alternative to PCM. These are ways digital data is presented to a dac. It has nothing to do with how the data is stored on a hard drive. PCM aka WAV or AIFF is an uncompressed representation of the digital signal and so is DSD. You could probably apply similar compression algorithms over DSD like you apply FLAC over PCM data.

In theory, DSD is superior to PCM. However PCM has won the war simply because of all the copyright and patent baggage that DSD carries.

I understand there is a difference between PCM and DSD because both these formats are inherently different and use different way to sample and store the data. But there should not be a difference between uncompressed PCM and FLAC encoded files. So, if PCM is comparable/alternative to DSD, so is FLAC. Thats all I am pointing out.


My main contention was although more about the widespread format acceptance. FLAC is widely accepted because of flexibility and availability on wider hardware. DSD still has a lot to catch up. They started good with SACD but Sony gave up sooner on it. There is some great music on SACD (and its competitor DVD-A) but most of the great recordings are now gone from retail market. There is a demand for those, but labels are not willing to make another production run. But if they have to make a comeback as downloadable format, they do have competition and some of the other formats are well established, whether there are quality differences are not. That's all I wanted to say.
 
In theory, DSD is superior to PCM. However PCM has won the war simply because of all the copyright and patent baggage that DSD carries.
Is DSD superior to PCM at standard Redbook 16/44.1 ? Yes
Is DSD superior to high resolution PCM (24/96 and above)? Very debatable.

There's an entirely different argument on whether resolutions higher than Redbook are actually 'better'. I am inclined to buy the argument that Redbook audio practically covers the human audible spectrum, and that high resolution audio sounds 'better' due to better mastering.

I remember seeing reports of many 'audiophile' labels which used DSD, switching to PCM. It seems that PCM is very easy to edit post-recording, while DSD apparently is very difficult to edit, so they had to get everything right at the time of recording itself.

My take is that the ecosystem is an important factor for adoption of any standard, and DSD's ecosystem is practically non-existant.

As a consumer, I don't want to be told what I can do with stuff I have purchased. If I want to rip my music to hear it on-the-go, I should have the freedom to so.

I can play PCM with practically any software player on any given platform (Windows, Linux, Mac, most MP3 Players). Not so with DSD. So fully agree with you that DSD's adoption has been crippled by not being as open as PCM.
 
Last edited:
DSD has been here for quiet sometime but SACD never became a popular format and is unable to remove the age old PCM based Audio CDs......
 
With DSD's x64 sampling rate of audio CD's 44.1 kHz, it better be superior:)

By the way, last night I was rummaging through my CDs and found out for the first time that Steely Dan's Gaucho album that I have on SACD has 3 different contents - SACD Stereo, SACD Surround and CD stereo. I bought it thinking, "SACD version of Gaucho, huh? Must be good." Sometimes I wish I have an SACD player just to hear the superiority.

We have only one life. Get the SACD (and DVD-A) player, if you can.
 
Yup, have only one life to enjoy DVD-A & SACD.

For this reason only had imported Denon 1940 CI which plays both. Software wise have few title of each format. SACD - dark side of the moon, DVD-A - Pet shop boys... and bluman group complex rock tour.

Only drawback is that the player is locked to region 1 and I could not find a mod process to unlock it. (had read its availability before purchase but later turned out that its not possible :sad:).. still holding on to it as its a player with very good SQ & PQ for all formats except blu ray.

Its well known fact that availability of titles has always been a concern in India specifically and even stores like planetM etc do not stock those.

As regards to difference, its surely there. Have experienced it while playing dark side of the moon in stereo and SACD mode..

So when I upgrade... ( hope very soon) will go for Oppo BDP 93 as it supports both and is a world class product.

Regards,

Amit
 
@manoj.p

You are going on a tangent for no reason.

Yes, it's a codec as well. But it still has no business being compared to DSD. DSD and PCM are "source" formats. That is, the "second" step right after analog master OR even the true source in case of digital recordings.

FLAC, ALAC, AIFF, WAV, MP3, AAC etc etc. come after these 2 (DSD and PCM) have done their work. I don't even know why you are arguing about this. It's like the ABC of digital A/V.
 
The Marantz PM7000N offers big, spacious and insightful sound, class-leading clarity and a solid streaming platform in a award winning package.
Back
Top