One to set the cat among the pigeons - a DSD vs PCM comparison

[wishihadtubes]

Someone's gone and done it - A DSD vs PCM comparison. I'm sure this is going to trigger off a huge debate.
Link includes DSD and PCM versions of three tracks for comparison.
Am sure Thad is going to truly get into this :lol:

 

[thx911]

This reinforces the assertions made in many AES gatherings that the RB standard was (is) the best we could've achieved for digital music. We should also consider that the position taken by Ayre by this comparison is convenient and easy for them without creating any conflict of interest the question could be who stands to gain/loose with the increasing interest being show towards DSD and the DAC market?

 

[ranjeetrain]

All such comparisons are incomplete in one way or the other.

The biggest truth is that it really is dependent on the piece of music, how it was recorded/mastered.

Technicalities are one thing, implementation is another.

 

[arj]

Someone's gone and done it - A DSD vs PCM comparison. I'm sure this is going to trigger off a huge debate.
Link includes DSD and PCM versions of three tracks for comparison.
Am sure Thad is going to truly get into this :lol:

Thanks for this ..is really informative.
I Liked Ayres view on the link mentioned

Recently the introduction of computers into home audio playback systems has made possible an unforeseen occurrence the reintroduction of DSD, the modulation scheme used in Sonys failed format of SACD from the turn of the millennium.
....................

Ever since Sonys early (convoluted and self-contradictory) marketing claims about the performance advantage of DSD, backed by the fact that their multi-million dollar budget was generally able to make better sounding products than the disorganized renegades that released DVD-Audio, many, many audiophiles have believed that DSD is inherently superior to PCM.

 

[wishihadtubes]

Hi Ranjeet,
Your observation on the qualities of mastering/mixing holds water.
I have a CD rip of a Dire Straits album that sounds infinitely better than a hi-res rip the same album from SACD (which I assume was in DSD).
On the other hand, the hi-res versions of the Eagles albums from HDtracks sound, to my ears, very close to vinyl and better than anything I've heard so far.
As for this DSD thing, I can't say - I haven't got gear that will play DSD bit perfect and I haven't as yet set up foobar or jRiver on my computer to convert DSD to PCM.
What I really want is cheaper downloads of music that sounds great on a majority of systems.

 

[thx911]

here is a old thread that on the same subject but with a different conclusion
http://www.hifivision.com/computer-...on-16-44-1-24-96-24-192-64x-dsd-128x-dsd.html

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Am sure Thad is going to truly get into this :lol:

Watching and waiting!

PCM does not have to be the end of the music recording world, even if 44/48khz does reproduce "all" of the music.

End to end, new audio technologies are to be hoped for --- and greeted with an open mind. Tempered with a little scepticism, because, hey, we're always being sold something.

So, the future: is it DSD? I can honestly say that I have no idea! hyeah:


~

 

[Santy]

Even if all the hardware remain same in the comparison, I am not sure if it would be still fair if the DSD was not made straight from analog tapes. The ayre site does not mention if the DSD file is native.
Notice the size of the sample PCM and DSD files on the ayre site. PCM files are almost double than that of DSD (the files are of PCM 24/192 and DSD64).

 

[wishihadtubes]

As the Audiostream website clearly states, these are parts of three tracks from three vinyl records ripped to single-rate DSD and 24/192 - no analog tapes or other sources were involved.

 

[Santy]

As the Audiostream website clearly states, these are parts of three tracks from three vinyl records ripped to single-rate DSD and 24/192 - no analog tapes or other sources were involved.

Now I understand why there were noise and pops in the music. I wonder if that is the best way to create PCM and DSD from analog for a serious experiment planned. Shouldn't it be from analog master tape rather?

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

It should be if one wants to show that DSD, end to end, can capture and reproduce more --- but as we don't have recording studios, we can, at least, start with a known source.

 

[wishihadtubes]

I think the intention here was to compare the exact same piece of music in PCM and DSD, and the provenance of the music was not the main issue.

 

[Santy]

The point I was trying to make is that whatever benefits hi res audio be it PCM or DSD claim to have like higher dynamic range or lower noise floor etc are lost in a Vinyl transfer. So what's the point of comparing formats when we are not making fullest use of the capabilities of those formats at source level. IMO, one could download PCM and DSD versions both transferred directly from analog master from any of those sites which offer them for this experiment. There are a few I guess.

 

[cyber_cat]

This reinforces the assertions made in many AES gatherings that the RB standard was (is) the best we could've achieved for digital music. We should also consider that the position taken by Ayre by this comparison is convenient and easy for them without creating any conflict of interest the question could be who stands to gain/loose with the increasing interest being show towards DSD and the DAC market?

Hi thx911 were you referring to this AES E-Library Audibility of a CD-Standard A/DA/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback ?

The point I was trying to make is that whatever benefits hi res audio be it PCM or DSD claim to have like higher dynamic range or lower noise floor etc are lost in a Vinyl transfer. So what's the point of comparing formats when we are not making fullest use of the capabilities of those formats at source level. IMO, one could download PCM and DSD versions both transferred directly from analog master from any of those sites which offer them for this experiment. There are a few I guess.

This is a very valid point from Santy. Most of the vinyl transfers suck IMHO.

 

[Naturelover]

Now I understand why there were noise and pops in the music. I wonder if that is the best way to create PCM and DSD from analog for a serious experiment planned. Shouldn't it be from analog master tape rather?

The point I was trying to make is that whatever benefits hi res audio be it PCM or DSD claim to have like higher dynamic range or lower noise floor etc are lost in a Vinyl transfer. So what's the point of comparing formats when we are not making fullest use of the capabilities of those formats at source level. IMO, one could download PCM and DSD versions both transferred directly from analog master from any of those sites which offer them for this experiment. There are a few I guess.

Definitely valid point. Would be a good idea if you posted on the Ayre page. Let's see what they say.

 

[jls001]

Just spin the vinyl

Surely they could have done better than rip a record! Analog records have very low inherent S/N, so the source is already flawed, in a way.

One trouble with DSD is the lack of hardware and software tools required to record and edit in native DSD format.

And being a closed and proprietary format with royalty fees to be paid, why should studios invest on DSD, considering that people are finding it difficult to see the superiority of the format over high bit rate, high sampling rate PCM?

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Hi thx911 were you referring to this AES E-Library Audibility of a CD-Standard A/DA/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback ?

That looks interesting, but I doubt that any of us are going to pay $20 to read the paper. I think I may have seen quotes from it elsewhere --- or perhaps just similar experiments.

I think that the comparison of DSD to PCM may also be a different story to the comparison of different sampling rates and word lengths in PCM.

Most of the vinyl transfers suck IMHO.

Similarly, you can find blind listening tests where the transfer could not be detected from the vinyl. The Matrix test is really interesting, where the differences between the LP and the commercially-issued CD were readily heard, but the CD-R copies could not be differentiated. This is my experience, but not properly blind tested.

Technology has moved on by miles. The Matrix guys were using CD recording machines. We should now (my theory, at least) be able to achieve even better results with a PC and quality sound card.

Of course, for testing purposes, the digitisation has to be entirely unprocessed, and that will usually not be the case, as we often digitise partly to be able to minimise scratches, surface noise, etc. Some people are very good, even professional, at those processes; some are not, and the results may, indeed, suck!

But that is another different story.

 

[Santy]

Should DAC manufacturers also pay royalty? If yes, then it seems DSD is here to stay, with more and more reputed Hifi manufacturers making DSD capable DACs. I don't think they would bother to spend on development and manufacturing DSD as well as its royalty if a) there is no demand or b) it makes no sonic difference.

DSD capable DACs

Any idea how expensive is the royalty for studios... if it is high then how small time labels are managing native DSD? Is royalty paid for content also?

Whatever, this industry seem to be evolving.
As volumes build up, things could change drastically.
More people buying DSD DACs means more people are out there ready to pay for DSD music.
More sales means new labels will start to do native DSD to cash in on the early waves.
When the industry flourishes at small scale, big studios might very well jump in.
I think it takes about 20k to 50k USD for the Studio DSD recorder/ editor which is not too much for the big studios (?).

Whatever is the conclusion, if at all one is arrived at, PCM is toooooo mighty a contender for DSD to overcome because.... its just everywhere.

So it is possible that nothing changes and the DSD hype just dies out as swiftly as it surfaced.
Just like the 3D losing its steam or UHD TVs struggling to justify its technology.

 

[manoj.p]

Whatever is the conclusion, if at all one is arrived at, PCM is toooooo mighty a contender for DSD to overcome because.... its just everywhere.

Correct assessment. Big issue with DSD is processing of the audio stream by the equipment. There is no way to process the data, you can only decode DSD directly to DAC. No bass management, no equalization, nothing else can be done on DSD stream. If you have to do any of that, then the DSD needs to be converted to PCM. This is a big hurdle to DSD, Unless one is prepared to put 5 identical, full range speaker, at exactly same distance from the listener.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

No bass management, no equalization, nothing else can be done on DSD stream.

This is the extent of my to-date ignorance about DSD: I didn't know that.

In a way, that be a marketing point for those who seek the grail called "bit perfect."

Whatever is the conclusion, if at all one is arrived at, PCM is toooooo mighty a contender for DSD to overcome because.... its just everywhere.

Things do move on, and CD elbowed vinyl out of the mass market, just as downloads are now finishing off the CD trade.

The mass consumers of music do not care about bits and bytes and samples-per-second. They just want music. That, in the download market, is going to make selling a different format very hard