Jump to content

spdif-usb

  • Posts

    980
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    country-ZZ

Retained

  • Member Title
    vinyl nerd

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Grimm Audio official website has a white paper that states they think 24/192 PCM sounds better than DSD. :cough: http://www.grimmaudio.com/site/assets/files/1088/dsd_myth.pdf
  2. Please define 'PCM DACs with non-linear distortions at redbook CD levels'. As for 'correlated aliasing artifacts'... the goal of using an anti-alias filter is to effectively prevent audible aliasing artifacts from actually happening, and, finally, 'resource-limited on-chip decimation and oversampling filters' will not necessarily always introduce artifacts that can become audible.
  3. If the actual modulator is 'true' 1-bit rather than multi-bit, you'll get an exact representation of it in the form of DSD output. With one 'minor' caveat. You'll lose two boatloads of SNR exactly because this modulator is 'true' 1-bit rather than multi-bit. If the actual modulator is multi-bit, but has nevertheless been specifically designed to be capable of giving you an exact representation of itself in the form of DSD output, you'll get an exact representation of it in the form of DSD output. With one 'minor' caveat. You'll introduce more processing steps exactly because it has been specifically designed to be capable of giving you an exact representation of itself in the form of DSD output. This is because, in order for it to be capable of giving you an 1-bit bitstream as opposed to it being only capable of giving you a multi-bit datastream, the multi-bit modulator must, by definition, introduce a form of re-quantization somewhere. How else do you think it can be made possible for a multi-bit modulator to output a 1-bit bitstream? Something called a free lunch? A pot of gold at the end of the rainbow? Or maybe it's just a one eyed one horned flying purple people eater........
  4. Why bother with PCM? DSD marketing propaganda vs. PCM fact-based scientific reasoning is why.
  5. It can easily be shown that increasing the number of conversions in, and complexity of the modulator can actually help to improve rather than deteriorate accuracy for both PCM and DSD if the right design criteria are met. The insertion of properly chosen digital filters inside the multi-bit Sigma Delta modulator's architecture can be a far more excellent design choice than many would suspect, and the necessity of using fewer processing steps to achieve more accuracy is just another typical example of those long overdue myths that keep on popping back up in pretty much every DSD related topic.
  6. Floyd Toole and Sean Olive are engineers, not trained psychoacousticians. Bob Stuart has a PhD in neuroscience, and is specialized in psychoacoustics. In fact, the ONLY peer-reviewed AES Convention paper that has EVER won AES Best Peer-Reviewed Paper Award (i.e. the highest award an AES paper can receive) in the category of Perception comes from him so not exactly the kind of guy whose opinion I would easily trade for an engineer's in this particular case: TAS 194: Meridian Audio's Bob Stuart Talks with Robert Harley | The Absolute Sound
  7. DSD cannot store the output of a 33-level Delta Sigma modulator bit-perfectly except if this modulator itself already digitally processes the bits in an irreversible manner before outputting them. If the modulator itself is lossy so it outputs lossy data as a result from lossy modulators being lossy, does the fact that the lossy data gets stored in a lossless format magically turn the lossy datastream into a lossless one? You know, most modern ADCs that output PCM data are using lossy DSP so the data itself is lossy. But if you really believe that a modern ADC that outputs DSD and that doesn't use lossy DSP can perform more accurately than any of the ones that do use. Then such is your belief.
  8. My point was that, in theory DSD is lossless because it is still technically possible to adhere strictly to 1-bit quantizers, but in practice hardly anyone in the industry does that anymore these days due to quantizers that incorporate MBM inherently being superior to that. I.e., does it matter to you the fact that the DSD format itself is lossless when in actual reality the digital data stored therein has almost certainly gone through DSP filters, even BEFORE it actually left the ADC that was used to create said data, anyway in the first place? The Classic Records remark was toungue-in-cheek as vinyl to me is superior to DSD in that the former makes the music genres I like most sound way better to me than the latter, generally speaking. Have you ever tried listening to prog rock on SACD?
  9. He (Putzeys) probably was referring IMO to both the editing (bar "Philips" style splicing) and the digital filters of the ADC itself. Since modern ADCs that do not apply digital filtering of any sort perform worse than ones that do (as well as are rare), in the practical sense you can't really consider DSD a 'lossless format'. Using it as a 'true' lossless format necessitates the use of a 'true' 1-bit modulator. This is because DSD can't be used to store anything other than a 1-bit datastream. It means that you can't use a multi-bit modulator (MBM), or multi-level modulator if you want to capture to DSD, without irreversably mangling them by incorporating a 1-bit re-modulation DSP method prior to capturing to DSD, the bits that are the output of said MBM. However, using an MBM as opposed to a 'true' 1-bit modulator improves performance in a well designed ADC. So again, in practice, the point would still be moot anyway in the first place.
  10. The term 'lossy format' just means that the digital data it contains is not bit perfect. But then, neither is PCM. This is because both modern PCM and modern DSD are storing data that has gone through various complex (parallel/cascaded) DSP filter stages that must exist within the ADC unit. Granted, there are (some rare) exceptions to this. But a case can be made that omitting the digital filters yields worse performance in both formats as opposed to not omitting them. So that's why these exceptions can be considered not to actually matter in the practical sense. (Even, if we can live without anything more than just "Philips" style splicing). The bottom line... everyone else but Classic Records can't water their plants in the desert.
  11. Please define '24bit performance'. Do you realize that the noise floor of 24-bit audio is inaudible, even if it's been truncated rather than having been dithered, and do you also realize that there exists no such thing as a 'DSD modulator'?
  12. From that same article that was linked by the OP: The fact that it's a lossy format isn't necessarily a problem in the practical sense. Just like the fact it doesn't rain enough in the desert isn't a problem if you can water your plants. That said, I don't see how the fact he isn't producing records has anything to do with whether the problem exists, and should be acknowledged. I don't produce records myself, either... but nevertheless I am familiar with DSD shortcomings, and, obviously so is B. Putzeys.
  13. You can do the cellphone test. If it's in the process of connecting to the mobile network while you're holding it within inches distance from your stereo, then if you can't hear any buzzing noises through your stereo's speakers, your stereo passed the test. On mine, I can't for the life of me hear the noises. Even, if I put my ear close against one of my stereo's speakers. Even, if I remove my preamp that is hooked up between my DAC and power amp on top of that. Even, though my speakers are 88.5 dB sensitive so not exactly very insensitive. Even, though my power amp has 32 dB of amp gain. So if you can hear RF noise then IMO it's time to go shopping for better gear. YMMV
  14. Had you read more carefully, you would have noticed his opinion on that still hasn't changed one bit since. :big grin:
  15. Sauce: https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=it#!msg/rec.audio.high-end/CvYykLvLV9U/nbuOb0LHf04J Emphasis in bold = mine.
×
×
  • Create New...