Jump to content

Tsarnik

  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tsarnik

  • Rank
    Newbie

Personal Information

  • Location
    Europe

Recent Profile Visitors

840 profile views
  1. Tsarnik

    Blue or red pill?

    @pkane2001, I think I need to mention first that, unfortunately, I do not have any degree in signal theory (or anything that would come close to it). So my hope was that the trained members of our CA community would happily jump on the cepstrum bandwagon and elaborate. 😉 As I understand it, the cepstrum, the "spectrum of the spectrum" can be used to analyse echos. If the different SFS settings e.g. had caused any repetitive pattern of small-scale signals, cepstrum analysis might be able to unearth the "rahmonic" peaks at the fundamental period (unit=time) with which they might occur (provided they occur rather regularly). That was my layman's reasoning (and speculation). Small-scale signals like the ones measured by PeterSt and posted earlier in this thread (see image below). If I am not mistaken (but I could well be) the peak at 48 kHz is a measure of the existence of the images that the non-brickwall upsampling filter generates, appearing after each 48 kHz, "overtones" to the fundamental at 48 kHz, so to say. But I am by no means an expert on this and would like to refer you to the following links: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3321562_From_Frequency_to_Quefrency_A_History_of_the_Cepstrum http://www.libinst.com/cepst.htm https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276465999_Cepstral_Analysis_for_the_Application_of_Echo-Based_Audio_Watermark_Detection
  2. Tsarnik

    Blue or red pill?

    @pkane2001 Impressive work so far! Are we still thinking about analysing the imaginary part of the fourier transform and could a cepstrum analysis help to uncover (or dismiss) possible differences of the A vs. the B captures?
  3. Tsarnik

    Tidal in trouble?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44066139
  4. Tsarnik

    Adventures in Upsampling to DSD

    Yes, with the Stereo192-DSD one can choose from three IIR DSD filters: 50, 60 and 70 kHz with -18 dB/oct. I am using the 60 kHz filter with DSD128 and am happy with the result. (I have to admit I never scratched my head about the final analogue filter... uh-oh...) Thank you for the tip with the resistor pad! I wouldn't feel comfortable to chance a circuit myself, though. Cambridge Audio technicians were so kind to mail me the max. input level of the amp, my own experiments confirmed this and I also checked with Fs/4 PCM signals that ISPs clearly survive by the same amount the 'Volume Trim" is being reduced, so I believe it's not a VC after the chip. :-) But I do not fully grasp how the ESS volume control attenuates DSD signals. Therefore it's not clear to me whether the shaped noise contained in the DSD stream at the ESS' input is attenuated together with the "music signal" or some DSD remodulation occurs which might even introduce more noise...
  5. Tsarnik

    Adventures in Upsampling to DSD

    Thank you barrows. :-) 2-ch 5,6448 MHz x 32 bit is a nice throughput. IIRC, ESS developers back then were talking about going with 29 bits into the internal pipeline (9008?), I think that was at the DIY forum. Again: IIRC, someone mentioned that everything is being modulated to ~20 MHz in the ES9016 (~40 MHz in the ES9018), but I could be wrong here. [T]he ESS volume control does absolutely nothing to the data when set to full scale, whether it is "on" or "off" Yes. My amp's inputs need the Stereo192-DSD's FS output to be reduced by a little less 1 dB. Attenuate 2 dB more and most ISPs wont cause problems either. At the same time I don't want the ES9016's internal modulator to overload from ISP while playing back CDs over S/PDIF, so I decided against the -6 dB jumpers. So I end up using the ESS volume control, because I attenuate by 3 dB via the 'Volume Trim' menu, the 'Volume Control' menu being set to 'BYPASS'. When I upsample in Foobar I set its 'replay gain' to -3 dB (or less) in order to reduce the chance of overloads in the SDM modulator (SACD plugin). This way the music signal is attenuated twice: 1) in Foobar and 2) in the ESS volume control. This way also the shaped noise contained in the DSD128 signal sent to the DAC is attenuated by 3 dB in the ESS volume control. (Or is it??) Alternatively, I could set Foobar's 'replay gain' to -6 dB and the Stereo192-DSD's 'Volume Trim' to DISABLED. That way I would bypass the second of the two digital gain stages, but at the same time increase the DSD128 noise relative to the music signal. So I went with the first option and my question was if this reasoning was reasonable. :-) And hope just the same that "@Miska will correct me if understand this incorrectly." Or anyone else, of course, for that matter. :-)
  6. Tsarnik

    Adventures in Upsampling to DSD

    Hello Miska, Wouldn't that also apply to the Mytek Stereo192-DSD DAC as well? I think you already answered that question when you listed the Stereo-192DSD as a recommended DAC for HQP. :-) Although my Mytek's 'Volume Control' is normally set to BYPASS I am still using the 'Volume Trim' (set to '-15 dB', corresponding to 3 dB attenuation) to adjust to my amplifier's input stage while also adding some headroom for ISPs (when using the S/PDIF inputs without the AD1896). Back to DSD: The Stereo192-DSD's 'Volume Trim' function is executed by the same volume control "unit" of the ES9016 that also handles the 'Volume Control' function (when set to DIGITAL), isn't it? The fact that the ES9016 applies a digital LP filter to DSD sources in any case makes the ES9016 chip a chip without a DSD Direct mode (as e.g. compared to the DSD179x family with their analogue FIRs), do I understand this correctly? So here's my question: Would I, in fact, gain anything (pun intended) if I would DISABLE 'Volume Trim' in the Mytek and instead reduce the 'replay gain' in Foobar by a further 3 dB — i.e. gain anything but 3 dB more shaped noise going out to my amp? [I am so sorry for not using HQP....yet? ;-\ ] So far I have been quite happy with the SQ improvement of upsampling Redbook to 8fs with SoX and further to DSD128 with foo_input_sacd (SDM Type D) and my i7-6700HQ even does this silently while on battery. :-) PS: BTW, the correct link the other day should have been: http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789811042881
  7. Tsarnik

    Tidal - Oh No

    You are welcome, also for clarifying my statement about the type and scope of watermark-free UMG content available. Of course, I hoped the other links might as well contain useful information about UMG's disturbing watermarking. Given the severity of the SQ damage done to paid content, especially when it comes to classical music, I am still scratching my head in bewilderment as to why - at least for all audiophiles - this doesn't seem to be as big a scandal as I think it still is. (Having put aside MQA for a moment, naturally.) The audible effect easily dwarfs other SQ impairments from the source to the amplification stage of our systems. That this watermark easily survives MP3 encoding and dynamic compression is telling enough. Then there are the watermarks on my DVD-A discs: I read about them, but I don't claim to hear them. They are short AFAIK, noisy and stay at least 36 dB beneath the signal (~1.6%). Yet of course, I would rather do without them.
  8. Tsarnik

    Tidal - Oh No

    These are some of the links I had collected 13 months ago (I updated the two CA links). http://www.rudyscorner.com/1102/disturbing-trend-universals-digital-watermark.html http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/is-universal-music-group-using-audible-watermarks-on-digital-files.334991/ http://www.progressiveears.org/forum/showthread.php/7424-Audible-watermarking-(intentional-degradation)-in-music-downloads-and-streams http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=30466 https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,111198.0.html The following post (from page 2 of the second link) might help with your question: http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/is-universal-music-group-using-audible-watermarks-on-digital-files.334991/page-2#post-9695405 "UMG sells lossless classical through its DG and Decca websites. http://www.deutschegrammophon.com/en/ http://www.deccaclassics.com/en/ Just click on a particular recording (or go to the search page) and choose "lossless flac" as the option. Edgard Varese, Nov 26, 2013"
  9. Tsarnik

    Tidal - Oh No

    You're right, I don't receive pre-releases or sample discs. But pointing at Tidal when they in fact are the ones who have been asking UMG for non-watermarked music misses the point. UMG will give out its files to AppleMusic, Amazon, Spotify, Tidal etc. only watermarked with a robust spread-spectrum watermark provided by a South Korean company, a watermark per provider. Downloads from UMG directly are the only ones that do not get a watermark. Since nothing is sacred to the labels (and has never been) I think it is not unimaginable that Universal could start using watermarking on CD releases, too. Yet the latter is just speculation at this time.
  10. Tsarnik

    Tidal - Oh No

    When I found out about that widespread watermark one and a half years ago I waa appalled. It is so clearly audible on classical music that I thought it was just scandalous. Then came the real shock: no-one I know seemed to care and a German manufacturer of expensive network players who knew about the watermarking mainly shrugged his shoulders: there's nothing we could do about it. We care about our low-distortion playback equipment only to be fed with up to –20 dB (10%) worth of fluttering noise in the signal? What a scam. Another poster suggested that UMG might be using watermarks on CDs as well... I hope that with your eloquence you can help raising the awareness about watermarking in this community even more.
  11. Tsarnik

    Tidal - Oh No

    How to paste an URL...? That one went terribly wrong, obviously! Here comes the full one, typed on mobile: http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789811042881
  12. Tsarnik

    Tidal - Oh No

    @Miska @mansr @FredericV Did you acknowledge this book yet? http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789811042881 Maybe in 10 years from now audiophiles will have stopped talking about delivery formats, reconstruction filters and room correction. The real worry by then might have become the quality of the watermarks used... besides DR and mastering, of course.
  13. Almost got a nervous laughing breakdown. Thanks Måns!
  14. Tsarnik

    MQA is Vaporware

    Hi everyone, and thanks for all the info here! I know, there's a thread for that, but this might be worth a link here, too: Andreas Koch about How to generate some stream...
×