Gareneau, I must say that I am repeating a pro guy who is at the edge of the art. He says that Sony and Philips devised a way to put copy protection on DSD recordings in doing their SACDs. He merely undoes this effort, as Playstation 3 allowed to get back to the DSD information. I compared a universal player playing SACDs to what I had on my music server by him playing the DSD that he had gotten off those same SACDs. There was much greater clarity and transparency.
Finally, as to why Sony is getting DSD out mainly on old recordings is that those tapes are deteriorating and approaching being lost. I have heard much discussion that all Sony's master tapes will be captured on quad DSD digital media. |
TBG, I'm not sure I understand your last post. Could you explain again what you mean my SACDs in DSD on a music server vs a universal player? |
Phasecorrect, the hybrid layer on most SACDs in DSD on a music server are far superior to those played a universal player. It is all the crap that SONY added to the DSD. |
I am not disputing the merits of DSD...that's in the eye of the beholder...and true...from a production angle it will have its niche...but Sony is a big company who expects BIG profits...and on the commercial side...there is not enough consumer demand...if there was....we have seen a vast array of hi rez downloads...remember, superior technology doesnt gurantee a place in the audio market...Sony had the arrogance of pushing SACd on the general public...only select audiophiles took the bait... |
Bien sur Ptss. C'est fou!
J'ai beaucoup de DSD. PS3 c'est genial...gace a Dieu! |
Mordante, pardon the pun, doesn't the first part of your name "mort" (ok there is a t instead of a d : )) say it all. Pour mes amis seulement. In the womb is a little harsh isn't it? |
Since there is hardly any DSD or even high res music available I agree. DSD is dead in the womb. |
"Mapman, I have been enjoying dramatic improvements in my audio reproductions the last several years. This has many roots but I will not bore you with them. What has happened is that I am getting realism that I never thought was possible and I have learned how fragile that realism is."
Same story here.
PCM has not gotten my attention to date. Too many other fish to fry until the unique value might become clear.
I am a computer systems/software engineer by profession and am tasked to understand new technology daily in my role. Adding DSD to my list of things to try to understand better when the right time comes. |
Mapman, I have been enjoying dramatic improvements in my audio reproductions the last several years. This has many roots but I will not bore you with them. What has happened is that I am getting realism that I never thought was possible and I have learned how fragile that realism is.
When I play the double DSD version, I hear the decay of notes that are absent when I listen to the PCM 192 version. And there more detail in general. It may not be dramatic but it is thrilling and, I thought, impossible. |
Mapman, you ask good questions and provide good counterarguments. DSD is not universally better than PCM in the sense that all DSD recordings are better than PCM recordings.
As for the technical reasons, I'm just a simple organic chemist, not an ee, computer scientist, or physicist. I'm smart enough to leave such discussions to those who know what they are talking about. I'd rather take an empirical approach here, allowing my ears and emotional response to music to trump technical considerations, although I don't want anyone selling me snake oil, either.
I have a limited sampling--one, which is somewhat short of being statistically significant. I'd like to have more samples, but I'm not going to blow my entire estate at $25 each to run the experiment.
My fascination with DSD is based on what I hear from people I trust, who are in a better position to make statistically significant judgments. Also, I have a general preference for the sound of cds that were produced from DSD masters. It's by no means a universal preference, but I don't have many bad recordings in my collection that were recorded in DSD, while I have more than a few bad recordings that came from PCM masters. In all fairness, I have a wall full of wonderful PCM master derived CDs. That observation is proof of nothing, but it is enough to keep me interested in native DSD files.
If Sony lets us down here (again), it is not the end of the world. As you have pointed out, PCM properly implemented can be extremely good. All I'm asking here is that Sony implement a marketing strategy that allows the musical cognoscenti an opportunity to determine the real value of hi rez in general, and DSD in particular. |
"I have listened to 192/24 PCM versus double DSD of the same material using SACDs as the source and double DSD wins hands down. "
Tbg always manages to determine what sounds better when comparing two very similar things. Can I assume he is unbiased in his judgements? Is anyone? I wish I had his ears and his unabiding trust in what I hear. I hear things that both sound really good in significantly different ways all the time and am still challenged to say which is conclusively "better".
On the other hand, I am pretty good I think at detecting noise and distortion when I hear it and have no doubt then that something is amiss, but still lots of reasons why still possible.
I think I've pretty much heard it all and have come to the conclusion that there is not always a clear winner when comparing two different things done well. Its more a matter of individual tastes and perspectives, which ALWAYS vary.
|
" I'm sold on native DSD being better than PCM"
Why is that again? Is there a concrete technical reason or reasons? I would think a quality implementation of each playing same resolution source material would be more alike than different.
What would be the technical reason for better apples/apples sound quality? THen how much is there really in practice and is there good value there or just another new technology and format to sell stuff with.
Thanks. |
|
TBG, I agree with your take. I'm sold on native DSD being better than PCM, and I am confident there is a large latent market waiting for the software to be released at a reasonable price. I am just afraid that there is a narrow window for capitalizing on that latent market, and I fear, with good reason, Sony is once again poised to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I'm a Cleveland Browns fan, so I am an expert in reading the signs!
Equipment like the new PS Audio DSD DAC and Sony's own HAPZ1, not to mention other similar devices, may make the difference in downloaded native DSD and DSD converted on the fly too small to justify buying the native DSD at a premium. Based on my listening with my ModWright Sony HAPZ1, I just don't see the price differential being worth it.
If my assessment of the difference between the DSD master of Ma's Appalachian Journey is typical, the DSD master is like 1.03 compared to 1.0 for the AIFF redbook up sampled to 2 x DSD by the MW Sony. The DSD is $25, the redbook CD was $7.00 shipped. I have a large budget for new music, but it is a budget, and I can buy a lot more music, with a very small sonic compromise. They are going to have to offer more music at a better price and do so quickly, or people are going to move on. |
Phasecorrect, There is a good deal of interest in native DSD especially at the pro level and in doing recording. I have listened to 192/24 PCM versus double DSD of the same material using SACDs as the source and double DSD wins hands down.
SONY does have a poor record but also owns 40% of master tapes. If they make their quad DSD at a good price and somehow distribute it, I think they will be an audiophile's friend. |
Sony is coming off a colossal failure in terms of mainstream acceptance...SACD...even when they attempted a hybrid CD layer...point being...Sony will probably drag its feet in terms of hi rez again....the real market is the non dsd Downloads...most non audiophiles are happy with "a" download...and I don't see the advantage...of Quad DSD if that is the case...that seems like an odd choice...but Sony does some odd decisions |
Sony's problem is not that they are greedy, it is that they are tactically stupid. The beauty of capitalism, done right, is that it is a win-win proposition. The company, its employees, its stockholders, and its customers all benefit. So much for the economic viewpoints of Brownsfan.
I received the CD corollary of the native DSD Appalachian Journey album, and uploaded wav, ALAC, AIFF, and MP3 files of the Cloverfoot Reel track (redbook) for comparison with the native DSD file supplied with the HAPZ1. As I expected, the native DSD file was better (across the board) than the redbook CD files uploaded in the 4 formats, then converted on the fly to 2x DSD by the Sony. But--- the difference was not profound. There was more sweetness in the violin, more edge in Ma's cello, better depth in the double bass, but it was not an overwhelming difference. I've heard far more difference from redbook cd to redbook cd. I paid $7 for the CD shipped, vs $25 for the DSD download.
Now, if I didn't have a machine that converted to DSD on the fly, what would the difference be, and would it warrant 3.5 x the cost of a CD? Tomorrow, I will compare the 4 transferred files with the DSD engine turned off, and see what that reveals.
Sony music is again not paying careful attention to what the Sony ES division is doing. Come on, guys, we are not idiots. Release your native DSD files, make a couple bucks over what you make on CDs, and we will all be happy. I'm pretty sure you will net more based on volume than what you are doing now. Forget trying to save your ancient treasures and focus on your current offerings, some of which are excellent.
Or, you can kill one more strategic initiative that deserves to succeed with a business plan that won't fly.
Just glad the ES guys have their act together. |
08-25-14: Tbg
Melbguy, what does the "new white bread" mean? Good or bad? That was just tongue in cheek Tbg ;) You know me, i'm in for a penny, in for a pound! Actually i'm delaying ordering my next cdp until they finish a new DSD USB board. |
|
Tomcy6, I'm glad to read what you say, but I think now SONY and every corporation is concerned only with the bottom line. But I do hope like you that the SONY Quad DSDs will see public availability or at least double DSD will be available. I should say that I have many of my SACDs in DSD on my music server and can play them as double DSD. They are clearly better than the SACDs played on a universal player. |
Tbg, I think most of us think or at least hope that DSD downloads along with user friendly servers will be a worthwhile upgrade. We have a problem with the low number of titles available, the fact that we've already been sold most of them a couple of times and the price of said downloads.
Also, Sony has burned us before (e.g. SACD), so a wait and see attitude is appropriate. The HAP-Z1ES looks like a pretty nice server but it's not really what I want (no dac and digital ins and outs).
So I'm hoping that one of the guys making the big bucks will have a moment of inspiration and say, "Hey! Let's build a variety of servers so that people can get the features they want, and while were at it, let's get thousands of titles into the marketplace and sell them at prices too good to pass up! After all we have to digitize our old tapes anyway and our new stuff is already being recorded digitally." But that guy would probably be fired immediately. So I'm being cautious for now. |
I think you guys are being unfair. Digital has come a long way since 44/16 was released. High definition is definitely superior. Sony with 40% of all existing master tapes has a real issue namely all the tapes are deteriorating and their solution is to put them into digital. Apparently, their choice is quad DSD, I am told.
So in reality, soon you will be able, I hope, to get master tapes for your personal use. Unfortunately, they are, I'm told, using a device that converts analog into quad DSD that has many opamps in it thus harming the quality of the recording. Probably they just could not wait any longer.
These files will be very large which is okay as I have 4 terabyte drives, but it does probably mean that only high speed internet downloads will allow your getting these. I have heard double DSD recordings and they are definitely superior.
Melbguy, what does the "new white bread" mean? Good or bad? |
Extinct, dead, die, end of the road, adios amigos, sayonara, dasvidaniya, ciao ciao, au revoir Mr Duck! Nah, DSD is the new white bread! |
|
The record companies became overly greedy...for years cds were $15-20 by the time they made it to an independent record store...which is close to 2 X what an lp was back in the day...when the mp3 generation hit...the big wigs decided it was time yet again to repackage the digital age...again touting superior fidelity...I was born at night...but not last night...pass |
Mitch4t, Tomcy6 and Brownsfan offer very well reasoned reponses to Bigamp's comment. I also feel that it's up to the record companies to present the new formats in a manner that appeals to the buying public. This means prices that the consumer finds palatable and attractive. It means offering a variety of title choices and not simply regurgitation of the same old recycled titles again and again. The lessons from the SACD experience apparently haven't been learned and absorbed. DSD may catch on and become widely available and successful. It if isn't presented/managed properly it will be just another flash in the pan format failure and remain a tiny niche market. I hope they get it right.
Charles, |
Sony was showing DSD Multichannel recording and DSD Download systems at last weekend's California Audio Show.
The show report from Enjoy the Music is at http://www.enjoythemusic.com/california_audio_show_2014/sunday/sony_sacd_dsd.htm |
Bigamp, I see your point. I have about 1600 CDs. At $25 each, a comparable library would be about 40K. I do spend some money on equipment. However, I'm really not a gotta have the latest and best kind of guy. I am a slow, deliberate, what is the best bang for the buck kind of guy.
I will buy a few DSD downloads at $25 each, but the reality is, it will likely be the exception not the rule. And I won't be buying DSD remasters of 40 year old performances at that price. Sony already has a large library of DSD masters. I'm not seeing that this requires a huge investment on their part to release the master files to Accoustic Sounds so that they can be purchased.
If they are able to convince enough people to buy at those prices, more power to them. To me, it appears that they are about to screw it up again by failing to read the market. |
Sony especially needs to show a big and continued commitment to the format after what they did with Sacd and other formats like Dat. They have to prove to us that they're committed to making the format a success.
We don't owe it to them to buy albums we already have or don't want at prices that I find hard to explain.
I'd be happy to buy in to high-res downloads and will when they offer products I want at a reasonable price and I know that they aren't going to discontinue the format in a year or so because it's not replicating the success of the Cd. |
.
Bigamp, get the music companies to put out a lot more music in the new format and not charge $25 and up for an album.
I never got on the SACD bandwagon because the music catalogs didn't have enough of the music that I liked in order to invest in the format. The music was and still is readily available on cd. I am not going to invest in DSD player so I can only play a dozen or so albums in DSD. I can't justify that kind of cash outlay for such a limited amount of music. Until the new music formats make a serious commitment to reissue the bulk of their catalogs in the new format...the new formats will be slow going and probably a slow death.
. |
It's curious how audiophiles devote so much time and energy toward their gear
to get higher resolution and better sound, but complain about the introduction
of new formats that enable better resolution and sound. No problem spending a
bunch of silly money replacing and upgrading gear, but scoff at upgrading to a
new media format that will sound better on any non-source gear. It can be
frustrating when a new format turns out to be a flash-in-the-pan, such as DVD-
A, but if enough people buy-in instead of resist (and gain the benefit of the
better sound), these formats may gain more traction... It's not like the content
providers aren't trying; they're offering the new formats; you're just not biting. Of
course they won't offer a full catalog right of the bat; there's too much
investment and risk in doing so until they determine there will be a market. Lot's
of DSD-capable DACs and content out now; seems to be hitting a critical mass in
a short time.
More power to the web sites offering DSD downloads. |
Jult52,
You might want to ask the experts on the PS Audio forum this very question. |
I've done reading about the Sony HAPZ1 & the DirectStream DAC but haven't seen an explanation, at least one clear enough for a layman like me, as to why converting non-DSD files into DSD as part of the playback would improve the sound. Why is 1-bit DSD so beneficial to playback? |
It is all just a "niche". Most just get their music off their phones. MP3 is all they know. Moderately priced to high end has always been just a niche but even more so today with so many cheap, awful sounding, easy options. As for converting all to DSD, that can not improve the quality of your sound. You are just moving the bits around from one place to another. Example a round bucked filled with water poured into a square bucket. No gain. Possible some loss. Definitely not improved. Native DSD, that is different animal. Possibly an improvement. I have heard some but content not to my listening interests. I will stick to HDtracks. Largest selection of HD music. Buy on the sales. Now CDs, another story. I use to buy CDs used, rip, then sell back. Some times forced to buy new, rip and sell back. Find for digital recordings, HD down loads sound the best. One reason is you take the drive out of the equation. A second is that 24 bit is quieter. A third obviously the extra info. I have compared them all. For the most part HDtracks sounds the best. Native DSD still up in the air. Have two recordings by David Elias. Sound very good. Do not have any other format recordings to compare to. Oh, I use flac not that it matters. My views anyway. |
Brownsfan,
I think this is the death knell for HiRes. Between their outta sight pricing and the advent of new DAC technology their days are numbered. IMO, it is only a matter of time. |
Sabai, I have a ModWright Sony HAPZ1, which like the PS audio DS converts everything to DSD. I have roughly 850 albums loaded to the hard drive, including some that are old recordings, some that are early digital, and many that were originally recoded in DSD. They are all of course, transferred to the HAPZ1 hard drive as redbook PCM files, mostly in AIFF format.
Everything I have played back with conversion to DSD has been very high quality. With the HAPZ1, one can turn off the DSD conversion and listen to the native PCM. Where I have A/B'ed the DSD against the redbook PCM, the DSD has been better by a wide margin. So what you say has some merit.
The HAPZ1 comes shipped with a few DSD tracks. One of those tracks is from Yo Yo Ma's Appalachian Journey, and is a particularly beautiful recording of fairly recent vintage. I have ordered the CD so that I can compare a native DSD file to a redbook PCM file that goes through the real time PCM to DSD conversion process. If I cannot discern a difference between the two, then for me, purchase of native DSD master files does indeed become moot.
I expect there will be a difference, but I am uncertain what the magnitude of the difference will be. However, in any case, I agree completely that redbook is alive and well. I have no desire to replace 1500 cds with HiRez files, no matter what. I am very much open to purchase of new music as HiRez downloads, especially native DSD, for new music, but the value proposition has to be more favorable than it is currently. $25 a title isn't going to happen on a regular basis, and as more equipment like the sony and the PS audio becomes available, the window of opportunity for the record companies to make HiRez download more than a niche may close. |
|
All of this may be a moot point with the advent of DACs like the PS Audio DS DAC that play PCM like DSD. Which means Redbook CD is very much alive and well. |
Pkoegz, It's great that you've found a solution that works for you. I was never judging your decision or saying it was wrong.
For now I'm sticking with CD's but I must add, my new CDP has various digital inputs, DSD capability can be added later and the built in DAC has high rez capability so I'm not closing the door entirely. So I can still do DSD if it doesn't whither on the vine. Plus, and I hate to even mention this because I may have been obsessive, I have around 6,000 CD's (possibly more). |
.
Until DSD recordings in every genre are widely available, I believe the whole point is moot. If there is no music, why would anyone need a DSD capable player? SACD had great promise, but there wasn't enough music. If the overwhelming majority of the music I like isn't available on DSD, there is no point in getting a player for the format. I'd love to get going with DSD, but until they get the music on DSD, I'm happy with cd and vinyl.
. |
Rja,
Not angry in the least. Just pointing out that I chose not to spend on a first class cd set up because I saw its demise coming for some time. Sold all my cd's because what's the point once ripped and backed up. Also I did not miss out on music but was very much involved in its listening and collecting. As far as the balance of my statement I was making the point that Native DSD's issue for me, is it's content. As far as music servers go, I did invest in the state of the art for around $3200 plus the dac. I am not a computer geek just do my research. The server is easy to use. The highest quality of digital sound possible with unbelievable access. Those who argue not ready for prime time aren't doing their home work. A good server, set up properly, with a good dac, can not be beat. My opinion. So if you wish to sit on the side line waiting for that all in one box, which in my opinion, will neither give you the best sound nor the most flexibility, their out there. In my opinion in the end you will be disgruntled which will reinforce your view of CA for all the wrong reasons. If you are interested in my findings email me and I will gladly respond. Either way I hold no grudge or animosity against anyone on these boards. To each their own. p.kogan |
I'm not up on the latest and greatest digital, but understand how this can all be frustrating. That's why I concentrate on vinyl.... Not only does it sound great, but it has stood the test of time.
The Teac 501 player looked interesting though. It could be a painless entry back in to digital. Well built, well reviewed, and selling on some dealer websites for $799 US. I have a few hundred CD's, and am just looking for a way to play them. I don't plan on diving back in to it. Just a relatively inexpensive player that has a nice tonality. |
Pkoegz, I'm not sure I understand your response to Tomcy6. There seems to be a real disconnect between what he said and your post. Are you angry about something?
As far as Sony and DSD, perhaps they made a premature announcement or changed their direction as they definitely seem to have fallen short. Maybe that's why the OP wondered about the viability of DSD. |
Rja,
I agree with you that the high-res situation is a real mess at present. I hope they manage to get easy to use servers in a variety of configurations available (server only, server and dac, all-in-one, etc.) along with reasonably priced high-res downloads that actually sound clearly better than cds. If things keep going as they are now, I see high-res downloads becoming another fumbled opportunity by Sony. I can't understand why a company with their resources can't get it together on a huge moneymaking opportunity. |
Hey guys, that's what meant by "trying" to listen to music. I was referring to buying music and the equipment used to listen to it. The whole scene is kind of a mess right now, definitely not as simple as it used to be.
Should I get a DAC (and a separate transport) or a CDP? How about HDCD, SACD, BluRay, DVDAudio? Are CD's dead? Are SACD'S Dead? Is BluRay the future? Is DSD dead or dying? Should I skip physical formats entirely and go strictly with computer? Should I go with downloads and/or rip my entire collection? Is USB the way to go? What software should I use? What computer should I use? Should I mod the computer? How long will some of these formats even last? Will I have to do this all over again if I don't make the right decision now? Do wires make a difference no matter which way I go? On and on, that's causing me a bit of angst.
Perhaps I should have been clearer. I certainly wasn't attempting to make a negative remark toward anyone.
BTW: Just bought a new CDP, skipped DSD although I can add it later if necessary. With the number of CDs I own I'll wait while this all shakes out a bit. What future have we wrought where the Luddite would be sticking with CD's? 8^) |
Hi Dasign,
It could be that my viewpoint is influenced by the genre I listen to. As you noted jazz on CD is most often very well done and other formats aren't really much(if any) better. For those into Pop, Rock,Hip hop etc. the situation may be different.With jazz the sound engineers(with a few exceptions) seem to keep the tonality and overall sound quite natural.
Charles, |
Charles1dad,
I agree that some recent CD recordings sound great and could live with their sound quality which is very satisfying (especially jazz records). Also true that newer formats like DSD are promising on paper but could also be somewhat disappointing. I recently purchased Santana's Abraxas in DSD, while it is the best sounding version of this album I have, it is still lacking the audio recording quality of more recent CD's (of the better recording quality variety). We have to remember that Abraxas was recorded in 1970 and it all comes back to the master recording quality.
My main point here is why would an artist agree to sign a record deal which presents a sub-par recording quality of his music? Also, music downloads represent the future model of music distribution. Why record companies cannot systematically provide Hi-Rez downloads for any new recording baffles me.
Neil Young has started a nice initiative with its Pono Music Player. I just hope that artists will embark in his project to provide quality recordings that music lovers want and at a price they want to pay. |
Tomcy6,
Really do not know what you are talking about. I have about 3000 vinyl records and 5000 + ripped CDs and down loads. 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's and through today. I have missed nothing. When I say skipped CDs did not mean music meant CD players. Never bought an expensive or "high end" one. I am about the music unlike many. But I will say for my taste there is almost NO native DSD to listen to. Not into,
Classical
Classical Crossover
Gospel
Independent Acoustic
Jazz
Spiritual
Traditional Chinese
Listen to some jazz not sure what independent acoustic is, but other then that,
Nothing there for me. If that is what you mean, well to each their own.
|
I won't claim that Redbook is better, only that it can be "very, very" good.I don't know how many times the latest format has been declared "game over".Time will tell, if DSD is really superior then that's good news. Its just that promises and hype are so easy to do.I just want good music reproduction.The cost of the music(DSD files) has to be market sensible or it's doomed to be merely another niche audiophile product with zero mass market appeal/sucess.I can buy used CDs for 4-6 dollars(or less) and they sound quite pleasing in my system.Even many new CDs are very reasonably priced.I'll buy into DSD(eventually) if the companies do things right and demostrate some foresight.
Charles, |
The lucky one are those who have a foot in all camps.
CompAudio is the future, but its also nice to throw on a spinning disk every now and then. Properly set up CompAudio sounds better though and when done with full DSP like with Spatial computing, its game over. |
