DSD, The last thing we need....

Status
Not open for further replies.
From: One-bit Delta Sigma Audio Encoding (DSD)

"One-bit Delta Sigma (or Sigma Delta) Audio Modulation; Direct Stream Digital (DSD; trade name)"

From https://www.nuforce.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40&Itemid=2674

"Direct-Stream Digital is simply a 1-bit digital audio format that is based on the Sigma-Delta encoding/decoding architecture, and in practice is commonly referred to as a DSD recording/file."

From SACD / SUPER AUDIO COMPACT DISC / The Sound of DSD: Oversampling/Upsampling and Noise Shaping.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"DSD is a 1-bit format, a so called pulse density format and definitely not a PCM format (Pulse Code Modulation).[/FONT]"
 
jphelan said:
I don't doubt for a minute that folks heard /are hearing a difference. Both systems are multi-bit - so they should sound similar.

But still - some don't like the sound of the lower-bit format - including well-known people in audio.
Click to expand...

And just as many well known do. So?
 
Myles B. Astor said:
And just as many well known do. So?
Click to expand...

It's hopeless Myles. Earlier in this thread, everyone loved everything in audio and there were no differences of opinion about anything except possibly speakers. People who loved analog suddenly like CDs and are playing them regularly because they sound so good. Now we are stating the obvious that not everyone agrees that DSD sounds better than PCM. The fact that audiophiles seldom agree on anything was the original point I was trying to make in this thread. We have come full circle.
 
"So" - SACD was supposed to be a high-resolution format. That many think CD sounds *better* means there's a problem with that claim...

As far as Pearson's "disagreement" - almost all vinyl people respect digital - esp. "if it's done right". Pearson is one of 2 audio reviewers who bad-mouth CD, at the present.

And "digiphiles" respect analog - for it's "warmth" and "full-body" sound. They think (lately) that some of this is distortion - but it's respected nonetheless.
 
jphelan said:
We go by work in the field - not what's written on the web (by unknown writers):

Q. How does the SACD format achieve higher sound quality?
Click to expand...

That's a ten year old article. Nothing has changed in a decade? Comparisons were made on mastering speakers? What does that mean? Auratones or Yamahas with tissue paper over the tweeters?

And what makes his opinion any more valid than Andreas Koch?

Andreas Koch got his start working for Studer ReVox in Switzerland back in 1982. It was his task to build the world’s first fully asynchronous digital audio sample rate converter, patent granted in 1984. Also, in 1984, he designed one of the first filter banks for digital audio. 512 banks were used to perform digital noise reduction for old recordings. Some of the same ideas were used later in audio compression algorithms such as MP3, AC-3 and others.

Following his accomplishments at Studer Revox, he went to work with Dolby Labs in San Francisco. In 1985 he built all the digital signal processing of the AC-1 encoder and decoder (delta modulator). This was a professional digital audio
compression scheme used for television transmission. It was Dolby’s first digital audio product and was sold quite successfully. In 1986 he built the hardware for the very first incarnation of what is today the widely used AC-3 compression algorithm.

In 1987 Studer ReVox in Switzerland required his return. Andreas managed the development of a professional digital audio tape recorder which was a 48-channel DASH format on 1/2 inch tape. For the next two years he was involved in the market and technology research for hard disk (PC) recording in professional applications. This job required visiting many high profile recording studios worldwide which helped to establish his solid base in this industry.

Andreas continued his great work in Switzerland until his transfer to Studer Editech in Menlo Park, CA, in 1989, where he was tasked to manage a group of engineers designing the ultimate hard disc recorder for professional post production applications, launched “Dyaxis” in 1992 which is still used today. The user interface was so revolutionary that it was copied by many competing products still produced today.

In 1993 Sony in Florida needed his services. He oversaw product development for professional audio products and launched various mixing consoles. Sony recognized Andreas’ great successes and asked him to relocate to San Francisco in 1997 where he started and managed the development for the world’s first 8-channel DSD recording / editing / mixing machine. “Sonoma” is still used today in studios throughout the world and has been used for most SACD releases. He designed all the digital parts of A/D and D/A converters that helped establish DSD as a superior sounding audio format in SACD. He followed that up by expanding the Sonoma to 32-channels of DSD on a single PC. Andreas also participated in all standardization committees for SACD in conjuntion with Philips.

During 2003 Andreas decided to go into business for himself as an independent contract engineer. For the next four years he designed all of the digital componentry, algorithms and architecture for EMM Labs digital audio products; professional and audiophile. He designed and implemented various revolutionary algorithms for sample rate conversion (SRC), as can only be expected from one of the original inventors of SRC. He also developed a discrete D/A converter and unique architecture for clock management from digital audio transmission inputs.



dsd

koch

dsd
 
BlueFox said:
Quite an impressive resume. It sounds like we should call him Mr. Digital. :D
Click to expand...

If you ever have the opportunity to meet Andreas at a show--and he is at practically all of them in Jonathan Tinn's room--he is the most unassuming person you've ever met. But many consider his digital gear among the best out there and many studios use his equipment too.
 
Nothing has changed in 10 years - DSD is a PCM clone. Did you read the Mark Waldrep interview offered by the OP ?

And why the push for Koch ? No doubt smart and experienced - but I thought this thread was about DSD, the format.

PS Audio seems to be doing a better job anyway - at a more attractive price. Red hot PFO review !!
 
I have heard the DStream in DSD and it sucks (MUCH better in PCM than DSD and that tells you who their target market is). Such a pity they crippled DSD for a supposedly having a DSD engine.

DSD is no PCM clone...their operating principles are VERY different.

Obviously you have never heard good DSD vua MSB Platinum or EMMLabs2x or Lampi DSD...DSD128 native is to die for. Plain truth and bad manners.
 
jphelan said:
And why the push for Koch ? No doubt smart and experienced - but I thought this thread was about DSD, the format.

PS Audio seems to be doing a better job anyway - at a more attractive price. Red hot PFO review !!
Click to expand...

Did you read the PFO review?

"The DirectStream itself does away with the usual off-the-shelf chipset solutions to digital processing. Instead, designer Ted Smith's use of FPGA, and the decision to convert all PCM signals, regardless of clock rate, to DSD, oversample them to 10x the single DSD rate of 2.8224mHz, and then drop them down to Double DSD (5.6448mHz), leads to a unified, remarkable solution to the digital maze that various flavors of PCM otherwise would impose at the chip and circuit level. This isn't the first time that such an approach has been used, of course. Ted freely admits his debt to other DSD designers like Andreas Koch of Playback Designs, who generously shared a concept or two with Ted to help him work through his own design approach. It is like unto what Andreas has done in his own reference-level work with the MPx series of players and DACs, all of which make PCM sound much more pleasant than any purely PCM approach has done."

BTW, where in the review did David say the PS Audio was better than his reference Playback Designs 5-series player?
 
wisnon said:
I have heard the DStream in DSD and it sucks (MUCH better in PCM than DSD and that tells you who their target market is). Such a pity they crippled DSD for a supposedly having a DSD engine.

DSD is no PCM clone...their operating principles are VERY different.

Obviously you have never heard good DSD vua MSB Platinum or EMMLabs2x or Lampi DSD...DSD128 native is to die for. Plain truth and bad manners.
Click to expand...

Norman - you've got to hear the Lumin S1 do DSD128 (and pretty much everything else).....wow!

Agree re: DStream.
 
wisnon said:
I have heard the DStream in DSD and it sucks (MUCH better in PCM than DSD and that tells you who their target market is). Such a pity they crippled DSD for a supposedly having a DSD engine.

DSD is no PCM clone...their operating principles are VERY different.

Obviously you have never heard good DSD vua MSB Platinum or EMMLabs2x or Lampi DSD...DSD128 native is to die for. Plain truth and bad manners.
Click to expand...

Winson-You are trying to talk sense into a troll and it's hopeless as we found out yesterday. Sometimes I think internet trolls are actually old men in nursing homes with access to the internet. When they are not on chat sites pretending to be an 18 year old nympho, they come on audio forums and say outrageous things in order to get a different type of reaction from people.
 
DSD is typically an 8-bit format (on recording, sometimes 16). Because of this, it decimates and oversamples (on recording, just like PCM).

But in order to hear "true" DSD, you have to eschew the DAC-chip because they all transcode to PCM. Until we have many more players than do this - almost all people who play SACDs are hearing PCM.

"mep" was dead-wrong on DSD - it is not 1 bit. He is the troll - ones who make unsubstantiated claims.

Still can't figure out why Myles pointed to Koch - this is about the DSD system - not the resume of audio designers.

The PFO review stated clearly that its Red Book performance was *much* better than anything he heard before. PS Audio wasn't going for DSD - they know better. So does Charlie Hansen - who never liked DSD/SACD.

Look at The Absolute Sound from June 2001. Here, REG had a report on the new audio formats. *He* didn't take to DSD, in this report. I could go on -

You guys are in the wrong lane -

The reviews of CD are clear - PS Audio for one, but EMM on AudioStream last year. The reviewer said that digital "of any resolution" was equally compelling. Including CD.

Superior Audio did EMM (last year) and Jules Coleman said it was as good as any source he's heard - at "anything near its price". And he has good experience with LP and even SACD. His review, BTW, was based on CD recordings. Read it.....
 
jphelan said:
DSD is typically an 8-bit format (on recording, sometimes 16). Because of this, it decimates and over-samples (on recording, just like PCM).

But in order to hear "true" DSD, you have to eschew the DAC-chip because they all transcode to PCM. Until we have many more players than do this - almost all people who play SACDs are hearing PCM.

"mep" was dead-wrong on DSD - it is not 1 bit. He is the troll - ones who make unsubstantiated claims.

Still can't figure out why Myles pointed to Koch - this is about the DSD system - not the resume of audio designers.

The PFO review stated clearly that its Red Book performance was *much* better than anything he heard before. PS Audio wasn't going for DSD - they know better. So does Charlie Hansen - who never liked DSD/SACD.

Look at The Absolute Sound from June 2001. Here, REG had a report on the new audio formats. *He* didn't take to DSD, in this report. I could go on -

You guys are in the wrong lane -

The reviews of CD are clear - PS Audio for one, but EMM on AudioStream last year. The reviewer said that digital "of any resolution" was equally compelling. Including CD.

Superior Audio did EMM (last year) and Jules Coleman said it was as good as any source he's heard - at "anything near its price". And he has good experience with LP and even SACD. His review, BTW, was based on CD recordings. Read it.....
Click to expand...

Since you like to quote TAS and from 2001, have a read from 2014

"DSD, on the other hand, uses a much higher sampling rate, 2.8224MHz, or 2,822,400 samples per second. That’s 64 times as fast as the sampling rate for CDs. But the word length is only one bit. If that bit is a “1,” the amplitude of the signal is increasing; if it’s a “0,” the signal amplitude is decreasing. The actual waveform is encoded by the frequency or density of the “1s” and “0s.” An actual sample of a musical waveform takes the form of a series of pulses of varying density (those “1s” and “0s” clumped together) and actually looks a bit like an analog waveform. " The ABCs of DSD Downloads | The Absolute Sound

DSD ? The New Addiction by Andreas Koch | DSD-Guide.com

pure Delta-Sigma signals are quantized to 1 bit
 
Wrong - I'll believe recording engineers over an *audio reviewer* any day of the week.....
 
jphelan said:
Wrong - I'll believe recording engineers over an *audio reviewer* any day of the week.....
Click to expand...

The same recording engineeers that creamed over CDs when they first came out?

And again, you totally gloss over Andreas Koch's review of how DSD operates.
 
Myles B. Astor said:
The same recording engineeers that creamed over CDs when they first came out?

And again, you totally gloss over Andreas Koch's review of how DSD operates.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the write up Paul McGowen of PS Audio did on DSD. What is DSD audio-- A Simple Explanation | DSD-Guide.com

"
Paul McGowen, of PS Audio, wrote a wonderful short explanation of what DSD audio is and how it differs from PCM audio. Here is an excerpt from his post on DSD audio or 1-bit audio and why it sounds closer to analog sound than PCM.


1-bit audio is simple to understand in concept. There are no samples, there are no words, there is no code. Instead there is a continuous streaming “train” of single identical bits that are either on or off. The more bits that are on, the higher the eventual output voltage becomes. The more bits that are off, the lower the eventual output voltage. We refer to this type of scheme as Pulse Density Modulation because when you have a greater number of on bits it appears as more densely populated. Here’s a picture that will help you visualize a 1-bit system."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top