|
|
Post by solidstate on Oct 16, 2016 19:55:49 GMT -5
That's a cap in the Linear Tech regulator circuit they placed for the AK4497EQ V right AT the AK4497EQ on the PCB... SMART PS I see pro insider EEs on diyaudioforum place regulators like that right at the DAC V inputs via PCB hacking etc ALL THE TIME and they claim sonic improvements |
|
|
|
Post by solarrdadd on Oct 16, 2016 20:46:43 GMT -5
at work, I use a small netbook with JRiver and I have my music on a 1.5tb USB HD. for the DAC I use the iFi nano iDSD DAC & iUSB power regenerator/power filter and it outputs to a emotiva mini-X amp G1 feeding a pair of Polk Audio Monitor 10 Series II speakers. this little DAC has never failed to give me the best, cleanest music I've ever heard. paired with the iUSB, it was about $400 or so when I purchased them. the nano iDSD supports: • PCM from 16/44kHz all the way up to 32/384kHz. • Quad-Speed DSD to 11.2/12.4MHz. • DXD up to 384kHz. all completely native, no conversion of DSD to PCM so you will get pure DSD in and pure DSD out. I have a number of DSD256 (Quad DSD) downloads and they sound incredible. I have one Quad DSD (256) that is 10.8gb in size and it sounds amazing. I also have plenty of 96/24 & 192/24 FLAC and it just plays everything without fail and it sounds great too. I've had it for almost 2 years and never had a problem with it yet. best of luck whatever you decide.  they sit on my desk (DAC on top of the USB power regenerator/filter) at work, next to my mouse & the mini-X amp, so that should give you and idea of scale of size. I prefer function over form and this thing just works. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Oct 16, 2016 20:59:06 GMT -5
Elephant ....... room .......... we have heard it from many people many times ............... DSD is dead ....... content is more important to sound quality than the format it is played from ....... DSD had a half life of around 7 years from 1999 .......... in the ~18 years since Sony has tried many times to pump life into DSD and has failed .......... there simply isn't enough DSD content to make it worthwhile ............ it's not like we haven't given it a chance ........... PCM continues to advance, while DSD just sits there.............. dead and decaying .......... is it really worthwhile spending money on a format that has next to zero chance of success?
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Oct 16, 2016 21:39:51 GMT -5
I guess it's dead in terms of consumer distro less digital files via DoP into a DSD DAC that supports it BUT in terms of pro production ADC it still lives! emmlabs.com/html/users/list.htmlIf the original production workflow was DSD then why not give the end user access to bit perfect masters via DSD files distro on the net? I've always thought 24bit 48Khz PCM is all that's really needed. Part of the reason for high sample rates like 96Khz and above in a pro studio production environment is to lower latency more than SQ improvements after mastering. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Oct 16, 2016 22:10:42 GMT -5
Not in any way my field of expertise, but my mixer fiends tell me that DSD can't be mixed (engineered), so they do it in PCM. For example, when remixing heritage music they take analogue tapes, ADC it to PCM, mix it, then run a conversion to DSD. So PCM is in fact more "direct" (ie; less conversions) than DSD. When they are mixing "new" music if it is recorded in DSD (a not very often occurrence by the sound of it) they convert it to PCM, mix it, then convert it to DSD. As a result truly any "original DSD" recordings are going to be unmixed, not sure how that would work out.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Oct 16, 2016 22:15:41 GMT -5
Your right most DAW can't mix it but it's still possible with the right software.
Sony has a DAW called Sonoma that can do it and there are others...
Mixing/processing is very basic though with no VST et al processing/effects unless going to PCM conversion.
Not very practical for modern music eh.
Perhaps that's why most stuff produced in the format is classical etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Oct 16, 2016 22:27:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Oct 16, 2016 22:35:46 GMT -5
Elephant ....... room .......... we have heard it from many people many times ............... DSD is dead ....... content is more important to sound quality than the format it is played from ....... DSD had a half life of around 7 years from 1999 .......... in the ~18 years since Sony has tried many times to pump life into DSD and has failed .......... there simply isn't enough DSD content to make it worthwhile ............ it's not like we haven't given it a chance ........... PCM continues to advance, while DSD just sits there.............. dead and decaying .......... is it really worthwhile spending money on a format that has next to zero chance of success? Cheers Gary I think this is strong evidence DSD is not dead. www.nativedsd.com/dsd-guide.com/where-can-you-find-dsd-music-downloadsYou're right though the production problems involved with trying to work in a pure DSD workflow is to much of a pain in the ass for most studios plus there is a number of PCM ADCs that perform almost on par with Ed's converters to most ears. The problem from day one has always been the issues with mixing the format and second getting ubiquitous transport to the listener. Thing is though man, some of the most expert critical ears who work in classical music as both musicians and engineers/producers swear the conversion is really that much better to their rather expert tuned ears. To us little fishes though... sh** I'd have trouble identifying DSD in ABX and the dif I'd spot would prob be mastering differences more than converters and bit perfect format perfect masters. |
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Oct 16, 2016 22:44:20 GMT -5
Not in any way my field of expertise, but my mixer fiends tell me that DSD can't be mixed (engineered), so they do it in PCM. For example, when remixing heritage music they take analogue tapes, ADC it to PCM, mix it, then run a conversion to DSD. So PCM is in fact more "direct" (ie; less conversions) than DSD. When they are mixing "new" music if it is recorded in DSD (a not very often occurrence by the sound of it) they convert it to PCM, mix it, then convert it to DSD. As a result truly any "original DSD" recordings are going to be unmixed, not sure how that would work out. Cheers Gary This is how the really high end pros go about mixing EMMlabs converters. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_eXtreme_Definition. 352.8 kHz/24bit PCM is enough to capture the original DSD256 audio information with no loss. This is how DoP sends DSD audio from a file into a DAC right on consumer transport in terms of principle IE encapsulating DSD data into a PCM frame. dsd-guide.com/dop-open-standard |
|
vmac72
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 9 
|
Post by vmac72 on Oct 17, 2016 1:37:56 GMT -5
Hi all so glad i asked for advice on such a greatly debated piece of audio gear! I have really enjoyed all the responses from others. there have been a couple suggestions i would like to explore, especially DIY builds kits. You get amazing b for $ and the audio quality based on my experience (albeit minimal) is as good as, if not better then some high end dacs. The "unknowns" of buying off the web, from replacement parts,............... to me having to wait for a month for it to maybe arrive!.......sorta keeps me from pulling trigger. Im not married to any one dac or another; the reason i was looking at the AKM 4490 chip was because all reviews i have read suggested warming of sound without losing detail. One of the biggest reasons to ask was also to see what everyone else would suggest?............as this introduces me to new companys and products that i may have not ever had the chance to experience. Peoples suggestions allowed me into the wicked world of Emotiva!!! Amen to that. And that is why i own 5 pieces of Emo hardware and i will keep coming back to check out what you regulars have to say........................keep chiming in! oh btw Dsd is alive and well to my ears!
Regards Vinniemac .........................ps if someone has had good luck sourcing electronic components and ordering please pm me.?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Oct 17, 2016 1:42:51 GMT -5
Not in any way my field of expertise, but my mixer fiends tell me that DSD can't be mixed (engineered), so they do it in PCM. For example, when remixing heritage music they take analogue tapes, ADC it to PCM, mix it, then run a conversion to DSD. So PCM is in fact more "direct" (ie; less conversions) than DSD. When they are mixing "new" music if it is recorded in DSD (a not very often occurrence by the sound of it) they convert it to PCM, mix it, then convert it to DSD. As a result truly any "original DSD" recordings are going to be unmixed, not sure how that would work out. This is how the really high end pros go about mixing EMMlabs converters. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_eXtreme_Definition. 352.8 kHz/24bit PCM is enough to capture the original DSD256 audio information with no loss. This is how DoP sends DSD audio from a file into a DAC right on consumer transport in terms of principle IE encapsulating DSD data into a PCM frame. dsd-guide.com/dop-open-standardYour first link confirms what my mixer friends told me "DXD is a PCM signal" and "DXD utilizes the vast array of plugins available to PCM based digital audio workstations". The guys mostly work on movie sound tracks, frequently with large orchestras, but also do contract sound engineering and mixing for local bands between movie gigs. They are currently working on Thor Ragnarok. The second link confirms the format issue that they raised, which was that "no specific format was defined for DSD and with the ongoing proliferation of USB converters in the current market it appears that the opportunity for the official USB specification to adopt a single common method of transferring DSD audio via USB is slowly disappearing." I have quite a few SACD's that I like to listen to, not because they are SACD's but because of their mastering. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Oct 17, 2016 6:06:47 GMT -5
Be sure to look at the Grace m920, often on massdrop.
First rate dac/preamp, checks all the boxes then some.
|
|
|
|
Post by yves on Oct 17, 2016 7:04:35 GMT -5
I find most Sabre implementations to be uh... sharp, at times shrill, and for the most part lifeless and to clinical. The sure measure well and all but there is something about them I simply don't like. Top end harshness/brightness, artificial/etched and uninvolving/sterile, fatiguing, I agree there are almost no Sabre DACs out there that do not suffer from any of those. IMHO the big untold secret is in the word "almost"........  |
|
|
|
Post by yves on Oct 17, 2016 7:17:58 GMT -5
I think this is strong evidence DSD is not dead. The only reason why it's not completely dead yet is because they've been keeping it on life support to milk those who can't understand what quantization distortion means. |
|
|
|
Post by mnyankee on Oct 17, 2016 9:56:18 GMT -5
Hi all so glad i asked for advice on such a greatly debated piece of audio gear! I have really enjoyed all the responses from others. there have been a couple suggestions i would like to explore, especially DIY builds kits. You get amazing b for $ and the audio quality based on my experience (albeit minimal) is as good as, if not better then some high end dacs. The "unknowns" of buying off the web, from replacement parts,............... to me having to wait for a month for it to maybe arrive!.......sorta keeps me from pulling trigger. Im not married to any one dac or another; the reason i was looking at the AKM 4490 chip was because all reviews i have read suggested warming of sound without losing detail. One of the biggest reasons to ask was also to see what everyone else would suggest?............as this introduces me to new companys and products that i may have not ever had the chance to experience. Peoples suggestions allowed me into the wicked world of Emotiva!!! Amen to that. And that is why i own 5 pieces of Emo hardware and i will keep coming back to check out what you regulars have to say........................keep chiming in! oh btw Dsd is alive and well to my ears! Regards Vinniemac .........................ps if someone has had good luck sourcing electronic components and ordering please pm me.? I would still consider the 2 Chord DAC's that I mentioned earlier. They have the warm and detailed sound that you are looking for. |
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Oct 17, 2016 10:41:54 GMT -5
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Oct 17, 2016 10:43:33 GMT -5
Just wanted to throw in a few things here...... and confirm a few from my own knowledge...... 1) DSD is very difficult to mix or edit (which means that there are only a VERY few pieces of equipment or software that can do it - and they aren't the cheap ones). In most recording situations this would be considered to be a serious drawback. However, arguably, if you're recording very simple music that actually can be "simply recorded and played back", then you could consider it a sort of advantage..... because it means that many DSD recordings are the equivalent of "direct to disk" - maybe, if you can't easily edit it, then you WON'T edit it. However, if you imagine that DSD avoids some sort of degradation of the audio signal that PCM will cause, then bear in mind that, if you record something in DSD, convert it to PCM to edit it, then convert it back to DSD to play it, any flaws in EITHER format will be added together in your final output. 2) Many of the supposed technical arguments in favor of DSD are inaccurate or downright misleading. DSD is a PURELY DIGITAL format; it is not "closer to analog" because the digital signal itself "looks more like an analog waveform". DSD also does NOT "require much simpler conversion circuitry and much less filtering" than PCM. While it is true that a simple but poor quality DSD to analog converter CAN be built, the converters that work well are based on complex DACs quite similar to standard Delta-Sigma designs. Likewise, while single rate DSD does have a frequency response that extends out to around 100 kHz, the S/N ratio at that frequency is extremely low. This means that, in order to limit distortion in your other equipment, and to protect your speakers and other electronics, DSD REQUIRES relatively aggressive filtering - even more aggressive than PCM. (So, while you can build a "demonstration" DSD decoder with a few simple parts, one that works safely and to "hi-fi" standards isn't at all simple, and requires even more filtering than a PCM-based D/A converter.) 3) The conversion in either direction between DSD and PCM is NOT lossless. Whenever you convert either to the other, filtering is required, and a slight change in sound is inevitable. WHETHER YOU START WITH A DSD OR PCM ORIGINAL, if you convert it to the other format, the result will NOT be absolutely identical. The difference may or may not be audible, and most converters offer lots of options that will have some effect on the results. However, this in no way suggests that either is better; it simply means that a direct one to one comparison is virtually impossible. (So, if you convert DSD to PCM, or PCM to DSD, it's quite likely that you'll hear a slight difference.... ) 4) There are several programs that can play both PCM and DSD and convert between them. Foobar2000 and jRiver Media Center can play both DSD and PCM. jRiver and dBPowerAmp can convert in either direction between DSD and PCM, and Foobar2000 can at least convert from DSD to PCM (and from SACD ISOs to PCM). Incidentally..... here's a quote about the technical superiority of one or the other: "Technically speaking, PCM from like 88.2kHz /24 bit up, is definitively better than DSD". (That's taken from a White Paper published by Weiss - who is widely considered to be one of the foremost authorities on DSD and conversion software.) www.weiss.ch/assets/content/41/white-paper-on-DSD.pdfI think this is strong evidence DSD is not dead. The only reason why it's not completely dead yet is because they've been keeping it on life support to milk those who can't understand what quantization distortion means. |
|
|
|
Post by solidstate on Oct 17, 2016 10:55:57 GMT -5
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Oct 17, 2016 11:09:18 GMT -5
In other words.... yes, you CAN oversample DSD.... but they seem to gloss over the actualexistence of any BENEFIT of using DSD there..... The simple reality is that DSD is more difficult to work with than PCM and, while it can almost certainly be as good, there is no adequate proof that it is better in any appreciable way. PCM is the standard, with a huge variety of recording equipment, playback equipment, transport options, and processing options available. In order to justify using the less standard, less widely supported, and more complex to use DSD format, you sort of need to show some legitimate reason to go to all that extra effort. The biggest commercial benefits to the SACD format, as a PHSYICAL distribution medium, were that it was arguably better than 16/44k PCM, and that it included a reasonably powerful copy protection mechanism. (They weren't enough, which is why the SACD format has been a commercial failure.) Other than in bad audiophile jokes, the fact that it's more complicated, more expensive, and more annoying to use, doesn't count as a reason TO use it As you can probably tell, I'm not a fan.  I do prefer to maintain the ability to play DSD content - because some content in my collection happens to have arrived in that format - but I fail to see any material advantage to it. (I find converting it to PCM at playback time, then playing it through a good DAC, to be quite adequate....) Please remember that the choice TODAY is NOT between CD (16/44k PCM) and SACD (DSD x1)...... It's between PCM and DSD at whatever resolution you choose...... You'll note that the White Paper that was referenced seems to conclude that 24/96k PCM is the obvious solution....... (and that, with proper jitter control, and dither, even 16/44k is probably quite adequate) |
|
|
|
Post by mnyankee on Oct 17, 2016 11:10:23 GMT -5
My experience with DSD is mixed. I have several native DSD recordings and they all sound great, better than their redbook counterparts. I can't really say if it due to the mastering or not. I suppose it is probably a combination of both but who knows. I do know that I have some Blue Coast music that was recorded as native DSD and have compared it to 96K and they sound similar with a slight edge to DSD. But Blue Coast music has superb mastering and recording. Cookie Marenco of BCM know's what she is doing. I have also used HQ player and JR to upsample to DSD. Sometimes it sounds better than the original and other times it is worse. I do not think that DSD is dead as there are more titles becoming available all the time and the prices are coming down. In addition, dac's are still supporting the format. But as I mentioned in an earlier post, it also depends upon your DAC's sweet spot. I think it also depends upon how detailed and resolving the rest of your system is. Every part of the chain is important.
With that being said, I can certainly live without DSD, espeically since my DAC's sweet spot is 352-384K.
Larry
|
|
