|
Post by bayderll on Mar 26, 2024 0:14:18 GMT -5
Thanks for responding Sensei, Brand new to forum, just fumbling around. Well, what I got from you Dirac is beneficial when considering DSD. I’m not using that high tech calibration just distance settings on Refurbished (XCM 1) I picked up Summer of 2022.
Furthermore, Magnetar’s new reference universal player claims to play both, dat’s where I come in at. So far, all my graphic readings via information is displayed 5.1 PCM, no DSD
With dat being said, I tend to agree SACDs sound great, only problem a small collection.
PS. Two just rolled in yesterday:
Barbara Patricia Four Play
Only about 20 Multi channel SACDs
They do tend to sound better on an $3K vs $400 But it just ought to lol 😂
The administrator did confirm da XCM 1 could play back DSD, I just don’t no how. And just purchased da Magnetar UPD 900 so still learning on that setup also.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,945
|
Post by KeithL on Mar 26, 2024 11:12:31 GMT -5
1. SACDs frequently sound different - and often better - than the equivalent CD release (But that's frequently because they are mastered differently - since SACDS are always intended for "the audiophile market"). 2. The XMC-1 is always going to report what is being sent to it. So, if it says it's getting PCM 5.1 then that's what the player is sending to it. You need to look for some settings on the Magnetar. You will probably find an option listed as something like: "Play DSD from SACDs as PCM / DSD ? " Or possible: "Play DSD via HDMI as PCM / DSD ?" 3. As for Dirac Live... I would say it's safe to say that "most people agree that Dirac Live is the best automatic room correction available today". Now, that said, some people find it a huge improvement, while some do not, and that is going to be a matter of both personal preference and your particular situation. Always remember that the purpose of "room correction" is to correct "imperfections" in your speakers and your room acoustics... (It DOES NOT "automatically make things better". What it does do is to do a great job of correcting or improving some issues that many people have.) Also note that you will NOT be able to use Dirac Live with DSD inputs on the XMC-1.... (DSD inputs are routed directly to the DAC... but DSD audio cannot be processed... which means that Dirac Live cannot be applied to it.) Thanks for responding Sensei, Brand new to forum, just fumbling around. Well, what I got from you Dirac is beneficial when considering DSD. I’m not using that high tech calibration just distance settings on Refurbished (XCM 1) I picked up Summer of 2022. Furthermore, Magnetar’s new reference universal player claims to play both, dat’s where I come in at. So far, all my graphic readings via information is displayed 5.1 PCM, no DSD With dat being said, I tend to agree SACDs sound great, only problem a small collection. PS. Two just rolled in yesterday: Barbara Patricia Four Play Only about 20 Multi channel SACDs They do tend to sound better on an $3K vs $400 But it just ought to lol 😂 The administrator did confirm da XCM 1 could play back DSD, I just don’t no how. And just purchased da Magnetar UPD 900 so still learning on that setup also.
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Mar 26, 2024 11:55:54 GMT -5
1. SACDs frequently sound different - and often better - than the equivalent CD release (But that's frequently because they are mastered differently - since SACDS are always intended for "the audiophile market"). 2. The XMC-1 is always going to report what is being sent to it. So, if it says it's getting PCM 5.1 then that's what the player is sending to it. You need to look for some settings on the Magnetar. You will probably find an option listed as something like: "Play DSD from SACDs as PCM / DSD ? " Or possible: "Play DSD via HDMI as PCM / DSD ?" 3. As for Dirac Live... I would say it's safe to say that "most people agree that Dirac Live is the best automatic room correction available today". Now, that said, some people find it a huge improvement, while some do not, and that is going to be a matter of both personal preference and your particular situation. Always remember that the purpose of "room correction" is to correct "imperfections" in your speakers and your room acoustics... (It DOES NOT "automatically make things better". What it does do is to do a great job of correcting or improving some issues that many people have.) Also note that you will NOT be able to use Dirac Live with DSD inputs on the XMC-1.... (DSD inputs are routed directly to the DAC... but DSD audio cannot be processed... which means that Dirac Live cannot be applied to it.) Thanks for responding Sensei, Brand new to forum, just fumbling around. Well, what I got from you Dirac is beneficial when considering DSD. I’m not using that high tech calibration just distance settings on Refurbished (XCM 1) I picked up Summer of 2022. Furthermore, Magnetar’s new reference universal player claims to play both, dat’s where I come in at. So far, all my graphic readings via information is displayed 5.1 PCM, no DSD With dat being said, I tend to agree SACDs sound great, only problem a small collection. PS. Two just rolled in yesterday: Barbara Patricia Four Play Only about 20 Multi channel SACDs They do tend to sound better on an $3K vs $400 But it just ought to lol 😂 The administrator did confirm da XCM 1 could play back DSD, I just don’t no how. And just purchased da Magnetar UPD 900 so still learning on that setup also. FYI bayderll
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,945
|
Post by KeithL on Mar 26, 2024 12:10:22 GMT -5
I absolutely agree that "in general definitive exact one-to-one comparisons" between PCM and DSD are virtually impossible. For one thing, since there is no exact mathematical correlation, there will always be a tiny difference when you convert between them. (Whether it will be audible is an entirely different question... but the conversion will never be perfectly "lossless".) (It's also worth remembering that this is always true... whether you do it in software... or configure your player to "play DSD as PCM".) Also note that, since the conversion is not exactly one-to-one, there are "options" involved... This means that, if you start with the same file, and convert it using two different converters... Or even slightly different settings on the same converter... You will get slightly different results... Another interesting thing to keep in mind is this... One of the reasons that DSD is not generally used in music production is that DSD digital audio files are virtually impossible to edit... (The kind of math used to edit digital audio content just doesn't work on DSD files... ) Because of this even the very few mixing consoles that do "edit DSD" actually do so by converting it to DXD (which is just another name for high-bit-rate 24/352k PCM). Without this conversion, while DSD tracks can be "cut and spliced", they cannot be "mixed" or "faded" or anything like that. This means that, even if you purchase an SACD or DSD file, in most cases the content on it will have been edited and recorded in PCM. (There are a few sources of DSD file downloads that are actually recorded and mastered in DSD... but, unless they say so, they aren't...) (And, to be quite blunt, I have never seen "a major album by a major group" that was mastered in DSD.) (It's also worth mentioning that analog tape is far less accurate than PCM or DSD - so "content converted directly from analog tape to DSD" is generally NOT top quality at all.) HOWEVER... There is one relatively easy way to make a direct comparison between DSD and PCM under specific conditions... Almost all SACD players, and both devices and software that can play DSD, offer the option of "outputting as PCM". (That's a nice way of saying that they're going to convert the DSD into PCM in their software or firmware and then output PCM.) So, for example, with your player, you CAN connect it to your XMC-1 via HDMI... And you should then be able to configure your player to either "output DSD as DSD' or "output DSD as PCM". (And be sure to configure your XMC-1 to use something like Direct or Reference Stereo mode to avoid all processing while playing the PCM version.) And, by doing this you will be able to make a more or less direct comparison between them. This comparison WILL include the conversion software in the firmware of the player... So, if you DO hear a big difference, then that difference could be because of the conversion, or because the XMC-1 is handling things differently. But... if you DON'T hear a significant difference... then you might conclude that there just plain isn't much difference. Finally... It's worth mentioning that Hybrid SACD discs contain a "Red Book CD layer". This is simply an entirely separate copy of the content, in "regular CD format", which can be played on "regular CD players". This copy is usually mastered the same as the DSD version... although, for the reasons outlined above, it will be at least slightly different. And, if the guys who made the disc wanted to, they could have made it sound very different... So, if you rip an SACD on a a device that doesn't support SACDs, you will be getting a copy of "CD layer"... Which will probably sound pretty much like the SACD layer (but maybe not)... The RMC-1 and XMC-2 will not play DSD over USB and likely never will. However, the new G4 processors are rumored to be capable of DSD over USB. Of course, the RMC-1 and XMC-2 will play SACD's. Many DSD recordings are spectacularly good. From my perspective the big advantage of PCM is that you can use it with Dirac while DSD is a no go with Dirac. Without Dirac considered, on my system, most of my DSD over USB and SACD recordings sound better to me than PCM, but with Dirac PCM is hard to beat. Of course, the differences in equipment necessary to play each format does make legitimate, definitive comparisons difficult at best. If the G4 processors can play DSD over USB comparisons will be much easier.
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Mar 26, 2024 12:19:12 GMT -5
Engineering Reality - It's just another format. ^^^^^ DSD/SACD - On its way to the audio dustbin of history... Its companions will be MQA and Auro -3D.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,945
|
Post by KeithL on Mar 26, 2024 13:07:09 GMT -5
That's kind of how I feel about it. I have several SACDs that sound better than their CD "counterparts"... Yet, when I take the DSD files ripped from them, and convert them to 24/96k PCM, they sound just as good. As far as I'm concerned, now that we have multi-channel high-res FLAC files, the last reason SACDs had to exist is now gone. (And, yes, when I convert those DSD files to PCM using different software, they sound a tiny bit different... but, to my ears, equally good.) Engineering Reality - It's just another format. ^^^^^ DSD/SACD - On its way to the audio dustbin of history... Its companions will be MQA and Auro -3D.
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Mar 26, 2024 13:22:36 GMT -5
That's kind of how I feel about it. I have several SACDs that sound better than their CD "counterparts"... Yet, when I take the DSD files ripped from them, and convert them to 24/96k PCM, they sound just as good. As far as I'm concerned, now that we have multi-channel high-res FLAC files, the last reason SACDs had to exist is now gone. (And, yes, when I convert those DSD files to PCM using different software, they sound a tiny bit different... but, to my ears, equally good.) ^^^^^ DSD/SACD - On its way to the audio dustbin of history... Its companions will be MQA and Auro -3D. SACD was just an early multi-channel format. History is in the pages of this thread. FLAC can go in the dustbin too. It doesn't add anything but complexity, limitation, and saves very little money. I have about 1,100 WAV albums on a 1TB stick (and HD) and it takes 465GB of space. The Stick cost $110.00. About 700 hours of music, in WAV formats, from 16/44 to 24/192, for $55. About 5 cents/album on the Stick. Less cost on the HD. No FLAC - No good reason to have it. However, I won't give you any flak if you want to record in FLAC.
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Mar 26, 2024 13:28:50 GMT -5
That's kind of how I feel about it. I have several SACDs that sound better than their CD "counterparts"... Yet, when I take the DSD files ripped from them, and convert them to 24/96k PCM, they sound just as good. As far as I'm concerned, now that we have multi-channel high-res FLAC files, the last reason SACDs had to exist is now gone. (And, yes, when I convert those DSD files to PCM using different software, they sound a tiny bit different... but, to my ears, equally good.) ^^^^^ DSD/SACD - On its way to the audio dustbin of history... Its companions will be MQA and Auro -3D. As more Atmos music becomes available there could be an argument for physical media to distribute TrueHD uncompressed versions of audiophile-worthy recordings (i.e. not just lame remixes of old pop albums). Some are available now as Pure Audio Blu-ray discs. But Atmos audio recordings are also being made available as MP4 and MKV files, with blank video or with just a menu system to select tracks. Even more reason to forget about DSD/SACD. And to my ear and others', these MKV and Blu-ray sources sound significantly better than the streaming services. I believe Sean Olive even documented measured differences. And for those "purists", maybe someone will make a multi-platter vinyl system that syncs players for that audiophile 7.1.4 pure analog vinyl Atmos experience.
|
|
|
Post by markc on Mar 27, 2024 2:53:50 GMT -5
Engineering Reality - It's just another format. ^^^^^ DSD/SACD - On its way to the audio dustbin of history... Its companions will be MQA and Auro -3D. errrr... ignoring the glaringly obvious there: Vinyl should have gone that way 20+ years ago too. I can see how properly produced (and played) vinyl may have sounded better than the earliest digital music released on CD - exclusively due to our lack of knowledge about how to capture and manipulate digital data. but that hasn't been true for years. (It saddens me that some recordings from the 80's (e.g. George Michael's Faith album) do not exist anywhere in what would be considered decent quality and what was heard in the studio can never again be reconstituted. DDD music production for CD ended up with recordings facing the audio equivalent of a bit perfect bitmap image being converted to a jpg, resized and saved as a jpg, rescaled and resaved as a jpg resaved as a jpg. Image blurring and loss of pixel resolution at each stage that can never be regained. Audio resolution was lost at every step of the process: Increase the kick drum track volume: digital interpolation and lost quality forever, and it is audible because at best they started with 16 bit 44.1 or 48 kHz DAT quality recordings.
|
|
turner
Sensei
Enjoy the music, not the gear.
Posts: 133
|
Post by turner on Mar 27, 2024 7:01:45 GMT -5
^^^^^ DSD/SACD - On its way to the audio dustbin of history... Its companions will be MQA and Auro -3D. errrr... ignoring the glaringly obvious there: Vinyl should have gone that way 20+ years ago too. I can see how properly produced (and played) vinyl may have sounded better than the earliest digital music released on CD - exclusively due to our lack of knowledge about how to capture and manipulate digital data. but that hasn't been true for years. (It saddens me that some recordings from the 80's (e.g. George Michael's Faith album) do not exist anywhere in what would be considered decent quality and what was heard in the studio can never again be reconstituted. DDD music production for CD ended up with recordings facing the audio equivalent of a bit perfect bitmap image being converted to a jpg, resized and saved as a jpg, rescaled and resaved as a jpg resaved as a jpg. Image blurring and loss of pixel resolution at each stage that can never be regained. Audio resolution was lost at every step of the process: Increase the kick drum track volume: digital interpolation and lost quality forever, and it is audible because at best they started with 16 bit 44.1 or 48 kHz DAT quality recordings. New SACD players are disk are still available. As long as MoFi and others still produce new content, they will sell. mofi.com/collections/new-releasesIf they were not selling it all, they wouldn't make new content or hardware. SACD, DSD files are only sold to folks who have nice systems and who want it. It's too easy to bash something you don't get or understand. Is it a commercial failure compared to the CD? Absolutely. It is far from the dustbin. At least with SACD/DSD it didn't require a whole system redesign. How many people truly have audiophile grade Atmos systems? What is the market share on that?
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Mar 27, 2024 7:30:40 GMT -5
^^^^^ DSD/SACD - On its way to the audio dustbin of history... Its companions will be MQA and Auro -3D. errrr... ignoring the glaringly obvious there: Vinyl should have gone that way 20+ years ago too. I can see how properly produced (and played) vinyl may have sounded better than the earliest digital music released on CD - exclusively due to our lack of knowledge about how to capture and manipulate digital data. but that hasn't been true for years. (It saddens me that some recordings from the 80's (e.g. George Michael's Faith album) do not exist anywhere in what would be considered decent quality and what was heard in the studio can never again be reconstituted. DDD music production for CD ended up with recordings facing the audio equivalent of a bit perfect bitmap image being converted to a jpg, resized and saved as a jpg, rescaled and resaved as a jpg resaved as a jpg. Image blurring and loss of pixel resolution at each stage that can never be regained. Audio resolution was lost at every step of the process: Increase the kick drum track volume: digital interpolation and lost quality forever, and it is audible because at best they started with 16 bit 44.1 or 48 kHz DAT quality recordings. You are going off track. The title of the board is "DSD/SACD vs PCM - Engineering Reality". It's about current formats and usefulness. Vinyl is a legacy format. The only things that keeps Vinyl going are tangibles, memories, and existing collections. It's kind of like old style romance. Someday, CDs will be like this. DAT is a legacy format. So are wax cylinders. Regardless how bad 'George Michael's Faith album' has been preserved, Caruso is less well preserved. Got any audio recordings of George Washington? Until the historical revisionists get full control, George Washington will be more well remembered than George Michael.
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Mar 27, 2024 7:44:40 GMT -5
errrr... ignoring the glaringly obvious there: Vinyl should have gone that way 20+ years ago too. I can see how properly produced (and played) vinyl may have sounded better than the earliest digital music released on CD - exclusively due to our lack of knowledge about how to capture and manipulate digital data. but that hasn't been true for years. (It saddens me that some recordings from the 80's (e.g. George Michael's Faith album) do not exist anywhere in what would be considered decent quality and what was heard in the studio can never again be reconstituted. DDD music production for CD ended up with recordings facing the audio equivalent of a bit perfect bitmap image being converted to a jpg, resized and saved as a jpg, rescaled and resaved as a jpg resaved as a jpg. Image blurring and loss of pixel resolution at each stage that can never be regained. Audio resolution was lost at every step of the process: Increase the kick drum track volume: digital interpolation and lost quality forever, and it is audible because at best they started with 16 bit 44.1 or 48 kHz DAT quality recordings. New SACD players are disk are still available. As long as MoFi and others still produce new content, they will sell. mofi.com/collections/new-releasesIf they were not selling it all, they wouldn't make new content or hardware. SACD, DSD files are only sold to folks who have nice systems and who want it. It's too easy to bash something you don't get or understand. Is it a commercial failure compared to the CD? Absolutely. It is far from the dustbin. At least with SACD/DSD it didn't require a whole system redesign. How many people truly have audiophile grade Atmos systems? What is the market share on that? I want everyone to play whatever format their heart and budget desires. All formats should be viewed realistically and truthfully. In our world, lies sell as easily as truth - often More easily. Remember, the Title of the board is "DSD/SACD vs PCM - Engineering Reality". If you have some information that the Board or the OP doesn't understand, please post it. FTR - I own many SACDs and Hi resolution PCM recordings; both in 2 channel and multi-channel. Some are the same recordings in SACD and PCM. I enjoy them all. SACD is Not better and presents system limitations that require conversion to PCM to be useful - bass management, Dirac, other room correction, PEQ... Blu-ray audio in any hi-rez PCM format is user and budget friendly, and just as hi-rez as any DSD/SACD. Few SACDs, or DSDs, start out as DSD. Almost all had their beginnings in analog or PCM. DSD cannot improve the analog or PCM provenance of a recording. DSD is like an 'in house' archive system that was intended for the preservation and control of intellectual property - Intellectual property that was recorded in other formats - formats that were much lower resolution than the formats available today. Its application has been extended Long past its usefulness.
|
|
turner
Sensei
Enjoy the music, not the gear.
Posts: 133
|
Post by turner on Mar 27, 2024 7:57:22 GMT -5
errrr... ignoring the glaringly obvious there: Vinyl should have gone that way 20+ years ago too. I can see how properly produced (and played) vinyl may have sounded better than the earliest digital music released on CD - exclusively due to our lack of knowledge about how to capture and manipulate digital data. but that hasn't been true for years. (It saddens me that some recordings from the 80's (e.g. George Michael's Faith album) do not exist anywhere in what would be considered decent quality and what was heard in the studio can never again be reconstituted. DDD music production for CD ended up with recordings facing the audio equivalent of a bit perfect bitmap image being converted to a jpg, resized and saved as a jpg, rescaled and resaved as a jpg resaved as a jpg. Image blurring and loss of pixel resolution at each stage that can never be regained. Audio resolution was lost at every step of the process: Increase the kick drum track volume: digital interpolation and lost quality forever, and it is audible because at best they started with 16 bit 44.1 or 48 kHz DAT quality recordings. You are going off track. The title of the board is "DSD/SACD vs PCM - Engineering Reality". It's about current formats and usefulness. Vinyl is a legacy format. The only things that keeps Vinyl going are tangibles, memories, and existing collections. It's kind of like old style romance. Someday, CDs will be like this. DAT is a legacy format. So are wax cylinders. Regardless how bad 'George Michael's Faith album' has been preserved, Caruso is less well preserved. Got any audio recordings of George Washington? Until the historical revisionists get full control, George Washington will be more well remembered than George Michael. I'm going off track and you bring up vinyl? Um... ok. CDs sales are already coming back. www.whathifi.com/news/cds-are-back-compact-disc-sales-just-rose-for-the-first-time-in-17-yearsAs far as vinyl goes, it's more than just tangible memories. New turn table owners and collectors are saving the industry. People who weren't old enough to even remember them the first time around. Vinyl has a sound that people like. I personally like some jazz, The Beatles, Norah Jones on vinyl over digital. Ultimately, I think consumers are starting to notice a difference between owning physical media and streaming. They are not the same. Vinyl has huge art and inserts and CDs have a smaller version. Tapping a screen just isn't the same. As far as SACD/DSD goes. It has a unique sound that sounds very good. I'm not going to pretend to fully understand the engineering behind it, but I've heard the it's all in the mastering comparing DSD to PCM for over a decade now. To me, that is a bit of a cop out answer. I've compared an older Oppo SACD player that converted to PCM and newer 4K BluRay / SACD player that has DSD out (and a DSD compatible AVR obviously) and the DSD sounds better IMO.
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Mar 27, 2024 8:11:47 GMT -5
You are going off track. The title of the board is "DSD/SACD vs PCM - Engineering Reality". It's about current formats and usefulness. Vinyl is a legacy format. The only things that keeps Vinyl going are tangibles, memories, and existing collections. It's kind of like old style romance. Someday, CDs will be like this. DAT is a legacy format. So are wax cylinders. Regardless how bad 'George Michael's Faith album' has been preserved, Caruso is less well preserved. Got any audio recordings of George Washington? Until the historical revisionists get full control, George Washington will be more well remembered than George Michael. I'm going off track and you bring up vinyl? Um... ok. CDs sales are already coming back. www.whathifi.com/news/cds-are-back-compact-disc-sales-just-rose-for-the-first-time-in-17-yearsAs far as vinyl goes, it's more than just tangible memories. New turn table owners and collectors are saving the industry. People who weren't old enough to even remember them the first time around. Vinyl has a sound that people like. I personally like some jazz, The Beatles, Norah Jones on vinyl over digital. Ultimately, I think consumers are starting to notice a difference between owning physical media and streaming. They are not the same. Vinyl has huge art and inserts and CDs have a smaller version. Tapping a screen just isn't the same. As far as SACD/DSD goes. It has a unique sound that sounds very good. I'm not going to pretend to fully understand the engineering behind it, but I've heard the it's all in the mastering comparing DSD to PCM for over a decade now. To me, that is a bit of a cop out answer. I've compared an older Oppo SACD player that converted to PCM and newer 4K BluRay / SACD player that has DSD out (and a DSD compatible AVR obviously) and the DSD sounds better IMO. I didn't introduce the discussion about 'vinyl'. This is not a vinyl thread. Whatever you believe about formats is OK with me. I'm format agnostic concerning audio opinions. I have my own yet try to not become religiously attached to them. It's the music that impresses me... Or Not.
|
|
turner
Sensei
Enjoy the music, not the gear.
Posts: 133
|
Post by turner on Mar 27, 2024 8:27:35 GMT -5
I'm going off track and you bring up vinyl? Um... ok. CDs sales are already coming back. www.whathifi.com/news/cds-are-back-compact-disc-sales-just-rose-for-the-first-time-in-17-yearsAs far as vinyl goes, it's more than just tangible memories. New turn table owners and collectors are saving the industry. People who weren't old enough to even remember them the first time around. Vinyl has a sound that people like. I personally like some jazz, The Beatles, Norah Jones on vinyl over digital. Ultimately, I think consumers are starting to notice a difference between owning physical media and streaming. They are not the same. Vinyl has huge art and inserts and CDs have a smaller version. Tapping a screen just isn't the same. As far as SACD/DSD goes. It has a unique sound that sounds very good. I'm not going to pretend to fully understand the engineering behind it, but I've heard the it's all in the mastering comparing DSD to PCM for over a decade now. To me, that is a bit of a cop out answer. I've compared an older Oppo SACD player that converted to PCM and newer 4K BluRay / SACD player that has DSD out (and a DSD compatible AVR obviously) and the DSD sounds better IMO. I didn't introduce the discussion about 'vinyl'. This is not a vinyl thread. Whatever you believe about formats is OK with me. I'm format agnostic concerning audio opinions. I have my own yet try to not become religiously attached to them. It's the music that impresses me... Or Not. Are you agnostic because you haven't listened to different formats? Or that you can't tell a difference? From my experience, the format isn't what makes music great, but I have my favorites in CD,SACD,Vinly because of how they were mastered or how they sound. I would never want to limit myself to just streaming or CDs at this point. I feel like there are two camps. Those that believe that PCM is all we need (regardless of mastering or how it sounds) and those that have experience actually listening. Years/decades of listening and experience. I am fully aware that short term placebo effects can happen in short term and or different isn't better. Years listening on the same system with different formats and mastering can reveal better sound on different formats. Even different releases on CD of the same album can sound different, and in some cases a lot different.
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Mar 27, 2024 8:35:55 GMT -5
I didn't introduce the discussion about 'vinyl'. This is not a vinyl thread. Whatever you believe about formats is OK with me. I'm format agnostic concerning audio opinions. I have my own yet try to not become religiously attached to them. It's the music that impresses me... Or Not. Are you agnostic because you haven't listened to different formats? Or that you can't tell a difference? From my experience, the format isn't what makes music great, but I have my favorites in CD,SACD,Vinly because of how they were mastered or how they sound. I would never want to limit myself to just streaming or CDs at this point. I feel like there are two camps. Those that believe that PCM is all we need (regardless of mastering or how it sounds) and those that have experience actually listening. Years/decades of listening and experience. I am fully aware that short term placebo effects can happen in short term and or different isn't better. Years listening on the same system with different formats and mastering can reveal better sound on different formats. Even different releases on CD of the same album can sound different, and in some cases a lot different. As I stated - "I'm format agnostic concerning audio opinions.". Even yours. The title of this board is "DSD/SACD vs PCM - Engineering Reality". Try to understand this. If you want to have a "My Opinion Is Better Than Your Opinion" board, please start one.
|
|
turner
Sensei
Enjoy the music, not the gear.
Posts: 133
|
Post by turner on Mar 27, 2024 8:45:49 GMT -5
Are you agnostic because you haven't listened to different formats? Or that you can't tell a difference? From my experience, the format isn't what makes music great, but I have my favorites in CD,SACD,Vinly because of how they were mastered or how they sound. I would never want to limit myself to just streaming or CDs at this point. I feel like there are two camps. Those that believe that PCM is all we need (regardless of mastering or how it sounds) and those that have experience actually listening. Years/decades of listening and experience. I am fully aware that short term placebo effects can happen in short term and or different isn't better. Years listening on the same system with different formats and mastering can reveal better sound on different formats. Even different releases on CD of the same album can sound different, and in some cases a lot different. As I stated - "I'm format agnostic concerning audio opinions.". Even yours. The title of this board is "DSD/SACD vs PCM - Engineering Reality". Try to understand this. If you want to have a "My Opinion Is Better Than Your Opinion" board, please start one. I don't believe it can be proven either way. Even professionals can't agree. PSAudio often states that DSD is better. If you can't trust your own ears or experience, than what is the point? Also, slapping years and decades of experience as opinion is bit of an insult and diminishing actual experience with nonsensical arm chair arguing. At some point it's just a straw man argument.
|
|
|
Post by bayderll on Mar 29, 2024 5:18:59 GMT -5
I don’t really know what I’m doing so please excuse me if this is a duplicate posting:
Well, I’m learning how to navigate around this forum. It's a tad different from da Naim Forum.
Bricks, LP 12, Active 280s, Naim, 250s etc.
In sum, I always thought there was a direct relationship between price and quality. For what little I know, I find da former to be true.
Thanks Kieth, I remember speaking to you on da phone, you really beat me up bad, but I did learn something!
And yes Protean Force, I think:
“ 1. SACDs frequently sound different - and often better - than the equivalent CD release (But that's frequently because they are mastered differently - since SACDS are always intended for "the audiophile market").
2. The XMC-1 is always going to report what is being sent to it. So, if it says it's getting PCM 5.1 then that's what the player is sending to it. You need to look for some settings on the Magnetar. You will probably find an option listed as something like: "Play DSD from SACDs as PCM / DSD ? " Or possible: "Play DSD via HDMI as PCM / DSD ?"
Thanks to you guys the readings are perfect and I tried all options:
Magnetar 900
5.1 Analog rca King Cobra XLR 2 Channel 32 bit - King Cobra 5.1 PCM SS 5.1 dtsHD 24 bit*****~ 4K Ultra BDP SACD PCM SACD DSD******** 5.1 multi ch.
Good wine, Good People, Great Music
Read out on both components:
XCM 1 - 4K Audio: dtshd MA 5.1 48kHz 24bit Video: 2160P/24 12 bits
(XCM 1 - SACD)
Audio: HDMI 5. 5.1 DSD. 2.8224Mkhz 1 bit Video: 2160P/60 12bits
(Magnetar 900)
Track type: SACD DSD Channel Type: Multi ch. 2.8M hz
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Mar 29, 2024 5:44:43 GMT -5
I don’t really know what I’m doing so please excuse me if this is a duplicate posting: Well, I’m learning how to navigate around this forum. It's a tad different from da Naim Forum. Bricks, LP 12, Active 280s, Naim, 250s etc. In sum, I always thought there was a direct relationship between price and quality. For what little I know, I find da former to be true. Thanks Kieth, I remember speaking to you on da phone, you really beat me up bad, but I did learn something! And yes Protean Force, I think: “ 1. SACDs frequently sound different - and often better - than the equivalent CD release (But that's frequently because they are mastered differently - since SACDS are always intended for "the audiophile market"). 2. The XMC-1 is always going to report what is being sent to it. So, if it says it's getting PCM 5.1 then that's what the player is sending to it. You need to look for some settings on the Magnetar. You will probably find an option listed as something like: "Play DSD from SACDs as PCM / DSD ? " Or possible: "Play DSD via HDMI as PCM / DSD ?" Thanks to you guys the readings are perfect and I tried all options: Magnetar 900 5.1 Analog rca King Cobra XLR 2 Channel 32 bit - King Cobra 5.1 PCM SS 5.1 dtsHD 24 bit*****~ 4K Ultra BDP SACD PCM SACD DSD******** 5.1 multi ch. Good wine, Good People, Great Music Read out on both components: XCM 1 - 4K Audio: dtshd MA 5.1 48kHz 24bit Video: 2160P/24 12 bits (XCM 1 - SACD) Audio: HDMI 5. 5.1 DSD. 2.8224Mkhz 1 bit Video: 2160P/60 12bits (Magnetar 900) Track type: SACD DSD Channel Type: Multi ch. 2.8M hz If you want to directly answer someone’s post, click ‘Quote’ at the right top of their post. Then, start your response above or below their post box. If you mess it up, you can always edit your response with the 'Edit' button, which is right next to the 'Quote' button. The names “Sensei’, ‘Seeker of Truth’, ‘Protean Force’, are just titles based on how many posts a person has written. Their avatar name is just above the title. Example – My title is ‘Protean Force’. My avatar name is PaulBe. PaulBe is specific to me. Protean Force could be anyone within a post count range. I guess the title ‘Protean Force’ is supposed to make me, PaulBe, feel more powerful in a comic book sort of way. I figure a 12 year old made this blog program. If you want to directly decode SACD/DSD, your player should output ‘bitstream’ into your XMC-1 over HDMI instead of PCM. This will also limit some features of the processor. See your manual.
|
|
|
Post by bayderll on Mar 29, 2024 13:32:14 GMT -5
I don’t really know what I’m doing so please excuse me if this is a duplicate posting: Well, I’m learning how to navigate around this forum. It's a tad different from da Naim Forum. Bricks, LP 12, Active 280s, Naim, 250s etc. In sum, I always thought there was a direct relationship between price and quality. For what little I know, I find da former to be true. Thanks Kieth, I remember speaking to you on da phone, you really beat me up bad, but I did learn something! And yes Protean Force, I think: “ 1. SACDs frequently sound different - and often better - than the equivalent CD release (But that's frequently because they are mastered differently - since SACDS are always intended for "the audiophile market"). 2. The XMC-1 is always going to report what is being sent to it. So, if it says it's getting PCM 5.1 then that's what the player is sending to it. You need to look for some settings on the Magnetar. You will probably find an option listed as something like: "Play DSD from SACDs as PCM / DSD ? " Or possible: "Play DSD via HDMI as PCM / DSD ?" Thanks to you guys the readings are perfect and I tried all options: Magnetar 900 5.1 Analog rca King Cobra XLR 2 Channel 32 bit - King Cobra 5.1 PCM SS 5.1 dtsHD 24 bit*****~ 4K Ultra BDP SACD PCM SACD DSD******** 5.1 multi ch. Good wine, Good People, Great Music Read out on both components: XCM 1 - 4K Audio: dtshd MA 5.1 48kHz 24bit Video: 2160P/24 12 bits (XCM 1 - SACD) Audio: HDMI 5. 5.1 DSD. 2.8224Mkhz 1 bit Video: 2160P/60 12bits (Magnetar 900) Track type: SACD DSD Channel Type: Multi ch. 2.8M hz If you want to directly answer someone’s post, click ‘Quote’ at the right top of their post. Then, start your response above or below their post box. If you mess it up, you can always edit your response with the 'Edit' button, which is right next to the 'Quote' button. The names “Sensei’, ‘Seeker of Truth’, ‘Protean Force’, are just titles based on how many posts a person has written. Their avatar name is just above the title. Example – My title is ‘Protean Force’. My avatar name is PaulBe. PaulBe is specific to me. Protean Force could be anyone within a post count range. I guess the title ‘Protean Force’ is supposed to make me, PaulBe, feel more powerful in a comic book sort of way. I figure a 12 year old made this blog program. If you want to directly decode SACD/DSD, your player should output ‘bitstream’ into your XMC-1 over HDMI instead of PCM. This will also limit some features of the processor. See your manual.
|
|