intersting article about dsd quality degradation with DXD passage
http://www.stereophile.com/content/promates-worlds-first-dxd-download-store
http://www.stereophile.com/content/promates-worlds-first-dxd-download-store
thats interesting Bruce
this would appear to breakdown their whole raison d'être
any graphics to back that up per chance?
Peter has been a big proponent of DXD when it was first extablished as the editing mode for DSD. I will have to say he is incorrect when he starts talking about UHF frequency building up and starts exceeding Scarlet Book spec. This was true 10yr. ago. That's why we now record at 2x and 4x so we won't have that build-up and can do multi-track mixing or multiple conversions.
Is there any reason why they would not sell the music in a compressed archived format such as RAR?
Thought that would make sense, anyone messed around to see what saving one gets with 24/192 album or DXD (if downloaded from them)?
Late here and a fair amount to do so unfortunately will not get a chance to mess around with it myself.
Context here is not about streaming but those who buy/download to play tracks and albums.
Cheers
Orb
Not sure .rar would be a good fit for music. Same goes with .zip. Thus the flac, .ape. vw of this world
FLAC gives me an average compression ratio of about 0.65 with DXD files.
Besides the data reduction there's the advantage of checksum verification.
Maybe I am misunderstanding but that link says to me that one should use DXD instead of DSD to avoid the noise rather transcode from DSD to DXD; maybe this position has changed from the past.
Seems to me that DXD is PCM. End of discussion. It will take a lot to convince me that these higher and higher sampling rates make any difference at playback.
Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |