Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 106

Thread: Weiss Saracon

  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
    I understand folk consider higher sampling rates as providing higher time resolution, ...
    Higher sampling rates do not help with time resolution. Wordlength (i.e. SNR) is important for time resolution.

    Daniel

  2. #12
    Site Founder And Administrator amirm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    9,069
    Late comer to the thread but I have to go with Daniel's view here. We can see the climbing power in higher frequencies which tells us that it is due to noise shaping. SACD process creates incredible amount noise in the audible spectrum. The encoding then, shifts that to higher frequencies above 20 Khz that is supposed to be inaudible. Since we can then no longer differentiate between what is signal and what is bunched up quantization noise in the ultrasonic range, I don't see an issue with their decision to apply a gentle roll off.

    Put another way, one-bit DSD is a one-way encoding. Backing out its effect and getting back to PCM is impossible.

    But sure, having that programmable and letting the operator pick how much of that noise+signal should be preserved is a good feature request.
    Amir
    Founder, Madrona Digital Audio, Video, Home Automation
    Contributing Editor, Widescreen Review Magazine

  3. #13
    WBF Technical Expert (Computer Audio)
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    784
    A company like Channel Classics records in DSD.
    They use the Weiss software to convert to FLAC

    HIGH QUALITY DOWNLOADS (ALL TRACKS) PRICE
    Studio Master HD FLAC 24bit 192kHz (2,093.6MB) 20.00
    Studio Master FLAC 24bit 96kHz (1,265.4MB) 17.00
    CD quality FLAC 24bit 44.1kHz (642.9MB) 14.00
    MP3 MP3 320k 44.1kHz (153.2MB) 9.00
    If Bruce is right, buying the 24/192 is a waste of money.
    http://www.channelclassics.com/high-...tra-27108.html

  4. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent Kars View Post
    If Bruce is right, buying the 24/192 is a waste of money.
    Not necessarily. Maybe your DAC performs better at higher sampling rates.

    Daniel

  5. #15
    WBF Founding Member and Super Moderator RBFC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    4,371
    Quote Originally Posted by weiss2496 View Post
    Not necessarily. Maybe your DAC performs better at higher sampling rates.

    Daniel
    Daniel, welcome to WBF! I'd like to begin a discussion about the changes in performance of DACs with regard to sampling rate. I hope you'll add some information to the discussion.

    http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showth...6443#post56443

    Lee
    Lee Aldridge

    I post my own opinions except when posting as a moderator in green.

    http://www.fightingconcepts.com

  6. #16
    Addicted to Best!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,556
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent Kars View Post
    A company like Channel Classics records in DSD.
    They use the Weiss software to convert to FLAC



    If Bruce is right, buying the 24/192 is a waste of money.
    http://www.channelclassics.com/high-...tra-27108.html
    Not disagreeing but this is strange as any detailed editing (used to anyway) would require them to convert from DSD to PCM and then back to DSD again.
    From what I understand this was one of the reasons Linn moved away from their native DSD recording studio setup ages ago and to hirez PCM.

    That said as I mentioned in some other threads it seems there may be a bit of luck from the consumer end to whether the hirez track they purchased is done correctly and has high bandwidth information or just noise.
    Keith Howard developed some software to enable accurate analysing of what is recorded in an easy to read way; shows both highest amplitude and average over the whole frequency so any issues with the filter or any noise show up.
    From his experience around 40% of those he purchased (I admit it was not many albums and he states that) were not true hirez tracks (this was not Linn, although he also gave example how even they had to remove a whole batch of tracks that they sold for another studio that were not true hirez).
    So, if someone is into hirez tracks then TBH I would look to use some software to validate it and never rely on the company selling as even they can be caught out by other 3rd party studios whose albums-tracks they also sell - several hirez companies been caught out this way but one would hope they now have safeguards in place for their own validation.

    Cheers
    Orb
    Last edited by Orb; 06-25-2011 at 02:24 PM.

  7. #17
    WBF Technical Expert/Member Sponsor
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Monument, CO
    Posts
    3,056
    Quote Originally Posted by weiss2496 View Post
    Higher sampling rates do not help with time resolution. Wordlength (i.e. SNR) is important for time resolution.

    Daniel
    Uh, I think we said the same thing? Though I am not sure I completely agree, as it depends somewhat on the source and the system... We want higher rates for wider bandwidth in RADAR, LIDAR, and other pulse systems, as well as ELINT systems etc., and in those cases a faster sampling ADC can provide greater time resolution (in terms of being able to accurately resolve smaller time differences). In those systems, the edge matters, and a 5 GS/s 8-bit is better than a 100 MS/s 16-bit ADC for precisely placing a pulse edge in time.

    Wordlength and resolution are only quasi-related in my world, due primarily to two factors:
    1. The system "wordlength" is a term usually used by the DSP guys and may not correlate with what the ADC/DAC can do; and,
    2. Actual resolution, defined by the IEEE as ENOB although we use SNR. SINAD, and SFDR as well (among other things), is not always tightly coupled to the number of bits (specified resolution) of the converter. In the audio world (and beyond) there are plenty of cases of lower-resolution converters outperforming higher-resolution devices.

    Note I define things from an engineering background dealing with wideband RF/mW/mmW systems, not (always) as an audiophile...

    In any event, this is far afield of the original topic, and I've had enough debating for one week, so I'll back out. - Don
    Don Herman
    "After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley

  8. #18
    WBF Technical Expert (Pro Audio Production)/Member Sponsor Bruce B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    5,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent Kars View Post

    If Bruce is right, buying the 24/192 is a waste of money.
    Yes, I feel if a company that is using Saracon to convert DSD->PCM, then anything over 24/88.2 is a waste of money, even if it IS just noise.

    Quote Originally Posted by weiss2496 View Post
    The "different program" mentioned above obviously allows for aliasing.
    Daniel
    The "different program" is a Pyramix apodizing filter.
    Last edited by Bruce B; 08-03-2011 at 01:13 PM.
    Bruce A. Brown
    Puget Sound Studios
    Stereomojo reviewer
    Seattle, WA


    Even a blind squirrel gets a nut once in a while!

  9. #19
    WBF Technical Expert (Pro Audio Production)/Member Sponsor Bruce B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    5,168
    Quote Originally Posted by amirm View Post
    Late comer to the thread but I have to go with Daniel's view here. We can see the climbing power in higher frequencies which tells us that it is due to noise shaping. SACD process creates incredible amount noise in the audible spectrum. The encoding then, shifts that to higher frequencies above 20 Khz that is supposed to be inaudible. Since we can then no longer differentiate between what is signal and what is bunched up quantization noise in the ultrasonic range, I don't see an issue with their decision to apply a gentle roll off.
    Amir... 50-60dB/octave is not a gentle roll off. We have done extensive listening and feel it clouds the music/image. We have more "gentle" filters we use that sound more like the original source.
    Attached Images Attached Images   
    Bruce A. Brown
    Puget Sound Studios
    Stereomojo reviewer
    Seattle, WA


    Even a blind squirrel gets a nut once in a while!

  10. #20
    Addicted to Best! Phelonious Ponk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,341
    Jaded old geezer that I am, I yawn in the face of this stuff. I can't hear much above 12khz (and neither can most of the rest of you geezers), and what's there is noisy as hell, so if I could hear it, I wouldn't want to. I should thank Daniel for filtering it out. Thanks, Daniel.

    Tim

    PS: I can still hear a tube mic preamp and an old Gibson Jumbo on a decent recording, though, so I'm good.
    In high-end audio, you can't even fight an opinion with the facts.

Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Weiss DAC 202 review on Positive Feedback
    By Nicholas Bedworth in forum Weiss Digital Audio
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-28-2012, 02:14 PM
  2. Weiss Engineering INT 202 review posted on 6moons
    By Nicholas Bedworth in forum Weiss Digital Audio
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 10-07-2010, 05:16 AM
  3. Greetings from Basspig (Mark Weiss) from Connecticut
    By Mark (Basspig) Weiss in forum Introduce Yourself
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-05-2010, 06:01 AM
  4. Weiss Engineering DAC 202
    By Nicholas Bedworth in forum Weiss Digital Audio
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-27-2010, 06:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •