DSD comparison to PCM.

opus111 · Feb 14, 2013

dallasjustice said:
Which one of those converters is multi-bit?

As far as I can see, none of the A/Ds Bruce mentioned there is multi-bit, they're all S-D, heavily oversampled, noise-shaped.

<edit> Slip up, changed D/A to A/D

Bruce B · Feb 14, 2013

opus111 said:
As far as I can see, none of the D/As Bruce mentioned there is multi-bit, they're all S-D, heavily oversampled, noise-shaped.

What?? I used these as A/D converters..... I never mentioned DAC's

opus111 · Feb 14, 2013

Ah, sorry Bruce I'll amend my post. Thanks for the heads-up.

<edit> Checking back I see you mentioned DAD AX24 as the converter to dallas' original question, presumably you used this as D/A as it contains both. Its D/A section is also S-D.

manisandher · Feb 14, 2013

opus111 said:
Does anyone have a hypothesis, any hypothesis at all however far-out, for why PCM's dynamics might be exaggerated?

And if you do, can you then explain why my PCM recordings don't have exaggerated dynamics compared to the original analog? The PCM recordings really do capture the essence of my vinyl beautifully, which is all I'm after.

Mani.

TBone · Feb 14, 2013

manisandher said:
And some would say that your other DACs are at fault, 'distorting' the sound in some way. OK, but when you have the original analog to hand (which I do), this argument loses all merit.

IME, a 24/192 PCM recording made on a true multi-bit non-oversampling ADC (not many of those around that are 24/192-capable), played back on a true multi-bit non-oversampling DAC (not many of those around that are 24/192-capable either!) sounds close enough to the analog for me not to care about any difference that may exist.

Mani.

Actually, the way I once perceived the sonic differences between 16/44 and vinyl has change considerably since I started recording LP to CDR.

tb1

TBone · Feb 14, 2013

manisandher said:
And if you do, can you then explain why my PCM recordings don't have exaggerated dynamics compared to the original analog? The PCM recordings really do capture the essence of my vinyl beautifully, which is all I'm after.

Mani.

Me too, although if anything, my 16/44 copies lose some dynamic contrast and certainly offer less dimensional capability, although I fully expect those issues to be minimized even further using 96/24 based recordings (or a better 16/44 recorder).

Audiophiles have, for far too long, judged PCM based on "CD quality" which has dismissed its true potential.

tb1

mep · Feb 14, 2013

TBone said:
Audiophiles have, for far too long, judged PCM based on "CD quality" which has dismissed its true potential.

tb1

Not true in my case. I own hi-rez files at 24/192 so I'm comparing the sound of those files against DSD and not comparing RB CD to DSD.

opus111 · Feb 14, 2013

mep said:
Not true in my case. I own hi-rez files at 24/192 so I'm comparing the sound of those files against DSD and not comparing RB CD to DSD.

Yet with a 'CD quality' (to me, ipod quality) DAC by all accounts.

dallasjustice · Feb 14, 2013

Bruce B said:
What?? I used these as A/D converters..... I never mentioned DAC's

I'm still not sure whether you are saying DSD is superior for capture AND playback. I would be willing to bet your MSB DAC does PCM better than your MPS5. Of course they are different price points, but then why does the MPS5 do DSD better than MSB? I would say its partly due to the multi bit design of the MSB lends itself more so to PCM than does the MPS5. Theres no best format for all DACs.

TBone · Feb 14, 2013

dallasjustice said:
Theres no best format for all DACs.

It's amazing how many digital based audiophiles I know kept chasing their audiophile tails trying to find that "perfect" DAC, which is the very reason I've long preferred top one-box players.

tb1

Bruce B · Feb 14, 2013

dallasjustice said:
I'm still not sure whether you are saying DSD is superior for capture AND playback. I would be willing to bet your MSB DAC does PCM better than your MPS5. Of course they are different price points, but then why does the MPS5 do DSD better than MSB? I would say its partly due to the multi bit design of the MSB lends itself more so to PCM than does the MPS5. Theres no best format for all DACs.

I believe what I said was that DSD was better on the MPS-5 and PCM was toss up between the MSB and PD.

opus111 · Feb 14, 2013

manisandher said:
And some would say that your other DACs are at fault, 'distorting' the sound in some way. OK, but when you have the original analog to hand (which I do), this argument loses all merit.

To be fair to John, his DACs are single chip 'economy' solutions (ES9023 and PCM5102) so yes, his other DACs are 'at fault' in this sense. As S-D DACs go though, they're jolly good bang-for-the-buck. AFAIK he's well aware of their deficiencies when up against top-end vinyl.

IME, a 24/192 PCM recording made on a true multi-bit non-oversampling ADC (not many of those around that are 24/192-capable), played back on a true multi-bit non-oversampling DAC (not many of those around that are 24/192-capable either!) sounds close enough to the analog for me not to care about any difference that may exist.

What's interesting is that there are, as you say, so few options available for those who want true multi-bit, rather than noise-shaped solutions. Your Phasure is using PCM1704 which wouldn't be as dynamic as TDA1541A, yet this latter one is limited to 16bits. So nobody has a solution with what I term 'segmented current source dynamics' at higher resolutions.

Incidentally, have you heard the Audial TDA1541A DAC up against your Phasure? Or the AMR CD-77?

Kal Rubinson · Feb 14, 2013

edorr said:
Opus111 was referring to premeditation in the context of "describing in language" of an observation, not "acting in response" to that observation. While you can argue the latter usually involves premeditation (i.e. a conscious thought process) the former in many cases does not.

Not so. One must elect to describe something in language and that requires cognition. Premeditation is a poor term since it larded with other implications.

However, I think your example of the fear driven response to a snake is way to restrictive as an example of non-premeditated response.

How can an example be too restrictive? Being an example implies that there are other expressions.

There are many examples of unlearned responses that do not involve premditation, for example the reflex to catch a falling object.

That is definitely learned behavior.

Secondly, there are learned non-premidated responses. I play squash and hit the ball without premeditation some of the time (mostly the defensive shots). The same is true for a a baseball player catching a ball coming at him at 90mph.

Agreed but it does require perceptual and cognitive processes although they are subconscious. Surely, you don't swing the same way for all balls.

The neurological process of each of these examples is probably different, but they have in common a lack of conscious thought process preceding the response (i.e premeditation).

But not all cognitive processing is conscious. That is why this is so thorny.

jkeny · Feb 14, 2013

manisandher said:
And some would say that your other DACs are at fault, 'distorting' the sound in some way. OK, but when you have the original analog to hand (which I do), this argument loses all merit.

Yes, I agree & I'm bearing this in mind when evaluating - that's why it's all preliminary impressions ATM. It's also why I'm bringing it to the friends house who has invited some other ears along. He also has an air-bearing TT & other TTs - the details of which escape me at the moment but I have always compared my offerings to this reference & found my offerings wanting

IME, a 24/192 PCM recording made on a true multi-bit non-oversampling ADC (not many of those around that are 24/192-capable), played back on a true multi-bit non-oversampling DAC (not many of those around that are 24/192-capable either!) sounds close enough to the analog for me not to care about any difference that may exist.

Mani.

Yes, Opus says more or less the same thing without the high-res bit.

Kal Rubinson · Feb 14, 2013

opus111 said:
Yep - the aim with sport is to enter the state called 'flow' where things arise and we attend to them without any conscious thought.

Right but that does not mean there is no thought (cognitive) process required.

dallasjustice · Feb 14, 2013

Bruce B said:
I believe what I said was that DSD was better on the MPS-5 and PCM was toss up between the MSB and PD.

Read post #20. Does that refresh the witness' memory? Something about MSB for PCM and PBD for DSD? I usually get paid for this level of harassment.

Kal Rubinson · Feb 14, 2013

rbbert said:
What would you recommend for those of us who grew up on a steady diet of analog and don't really care for the current state of analog or digital all that much??

The Way-Back machine.

jkeny · Feb 14, 2013

opus111 said:
To be fair to John, his DACs are single chip 'economy' solutions (ES9023 and PCM5102) so yes, his other DACs are 'at fault' in this sense. As S-D DACs go though, they're jolly good bang-for-the-buck. AFAIK he's well aware of their deficiencies when up against top-end vinyl.

Yes, indeed you are correct

I hope to also compare a NOS offering at the weekend if I can - a Metrum - still only 16/44 however & I know it has some shortcomings but it will give another datapoint.

opus111 · Feb 14, 2013

Kal Rubinson said:
Right but that does not mean there is no thought (cognitive) process required.

Perhaps there's misunderstanding over terms - as edorr has mentioned what I meant by 'thought' wasn't 'cognitive process' rather 'conscious thinking in language' or 'the voice in our head'. Does that help any? I didn't mean to say by 'unpremeditated' that we're unaware of cognition going on. I'll accept your clarification if you have a better way of describing 'unpremeditated'.

rbbert · Feb 14, 2013

Kal Rubinson said:
The Way-Back machine.

I'd prefer the Way-Forward machine, although I don't know what form that might take...

DSD comparison to PCM.

Banned

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Banned

Member Sponsor

New Member

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

Industry Expert, Member Sponsor

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor

Well-Known Member

Industry Expert, Member Sponsor

Banned

Well-Known Member

Similar threads