|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
174.127.112.97
In Reply to: RE: TAS Spencer Holbert's Shameful Admission. posted by RGA on April 07, 2014 at 18:20:53
What planet are you from? The ONLY folks that think a DAC is obsolete are reviewers..who regurgitate the marketing drivel they are handed by manufactures.The fact that 99.99999999 % of all the digital music anyone will ever own is in PCM, topping out at 192 kHz. The trail of embarrassing proclamations by the industry concerning digital music is lengthy, with Stereophile critics claiming as Far back as 2007 that physical media is dead...LOL!!!...and one jerk of a manufacturer 18 months ago claiming DXD would be the standard going forward. Apparently none of the recording and mastering studios got the memo,,lol
Robert Harley is an outright liar..he proclaimed in his famous editorial that long term loans are "good" for readers because they see what context a reviewer is reviewing in and it creates "consistency"' all with the notion that EVERY review has a complete list of associated equipment. They do not. Barely half off TAS reviews have this sidebar. There are some TAS reviewers that have NEVER revealed their reference systems,
Lastly..you are using a 14 year old DAC review to illustrate comparisons? What a joke. Shocker..Audio Note to boot. Of FAR more import are comparisons of sub $2000 DACs of today a fare more competitive market. A trust fund baby reviewer like Rochlin playing with expensive toys serves who exactly?
Edits: 04/07/14Follow Ups:
Read the first postings after ANY review of a DAC that doesn't support DSD.It's always the same: It doesn't do DSD. Strike it off my list!
Who cares if the average music lover has precisely zero recordings on DSD and in the next five years will acquire a similarly impressive no DSD recordings? Who cares if the sum total of DSD recordings worth owning, as one of my writers so succinctly put it, "can be counted on the fingers of one knee?" Who cares if, in the process of trying to shoe-horn DSD into a DAC to tick a box on the spec sheet, it ruins the sound of many budget DACs (which would, incidentally, be better served topping out at 24/96 in the vast majority of cases)? Who cares if the said DAC is hand-built by elven folk and costs as much as a small French village, or is made by the million and costs as much as a tube of Pringles?
It doesn't do DSD. Strike it off my list!
This is the same thing as the video enthusiasts' sudden and disasterous obsession with DVD-Audio and SACD in the early 2000s. They didn't develop an overnight interest in SACD and they sure as hell didn't get it from the magazines, who initially dismissed the inclusion of these 'audiophool' formats as a pointless specification chase. It came from the buyers, pure and simple. Over the course of about a month or two, it became functionally impossible to recommend or sell a DVD-Video player unless it had SACD and DVD-Audio support, and some very good players ended up as landfill as a result.
For my part, I'd like to see recommendations of DACs based on performance, not acronyms. But, if you like a DAC with DSD today, you are an industry-promoting shill; if you like a DAC that only does PCM, you're a luddite.
-
Editor, Hi-Fi Plus magazine, Lun-duhnn, Ingerland, innit
Edits: 04/09/14
Alan, excellent post! Maybe the post of the year for me concerning reality and perception.
Let's be clear.. there are currently approximately 12,000 SACD titles to choose from, dating back to circa 2000, and DVD-A are STILL being released in deluxe reissue packages AND in new releases. Steve Earl's latest album came with a DVD-A. The Jethro Tull and Yes reissues, and many more, came with DVD-As.
SACD is dead as far as major labels are concerned, but it is the realm of the boutique folks like MoFi, Audio Fidelity, and Analogue Productions.
One thing IMO that will slow the growth of any DSD download market is the requirement of a computer for playback. If and when file players can play DSD files from directly connected storage or via a network, that could be a game changer.
"The fact that 99.99999999 % of all the digital music anyone will ever own is in PCM, topping out at 192 kHz."
The tracks in my personal music library on my computer are 95% PCM and 5% DSD. These are essentially all the digital material that I have purchased over the decades. I guess we listen to different types of music.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I am not sure I understand your post.
I essentially said that 99% of all digital music owned by most people is in PCM..you say you have 95% PCM..how does this 4% differential to what I estimate account for different tastes in music, or anything else.
Whether 95% or 99%, should one base their entire system around an "upgrade" that accounts for 5% of their music library. I think not.
> > I essentially said that 99% of all digital music owned by most people is in PCM..you say you have 95% PCM.
Essentially? What you originally wrote was:
"99.99999999 % of all the digital music anyone will ever own is in PCM"
Tony Lauck qualifies as an "anyone". He has more than 1% DSD music. For someone
who is quick to jump on others' assertions, it seems you went overboard with yours.
There is a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in.
—Leonard Cohen
Actually I agree with you.
What I SHOULD have said is that MOST people's digital collection will be 95% PCM..and not used such an extreme number. It left the door open for hair splitting.
There is little or no extra manufacturing cost associated with adding DSD playback capability to most new DAC designs and there is an increasing availability of demonstration quality recordings appearing as DSD downloads. So it is not surprising that many new DACs oriented to the audiophile marketplace are including DSD capability.
One can question the benefits, but if the costs are low, why bother?
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I don't disagree.
What irks me, and the point I was trying to make, is that is silly to call a DAC "obsolete" or "non competitive" if it does not decode DSD. Far more important is how good does it sound.. the analog output stage, etc.
The audio press has somehow desperately latched on to this non existent "DSD Revolution" causing hysteria and getting to consumers to question their DACs value if it is not stamped "DSD Ready". Again the numbers don't lie as far as available titles.
I don't disagree. Indeed, if I hadn't already been in the market for a new DAC for other reasons, it's unlikely that I would have purchased a new DAC just because to play DSD, especially because I had no DSD files to play and would be facing a "chicken and egg" situation. Nor would I have paid a huge premium to check of the "DSD" box in my new selection. I did feel willing to pay a certain premium to satisfy my curiosity, however.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Understood.
I am ALL for DSD. But I refuse to buy the nonsense that the flood gates will open concerning available media and that DSD will enjoy anything approaching mainstream acceptance.
Where has this come from, or have you made it up?
Accurate number. There are currently less than 250 non classical DSD titles downloads for sale. Don't even bother to bring up ripped SACDs. That is a non starter.
Reality.
There are over 3500 titles not including archives.
....tick tock...still waiting for those links.....
Edits: 04/10/14
Looks to be more like 9000+, but I've not vetted the site.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Huh????? These are SACDs. I was specifically referencing DSD DOWNLOADs.
I MY SELF referenced the fact there were upwards of 12,000 SACD titles in print.
Somewhat confusing. The posts were somewhat cryptic, as fitting the style of some of the posters in the thread.
If it makes you feel better, I'll not be buying a single one of those 9000 SACDs, as they all come with DRM.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
My post: There are currently less than 250 non classical DSD titles downloads for sale. Don't even bother to bring up ripped SACDs. That is a non starter.
FMAKs response: There are over 3500 titles not including archives.
My previous post:. there are currently approximately 12,000 SACD titles to choose from, dating back to circa 2000...
FYI, I own approx. 1000 SACDs.
Please provide a link where I can find 3500 POPULAR music tiles in DSD to download. Please do not include classical. I will be waiting.
Were I to take him at his word (250 DSD titles) and 99.99999999% (10 9's) aren't DSD, then there have to be 250 x 10^10 = 2.5 trillion titles in all.
It looks like the music industry is a lot bigger than I thought. :-)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Man relax a little. Look I disagree with the long loans (free gear for indefinite periods) but the argument for it is at least plausible. Reviewers may be good writers but not able to afford "the absolute sound" so they need the tools to do the job.
So I get it. Their system should be listed. I don't want to waste time reading reviews from people who own stuff that imo sucks. Not relevant to me or helpful.
As for the example well I go with what I've heard and it was a fitting example of telling it like it is without holding back. And from an online magazine. Trust fund guys don't need to worry about advertising dollars and don't have to tread lightly.
"Look I disagree with the long loans (free gear for indefinite periods) but the argument for it is at least plausible"
Though the argument for not disclosing them to reader does not hold any water.
"Though the argument for not disclosing them to reader does not hold any water."
Agreed.
Hasn't Robert Harley stated in the past that his system consists of long term loans only? He doesn't buy a thing, he just waits for a couple of months until 'the next best thing' comes into his possession and then the cycle repeats itself.
Index.
Fax mentis incendium gloria cultum, et cetera, et cetera...
Memo bis punitor delicatum! It's all there, black and white,
clear as crystal! Blah, blah, and so on and so forth ...
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: