|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
115.188.11.47
In Reply to: RE: So much noise! posted by AbeCollins on February 15, 2015 at 16:07:44
Happy to hear new tech that's better. Until then, I'll keep collecting CDs, I think.
Big J
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."
Follow Ups:
Hi !
thanks a lot for the helpful reply.
the interesting point of this new approach is that promises much better sound even from the normal cds (!). Owning only cds i am intrigued.
English is not my language but they say that " there is so much more information inside a normal cd than what we normally hear playing back the cd with a normal pcm dac ".
As usual this kind of performance never come cheap.
Anyway it looks like a great technical achievement.
DSD promises a better soundstage that for me is very fascinating.
Then if also the PRAT is fine i am done.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 02/15/15
...vs this whole hi-res PCM or DSD vs redbook playback argument. A good recording and master can produce an excellent sounding CD.
Hi and yes but ...
every time i listen to analog, even so so one, i feel a sense of ease that with digital i get when there is a tube in the chain.
I do not like tubes in general, they are not accurate.
But i agree that they give "something" to digital.
From what i understand with SACD there is more of that ease, even without tubes. The music flows better ... very good detail ... very good ambience ... like with analog.
Now if i have understood well the video, this dac promises to give to pcm the same sense of ease.
Nevertheless i also read that some SACD sound "digital".
I strongly believe that this is for the dsp action of digital filters.
But SACD gives the opportunity to use analog filters, and that "analog" is the key i guess.
But in the next future more reviews will come and we will see if the approach is winning or not.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 02/16/15
For whatever reason, I found SACD to sound polite and sometimes almost artificially smooth. For file playback I prefer 24/96 PCM over DSD. For electronics, I seem to gravitate back to tubes even though I've had many solid-state and tube systems.
What is 'accurate'? If we go strictly by specs and measurements alone you'll find many awful sounding but 'accurate' systems. ;-)
Hi and thanks a lot for the always valuable advice.
If i understand well you get with the use of tubes that sense of "ease" that analog sources provide.
Maybe tubes are doing something to the digital sound. Some kind of filtering effect on some digital artifacts.
If video can be used as a reference, digital artifacts can be extremely shocking (i think to pixelation to name one).
Another story ...
i was fighting to get just an acceptable sound with a Rotel 970bx cd player from my cheap but decent rig.
No way ... the sound was hard, harsh and flat. Quite common with digital in my experience.
Then a friend of mine brought his Thorens to my flat.
I can only tell you the big problem was not the system ... was the source.
Immediately i heard music instead of sounds ...
And the system was completely solid state but with LPs it had even depth !!! unbelievable.
From that moment my love and hate relation with digital started.
One thing is evident to me. Digital is not completely understood.
But we have all the time in the world.
Have a nice day.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 02/17/15
1. pcm has brick wall filter at 1/2 sampling frequency unless it is replayed without one, in which case supersonic noise is fed back into the chain.
2. pcm has poorer impulse response (transient) due to brick wall filter.
3. dsd pushes noise out beyond the audible region of frequencies but may upset systems with poor ultrasonic noise tolerence. Only an analogue and more gentle filter is needed following the dac. It has much better transient response.
There is no absolute superiority in either system.
My own leaning is towards 352k 24 bit pcm and dsd 128/256 for better sound quality.
Hi and thanks a lot for the very valuable explanation.You say " dsd pushes noise out beyond the audible region of frequencies but may upset systems with poor ultrasonic noise tolerence. Only an analogue and more gentle filter is needed following the dac.
It has much better transient response."I think it is possible to have analog filter with very sharp slopes.
I mean filtering this ultrasonic noise should not be that difficult.
I have a cheap dac (Cambridge Audio) with different digital filters.
Any filter action is clearly audible ... no one is very nice.
I understand i am trivializing a lot the issue, but i think that the problem are digital filters. They ruin the sound.
Anyway it is just a matter of time. If the concept is sane we will see many converters based on the same approach very very soon.
PCM to DSD upsampling with analog filtering.
Maybe i am just an ignorant dreamer ...
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 02/16/15
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: