DFF and DSD-IFF, etc. - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 15th May 2007, 07:51 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Default DFF and DSD-IFF, etc.

Well, I jumped on the bandwagon and got me a Korg MR-1000. It is a very neat little unit with balanced i/o and (cough) usb 2.0 connectivity with Mac/PC. It includes Audiogate which converts and plays audio from the unit at any one of the various rates. My specific reason for buying? It was the shortest distance between me and the edge of DSD recording.

All is well and good. I leave in Tennessee, so I can walk outside my house with a field mixer and a couple of mics and this Korg unit and do some beautiful nature recording. The unit came with a carry bag w/ shoulder strap. xlr/trs in's located at the bottom of the bag, where velcro allows you to reach them with your input while you walk about.

Obviously, having spent just over a grand on it, I feel pretty good. Especially now that I snoop around and examine my dsd/dff editing and mixing options. I've read just about every Sony Sonoma, SADiE, Genex, Tascam, and Pyramix documentation availible. I've browsed nearly every site returned from searches on google.

in the long journey, I've had hopes dashed by the innovators. It seems as though the technology behind SACD and DSD is suffering from prosumer nit-picking, rather than from technical fault or lack of commercial viability. DVD-A purists are constantly searching for ways to 'outdo' SACD.

Why couldn't these two formats co-exist in the market, I wonder? Isn't Blockbuster stocking their shelves with Blu-Ray and DVD?

The reality of my situation, and of the situation i imagine more people are getting into, is that we want to edit and mix mutliple channels of DSD audio - with PCM style interfacing and waveform imaging, outboard hardware that doesn't require 8u of rack space, and perhaps even the ability to mix in surround formats.

Why, oh why, must this technology cost $21,000 the bare minimum?

Here's my real question to you fine people:
is anyone out there developing DSD-related software/hardware? I don't care if its you and your garage, I want to know more about what you are doing. If someone is onto something cool, I am not above financing development.

like this: http://www.jamminpower.com/PDF/DSD%2...g%20System.htm

Am I an entrepeneur? No. I don't want to make money with something like this. Its a technology with possibilities that I care about and cannot place a value on. The reason for me wanting to pursue "underground" DSD innovation is because I want to take this technology out of the hands of multi-national corporations who lack the cojones to push forward, despite projected market 'viability.'

And while I am not an engineer or designer, I realize and understand that the people who are will ultimately decide on what products/components/general technologies are availbe in the future.

So if anyone out there is up to anything, let me know. Conversely, if anyone has any experiements they'd like me to try with the MR-1000 or the included software, don't be shy.

thanks, and sorry as hell for the protracted post.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 12:22 AM   #2
peufeu is offline peufeu  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Lyon, France
Yeah, why ?

Because 24/192 is better than DSD in every way ? Of course, but this is only part of the answer.

You can't edit, mix, or do any processing in DSD, since it is a 1-bit format. Computers can't think in 1-bit. They have to convert to PCM and back. Which is why they introduced DXD which is the same frequency, but coded as ... PCM of course (8 bits I think).

Processing that stuff is much more complicated than processing PCM, and since very few people will use it since SACD is diying anyway, the costs are huge.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 12:43 AM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: .
Quote:
Originally posted by peufeu
Which is why they introduced DXD which is the same frequency, but coded as ... PCM of course (8 bits I think).
Not from Sony it isn't. DXD is 24 bits at 352k8.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 04:07 AM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
I was under the impression the 24/192 is compressed audio.

Doesn't sound like 1-bit to me. Even if SACD is collapsing, I'd still rather archive my important mixes to DSD-IFF. I can always down-convert it to 192, or any other inferior PCM-based data format, later.

If I'm not mistaken, there are indeed DSD editors which do not jump between the two. SADiE? Not for 20+ grand, they wouldn't jerk you around like that.

Thanks for the real warm reception. Hope you figure yours out.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 11:51 AM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: .
As it appear that even Sony have given up on native 1-bit editing, as seems probable with the introduction of DXD, then it seems most likely that native 1-bit editors are destined to remain rare and expensive beasts.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 12:30 PM   #6
peufeu is offline peufeu  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Lyon, France
> I was under the impression the 24/192 is compressed audio.

Depends on what format you use to store it...
You could also say that all audio formats are lossy compressions of reality, which is true

> If I'm not mistaken, there are indeed DSD editors which do not jump between the two.

Nope. It is not possible to do any signal processing on DSD without converting it to PCM* first and then back to DSD. The only thing you could do on DSD would be copypaste (ie. splicing).

* = That doesn't impose any special sample rate on the PCM, processing could be done in 24/192 or floating point samples at the DSD rate... depends on CPU power available.

Even a simple volume change would need converting 1-bit to, say, floating point, then multiplying by your volume change, then converting back to 1-bit.

And since the conversion of DSD <-> anything else is lossy in both ways, the more conversions you do, the more you lose.

DXD is just PCM with less bits and more sample rate.

If you use a software mixer, then internally it works in PCM, obviously, and then converts to DSD. So, archiving in PCM would make more sense than archiving in DSD then re-converting back to PCM later...

If you have a mike ADC that outputs DSD only, then of course it makes more sense to archive the raw DSD data.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 04:09 PM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: .
Quote:
Originally posted by peufeu

DXD is just PCM with less bits and more sample rate.
WRONG.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 04:38 PM   #8
peufeu is offline peufeu  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Lyon, France
Quote:
Originally posted by rfbrw


WRONG.
I love your precise, to the point and detailed explanations

OK, I suck, I got the number of bits wrong, I mixed it with another format (forgot the name) which is 8 bits at very high sample rate... So DXD is 24 bits at 352.8 kHz.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 05:34 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: .
Quote:
Originally posted by peufeu


I love your precise, to the point and detailed explanations
That is due to the superior discipline of a fixed-point mindset. None of that sloppy floating-point overflow-what-overflow? nonsense.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2007, 08:46 PM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Checks out. I guess I just needed to read up more.

Don't you just love it when uneducated newbies start in on this topic?

Its a shame, though. Its not that I'm trying to wave a flag for one side or another, but I am interested in hearing and working past 192. 5.2 just seemed like a great step beyond.

I couldn't care less what Sony does, honestly. I don't believe that corporations will always pave the way for technology or progress. New ways of making money? Sure.

However, I've now made a few recordings at the MR-1000's top format. Listening to it over my monitor system is quite wonderful - it is like you are there. There is so much depth I feel like I can measure spacial distances between the bird song and the creeking trees and the Cumberland River a mile out. I've spent so much time researching Pyramix and SADiE and discWELDER ... I started dreaming about it.

I want a 7.1 channel 1-bit recording of rain falling around my old house in Seattle. I wish that didn't sound so dumb, but its 100% true. I can't stop thinking about it.

I figured I'd sign up for this message board and throw my question out there. If indeed there was an underground answer to this problem, it'd be here.

Sorry to waste your time with a null issue. I suppose I embody a major problem with prosumer technology - I'm into it, but don't understand it near enough.

Thanks for your time.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:00 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2