Comparison: SACD & 24/192hz - Page 3 - 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 27th December 2011, 03:31 PM   #21
Wombat is offline Wombat  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Wombat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic_real_one View Post
The truth is that the DSD sounds exactly like analog LP/reel-to-reel. With less noise and less distortion. I have PCM 96k and it does not sounds the same.
The truth?
Thats what i mean with unfounded claims. Sounds like DSD gives you some esotheric feelings. Canīt argue with that
__________________
If time permits - stuff some parsley in your ears and listen how it grows!
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2011, 03:42 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
That picture does not show infinite bandwidth on analog side. LP and RtR recordings can get into the 50kHz easily.

Nobody on the "PCM" side accepts the fact that, ultimatelly, any modern delta-sigma DAC will convert the PCM to DSD before the actual DAC conversion stage.
The same for any modern ADC - they all digitize the signal as DSD and latter convert it to PCM.
From WM8786 ADC page:
Quote:
Stereo 24-bit multi-bit sigma-delta ADCs are used with digital audio output word lengths of 16 to 32 bits, and sampling rates from 8kHz to 192kHz.
And yes, they use noise-shaping too...

So the discussion is moot... ADC/DAC manufacturers already decided.

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 27th December 2011 at 03:52 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2011, 04:00 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Personally, I have yet to be able to do a verifiably valid comparison between CD, DVD-A, SACD & etc., due to the problem of MASTERING engineers, who can't seem to resist messing with the sound of a recording when doing the higher res version("re-mastered" is almost always a warning label, in my book). Any time I've found something in higher res that's also on CD, comparison is completely torpedoed when I find that they are inevitably two completely different mastering jobs, with different EQ, or mixing or even with noise reduction applied. For a truly valid comparison to be made, I would need to know that both the CD-res and higher-res tracks were done from the same *analog* master or simultaneously from the same live performance, through entirely equal quality preamps & a/d converters, and with no other conversions in the chain before getting to final media. I just DON'T see this ever happening, unless one of my best recording engineer clients takes on the challenge, and has enough time to actually do it. Until then, I am not, and can't be convinced that any human's perception of advantage of one versus the other is not being totally skewed by differences in the mastering & recording signal chain. I don't disbelieve that human hearing extends well past 20kc with real sounds(rather than traditional pure tone testing), but don't believe that, in general practice, the recording industry is capable of taking proper advantage of the higher res formats beyond the extent that could easily be heard perfectly accurately in CD format.

Last edited by stephensank; 27th December 2011 at 04:02 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2011, 07:23 PM   #24
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
most "flagship" audio ADC, DAC chips today are multi-bit delta-sigma, not DSD

multi-bit delta sigma is related but has fundamental advantages over DSD single bit conversion, the average shaped noise amplitude is reduced by the multi-bit internal subcircuit DAC resolution
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2011, 07:34 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephensank View Post
due to the problem of MASTERING engineers
You can try out Tacet label
TACET-Website - english

Harmonia Mundi also very good harmonia mundi
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2011, 07:58 PM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post
most "flagship" audio ADC, DAC chips today are multi-bit delta-sigma, not DSD
Mathematically it does not matter what buzzwords are used by electronic engineers. Digitizing means that low pass filter in frequency domain must be applied. It results in decimation literally.

The higher is the sample rate the more accurate interpolation can be done during playback. DSD sample rate is MHz while PCM is KHz. No tricks pure mathematic like 2x2=4.

BTW I am owning Wadia transport and Wadia decoding computer and absolutely happy with RedBook playback many years already. But I had stopped buying RedBook's several years ago only SACD instead.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2011, 08:14 PM   #27
Vil is offline Vil
diyAudio Member
 
Vil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Europe
Quote:
Originally Posted by suntechnik View Post
Mathematically it does not matter what buzzwords are used by electronic engineers. Digitizing means that low pass filter in frequency domain must be applied. It results in decimation literally.

The higher is the sample rate the more accurate interpolation can be done during playback. DSD sample rate is MHz while PCM is KHz. No tricks pure mathematic like 2x2=4..
Really ? So you say 1bit DSD = 24 bit PCM , or 1=24 (if we compare just sampling rate). I don't think so .
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th December 2011, 08:30 PM   #28
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
actually the terms do mean a lot to those understanding the tech, current devices

128x, 256x oversampling rates are available in current flagship audio converters - exceeding DSD sample rate when running at 192k, 256x

and they are multibit internal so that they are aquiring ~ 5 bits per sample vs DSD one bit - that means less interpolation by a factor of the multi-bit resolution

so modern multi-bit high OS delta-sigma chips can actually beat DSD on all of the hyped SACD sales literature "specs" - especially when the 50 kHz 6th order (or higher order) reconstruction filter is applied to control the rising shaped DSD noise

Last edited by jcx; 27th December 2011 at 08:32 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 12:37 AM   #29
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
There is no point in having multiple bits if the ANALOG part cannot provide more ACTUAL resolution - limited by linearity, distortion and noise.

The absolute best we have today in PCM domain is almost at the level of 22bit (that means 132dB - I still have to see actually a DAC that will provide this level of THD+N) and this at 88-96kHz samplerate. That's exactly what DSD provides easily too...

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 28th December 2011 at 12:39 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 01:11 AM   #30
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
there's no obvious "need" for more than 44/16 with noise shaped dither

but I thought the question was SACD vs hi res PCM

while you've been spouting decade old SACD/DSD sales literature talking points I've been pointing out current multi-bit delta sigma converters have advantages both theoretical and practical over the DSD process

whatever the practical limits of audibilty or analog circuit resolution, today's best multi-bit delta-sigma converters can capture/reproduce more information, at higher ovesampling frequency than DSD, and with lower jitter sensitivity while avoiding a zoo of nonlinear effects in the delta-sigma processing by the fact of having multi-bit internal converters vs DSD single bit

SACD was heavily hyped, its "real" contribution was difficult to break copy protection - it has been technically surpassed by "hi res" multi-bit PCM
not suprising after a decade with Moore's Law still working, chip manufacturer's still seeing (some) potential profit in audio converters

Last edited by jcx; 28th December 2011 at 01:16 AM.
  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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WTB :Sony SCD1 SACD or SCD777 SACD main circuit board and parts Stump Swap Meet 0 27th November 2011 01:56 AM
Are there any DIP 24/96 or 24/192 ADCs and I2P to FireWire Codecs? BoilermakerFan Digital Source 0 21st July 2008 08:27 PM
LP, CD, DVD-A & SACD comparison Cloth Ears Everything Else 0 28th March 2007 11:40 PM
comparison of t-amp and any stereo amp in 500-1000$ price range? irss Class D 7 31st January 2006 07:35 PM
advice on soundcards that upsample to 24/192Hz jamescb01 Digital Source 0 29th November 2004 06:56 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:04 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Đ1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2