New digital file is meant to sound more analogue

[Rabs]

We all know that with digital sound, even though the format is very convenient it sounds much harsher on the ear than analogue....

 

BUT they have now invented a new type of file called DSD (Direct Stream Digital) which is meant to be the closest they have come to reproducing the analogue sound yet...

 

A DSD file is 30 times bigger than an MP3. DSD best captures the full range of the music and sounds most like an analogue tape recording.

 

 

Heres a BBC story

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27161894

 

But if you want to hear and skip that part, heres the web page with samples.

http://edu.bluecoastrecords.com/bbc

[Tman]

Very interesting Rabs.

 

Looks like DSD is much better than a wav file and way better then an mp3 sound wise. I just learned 2 weeks ago about the existence of FLAC.

In this article, they say themselves the downside is file size and also limited availability of players. It's very much like advances in technology in many arenas with huge continuous strides as long as people will purchase.

 

Soon standard players and computers will come equipped with the capability to play them as well as huge storage capacity and then audiophiles won't be the main audience. Analagous to transistor amplifiers which are continuously improving in their tube-like sound.

 

I have an idea for a new file that is made from a tape that will really sound very analogue like. :unsure: .

[jdgm]

Direct Stream Digital is another Sony invention and has been used to record and master CDs since about 1998. It has pretty well superseded SACD.

I have a DSD remaster of the Tony Williams Lifetime "Believe It" album (with Allan Holdsworth) which is absolutely razor-sharp, one of the best remasters I have ever heard and I do not think you could get much closer to the original master tape.

Have they now found a way to compress DSD data?

Don't think I've heard of Cookie Marenco though!

[surfpup]

Interesting. I think hi quality digital audio is coming. We've gotten so used to the portability and network capabilities of digital audio. I generally listen to FLAC files and avoid mp3 if possible. I'd love to see if i can hear the improvements of the DSD formats. Unfortunately you can't listen to them from that site - though perhaps if I register I can.

[saturn]

Is this anything like, or in any way related to the PONO player that Niel Young was endorsing and which had the third biggest Kickstarter campaign in the site's history?

[Rabs]

Is this anything like, or in any way related to the PONO player that Niel Young was endorsing and which had the third biggest Kickstarter campaign in the site's history?

Pono is a FLAC player from what I can tell... Different type of files... These DSD files will be even bigger and hopefully sound that much better.

[capmaster]

The first generation A/D and D/A convertors made until the mid-1990s were multibit devices. Their conversion worked through iterative comparison, resulting in subsequent approximation of the signal, and generating a digital multibit signal as equivalent as possible to the analogue input signal. However, the reference levels for comparison were critical and suffered from temperature and component aging. Another, probably more serious weakness was the high order analogue filtering required before A/D and after D/A conversion. It caused high audio frequencies to lag up to ten revolutions per conversion (!), and a passband ripple within the upper octave of the audio band, also increasing with the number of conversions. The typical result was a blurred, indefinite transient response, usually referred to as digital cold.

 

During the mid-1990s, DSD or direct stream digital 1-bit conversion took over in all areas, i. e audio, other household, industrial, and automotive applications. Due to the high sample rate and oversampling, the analogue filter are of much lower order and tuned to much higher frequencies. The audio frequency range is no longer affected, and all the filtering between the upper audio frequency limit and the analogue filter frequency is done by digital filters. These affect neither the phase response nor the amplitude response of the entire system.

 

Usually the DSD signal is digitally converted into a multibit signal, typical 16 or 24 bit, at any sample rate accessable through division by rational - not necessarily integer - factors. So e. g. all of my several dozens of convertors made between 2005 and 2012 work at 2.8224 MHz or 5.6448 MHz, equivalent 64 resp. 128 times oversampling referred to 44.1 kHz which always is my destined sample rate in the end. I also use a high-grade wordclock for clocking them all precisely in parallel using star distribution. The audio quality is excellent, far beyond that of any analogue system ever made.

 

The very reason for marketing DSD use and storage in consumer's hand is to sell storage media in my opinion. They fouled up audio quality through loudness war, lossy codecs like ATRAC, AC-3 aka Dolby Digital, AAC aka MPEG-1 and MPEG-2, MP-2 and MP-3, LAME, and theoretically lossless codecs as FLAC, MPEG-4 or WMA which forcibly suffer from variable and unpredictable data rates. They are definitely inferior compared to multibit storage of 1 bit convertor output signals and might eat up more storage space. Now since the SACD didn't catch on, they obviously look for a new business model...

 

It is best to stay linear. 24 bit/44.1 kHz is sufficient by far. Convertors of good quality, clocked by a stable and jitter-free wordclock, are much cheaper than heaps of storage media in the long run.

[surfpup]

Pono is a FLAC player from what I can tell...

 

Don't think so. FLAC is just CD quality. From what I understand PONO requires making a new master from the original tapes and results in superior to CD quality. That's Neil Young's whole point. That is also what may limit it's success IMO - the need for original recordings as a starting point.

[Rabs]

The first generation A/D and D/A convertors made until the mid-1990s were multibit devices. Their conversion worked through iterative comparison, resulting in subsequent approximation of the signal, and generating a digital multibit signal as equivalent as possible to the analogue input signal. However, the reference levels for comparison were critical and suffered from temperature and component aging. Another, probably more serious weakness was the high order analogue filtering required before A/D and after D/A conversion. It caused high audio frequencies to lag up to ten revolutions per conversion (!), and a passband ripple within the upper octave of the audio band, also increasing with the number of conversions. The typical result was a blurred, indefinite transient response, usually referred to as digital cold.

 

During the mid-1990s, DSD or direct stream digital 1-bit conversion took over in all areas, i. e audio, other household, industrial, and automotive applications. Due to the high sample rate and oversampling, the analogue filter are of much lower order and tuned to much higher frequencies. The audio frequency range is no longer affected, and all the filtering between the upper audio frequency limit and the analogue filter frequency is done by digital filters. These affect neither the phase response nor the amplitude response of the entire system.

 

Usually the DSD signal is digitally converted into a multibit signal, typical 16 or 24 bit, at any sample rate accessable through division by rational - not necessarily integer - factors. So e. g. all of my several dozens of convertors made between 2005 and 2012 work at 2.8224 MHz or 5.6448 MHz, equivalent 64 resp. 128 times oversampling referred to 44.1 kHz which always is my destined sample rate in the end. I also use a high-grade wordclock for clocking them all precisely in parallel using star distribution. The audio quality is excellent, far beyond that of any analogue system ever made.

 

The very reason for marketing DSD use and storage in consumer's hand is to sell storage media in my opinion. They fouled up audio quality through loudness war, lossy codecs like ATRAC, AC-3 aka Dolby Digital, AAC aka MPEG-1 and MPEG-2, MP-2 and MP-3, LAME, and theoretically lossless codecs as FLAC, MPEG-4 or WMA which forcibly suffer from variable and unpredictable data rates. They are definitely inferior compared to multibit storage of 1 bit convertor output signals and might eat up more storage space. Now since the SACD didn't catch on, they obviously look for a new business model...

 

It is best to stay linear. 24 bit/44.1 kHz is sufficient by far. Convertors of good quality, clocked by a stable and jitter-free wordclock, are much cheaper than heaps of storage media in the long run.

I saw this diagram that illustrates your point

 

And this site that are making DSD players

http://en.audiofanzine.com/misc-hifi-product/audiofeel/d-play/news/a.play,n.18156.html

[Rabs]

Don't think so. FLAC is just CD quality. From what I understand PONO requires making a new master from the original tapes and results in superior to CD quality. That's Neil Young's whole point. That is also what may limit it's success IMO - the need for original recordings as a starting point.

Im just going by what I read on their site

 

http://www.ponomusic.com/#faq

Is PonoMusic a new audio format? What about PonoMusic quality?

 

No. We want to be very clear that PonoMusic is not a new audio file format or standard. It is an end-to-end ecosystem for music lovers to get access to and enjoy their favorite music in the highest resolution possible for that song or album. The music in the PonoMusic.com store is sold and downloaded in industry standard audio file formats.

The PonoMusic Store uses FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec) audio format as its standard, for compatibility, although the PonoPlayer can play most popular high-resolution music formats from other sources. PonoMusic has a quality spectrum, ranging from really good to really great, depending on the quality of the available master recordings:

 

• CD lossless quality recordings: 1411 kbps (44.1 kHz/16 bit) FLAC files

• High-resolution recordings: 2304 kbps (48 kHz/24 bit) FLAC files

• Higher-resolution recordings: 4608 kbps (96 kHz/24 bit) FLAC files

• Ultra-high resolution recordings: 9216 kbps (192 kHz/24 bit) FLAC files

[capmaster]

I saw this diagram that illustrates your point

 

And this site that are making DSD players

http://en.audiofanzine.com/misc-hifi-product/audiofeel/d-play/news/a.play,n.18156.html

In contrary to early multibit convertors using iterative approximation, the PCM system shown here can be of virtually same quality as storing the DSD signal as is. This will not apply to a bat's hearing, of course, but since all the microphones and speakers are limited, too, the very point remaining is selling storage devices through DSD use. There's no disadvantage in decimation and delta-sigma modulation. These were invented around 1962 but technical development took some more time.

 

24 bit/44.1 kHz linear is better than using data compression in any case.

[capmaster]

Don't think so. FLAC is just CD quality. From what I understand PONO requires making a new master from the original tapes and results in superior to CD quality. That's Neil Young's whole point. That is also what may limit it's success IMO - the need for original recordings as a starting point.

Since no one can repair the overcompressed audio material released since about two decades, there will always be the need for accessing the original mixdown in a pre-mastered state to achieve high sonic quality.

[quapman]

Interesting stuff.

 

Although the title "New digital file is meant to sound more analogue" is a little misleading.

 

From what I'm reading this file format is useless unless you have the DSD player,, or if not useless

it becomes affected by the various codecs it needs to get out of your computer at which point fidelity is lost.

 

 

Looks to me like DSD and PONO are both players.

 

I didn't read too much but did anyone see where DSD is getting its "very close to the analog signal" from?

Are they claiming to remaster original recordings? Because if they are not, I don't believe the claims.

 

If they are, this could be the next VHS/BETA war. And we all know how that ended.

(that's pre-DVD for all you youngens. ;)

 

But at least Neil is on PONO so I'm half way there for material I like;)

 

That is also what may limit it's success IMO - the need for original recordings as a starting point.

 

 

I haven't done much reading on this tech so I may be completely out to lunch on my claims.

But wouldn't that be true for any format anywhere?

What would be the option if not the original recordings?

[Rabs]

Interesting stuff.

 

Although the title "New digital file is meant to sound more analogue" is a little misleading.

 

From what I'm reading this file format is useless unless you have the DSD player,, or if not useless

it becomes affected by the various codecs it needs to get out of your computer at which point fidelity is lost.

 

 

Looks to me like DSD and PONO are both players.

 

I didn't read too much but did anyone see where DSD is getting its "very close to the analog signal" from?

Are they claiming to remaster original recordings? Because if they are not, I don't believe the claims.

 

Well theres many different opinions (isn't there always :)) but theres many sites that have info like this... of course.. im not claiming to be any sort of expert.. just going by what I read online.. Pretty interesting though.. And as mentioned, in the future size wont be such an issue as memory gets bigger and cheaper etc etc Probably what will happen is some other tech will come along that even better lol (technology, don't you just love it ;))..

 

I just think its a good thing if we can start listening to more natural sounds than the "coldness" of MP3 type digital sound.

 

 

http://dsd-guide.com/what-dsd-audio-simple-explanation

 

What is DSD audio-- A Simple Explanation

 

Paul McGowen, of PS Audio(link is external), wrote a wonderful short explanation of what DSD audio is and how it differs from PCM audio. Here is an excerpt from his post on DSD audio or 1-bit audio and why it sounds closer to analog sound than PCM.

 

1-bit audio is simple to understand in concept. There are no samples, there are no words, there is no code. Instead there is a continuous streaming “train” of single identical bits that are either on or off. The more bits that are on, the higher the eventual output voltage becomes. The more bits that are off, the lower the eventual output voltage. We refer to this type of scheme as Pulse Density Modulation because when you have a greater number of on bits it appears as more densely populated. Here’s a picture that will help you visualize a 1-bit system.

 

Pulse density modulation 2 periods How dense are you?(link is external)

 

Note the blue areas are on and the white areas are off. Also note the periodicity between single bits is identical. The red sine wave overlaid on this image shows the results of more bits or fewer bits. Where there are no on bits (all white) the sine wave is at its lowest point – lots of on bits and it’s at its highest point.

 

The speed of the bits is 64 times the sample rate of a CD and some DSD schemes run at 128 times faster than a CD.

 

Here’s the interesting part of this: if you take a DSD stream and run it through a simple analog lowpass filter to smooth out the on/off transitions, you get music! This is amazing considering that if you do the same with PCM you get only noise.

 

DSD is a lot closer to analog than PCM ever thought to be.

[quapman]

Ya but for the stream they are talking about you still need the DSD player.

[Rabs]

Ya but for the stream they are talking about you still need the DSD player.

Well its just like MP3s... you can get players on your PC and MAC and eventually if it takes off im sure they will make more portable versions (with HUGE amounts of memory :))

 

Of course you need some kind of player :) (but you do for any format)

[quapman]

Yes, but like they said,, to get it out of a computer you will use various codecs, sync and usb limitations which all affect the quality. Codec, if you don't know, is an acronym for compression decompression. The more you compress any signal, you degrade it.

 

That is why the DSD player has RCA jacks so you can go direct to your stereo.

[Tman]

Capmaster your replies are amazing, you obviously know this subject. Is there an advantage of 48k over 44.1K in what you are accomplishing? I'm trying to record at 48k now. Does it matter on the listening side?

 

Like I said in my first post, DSD looks great but will require systems with loads of memory, which eventually will be standard, but maybe not quite there yet for the average music listener. I too thought it was something new but apparently not. Really enjoy learning about this stuff though.

[Rabs]

Capmaster your replies are amazing, you obviously know this subject. Is there an advantage of 48k over 44.1K in what you are accomplishing? I'm trying to record at 48k now. Does it matter on the listening side?

 

Like I said in my first post, DSD looks great but will require systems with loads of memory, which eventually will be standard, but maybe not quite there yet for the average music listener. I too thought it was something new but apparently not. Really enjoy learning about this stuff though.

Well even though the format is not that new... The BBC article says that in 2010 the first DSD files were released for public consumption so its still fairly new from that standpoint..

 

and as you say, with broadband and memory becoming ever larger and cheaper technology is catching up real fast.. so I just look forward to the day all of this stuff is perfected and we get to hear warmer audio from all our devices..

[surfpup]

What would be the option if not the original recordings?

 

Previous digital masters for example. If all you are getting is CD quality, PONO is no better than FLAC. Just rip a CD into any lossless format and you are there, right?

 

In reading Neil's bio (where he talks about PONO a lot) the whole point was to create a digital product that sounded better than CD but had the portability advantages of a digital file. At least that's the way I understood it.