Thread: DACs - the core of your system

Posts: 40
Page: prev 1 2 3 4

Post by Iain September 4, 2015 (31 of 40)
Euell Neverno said:

What is the point of archiving in DSD 256 if the source material is below the resolution provided by DSD 64?

A sense of superiority and bragging rights, even if there's no audible reason to archive media at that resolution.

Post by bmoura September 4, 2015 (32 of 40)
Iain said:

A sense of superiority and bragging rights, even if there's no audible reason to archive media at that resolution.

Again, archiving at DSD 256 is done for Vinyl LP and Analog Tapes - not SACDs.

Post by Euell Neverno September 4, 2015 (33 of 40)
bmoura said:

Again, archiving at DSD 256 is done for Vinyl LP and Analog Tapes - not SACDs.

So, do vinyl and analogue tapes supply resolution that would be lost at DSD 64? Doubtful, I suspect.

Post by rammiepie September 4, 2015 (34 of 40)
Euell Neverno said:

So, do vinyl and analogue tapes supply resolution that would be lost at DSD 64? Doubtful, I suspect.

Euell, I'm sure you'll get a kick out of this http://www.unitedhomeaudio.com/master_tapes_for_reel_to_ree.htm

So now they're doing QUAD DSD from vinyl and analogue sources. Especially $300~500 10 1/2" reels running at 15 ips. Like Vinyl, every time one plays a tape, degradation takes place........oxide flaking and if you don't demagnetize those heads regularly, the higher frequencies suffer.

I agree with Euell. if, in 2015, we can't extract the 'limitations' of the analogue era with either DSD 64 or PCM 96/24 someone is asleep at the wheel (or spinning Reels).

IMHO, DSD will be another passing phase.....like HDCD, DBX, HQCD, etc.

It seems the Record Conglomerates could never get their shit together. When Vinyl was being ridiculed for poor pressings they switched to 8 track/cassette.......a step WAY down....

When RBCDs were introduced, the powers that be KNEW IN ADVANCE that it was a NOT READY FOR PRIMETIME format.

And with the PISS POOR introduction of SACD and DVD~A with little or NO advertising.......how were those formats going to flourish?

Ironic, that 420p DVD with lossy DD 5.1 was, by far, one of the best format introductions EVER, eclipsing even 1080i/p LOSSLESS BD~V (at this point everyone had HD cable/satellite and was wary of replacing their video collections YET AGAIN).

As the AUDIO FORMAT WARS continue (probably one of the longest wars in history) with the VAST myriad of download and streaming codecs, will there be a clear VICTOR?

Doubtful.

And isn't anyone (besides myself) tired of hearing that the NEWEST reissue (whatever the format) is THE definitive version when two years later a MORE definitive version is released.

OH ME!

Post by bmoura September 4, 2015 (35 of 40)
Euell Neverno said:

So, do vinyl and analogue tapes supply resolution that would be lost at DSD 64? Doubtful, I suspect.

There are certainly people out there who are fans of archiving and listening to Analog to DSD transfers at both DSD 64 and DSD 256.

http://positive-feedback.com/Issue79/dsd_panel.htm

Post by Iain September 5, 2015 (36 of 40)
bmoura said:

Again, archiving at DSD 256 is done for Vinyl LP and Analog Tapes - not SACDs.

I mentioned nothing in my post regarding SA-CD.

Please keep your posts in context with the flow of the thread.

Post by Iain September 5, 2015 (37 of 40)
Euell Neverno said:

So, do vinyl and analogue tapes supply resolution that would be lost at DSD 64? Doubtful, I suspect.

Indeed.

Post by AmonRa September 6, 2015 (38 of 40)
Euell Neverno said:

So, do vinyl and analogue tapes supply resolution that would be lost at DSD 64? Doubtful, I suspect.

I find it both funny and sad that some people actually think ANALOG recording methods were somehow better than even the early digital systems of the eighties. Analog just means TRYING to emulate the vibrations of the air with a wiggly groove on a LP or fluctuating magnetism on a tape, not that it is nowhere near an accurate copy. Far from it. Even a 30 year old digital recorder made a recording which is 100 to 1000 times more accurate than the best tape machines or direct-to-disk lathes of the era.

Thus a person who thinks that ancient tapes and LPs actually contain information that can not be copied by DSD, or even 16/44.1 PMC actually, live in some kind of bubble of ignorance and religious romanticism.

Just compare the frequency response curves of the best ANALOG tape recorders to an utterly cheap digital audio card: http://www.endino.com/graphs/

Not to mention 1000 time better DR, noise figures, no wow & flutter, 100 times less distortion etc. And this is just analog recordings compared to CD quality. Now we have 24/96 and better, 128 & 256DSD etc...

Post by rammiepie September 6, 2015 (39 of 40)
You have to understand, AmonRa, that the 'consumer' CD players of the early 80's were CRAP which the High End Audio rags immediately seized upon as a negative and praised vinyl for its warm, 'analogue' sound. NO mystery there.

Same for the 'resurgence' of vinyl today. RBCDs (POP/ROCK) are compressed to hell and naturally, the consumer feels he is getting something special by purchasing the NON~COMPRESSED vinyl edition. Even though a lot of so called non compressed vinyl is made from digital masters (unless otherwise specified).

Post by AmonRa September 6, 2015 (40 of 40)
rammiepie said:

You have to understand, AmonRa, that the 'consumer' CD players of the early 80's were CRAP bla bla…

Same for the 'resurgence' of vinyl today bla bla...

While CD players have improved, they were not crap when they first came out. Audiophiles just lost the endless tweaking possibilities offered by turntables and cartridges, this is what those rags seized. All major classical labels who could afford it switched to digital even before CDs came out. This was for sound quality reasons, not for convenience or cost, as digital was a step back in several ways (only 2 tracks at the start, editing equipment was hugely expensive).

Your second paragraph really has zero relevance in relation to what I wrote about. How pop producers decide to mangle the signal has nothing to do with what kind of quality even CDs are capable of.

Igor Tiefenbrun, the father of Linn and Sondek turntable, could not tell when the signal from his beloved player had passed through an early Sony PMC unit, basically running at 12 bit resolution. That might tell something about the transparency of even the early digital systems compared to the mush even the best turntables provided.

Page: prev 1 2 3 4

Closed