Ayre wants $1.5K for DSD'ed QB-9

[Charles Hansen]

Charles,

 

Many thanks for the explanations. A real pleasure to have you around from time to time!

 

Guess your recommendation would be that I not bother to upgrade my QB-9 ...

 

Cheers,

Geoffrey

 

Hello Geoffrey,

 

The choice to upgrade is strictly up to you. When we have developed enough improvements to warrant improving a product, we do so. (In other words, we don't just bring out a new one every year because we didn't do it right the first time or because we add a few whistles and bells.) Unlike most companies, when we introduce an upgrade, we design it so that the previous models can be fully upgraded to the latest specification. Then if you want to improve your system, you don't need to sell the old unit or trade it in or anything like that. This is a much more cost-effective approach to purchasing stereo equipment.

 

In the case of the QB-9-DSD, which we just started shipping, customers in the US will be able to upgrade their units for the cost difference between the earlier model and the current model. So there is no price penalty whatsoever as far as upgrading your unit goes. As the name "-DSD" implies, we are adding the ability to decode "DSD over PCM" (DoP) so that you can play downloaded DSD files. (It's kind of ironic as SACD was on the verge of extinction when Sony released a new spec called "DSD-Disc" that is essentially an SACD but without the pit-width modulation, so it can be played on a computer. With this spec came the possibility for labels to sell DSD downloads, and now there are several (very) small labels selling these downloads.

 

Adding the DoP capability was a no-brainer as the DAC chip was already DSD-capable. But since the unit was about five years old, we thought it was a good time to see if we could make some sonic improvements at the same time. We had learned some things from designing the QA-9 A/D converter and the AX-5 integrated amplifier that we could apply to the QB-9 that made a much larger improvement than I was expecting. We also gave the ESS DAC chip a listen and found that it raised the performance another notch. It requires higher master clock frequencies to give the best performance so we replaced the existing clock oscillators with low-phase-noise modules running at twice the previous speed.

 

So the only added feature is the ability to play DoP. But the improvement in performance is quite significant and something that I wasn't expecting. I was quite happy with the sound of the unit before and was frankly taken aback by how big the improvement was.

 

It is strictly up to you. It's a great DAC as it is, and it is even better with the upgrade. Personally I wouldn't buy the upgrade just for the DoP capability, as I don't think there is enough software available to justify it. (Although we could have done that upgrade alone for less than $50 -- it was just a firmware change.) But if you are looking to give your system a boost, I think you would have a very hard time finding an equal improvement for even 5x as much money. For example let's say that you have a $500 Brand X power cord. I would be shocked if you could find any brand of power cord for $1000 that would come anywhere near to providing as much improvement as the "-DSD" upgrade.

 

Hope this helps,

Charles Hansen

Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

[wisnon]

Tip o' the hat to you and your mountain of overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence that DSD is the shiz. And if 11.2 MHz "catapults" you to the next level, just imagine what 33.6 MHz will sound like! You must be quivering with anticipation!

 

Meanwhile, I'm going to go bliss out with my broken DAC playing some broken-format files. Ciao.

 

You will love DSD, just wait and see.

[Charles Hansen]

By the way Charles, for informative,where I live, in France, the QB-9 costs around 4400 $.

Hopefully, the upgrade will not be to expensive, even if I know you're not responsible for prices outside of the U.S.

Thanks again.

 

Hello Onkle,

 

Yes, any time you purchase a product outside the domestic market, it will always cost more (with a few exceptions). There are extra costs for freight and duty and/or import taxes, which there is no way around. Each distributor must also provide review samples, magazine advertisements, warranty labor, and so on. Another problem is the unstable exchange rates. When economic time are uncertain, the wise distributor needs to build in a little bit of extra "cushion" to be able to absorb fluctuations. The only other thing to do is change the prices monthly -- sort of like the precious metals commodity exchange! But that would be a real disaster as each dealer would have paid a different price for their unit, depending on what month they purchased it from the distributor....

 

I would say that it is very normal to pay anywhere from 1.5x to 2x of the domestic price for imported products. The only exceptions are:

 

a) When a brand is so large that the export business is essentially the same size as the domestic business and the business is so large that each country has a giant distribution organization. Automobile manufacturers are like this, but the only audio manufacturers that are large enough for that are huge organizations like Bose or B&O.

 

b) Most cable manufacturers have such high profits that they can give massive price discounts to their overseas distributors and achieve world-wide pricing uniformity. One way to look at this is simply that the customers in the domestic markets are overpaying considerably for these products, as even though there are no added distribution costs (such as freight and import taxes), they still must pay the same (high) prices that the overseas customers pay.

 

As far as the upgrade prices go, we sell a kit of parts (typically complete PCB assemblies) to the distributor at a wholesale price. They add their markup and then either have a technician on staff (for the larger distributors) or must pay a "free-lance" technician the labor to perform the upgrade. The upgrade for the QB-9-DSD is fairly straight-forward and shouldn't take too much time, so hopefully the labor charge will be reasonable.

 

Best regards,

Charles Hansen

Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

[wisnon]

Charles,

 

I have over 500 riped SACD albums and I know people with over 1200! Tons of material out there and when playing a pure DSD album, it sounds superb!

[wisnon]

From the 6Moons Auralic Vega review:

 

"About DSD and the ES9018, we're dealing with a multi-stage delta-sigma chip. I think it converts 1-bit DSD to a multi-bit version but not 24/32 bits. Direct 1-bit processing of raw DSD doesn't seem possible as any DSP operation during post production, even the simplest summing or gain change, will request that the 1-bit data be converted to multi-bit. However converting such 1-bit data to multi-bit doesn't equate to DSD/PCM conversion. I did check the final output of Sabre's chip on DSD. That signal exhibited text-book ultrasonic noise typical of DSD which meant that it hadn't been converted to PCM. I also compared the same music on DSD and PCM. DSD sounded better. In the end we won't fret over exactly how the ES9018 processes DSD. The only thing of concern is how good DSD sounds over the Vega. For converters in general I think the presently most advanced is dCS's patented 5-bit RingDac. By the way, here and here are some lovely DSD128 and DXD samples from Kent Poon's Design w Sound blog. Simply register on his website to gain access to some free downloads which allow anyone to compare DSD and DXD directly."

[gcorley]

 

It is strictly up to you. It's a great DAC as it is, and it is even better with the upgrade. Personally I wouldn't buy the upgrade just for the DoP capability, as I don't think there is enough software available to justify it. (Although we could have done that upgrade alone for less than $50 -- it was just a firmware change.) But if you are looking to give your system a boost, I think you would have a very hard time finding an equal improvement for even 5x as much money. For example let's say that you have a $500 Brand X power cord. I would be shocked if you could find any brand of power cord for $1000 that would come anywhere near to providing as much improvement as the "-DSD" upgrade.

 

 

Thanks again!

[Onkle Je]

Hello Onkle,

 

Yes, any time you purchase a product outside the domestic market, it will always cost more (with a few exceptions). There are extra costs for freight and duty and/or import taxes, which there is no way around. Each distributor must also provide review samples, magazine advertisements, warranty labor, and so on. Another problem is the unstable exchange rates. When economic time are uncertain, the wise distributor needs to build in a little bit of extra "cushion" to be able to absorb fluctuations. The only other thing to do is change the prices monthly -- sort of like the precious metals commodity exchange! But that would be a real disaster as each dealer would have paid a different price for their unit, depending on what month they purchased it from the distributor....

 

I would say that it is very normal to pay anywhere from 1.5x to 2x of the domestic price for imported products. The only exceptions are:

 

a) When a brand is so large that the export business is essentially the same size as the domestic business and the business is so large that each country has a giant distribution organization. Automobile manufacturers are like this, but the only audio manufacturers that are large enough for that are huge organizations like Bose or B&O.

 

b) Most cable manufacturers have such high profits that they can give massive price discounts to their overseas distributors and achieve world-wide pricing uniformity. One way to look at this is simply that the customers in the domestic markets are overpaying considerably for these products, as even though there are no added distribution costs (such as freight and import taxes), they still must pay the same (high) prices that the overseas customers pay.

 

As far as the upgrade prices go, we sell a kit of parts (typically complete PCB assemblies) to the distributor at a wholesale price. They add their markup and then either have a technician on staff (for the larger distributors) or must pay a "free-lance" technician the labor to perform the upgrade. The upgrade for the QB-9-DSD is fairly straight-forward and shouldn't take too much time, so hopefully the labor charge will be reasonable.

 

Best regards,

Charles Hansen

Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

 

Thank you again.

[Freann]

Mr. Hansen – I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on and recommendations for the iZotope settings in Audirvana.

 

 

I find the QB-9 sounds best with Preringing at 0 (@44,1 -> 176,4 kHz). This is a consequence of the unique filter design? For other Dac settings around 0,6 is usually recommended.

 

 

More surprising, I can run it at Steepness at 0. Still experimenting here, but I thought that would introduce audible artifacts. Your filter design again?

[freddie40]

Mr. Hansen – I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on and recommendations for the iZotope settings in Audirvana.

 

 

I find the QB-9 sounds best with Preringing at 0 (@44,1 -> 176,4 kHz). This is a consequence of the unique filter design? For other Dac settings around 0,6 is usually recommended.

 

More surprising, I can run it at Steepness at 0. Still experimenting here, but I thought that would introduce audible artifacts. Your filter design again?

 

Freann, What settings do you like best?

 

Dave

[beetlemania]

You will love DSD, just wait and see.

One thing I already don't love is the near complete lack of DSD titles that I would consider buying. I've gotten a bit more into classical over the past year, mostly because my modest collection of 24/192 is predominantly in that genre. But even now, classical is <5% of what I listen to. One of the DSD sites has a sampler with a single track from Eric Bibb (I have a couple of his CDs - excellent musically and sonically). I would probably buy the sampler just for the Bibb track. But where the %&* is the rest of the Bibb album?

 

As an aside, an interesting experiment would be for Michael Lavorgna to repeat his tests using files ripped with a QA-9 instead of the Korg.

[wisnon]

What kinda music do you like?

 

Go get a vintage PS3 and start ripping. LoL. Alternatively, get a volunteer ripping service to help.

 

There are over 3,000 pure DSD SACDs and about 1,500 analog transfers.

 

Not chickenfeed.

[Freann]

Freann, What settings do you like best?

 

Dave.

 

Im back were I was before I started tweaking the... never mind. Listening to other types of music I’m now at:

- 12

- 2 000 000

- 1.0

- 0.30

 

Setting 0 for pre-ringing and steepness is too fuzzy. I realize that now...

[Charles Hansen]

Charles,

 

I have over 500 riped SACD albums and I know people with over 1200! Tons of material out there and when playing a pure DSD album, it sounds superb!

 

What kinda music do you like?

 

Go get a vintage PS3 and start ripping. LoL. Alternatively, get a volunteer ripping service to help.

 

There are over 3,000 pure DSD SACDs and about 1,500 analog transfers.

 

Not chickenfeed.

 

Hello Winson,

 

That is exactly the problem! When the SACD titles I wanted were in print (eg, Creedence Clearwatater Revival), they were $30 (2x to 3x the price of the CD). Now they are out of print. I don't have the time, the money, or the brain-space to try and track them down on eBay. Then I would have to do the same thing for the PS-3 -- the last version that could be used for SACD ripping was discontinued many years ago. Parts for them are no longer available, so when the laser dies (an inevitability) there will be no way to repair it.

 

All that leaves is the downloads of the Fourth National Scandinavian Nose Whistler's Orchestra in super-fidelity DSD-128. The ONLY way it would make sense to put any effort into DSD would be a bit-torrent website (totally illegal in most countries) where one could download rips of out-of-print SACDs. I recently saw one such place that had the entire Police ouevre available, apparently ripped from a PS-3.

 

On the other hand if an audiophile company were to reissue those in 192/24 PCM I would rather have those, especially if they used the Ayre QA-9 as the A/D converter. :-)

 

Best regards,

Charles Hansen

Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

[Miska]

For converters in general I think the presently most advanced is dCS's patented 5-bit RingDac.

 

I think it is important to not think it has "5-bit" because it would incorrectly lead to think bits as in PCM. AFAIK, it is a 24-level delta-sigma so it's log₂(24) = 4.5850 bits -> ~ 5-bit.

 

Sabre is "6-bit" in slightly similar, but still different way.

[wisnon]

No way in PCM for pure DSD material.

I want to hear PCM recordings in PCM and DSD in DSD playback.

 

As I said, there are free ripping services at other fora.

 

Many SACDs are available at elusive disc and other such sites, even Amazon.

[wisnon]

I think it is important to not think it has "5-bit" because it would incorrectly lead to think bits as in PCM. AFAIK, it is a 24-level delta-sigma so it's log₂(24) = 4.5850 bits -> ~ 5-bit.

 

Sabre is "6-bit" is slightly similar, but still different way.

Thats my point, its NOT PCM, rather DSD wide, etc.

[SoNic67]

Charles,

 

I have over 500 riped SACD albums and I know people with over 1200! Tons of material out there and when playing a pure DSD album, it sounds superb!

90% of those are originating from PCM tracks. Most at CD quality (that is the way most of the original analog tapes where converted).

It's just an marketing illusion.

[SoNic67]

I recently saw one such place that had the entire Police ouevre available, apparently ripped from a PS-3.

I have listen to those Police SACD and they are no better than my original Police CD's. I listen them trough my Denon universal player (SACD-R capable) and PC (Foobar + E-MU 1820m). Looks like the old PCM files where plain converted to DSD, probably the analog tapes are either damaged or lower quality now than original digital transfers from 10 years ago.

DSD makes sense only if the native recording is in that format or something higher (DXD format) like they do it here: High Resolution Music DOWNLOAD services .:. FLAC in free TEST BENCH

[wisnon]

90% of those are originating from PCM tracks. Most at CD quality (that is the way most of the original analog tapes where converted).

It's just an marketing illusion.

 

Nope about 4,500 of the 8500 albums are pure DSD or analog transfers. This is well documented.

[labjr]

I have listen to those Police SACD and they are no better than my original Police CD's. I listen them trough my Denon universal player (SACD-R capable) and PC (Foobar + E-MU 1820m). Looks like the old PCM files where plain converted to DSD, probably the analog tapes are either damaged or lower quality now than original digital transfers from 10 years ago.

DSD makes sense only if the native recording is in that format or something higher (DXD format) like they do it here: High Resolution Music DOWNLOAD services .:. FLAC in free TEST BENCH

 

A friend has The Police - Every Breath You Take SACD and it doesn't like any CD I've ever heard. I was stunned by the dynamics of the drums etc. Sounded like Sting was in the room on Roxanne. Most of the album was very good.

[wisnon]

I have listen to those Police SACD and they are no better than my original Police CD's. I listen them trough my Denon universal player (SACD-R capable) and PC (Foobar + E-MU 1820m). Looks like the old PCM files where plain converted to DSD, probably the analog tapes are either damaged or lower quality now than original digital transfers from 10 years ago.

DSD makes sense only if the native recording is in that format or something higher (DXD format) like they do it here: High Resolution Music DOWNLOAD services .:. FLAC in free TEST BENCH

 

Wrong again.

 

DSD is best when pure DSD recorded or quality analog transfers. Clearly the other 4000 mentioned are from PCM sources and are not really worth the effort in DSD. However, many of those 4,000 ONLY exist in his-rez PCM from SACDs, they dont exist yet as downloads, so once ripped they could be converted to any PCM hirez format.

 

Again, SACD is NOT DSD. Listening on anything but a stellar SACD player cant compare to computer DSD playback thru a quality Dac.

[Charles Hansen]

Mr. Hansen – I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on and recommendations for the iZotope settings in Audirvana.

 

 

I find the QB-9 sounds best with Preringing at 0 (@44,1 -> 176,4 kHz). This is a consequence of the unique filter design? For other Dac settings around 0,6 is usually recommended.

 

 

More surprising, I can run it at Steepness at 0. Still experimenting here, but I thought that would introduce audible artifacts. Your filter design again?

 

Hello Freann,

 

Sorry, I can't help you at all here. I have never used iZotope. All I can tell you is that we spent four months listening to different types of digital filters, and the one in all of our current players is a reflection of that effort. I seriously doubt that you are going to improve the sound of any of our current products by inserting another digital filter in the signal chain.

 

Best regards,

Charles Hansen

Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

[beetlemania]

That is exactly the problem!

 

Indeed, it makes my eyes glaze over.

 

Apparently, it is possible that DSD over a PC can sound better than an SACD:

Cookie Marenco dems DSD | Stereophile.com

 

I sure hope so, 'cus the couple of times I've heard an SACD, the sound was very good but it didn't bowl me over either. Certainly nothing to merit the DSD hoopla I'm reading about. The end product would have to be stupidly good to make the effort worthwhile.

 

 

On the other hand if an audiophile company were to reissue those in 192/24 PCM I would rather have those, especially if they used the Ayre QA-9 as the A/D converter. :-)

 

Maybe you should consider sending a loaner QA-9 to Bruce Brown, David Chesky, Bill Schnee, or Barry Diament. Maybe circulate it amongst all of them. I 'spose I'll buy the John Marks download just to support the effort . . . can't get excited about about organ music.

[Charles Hansen]

Thats my point, its NOT PCM, rather DSD wide, etc.

 

Hello Wisnon,

 

This is where Sony painted themselves into a corner. PCM is a technical term. It was developed and used by engineers and has a very specific meaning that is clearly understood and allows engineers to communicate clearly about it.

 

On the other hand "DSD" is strictly a marketing term. "Direct Stream Digital" doesn't mean anything except what Sony wants it to mean. In this particular case, they defined it as a pulse density modulation system running at 2.8224 MHz, using a 7th order filter in the noise shaper of the modulator.

 

All of these other terms are nonsense terms made up by people with very little technical knowledge. The Sonoma system is a PCM system that uses 2.8224 MHz, 8-bit data. Some people call this "DSD Wide" because they are embarrassed to admit that it is actually a PCM system.

 

Part of Sony's lies and propaganda was that "DSD" was more "pure" than PCM because a 1-bit system automatically is free from linearity problems. (This is why Sony was so embarrassed to admit that the Sonoma used 8 bits and is actually a PCM system.) Any time that more than one bit is used, one has to take care that all of the bits are the same size. There are various ways to do this. Some involve careful (usually laser) trimming of circuit elements.

 

Your favorite DAC is a PCM DAC that uses a technique that is actually fairly commonplace. They have an algorithm that will output different "bits" in a pseudo-random fashion. Then the errors in the bit sizes are converted to a pseudo-random noise. Philips has used a similar technique in their DAC chips for decades before the "Ring DAC" (again, just a marketing name), but Philips' marketing name for the same technique was "Dynamic Element Matching".

 

As I said, Sony painted themselves into a corner when they defined "DSD" as only having one bit. With only one bit the only signal manipulation that can be used is a time delay. That's it. One cannot even change the level (to do a fade out, or to match levels between different tracks) unless the signal is converted to a multi-bit (PCM) signal.

 

So in actual fact, there is virtually no such thing as a "pure" DSD recording.

 

There are two ways that one can get close:

 

1) Take a completely analog project, where everything was done in the analog domain, and then as the very last step, convert it to "DSD" for distribution. The problem of this is that one loses most of the advantages of digital. Unless you are very careless with your recordings, you are better off to listen to this type of recording in the analog domain, either with a turntable or a tape deck.

 

2) Telarc did several releases that were almost completely done in "pure DSD". The only way to actually make a recording in "pure DSD" is to do it "live to hard drive". All signal processing (levels, EQ, reverb, or any other effects) must be done in the analog domain, live in real time, with no overdubs or retakes.

 

This is extremely impractical. Telarc came as close as they could to that. They would record several takes of the orchestra playing a particular piece. Inevitably there would be a section where a player would make a mistake or somebody would cough or whatever. Then they would need to replace that bad section from the same section from a different take.

 

Guess what? Out comes the Sonoma and they have to convert that replaced section with a section that has been converted to PCM. Why convert it to PCM? No two takes were ever exactly at the same volume and tempo. While it was in PCM in the Sonoma, they could adjust the level and the tempo and then blend it in to match the "good" take.

 

With the Telarc releases, there were small sections that were run through the Sonoma, but in general, the bulk of the recording was "pure DSD". These are the only commercial releases that were made with this care, to minimize the conversion to PCM.

 

So of all the SACD's you have, probably only a handful are even close to "pure DSD".

 

But their marketing campaign was so effective that they have been able to convince hundreds of thousands of audiophiles (and even some recording engineers) that there is something "special" (perhaps almost even "sacred") about "DSD" that makes these recordings "special" and different.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~

 

If you go back and read some of my other postings, you will see that the only difference between "DSD" and PCM is the use of digital filters.

 

So now comes the trick. Pay attention and try to stay with me here, as this is the critical part.

 

You are right that most SACDs sound better than most PCM recordings.

 

BUT,

 

This has nothing to do with the choice of the number of bits used. It has everything to do with the filters used.

 

Almost every PCM recording you have ever heard has been a CD with a sampling rate that forces the use of brickwall filters, both for recording and for playback. (Well some people will play back their CD's without brickwall filters -- the so-called non-oversampling or NOS DACs, and there are some advantages to doing this and some disadvantages to doing this.)

 

Brickwall filtering kills the music.

 

That is why you don't like PCM. Now that computer audio has finally (after the false starts of 96/24 on DVD-Video and 192/24 on DVD-Audio) made high-res PCM a reality.

 

But almost every piece of high-res equipment ever made still uses brickwall filters.

 

So instead of killing the music, it merely mangles it.

 

The thing is, that when you go to high-res PCM, especially quad-rate, there is no reason to use brickwall filters. If you record with high-res PCM and don't use brickwall filters, then you get all of the best things of both worlds.

 

You get the natural sound of "DSD".

 

You get rid of all of the out-of-band noise of "DSD".

 

You get all the ease of editing and signal manipulation of PCM.

 

You don't need to buy all new equipment.

 

QED

 

I have posted a link in another post to a recording made with our Ayre QA-9 A/D converter that uses no brickwall filter. It sounds extremely good especially if you play it on a player without a brickwall filter. Try it, you'll like it.

 

Charles Hansen

Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

[Charles Hansen]

Again, SACD is NOT DSD. Listening on anything but a stellar SACD player cant compare to computer DSD playback thru a quality Dac.

 

Uhm... Would you care to explain this? It makes no sense to me whatsoever.