Where Are We Going From Here?

[Superdad]

Plenty of room to disagree. But consider, have you listened to an Atmos system playing back a high res movie? Have you seen the difference a 4K display makes?

Did you know you can stream 4K content from Netflix, Youtube, Amazon, Vudu, and other providers? You can. For $12.99/month.

 

Fair enough. I have not. Well I have seen 4K displays (oh my), but not hear Atmos. Most of the films I watch are not the sort that need surround sound--or at least that is not a priority for me and our living room layout is not conducive to having extra speakers (have a hear enough time keeping the new kittens away from the pair of speakers flanking the flatscreen).

 

From what I read in the trade journals, the average-to-mid dollar home theatre market (i.e. living room systems) has not been doing so well these last few years (though there is a lot of money being made by custom installers and HT room contractors at the high end). Big box store commoditization, distractions of personal computing devices, life-style systems, etc…

 

But I am sure that large, beautiful displays will always sell well. They have tremendous WOW factor and you seem to get a LOT more for the buck each year.

 

Just my $0.02. I readily admit to not following the HT market closely anymore. Two-channel audio's me thing!

[semente]

You are right on the money, but with the right source/transport, a good DAC, and the AVR in direct mode (processing turned off) you can get pretty decent sound. Of course no head to head comparison to a stereo amp (not right now at least), but for the money AVRs actually do everything quite well... especially these days. The other day I heard a Marantz AVR with a good DAC chip that actually sounded very good with FLAC rips, nothing amiss, excellent transparency and detail, and the separation and placement was spot on. I had a similar experience with a Cambridge CXR200 playing audio.

 

The Oppo (though not an amp) is another example of a multi-solution unit actually performing really well in a particular department (DAC in this case).

 

Eventually I think that's how the future is going to look... everything in a single box solution. I mean how many of us really want multiple DACs even if we can afford them. I'd rather upsample/downsample/transcode my music or simply go with something like Naim Mu-so for the simplicity.

 

Putting it all in the same box creates compromises in power supply design, grounding, RMI/EMI screening, mechanical vibration control, etc.

I would rather have the simplest possible design/topology for each equipment stored in it's own box and if possible with an outboard PSU.

Swiss Army knives are practical but not very effective.

 

R

[orgel]

I just don't take a lot of pleasure anymore investing a lot of time in learning new technology when there are so many other things filling my time.

 

I can see your point. I might find playing with software and, to a lesser extent hardware, enjoyable, but it's clear that not everyone does. I think this is why all-in-one boxes that serve/stream and sometimes include a DAC are popular. While some of the current ones seem pretty or very good, I expect we'll continue to see more, better, and cheaper ones in the not-too-distant future. This is a trend that meshes very well with streaming services, IMO.

 

I also think devices like the Sonore Sonicorbiter SE and microRendu, while conceptually a bit more difficult than a box that just plays music, can facilitate very good sound in a pretty simple system that's relatively easy to set up and use. (Probably not for everyone, but what is?)

 

--David

[YashN]

Terrific, thoughtful, and honest post YashN. Good fuel for this interesting discussion.

 

Thanks for the kind words, 'Superbad'

[YashN]

Miska's DSC1 (see Signalyst and Signalyst DSC1 - diyAudio). These have the potential of offering extremely competitive performance at quite low cost (the parts estimate for the DSC1 is in the $400 range).

 

Jud, may I ask the breakdown to arrive at this figure? My DIY Tube amp, with three large Transformers from Edcor and 4 tubes cost about that figure. I was under the impression that a DSC1 build would be less.

[Jud]

Jud, may I ask the breakdown to arrive at this figure? My DIY Tube amp, with three large Transformers from Edcor and 4 tubes cost about that figure. I was under the impression that a DSC1 build would be less.

 

I think Miska's mentioned it, but I don't have the time to look right now. The DIY Audio thread might be a place to look.

[YashN]

I think the culture of DIY is getting a real kick start from the Web, see, e.g, Make: DIY Projects and Ideas for Makers |.

 

Where might all these threads start coming together? Anybody remember - or build - Heathkits? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathkit) It seems to me something like that approach, though more Web-based, is very possible now for DACs.

 

Actually, the notion can be extended to any component in the audio chain.

 

And apart from audio, almost anything can be DIYed nowadays: global knowledge + global sourcing, available at one's fingertips and senses at any time of day or night.

[YashN]

I think Miska's mentioned it, but I don't have the time to look right now. The DIY Audio thread might be a place to look.

 

Not sure if the parts in this post contain the power supply parts but this sounds about right - it shouldn't be that expensive and perhaps even half or less:

 

cost wise

pcb: depends on batch size

parts: about 130 sourcing from mouser and 20 for transformers from antek. 97+shipping for amanero

case: 0-unlimited

[beerandmusic]

I like telling the amazon echo "Alexa, shuffle play my jazz playlist"

or "alexa, play Chet Baker ALONE TOGETHER"

 

After much anticipation, the "amazon echo dot" finally has audio out so you can connect to your own stereo instead of using alexa's speaker.

 

I hope the next version has digital out....but the dac chip in the alexa dot sounds "ok" for now for the versatility to tell alexa what to play without having to hit any buttons. The SQ isn't there, but it could be much improved with a digital out?

 

I think much improvement can be made here, and it will become popular.

 

I also like using it to control lights and temperature in the house.

 

[PopPop]

I can see your point. I might find playing with software and, to a lesser extent hardware, enjoyable, but it's clear that not everyone does. I think this is why all-in-one boxes that serve/stream and sometimes include a DAC are popular. While some of the current ones seem pretty or very good, I expect we'll continue to see more, better, and cheaper ones in the not-too-distant future. This is a trend that meshes very well with streaming services, IMO.

 

I also think devices like the Sonore Sonicorbiter SE and microRendu, while conceptually a bit more difficult than a box that just plays music, can facilitate very good sound in a pretty simple system that's relatively easy to set up and use. (Probably not for everyone, but what is?)

 

--David

 

You are exactly right. I was interested in learning some about the Sonic Orbiter because it looked like a good solution to having a noisy PC sitting in the same shelf as my DAC, but, despite the reading I've done I can't get past the acronyms and jargon to understand whether it would work in my system or not. That's frustrating to me but that's just me.

[jabbr]

We've always had DIY around, but reasonably new is the idea of DIY DACs that make heavy use of software filtering, e.g. Miska's DSC1 (see Signalyst and Signalyst DSC1 - diyAudio). These have the potential of offering extremely competitive performance at quite low cost (the parts estimate for the DSC1 is in the $400 range).

 

The DSC1 is under the Open Hardware license (CERN Open Hardware Licence - Cernohl - Open Hardware Repository). Already people have begun chiming in with ideas to move input away from the USB interface to one just as common but perhaps less subject to problems: Ethernet.

 

I think the culture of DIY is getting a real kick start from the Web, see, e.g, Make: DIY Projects and Ideas for Makers |.

 

Where might all these threads start coming together? Anybody remember - or build - Heathkits? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathkit) It seems to me something like that approach, though more Web-based, is very possible now for DACs. The instructions for building the kit, as well as how to make your own filters with sox, along with suggested parameters for typical filters, could easily be provided via the Web, and printed down by anyone wanting a hard copy.

 

Will this take over the market from pre-built audio equipment? Hardly. What it may help do, though, is two things:

 

- De-mystify and perhaps lower the price of pre-built DACs.

 

- Like the old Heathkits, inspire a new generation of audio entrepreneurs and enthusiasts.

 

Great post! I remember Heathkit very fondly ... before the Internet existed, there was Ham radio.

 

DIYAudio is really a terrific resource for all levels of participation in all sorts of projects, from connecting preassembled boards and power supplies to some really cutting edge design in which a great variety of real experts from all over the world participate.

 

For me, a hurdle was SMD but thanks to the maker world, I modified a cheap toaster oven with a "reflowster" controller and off we go -- well I did invest in a binocular microscope for post bake inspection and cleanup.

 

The supply chain is fascinating ... you can design circuit boards on a laptop (Eagle) and then order via the web e.g. OSHPark.com, you can even design and then order completed, populated, and tested circuit boards via the web. Of course pricing is *very* volume dependent.

 

In another fashion are the FPGAs in which complex chips, even CPUs/GPUs can themselves be designed using high level languages. As the demand for these and systems on chip (SoC) expand we are seeing markets for custom board design for things like Raspberry Pi (https://www.element14.com/community/docs/DOC-76955/l/raspberry-pi-customization-service) so the idea of an DIY audiophile processor board/motherboard is a reality.

[jabbr]

an example of volume pricing: 1% vishay resistors: 3900pcs Vishay Resistors SMD 140K Ohm ±1 1 8W 0805 1 Reel | eBay

[master]

Putting it all in the same box creates compromises in power supply design, grounding, RMI/EMI screening, mechanical vibration control, etc.

I would rather have the simplest possible design/topology for each equipment stored in it's own box and if possible with an outboard PSU.

Swiss Army knives are practical but not very effective.

 

R

 

You have a point, especially with low end mass manufacturers of the HTIB, boombox, etc. types.

 

But in audio Bose has been doing it for a long time, their WAVE series. It's caught on so much that many brands like Onkyo, Sony, etc. have an all-in-one box solution that plays audio CDs, FM, streaming service, and with an inbuilt speaker. Eventually the concept will catch on.

 

The Naim Mu-so is a good example. I've also demoed Dynaudio Xeo loudspeakers, of course they are wireless solutions more than single box, but its a step in that direction. I've also seen Klipsch demo wireless home theater (5.1) speakers, again a move towards a single unit of speaker + amp. All of them take both both analog and digital inputs for source and incorporate streaming, so its more than studio monitors like Genelec that need external DACs.

 

You could say its a move towards wireless streaming and wireless speakers, or integrated units that incorporate streaming, amplification, DAC, and speakers in a single box.

[master]

I'm a little suspicious of some of the categories. I'd guess that some of what they define as dance, pop, rock, and R&B may be closer to hip-hop. But the big picture stays the same: jazz and classical - really small.

 

Makes you wonder why nobody is pushing DSD for the more popular genres like rock and pop. Maybe Taylor Swift fans only use the likes of Spotify while the jazz and classical aficionados actually buy their media.

 

However, compressed music really sucks for classical. For the most part you can get away with MP3 320 kbps VBR rips for the mainstream genres, only symphonic rock from the likes Queen loses too much data and so sound bad on MP3s.

 

I guess that's one way of seeing it, you need something like DSD to really enjoy classical, but not so much for other mainstream genres.

[sdolezalek]

I had commented earlier about subscription based software as a relevant business model, but no one seems to have picked up on it. Yet I still hear a lot of concern about DRM (especially as it relates to MQA). Isn't the practical reality that much of our music libraries today are filled with streaming content from Tidal, Qobuz or the like. Obviously, if those companies went under we would lose access to that content (although by subscribing to whomever survived, we could just recreate the library by paying the next company's subscription fee).

 

In that world, why should we feel differently if we were gaining access to hi-res files on a subscription basis (only difference being that you downloaded them in advance, but your right would last only as long as you kept subscribing). Then each content provider could offer a multiple of formats (just as ProStudioMasters, HDTracks, Native DSD, etc today do), you could download whatever fit your needs today, change to a different format tomorrow if you bought new hardware, and have continuing access to the latest format so long as a) you paid the subscription and b) the provider stayed in business.

 

We seem pretty comfortable doing that with Netflix and similar (and thus have access to the latest in video formats), but we seem much less comfortable doing that with our music. Is that because we watch a movie once, but we keep coming back to old favorites in music?

 

What would it take to make a flexible, latest format subscription service work? If that meant you could switch your entire library from PCM to DSD to MQA without paying to replace it, what would that be worth? Isn't that,in all likelihood where we are headed?

[esldude]

Makes you wonder why nobody is pushing DSD for the more popular genres like rock and pop. Maybe Taylor Swift fans only use the likes of Spotify while the jazz and classical aficionados actually buy their media.

 

However, compressed music really sucks for classical. For the most part you can get away with MP3 320 kbps VBR rips for the mainstream genres, only symphonic rock from the likes Queen loses too much data and so sound bad on MP3s.

 

I guess that's one way of seeing it, you need something like DSD to really enjoy classical, but not so much for other mainstream genres.

It is no wonder. Pop mixing and mastering is DSP intensive. Such also uses lots of tracks. 48 or more being common. You can't generally do DSP in DSD. The extra data rates for large number of tracks would impede if you could. That is why DSD usually is minimalist Classical, jazz or simple acoustic tracks.

[master]

I had commented earlier about subscription based software as a relevant business model, but no one seems to have picked up on it.

 

I use (and pay for) quite a few subscription services, but yet I'm not sold on them entirely and believe its not a model stacked in favor of the end consumers.

 

Right now I pay for both Spotify and Tidal. Not a lot, $30 each month, and $360 yearly. Not much you can do with $360 when it comes to audio components, maybe a decent budget DAC, a good NAS, etc.

 

Now I like my TV and my movies too so I'm also paying for the likes of Netflix, Hulu, etc. Add in the ISP, mobile + data, and you are looking at actually paying for a lot of services, but not actually owning anything.

 

In truth I could dispense with the music services (despite being a music lover), because for the most part I'm the only one who actually uses them, but Netflix and Hulu are something everybody in the family uses, ditto for ISP... so there is no getting around paying for them. Call them essential if you will.

 

Music subscription, while not a lot at $360 yearly, will still get me a lot of decent CDs, which I will own for life. Something to consider... or just my 2 cents. But if I had to look at cutting down on the monthly expenses column, I know exactly where the spouse (and possibly even me) would look at first. Honestly with over 2400 CDs and having access to them all over home and even out of home (via mobile streaming) I could in fact live with free Spotify for music discovery.

 

Not too sure how many would agree with me on an audiophile forum, but the subscription model (especially for music) is not really stacked in our favor. Netflix is something everyone in the family watches, but most of us have better halves who are perfectly happy listening to music for free on iHeartRadio, Spotify, or YouTube and find no difference in quality whatsoever.

[semente]

Makes you wonder why nobody is pushing DSD for the more popular genres like rock and pop. Maybe Taylor Swift fans only use the likes of Spotify while the jazz and classical aficionados actually buy their media.

 

This may sound harsh but I think that at least 2/3rds of the pop music that has been publish is not worth being released in high-res; it's usually some simplistic flavour-of-the-month form of melody that gets thrown away like a used chewing gum once the sweetness has died away...

Every once in a while I get a new pop song from Amazon for my eldest child and it usually sounds far less bad in his tablet than when played through my system.

Horses for courses?

 

R

[Solstice380]

The trend in using "services", in our case content steaming, is a reflection of the general trend of society. In the U.S., home ownership is on the decline and renting is up almost 50% over the last 10 years alone. Car leasing, etc.

 

It may be a fallout of the growing divide in wealth. People can't afford to buy their house or car, so people or corporations that have capital will build and get their money over time plus "interest". The bottom end of this are the businesses that will rent you a TV for $10/month (Rent-a-Center in the U.S.). And, people are never settled! It's been that way for all the history of mankind. Bigger, faster, better, cheaper. The last 3 of those were the national Japanese corporate motto. Now that the big corporations run the world they are driven to get bigger every year to keep the wheel churning. It's not good enough for "investors" (or Wall Street) to reach an adequate business level and stay there. Gotta' have more, and more is (must be) better!

 

When it takes billions of dollars to build a factory for something it must be for a volume sales product to get the money back. On an individual basis, it takes saving up for a down payment to buy anything, so renting/leasing/streaming is the way to go.

[Paul R]

In that world, why should we feel differently if we were gaining access to hi-res files on a subscription basis (only difference being that you downloaded them in advance, but your right would last only as long as you kept subscribing). Then each content provider could offer a multiple of formats (just as ProStudioMasters, HDTracks, Native DSD, etc today do), you could download whatever fit your needs today, change to a different format tomorrow if you bought new hardware, and have continuing access to the latest format so long as a) you paid the subscription and b) the provider stayed in business.

 

That is pretty much the model that DIVX tried to promote back in the 90's - end result we were left with a lot of discs that nobody could play. Very annoying then, would probably start riots now. (grin)

 

-Paul

[firedog]

Makes you wonder why nobody is pushing DSD for the more popular genres like rock and pop. Maybe Taylor Swift fans only use the likes of Spotify while the jazz and classical aficionados actually buy their media.

 

However, compressed music really sucks for classical. For the most part you can get away with MP3 320 kbps VBR rips for the mainstream genres, only symphonic rock from the likes Queen loses too much data and so sound bad on MP3s.

 

I guess that's one way of seeing it, you need something like DSD to really enjoy classical, but not so much for other mainstream genres.

 

I don't wonder about it at all. Nobody is pushing it because hardly anyone sees a need for it. And anyway, pushing it doesn't help - there needs to be demand for that type of recording. You can't really do modern multi-track recording and processing in it, so most pros in those genres aren't interested. For jazz and classical that can be recorded "live" it's possible.

 

Beyond that, 99% of studios, engineers, etc. are trained on and have equipment for PCM. Lots of studios work at 24/44.1 or 48, a small number at 24/96. You have very few who even work at higher res. A large recording organization like EMI is even on record as saying they see no sonic or other reason to record in anything higher than 24/96. So it ain't gonna happen.

[Jud]

I don't wonder about it at all. Nobody is pushing it because hardly anyone sees a need for it. And anyway, pushing it doesn't help - there needs to be demand for that type of recording. You can't really do modern multi-track recording and processing in it, so most pros in those genres aren't interested. For jazz and classical that can be recorded "live" it's possible.

 

Beyond that, 99% of studios, engineers, etc. are trained on and have equipment for PCM. Lots of studios work at 24/44.1 or 48, a small number at 24/96. You have very few who even work at higher res. A large recording organization like EMI is even on record as saying they see no sonic or other reason to record in anything higher than 24/96. So it ain't gonna happen.

 

Add to that Sony being a pig about SACD, which pretty well ensured DSD would continue to leave a very bad taste in the mouths of anyone who wanted to work in that medium back when it was discs rather than downloads. (Check out Charles Hansen of Ayre on DSD some time.)

[master]

I don't wonder about it at all. Nobody is pushing it because hardly anyone sees a need for it. And anyway, pushing it doesn't help - there needs to be demand for that type of recording. You can't really do modern multi-track recording and processing in it, so most pros in those genres aren't interested. For jazz and classical that can be recorded "live" it's possible.

 

Beyond that, 99% of studios, engineers, etc. are trained on and have equipment for PCM. Lots of studios work at 24/44.1 or 48, a small number at 24/96. You have very few who even work at higher res. A large recording organization like EMI is even on record as saying they see no sonic or other reason to record in anything higher than 24/96. So it ain't gonna happen.

 

Add to that Sony being a pig about SACD, which pretty well ensured DSD would continue to leave a very bad taste in the mouths of anyone who wanted to work in that medium back when it was discs rather than downloads. (Check out Charles Hansen of Ayre on DSD some time.)

 

I've never been interested in DSD or any high res formats, for starters most (nearly all) of the music I listen to is limited to audio CDs, and I can honestly say I've been extremely happy with it. Not like the tapes and the Nak I had back in the day, but still pretty good especially with how good DAC technology has come along and how good they make the music sound, even compressed music most of the time.

 

The interest was piqued only because of the all the recent trolling on the Schiit Yggdrasil and why its such a bad DAC when it doesn't even do DSD. Considering how little music is even available in DSD I wonder what all the fuss was about.

 

I've one friend with a Lampi and despite what it costs, it still "improved" with a Regen. That said this friend is stuck on the Lampi and USB input only because of the need for high res. But that's just one person considering all the scores of friends and acquaintances I've come to know from various forums, audio meetups, etc. over the years. Everybody has their own preference, like I'm stuck on Toslink and I know many prefer Coaxial, some USB, and now a few ethernet, but its never been a requirement, only more of a preference.

 

Now it looks like all the recent trolling with regard to DSD was a lot of smoke without any actual fire.

 

PS: No offense to folks who are into DSD, if its your thing then enjoy it, and I'm certainly not looking to start another PCM vs DSD flame war. I don't even do high res in PCM.

[master]

(Check out Charles Hansen of Ayre on DSD some time.)

 

Not sure if its these, but interesting reading with sample downloads.

 

Ayre Acoustics Design Thoughts

 

On CA - http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/another-example-why-i-hate-direct-stream-digital-and-why-customers-who-bought-sonys-boloney-are-so-annoying-17112/.

[YashN]

For me, a hurdle was SMD but thanks to the maker world, I modified a cheap toaster oven with a "reflowster" controller and off we go -- well I did invest in a binocular microscope for post bake inspection and cleanup.

 

Let me know if you have more info, jabbr, I'm interested.