Direct Stream Digital and the Power of Imagination

[mansr]

I received this suggestion from Jussi about an analyzer:

 

https://www.xivero.com/musicscope/

 

Also nice, but not free.

[徐中銳]

The practice

 

Of which :

« A voyage through the studio' date=' the control room, introducing beautiful new music, recording 8 different ensembles (acoustic, jazz & classical). All in Native DSD, of course... » :

 

Of bmoura's Thread in Music Downloads & Streaming

[Nikhil]

I received this suggestion from Jussi about an analyzer:

 

https://www.xivero.com/musicscope/

 

 

Here are the MusicScope Analysis reports of the files (with loudness values etc)

PCM 24/192 PCM 32/384 DSD128 DSD256

 

 

The analysis reports I had provided earlier are Musicscope reports.

Fantastic tool for file analysis

[esldude]

The analysis reports I had provided earlier are Musicscope reports.

Fantastic tool for file analysis

 

Yes it is a fantastic tool. But when going from PCM to DSD each component will do them differently. Without measuring the output in some way you can't determine the level difference between the two formats. If they included test tones a multi-meter at the speaker terminals would do. Without that recording or measuring output of the DAC would work. Just not convenient though needed to do a good comparison. Without level matching you really can't compare them for quality of sound.

[Nikhil]

Without level matching you really can't compare them for quality of sound.

 

And the practical difficulties of trying to do that have already been mentioned

It's not that I don't appreciate Level Matching ... it's hard to do when comparing PCM to DSD

[Miska]

And the practical difficulties of trying to do that have already been mentioned

It's not that I don't appreciate Level Matching ... it's hard to do when comparing PCM to DSD

 

Disclaimer; I don't know where the discussion is going on at the moment, so my comments may be unrelated. I don't really have time to read all.

 

But it is practically impossible to compare plain formats. There are so many different implementations of ADC and DAC that play much bigger role than the format itself. You can just compare how a particular hardware performs at particular format (including sampling rate, word length, etc). So either switch formats and pick up the best, or use different converters at same format and compare.

 

When it comes to level matching, DSD is usually quieter than PCM. So the usual claim of louder sounding better would favor PCM most of the time.

[Miska]

Yes it is a fantastic tool. But when going from PCM to DSD each component will do them differently. Without measuring the output in some way you can't determine the level difference between the two formats. If they included test tones a multi-meter at the speaker terminals would do. Without that recording or measuring output of the DAC would work. Just not convenient though needed to do a good comparison. Without level matching you really can't compare them for quality of sound.

 

I usually use 1 kHz tone and measure the DAC output with scope's RMS voltage metering and dScope audio analyzer's continuous time detector level meter. Both devices also have valid calibration, so the absolute values should be also fairly accurate.

[Bunpei]

There is only one sure way to exactly level match the same analog level fed recording in both PCM and DSD, and that's recorded tone MEASURED and adjusted at the individual DAC's output chain.

 

There is no numerical equivalence between the two formats. PCM is a series of actual measured level values at some sample rate, where 0dB is the extreme system upper level limit. DSD is a relative level of modulation of a clock by the modulating signal where 0dB is/was selected as 50% modulation. The actual reconstructed level (DAC) is completely dependent on the reconstruction element (DAC) design.

 

It's analogous to matching the levels between tape and vinyl. They're two completely different systems where only the very chain ends can be compared with a same recorded reference level, usually tone.

 

According to my understanding, there is no formal "standard" for a generic DSD signal which is apart from SACD.

As for DSD data stored in a SACD media, a document circulated among SACD licensees defines a set of minimum rules and SACD authoring tools may enforce the rules.

For example, there is no standard at all, for Quad DSD (DSD256, 12.288MHz sampling).

 

Is my understanding correct?

[Miska]

According to my understanding, there is no formal "standard" for a generic DSD signal which is apart from SACD.

As for DSD data stored in a SACD media, a document circulated among SACD licensees defines a set of minimum rules and SACD authoring tools may enforce the rules.

For example, there is no standard at all, for Quad DSD (DSD256, 12.288MHz sampling).

 

You can scale the specs to other rates too. That's what I've been doing.

[徐中銳]

"standard"

 

Well, recalling an extract from Andrew Everard :

« Standards need to be more standard

As I said in a blog piece long ago and far away in a different life, it seems Universal Plug’nPlay is neither as universal as it might suggest, and sometimes far from plug’n’play. Ask anyone who’s struggled to get their shiny new NAS to talk to their network player, their network player to handle the files it says it can see – and don’t even get me started on the frustrations of tag-handling.

 

What’s needed, apart from truly universal interoperability as a standard, is a labelling system able to show buyers one simple thing – not where or how the recording was sourced, but what will play on what.

 

Or, even better, some rapid upgrading of current hardware so that whatever you throw at it, your equipment will play it – you know, just like CD was before the great and the good of the consumer electronics industry starting adding graphics formats to discs, or copy-protection designed to create for pirates, but actually stopping CDs playing on some hi-fi hardware.

 

You know, a standard everyone to which everyone can adhere – and preferably before consumers get totally drowned in a sea of competing and non-interchangeable file formats, and go back to ‘Oh well, at least if I buy an MP3 version it’ll play on anything.’ »

SO, AS IF WE WEREN’T CONFUSED ENOUGH BY DSD, FLAC, PCM AND HRA…

[Bunpei]

You can scale the specs to other rates too. That's what I've been doing.

 

Hi, Miska!

 

These are my silly questions. Please ignore them if they are useless.

 

1. Your HQPlayer can convert PCM to DSD on-the-fly. In the process, do you check that the resulting DSD signals observe "Maximum Super Audio CD Audio Peak Level" requirement?

 

2. As for DSD256, how do you scale Butterworth filters which are defined in "High Frequency DSD Signal + Noise Level" requirement of SACD?