Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted April 25, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 25, 2017 I just read this post on DSD Guide about DSD and dynamic range. The post is a bit misleading, especially the sentence, "For me this analysis clearly shows that DSD has the best DR values." I left the following comment (see image), that's awaiting approval to be published. http://dsd-guide.com/music-lovers-creates-his-own-test-for-dynamic-range-no-surprise-dsd-wins#.WP-jL4nysUF AudioDoctor, ecwl, audiventory and 2 others 4 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted April 25, 2017 Author Popular Post Share Posted April 25, 2017 Glad I took a screenshot. My comment has been removed. Solstice380, tmtomh, AudioDoctor and 1 other 3 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post Ralf11 Posted April 25, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 25, 2017 and then, there was this study... Meyer, E. B. and D. R. Moran. 2007. Audibility of a CD-Standard A/DA/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback. JAES 55(9): 775-779. Abstract: Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard. The authors report on a series of double-blind tests comparing the analog output of high-resolution players playing high-resolution recordings with the same signal passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz “bottleneck.” The tests were conducted for over a year using different systems and a variety of subjects. The systems included expensive professional monitors and one high-end system with electrostatic loudspeakers and expensive components and cables. The subjects included professional recording engineers, students in a university recording program, and dedicated audiophiles. The test results show that the CD-quality A/D/A loop was undetectable at normal-to-loud listening levels, by any of the subjects, on any of the playback systems. The noise of the CD-quality loop was audible only at very elevated levels. hvbias and tmtomh 2 Link to comment
ShawnC Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 46 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: Glad I took a screenshot. My comment has been removed. Try responding again, you can be first all over again. Next time be nicer, as you are the King and proprietor of the top audio website in the world, sometimes you put fear in the competition. Or they simply didn't know how to respond. AudioDoctor 1 Computer setup - Roon/Qobuz - PS Audio P5 Regenerator - HIFI Rose 250A Streamer - Emotiva XPA-2 Harbeth P3ESR XD - Rel R-528 Sub Comfy Chair - Schitt Jotunheim - Meze Audio Empyrean w/Mitch Barnett's Accurate Sound FilterSet Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted April 25, 2017 Author Share Posted April 25, 2017 I didn't mean to come across as not nice. Perhaps it was read that way. I just wanted to state the facts :~) Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post ShawnC Posted April 25, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 25, 2017 I was being completely sarcastic. It does show how well you run your site. You let everyone comment within reason (well beyond reason) and only moderate if needed. But everything initially gets published. Kudos semente, AudioDoctor and The Computer Audiophile 3 Computer setup - Roon/Qobuz - PS Audio P5 Regenerator - HIFI Rose 250A Streamer - Emotiva XPA-2 Harbeth P3ESR XD - Rel R-528 Sub Comfy Chair - Schitt Jotunheim - Meze Audio Empyrean w/Mitch Barnett's Accurate Sound FilterSet Link to comment
ted_b Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 Everyone knows red cars are faster! That's why they get so many tickets. Also, they thought you were being mean, i.e dynamic RAGE. (It's good to be king...so fix your title). AudioDoctor 1 "We're all bozos on this bus"....F.T. My JRIver tutorial videos Actual JRIver tutorial MP4 video links My eleven yr old SACD Ripping Guide for PS3 (needs updating but still works) US Technical Advisor, NativeDSD.com Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted April 25, 2017 Author Share Posted April 25, 2017 Just now, ted_b said: Everyone knows red cars are faster! That's why they get so many tickets. Ha! Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
blue2 Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said: I just read this post on DSD Guide about DSD and dynamic range. The post is a bit misleading, especially the sentence, "For me this analysis clearly shows that DSD has the best DR values." I left the following comment (see image), that's awaiting approval to be published. http://dsd-guide.com/music-lovers-creates-his-own-test-for-dynamic-range-no-surprise-dsd-wins#.WP-jL4nysUF Chris I his agree the statement is ambiguous, but it may not be intentionally misleading. He may mean to say that if you buy DSD music you find on average better DR, not that the DSD format is intrinsically better. He may not have realised it can be read both ways and should take on board your comment. Cheers 4est 1 🎸🎶🏔️🐺 Link to comment
elcorso Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 My very personal opinion on what I feel when listening to DSD vs PCM. - DR is, of course, limited by the recording itself. - But, on very hard DR peaks, when listening to DSD, I got no colapse in nothing, call you soundstage, harmonics, distortion, etc.. But yes with PCM. I would call this "Dynamic Contrast", that is different from DR. With my system and several DACs I own. Roch Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted April 26, 2017 Author Share Posted April 26, 2017 Yay, my comment is back up :~) Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 The real question is what led to the mis-apprehension as to DR. Maybe it was some confusion about bit depth(?) Link to comment
Popular Post mansr Posted April 27, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 27, 2017 What he fails to realise is that to calculate the dynamic range of a DSD recording, it must first be converted to PCM. That alone invalidates any conclusions of his. AudioDoctor and semente 2 Link to comment
Popular Post ted_b Posted April 27, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 27, 2017 The loudness wars are primarily due to major labels asking recording engineers to make their recordings louder than the next guy, so playlists will highlight them. These major labels primarily record in PCM and use post-processing out the wazzoo. In contrast, small boutique labels don't apply that pressure; and some of these smaller labels (especially classical, world and some jazz) record in DSD. Therefore, many DSD recordings have good DR. But geez, so do many PCM recordings (those that don't have the pop commercial loudness pressures). He's measuring the wrong statistics! look&listen, semente and elcorso 3 "We're all bozos on this bus"....F.T. My JRIver tutorial videos Actual JRIver tutorial MP4 video links My eleven yr old SACD Ripping Guide for PS3 (needs updating but still works) US Technical Advisor, NativeDSD.com Link to comment
elcorso Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 45 minutes ago, mansr said: What he fails to realise is that to calculate the dynamic range of a DSD recording, it must first be converted to PCM. That alone invalidates any conclusions of his. That means there isn't any tools to measure DR from DSD directly? Roch Link to comment
elcorso Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, ted_b said: The loudness wars are primarily due to major labels asking recording engineers to make their recordings louder than the next guy, so playlists will highlight them. These major labels primarily record in PCM and use post-processing out the wazzoo. In contrast, small boutique labels don't apply that pressure; and some of these smaller labels (especially classical, world and some jazz) record in DSD. Therefore, many DSD recordings have good DR. But geez, so do many PCM recordings (those that don't have the pop commercial loudness pressures). He's measuring the wrong statistics! And, when you record directly to DSD, overloading the vu meters (>0 dB) will be noticed with easy. Roch Link to comment
Popular Post mansr Posted April 27, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, elcorso said: That means there isn't any tools to measure DR from DSD directly? It is mathematically meaningless to do so. With 1-bit resolution, you have by definition maximum loudness all the time. Only by filtering out the ultrasonic noise can you get a meaningful signal to analyse, and that necessarily means going to a multi-bit PCM format (although the sample rate can remain high if you wish). esldude, semente, bogi and 1 other 4 Link to comment
elcorso Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 11 minutes ago, mansr said: It is mathematically meaningless to do so. With 1-bit resolution, you have by definition maximum loudness all the time. Only by filtering out the ultrasonic noise can you get a meaningful signal to analyse, and that necessarily means going to a multi-bit PCM format (although the sample rate can remain high if you wish). Thanks ! Roch Link to comment
crenca Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 On 4/27/2017 at 8:12 AM, mansr said: It is mathematically meaningless to do so. With 1-bit resolution, you have by definition maximum loudness all the time. Only by filtering out the ultrasonic noise can you get a meaningful signal to analyse, and that necessarily means going to a multi-bit PCM format (although the sample rate can remain high if you wish). No possible way to get a meaningful range in the analogue domain (that is, of the signal after the filter/conversion)? I realize this would not be quite apples to apples, but could (is?) this done in a way that is meaningful for listeners/consumers? Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
ShawnC Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 Lots of great information here guys. Too bad this isn't apart of the article comment section at the DSD-Guide.com website. Computer setup - Roon/Qobuz - PS Audio P5 Regenerator - HIFI Rose 250A Streamer - Emotiva XPA-2 Harbeth P3ESR XD - Rel R-528 Sub Comfy Chair - Schitt Jotunheim - Meze Audio Empyrean w/Mitch Barnett's Accurate Sound FilterSet Link to comment
mansr Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 46 minutes ago, crenca said: No possible way to get a meaningful range in the analogue domain (that is, of the signal after the filter/conversion)? I realize this would not be quite apples to apples, but could (is?) this done in a way that is meaningful for listeners/consumers? How do you propose to measure the analogue signal? Link to comment
Popular Post tailspn Posted May 2, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted May 2, 2017 As formats, DSD has +6dB greater dynamic range than PCM. DSD and PCM are digitally storable formats to record and transmit analog signals, mostly audio for our interest. 0dB is a definition in recording to signify a maximum level not to be exceeded. Below 0dB, both PCM and DSD are capable of the same signal level range, better known as dynamic range. Both can express an infinitely small signal, far below the practical minimal signal transferable by practical analog electronic circuits. In the case of PCM, 0dB represents the maximum binary range that the the format can represent; there's no bits left. It's a 2's compliment binary word for each sample that's either all 1's, or all 0's at 0dB (full scale). It's 2's compliment to support both positive and negative values. In DSD, there are no values represented. It's the density modulation of a bit clock, who's percent of modulation is proportional to the signal level, not a numerical value of a signal level (at an instant in time). All of that is background to the fact that from the lowest signal level deliverable to a A/D converter to the maximum that produces 0dB, the same dynamic range is expressible in both a PCM or DSD format up to 0dB. The DSD format however has an additional +6dB of headroom above 0dB that is not achievable with PCM. That's because DSD 0dB is specified as 50% modulation, allowing an additional 6dB of signal level to be represented. johndoe21ro, ferenc, look&listen and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment
crenca Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 6 minutes ago, tailspn said: As formats, DSD has +6dB greater dynamic range over PCM. DSD and PCM are digitally storable formats to record analog signals, mostly audio for our interest. 0dB is a definition in recording to signify a maximum level not to be exceeded. Below 0dB, both PCM and DSD are capable of the same signal level range, better known as dynamic range. Bot can express an infinitely small signal, far below the practical minimal signal transferable by practical electronic circuits. In the case of PCM, 0dB represents the maximum binary range that the the format can represent; there's no bits left. It's a 2's compliment binary word for each sample that's either all 1's, or all 0's at 0dB (full scale). It's 2's compliment to support both positive and negative values. In DSD, there are no values represented. It's the density modulation of a bit clock, who's percent of modulation is proportional to the signal level, not a numerical value of a signal level (at an instant in time). All of that is background to the fact that from the lowest signal level deliverable to a A/D converter to the maximum that produces 0dB, the same dynamic range is expressible in both a PCM or DSD format up to 0dB. The DSD format however has an additional +6dB of headroom above 0dB that is not achievable with PCM. That's because DSD 0dB is specified as 50% modulation, allowing an additional 6dB of signal level to be represented. So, if you have a signal of infinite loudness, that signal could be measured by PCM to exactly infininity given an infnate bit depth, but an DSD recording of infinite sample rate could measure that same signal PLUS an extra 6dB...so infininity plus 6dB (and here I am of course thinking of Toy Story Spanna 1 Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
tailspn Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 You're right! As long as the infinitely loud signal does not exceed the full scale range of PCM (0dB in DSD is the same level as 0dB in PCM), then the DSD representation will have +6dB additional headroom. AND BEYOND! Link to comment
audiventory Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 On 25.04.2017 at 10:39 PM, The Computer Audiophile said: I just read this post on DSD Guide about DSD and dynamic range. The post is a bit misleading, especially the sentence, "For me this analysis clearly shows that DSD has the best DR values." I left the following comment (see image), that's awaiting approval to be published. http://dsd-guide.com/music-lovers-creates-his-own-test-for-dynamic-range-no-surprise-dsd-wins#.WP-jL4nysUF Absolutelly. It is necessary to separate dynamic range of music and dynamic range of resolution/medium. Dynamic range of music is matter of record mixing/mastering. Higher resolution of medium give more potencial (it is not guaranteed) for the wider dinamic range. AuI ConverteR 48x44 - HD audio converter/optimizer for DAC of high resolution files ISO, DSF, DFF (1-bit/D64/128/256/512/1024), wav, flac, aiff, alac, safe CD ripper to PCM/DSF, Seamless Album Conversion, AIFF, WAV, FLAC, DSF metadata editor, Mac & WindowsOffline conversion save energy and nature Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now