Mytek Stereo 192

[Miska]

DSD to PCM is not a lossy conversion. 24/176.4 PCM has more information than DSD, so the conversion is not lossy in any way.

 

Well, you lose in time domain mostly.

 

So the Mytek is converting single bit DSD first to a multi bit format, then converting to analog.

 

The important part, AFAIK, is hat it is non-decimating conversion; it upsamples DSD to even higher frequency and adds some bits on the way...

 

I don't know if it has configuration option to convert directly, like some other DACs have. But theoretically it could do that too and it should be easy to do in hardware.

 

 

[barrows]

"The important part, AFAIK, is that it is non-decimating conversion; it upsamples DSD to even higher frequency and adds some bits on the way..."

 

Yes, that is my point... the ESS is manipulating the data, but not doing any "down conversion" per se. I have no problem with this personally, but the description of it being "native" conversion just seems a little innaccurate to me.

 

 

 

 

 

[barrows]

Is that there are lot of "purists" who are espousing "native" playback of DSD, rather than converting it to high level PCM. While I mostly agree with this point of view, in reality, it is often rather moot: in the case of Mytek, we have a DAC which is not operating "natively", as an example. In the case of DSD in general, there is not a lot of pure DSD music available. Most SACDs were PCM at some point in their existence, especially pop/rock titles. I am pretty sure the latter Telarcs are pure DSD, recorded in DSD, and mixed/mastered on the Sonoma. But every rock title and most jazz which I am aware of the provenance, was mixed and/or mastered in PCM, and then captured in DSD for SACD release. I do not know the provenance of the rest of classical producers' (Harmonia Mundi, Pentatone, DG) DSD release...

It might be instructive to recall the real reason we have DSD at all. Sony/Phillips licensing of the CD was expiring, and they wanted to create a new reveune stream to replace the lost CD licensing revenue. They could not charge anyone for high resolution PCM, so they created DSD, a totally new format for which they could charge licensing fees.

 

[Esprit]

Hi to all from Italy,

this is my first post here :-)

 

@ Yverof: Can you tell me if you prefer a direct connection to the amplifier or the use of a preamplifier.

 

In addition: for those who already own a Mytek 192 DSD, in order to understand if the three products are "equal"; what is the version you have bought?

 

P.S. I apologize for my bad english and thank Google for the help... :-D

 

[KarolG]

Let's not start another DSD vs. PCM war

What really matters for me is not if DSD is superior to PCM (or not) but what kind of release is available for me to buy for the best possible digital version.

 

If the best digital version currently available for "I Robot" by The Alan Parsons Project is DVD-Audio (HDAD) then I want to get it.

 

Unfortunately for many releases the best digital version currently available seems to be DFF file ripped from SACD. I mean releases like MoFi or Analogue Productions.

 

I just want to play them all using one device in the best possible way.

 

I am aware recording companies want me to buy the same stuff all over again - but now we not only listen but also measure and view the music using our computers. It's not so easy to make me buy another version before I do Internet research first

 

Now Mytek opened for me the new possibilities. Now I learn how to use them properly

 

[barrows]

No war intended! But it would be interesting to discuss the relative merits of DSD and PCM in a dedicated thread...

To your point. If the best version available is SACD, and you have the ability to rip it, then, wouldn't you like to know, definitivly, if you can then sample rate convert the DSD to PCM at 24/176.4 without any degradation in sonics?

Considering that many (most) titles available on SACD were PCM at some point, it is likely that using a good SRC, a conversion to 24/176.4 will not introduce any degradation.

 

[Miska]

It might be instructive to recall the real reason we have DSD at all. Sony/Phillips licensing of the CD was expiring, and they wanted to create a new reveune stream to replace the lost CD licensing revenue.

 

I think there are multiple reasons:

- Converters at that time were 64fs 1-bit delta-sigma

- Making a high quality DAC for DSD is significantly cheaper and simpler than equivalent quality for PCM

- Multibit PCM DACs had low level linearity and cost problems as number of bits increased

- CD was lacking multichannel support

- CD was lacking copy protection

 

Now we essentially have "upgraded DSD" (multi-bit delta-sigma) in the converters, but since the data we talk in (PCM) is not native to these converters, they need to employ tons of DSP to convert it. Both at A/D and D/A side.

 

 

[ted_b]

to my original post/goal months ago:

If the source is PCM, lemme hear it in PCM. If the source is analog or DSD lemme hear it in DSD (Sony's secondary goal with DSD was analog archiving)

 

Now...to me the issue is those analog tapes that were EQ'd and edited with PCM, then transferred to DSD. Usually the PCM editing portion was done early in the digital life at 24 bit at 48k, or even 44k. The issue then becomes whether the better eventual outcome is DSD or is it 24/88+. I wonder if a tile like Beck - Sea Change (I own both SACD and DVD-A) is a possible test case. I'm not sure what was done prior to each release. Clearly, HDtracks SACD rips are not test candidates in that they have gone through a needless step (meticulously done but needless in this argument).

 

[ted_b]

production version, and it doesn't support DSD DACs, just DSD-to-PCM conversions. Get the latest from Rob; it will not require typing in the driver name on the "special options" page (page 6 of the pdf). To answer your question, if you must type, then type in the exact name of the driver as it shows in the pull down area of the "output" hog mode screen (page 5 of the pdf). My drivers (USB and firewire) might be named slightly different than yours if you have a different version of them.

 

Edit: Rob corrected me to say that 1.82 version is capable of DSD, but Mytek was not in its listing, so we need to tell PM that the Mytek is a DSD DAC (via typing in driver name in early D3, or clicking checkbox in later betas).

 

[audiozorro]

That is if you start with a DSD64 file convert it to 24/176.4 PCM file and convert that to a new DSD64 file, the old and new DSD64 files are different.

 

I also thought one of the chief arguments for the high resolution DXD format was to enable more transparent conversions between DSD and PCM. At this very high resolution the conversions just minimize but do not eliminate the differences.

 

A few vendors have comparison discs and the two formats, DSD and PCM definitely capture different, sound different, and measure different.

 

[ted_b]

now out the door, so Pm is not far behind.

 

[barrows]

"different" does not equal "destructive"

 

24/176.4 actually has more information than DSD...

 

Ted: agreed, but, as you note, it is impossible to know, with a few exceptions, whether a title released on SACD had a PCM intermediate step. There seems to be very little "native" DSD content out there (like the latter Telarcs I have mentioned). In this case, there is not much "need" for DSD at all, if we only have a small handful of titles which are truly DSD. Say Miska is correct in that DSD has an advantage in transient response, as soon as a PCM step is included in the mixing/mastering process, that transient advantage is gone forever. To my mind, even if we determine that DSD to 24/176.4 conversion does lose something meaningful (and I am not convinced of this at all) it will only lose something from (the very few) titles which are native DSD all the way through.

 

[Miska]

A few vendors have comparison discs and the two formats, DSD and PCM definitely capture different, sound different, and measure different.

 

I have an A/D/A that has 192/24 PCM AD and 128x DSD AD, both running in parallel with the same analogue stage, and I can switch either one to the same DA. And I can say that these two do sound different when doing A/B comparison.

 

 

[pacwin]

 

Depends on your listening tastes. There are thousands of native DSD recordings. Half a dozen came through my mailbox yesterday. Last month I acquired a 24 channel native DSD recording of a big band. Its everywhere in stereo and more so in multichannel, new releases every week. New companies recording in DSD are starting up all the time and joining the long list of publishers who record or commission recordings in DSD. It's pointless to compare the bitrate/information content of PCM against DSD. One is pulse code modulation and one is pulse width modulation. Its like chalk and cheese.

 

PCM >DSD has much less if any degradation than DSD->PCM. There are plenty of companies doing DSD mixing/editing in certain DAW's and others who use DXD. And there's been plenty of analogue transfers using DSD A/D converters i.e published by analogue productions alone (more than 75). There's a lot of scaremongering going on about the death/unavailability of DSD. This is the case if your tastes are pop and rock music or multi tracked studio generated cut and paste music with a lot of DSP and software plugins, in those cases PCM rules.

 

Serious audiophiles are interested in musical performance and quality recordings of those performances. Both exist in the PCM and DSD world.

 

[Miska]

as soon as a PCM step is included in the mixing/mastering process, that transient advantage is gone forever.

 

That's true in case that rate is lower than the original. However, I've understood that for example Sonoma uses 8-bit SDM for editing at the original sampling rate.

 

DXD is another thing, but since it's PCM it has somewhat different properties. It's generally "high enough" to avoid truncating any musical information. Down side is that it still needs to be converted from/to SDM at the converter side in order to obtain needed low level linearity.

 

 

[pacwin]

>They could not charge anyone for high resolution PCM, so >they created DSD, a totally new format for which they could >charge licensing fees.

 

You are confusing the digital format of the data with the carrier. DSD is not proprietary it is an open standard. SACD, the physical carrier of DSD, with watermarking signal pit processing does require royalties (these days very marginal few cents per disc).

 

>the case of Mytek, we have a DAC which is not >operating "natively"

 

Do you mean because it's a multi bit sigma delta DAC? Which one-bit Dacs are still in production?

 

>>But every rock title and most jazz which I am aware of the >>provenance

 

There are DSD recorded jazz titles, I have several hundred of them, but few of them compared to the total jazz output, many of those though in surround. One of the most recent jazz one in my collection is a DSD recorded/mixed from Village Records in Japan a lovely Jimmy Cobb album (ironically recorded in New York, sold in Japan). Impex records a reinvigorated label has released a DSD recording this year, a large ensemble jazz recording, recorded in 24 channel DSD (the album booklet shows the exact mike placement).

 

In general jazz musicians, recording houses and the jazz press have never got their head around high resolution audio especially DSD, have ignored surround sound, and even up until today have not taken advantage of digital downloads. Classical music far and away leads the field in innovation and enterprise.

 

Computer audio is one thing, just rip all your pop music from mas market CD's . Computer audiophile is another. Your musical tastes have more impact than the gear you use in the latter case.

 

[Miska]

Which one-bit Dacs are still in production?

 

I think none, but I know two that have configurable option to work like one.

 

 

Onkyo has an SACD player where user can switch between the modes of the latter one.

 

Would be interesting to hear if the ESS chip has similar configuration option.

 

[barrows]

 

"You are confusing the digital format of the data with the carrier. DSD is not proprietary it is an open standard. SACD, the physical carrier of DSD, with watermarking signal pit processing does require royalties (these days very marginal few cents per disc)."

 

No, I am not confused at all. Sony created DSD so they could create a new revenue stream to replace the lost revenue when the CD licensing expired. It is plain and simple. If it were not for this reason, it is very likely that DSD never would have been developed. The fact that SACD was the medium through which they collected their fees makes no difference.

 

"Do you mean because it's a multi bit sigma delta DAC? Which one-bit Dacs are still in production?"

 

Yes, native conversion of DSD to analog would be a single bit process. I do not know what single bit DSD DACs are available, I suspect Miska would be a good person to ask about that. BTW, I have nothing against the way the Mytek processes DSD personally, I just wanted to point out to DSD "purists" that things are not always as "pure" as they seem. My DAC uses the ESS 9018.

 

"There are DSD recorded jazz titles, I have several hundred of them, but few of them compared to the total jazz output, many of those though in surround. One of the most recent jazz one in my collection is a DSD recorded/mixed from Village Records in Japan a lovely Jimmy Cobb album (ironically recorded in New York, sold in Japan). Impex records a reinvigorated label has released a DSD recording this year, a large ensemble jazz recording, recorded in 24 channel DSD (the album booklet shows the exact mike placement)."

 

Thanks for sharing!

 

 

"Computer audio is one thing, just rip all your pop music from mas market CD's . Computer audiophile is another. Your musical tastes have more impact than the gear you use in the latter case."

 

Huh? Not sure what you are getting at here? Who are you talking to? Your "pop" music?

 

Pacwin, since you seem to have a lot of great sources for high resolution native DSD recordings, I, and I am sure many others here, would be appreciative if you might start a thread which points us in the right direction. I am sure once it gets going others will share as well and it could become a very valuable resource on this site.

 

 

 

[ted_b]

I have his Jazz In The Key Of Blue from Chesky, and love it. I've heard it both as my SACD rip (DSF) and as a Chesky download (24/192k) and like the download better...I'm sure the source is 24 bit, knowing Chesky (A Mytek pro customer BTW). I own the SACD for surround, but haven't really played it enough. I love the stereo mix. I also own New York Time (24/96).

 

[blaine78]

thanks yverof for your observation. I've been waiting for a small review like that, and I can now imagine how it would sound on my system a little better.

 

[yverof]

Hello Esprit

 

I prefer the direct connection with balanced in/out.

I have an Audio Research sp17 pre-amp. I tried it but I loose 'silence' and 'neutrality'. I have the Mytek with analog pre-amp (not sure this is still available).

look here : http://www.mytekdigital.com/europe/store/index.php?cPath=22

 

Yves

 

[pjomaestro]

Hello Yves,

Is the updated pdf located in the same previous post ?

I downloaded it again assuming it is the updated version, but I do not see any difference between the two versions.

Maybe I am missing something.

 

pjo

 

[yverof]

It is not in the initial message, I did not know you can update a previous post. For some reasons I attach it to this message (?)

 

[Esprit]

thanks for the answer :-)

 

Black (RCA input) with LED meters or Silver without?

 

Silvio

 

[Esprit]

what computer you use (PC/Mac/other...)? What operating system (Lion/Snow/Win7)? What computer output, Mytek input (FW/USB)?

 

Silvio