A toast to PGGB, a heady brew of math and magic

[ted_b]

So a 4 GB DSD64 album becomes how big?  I can do the math when PCM to PCM but wondered here.  Thx

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

18 minutes ago, ted_b said:

So a 4 GB DSD64 album becomes how big?  I can do the math when PCM to PCM but wondered here.  Thx

 File size is a function of output sample rate and the track length, the number of taps only determines the quality of conversion, not the file size. In fact it is easiest to compute size when you go DSD -> PCM. 

 

DSD 64 is 64 x 44.1k @ 1 bit/ sample,  PCM 32FS is 32 x 44.1k @ 32 bit/sample  so:

 

4GB DSD 64 becomes  4 GB x 16 = 64GB  at 32FS 32 bits or 48GB at 32FS 24bits (ouch, but I hope you do not have too many of those 4GB of DSD 64)

 

Similarly:

4GB DSD 128 becomes 32 GB at 32FS 32bits

4GB DSD 256 becomes 16 GB at 32FS 32bits

4GB DSD 512 becomes   8 GB at 32FS 32bits

 

A better way to compute the space requirement is based on the track length in minutes.

At 16FS output rate (i.e 705.6kHz) and 32 bits, expect 1GB of file size for every 3 minutes of your track. For 32FS double it to 2GB every 3 minutes. 

 

Edit: Above sizes are without compression, with wavpack I have seen compression to anywhere between 25% and 50% of original size.

[happybob]

6 hours ago, austinpop said:

A few PGGB findings on DSD albums and provenance in general

 

There are indeed some albums that were recorded, mixed, edited, and mastered all in the DSD domain. But they are few, and none of these have found their way into my "albums I love and must own" list.

 

This statement that there are few albums that stay in DSD the entire path is so true and so hard for most DSD enthusiasts to acknowledge. Now some folks (who use a DAC that sounds best with DSD and/or that doesn't benefit from PGGB) might still prefer the sound of a DSD final version but this might say more about their specific DAC than it does about the underlying information truly available in the recording.

[kelvinwsy]

Zaphod, I am still finding USB drives to produce Clicking sounds. Same file 32fs on HDD or SSD on the PC plays perfect. Why is this so?

 

[kelvinwsy]

Oh another finding, most Endpoints cannot handle 32fs files. My SOTM Ultra Neo bit the dust and starting to produce crackling sounds. 

A correction. The USB drive connection is ok. It is the SOTM SM200 Ultra Neo that cannot handle the 32fs files.

 

Thanks again. Sounds Out of this world the Default setting on PGGB files.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

1 minute ago, kelvinwsy said:

Oh another finding, most Endpoints cannot handle 32fs files. My SOTM Ultra Neo bit the dust and starting to produce crackling sounds. 

A correction. The USB drive connection is ok. It is the SOTM SM200 Ultra Neo that cannot handle the 32fs files.

 

Thanks again. Sounds Out of this world the Default setting on PGGB files.

Yes  16FS and especially 32FS can be brutal on endpoints that do not have enough buffer or horsepower.

[Miska]

3 hours ago, happybob said:

who use a DAC that sounds best with DSD

 

Should be any DAC that is able to convert DSD natively to analog...

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

46 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Should be any DAC that is able to convert DSD natively to analog...

Assuming  the same DAC being incapable of sounding as good or better with PCM.

Also assuming  said DAC is a single bit delta sigma DAC and not a multi-bit delta-sigma DAC  or has a pure single bit delta sigma mode that sounds superior to other modes that may be available on the same DAC.

[davide256]

Having a problem... trying to create some listening samples at higher rates, instead of getting   .wav for output file extension I'm getting .wv

and euphony doesn't recognize any sample rate for this. Suggestions?

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

1 minute ago, davide256 said:

Having a problem... trying to create some listening samples at higher rates, instead of getting   .wav for output file extension I'm getting .wv

and euphony doesn't recognize any sample rate for this. Suggestions?

You have compression turned on, click on the cocktail image, uncheck FLAC or Wavpack

[SwissBear]

Just wanted to share my appreciation of this technology and of the quality of Zaphod’s support. I asked for a trial licence on Sunday, and was happy to receive it straight away.

 

Zaphod asked about the DAC I had and underlined the fact that the Gustard x26-Pro would be a good candidate to appreciate PGGB. I was sceptical and expected no significant difference between the 16fs capabilities of the x26-Pro compared to the 8fs capabilities of my Singxer SDA-6. I was also expecting that processing files in 24 bits would be enough and that I would not need 32 bits.

 

Zaphod took the time to explain with a great length of details and his genuine skills why I would be better trying 32x16fs and compare with 24x16fs or the like in 8fs with the SDA-6.

 

And as hopeful as I was that I could spare some storage space going for 24x8fs, I have to admit that 32x16fs makes a big difference in the resolution and the airiness of the treble on my system.

 

And PGGB really is a game changer even for “modest” DACs such as the Gustard x26-Pro.

So thank you Zaphod for having brought this technology to us, and thank you for your support.

[Miska]

8 hours ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

Assuming  the same DAC being incapable of sounding as good or better with PCM.

 

So far all delta-sigma DACs on the market I've seen make shortcuts for PCM processing.

 

DSD is only way to run proper digital filters up to modulator rate and also work around on-chip modulator deficiencies.

 

8 hours ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

Also assuming  said DAC is a single bit delta sigma DAC and not a multi-bit delta-sigma DAC  or has a pure single bit delta sigma mode that sounds superior to other modes that may be available on the same DAC.

 

No, multi-bit delta-sigma doesn't make it any better than single-bit. Best example are DACs with TI's chips that work absolutely best in DSD mode. Same goes for recent AKM chips that have DSD Direct mode.

 

Also DACs like Chord Mojo have so inadequate multi-bit modulator, that they would benefit from direct DSD conversion if they would have such. It is just that their DSD-to-PCM conversion is even more inadequate than their PCM processing. So you are stuck to just playing with digital filters but no way of getting around the modulator.

 

Even with ESS Sabre you can get around deficiencies of the PCM side by using DSD inputs even though it doesn't have direct mode. The DSP just gets so much simplified for DSD inputs.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

45 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

So far all delta-sigma DACs on the market I've seen make shortcuts for PCM processing.

 

DSD is only way to run proper digital filters up to modulator rate and also work around on-chip modulator deficiencies.

 

 

No, multi-bit delta-sigma doesn't make it any better than single-bit. Best example are DACs with TI's chips that work absolutely best in DSD mode. Same goes for recent AKM chips that have DSD Direct mode.

 

Also DACs like Chord Mojo have so inadequate multi-bit modulator, that they would benefit from direct DSD conversion if they would have such. It is just that their DSD-to-PCM conversion is even more inadequate than their PCM processing. So you are stuck to just playing with digital filters but no way of getting around the modulator.

 

Even with ESS Sabre you can get around deficiencies of the PCM side by using DSD inputs even though it doesn't have direct mode. The DSP just gets so much simplified for DSD inputs.

 

Let us agree to disagree and avoid a PCM vs DSD  discussion. It depends on the DAC implementation, the quality of DSD or PCM upsampling, listening preference and playback chain and I am not comfortable making any generalizations.

 

[Miska]

4 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

It depends on the DAC implementation

 

It is pretty easy in a way that there are only few DAC chip architectures. I have measured quite a bunch and continue doing so.

 

4 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

the quality of DSD or PCM upsampling

 

Certainly...

 

4 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

listening preference and playback chain

 

I have objective approach, so listening preferences don't affect this.

 

[davide256]

On 5/26/2021 at 11:08 AM, taipan254 said:

I have to agree on this. I got the iris ddc and tried my pggb test files with my lps powered 2qute. I hear more of pggb's magic via an optical cable from iris ddc downspampled to 192k than hardwired usb at full sample rate.

 

I think the source still matters depite pggb magic (dell laptop vs. Iris ddc)! Will experiment more in the next few weeks. 

Something I'm trying now, step the sample rate down in Euphony to the output rate (176/192)  on coax/optical from IRIS. Using Reference Recordings RR-83

Ein Heldenleben track 1  as my torture test for treble irritants. Will be curious what you think. My least offensive result so far was 705/20 down-sampled by IRIS

but could hear loss of detail vs 705/32. Giving 176/32 a whirl next out of curiosity

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

5 minutes ago, davide256 said:

Something I'm trying now, step the sample rate down in Euphony to the output rate (176/192)  on coax/optical from IRIS. Using Reference Recordings RR-83

Ein Heldenleben track 1  as my torture test for treble irritants. Will be curious what you think. My least offensive result so far was 705/20 down-sampled by IRIS

but could hear loss of detail vs 705/32. Giving 176/32 a whirl next out of curiosity

Yes the better test is directly converting to 176/32. I expect it to sound better than letting IRIS do the downsampling 

[davide256]

Just now, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

Yes the better test is directly converting to 176/32. I expect it to sound better than letting IRIS do the downsampling 

yea.. I'm suspecting noise creeps in when the IRIS down converts... will see if @taipan254 can corroborate.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Released a minor update v1.1.13 

 

Based on some feedback I got, there is now option in the hidden menu to optionally add '[PGGB][Bitdepth-samplerate]' to the Album tag of gargle-blasted albums like below. this makes it to easily identify/search for gargle blasted albums.

 

Hidden menu:

[chrille]

On 5/26/2021 at 11:27 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

@chrille I tend to overspec what PGGB needs and I have been wrong many times. Taking a conservative approach is a good idea, just make sure your Mac will let you add more RAM later, starting with something like 40GB and then later go up to 64GB. If you are only going to do DSD64 and occasional DSD128. I am happy with 64GB of RAM on my workstation and I have done the occasional DSD128 and DSD256 but a significant portion of my library is older Jazz recordings for which DSD64 is my best option, very few cross 2B taps.

Hi again not wanting to abandon the mac platform I have found a mbp with Big Sur a 1TB SSD but only 16 gigabyte ram that I could buy at a decent price.

I am not really in need of top speed racing, I can patiently wait even overnight provided it will be possible to convert both hi res pcm and DSD 64.

Or would there be a risk that it would go up in flames if I try to  convert hi res?

The only problems I have had on my current mbp with heavy photoshop jobs is that it takes time and the fan goes on  working really big heavy photos at 64bits.

But alas it can not be upgraded above High Sierra.

Please advice how to proceed ?

Cheers Chrille

 

[kelvinwsy]

23 hours ago, Miska said:

 

It is pretty easy in a way that there are only few DAC chip architectures. I have measured quite a bunch and continue doing so.

 

 

Certainly...

 

 

I have objective approach, so listening preferences don't affect this.

 

My listening tests seem to indicate Jussi's statements above. I am using the iFi iDSD Micro BL in bit perfect mode as well as the SMSL VMV D1 -(dual ESS9038pro- no MQA) and the Gustard A22 (dual AK4499) in PCM mode - Sorry No NOS mode for both.

Using JRiver MC26 as well as HQPlayer 4.10.3 and 4.11.2 in PCM mode with Nil all in the PCM menu boxes;

 

The 32fs files - 705.6khz sound quite good, but I am sure my 3 DAC's are NOT the correct equipment to hear these files in the best bit perfect mode. 

Zaphod - Any suggestion in this area?

My DACs still produce DSD 256 with EC Modulators with a clearly audible superiority in airiness, HF smoothness and extension, Bass impact and definition and Mid range presence and overall PRAT.

Any ideas anyone?

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

38 minutes ago, chrille said:

Hi again not wanting to abandon the mac platform I have found a mbp with Big Sur a 1TB SSD but only 16 gigabyte ram that I could buy at a decent price.

I am not really in need of top speed racing, I can patiently wait even overnight provided it will be possible to convert both hi res pcm and DSD 64.

Or would there be a risk that it would go up in flames if I try to  convert hi res?

The only problems I have had on my current mbp with heavy photoshop jobs is that it takes time and the fan goes on  working really big heavy photos at 64bits.

But alas it can not be upgraded above High Sierra.

Please advice how to proceed ?

Cheers Chrille

 

With 16GB of RAM you will have to limit it to CDs and 256M taps.  Big Sur is not a requirement, I suggested it for future proofing reasons. Mojave or Catalina will be OK too. RAM is what PGGB requires most, and on a Mac, unlike wWindows it is not possible to change virtual memory/swap space. If you can go up to 32GB for Hires and 40-64GB for DSD. You can do DSD at 32GB but may have to limit it to 512M taps if you run out of memory.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

4 minutes ago, kelvinwsy said:

My listening tests seem to indicate Jussi's statements above. I am using the iFi iDSD Micro BL in bit perfect mode as well as the SMSL VMV D1 -(dual ESS9038pro- no MQA) and the Gustard A22 (dual AK4499) in PCM mode - Sorry No NOS mode for both.

Using JRiver MC26 as well as HQPlayer 4.10.3 and 4.11.2 in PCM mode with Nil all in the PCM menu boxes;

 

The 32fs files - 705.6khz sound quite good, but I am sure my 3 DAC's are NOT the correct equipment to hear these files in the best bit perfect mode. 

Zaphod - Any suggestion in this area?

My DACs still produce DSD 256 with EC Modulators with a clearly audible superiority in airiness, HF smoothness and extension, Bass impact and definition and Mid range presence and overall PRAT.

Any ideas anyone?

 

1. Were you using the default settings in PGGB? 2.  Was the max and min volume set to 0 on HQP?  If the answer is yes to both then it is likely PGGB is not a good fit for your setup.

[kelvinwsy]

Yes 0db for Max and Min - But I will try again.

My question(if I understand the exchange between the 2 experts Zaphod and Miska)  is this:

1. Are there recommended DACs which are recommended to play back 32fs and even 64 fs files

And 

2. I have reduced the gain -5db to prevent clipping and this allows me to play 0db max and min under PCM playback mode. (I tried Source and it sounded weird and distorted.)

3. What are the others on this thread doing >> ? I am willing to try any ideas.

 

 

[kelvinwsy]

On checking the official specs of the Gustard A22 - it does not specify 705.6. Only the SMSL VMV D1.

The iFi iDSD sounds great with the 32fs. 

I think I will try 16fs on some similar test tunes and try them out on the Gustard A22. 

 

Report back in a day or so.

 

 

[kelvinwsy]

Sorry about typo - Let me correct myself. 16fs - 705.6

I will try 8fs - 352.6 instead

 

Thanks