Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Testing audiophile claims and myths - Page 170

post #2536 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

Multichannel sound is the next frontier for home audio. If standards for recording and playback can be firmly established, and some way of dummyproofing installation and room acoustics can get worked out, it will be as much of a leap over normal 2 channel as stereo was over mono. Unfortunately, 5:1 straight out of a box doesn't even come close to touching its potential. It takes a experience to tweak it properly- perhaps installation services that make house calls and set the whole system up... like a cable man. I had a professional install my sound system, but the only sort of calibration service he offered was THX certification, which in my opinion is overpriced and not at all what I was looking for. I had to do all of my tuning myself.

By the way, binaural recording is tremendously limiting and only appropriate for certain types of recordings. 5:1 is much more flexible and has the potential to improve every kind of recorded sound, from television broadcasts to recorded music of all kinds.

Agreed on the first chapter. Due to the requirements, unlikely to EVER become widespread enough.  How many real households can afford listening-only room ?

Similar problem was with the quadrophonic systems ( quite a number of presently available "surround" recordings started their life during quadro era in the 70s )

 

I do not see binaural THAT tremendously limiting - but I agree 5:1 to be more flexible. With one fly in the ointment : it is inherently flawed ( some say; I heard it for real only once and do not have a room sized to implement it properly, so I will leave it at that. )

 

I remember Chesky being one of the prime detractors for binaural say around 2005 or so. They had all kinds of reservations. Look at them now: like any other manufacturer of audio gear and/or record label, they saw where the action ( $ ) is. To each speaker centric high end system - how MANY headphone based portable systems preferred by young people are sold nowadays? Who buys then more records/downloads ? And they simply conformed to the real world market needs...

post #2537 of 2956
I think the key to acceptance of 5:1 in normal homes is going to be when the TV/home theater, computer/media server, and stereo system all merge into one entertainment/media center. It's getting there. I bet you'll find people dedicating rooms in their house for it, just like people started turning their unused dining rooms and spare bedrooms into home offices in the 90s.

Re: Binaural- The average kid doesn't buy music for how well it's recorded and how good it sounds, that's for sure! No hope there except as a novelty.
Edited by bigshot - 4/22/14 at 12:04am
post #2538 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

I think the key to acceptance of 5:1 in normal homes is going to be when the TV/home theater, computer/media server, and stereo system all merge into one entertainment/media center. It's getting there. I bet you'll find people dedicating rooms in their house for it, just like people started turning their unused dining rooms and spare bedrooms into home offices in the 90s.

Re: Binaural- The average kid doesn't buy music for how well it's recorded and how good it sounds, that's for sure! No hope there except as a novelty.

Regarding 5:1 - I certainly hope you are right.

 

Re binaural - it is not only kids. Like it or not, sad, but true: an average musician, in anything from the early 30s to about 60s, is VERY likely to confess to have time/peace of mind to listen to recorded music - EVEN his own - in a car only. No kids running around, no nagging wife ( or husband ) - otherwise, (next to ) no time for listening to recordings. Is such a person going to invest in all the needed for 5:1 ? Dedicate a room desperately needed for growing kids - to audio? Possible, but unlikely.

 

Headphone setup of even the highest calibre is both easier and cheaper. So binaural will have its share in the future.

post #2539 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogsurviver View Post
 

 

Korg DSD recorders record to a hard disk ( solid state is , even under best/most expensive scenario, barely capable of 100 MB/s requirement  for glitch-free DSD recording - besides, it apperently does not like numerous deleting/overwriting , leading to premature destruction, all of which is totally unacceptable for the requirements of DSD ) - and you can only hear its analog output AFTER it has been recorded to the HDD. It is the very same thing listening to the monitor or playback - so DSD recorders can be said to  "burn their audio on the fly - in real time ".

This is laughably incorrect - current hard disk drives are capable of ~200MB/s sustained write rate on one device, while current high end solid state is capable of over 400MB/s sustained onto a single device. This rate can be further increased through the use of RAID and caching. My home computer has a solid state array capable of well over 600MB/s sustained writes and near 1GB/s sustained reads. I am curious where you're getting these required data rate figures though, since even DSD512, with a sample rate of ~22-24MHz, only requires ~3MB/s per channel of audio data (so even a 7.1 recording at DSD512, with a full separate channel used for the subwoofer info, would only require about 24-25MB/s).


Edited by cjl - 4/22/14 at 9:29am
post #2540 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjl View Post
 

This is laughably incorrect - current hard disk drives are capable of ~200MB/s sustained write rate on one device, while current high end solid state is capable of over 400MB/s sustained onto a single device. This rate can be further increased through the use of RAID and caching. My home computer has a solid state array capable of well over 600MB/s sustained writes and near 1GB/s sustained reads. I am curious where you're getting these required data rate figures though, since even DSD512, with a sample rate of ~22-24MHz, only requires ~3MB/s per channel of audio data (so even a 7.1 recording at DSD512, with a full separate channel used for the subwoofer info, would only require about 24-25MB/s).

OK, I may have oversimplified a bit - I was stating the facts about what can be used with the Korg units.

 

And that means CF or SSD cards connected trough an adapter instead of HDD. INTERNAL !

 

You are dead wrong on the speed requirements : please see 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/425849/korg-mr-1-can-this-be-used-as-a-portable-player/225

 

MR 1, MR 1000 and MR 2000S all use very similar "everything", and they DO require 100 MB/sec for glitch free DSD recording. It could maybe work with 90 MB/sec ( Hoodman IIRC ) - but I am not about to splash that much money to end up with iffy performance I can not 100% rely on.

 

Korg ( with the exception of 2000S ) are portable units - so any mumbo jumbo with external anything ( like RAID during recording - shivers....) is simply out of place.

 

The figures you have quoted may well hold true in the latest computer gear - any principally audio gear is unlikely to support latest in computers, as it is hard enough to achieve the desired goal to function as intended in the first place and is usually "one computer generation behind" upon release; more so when using what is available at reasonable price. A Hoodman SSD card at roughly $ 500 a pop is a FAR cry above any manufacturer would consider in a device selling for less than say 5K. When introduced in 2006, MR 1000 was less than a third of that.

 

And, yes, although I would have liked it otherwise, Korg MR series achieves below 20 KB/sec via its USB 2.0 .

 

There will be no more serious DSD recorders from Korg; current MR 2 is a fancy dictaphone aimed at musicians to be a minimum fuss device enough for them to be able to make recordings of spontaneous musical ideas. They are selling DSD DACs now - the number of DAC users outstrips the number of recorder users by .... 

post #2541 of 2956

The only number I see in that thread is 100Mb/s, which is 12.5MB/s, right in line with my expected numbers for 8 channels of DSD256 or 4 channels of DSD512, and a data rate easily achievable by even a large number of USB thumb drives.

 

(Note that B and b do not mean the same thing when it comes to data rates)

post #2542 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjl View Post
 

The only number I see in that thread is 100Mb/s, which is 12.5MB/s, right in line with my expected numbers for 8 channels of DSD256 or 4 channels of DSD512, and a data rate easily achievable by even a large number of USB thumb drives.

 

(Note that B and b do not mean the same thing when it comes to data rates)

Sorry, you are correct in B vs b; but then, cards that can be used with Korg units ARE also generally below 100Mb/s,

meaning we are basically back to square one.

 

And that "at least 100 Mb/s" holds true for 2 channels of DSD64 ...- as far as I have searched the web, no one attempted+suceeded in replacing HDD with card of one description or another while retaining glitch free 2 channel DSD128 recording with the MR 1000. As it is a portable field recorder, having no moving parts storage without impact sensitivity, certainly was/is wish/desire of many.

 

The MR-1 thread is full of attempts - which, to my knowledge, all failed when DSD64 recording was required. The price of the Hoodman SSD cards that are on the border of useability proved to be deterrant enough for the time being.

post #2543 of 2956

That's using a slow interface though - anytime there are truly high bandwidth requirements, you see completely different interfaces with the flash memory than you see in any audio device. For a truly extreme example, look at high speed HD cameras - they can push hundreds of megabytes or more per second of data, and as a result have large, specialized (and expensive) flash storage arrays to handle the huge data volume. No audio recording currently in use (of any type) comes remotely close to stressing a modern storage device the way that high res/high speed video can.

post #2544 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjl View Post
 

That's using a slow interface though - anytime there are truly high bandwidth requirements, you see completely different interfaces with the flash memory than you see in any audio device. For a truly extreme example, look at high speed HD cameras - they can push hundreds of megabytes or more per second of data, and as a result have large, specialized (and expensive) flash storage arrays to handle the huge data volume. No audio recording currently in use (of any type) comes remotely close to stressing a modern storage device the way that high res/high speed video can.

I know that interface used in Korg MR series is slow. It is the sign of the time during it was developed - currently, there is (?) only one new model of TEAC DSD recorder availble at the prosumer level - or pro device$$$$. 

 

I agree that high res/speed video is even more difficult task than hi res/speed audio. 

post #2545 of 2956
https://wyred4sound.com/products/music-servers/music-server
post #2546 of 2956
Wow! 2 grand! My mac mini media server was a lot cheaper and it does all that too.
post #2547 of 2956

Our Music Servers, which come in 1TB and 2TB capacities, offer resolution up to 32/384 kHz (as well as DSD), can be controlled wirelessly with both Apple and Android devices, play internet radio (and great music apps like Pandora and MOG) and support drag-and-drop transfer of music from your computer or NAS drive.

 

:rolleyes:

post #2548 of 2956

So? Any reasonably-competent media server (capable of bit-perfect playback of 16/44 or ideally 24/44 or 24/48) will sound identical to that for a huge amount less money (and if for some strange reason, you have files that only come in esoteric high-bitrate formats, there are plenty of available software suites for both Mac and Windows (and Linux, for that matter) that will play them or downconvert them for you).

post #2549 of 2956
..

Edited by SilverEars - 4/22/14 at 9:17pm
post #2550 of 2956

..


Edited by SilverEars - 4/22/14 at 9:17pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths