[theaudiohobby]

Quote:

I am talking about plain CDs that have the DSD label on them

That was what finally won me over to DSD, I was auditioning a Consonance CD Player, the demo CD wiped the floor, there were few other CDs used in that audition which took place over a period of few days. The demo CD (DSD CD) was consistently cleaner and more transparent than any other CD we demoed the player with. I requested to buy the CD and lo and behold the dealer produced a hybrid SACD as the demo CD was not available for sale, that was when it dawned on me that I had been listening to a DSD CD. That demo CD was produced by 'JMLabs'. Another incident occurred when I was at home and placed a hybrid SACCD in my plain old jane DVD player, that was the best music ever produced by that DVD player and I was somewhat taken aback by that experience and it confirmed some comments I read way back in 2001 when some of the music publishers said that DSD has a beneficial effect even it is only employed at the recording/master/mixing stages. And yes there is equipment trickling to the market to address these needs.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

What can I say... whatever rocks your boat

And how much DVD-A have you auditioned?

 

[Calanctus]

Quote:

Originally posted by Joe Bloggs I'm not talking about SACDs (hey I don't even have an SACD player ) I am talking about plain CDs that have the DSD label on them. What? (I mean the CDs not you )

My bad--misread your post. I heard a similar complaint from an audio salesman I was buying some speakers from, so you're not alone, but I haven't noticed it.

 

[taoster]

Quote:

Originally posted by Joe Bloggs What can I say... whatever rocks your boat And how much DVD-A have you auditioned?

and how much DVD-A, SACD, DSD have [size=small]you[/size] auditioned?

Or even a player to play any of the above.

 

[kartik]

I have now been using the Sharp DSD player for a couple of days. I only happen to have one DSD/SACD hybrid disc. There are some subtle differences between the SACD and the redbook sound in the disc although they are not the kind that hit you in the face. The SACD layer has better definition and more space with a slightly bigger sound than the redbook, However I had to concentrate really hard and after listening to the same track several times to reach this conclusion. Whether this is a reflection of the quality of the redbook playback or the lack of a difference between the formats it seems unclear. Moreover, the element of observer bias is a factor because I wasn't blinded to the format used. Be that as it may the sound from this source is very different from my lofi Sony XE400. It is much smoother and easier on the ears and none of the tracks sound hurried. If someone has an extra $1300, you might try out this player particularly if you have an SA8260 or a TriVista to A/B the sound from this player.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Quote:

Originally posted by taoster and how much DVD-A, SACD, DSD have [size=small]you[/size] auditioned? Or even a player to play any of the above.

Hey, this isn't really my fight--I hardly listen to music anymore period. All I know is that both SACD and DVD-A are so overspecced that it's safe to say there's nothing either is missing. But it would sadden me if out of the two formats, the one that almost anyone can record in cheaply is abandoned in favour of the one that is controlled by 'da corporation'.

 

[theaudiohobby]

Quote:

Originally posted by Joe Bloggs I hardly listen to music anymore period. All I know is that both SACD and DVD-A are so overspecced that it's safe to say there's nothing either is missing. But it would sadden me if out of the two formats, the one that almost anyone can record in cheaply is abandoned in favour of the one that is controlled by 'da corporation'.

Now the second point is very valid and I can understand that it would be a shame if folk lost the ability to record music cost effectively. But why have a go at us, if you do not listen to music anymore and some of us like DSD.

 

[immtbiker]

STOP!

 

[Jasper994]

Quote:

Originally posted by Joe Bloggs Hey, this isn't really my fight--I hardly listen to music anymore period. All I know is that both SACD and DVD-A are so overspecced that it's safe to say there's nothing either is missing. But it would sadden me if out of the two formats, the one that almost anyone can record in cheaply is abandoned in favour of the one that is controlled by 'da corporation'.

WOOHOO! One for the home team!

In all seriousness though, he's very right... What happens to all the little guys if DSD does take over the bulk of the market?!? Anti-trust anyone?

hmmmm the big S and the big M... sounds kinda kinky doesn't it!

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Quote:

Originally posted by immtbiker STOP!

Stop what?

 

[Czilla9000]

Can we all agree that both the formats are better than the Compact Disk?


I remember IAR was saying (and still is) that the CD sounds better and has better rersolution above 8000Hz than SACD.

www.iar-80.com/page17.html




Joe, can you comfortably say that both are better than the CD? If so I am going to go get me an SACD player......


Will this help you Orpheus?

http://www.mytekdigital.com/dmaster.htm

 

[immtbiker]

Quote:

Stop what?

I felt that Joe Bloggs and the AudioHobby, who both had valid points, were starting to undermine each other, on what was a good thread. It seemed to me to be getting personal.
It is a no win situation, because both formats are quite enjoyable
and the technologies, while being quite different, are certainly an advancement over what we have been listening to since the late '70's.
If I took their debate the wrong way, and it was truly a friendly disagreement, then I am truly sorry. But it seemed like a personal battle to me, in the middle of an excellent thread. I meant no malice.
Music is one of the few things in the world that helps me achieve peace in an otherwise confrontational world. That's my $.03 (inflation).

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Well, you could have said that in the first place, rather than just saying "Stop!"

 

[immtbiker]

I apologized for my actions.

Quote:

Well, you could have said that in the first place, rather than just saying "Stop!"

I speak softly and carry a big amp.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Quote:

Originally posted by Czilla9000 Can we all agree that both the formats are better than the Compact Disk? I remember IAR was saying (and still is) that the CD sounds better and has better rersolution above 8000Hz than SACD. www.iar-80.com/page17.html Joe, can you comfortably say that both are better than the CD? If so I am going to go get me an SACD player......

I can definitely agree with that, no problem

They must have improved the noise shaping since then (I'd give a lot to know exactly how

)

Of course I should be persuading you to buy a DVD-A player instead

Here's some flaws of SACD as it stands now, from here:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/index.p...=ST&f=1&t=3390

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Klemm Some of the technical flaws of SA-CD: * If you want to do some digital post processing, you must convert it to PCM. If PDM has any advantage, this advantage is removed. Digital post processing can be - digital filters for loudspeaker/room acoustic equalization - digital filters for splitting the signal for 2/3-way loudspeakers - digital filters for sound control (more complex equalizers) * PDM is also not suitable to directly drive digital power amplifiers. It switches too often so you have to much switching losses. So PDM must converted to PCM and then to PWM. * PDM is may be suitable to built low cost head phone DA/C+Amplifiers. * PDM is very sensitive to asymmetries between switch on and switch off. * Best possible converters (noise + linearity at low levels) do NOT use PDM, but - PWM - 4...16 PDM convertes in parallel Both can not be generated by PDM, but by a PCM. *The frequency response of the output filter of a SA-CD is not defined - So it is not possible to compensate the effect of the output filter in the recording - It is very likely that manufacturs built gadgets with extremely wide frquency response and huge amounts of HF noise to boast with a extremely wide frequency response. A proposal of such a filter should look like: * 4th order LR-filter with f_{-6dB} = 48 kHz 12 kHz: -0.03 dB 24 kHz: -0.53 dB 48 kHz: -6.02 dB 96 kHz: -24.61 dB 192 kHz: -48.20 kHz 384 kHz: -72.25 kHz Depending on the high frequency amount the frequency overall-frequency response can be linearized up to 60 kHz (Pop) or 80 kHz (Classic).