SONY NW-ZX500
May 30, 2020 at 4:25 PM Post #3,511 of 8,639
Well that's alot of dynamic range for 32bit float format:

The dynamic range that can be represented by a 32-bit (floating point) file is 1528 dB. Since the greatest difference in sound pressure on Earth can be about 210 dB, from anechoic chamber to massive shockwave, 1528 dB is far beyond what will ever be required to represent acoustical sound amplitude in a computer file.

https://www.sounddevices.com/32-bit-float-files-explained/

Guess why it isn't used to store music is because it is 33% bigger than 24bit integer files and no dac has that kind of dynamic range.
 
Last edited:
May 30, 2020 at 4:59 PM Post #3,512 of 8,639
I was a little confused by some of the points in your reply. So I've tried to respond as best I can.


WAV is just file name for a raw PCM representation. I'm making assumptions as to how Sony have implemented their upsampling, I don't actually know. The DAC is listed as being able to handle 32bit float wav, but that doesn't mean that the DAC is doing the conversion (or synthesis as you put it). It might be software based or even being sent to a different chip in the Walkman (I suspect the CPU as its an ARM chip and Float processing is bread and butter for modern chips, lighting fast and very accurate https://developer.arm.com/architectures/instruction-sets/floating-point ).

This is riddled with misinformation. The DAC is the only thing that converts a sequence of numbers into the analog signal that drives your headphones. An ARM CPU can be used to further process the numeric data (i.e before being passed to the DAC, but it is the DAC that synthesizes the waveform.

No, the spec does not state the DAC handles "32-bit float wav". The spec states the PLAYER is capable of DECODING 32-bit float (single precision) WAV files. That does not necessarily mean IEEE standard single precision values are shipped to the DAC for synthesis.

Yes, you are right though that most modern CPUs have an FPU and perform floating point computations. FPGAs for example usually do not unless the author of the RTL implements their own floating point engine (of course commercial IP may also be available for licensing).That does not mean the DAC also accepts floating point values, and often times those floating point values are quantized to fixed point integers before driving the DAC.

Also I'm confused by the use of Quantized at the output stage? Quantiztation is performed when the signal is converted from Analog to Digital. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantization_(signal_processing)



32 bit float is not just 8bits more;
590px-Float_example.svg.png

In my post I do mention that most audio uses 32bit float vs int and therefore I assume Sony is doing that here.

That is one form of quantization. Quantization noise is introduced at any step where precision changes. Rounding error is another type of quantization noise. Internal processing may use single precision floating point, sure... Most people model in matlab for example this way. And you're right I'm thinking from an FPGA/ASIC perspective instead of CPU - you'll have to excuse me for this, it's what I do for a living. So yes, internally there is single precision up until the output stage. At that point conversion to fixed point may be (and likely is) necessary. That introduces quantization noise... and while it may be much smaller than previously stated, it still exists and so my point of not playing the file as is still stands. By the way, anyone who has used matlab long enough has seen the limitations of both single and double precision floating point types... There are still limits to what can be represented by these types

Additionally I very much doubt that Sony are just multiplying/adding binary words against each other and therefore dealing with bit-growth. They would probably be using the C language and converting the integers to floats, then calling up samples from the audio buffer, using the Nyquist formula combined with an interpolation formula, filtering the finished result and then exporting the final result to the buffer. But when we are talking about quadrupling the sample rate to 192kHz - we are dealing with halves, quarters, eights which is were floating point numbers excel as they naturally work in Base 2.

Correct. Except for the "Nyquist formula combined with an interpolation formula" part. The filter used to implement the interpolation must have a cutoff frequency below Nyquist. Interpolation itself is performed by first upsampling (zero insertion between samples) and then filtering using a FIR. But yes, you are right this is likely being done in SW with floating point precision. That said, the above paragraphs still apply.

If thats how you like listening to music I would recommended avoiding any streaming services then and just use the DAP to play local files with Direct Source turned on. However you have to take into account that every DAC has a different design and therefore sound. Sony have their own DAC whereas Fiio, Drangonfly, Apple all use off the shelf DACs. Buying a Sony audio product very much gives you a different sound (one that I like a lot).

Like I said, I was a little confused by some of the things you put in your response, so if I've gotten the wrong end of the stick and I'm missing the point of your argument please let me know.

Why? The DAP should be able to play bit perfect from streaming sources as well as local files. What difference does it make if the file is located on an SD card or a server?

And this all somewhat amusing, because I have said all along I don't think the artifacts are audible. I'm just trying to explain the mindset of someone who is annoyed that bit perfect streaming is not an option. On principle I may agree with the sentiment, but you haven't seen me complain about the listening experience of the upsampling, have you?
 
May 30, 2020 at 5:03 PM Post #3,513 of 8,639
Well that's alot of dynamic range for 32bit float format:

The dynamic range that can be represented by a 32-bit (floating point) file is 1528 dB. Since the greatest difference in sound pressure on Earth can be about 210 dB, from anechoic chamber to massive shockwave, 1528 dB is far beyond what will ever be required to represent acoustical sound amplitude in a computer file.

https://www.sounddevices.com/32-bit-float-files-explained/

Guess why it isn't used to store music is because it is 33% bigger than 24bit integer files and no dac has that kind of dynamic range.

The ZX507 doesn't even have dynamic range to support 24 bits. I can't think of a DAP that does. The ZX507 however, may not even support the dynamic range of 16-bit data based on estimates computed from measured data that has been made public.

Yet people in this thread seem to be very pleased with the listening experience. That tells you the redbook spec is nearly perfect. In fact, some may argue that even some lossy codecs are audibly indistinguishable from CD quality.
 
May 30, 2020 at 5:19 PM Post #3,515 of 8,639
The ZX507 doesn't even have dynamic range to support 24 bits. I can't think of a DAP that does. The ZX507 however, may not even support the dynamic range of 16-bit data based on estimates computed from measured data that has been made public.

Yet people in this thread seem to be very pleased with the listening experience. That tells you the redbook spec is nearly perfect. In fact, some may argue that even some lossy codecs are audibly indistinguishable from CD quality.

There is more to listening enjoyment than just straightforward measured dynamic range.

customizability of Sony DSP to suit listening preferences.
stereo imaging and soundstaging
Noise floor and lack of background hiss
Instrument layering
Lack of perceived digital nasties (vocal simbliance, treble glare etc)

What I mention above are either found in another audio measurement criteria or something that is yet to be able to measured in a meaningful way by equipment.

Just ask the legions of crazy Sony fans at the WM1Z/WM1A thread why they love their Sony Walkman even though it's also not the best measuring dap for RMAA.
 
Last edited:
May 30, 2020 at 5:33 PM Post #3,516 of 8,639
So if the 88.2 or 96 then gets up-converted to 32/192 your certain there is no quality loss/change ? Sounds as good as it would if bit-perfect ?

Same with Spotify? A 16/44 up-scaled to 32/192 no loss/change of quality ? I was always advised that say converting a 320kbps to higher quality is actually bad, are they not same thing? I'm no expert on the theory.
So if the 88.2 or 96 then gets up-converted to 32/192 your certain there is no quality loss/change ? Sounds as good as it would if bit-perfect ?

Same with Spotify? A 16/44 up-scaled to 32/192 no loss/change of quality ? I was always advised that say converting a 320kbps to higher quality is actually bad, are they not same thing? I'm no expert on the theory.
I believe psikey has a point and and I'm pretty sure he/she is not the only one with this concern. I have read countless posts on this thread referring to how cables, firmware updates, burn in time and SD cards can/could/would change the sound for better...or worse. My question would be for those who get very defensive on the upsampling subject, do you believe on any of the following changing the sound quality/signature: material of cables, burn in time, firmware updates and my favorite...SD cards? Please let me know if I'm missing something.
 
May 30, 2020 at 5:41 PM Post #3,517 of 8,639
This is riddled with misinformation. The DAC is the only thing that converts a sequence of numbers into the analog signal that drives your headphones. An ARM CPU can be used to further process the numeric data (i.e before being passed to the DAC, but it is the DAC that synthesizes the waveform.

No, the spec does not state the DAC handles "32-bit float wav". The spec states the PLAYER is capable of DECODING 32-bit float (single precision) WAV files. That does not necessarily mean IEEE standard single precision values are shipped to the DAC for synthesis.

Yes, you are right though that most modern CPUs have an FPU and perform floating point computations. FPGAs for example usually do not unless the author of the RTL implements their own floating point engine (of course commercial IP may also be available for licensing).That does not mean the DAC also accepts floating point values, and often times those floating point values are quantized to fixed point integers before driving the DAC.



That is one form of quantization. Quantization noise is introduced at any step where precision changes. Rounding error is another type of quantization noise. Internal processing may use single precision floating point, sure... Most people model in matlab for example this way. And you're right I'm thinking from an FPGA/ASIC perspective instead of CPU - you'll have to excuse me for this, it's what I do for a living. So yes, internally there is single precision up until the output stage. At that point conversion to fixed point may be (and likely is) necessary. That introduces quantization noise... and while it may be much smaller than previously stated, it still exists and so my point of not playing the file as is still stands. By the way, anyone who has used matlab long enough has seen the limitations of both single and double precision floating point types... There are still limits to what can be represented by these types



Correct. Except for the "Nyquist formula combined with an interpolation formula" part. The filter used to implement the interpolation must have a cutoff frequency below Nyquist. Interpolation itself is performed by first upsampling (zero insertion between samples) and then filtering using a FIR. But yes, you are right this is likely being done in SW with floating point precision. That said, the above paragraphs still apply.



Why? The DAP should be able to play bit perfect from streaming sources as well as local files. What difference does it make if the file is located on an SD card or a server?

And this all somewhat amusing, because I have said all along I don't think the artifacts are audible. I'm just trying to explain the mindset of someone who is annoyed that bit perfect streaming is not an option. On principle I may agree with the sentiment, but you haven't seen me complain about the listening experience of the upsampling, have you?

I had a feeling you were trolling me with that second response, throwing in terms in a very confusing and misleading manor (example - why do you need an FIR Filter when UPSAMPLING in the DIGITAL domain? The source you are upsampling from has already been band limited, you know its maximum frequency and the higher sampling rate will encapsulate it with no issues. You appeared to be confused by brining up topics/terms that apply to Downsampling/DSPing vs just pure upsampling), however I responded giving you the benefit of the doubt. This response further points to being trolled.

My impression from this response is that you probably understand what you're talking about, but your explaining it very poorly. As a result; my responses to your first posts were trying to explain it to you. But because you already know it and I was explaining in as simple a manor as i could that skips over a VAST AMOUNT of detail, you found this patronising. If you had just said - I understand this process, I do it for a living, I could have gone into significantly more detail to support my assertion that upsampling doesn't make a difference when implemented correctly - because thats the conclusion of several studies we have conducted on this topic at my work place which took months and months.

I will not be replying further in this forum. I feel you led me into a trap by saying confusing things - so when I explained them in simplistic ways (because the vast majority of people I come across do not program audio systems like we both do) - you then attacked by saying - this is wrong - thats wrong - this is miss-leading.
 
Last edited:
May 30, 2020 at 5:58 PM Post #3,518 of 8,639
You guys have completely gone over my head. Some serious knowledge by some in here!

So, for us normal mortal's with simple terms:

If a Hiby R5 for example (or DFC with UAPP) can play a Tidal MQA with the 1 or 2 unfolds to play as intended, bit-perfect, would there be any noticeable or measurable change in the same MQA file played on the ZX507 that does some kind of manipulation to output at 32/192?

Same applies if an Amazon HD track of 24/48 is unscalled to 32/192 rather than bitperfect with something like Hiby R5.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
May 30, 2020 at 6:13 PM Post #3,519 of 8,639
I had a feeling you were trolling me with that second response, throwing in terms in a very confusing and misleading manor (example - why do you need an FIR Filter when UPSAMPLING in the DIGITAL domain? The source you are upsampling from has already been band limited, you know its maximum frequency and the higher sampling rate will encapsulate it with no issues. You appeared to be confused by brining up topics/terms that apply to Downsampling/DSPing vs just pure upsampling), however I responded giving you the benefit of the doubt. This response further points to being trolled.

My impression from this response is that you probably understand what you're talking about, but your explaining it very poorly. As a result; my responses to your first posts were trying to explain it to you. But because you already know it and I was explaining in as simple a manor as i could that skips over a VAST AMOUNT of detail, you found this patronising. If you had just said - I understand this process, I do it for a living, I could have gone into significantly more detail to support my assertion that upsampling doesn't make a difference when implemented correctly - because thats the conclusion of several studies we have conducted on this topic at my work place which took months and months.

I will not be replying further in this forum. I feel you led me into a trap by saying confusing things - so when I explained them in simplistic ways (because the vast majority of people I come across do not program audio systems like we both do) - you then attacked by saying - this is wrong - thats wrong - this is miss-leading.

I'm not trolling. I'm providing technical responses to technical questions on a technical discussion.

My explanations are sound and rooted in engineering principles. I'm sorry you don't like them.

Spend some time googling sample rate converters and you'll see that they are in fact implemented using FIR filters following an upsample.
 
Last edited:
May 30, 2020 at 6:23 PM Post #3,520 of 8,639
There is more to listening enjoyment than just straightforward measured dynamic range.

customizability of Sony DSP to suit listening preferences.
stereo imaging and soundstaging
Noise floor and lack of background hiss
Instrument layering
Lack of perceived digital nasties (vocal simbliance, treble glare etc)

What I mention above are either found in another audio measurement criteria or something that is yet to be able to measured in a meaningful way by equipment.

Just ask the legions of crazy Sony fans at the WM1Z/WM1A thread why they love their Sony Walkman even though it's also not the best measuring dap for RMAA.

Jeez, no need to get defensive. I never said dynamic range is the only contributor to listening enjoyment. I was pointing out a simple fact in relation to YOUR post that brought up dynamic range.
 
May 30, 2020 at 7:07 PM Post #3,521 of 8,639
You guys have completely gone over my head. Some serious knowledge by some in here!

So, for us normal mortal's with simple terms:

If a Hiby R5 for example (or DFC with UAPP) can play a Tidal MQA with the 1 or 2 unfolds to play as intended, bit-perfect, would there be any noticeable or measurable change in the same MQA file played on the ZX507 that does some kind of manipulation to output at 32/192?

Same applies if an Amazon HD track of 24/48 is unscalled to 32/192 rather than bitperfect with again a Hiby R5 or DFC.

Thanks

I am not sure about MQA because I never listen to any MQA file before.

I would suggest that Bit perfectness is not a rubber stamp seal of approval for better sound quality out of a dap/dongle.

E.g. my LG V20 does Hi Res bit perfect audio with USB Audio App Pro but I rather listen to my old ZX2 Walkman anytime over the LG because I just cant stand the ESS Sabre sound anymore(used to be able to).

I would worry less about the technical internal manipulation and care more about final sound quality output from the DAP/Dongle.

Like I said before, there’s no such thing as no manipulation/bit perfect as most modern dap are not bit perfect in nature unless your dap is using a R2R ladder dac. In the case of the Sony s-master hx, the digital waveform input is noise shaped and process as a 1bit signal at around 90MHz internally, which is plenty of “manipulation”.


https://www.head-fi.org/threads/sony-nw-wm1z-wm1a.815841/page-1586#post-14499739
 
Last edited:
May 30, 2020 at 7:53 PM Post #3,522 of 8,639
I'm not trolling. I'm providing technical responses to technical questions on a technical discussion.

My explanations are sound and rooted in engineering principles. I'm sorry you don't like them.

Spend some time googling sample rate converters and you'll see that they are in fact implemented using FIR filters following an upsample.

I said I wouldn't respond, but if you genuinely are not trolling. Again I'm giving you the 'benefit of the doubt'.

It really wasn't a case of not liking your responses. It was the fact you would put statements that were unclear, which I made very clear throughout my response. Your statements might make perfect sense to you because you know the context in which you typed them. To me it looked like someone who only half got it/guessing so I tried my best to help. For example it looked very much from this response you did not understand integer to floating point conversion(highlighted the bits that I latched onto to think that);

More simple math, 24 bit input data (fixed point) and max 32 bit output data means 8 bit coefficients for just a single tap. That doesn't include bit growth through the add tree which is log2(number of taps). Obviously 8 bits is not going to accurately quantize the coefficients, so there is necessarily some rounding and or truncation in the process.

Additionally when I first read this I thought you were talking about applying a band pass filter; however upon re-reading it I miss-understood it. Hence my What comments about the FIR Filter. My mistake.

From a strictly mathematical perspective, there are artifacts that can be introduced from the interpolator. For example, rounding/truncation FIR filter necessarily adds correlated noise. As to whether or not it is audible... Almost certainly not.

So at the end of it, when I get a response that contains a lot of correct information and at the same time seems to deliberately missinterpritate my response (for example, re-reading our discussion we both make the point that the DAC doesn't do the up-sampling) it does come across as tolling.

If you're not trolling and would like to continue the discussion I'm more than happy to, but fear that in order to write a proper reply knowing your knowledge level at this stage; it would take a long long time. Additionally, getting some of the screenshots from my work to show you would be tricky (commercial complications) and I don't have the personal equipment needed to recrate them and even then...might be flying to close to the sun.

I've been trolled in the past on a Audiophile website so might be a bit more sensitive to it.

Apologies for over reacting, I was trying to help in good faith.
 
May 30, 2020 at 11:14 PM Post #3,523 of 8,639
People are sometimes confused about the benefits of high res.

Some people think it is the frequency extension that is causing the benefit, which is not the case because only the very best microphones go to around 40khz when recording in a studio.

A possible benefit of going from 16 bit to 24 bit, improves headroom from 96db to 144db, meaning you won't be losing any detail when recording a rock concert for example, but if the volume of recorded music does not exceed 96db there is no benefit of going from 16 bit to 24 bit, which is often the case in a studio. 32 bit is only useful in the audio processing space, not in actual analog output.

The only area where High-Res is better than 16/44 in all instances is sample rate. CD quality is 44khz, meaning audio data has been captured 44 times per second. While a 96khz high res file means audio data was captured 96 times per second. This does improve portrayal of transients and atmospheric details. 96khz is the sweet spot, there is diminishing returns over that.

Only a well designed dap can take advantage of this though, the digital stage must be low in jitter and the analog stage must also be sensitive and accurate. Just because a dap or phone has the CPU power to play back a High-Res file does not mean it has the audio engineering to portray the detail. Which is why it hurts when people say "I can just use my phone instead of a dap".

Sony does great at this. People often look at measurements like dynamic range which aren't anywhere as important as other factors like the circuit's jitter, slew rates and gain bandwidth, these are some things that enable you to hear the detail in High-Res, and this is where Sony excels over other dap's.

I find it nuts that people are bothered by this 32/192khz output, if you trust your ears you should be able to tell that it sounds brilliant.

Fyi most of my collection is 16/44 because I'm perfectly happy with how it sounds and most of the stuff I listen to is only available at CD quality. But if I could easily obtain 96khz source files that is what I would use.
 
Last edited:
May 30, 2020 at 11:35 PM Post #3,525 of 8,639
I agree that 16/44 is absolutely fine for me. Do you download your files, stream or RIP CDs?
How would one go about ripping cds out of curiosity? Would you just want to copy the .wma files onto say a hard drive and then copy / convert them into FLAC or MQA or something... ?

Also guys I have a NW-ZX507, does this SD card work with my walkman? Sandisk product number: SDSQXA1-1T00-AN6MA
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07P9W5HJV/ref=twister_B07V2PRSXC?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1
and better yet if I mostly plan on listening to Pop, Rock, Alternative, Country, Techno, Disco, and such using Tidal HiFi do you think I'll need it if I want to download just about everything if all I ever do is listen to music all day? Well I do... though $200 is allot and yeah I swear up and down I was on sony.com and they said that the NW-ZX507 supports up to a 2gb micro sd card.

Post Script Edit: Also, It might of been for the zx500 and other simliar models but sony reccomended a wall charger of 1.5amps. I have a 0.7amp charger that I've been using so to not go over board however I have a surge protected 1Amp/5v or 2.4Amp/5v.
So in summation regarding charging, what have ya'lls experiences been like? Also can I listen to my headphones and use like a 10 foot otg cable to an amp using the c cable or can I charge it with a 10 foot cable to a usb to an afromentioned usb hub? Just curious what ya'll have been doing.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top