[ProtegeManiac]

   
Read the info on these links for a sample of how they do native DSD.
 
http://astellnkern.com/eng/htm/ak240/ak240_feature01.asp
http://astellnkern.com/eng/htm/ak380/ak380_feature01.asp

 
I've read it and there's really nothing helpful there. What do they mean exactly by:

Since the main CPU does not process Native DSD, we needed a chip that will work with it. It took us a long time, but we made it work. Through countless hours of testing, we were able to achieve Native DSD playback by having the main CPU process the data, send it to the exclusive XMOS chip, then through the DAC to deliver the sound.
 
What exactly does the XMOS chip do to the DSD file and how does a DAC that can't do 2.8Mhz decode it?
 
-----------------------------
 
I found more info just looking up the CS4398 chip, which A&K did not mention specifically as the key to all that. Apparently, it can go up to 216Khz (still around 1/10th of what SACD actually uses), and has a 50khz filter. The only thing that is really identical to SACD is the claimed 120dB dynamic range. So, if in effect it can deliver such a dynamic range despite the other spec disparities, then it's delivering nearly all that you can get out of SACD.
 
The other practical reality that needs to be sorted out though is whether what one listens to actually has a 120dB dynamic range. AFAIK, it would likely (not necessarily the only ones) be properly recorded classical music on SACDs that would have that kind of range, so it depends on how much one will invest in terms of money, HDD space, and compatibility with devices that one uses if DSD will be worth it.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I've read it and there's really nothing helpful there. What do they mean exactly by:

Since the main CPU does not process Native DSD, we needed a chip that will work with it. It took us a long time, but we made it work. Through countless hours of testing, we were able to achieve Native DSD playback by having the main CPU process the data, send it to the exclusive XMOS chip, then through the DAC to deliver the sound.
 
What exactly does the XMOS chip do to the DSD file and how does a DAC that can't do 2.8Mhz decode it?
 
-----------------------------
 
I found more info just looking up the CS4398 chip, which A&K did not mention specifically as the key to all that. Apparently, it can go up to 216Khz (still around 1/10th of what SACD actually uses), and has a 50khz filter. The only thing that is really identical to SACD is the claimed 120dB dynamic range. So, if in effect it can deliver such a dynamic range despite the other spec disparities, then it's delivering nearly all that you can get out of SACD.
 
The other practical reality that needs to be sorted out though is whether what one listens to actually has a 120dB dynamic range. AFAIK, it would likely (not necessarily the only ones) be properly recorded classical music on SACDs that would have that kind of range, so it depends on how much one will invest in terms of money, HDD space, and compatibility with devices that one uses if DSD will be worth it.

 
16-bit can already handle all the dynamic range out there, so I guess it doesn't really matter in the end, except for issues pertaining to how the players process and convert the DSD files in a way that may make it sound different than it should.
 
Hmm. Since DSD is only 1-bit, with a really high sample rate, I wonder how that relates to dynamic range.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

   
16-bit can already handle all the dynamic range out there, so I guess it doesn't really matter in the end, except for issues pertaining to how the players process and convert the DSD files in a way that may make it sound different than it should.
 
Hmm. Since DSD is only 1-bit, with a really high sample rate, I wonder how that relates to dynamic range.

 

DSD dynamic range is also at 120dB, the encoding and decoding are just done differently. Supposedly it would be cleaner too  and so far that's about the only thing I can perceive in practice, and this was an entry level true SACD Player with a noisy transport I had to mass load compared to that same player using SPDIF and regular CDs with a few DACs. On its own the slightly blacker background is great, even if it's not that huge a difference, but when you start factoring in the cost of converting all your music to SACD but you need to maintain a PCM decoder if not all of your music is available on that format, on top of which some SACD albums aren't that well recorded anyway (like the Guano Apes SACD - it sounds exactly the same as the CD copy), it gets nutty. As it is in the future I might just get the Loki, but since I'm using a smartphone as a convenient server, the Loki will have to wait until I switch over to a headless miniPC server. 

That's not likely to happen soon as I'm planning on getting not just the cheapest and smallest miniPC, but one with an NVidia GPU that can do remote play just so I can play some games that don't need a large PC monitor on the Shield, in a chair where I can pretty much have more flexible sitting options (I used to sit upside down on a large armchair when I had Sonic2 on my GameGear).

 

[auradud3]

 
"Even" the AK100 does with current software.

acording tto the website DSD is native but leaves the Dacs as a PCM signal

 

[auradud3]

ok so i am up and running with my new AK120 II, i am streaming using MQS, but i downloaded maybe 15 gigs of flac on the AK and nothing was visible, even though the AK told me i had x amount of songs? i have been Googling all night and this morning....... zero results? i have 9 downloads ready for me at HDTracs, but until i get this playability issue solved theywill stay in basket! lol
 
this player with my Apple lossless files and my Aurisonics ASG 2.5's have brought me to new highs in listening, it is truly remarkable how much more there is to sound! i sense a Roxanne in my future

 

[Music Alchemist]

 

DSD dynamic range is also at 120dB, the encoding and decoding are just done differently. Supposedly it would be cleaner too  and so far that's about the only thing I can perceive in practice, and this was an entry level true SACD Player with a noisy transport I had to mass load compared to that same player using SPDIF and regular CDs with a few DACs. On its own the slightly blacker background is great, even if it's not that huge a difference, but when you start factoring in the cost of converting all your music to SACD but you need to maintain a PCM decoder if not all of your music is available on that format, on top of which some SACD albums aren't that well recorded anyway (like the Guano Apes SACD - it sounds exactly the same as the CD copy), it gets nutty. As it is in the future I might just get the Loki, but since I'm using a smartphone as a convenient server, the Loki will have to wait until I switch over to a headless miniPC server. 

That's not likely to happen soon as I'm planning on getting not just the cheapest and smallest miniPC, but one with an NVidia GPU that can do remote play just so I can play some games that don't need a large PC monitor on the Shield, in a chair where I can pretty much have more flexible sitting options (I used to sit upside down on a large armchair when I had Sonic2 on my GameGear).

 
DSD, SACD, CD, PCM, etc. all sound the same if the master is the same.

 

[auradud3]

   
DSD, SACD, CD, PCM, etc. all sound the same if the master is the same.

i am happy after all this reading and searching that you guys gave me the short answers that kept me from buying tons of music. with my new system everything is like new again, never knew some of my music had so much lost detail thanks all!
 
anyone know about the transfer problems? Astell & Kern seems to be oblivious?

 

[Music Alchemist]

  i am happy after all this reading and searching that you guys gave me the short answers that kept me from buying tons of music. with my new system everything is like new again, never knew some of my music had so much lost detail thanks all!
 
anyone know about the transfer problems? Astell & Kern seems to be oblivious?

 
As long as you don't already own the same master of an album, hi-res downloads can still be worth it. I have some that are pretty awesome.
 
You mean transferring files to your DAP? Oh, I must have missed when you said that.
 
Anyway...if/when you upgrade to even better headphones, you'll get even more out of your music! That's where most of the improvements come from.

 
(I love STAX far more than everything else.)

 

[KG Jag]

  ok so i am up and running with my new AK120 II, i am streaming using MQS, but i downloaded maybe 15 gigs of flac on the AK and nothing was visible, even though the AK told me i had x amount of songs? i have been Googling all night and this morning....... zero results? i have 9 downloads ready for me at HDTracs, but until i get this playability issue solved theywill stay in basket! lol
 
this player with my Apple lossless files and my Aurisonics ASG 2.5's have brought me to new highs in listening, it is truly remarkable how much more there is to sound! i sense a Roxanne in my future

 
My first thought is to reload the latest software.
 
Are you loading the music directly on the A & K or to a card in the A & K?

 

[auradud3]

   
As long as you don't already own the same master of an album, hi-res downloads can still be worth it. I have some that are pretty awesome.
 
You mean transferring files to your DAP? Oh, I must have missed when you said that.
 
Anyway...if/when you upgrade to even better headphones, you'll get even more out of your music! That's where most of the improvements come from.

 
(I love STAX far more than everything else.)

 
 

   
My first thought is to reload the latest software.
 
Are you loading the music directly on the A & K or to a card in the A & K?

thanks for the ongoing help guys, i re-did the downloads to my SD card and now i have sweet sweet music, but i still dont know about the internal storage, i'll keep working on it............. much thanks