[emmodad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif Big brother Microsoft doesn't go out and buy just any ole company, they knew Pacific Micro had something very special.

fwiw

MS interest was less about audio, and far more about the underlying intellectual property (and associated patents) pertaining to the pseudo-random noise encrypted control signalling technique which passes HDCD control signals utilizing the audio signal LSB for a very small portion of the time.

---

in audio discussions about "bit-perfect" transmission, you will often see as commentary the simplification that if one transmits a 16- or 24-bit HDCD-encoded signal over a digital interface (ie from a computer, over USB/SPDIF/FW/etc, to a DAC), and the receiving unit can correctly distinguish the presence of the HDCD subcode, then the transmission was "bit-perfect."

the HDCD subcode information exists only within LSBs of the audio signal, and only for a small percentage of the time. here, "small percentage of the time " = generally only around 2-3% of all audio samples have their LSB "stolen" by the HDCD process in order to transmit the HDCD subcode.

so, "bit-perfect" audio transmission implies that HDCD subcode information has made it through the transmission process without corruption. or looked at another way, the transmission of data completed successfully, and did not corrupt the LSBs of the audio signal (which contain the HDCD subcode info).

---

if you are Big Software MegaCo, and you want:

- to be sure that large software distributions are correctly received by developers, with not a single bit of the product changed;

- software distributions to consumers (via "transmission channel" of bits burned on a DVD") are authentic;

- an anti-piracy measure to prove if software distributions are "authentic"; or

- if you had/have aspirations about distributing audio and/or video content to consumers and wanted/want to have a method of controlling "authorized" playback

well, the PM technology is quite useful...


call this use of hidden subcodes something like "watermarking" if you will.... not quite correct terminology, but you get the idea.

 

[slim.a]

Hi guys,

I did some experimenting with 24/88 and PMD100.

I converted a track from an album I know very well (Sol Gabetta - Schostakowitsch Cellokonzert Nr. 2/Cello) to 24/88.2 using Foobar's SRC (Secret Rabbit Code) with Best Setting offline.

I then listen twice to the 16/44 file before listening to the 24/88 upsampled one.

My findings are as follow, I noticed the same changes in sound as I have noticed with upsampled files using DF1704 filter.
There is a very slight loss in transparency/veil (probably due to the upsampling).
The soundstage improves by becoming more "coherent" and it is pushed a little bit backward (a good thing).
Dynamics seems to be untouched and the timbre of instruments seems to be slightly sweeter.

My conclusion is that there is no real audible loss of sound quality when using the PMD100 module at 24/88. Most of the differences I heard between the 2 files (original vs upsampled) were similar to what I used to hear when doing the same test with the DF1704.

Anyway, I would be very intersted in other opinions/test trials with the 24/88 mode on the PMD100.

 

[regal]

Slim, thanks for the testing. Try dithering downand resampling a 24/96 to 16/44 and tell us if you can hear the difference using the DF1704. In my testing I could not hear a difference using Izotope Ozone to do the dithering.

 

[slim.a]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif Slim, thanks for the testing. Try dithering downand resampling a 24/96 to 16/44 and tell us if you can hear the difference using the DF1704. In my testing I could not hear a difference using Izotope Ozone to do the dithering.

I have already tried comparing native 24/96 files and 16/44.1 files (same album downloaded in two different formats from Linn Records) and the difference between the two files is minimal with the DF1704. While there is a big jump in sound quality between a 320kbps mp3 and Wav/Flac file, the improvement is not as noticeable with higher rez files.

Funny thing, I find that the difference is far greater when using the EMU 0404 usb. However, it is not because it is more transparent but it is probably to the digital filtering and analog filtering of both DACs. The EMU 0404 seems to be lacking a proper analog filtering stage which allows it to have a ruler flat measured frequency but compromises its sonic output. The EMU 0404 usb also benefits a lot from upsampling. Any 16/44.1 sounds much better when upsampled to 16/96 or better to 192. By using higher sample rates, we are avoiding the effect of the filtering at 44.1 which is not well controlled.

The DAC-19MK3 doesn't seem to be affected by this characteristic. Even with 16/44.1 the sound is far superior to what you would get with lesser DACs at 24/96. My guess is that the analog filtering is doing a good job which reduces the usual perceived benefits of playing files at high sampling rate (88.2 and 96).

As for the bit depth, I am not sure I can hear the benefits of going from 16 bit (96 db of dynamic range) to 24bit (144 db of dynamic range). However there might be some sonic benefit in outputing a 24 bit data format to the DAC (even if the original file is only 16bits).
When you look at the specs of the PCM1704 you can see that is better performing when it is fed with 24bit data (page 4 for instance).
(By the way, I use foobar with either 24bits output or 32bits output to avoid that issue.)

To sum up, the improvement brought by 24/96 over 16/44 is minimal in my current set-up. Also, I understand that many people can experience a big improvement between the two formats (even with less "transparent" gear). The question that remains is to know whether the improvements in those cases are due to the better quality of the file or simply to the upsampling/higher sample rate process.

By the way, Regal, I have switched back to mode A (PMD100) last week-end and I am enjoying it a lot. After upgrading my cables to pure silver and doing some tweaks to my system (mainly putting Herbie's Audio Tenderfoot under all my equipment : notebook, headphone amp, BADA power filter, DAC) the sound was too "bright" with the mode B (DF1704).
Now PMD100 became a better match for my system

 

[regal]

I agree that the PMD100 is superior, even if only 16/44, HDCD though is out of this world. The HDCD process is more than an increase in bit depth, the fact that the recording process uses the same digital filtering in the ADC as we use in the DAC makes the smoothest digital playback possible.

 

[vlach]

I have already tried comparing native 24/96 files and 16/44.1 files (same album downloaded in two different formats from Linn Records)

Did you notice the files on the Linn Records website are half-rate? For example a 16/44.1 track is half the size of what it would be compared to the actual CD, this suggests a bit rate of 705.6Kbps instead of red book CD at 1.411Mbps. You'll notice entire albums are at around 350Mb as opposed to the usual 700Mb.

 

[regal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vlach /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have already tried comparing native 24/96 files and 16/44.1 files (same album downloaded in two different formats from Linn Records) Did you notice the files on the Linn Records website are half-rate? For example a 16/44.1 track is half the size of what it would be compared to the actual CD, this suggests a bit rate of 705.6Kbps instead of red book CD at 1.411Mbps. You'll notice entire albums are at around 350Mb as opposed to the usual 700Mb.

Thats just how flac works, uncompress the flac files to wave and you will have your 1.411Mbps.

 

[vlach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thats just how flac works, uncompress the flac files to wave and you will have your 1.411Mbps.

What about the half rate WMA files?

 

[slim.a]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thats just how flac works, uncompress the flac files to wave and you will have your 1.411Mbps.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vlach /img/forum/go_quote.gif What about the half rate WMA files?

The same applies for WMA Lossless files. It is like a zip file, when you uncompress it, you should have your 1.4 Mbps.
By the way, high rez Flac files on Linn Records and HD tracks have bit rates of over 2.500 Mbps, which is even greater than the bitrate of a CD.

Anyway, you shouldn't worry, you don't loose data by storing music in FLAC or WMA Lossless.

However, and in my opinion, if you have the choice between the 2 formats, it is better to go with FLAC as you can easily convert it to wav and it is read by many media players (including windows media player with the right plugin).

 

[RickEC]

Ordered 19MK3 from Kingwa, and I must say that he is serious in his business. I feel that I am not only getting a DAC from him, but also sincere attention. Judging by the technical articles he wrote on his website, I can tell that he puts his mind and heart into his designs and production. Kudos.

Thanks to all in this thread who did the reviews. Will report back after sampling the DAC.

 

[JulioCat2]

Yesterday my musiland monitor 01 arrives install driver 1.07 in my laptop, canare digital cable to my DAC19MK3 and voila!!!!!! huge stage but really huge!!!!!!! it's like surround sound from just 2 speakers these thing transport the recording studio to my house, much better than the M-audio spdif out, resolution improves, i can hear everything in the recording loud and clear, my DAC9MK3 almost arrives, it's in DHL Van so i'll report a compare between both soon.

 

[stellablues]

Please let us know your thoughts on the DAC9 vs Dac19. I am ready to pull the trigger on the 19 but am still thinking about the 9 built out with the PMD100. Twice the price and probably pushing diminishing returns with my systems...

headphone: Modded Pioneer DVD transport > Compass > Rockhopper M^3 + S11 (shunt volume mod with naked vishays... highly recommended btw) > Senn hd600

Speakers: ALAC > Airport Express > Compass > Croft CGI > Ellis 1801s

Did you order yours with PMD100?

 

[JulioCat2]

Nop comes with DF1704

 

[dunski]

I know that there isn't much I could say about this DAC that hasn't been said already but it is simply mind blowing. Right now I'm listening to the Best of Dire Straits HDCD using the NAD 541i as transport and it is just mind blowing.

 

[slim.a]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dunski /img/forum/go_quote.gif I know that there isn't much I could say about this DAC that hasn't been said already but it is simply mind blowing. Right now I'm listening to the Best of Dire Straits HDCD using the NAD 541i as transport and it is just mind blowing.

I totally understand what you feel, I have had this dac for a few months and I am still amazed by its highly resolved yet "analog" sound each time I listened to it.
I am sure there a better dacs out there, but it is really mind blowing to have such a performance from such an affordable DAC