Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • carlspeak
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Here is another link to that great DSD information summary. While you're there, browse around the CAS site. The society welcomes all visitors and those interested in membership.

    https://sites.google.com/site/thecon...sting-articles

    Leave a comment:


  • SirNickity
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Originally posted by carlspeak View Post
    If you guys have an hour or so to spare, here's a video of the DSD discussion held at the RMAF last fall. A huge turnout of attendees, but more impressive was the huge turnout of panelists - a sure sign DSD isn't going away any time soon. At just over an hour, my mug appears to ask a question (elephant in the room)...... :p

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGwon6FDBr4
    Interesting video, thanks.

    The copy protection discussion was a breath of fresh air. "We don't want to have anything to do with it." Nice.

    But the best part for me was the question directed toward the Benchmark engineer -- quoted from an earlier interview where he said he's creating devices to play DSD because it exists and there needs to be a way to play it, not because he likes it, or wants to see its proliferation. The diplomatic response to that question spoke volumes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thump
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Thanks for taking the time to write the excellent details, and:

    Originally posted by SirNickity View Post
    The term DSD is used as both an encoding method as well as a file format in this case. Sorry if this is well understood, but it is common for people to be confused about the difference between container formats and the actual codec used within. (E.g., MP3 frames can be natively stored in WAV, MPA/MP3, MKA/MKV, MOV/MP4/M4A, among other containers.)
    Never apologize for helping those with less understanding to gain it. It's appreciated

    The only reason I personally have a concept of containers is because of gaining the knowledge through investigating streaming formats for video, and even though I've gained a lot, I never encountered "DSD" discussed on the audio side but more importantly, I didn't consider the audio side as "containers" at all until what you just said, so, thanks again!

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul W
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    "Provenance" is truly a key point. Since HD tracks won't tell me the weakest link (from original performance to my desktop) I refuse to buy from them or any other company lacking transparency. (I believe ITrax is an exception.)

    The local library is filled with standard def recordings.

    Leave a comment:


  • carlspeak
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Originally posted by carlspeak View Post
    If you guys have an hour or so to spare, here's a video of the DSD discussion held at the RMAF last fall. A huge turnout of attendees, but more impressive was the huge turnout of panelists - a sure sign DSD isn't going away any time soon. At just over an hour, my mug appears to ask a question (elephant in the room)...... :p

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGwon6FDBr4
    I've added the below link to my above post. It's a presentation that was put together by one of the CT. Audio Society members who got himself set up with DSD downloads and did his homework to create what I think is a nice summary on the subject and much more. One key term to remember is "Provenance" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provenance). The link is to my drop box.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/mzvndea232...how_130927.pdf

    Leave a comment:


  • SirNickity
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Originally posted by Thump View Post
    I wish this was the case so damn bad. I don't have the background or expertise in the details as many here do, but my ears work and the differences in quality I've experienced because of "whatever" mastering process was used is incredibly annoying, and disappointing.

    In general I'm certainly a big fan of FLAC when the source is excellent. I use a dedicated optical cable from my streamer to receiver and of the very large amount of supported formats, FLAC always seems to win. I'm not familiar with DSD but at the moment it's difficult for me to imagine how it could be any better than FLAC if created from the same source.
    Agree completely on the mis-spent energy comment. I've bought a whole bunch of new CDs lately and most of them just don't sound very good. It's generally the same two things ... bad EQ (either a dull overall sound or too much midrange emphasis on vocals / drums) or too much compression. Of course there's ALWAYS too much limiting, but lately, I've been feeling like the whole industry is so used to squashing the drums through an LA-2A that enough isn't enough anymore, and it has to come out stinking of vintage tubes to be taken seriously. Too much of a good thing.

    Also, if I may be pedantic... FLAC is a file format and data compression scheme, but it isn't itself a competitor to DSD. That would be PCM, which FLAC encodes from and decodes to. Same for ALAC and WAV (although the latter is simply a storage format, with no encoding or decoding ... usually. Although that really gets into semantics.) Of course, the line gets blurred when you're talking about music download sites, since you're more likely to see some combination of DSD, WAV, FLAC, and ALAC as download options, and not "DSD or PCM". The term DSD is used as both an encoding method as well as a file format in this case. Sorry if this is well understood, but it is common for people to be confused about the difference between container formats and the actual codec used within. (E.g., MP3 frames can be natively stored in WAV, MPA/MP3, MKA/MKV, MOV/MP4/M4A, among other containers.)

    Leave a comment:


  • generic
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Originally posted by Thump View Post
    I wish this was the case so damn bad. I don't have the background or expertise in the details as many here do, but my ears work and the differences in quality I've experienced because of "whatever" mastering process was used is incredibly annoying, and disappointing.

    In general I'm certainly a big fan of FLAC when the source is excellent. I use a dedicated optical cable from my streamer to receiver and of the very large amount of supported formats, FLAC always seems to win. I'm not familiar with DSD but at the moment it's difficult for me to imagine how it could be any better than FLAC if created from the same source.
    I really don't know. Here is a place you can get the same thing in different formats and compare. http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html

    I might attempt to get the DSD foobar plugin working and try them out myself.

    I think spending a grand plus on gear only to play DSD files is silly. I'd rather build $1000 speakers, but I sometimes keep an eye out on a older PS3 with the right firmware so I can rip my SACD disk. Some of them don't have a CD layer on them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thump
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Originally posted by generic View Post
    ... If they spent the same amount of energy fighting for quality mastering and standards, then we wouldn't have to worry about it as much.
    I wish this was the case so damn bad. I don't have the background or expertise in the details as many here do, but my ears work and the differences in quality I've experienced because of "whatever" mastering process was used is incredibly annoying, and disappointing.

    In general I'm certainly a big fan of FLAC when the source is excellent. I use a dedicated optical cable from my streamer to receiver and of the very large amount of supported formats, FLAC always seems to win. I'm not familiar with DSD but at the moment it's difficult for me to imagine how it could be any better than FLAC if created from the same source.

    Leave a comment:


  • carlspeak
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    If you guys have an hour or so to spare, here's a video of the DSD discussion held at the RMAF last fall. A huge turnout of attendees, but more impressive was the huge turnout of panelists - a sure sign DSD isn't going away any time soon. At just over an hour, my mug appears to ask a question (elephant in the room)...... :p

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGwon6FDBr4

    Leave a comment:


  • Dabspok
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Soooo.... The reason I asked is I am looking at buying a Marantz tuner. Some of the newer ones do DSD as well as all the other formats. They have changed the power supply in the 6007 making it lighter than the 6006. Probably not an issue that I would notice in the sound. The 6006 does not do DSD and the 6007 does. I have heard the 6006 several different speakers and I like it.

    Leave a comment:


  • fastbike1
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    FLAC is the way of the now. While sources are not plentiful, FLAC can support hi bit rate multi-channel, so DSD not strictly needed. As always, the source matters much more than the method.


    Originally posted by doctormorbius View Post
    DSD DACs aren't exactly cheap and plentiful so I'm sticking with 2 channel. As far as flac vs. ACC, I've been ripping any new material to flac in hopes that flac is the way of the future.

    Leave a comment:


  • doctormorbius
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    DSD DACs aren't exactly cheap and plentiful so I'm sticking with 2 channel. As far as flac vs. ACC, I've been ripping any new material to flac in hopes that flac is the way of the future.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pallas
    replied
    DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Originally posted by generic View Post
    So what? If your going to quote a study, you shouldn't include things that were not in it. At least that's how I feel. It is only my opinion.

    The Meyer and Moran study was quoted as to the issue of hi-rez vs Red Book.

    The bit-perfect equivalence of Red Book and lossless 44.1/16 is well established. But you are correct that the Meyer and Moran paper is silent as to that issue. As for lingering questions about lossless vs aiff...If others wish to beat themselves up over non-issues, I recommend using an expensive brand of audiophool approved wire for the self-flagellation. The more expensive the more effective, of course.

    Leave a comment:


  • generic
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Originally posted by Pallas View Post
    So what?

    As for the rest of your post, my earlier post addressed your concerns completely.
    So what? If your going to quote a study, you shouldn't include things that were not in it. At least that's how I feel. It is only my opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pallas
    replied
    Re: DSD files vs FLAC or AAC

    Originally posted by generic View Post
    The study didn't include lossless files.
    So what?

    As for the rest of your post, my earlier post addressed your concerns completely.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X