Is it "whats best forum" , or what's more expensive

[opus111]

The question is how hard is it to filter out and is the cure worse than the disease? Meaning will the filter harm the signal more than not using a filter? I guess you would have to experiment yourself to know for sure.

I haven't built one myself but have designed a passive filter which I've simulated and appears to do the job nicely on the ESS Sabre. Also a passive filter at the output of my NOS DAC does more good than harm to my ears. But yes the ultimate test is by listening.

 

[opus111]

DSD does appear to measure much worse than PCM yet some people prefer the sound of DSD. I am inclined to go with what my ears prefer over what the test gear prefers.

Yet the paper I was talking about by Lipshitz shows a serious technical flaw in that the system as a whole isn't linear due to inadequate dither. An analogy might be helpful - inadequate dither is rather akin to crossover distortion in a class B amplifier, it leaves a dead band in the transfer function. Of course DSD has vast feedback around the dead band as a way of linearizing the discontinuity. But ISTM we've been here before (was it in the 1960s?) with the introduction of transistor amplifiers...

 

[opus111]

Dunno if the analog filtering on my EAR Acute III is passive before the tube output stage, or whether Tim d'PVC (probably) does active filtering with the Pcc88/Ecc88. Regardless, the Ecc88 family was developed for cascode rf operation and wouldn't think the ultrasonic frequencies of the upsampled audio signal would be problematic. I rather like my Acute, but this is obviously a subjective call.

I hadn't heard of this player before but a quick Googling revealed a PFO review which reveals its using a Wolfson DAC. This would already have some kind of filtering on-chip, prior to the internal CMOS opamps, or maybe comprising those opamps. So its not directly comparable to the situation with the ESS Sabre. Interesting though that the reviewer remarks there's no ambience retrieval - this is something I have noticed on DSD mastered recordings myself and it seems that's due to the noise modulation introduced. Its not that the ambience isn't reproduced, just that its being masked by additional noise.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I hadn't heard of this player before but a quick Googling revealed a PFO review which reveals its using a Wolfson DAC. This would already have some kind of filtering on-chip, prior to the internal CMOS opamps, or maybe comprising those opamps. So its not directly comparable to the situation with the ESS Sabre. Interesting though that the reviewer remarks there's no ambience retrieval - this is something I have noticed on DSD mastered recordings myself and it seems that's due to the noise modulation introduced. Its not that the ambience isn't reproduced, just that its being masked by additional noise.

Believe me there's ambience on DSD recordings. If there's not, it wasn't there on the original digital recording or something else is amiss. Bruce played me DSD copies of master tapes (vs. the second gen tape that the files were made from) and there's no mistaking the ambience.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I hadn't heard of this player before but a quick Googling revealed a PFO review which reveals its using a Wolfson DAC. This would already have some kind of filtering on-chip, prior to the internal CMOS opamps, or maybe comprising those opamps. So its not directly comparable to the situation with the ESS Sabre. Interesting though that the reviewer remarks there's no ambience retrieval - this is something I have noticed on DSD mastered recordings myself and it seems that's due to the noise modulation introduced. Its not that the ambience isn't reproduced, just that its being masked by additional noise.

please cite some examples of specific analog sources and dsd copies where you heard additional noise....and where you did not with PCM.

 

[opus111]

I don't listen to analog sources.

 

[opus111]

Believe me there's ambience on DSD recordings. If there's not, it wasn't there on the original digital recording or something else is amiss. Bruce played me DSD copies of master tapes (vs. the second gen tape that the files were made from) and there's no mistaking the ambience.

I didn't say I don't hear ambience on all DSD mastered recordings, so I have no trouble believing you Myles. However I don't hear the best ambience retrieval on DSD mastered ones, rather pure PCM.

 

[mep]

Opus-With regards to those of us who regularly listen to DSD, analog, and PCM, I think you are standing on a windy corner all by your lonesome with regards to your impressions of DSD.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I didn't say I don't hear ambience on all DSD mastered recordings, so I have no trouble believing you Myles. However I don't hear the best ambience retrieval on DSD mastered ones, rather pure PCM.

This is what you said:

Interesting though that the reviewer remarks there's no ambience retrieval - this is something I have noticed on DSD mastered recordings myself and it seems that's due to the noise modulation introduced.

So I guess which is it?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I don't listen to analog sources.

which explains alot. how can you (optimally) compare PCM and dsd without hearing the analog source of the files?

i'm not the judge and jury of what is or is not a proper dsd-PCM comparison. but having the analog source is helpful over time and lots of samples to get a feel for what is happening.

I didn't say I don't hear ambience on all DSD mastered recordings, so I have no trouble believing you Myles. However I don't hear the best ambience retrieval on DSD mastered ones, rather pure PCM.

you may need a better SACD player/dsd dac to hear optimal dsd/SACD. my viewpoint of dsd verses PCM is 180 degrees opposite of yours. but i'm basing my views on my analog tape and vinyl as the truth.

 

[Occam]

I hadn't heard of this player before but a quick Googling revealed a PFO review which reveals its using a Wolfson DAC. This would already have some kind of filtering on-chip, prior to the internal CMOS opamps, or maybe comprising those opamps. So its not directly comparable to the situation with the ESS Sabre. Interesting though that the reviewer remarks there's no ambience retrieval - this is something I have noticed on DSD mastered recordings myself and it seems that's due to the noise modulation introduced. Its not that the ambience isn't reproduced, just that its being masked by additional noise.

from your PFO source -
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue62/acute.htm

E.A.R. has decided to go their own way in some of the design solutions incorporated in this product. The most obvious is an output stage that features a pair of PCC88 tubes (otherwise known as 6DJ8) and a transformer. Even more unusual are the filters employed. Filters are mandatory in digital playback and everybody uses digital filters—even knowing they don't sound good. The Acute eschews these for analog filters of their own design.

Yes, I'd think the analog output of the dac chip exits via 'evil' LTP containing opamps, but a quick check of the datasheet reveals that the ability to disable the digital filtering is built into the dac chip.

Regarding your assertion that Marshall says 'there's no ambience retrieval', what was actually said is -

Listening to the Brahms Sonata for Violin and Piano with Arthur Grumiaux (Pentatone PTC 5186155, SACD), via the Sony, it sounds like a vintage 1970's recording. (It was originally a Philips LP from 1974.) It sounds dated. I have to hand it to the Sony—it is wide open everywhere from 20—20,000 cycles. Through the Acute, it sounds contemporary, if not as open at the frequency extremes. BTW: the liner notes indicate the recording was made in the Concertgebouw, a world-class concert stage. However, neither player reproduces any hall ambiance.

So your takeaway from that quote is that the Ear Acute III given its topology is incapable of ambiance retrieval. Having lived with the Acute and also having the pleasure of hearing Dan Wright's excellent modded Sony, which IMO offer excellent ambiance retrieval, I assume that the last line is a caveat, and perhaps the recording itself lacks the ambiance.

When your only tool is a hammer, you tend to view everything as a thumb....

 

[JackD201]

Digital vs Digital. Gotta love it. LOL.

 

[MarinJim]

Sometimes even engineers can out think and out smart themselves, really.

 

[rbbert]

Opus-With regards to those of us who regularly listen to DSD, analog, and PCM, I think you are standing on a windy corner all by your lonesome with regards to your impressions of DSD.

Perhaps here on this forum, but in the larger world there are many engineers and audio professionals (e.g. Barry Diament, who is sometimes here now that I think about it) who prefer PCM to DSD.

 

[Andre Marc]

Digital vs Digital. Gotta love it. LOL.

The Endless Audiophile Debating Society....eh..I've got way too many tunes to get to.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Perhaps here on this forum, but in the larger world there are many engineers and audio professionals (e.g. Barry Diament, who is sometimes here now that I think about it) who prefer PCM to DSD.

And vice versa.

 

[JackD201]

The Endless Audiophile Debating Society....eh..I've got way too many tunes to get to.

How's about listing some hot new tunes. I've been getting stagnant of late.

 

[Bruce B]

Perhaps here on this forum, but in the larger world there are many engineers and audio professionals (e.g. Barry Diament, who is sometimes here now that I think about it) who prefer PCM to DSD.

Count me as a DSD believer...

 

[opus111]

Opus-With regards to those of us who regularly listen to DSD, analog, and PCM, I think you are standing on a windy corner all by your lonesome with regards to your impressions of DSD.

Suits me fine. I'm at the mercy of what my ears have told me Now if anyone wants to recommend a DSD mastered RBCD for me to listen to which they reckon has great ambience and dynamics, I'll be all ears to get hold of it (if that's not too mixed a metaphor).

 

[opus111]

So I guess which is it?

I filter what I read through my own experience - I have never heard a CD (or SACD) with zero ambience whatsoever. So I took it that what the reviewer really meant was that the ambience was severely curtailed.