|
Josh Lyman posted:why stop at 24/192 when you could do 64/1024? Version 2
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:19 |
|
|
D1E posted:I take it you wageslave plebescrub common people are not familiar with DSD or DXD audio files then? DXD is only 24/352.8, scrub 
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
D1E posted:I take it you wageslave plebescrub common people are not familiar with DSD or DXD audio files then?  Sadly, I didn't spring for the UD-503 and the UD-501 is only 5.6 Mhz DXD, so I am but a pleb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
The only thing that is more stupid than DSD is MQA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:The only thing that is more stupid than DSD is MQA. all you really need to know about DSD is that Sony started hyping it really hard about the same tine their patent on compact disc ran out. Purely coincidental, I'm sure
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
Neil Young is totally right that the fancy high resolution audio tracks shouldn't have ridic high prices compared to normal releases these days though. They should cost about the same as the normal releases, because they sound about the same and usually don't need special remastering.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:all you really need to know about DSD is that Sony started hyping it really hard about the same tine their patent on compact disc ran out. Purely coincidental, I'm sure Just as it is totally unrelated that DSD, instead of being a natural follow up to 16/44.1 PCM like 20/88.2 or whatever, uses 1-bit samples at several MHz. This requires serious additional tech to make it work somewhat well (DSP based noise shaping etc) that would be totally superfluous in a more conventional system design, but is novel and therefore much more defensible in patent courts. I am sure however that Sony's engineers were pursuing the best possible technical solution, they couldn't have had any other reason for designing DSD that way
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:Just as it is totally unrelated that DSD, instead of being a natural follow up to 16/44.1 PCM like 20/88.2 or whatever, uses 1-bit samples at several MHz. This requires serious additional tech to make it work somewhat well (DSP based noise shaping etc) that would be totally superfluous in a more conventional system design, but is novel and therefore much more defensible in patent courts. I am sure however that Sony's engineers were pursuing the best possible technical solution, they couldn't have had any other reason for designing DSD that way They used it in dvd-a
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 03:57
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:They used it in dvd-a I really wish I had held on to my DVD-A of Deadwing because the mastering was tons better than the brickwalled CD. It is truly a shame that you have to pay a premium on a novelty format just to get appropriate dynamics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:They used it in dvd-a Nope, DVD-A was PCM audio. SACD used DSD.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 09:39
|
|
|
Theris posted:Given his age and career, how likely is it that Niel Young could even hear the difference between a CD and a 64kbps MP3 recorded from a third generation analog cassette that had been high speed dubbed on the cheapest deck you could buy in 1982? Keeping in mind how notoriously loud his 80s shows were, I just assume anything above 10k is quiet background noise fighting his admitted tinnitus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
DSD has a practical reason to exists; it's just for making DACs that play it cheaper and more power efficient, not for audio quality. Your typical audio DAC takes a PCM sample, transforms it to a 1-bit signal at a higher frequency, then smooths the output to get the analog signal. It's small (=cheap) in terms of circuit area and power efficient since the transistors are always either fully on or fully off so they dissipate minimal energy. DSD as an input format would let you skip the upsampling parts and dithering parts of the circuit. If they had gotten it as the audio track format in blu-ray, players would have been a couple of pennies cheaper AND they'd have license fees/barriers to entry for competitors. (24 bit audio also has some practical uses. If you embed a 16-bit signal with 8 padding bits, it gives you 24dB of wiggle room to do digital volume changes without having to vary amplifier gain.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 08:46
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:DSD has a practical reason to exists; it's just for making DACs that play it cheaper and more power efficient, not for audio quality. Delta-sigma is a common way to build a DAC, yes. The questionable choice is making that post-conversion 1-bit stream (which would normally be an intermediate format that only exists inside the DAC) be what's sent from the recording studio to end users via distribution media (SACD, files streamed over internet, whatever). I haven't ever heard any good technical reason why this makes sense. quote:It's small (=cheap) in terms of circuit area and power efficient since the transistors are always either fully on or fully off so they dissipate minimal energy. This doesn't make any sense to me unless you are conflating class-D amplification and DSD. Much like you don't need DSD to build a delta-sigma DAC, you don't need it for class-D power amplification. quote:DSD as an input format would let you skip the upsampling parts and dithering parts of the circuit. Yeah but (a) who cares, that's barely any area / power these days and (b) lots of consumer audio gear would like to do some DSP on the signal (surround sound processing, for example) and I doubt it's easier to do that with a DSD input stream. quote:(24 bit audio also has some practical uses. If you embed a 16-bit signal with 8 padding bits, it gives you 24dB of wiggle room to do digital volume changes without having to vary amplifier gain.) But you don't need 24-bit PCM in the distribution media to do this, just a 24-bit dac. "Hi res" distribution media is basically a scam even if it's 24/96 PCM IMO. 16/64 is probably way more than good enough but the numbers aren't sufficiently bigger than 16/44.1 to be sexy I guess
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 10:03
|
|
|
DSD also imposes some significantly limitations on what sort of digital operations you can do to the sound. There is currently no EQ/room correction that works on DSD, in fact almost every single DSP plugin or effect works on PCM only. That's why DSD has to be converted to DXD (which is PCM) if you need to do any kind of operations, other than very simple cutting or splicing. The sheer inconvencience of DSD is the biggest mark against it, and are much worse than the relatively simple PCM to delta-sigma conversion done by the DAC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
Wondering which cables to get for your fancy system? Wonder no more! http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/2017-editors-choice-interconnects-and-speaker-cables-part-3/
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
There's a million things to pick apart in that but praising a cable for its "speed and precision" stands out to me as the most hilarious. Like there's some slow-rear end cables that the sound waves get stuck in and the music plays out of phase because the left speaker has a bit of a backup. e: related since I saw it on TAS I have to hand it to Magico, they've really nailed the whole "make super expensive speakers that don't look like a minecraft Dalek or a refrigerator with holes punched in it" thing: https://vimeo.com/216956417 only one hundred seventy five thousand of your earth dollars qirex fucked around with this message at 16:08 on May 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
No, that is referring to physical speed and precision. The cable has a nickel-PFTE sheath that reduces friction for the fastest uncoiling and routing. Patented feed lips machined into the plug allow for lightning fast cable changes and drop-free release of spent cables. For the absolute fastest USB cable changes, you will also want to add the accompanying portwell to your system's USB ports:
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
Good comment on it though: " In the meantime I've given up on cables. When I want to listen to my audio, I call a bunch of players from the string section of the LA Phil, wrap them with high quality aluminum foil from Costco, arrange then in four lines with their arms stretched and holding hand to hand and then I have the ends of the line each touch the amp or the speaker terminal with their free fingers. The biggest concern is to avoid creating short circuits. The wind ensemble guys are best for chamber works, the horns are great for french music and the bassists and celloists do justice to Russians. I'm still trying to get a set up for Rock and Roll, as the last set of rock musicians came drunk, kept short circuiting and triggering the amp's protection. Oh, the LA Phil guys are great, but being union there's no way they'll stick around for the encore"
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
With audio cable woo-woo I can never be sure who are the believers and who are stealth trolling the gently caress out of the former.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
Something something, the abyss stares also into you.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
I feel like we here could have a chat with a Chinese company and get some cabling made up to sell on at obscene prices whilst buying them in for pennies. Gooncable
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
günkabel
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
Olympic Mathlete posted:I feel like we here could have a chat with a Chinese company and get some cabling made up to sell on at obscene prices whilst buying them in for pennies. There's a million people that have had this exact thought so unless you're willing to spend a crapload of money on marketing and outright bribery you're probably doomed. Plus I think the kinds of people that buy this sort of thing can spot true believers, their crazy frequencies are on the same time-correct directional phase [accounting of course for skin effect].
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Wondering which cables to get for your fancy system? Wonder no more!  my favorite thing about these is the super fancy exposed coaxial braid shield covering
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
You're buying more expensive wires than are put on space ships and aeroplanes and particle accelerators.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
Jago posted:You're buying more expensive wires than are put on space ships and aeroplanes and particle accelerators. The point is my toys are more expensive than yoooooooooours
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
If your hi-fi doesn't sound any better with those hyper expensive cables, that's 'cos your system simply isn't good enough, you pov.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 10:07
|
|
|
MP3 is officially dead as founders terminate licensing program Countdown to a couple of years from now when audiophile hipsters will start praising mp3 for it's "warm, soulful" sound.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 13:41
|
|
|
I thought the patents expired anyway?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
But what on Earth does the author mean when they write "the removal of support for the format signals an official shift in the industry."? What support? The statement on Fraunhofer Institute's web page says: quote:On April 23, 2017, Technicolor's mp3 licensing program for certain mp3 related patents and software of Technicolor and Fraunhofer IIS has been terminated. I read the statement as "we used to require a licensing agreement for people to use our patented technology, but there's not enough money in it anymore to continue". Which sort of implies that they're not going to bother to hunt down and prosecute people who continue to use it. Which means usage might actually increase (even if I think it unlikely due to competing free codecs). ^ Yes, according to this page on the Internet, the last few patents are about to expire. https://madfileformatscience.garymcgath.com/2016/04/05/mp3patent/
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
Yeah it's sensationalist bullshit that doesn't mean anything. Nothing will change other than some legal shot which was mostly irrelevant now anyway. Same thing happened with GIF a while back. I guess that's why I haven't seen or heard of GIF since then. What a dead format that is.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 14:29
|
|
|
GutBomb posted:Yeah it's sensationalist bullshit that doesn't mean anything. Nothing will change other than some legal shot which was mostly irrelevant now anyway. Same thing happened with GIF a while back. I guess that's why I haven't seen or heard of GIF since then. What a dead format that is. I blame clickonomics.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
Audacity might start including LAME at the time of install! I can't think of anything else.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
Hippie Hedgehog posted:
The consequence is that now any company who wants to make software or hardware decoders for MP3 can do so without worrying about paying the licensing fees. So, you can expect a slight increase in MP3 usage among small time outfits that currently had to stick with either a free codec or one with lower licensing fees. It also means that it's a lot easier to get "truly free" MP3 support in many open source projects that required users to provide their own MP3-handling libraries or programs before. For instance, the popular open source audio editor Audacity currently doesn't support MP3 export in its default download. You need to specifically download LAME or a similar MP3 package from elsewhere to get the MP3 export functionality, presumably once the patent has fully run out the functionality will be fully incorporated to Audacity.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
I doubt the original designers of MP3 back in 1993 can even imagine that their codec would still not be made anywhere near obsolete by 2017. LAME is the closest thing to a work of god.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 16:47
|
|
|
Palladium posted:I doubt the original designers of MP3 back in 1993 can even imagine that their codec would still not be made anywhere near obsolete by 2017. LAME is the closest thing to a work of god. Compatibility is king. Witness h.262 video still being every-goddam-where simply because everything supports it.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:Compatibility is king. Witness h.262 video still being every-goddam-where simply because everything supports it. Well, I was coming from the quality POV. Anyway, I remember there was a big ruckus in the Anime  scene when the release groups dropped Xvid for H264 because people still want to watch the lousy IQ to bitrate stuff on their 10 year old DVD player.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
I assume this also means we can stop pretending ogg vorbis is even remotely relevant
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
qirex posted:I assume this also means we can stop pretending ogg vorbis is even remotely relevant Spotify uses Ogg Vorbis. That's pretty darn relevant.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:19 |
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Spotify uses Ogg Vorbis. That's pretty darn relevant. So do a shitlot of video games, including titles you might have heard of like Halo, GTA, and WOW. And little radio stations like NPR. Yeah, pretty relevant.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 20:30
|
|
