Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD? (Read 15787 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #25 –
I have no 384kbps DAC. For recording I use 48 kbps. I have tried in the past to find my listening threshold about 256 kbps MP3 with some sample tracks but I do not think that is the only relevant thing for audio storage. I mentioned my hypothesis just because tjis topic was about upsampling. The rest is hard to discuss when the opponent attacks the messenger.

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #26 –
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
I have no 384kbps DAC.
Sorry, I meant 384kHz. EDIT: I also explicitly mentioned DSD in the same breath. Sigh. I can't manage to get this nonsense straight anymore.

Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
The rest is hard to discuss when the opponent attacks the messenger.
I'm attacking your inability to operate within the confines of reality.  Honestly, I'd prefer to be your proponent, but you keep clinging to the idea that sonic bliss lies beyond the horizon.

As for the topic, the OP seemed pretty clear:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112954.msg930001.html#msg930001

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #27 –
Ok. I have no other input, if my hypothesis about oversapmling/upsampling source is false then the rest was just an appreciation that i have not find any objective evidence since our debate in the spring.

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #28 –
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
I have no 384kbps DAC. For recording I use 48 kbps. I have tried in the past to find my listening threshold about 256 kbps MP3 with some sample tracks but I do not think that is the only relevant thing for audio storage. I mentioned my hypothesis just because tjis topic was about upsampling. The rest is hard to discuss when the opponent attacks the messenger.

And I by mistake wrote about kbps (while thinking about those MP3s ... ) where should be kHz :) :)

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #29 –
You quoted my dumb mistake which I fixed.  I should have gone to bed.

To your earlier point, sure, I won't dismiss the possibility that there are DACs which require upsampling in order to be transparent because they are incompetently designed.

From PCM to DSD?  I have no idea.  Good luck finding a single advocate for this method who actually performed a proper listening test.

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #30 –
OK. I was talking about PCM upsampling only (from 16bit/24bit source), as I have no experience with DSD (and from what I have read I do not miss anything by leaving DSD/SACD aside).

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #31 –
Quote from: jumpingjackflash5 on
I was talking about PCM upsampling only (from 16bit/24bit source)
That is not upsampling.  Regardless, that has already been discussed to death, and this topic is not the place to have another round at beating the horse.

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #32 –
Wow! Reading greynol's comments in this thread reads exactly the same as most of the comments I've been making on a couple of 'audiofool' forums I've been stupid enough to join whilst taking a hiatus from here. It's good to be back!  :))

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #33 –
I want 384kHz. ADC. For higher work precision when recovering analog media with physical damage. Of course, chances are, even with the RX 5 suite of tools, it's totally pointless, and serves nothing better than the 44100/16 recordings I already made and cleaned up. They even satisfy me, except for the fact that this record seems to be damaged or something, as the first 25-30 seconds seem to have some sort of saturation going on, without actually hitting the recorder's clipping threshold. Oh well, I'm satisfied with what I've got.

(I'd be even more satisfied if the original studio still had some master tapes and produced a CD, so I didn't have to hit up Discogs for an aging record release. Not like I could expect K-Tel, the company that brought us "As Seen On TV" product branding, to find a 1980 children's record to be marketable to today's generation. I wouldn't expect them to even bother putting it on streaming services. Got my nostalgia on, and moved on with my life.)

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #35 –
I can't actually test whether the signal processing software has a better chance of processing pops and clicks at that sample rate, as I don't have the hardware to record over 48KHz from a turntable. I suppose it can easily be tested by someone with such insane hardware, but that same person is probably likely to have their opinion colored by their hardware choices and budget.

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #36 –
According to Cookie Marenco, Blue Coast Music will create DSD from PCM "for your convenience" and they note it on the top of the page where you buy the stuff. I take it that "for your convenience" means just that, convenience only and that there is no reason to do the conversion otherwise. What's the point?

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #37 –
Quote from: kode54 on
I want 384kHz. ADC. For higher work precision when recovering analog media with physical damage.

Why?

Quote
Of course, chances are, even with the RX 5 suite of tools, it's totally pointless, and serves nothing better than the 44100/16 recordings I already made and cleaned up. They even satisfy me, except for the fact that this record seems to be damaged or something, as the first 25-30 seconds seem to have some sort of saturation going on, without actually hitting the recorder's clipping threshold. Oh well, I'm satisfied with what I've got.

It is possible that certain tools that are sold for the purpose of recovering analog media might be themselves  poorly made. and might benefit from addition of huge amounts of excessive bandwidth. 

It is likely that well-designed products of this nature can be highly effective, even if operating with less bandwidth and lower resolution than 44/16, given that 44/16 is itself sonically an overkill format.

Sounds to me like the product you are using has serious problems that even more bandwidth couldn't help.

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #38 –
http://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-are-wow-and-flutter-key-analogue-tape-sound

Quote
someone had invented a de-wow-and-flutter system that tracked variations in the pitch of the bias signal to correct for wow and flutter, and he said the result sounded 'just like digital'

How about this? Is it real? I heard about this technique before but I don't know if an actual product exists or not. From what I know about analog tape, bias signals can be as high as 100khz or more right?

But there is also a product claims to correct wow and flutter without using the bias signal.

https://youtu.be/qqK6wgsh3QA

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #39 –
Quote from: bennetng on
http://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-are-wow-and-flutter-key-analogue-tape-sound

Quote
someone had invented a de-wow-and-flutter system that tracked variations in the pitch of the bias signal to correct for wow and flutter, and he said the result sounded 'just like digital'

How about this? Is it real? I heard about this technique before but I don't know if an actual product exists or not. From what I know about analog tape, bias signals can be as high as 100khz or more right?

But there is also a product claims to correct wow and flutter without using the bias signal.

https://youtu.be/qqK6wgsh3QA

There are several products that claim to do this.

One is Celemony Capstan: Celemony Capstan

The other is Plangent:   Plangent Processes

There may be others
 

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #40 –
Thanks Arnold. So the Plangent Processes is a hardware system capable of capturing the bias signal and this piece of specifically designed hardware should be much more expensive than a 384khz ADC. I ran some 96k RMAA tests on a cassette deck and it started to lowpass at 15khz and after 20khz there is only noise, so I suppose the bias signal cannot be reproduced by a typical cassette deck or open reel tape recorder at all.

Re: What's the point of "upsampling" PCM to DSD?

Reply #41 –
Quote from: bennetng on
Thanks Arnold. So the Plangent Processes is a hardware system capable of capturing the bias signal and this piece of specifically designed hardware should be much more expensive than a 384khz ADC. I ran some 96k RMAA tests on a cassette deck and it started to lowpass at 15khz and after 20khz there is only noise, so I suppose the bias signal cannot be reproduced by a typical cassette deck or open reel tape recorder at all.

Yes, either process needs some kind of a reference tone that "in the wild" can reasonably expected to be relatively free of jitter at the frequencies that are present in the recording to be de-jittered.

I believe that Plangent Processes  has some more detailed white papers (AES? IEEE?) about their procedures. I seem to recall their needing to use custom reproduce heads with exceedingly narrow gaps.

There are also  papers with some details about Celemony's process, which I believe uses the components of the music itself as the source of a jitter-free reference.

Given that we can measure jitter to far lower levels than we can hear, this method might work as well as Planget's without special hardware.