I hope these links work...

CD rip: http://rapidshare.com/files/3980571067/Dead%20Can%20Dance%20-%2012%20-%20Radharc.wav

Digitized Vinyl Files

16/44.1: http://rapidshare.com/files/2382222736/12.%20Radharc%2016_44.1.wav

24/88.2: http://rapidshare.com/files/1295849148/12.%20Radharc%2024_88.2.wav

24/176.4: http://rapidshare.com/files/375223364/12.%20Radharc%2024_176.4.wav

Mani

Peter, I'm just about to catch a plane but will sort this out at the other end.

Mani.

Haha, this ties in nicely with what I'm doing:


I've just made three recordings of the 'Dead Can Dance' track, 'Radharc' in 16/44.1, 24/88.2 and 24/176.4 on the PMII. I've compared my files to the 16/44.1 CD rip (same master by the sound of it), and here's what I'm hearing when I play back on the NOS1 with all files upsampled to 705.6 in XX:

Firstly, the CD obviously has a more stable sound, with massive channel separation. But Lisa Gerrard's voice is 'thick' and flat - dull. I saw DCD live in October and can definitely say that she doesn't sound like this.

The 16/44.1 file has a remarkably 'similar' sound to the CD rip, albeit with much diminished channel separation, and approx. 1dB lower volume. IMO it has more rhythm though.

Surprisingly, the 24/88.2 file doesn't sound that much different to the 16/44.1 file. A little more 'holisitc', but a similar sound.

The 24/176.4 file however is fundamentally different, and soooo much closer to how the vinyl sounds. Lisa's voice is now 'delicate'. There's a sweetness and liveliness to the sound that the other files just don't have.

IMO, only the 24/176.4 file played back through XX/NOS1 really sounds identical to the vinyl. This is my subjective opinion, but there is one thing I know for sure: Only at 24/176.4 (and 24/192) is the PMII a truly non-oversampling ADC.

My hypothesis is that any oversampling in the ADC and/or the DAC kills the sound. (It seems the guys are ESS, who produce the Sabre DAC, are onto this too: RMAF 11: Noise Shaping Sigma Delta Based Dacs, Martin Mallison, CTO, ESS Technology).

I'm happy to share these files for anyone to try themselves but am having difficult setting privileges in 'Rapidshare'. Does anyone know of another (easier) way to share them?

Mani.

Setting the output to 192KHz in the Phasure USB Control Panel seems to help. Of course, Windows' upsampling won't be anything special, but it's better than nothing.

Mani.

Well, I'm listening to Spotify via the NOS1 right now - hey it sounds quite OK. BBC's radio 3 here in the UK sounds even better - its 320kbps. (I know Spotify Premium is supposed to be 320kbps also, but some people suggest that it's only 160kbps.)

Arjan, thanks for asking the question in the first place as I would never have thought of doing this otherwise. For me, the real prize isn't being able to listen to Spotify (although very welcome), but being able to listen to BBC Radio 3 AND being able to have a direct NOS1 connection to my amp.

I'm still a little bit concerned about relying on Windows' volume control to stay exactly where I last put it (quite low) and not all of a sudden jump up, but I suppose there's no reason why this should happen...

Mani.

If you're thinking of using the NOS1 in a more general way, I would strongly advise that you feed the NOS1 into a preamp (or integrated amp) and use the amp's volume control.

EDIT: More specifically, use a preamp until you're happy using Windows' (or OS X's) volume control.

I wouldn't trust Windows' volume control from a safety POV or a sound quality POV. Any preamp's volume control is going to degrade the sound quality of the NOS1 - not a problem when listening to Spotify, but a problem when wanting absolutely the best sound quality with XX. Of course, you can manually bypass the preamp when needed, but this is a PITA.

For my own part, I use a preamp in my office/study system. It's a Pass Labs X1, quite good in its day. But let me tell you that there is a massive hit on sound quality when using XX - a direct NOS1-amp connection is just so much better... BUT I'm happy to have this compromise in my office/study to give me the option of listening to radio when I'm working. I would never do this is my main system.

EDIT: Having written this, it occurred to me that maybe I should try a direct NOS1-amp connection and see if I can live with the NOS1 being fed from Spotify,etc, just so that I can totally eliminate the preamp...

Mani.

PA(-) all the way here

Mani.

I want to share my experiences in case anyone else is thinking of doing this.

My little 'studio' is now all set up (see below) and I have to say that early attempts at digitizing vinyl suggest that the effort has been worthwhile. It's probably gross distortion, but there's something about the sound of vinyl that is really, really nice. I'll put some 24/192 and or DSD files up for anyone who's interested at some point.

I'll be using this thread as a bit of a blog, as I'm sure there's still a lot for me to learn. But for now, I'll just list the equipment that's gone into the 'studio':

- sealed and sound-insulated room with semi-Faraday cage (builder's wire mesh used instead of copper plating) and integrated air purifier and ventilation system
- PurePower PP2000 (used in battery mode for turntable only)
- 5KVA balanced transformer (for linear PSs)
- 5KVA balanced transformer (for SMPSs)
- Loricraft vacuum record cleaning machine
- Technics SP10 MKII turntable
- Transfi T3Pro arm
- London Decca Reference cartridge
- Ray Samuels F-117 phono stage
- Pacific Microsonics Model Two (for PCM 24/192)
- Weiss AFI1 (with Paul Hynes linear PS)
- Korg MR1000 (with Paul Hynes linear PS) (for DSD128)
- Tascam DV-RA1000HD
- Berning Siegfried 300B
- AKG K-1000
- Sony PS3 (for SACD rips)

As far as possible, all power supplies sit outside the studio.

More posts later...

Mani.

Yep, definitely the way to do things.

I tend to do a lot of (too much?) A/Bing. But what's interesting is that as I oscillate between the options, I'm pretty certain I end up with the one that I would have chosen in longer term listening anyway. And it's usually the one that's easier on the ear and not objectionable in any way.

Mani.

Jud, not sure if this will help, but here's my modified version of a diagram originally posted in the A. Koch paper.

The top process is what 99.9% of people are experiencing. And the 'killers' here are the DSD-to-PCM conversion in the ADC and the PCM-to-DSD conversion in the DAC.

Mani.

Edit: Really, the biggest issue using the Mytek for playback of DSD is that I'd have to introduce a preamp into the chain. I'm sure you'd agree that this is a total no-no...

Yes it's true that I don't 'trust' the Mytek to be able to get the best out of the native PCM24/88.2 recordings. So using it to compare native-DSD vs. native-PCM is a no-go - I'm sure the DSD would win hands down. But that's not to say that the DSD recording is actually better (but it could be).

The DSD-to-PCM conversion with Audiogate is just an experiment to see what it sounds like. But I agree, ideally there should be no conversions whatsoever (except done 'properly' in XX).

OK, so there are 3 options:

1. DSD -> Mytek

2. PCM -> NOS1

3. DSD -> XXHighEnd -> DSD-to-PCM -> NOS1

As you mentioned, 1 and 3 are attractive simply because of the lack of filtering during the ADC process (Edit: which answers your first question as to why I'd want to listen to DSD on the NOS1).

Now the BIG problem I have is in comparing 1 with 2. I don't have a totally transparent preamp, and without this making a comparison is almost impossible. But if 3 were available, I could compare 2 to 3 easily.

I think I've stated before that the way I will proceed is to record everything twice; once in DSD128 on the KORG and once in PCM24/88.2 on the PMII. (Why 88.2 and not 192? Well because I can't use the PMII in 'master clock' mode with the Tascam recorder at 176.4/192 rates. I could revert to using the RME or Weiss interfaces at 176.4/192 rates, but really don't want to use a PC for recording. In any event, I think 24/88.2 should be plenty good enough for vinyl recordings.)

Sorry this subject is not of much interest to the vast majority of people here. Maybe it will be in the future?

Mani.

There seems to be quite a bit of a buzz around DSD in audiophile circles nowadays. Many DAC manufacturers are placing DSD capabilities into their DACs. Some reviewers felt DSD gave them the best sound at CES2013 with true DSD surround sound recordings (http://www.stereophile.com/content/my-epiphany-pass-labs-sony-kimber-and-dsd-files).

I've embarked on my 'vinyl digitization' project and hope to gain some insights on the whole DSD vs. PCM debate. I have a true 1-bit DSD recorder and also a true 24-bit PCM recorder. But comparing the two is more easily said than done because I can't use the NOS1 to listen back to the DSD recordings natively. Right now, I'm converting DSD128 to PCM24/88.2 using Korg's Audiogate software and using these files with the NOS1. The results are already very, very good. I've not yet had the time to compare them to native PCM24/88.2 files, but will do this soon and post the files for anyone to listen to.

So a simple question: will XX ever be able to play DSD files?

A more involved question: what's your gripe with DSD in general (I'm pretty sure you have one)?

Mani.

The whole thing's a moving target. When PA was first introduced, most of us were on high SFSs and we didn't have XTweaks. I can't remember the state of my hardware, but I'm sure it was different. But certainly, PA(-) just sounded too dull.

But today, I can get a very nice sound out of PA(-). In comparison to PA(+), it still sounds 'dull', but way more 'natural'. This is especially true with female voices.

I started using PA(-) when you removed PA(+) as an option. Even though PA(+) is back, I will continue with PA(-).

Mani

Edit: When Paul visited, we used PA(-) exclusively.

I have to say that Robo's description of PA(-) is spot on. So, this is down to reduced distortion, is it?

I've just compared no-PA, PA(-) and PA(+) again and I'd describe the differences as:

1. no PA - nice, but flat (in comparison to 3.)
2. PA(-) - very easy on the ear, but duller than 1.
3. PA(+) - exciting and dynamic with loads of 'sparkle', but has a 'hollow' sort of sound, a reduced low end and is perhaps fatiguing over time

FYI, PA(-) sounds a bit like PA(+) if I reverse the polarity of the speaker cables at both ends... which I guess is to be expected, no?

Mani.

Hi Coen.


Yep, same here. I'm using liquid cooling for the 3960X CPU - passive cooling wouldn't be enough with XTweaks.


Exactly how I do things. But in my case, the PC sits in the basement and I use two 5m PS/2 extenders.


Yep, I arrived at the same conclusion a while ago. But a linear PS for a powerful PC is just a no-go. So I use two independent 5KVA balanced transformers (connected to the same isolated earth in a 'star-earthing' arrangement) for all linear and switch-mode power supplies respectively.


Ah, now that's interesting. I think I'll still go ahead and get a cheap lab power supply though, just to play around with.


I use a NAS to store all the stuff I don't listen to very often, and for backup purposes. But I agree, this is the biggest current obstacle to using just a single SATA drive.

Ha, it just occurred to me that I have one of Peter's PCs sitting in my basement still sealed in its box. I've been helping a friend set up a NOS1 and I ordered this PC on his behalf. If I can find the time, I might try to compare it to my own PC before I deliver it to my friend's place. But these things just take sooooo long and there are so many more enjoyable things to do...

Hey Peter, why don't you find some time to make a visit and we can compare together?

Mani.