What is better: FLAC or DSD?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 кві 2019
- Again a popular question amongst my viewers: what is better, high-res PCM or DSD. Well, that depends…
Relevant videos:
DSD Explained part 1: • DSD Explained part 1
DSD Explained part 2: • DSD explained part 2
The truth about Nyquist and why 192 kHz does make sense: • The truth about Nyquis...
If you like my work, support it using Patreon or Paypal:
My Patreon page: / thehbchannel
Paypal: www.paypal.me/theHBchannel
My book: • File Based Audio aka S...
My site: www.theHBproject.com/en
My channel: / thehansbeekhuyzen
My Facebook page: / hansbeekhuyzen
My Google+ page: www.google.com/+TheHansBeekhuyzen
My Twitter: / hansbeekhuyzen
My reference sets:
About Questions: • About questions
What DAC is the best: • What DAC is the best? - Наука та технологія
over 40 people that down voted, do not have a clue about the effort involved in creating this video, nor do they appreciate the content. TY Hans!
🙏🏽
what a shame
As for the down voters...... I was once told that you cannot teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
This is the best explanation I've heard yet. You have a gift for making complex issues clear without oversimplifying. Thanks for the effort you put into this.
Not over-simplified and not over-sampled! :D
Sorry, I could not resist the bad pun but also could not agree with you more!
I’m attaining you class regularly because you easily solved audio questions/myths in simple but accurate informative ways
🙏🏽
Thank you for this marvelous lecture and lesson. I like, "trust your ears."
EXCELLENT explanations, Hans. All the best, Rob
wwwoooowwwww,,,i mean what???? slowly slowly,, you puted in 15 minutes more information than other persson in 15 videos, i really aprecciate, thanks for your time
Wow, thanks
Hans, you are the Man!
An utmost excellent video. Superb explanation.
Totally subscribed and liked!
Excellent & informative! One of the best succinct explanations on this topic by anyone yet. Thank you!
i prefer to convert youtube music videos to mp3 and listen to them on my dollar store ear buds lol
I've spent most of my audio engineering life (when making comparisons) trying to decide if various differences are better, worse or err, just different.
It can be very subjective.
As you state clearly here with digital, what and how digital data is handled as well as the quality of processing involved really does account for differences heard.
The quality of recording/replay equipment I own does allow me to resolve these sound differences.
This might sound funny, I found in storage an old but immaculate Phillips 256 times over-sampling 1bit CD player. It became a talking point in the studio as it sounded incredible - better than our vastly more expensive Red Book mastering CD burner with its dual BURR BROWN DAC converters, which is still occasionally used.
I've found creating the highest possible digital master (DSD or PCM) will create far better Down sampled copies. Works the same in the digital filming world. Film in high end raw @ 4K, 6K or 8K and down sample to 1080p for superior image quality.
Hi Chris, Which Phillips model was that CD player?.
@@seamussheehy8380
Yes, we had two old models ... The CD-840 was the one that impressed. I note I made a mistake. Its a 1bit 256x over sampling player ... The other Philips was a CD-960 which is 16bit. That sounded excellent to, but it was the less substantial CD-840 that grabbed our attention.
@@roygalaasen
When you consider the age Its pretty amazing really.
@@ProjectOverseer Thanks Chris.
@@seamussheehy8380
Glad I could clarify.
Mr. Beekhuyzen, I really enjoy your videos. They are very informative, and I particularly appreciate you always ending with "enjoy the music." It's simple, but such a good reminder that we're all in this hobby for a reason, and not to lose sight of it or get in fights about different ideas. Thank you!
My pleasure
Thank you Meer Beekhuyzen for your utilitarian ability of making very complex subject matter somewhat understandable to an Redbook CD file player! I think most, if not all your "mini" seminars are the exception rather than the rule here on UA-cam (regardless of subject content!) Be well and many thanks!Marco B.Brooklyn, NY
This video has cleared up a few points for me. This week I ordered a DSD DAC .Plus with other advice I have got it should sound.. smokin :)
What did you order? I have an interest in dsd. I heard a sacd player many years ago and it sounded like nothing i had ever heard. Through researching i found that sacd is dsd64. That got me excited as now we have dsd at higher sampling rates but the files available for dsd are ao eclectic my enthusiasm has decreased massively. Still curious, what external dac did you order for dsd playback?
Fantastic video.
What an excellent video. Thank you for your clean, professional presentation.
You're very welcome!
This is an amazing explanation I get it now :) thank you I have literally watched this five times
*Simply* great....
All of these relevant video links... I have stuff to do! At least it looks like you'll save me time digging for more info in the long run, though. Great video, very informative! Thanks!
Great to hear!
PS ... Love your detailed observations, Hans 👍
Thx man👍🏻
Excellent video. As usual :-) BR, Per
Good explanation. Stay safe and stay healthy.
Thank you, I will.
Very well explained. Thank you.
🙏
Excellent material and presentation.
Thanks for watching
@@TheHansBeekhuyzenChannel my first video as I start my day!! Going to buy Aldine more SACD’s and work on my player :-)
Very informative
Thank you so, so much for adding English subtitles so as to understand technical terms with your native accent.
👍🏼
Thanks for the amazing information and video.
Glad it was helpful!
very informative. thank you.
Thank you!
very well explained Sr !
Thanks and welcome
Bedankt Hans! 👍
Excelente explicación. Muy profesional y asequible para los que no somos cientificos en el tema pero apreciamos el audio con calidad. Este canal es mi favorito en el tema del audio musical. Muchas gracias.
🙏
Thank you
Thanks for your detailed wisdom good sir.
My pleasure
Thanks for the "no BS" approach.
🙏
Wonderfull explanation that I think will helping a lot of Audiophile People. Thanks so much !
my pleasure
Trust your ears...Great advice that many overlook
👍🏼
Have you had a chance to try the Chord Mscaler? I am interested to hear you thoughts on it and the effects it has on the final sound.
Woah Thank you for this educational video.
Technical details are well explained, much less if a difference is audible or meaningful, which are what really matters, the second much more over the first. For that I would not dismiss compression so easily.
What sounds the best depends largely on the equipment used. Some equipment handles DSD better, other do PCM better.
A beautifully concise video that thoroughly debunks the snake oil in the audiophile community.
Sound advice.
🙏🏻
Nyquist was a mathematician, not and electronics engineer. The nyquist theorem assumes an infinitely sharp cutoff filter. Something that does not exist. Therein lies the problems.
Well said
I enjoyed this but I am completely lost about the "nasties" that occur in the 3kHz spectrum as a result of filtering above 20khz. As far as I can tell, you haven't offered any explanation as to why that is. If you could elaborate I'd really appreciate it.
The nasties are caused by time smearing, in general due to digital filtering.
In some download sites, the choice is not DSD vs FLAC. The choice is often FLAC, AIFF, and a few others. Assuming disk space is not an issue, would AIFF be better than FLAC since there is less work for the playback computer?
As i said in the video, AIFF and FLAC contain the same information, it's all about the quality of the player if one sounds better over the other.
@@TheHansBeekhuyzenChannel Thank you. So a high quality streamer would not be impacted by the extra work of uncompressing FLAC. This makes sense.
When converting from SACD to Flac what is the best conversion type to use? I see options ranging from Integer Multistage to 64Bit Extreme Precision Direct. Thank you
Frankly I don’t know.
Not sure; but my thoughts is that DSD is based off the CD sample rate; i.e. DSD64 is 64x44.1kHz. With that in mind, when converting to PCM I would choose a multiple of 44.1kHz; i.e. 24bit/88.2kHz
@@rui1863 thanks but that was not my question.
a humble question to add is, if you had a SACD or mastering source .ISO disc file, and if you convert to DSD, and then using the same source to FLAC without any compression, which will sound better? running the properly DAC which could run natively both format. :)
That is a question that is impossible to answer. If the source file is recorded in DSD, conversion to PCM will give a (very) small loss in quality. If the file is recorded in PCM and then converted to DSD, there equally will be a (very) small loss. It then depends on the DAC. Some will do PCM better, others DSD. A DAC that does PCM AND DSD equally good, is unknown to me. Illustrated: the Chord DAVE can be switched between optimised for DSD or optimised for PCM.
@@TheHansBeekhuyzenChannel thanks for take your time for the explanation. I'm aware of that. if you had a studio quality ISO file, for sure, DSD will comply with top quality. in my humble opinion.
Hans the type of homie that your turn off your Adblock for 👍
did you ever do any analysis on/with BURR BROWN DACs ?
I am only interested in ready to use equipment and not in components.
@@TheHansBeekhuyzenChannel can you answer the actual question that I asked?
did you ever do any analysis on/with BURR BROWN DACs ?
Great explanation. There are other youtube videos that dont like dsd and flac is enough for them. So i tried it... got a better dac that plays dsd natively. There is a difference and no one could tell me other wise. The dsd and sacd sounded better to me, while 24bit flac sound fine. If i didnot hear any difference, i would be happier to listen to flac.
Listen and trust your ears is the best advise for people going in to the hobby.
It all depends on your hardware.
My files are in FLAC but when I play them, the DAC says DSD 2.8 Mhz. Does my receiver convert the FLAC into DSD on the fly? Or is the file being played using FLAC implementation but the DAC only says DSD because it was converted into DoP?
I really can't say. If our receiver does offer PCM to DSD conversion, that is the most likely situation.
Great video..It's funny it takes me a few minutes to adjust to his accent
I am still not used to it 😁
What are your thoughts of software such as HQplayer upsampling 44.1 to say DSD 512?
I have no thoughts on products I haven't reviewed. Sorry.
What are these 'nasties' at 3k at cd sample rate?
Or in other words, why is the filter affecting 3K, when it's set to 20K?
If this is true, it would explain a lot. Before all I got from audiophiles was that we needed the extra bandwidth past 20k, but no reason given.. Very frustrating!
It's what filters always do: time smearing> This is what MQA solves to a degree. And it is not AT 3kHz it is the area around 3 kHz where our ears are most sensitive and where the time smearing is most noticeable.
should i bother getting dsd if i'm listening to music from my phone, not player?
I don’t know much about phones
I just had no idea of the complexity of the issue.
Nothing in audio is easy.
Superbe 👍♥️
🙏🏽
so what does dsd do/ is used for?
does the sampling rate effect the dsd?
DSD uses 64 times higher sampling rate compared to CD but it only uses 1 bit in stead of 16. It's just another way of coding audio.
@@TheHansBeekhuyzenChannel and can you use dsd bia bluetooth or is it only for wired headphones?
It’s all about the ,,,DAC’’’
It’s all about DAC’s processing
I've listened to Hotel California in FLAC and the same file in DSD and the DSD sounded a little better and more 3 dimensional.
That means primarily that your DAC is better in reproducing DSD better than PCM. At least, with the track you used.
Hans I need a good computer to run my Brooklyn DAC and sotm 200 ultra thxs
FLAC. Since most DSD recordings, with the exception of some archived analog master tapes, are made from DXD (i.e. 24-bit 352.8 kHz PCM) there is no rational reason to use DSD 😊
This is not fully correct. The DSD signal remains in DSD, only on edits a very short section is automatically converted to DXD, the edit is calculated and the section is converted back to DSD. Apart from that: for affordable DAC's the signal can be easier to covert to analog since the very high sampling rate requires almost no reconstruction filter.
Maybe, just maybe, one day the audiophile community will stop blaming the format but instead blame the real culprit, the filters, the DAC.
👍🏼
The theorem was not really about sampling with numerical values (digital) but sampling with pulses ( dirac delta). Storing the pulses with numerical values is not the core of the theory. An overlooked part of the theory is the reconstruction part. It is often said that all you need is to sample at twice the sampling rate of the highest signal frequency and you are fine. Just add a HF filter at the input to limit the frequency. One problem is that signal that start and stop have a wideband spectrum compared to the steady state signal that the theory deals with. The reconstruction of the signal assumes a sinc filter or a brickwall filter at the output. It is a part of the mathematics that the reconstructed signal is an addition of endless sinc pulses. This is never done in practice and various type of HF output filters are used. Sometimes none, an approach by Audio Note. No wonder digital does sound non natural to many ears.
You're so right. BTW the Chord WTA filtering constructs the analog signal with sync pulses which explains the sound quality. But even then only products like the M-Scaler come close to what I consider to be close to optimal.
@@TheHansBeekhuyzenChannel I have never heard the M scaler but very curious to hear. Maybe one day this can be done cost effectively.
He lost me at "investigating the flaws in these theorems journalistically, not scientifically." At that point, it's just opinion.
That’s correct. I never claimed it to be else.