• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

mkt

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
347
Likes
475
Neat, having such a device sure would open up a lot of options. Can you give my any details on your device?
Mine is a Sony BDP-S5100. Maybe from 2013? I figured it was not the first or last 40 bucks that I'd waste. @Kal Rubinson gives the links where all the info is. Data wants to be free.
 

Aerith Gainsborough

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 4, 2020
Messages
860
Likes
1,286
Did you ask?

Perhaps you are fortunate in that many Sony UHD are among those with ripping capability.
Nope, didn't ask just went "ARRR!" and started the download. *chuckles*

Unfortunately the UBP-X700 is not compatible, I have already tried the AutoScript. :/

For me, price isn't the issue. I already have suitable hardware. I simply dislike the idea of relying on accidental features in order to access music I've bought.
I understand what you mean. Though I'd rather not gamble around on ordering some old 2nd hand product, hoping that the hack will work.

DSD64 isn’t 25x larger than 24/44K; not even close. Do you know what the storage capacity of a single-layer SACD is? Hint: it’s not 30GB. You are orders of magnitude off here.
I was referring to DSD256.
DXD would have a similar filesize. IIRC I have seen @Kal Rubinson quote some ~40GB number for an album in another forum.

Mine is a Sony BDP-S5100. Maybe from 2013? I figured it was not the first or last 40 bucks that I'd waste. @Kal Rubinson gives the links where all the info is. Data wants to be free.
Heh, you guys in the U.S. sure have it easy in that regard.
It would cost me at least 80€ to import one. :D
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,364
Likes
9,991
Location
NYC
Whatever adjective you use, there's no guarantee you'll be able to replace it if it breaks.
Had I adopted your criterion, I would not have thousands of the files on my NAS that I now enjoy. If the player breaks, I still have them.
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,364
Likes
9,991
Location
NYC
DXD would have a similar filesize. IIRC I have seen @Kal Rubinson quote some ~40GB number for an album in another forum.
Yes, I have a couple of albums of about 40GB that are of a single-work (e.g., multi-movement symphony) but they are the equivalent of a 2-disc release. They are not all DSD; one is a FLAC!

I also have multi-disc "albums" which are much larger. The largest single-track files I have are in the 10-15GB range and there are only about 10 of them.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
83
Likes
49
I was referring to DSD256.
DXD would have a similar filesize. IIRC I have seen @Kal Rubinson quote some ~40GB number for an album in another forum.

Gotcha. From what I understand, there are inherit advantages to upsampling DSD64 to DSD128 or higher, such as pushing noise artifacts further away from the audible spectrum. This is a bandaid on a what some may consider a self-inflicted wound, but worth noting nonetheless when asked “why” someone might want dual or quad DSD.
 

firedog

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
379
Likes
644
Gotcha. From what I understand, there are inherit advantages to upsampling DSD64 to DSD128 or higher, such as pushing noise artifacts further away from the audible spectrum. This is a bandaid on a what some may consider a self-inflicted wound, but worth noting nonetheless when asked “why” someone might want dual or quad DSD.

Jussi from HQP has measured DACs that perform best with DSD 256 input. Ask him for the details.
 

firedog

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
379
Likes
644

PaulD

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
453
Likes
1,343
Location
Other
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
83
Likes
49
That is the best way to put it mansr, DSD is indeed a fetish, it has no technical reason to exist, so the community around it engages in audiophile BS. I would just point back to post 2 of this thread... https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/the-sound-quality-of-dsd.14773/#post-459542

This entire board is a fetish.

Given the choice between red book and DSD, I’ll go with DSD. Plenty of “technical reasons” why, and is the exact reason DSD was adopted by many users.

Not every recording available in DSD is available in high res PCM.

Not every recording available in both DSD and high res PCM is mastered the same.

Not everyone wants to repurchase their audio library in the latest high res format when they’re already satisfied with the DSD versions of what they already have.

I‘ll say it again, the angst some have for DSD is truly entertaining.
 

PaulD

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
453
Likes
1,343
Location
Other
Given the choice between red book and DSD, I’ll go with DSD. Plenty of “technical reasons” why, and is the exact reason DSD was adopted by many users.
Thanks for proving my point, not a lot of evidence included there... How many blind and level-matched tests have you done between PCM and DSD? I mentioned the first of what I did in post 2. DSD offered no advantages, only disadvantages. I have done more with the same result.

DSD should never have been allowed out of the chip, that is what it was designed for and where it is handled properly. Sony used it for distribution because it could not be copied. Then it became an audiophool fetish...
 

Aerith Gainsborough

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 4, 2020
Messages
860
Likes
1,286
Not every recording available in DSD is available in high res PCM.
Every recording is available, probably not to the end user but studios do not work with redbook. They actually need the other formats.

For simple playback, "Hi-Rez" PCM is as useless as DSD, unless it's a different master altogether..
It's just the expression of the Audio industries jealousy and desperate wish for a pendant to the HD/UHD video formats, that lead people to re-buy content in droves.

You can always convert DSD to PCM and no: you won't hear any difference whatsoever.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
83
Likes
49
Thanks for proving my point, not a lot of evidence included there... How many blind and level-matched tests have you done between PCM and DSD? I mentioned the first of what I did in post 2. DSD offered no advantages, only disadvantages. I have done more with the same result.

DSD should never have been allowed out of the chip, that is what it was designed for and where it is handled properly. Sony used it for distribution because it could not be copied. Then it became an audiophool fetish...

TIL redbook cd is multichannel :facepalm:

You guys really are trying too hard
 

Mnyb

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
2,929
Likes
4,128
Location
Sweden, Västerås

danadam

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
1,057
Likes
1,616
TIL redbook cd is multichannel
Ah... so in:
Given the choice between red book and DSD, I’ll go with DSD. Plenty of “technical reasons” why

by "DSD" you meant "SACD" and by "plenty" you meant "one"? You should be more precise, those words have different meanings, you know. :)

And I somehow must have missed that we are limiting the discussion to physical formats. When did that happen? (/s, just in case)
 
Last edited:

Mnyb

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
2,929
Likes
4,128
Location
Sweden, Västerås
There where also DVDA for MCH PCM content and now BlueRay also with MCH PCM content if we speak of physical formats .

Wonder if SACD's pyrrhic victory over DVDA was mostly Sony pushing hard to get their solution to be market dominant .

Sony has a history of trying to push weird formats on us from mini disc to Video 8 to SACD and BetaMax
 
Top Bottom