Why not DSD (SACD) audio instead of PCM?

[Krazy]

Just curious, but why didn't Sony and the rest of the BDA go for DSD (the audio coding used in Super Audio CD's) Audio instead of PCM for the audio spec of Blu-Ray? Going DSD would have made more sense for blu-ray with the higher quality of DSD compared to PCM

[Ender]

Maybe DSD takes up too much space? It sure would be nice if SACD was able to make a comeback, the few I have sound so good.

[Krazy]

Originally Posted by Ender

Maybe DSD takes up too much space? It sure would be nice if SACD was able to make a comeback, the few I have sound so good.

Not necessarily, current SACD's (which are physically DVD 9's) already hold 80 minutes of both 5.1 and stereo (separate stereo track, not a downmix of the 5.1 mix) so storage would be a piece of cake on the 50Gb of BD's

[Ender]

Another possibility is that the studio masters are PCM, which would make DSD conversion an unnecessary step that only adds to production cost with no real benefit. Just a guess though, hopefully one of the studio insiders will see this and give a better explanation.

[MasterXeus]

Originally Posted by Ender

hopefully one of the studio insiders will see this and give a better explanation.

agreed

[Manco]

SACD's one-bit word length and very high sampling rates was "theorized" to better reproduce analog. As we can see, SACD never really took off the way it was expected.

There is no sense in requiring BR player manufacturers to invest in PCM -> DSD (SACD) conversion in the players when everyone is so heavily invested in DVD already...which carries PCM. Nearly all BR players will be used for DVD upconversion at the outset and this would just add additional cost. It was a good decision of the BDA to stick with what already works. We are already getting "uncompressed" PCM on many BD's plus the lossless audio codes. I see no reason for DSD.

[Deciazulado]

Actually paidgeek mentioned something about this on the insiders thread so you could seek his post. The BDA if composed of several manufacturers and companies so all had to agree on everything the format specs would include. That one wasn't included while others were.

[frank_t]

Originally Posted by Ender

Maybe DSD takes up too much space? It sure would be nice if SACD was able to make a comeback, the few I have sound so good.

no doubt! it's kind of hanging on, but only through imports.

I just picked up the 1st 12-disc genesis SACD set. Anxiously awaiting the others.

also have some of the recent moody blues SACDs.

it's really a shame what iTunes did to the music market. dumbed down audio for the masses!

[Manco]

Originally Posted by frank_t

it's really a shame what iTunes did to the music market. dumbed down audio for the masses!

LOL! It's funny to hear that again. When CD first came out, audiophiles kept repeating this statement over and over again when it came to vinyl. Guess what... your and "old timer" now!!

[Alex Pallas]

Originally Posted by Manco

LOL! It's funny to hear that again. When CD first came out, audiophiles kept repeating this statement over and over again when it came to vinyl. Guess what... your and "old timer" now!!

a lot of the early issues of CDs actually had lower quality than vinyl (i read an interesting article accompanied with spectral analysis on the issue). i personally cant imagine paying money for DRM-ridden music at a lower quality than 44.1. but then again i dont like SACD since you cant store it on a hard drive (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_A...opy_protection ).

[Krazy]

Originally Posted by Manco

SACD's one-bit word length and very high sampling rates was "theorized" to better reproduce analog. As we can see, SACD never really took off the way it was expected.

There is no sense in requiring BR player manufacturers to invest in PCM -> DSD (SACD) conversion in the players when everyone is so heavily invested in DVD already...which carries PCM. Nearly all BR players will be used for DVD upconversion at the outset and this would just add additional cost. It was a good decision of the BDA to stick with what already works. We are already getting "uncompressed" PCM on many BD's plus the lossless audio codes. I see no reason for DSD.

actually the BD players wouldn't have to convert PCM to DSD, the BDA should have just made DSD as an included playback codec (in the same way that BD players play both AVC and VC-1 for video and let the content providers decide on using PCM or DSD (or any of the other lossy/lossless codecs), depending on how the audio was recorded because there's no point in converting PCM to DSD as the players would play both natively

[WriteSimply]

Originally Posted by Manco

SACD's one-bit word length and very high sampling rates was "theorized" to better reproduce analog. As we can see, SACD never really took off the way it was expected.

The reason why it didn't take off has nothing to do with its 1-bit 2.82Mhz. The same reason why DVD-Audio didn't take off applies here. HOWEVER, SACDs are still being issued while DVD-A is slowly dying from lack of releases. The last hyped one was The Beatle's Love, I believe. SACD has Genesis.

As for my listening taste, I can hear the difference between Redbook CDs, DVD-A and SACD from my very cheap setup. I can easily recreate the "volume of air" on high-end CDs and vinyl setups with mine. That is why SACD is impressive.

But to each his/her own.


fuad

[Manco]

Originally Posted by Krazy

the BDA should have just made DSD as an included playback codec

You just re-stated what the original poster wrote.

Codecs are not free, they are licensed. There are royalties $$$ that go back to the patent holder for every player that goes out the door. Throw every codec known to man in a machine and you'll have a great player that nobody can afford. The goal here is to have a $99 BD player that everyone can enjoy.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by frank_t

it's really a shame what iTunes did to the music market. dumbed down audio for the masses!

I couldn't agree more. I absolutely hate buying songs from iTunes, at their totally awesome 128kbps! Some of us listen to music on something other than headphones (which is another thing that kills me . . . how it's fashionable now to walk around with your headphones plugged into your head. I cannot stand it when people come into my store and expect me to talk to them while they're still listening to their Fall Out Boy, or whatever crap is popular now). They should at least give you the option for 320 (even though I still rip my CD's using lossless).

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Manco

There is no sense in requiring BR player manufacturers to invest in PCM -> DSD (SACD) conversion in the players when everyone is so heavily invested in DVD already...which carries PCM.

I think you mean DSD > PCM conversion.
All SACD discs are in DSD format. The PS3 decimates DSD to 24/176.4 PCM up to 6 channels output through HDMI.

You can't get this sort of performance from most North American standalone SACD players.

There are several receivers that accept DSD natively through HDMI, but you need to verify the specs. The new Pioneer Elite VSX-91 does, all the new Onkyo HDMI 1.3 receivers from the TX-SR705 and up accept DSD.

I don't think native DSD output is coming anytime soon, but they did add CD upconversion so you never know.

In the meantime you can get an SACD/DVD-A player from Oppo for only US$169 that supports DSD out through HDMI.
http://www.oppodigital.com/dv980h/default.asp

Optimized high-fidelity audio circuitry

Taking inputs from audiovisual enthusiasts and world-famous high-fidelity audio equipment partners, OPPO designed the DV-980H with a focus on precision rendering from Super Audio CD, DVD-Audio, HDCD and regular CDs. Its digital-to-analog (D/A) converters feature 192kHz high sampling rate and 24-bit resolution. The driving stage uses carefully selected op-amps and capacitors. Combining these premium components in an optimized design, the DV-980H reduces quantization distortion and accurately reproduces the analog waveform, resulting in faithful, natural, detailed and rich sound.


HDMI v1.2a output with exceptional core video performance and high resolution audio support (multi-channel PCM and DSD™)

HDMI is an all digital interface for the cleanest possible connection. It delivers high-quality digital video and audio through a single cable. The DV-980H is among the very few players on the market that support HDMI v1.2a with multi-channel PCM and DSD audio, making it an ideal source device or digital transport for audiophiles.

In Europe you'll find DSD used natively a lot more often than in North America.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Manco

You just re-stated what the original poster wrote.

Codecs are not free, they are licensed. There are royalties $$$ that go back to the patent holder for every player that goes out the door. Throw every codec known to man in a machine and you'll have a great player that nobody can afford. The goal here is to have a $99 BD player that everyone can enjoy.

Assuming royalty cheating doesn't occur (and some of AACS is actually intended to control that), a $100 retail player may never be practical.

A $100 retail product would have to be maximum $50 cost. And there are probably $40 in royalties in a player.

Gary

[WickyWoo]

A $100 retail product would have to be maximum $50 cost. And there are probably $40 in royalties in a player

Standard profit margin is 35%. So after $40 in royalties, maximum build cost would be $25 on a $99 player.

Like with DVD, royalties will likely be reduced over time.

[crackinhedz]

Originally Posted by frank_t

I just picked up the 1st 12-disc genesis SACD set. Anxiously awaiting the others.

How was this set?? I have never heard a SACD before, and have been looking to buy one because I have heard its a great improvement over standard cd's...and the GENESIS set really caught my eye...was it worth the money?

[ra1024]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

The PS3 decimates DSD to 24/176.4 PCM up to 6 channels output through HDMI.

You can't get this sort of performance from most North American standalone SACD players.

I've been considering trying out some SACDs now since I understand the PS3 can play them and I've already made that investment. Will any HDMI receiver like the Onkyo 605 play them like they're intended or do you have to get an HDMI receiver that can decode the DSD bitstream?

[WriteSimply]

Originally Posted by ra1024

I've been considering trying out some SACDs now since I understand the PS3 can play them and I've already made that investment. Will any HDMI receiver like the Onkyo 605 play them like they're intended or do you have to get an HDMI receiver that can decode the DSD bitstream?

Well currently the PS3 can't stream the DSD so that's a moot point (and not MUTE).

As it works right now, you should get any HDMI receiver that can handle 192kHz for all 5-7.1 channels. The Christ Botti BD PCM audio is at 192kHz so you wanna listen to that!

The PS3 decimates the 1-bit 2.82Mhz sampling rate of DSD to 24-bit 44.1kHz PCM progression, depending on the receiver's PCM capability. That means it starts with 44.1kHz to 88.2kHz to 176.4kHz, which is why finding a receiver that can handle 192kHz would be ideal.

I don't know if the Onkyo can handle 192kHz but hopefully it would. Two of my favorite SACDs are Michael McDonald's Motown and Motown 2. Brilliant stuff. Great songs and great performance.

EDIT: If a receiver can handle the DSD decoding itself, it may not be a native DSD receiver but a DSD-to-PCM receiver. Meaning that it won't give you 1-bit 2.82Mhz per channel audio but a DSD-to-PCM conversion of the audio. Native DSD receiver is expensive as far as I know. And as I explained above, the PS3 already does a very high degree of decimation for the conversion.


fuad