DS killer

Conversations about Lejonklou Products and this Forum

Moderator: Staff

User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Re: DS killer

Post by Music Lover »

matthias wrote:, but Linn have a dogmatic fixation against DSD.
Do we know why?
It's all about musical understanding!
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Re: DS killer

Post by matthias »

Music Lover wrote:
matthias wrote:, but Linn have a dogmatic fixation against DSD.
Do we know why?
It seems to be a love-hate-relationship. On one side they engaged one of the best recording companies, Five/Four Productions, to make two award winning recordings with the Boston Baroque in DSD256 and on the other side they started a thread on the Linn Forum: "Why DSD is a terrible idea in 2013"

Matt
hcl
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 360
Joined: 2008-01-13 11:03
Location: Göteborg
Contact:

Re: DS killer

Post by hcl »

matthias wrote:
hcl wrote:
matthias wrote:... A lot of high quality recordings are made with Merging equipment, including Linn recordings.
Is that so? I was told they use DAD interfaces, at least for classical recordings. They might have exchanged them and if so that is surely interesting. Do You have a reference for this info?
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f15-m ... post224279

Matt
So, I guess it is not a recording made by Linn Records.
Last edited by hcl on 2015-12-27 00:02, edited 1 time in total.
hcl
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 360
Joined: 2008-01-13 11:03
Location: Göteborg
Contact:

Re: DS killer

Post by hcl »

matthias wrote:
hcl wrote:
matthias wrote:Linn do not support DSD because it is not compatible with their Exakt-System.
Are You sure this is the primary reason? Linn have argued against DSD long before going for Exakt. I'm sure both PCM and DSD can produce very good end results. Dogmatic fixation to a specific technology seems unessesary.
Linn have planned Exakt long before releasing it. So it does make sense for Linn to argue against DSD long before going for Exakt. I agree with you regarding the results of PCM and DSD. Merging have an open mind and support both formats, but Linn have a dogmatic fixation against DSD.

Matt
I wouldn't know if Linn have a dogmatic fixation against DSD. Maybe they just think it is unnecessary to support both in a single system? There might well be good reasons that both formats can not given equal support or even that both formats may suffer from having to co-exist in a single design?
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Re: DS killer

Post by matthias »

hcl wrote: So, I guess it is not a recording made by Linn Records.
It is a recording which Five/Four Productions made for Linn Records.

Matt
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Re: DS killer

Post by matthias »

hcl wrote: I wouldn't know if Linn have a dogmatic fixation against DSD. Maybe they just think it is unnecessary to support both in a single system? There might well be good reasons that both formats can not given equal support or even that both formats may suffer from having to co-exist in a single design?
It is absolutely ok to say DSD is not compatible with Exakt and there is no one who would not accept this but to malign DSD and to say there is no reason to exist is another thing.

Matt
hcl
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 360
Joined: 2008-01-13 11:03
Location: Göteborg
Contact:

Re: DS killer

Post by hcl »

matthias wrote:It is absolutely ok to say DSD is not compatible with Exakt and there is no one who would not accept this but to malign DSD and to say there is no reason to exist is another thing.
I agree. It might be right to dismiss DSD on theoretical grounds, but machines are not theoretical things, they have to be built and compromises have to be made. Even though theory says that PCM would be better DSD might be the best way to reach the best result and if so it is rather stupid to completely dismiss the technology.

I think good results can be reached with both technologies, but DSD is surely limited to be a recording (or possibly distribution) format as it require the transition to multi bit when editing (mixing, mastering,...). If it is a pure decoding issue one wants to solve by using DSD I suggest the transition to DSD should be done in or close to the DAC.

As a vast majority of all recordings are PCM coded I think it is a good call to decide to go with full support for that format.
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Re: DS killer

Post by matthias »

hcl wrote:It might be right to dismiss DSD on theoretical grounds.......
Even though theory says that PCM would be better..........
Sorry hcl, but I am not aware of any theory about the superiority of PCM over DSD.
hcl wrote:I think good results can be reached with both technologies, but DSD is surely limited to be a recording (or possibly distribution) format as it require the transition to multi bit when editing (mixing, mastering,...). If it is a pure decoding issue one wants to solve by using DSD I suggest the transition to DSD should be done in or close to the DAC.
You get the best quality with recording to analog tape, mixing and mastering in the analogue domain and converting in a last step to DSD256 or higher.
hcl wrote: As a vast majority of all recordings are PCM coded I think it is a good call to decide to go with full support for that format.
The vast majority of all PCM recordings are recordings with a sample rate of 48kHz and 16 to 24 bit. These recordings can be converted with very favorable results by a high quality software player like HQPlayer to DSD256. Nearly all DAC chips are working inside the chip with a conversion from PCM to DSD to Analog. With PCM to DSD conversion by the software player you have two advantages:
1. You get a higher quality DSD signal than inside the chip.
2. The chip does not need to work so hard and has to perform the conversion from DSD to Analog only.

Matt
tokenbrit
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2012-03-22 19:47
Location: New England

Re: DS killer

Post by tokenbrit »

matthias wrote:I am not aware of any theory about the superiority of PCM over DSD
I should qualify this post by saying I have no technical expertise to verify or disprove the following statement, or to know if it applies to DSD64 only, or equally to DSD256/512:
"DSD has significantly higher quantization noise than PCM, and the noise is much closer to audible frequencies, requiring significantly more sophisticated digital filters, as well as noise-shaping and upsampling algorithms, that can result in distortion of the analog signal." [source: http://www.mojo-audio.com/blog/dsd-vs-p ... -vs-truth/]

Further, I don't know the extent to which the blog & quoted statement is peer reviewed, or reflective of bias, but the article does appear to promote the owner's product(s) (surprise ;). I just found the blog interesting as the philosophy seems close to Fredrik's: [analogue] signal preservation ?= [digital] error prevention.
hcl
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 360
Joined: 2008-01-13 11:03
Location: Göteborg
Contact:

Re: DS killer

Post by hcl »

matthias wrote: You get the best quality with recording to analog tape, mixing and mastering in the analogue domain and converting in a last step to DSD256 or higher.
There might be some that record like this, but they surely represent a very small part of the industry. I can not say I know which recording technique that is better, but I would stress that the way You suggest is both very expensive and very difficult.
matthias wrote:The vast majority of all PCM recordings are recordings with a sample rate of 48kHz and 16 to 24 bit.
Since a while back most quality recordings are made to 24/96 or higher bit depth/rate. Old recordings does not benefit in any way from being converted to anything else than how they are already stored. How the DACs are designed is another matter.

Ayway; As the music production process, in a totally over whelming majority of recordings, are so far from exploiting the potential of any of the higher bit rate formats I think this discussion is not very relevant. Good DACs (DS killers if You like) are always most welcome, but I find the constant struggle about the less significant issues disturbing. Not because they are un-interesting, but because the energy should be directed at the important questions. Loudness war, bad recording and mixing dechniques in general and bad mastering, bad distribution formats (MP3, OGG, AAC etc), distribution channels (Spotify and other streaming services) that drains the music industry from means to actually make good recordings (as they tend to require skilled people, working long hours using rather expensive equipment, in expensive purpously built environments).
tokenbrit
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2012-03-22 19:47
Location: New England

Re: DS killer

Post by tokenbrit »

Some consistency here:
Benjamin Zwickel wrote:some of my favorite digital recordings were digitally mastered from 1950s analog recordings made on tube-based reel-to-reels. When you hear the organic character and coherent in-the-room harmonics, it is clear why so many audiophiles prize these recordings.
and,
matthias wrote: You get the best quality with recording to analog tape, mixing and mastering in the analogue domain and converting in a last step to DSD256 or higher.
Both appear to agree that analogue recording is best, but come to different conclusions with respect to the digital element. Curious that analogue is the best start point, and we buy electronis to make the best of replaying analogue (music) - it's the digital bit in the middle where there's theory, and dogma, and disagreement. Meanwhile, those with LP12s look on ;)
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Re: DS killer

Post by matthias »

tokenbrit wrote: ....quantization noise.......
QN is not an issue with DSD256 and higher.
tokenbrit wrote: Further, I don't know the extent to which the blog & quoted statement is peer reviewed, or reflective of bias, but the article does appear to promote the owner's product(s)
I agree.

Matt
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: DS killer

Post by ThomasOK »

tokenbrit wrote:Some consistency here:
Benjamin Zwickel wrote:some of my favorite digital recordings were digitally mastered from 1950s analog recordings made on tube-based reel-to-reels. When you hear the organic character and coherent in-the-room harmonics, it is clear why so many audiophiles prize these recordings.
and,
matthias wrote: You get the best quality with recording to analog tape, mixing and mastering in the analogue domain and converting in a last step to DSD256 or higher.
Both appear to agree that analogue recording is best, but come to different conclusions with respect to the digital element. Curious that analogue is the best start point, and we buy electronis to make the best of replaying analogue (music) - it's the digital bit in the middle where there's theory, and dogma, and disagreement. Meanwhile, those with LP12s look on ;)
And on and on... ;-)
The LP12 Whisperer
Manufacturer, Distributor, Retailer and above all lover of music.
Barron
New member
New member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2017-06-13 12:36

Re: DS killer

Post by Barron »

Spanenko wrote:I'm genuinely looking forward to a Lejonklou streamer, even if the prospect creates a small amount of anxiety! I've a lot of money invested in my Linn system, and moving away is not an easy choice.
It didn't kill the ds.
Last edited by Barron on 2021-10-15 18:09, edited 6 times in total.
Spannko
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2292
Joined: 2008-01-24 21:46
Location: North East of The Black Country, UK

Re: DS killer

Post by Spannko »

Barron wrote:It didn't kill the ds.
What didn't?
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: DS killer

Post by ThomasOK »

Spannko wrote:
Barron wrote:It didn't kill the ds.
What didn't?
It would be hard for it to kill the DS when it doesn't yet exist.

And then there is the question of whether you mean figuratively or literally. With Linn's head start and established base it would be difficult for anything to literally kill the DS.
The LP12 Whisperer
Manufacturer, Distributor, Retailer and above all lover of music.
Spannko
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2292
Joined: 2008-01-24 21:46
Location: North East of The Black Country, UK

Re: DS killer

Post by Spannko »

My point, exactly.

I'm genuinely looking forward to a Lejonklou streamer, even if the prospect creates a small amount of anxiety! I've a lot of money invested in my Linn system, and moving away is not an easy choice.

Nevertheless, its survival of the fittest, and may the best man win!
User avatar
Ron The Mon
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 301
Joined: 2014-07-17 17:17
Location: Detroit
Contact:

KILLER!!!

Post by Ron The Mon »

Almost immediately after the first Linn DS was introduced, it killed all other high-end streamers instantly. Shortly thereafter, Linn announced they were discontinuing their CD player production and that killed all competitors CD player production worldwide within a year.

There are many reasons why but the main one is most DACs are not very good. Almost all brand-name DACs are average, regardless of price. Linn let consumers continue using the same ripping software and servers they were using but upgraded only the player and DAC. The key here is the player. Using source-first logic, a better player and worse DAC would offer a better sound. Linn bettered both. I remember around 2005 many friends using Squeeze-boxes as it bettered any CD player regardless of DAC used. Now I can't think of one person using the word "Squeeze-box" or posting it on-line in over ten years.

Fast-forward. To kill the Linn DS is very easy. All you have to do is first come up with a better way of ripping CDs. Then invent a better way to store and distribute those files. Then devise a better sounding player with software and apps that are much easier to undererstand and use. A better DAC is unnecessary..., Oh, and do it for around $2000.

Then you must be a reputable brand that has unbeatable reliability and a dealer network.

That's it.

Ron The Mon
Needle-Freak
beck
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2752
Joined: 2012-10-22 22:25

Re: DS killer

Post by beck »

Listened to the radio the other day. A high end hifi dealer explained to the reporter why some people use a lot of money (more than 100.000£) on hifi.
Then he explained that the speakers were most important followed by the source, amps and cables (but it should all be balanced!?). Then he explained that the best source was vinyl followed by cd! and last came streaming (streamers).
There is a world out there with a different take on things (or maybe just a dealer). :-)
Playing cd’s…………
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Re: DS killer

Post by matthias »

beck wrote:There is a world out there with a different take on things (or maybe just a dealer). :-)
Yes, interesting to read Alan Sircoms review from HiFi+ Dec 2015 about dCS Rossini:

Here’s the thing, though. Despite making one of the best streaming front-ends I can think of, despite the excellence of the USB input, and the sublime performance of DSD playback under DoP (as you might expect from the company that first minted the concept), I still prefer the sound the Rossini makes when spinning a disc. I don’t think I’m channelling my inner luddite here, and this conclusion isn’t that dCS doesn’t know how to do streaming – if anything, I’d put dCS’ network and online streaming performance at the top of what is currently possible. Rather, it’s that CD replay is just more ‘organic’ sounding than file-based versions of the same. Even the like-for-like WAV file ripped from the disc doesn’t sound quite as ‘there’ as the CD. The problem is the dCS CD replay doesn’t just out-perform dCS’s take on ‘next-gen’ audio; it’s a universal thing, and using the Rossini as transport to the other DACs in this test (and more besides) pointed to the same conclusion. Every time. As someone who was early to adopt file-based music, this comes as something of a shock.

If this is right something is wrong long before the signal reaches the DAC.

Matt
Matt

MBP / Exposure pre + power (both modified) / JBL3677
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6523
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: DS killer

Post by lejonklou »

Alan's review is interesting. And also makes sense to me. There are clear advantages with reading the CD and converting the music to analogue at once IF it's done right.

Ripping, storage and retrieval of digitally stored music is very tricky from a quality point of view. We are still wishing for a process that can "wash data" so that the quality of the preceding processes doesn't matter, as long as the data is intact. Theoretically, this should be possible. But in practice it hasn't worked so far.
User avatar
Tendaberry
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 982
Joined: 2010-08-30 16:08
Location: Hamburg

Re: DS killer

Post by Tendaberry »

beck wrote:Listened to the radio the other day. A high end hifi dealer explained to the reporter why some people use a lot of money (more than 100.000£) on hifi.
Then he explained that the speakers were most important followed by the source, amps and cables (but it should all be balanced!?). Then he explained that the best source was vinyl followed by cd! and last came streaming (streamers).
There is a world out there with a different take on things (or maybe just a dealer). :-)
Well, for fun I just read a few threads on a German hifi-forum (hifi-forum.de). Seriously, there are people there advocating a Saba or Grundig record player from the 80's (€ 50-100,- on flea-bay) combined with an Ortofon 2M Black (€ 540,-) instead of a new Rega 2 or similar. Just unbelievable!
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Re: DS killer

Post by matthias »

lejonklou wrote:Alan's review is interesting. And also makes sense to me.
Yes, and his review of Linn Katalyst made clear that he prefers the Linn to the dCS:
http://www.hifiplus.com/articles/linn-k ... ic-player/

BTW, in the comments section he mentioned Sagatun and Tundra as sounding great.
And he is listening through TIDAL (as I do):
The 'own recordings' aspect was largely nailed through TIDAL. I use TIDAL, Linn uses TIDAL, I quickly shifted to my TIDAL account and accessed my files.

So if you can beat Katalyst with TIDAL streaming this would be a great achievement.

Matt
Matt

MBP / Exposure pre + power (both modified) / JBL3677
ChrBea
Active member
Active member
Posts: 113
Joined: 2012-02-22 15:15
Location: Luxembourg

Re: DS killer

Post by ChrBea »

matthias wrote:And he is listening through TIDAL (as I do)Matt
I prefer Qobuz Sublime+ (Hi-Res). I still buy albums in hi-res, but being able to stream in hi-res is a nice feature.
LP12 Kore-KRad-Majik Tonearm-Slipsik 8 & KDS/3 > Sagatun & Tundra Monos 3 > A242
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Re: DS killer

Post by matthias »

ChrBea wrote:
matthias wrote:And he is listening through TIDAL (as I do)Matt
I prefer Qobuz Sublime+ (Hi-Res). I still buy albums in hi-res, but being able to stream in hi-res is a nice feature.
Do Qobuz offer streaming of ECM records in Redbook quality without buying the downloads?

Matt
Matt

MBP / Exposure pre + power (both modified) / JBL3677
Post Reply