Linn electronics take on the future of DSD

BlueFox

Interesting take on DSD in 2013, and beyond from Linn. Of course, it is their opinion, and they are interested in selling Linn products.


"DSD was invented to solve problems that no longer exist today.

A good idea in 1999, DSD was conceived to improve the quality of music at home over the prevailing 16-bit CD format. By bypassing the down-sampling and up-sampling filters in the CD audio chain, DSD sought to improve performance by shortening the audio signal path:



However, DSD has been overtaken by modern technology; A-D and D-A converters have moved away from 1-bit, to far superior multi-bit processes, and the down-sampling and up-sampling filters that DSD sought to bypass have been rendered transparent by the use of higher sample rates and modern algorithms. In fact, DSD is now the quality bottleneck in the modern recording and playback chain.

The arrival of 192kHz 24-bit capable Linn DS players in 2007 signalled the end of DSD. There is no longer the need to convert the original Studio Master recording, which is usually in PCM format, to a DSD stream, because the Studio Master can now be decoded natively on the Linn DS player. Hence, a needless and lossy conversion from PCM to DSD has been eliminated.

DSD has, like so many audio formats, come to the end of it's natural life. It's time to move on."

http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread.php?tid=23096

The next few years will be interesting as we move away from CD quality sound, and into higher resolution audio.

F1nut

Ya know, they have always been a bit......ummmmm, different.

TroyD

Linn has their cult following.....and, mind you, they are trying to sell Linn products.

BDT

FTGV

There are a number of other industry professionals that would agree with Linn's take on the subject.An example http://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=74

tonyb

I usually take all this mumbo jumbo with a grain of salt. After all, in the end it's all about selling product. Granted, I've only had an ear on a handful of DSD recordings, but honestly nothing blew me away and said "gotta have it". While some of this too maybe measurable on a scope, actually contributing to better audio is questionable.

I find it somewhat disturbing that audiophiles can seek out the most absolute quality signal, free from any added noise, clean as a whistle with nothing polluting it only to play it back on the exact opposite in tube gear which is high in distortion. Granted too a different kind of distortion none the less.

Distortion can or can not be the enemy in audio, depends on where it originates. Trying to remove every last bit of it however sucks the musicality out of it if you ask me. Tubes as we all know add a dimension of musicality, in our quest for better audio I believe our efforts should remain in that area of musicality rather than a few differences in a signal on a scope. I'm not sold yet on the DSD wave, maybe I just need to hear more of it to make that determination, I dunno. I'm certainly not sold on the higher rez formats above 24/96.

In the video world, we believe what our eyes tell us. If a certain technology in a tv produces better video images, our eyes will tell us and the money spent justified. In the audio world, our ears tells us what is justifiable and what isn't. So far my ears say "keep your wallet shut".