new Korg portable DSD recorders..

[Ruphus]

The "production chain problem" ie. the fact that signal quality quickly and irreversibly deteriorates as it passes through subsequent processing stages, is in itself not solvable. The root cause lies in the high HF noise level. This noise is indistinguishable from the wanted signal, so it cannot be stopped from accumulating every time a signal is converted to 1-bit. This is not to say there are no workarounds.

I suppose the workaround would be a HF filter.
Can someone tell how this would be looking like for converting DSD to a PCM 96k environment?
( It appears from this informative interview like staying within PCM format for tracking seems advisable, but if I knew of the workaround for the DSD HF noise I would like to try that and compare the result to PCM recorded example.)

In my own experience, high speed PCM also produces the air DSD has, while the "digital glare" of some PCM can even be solved at low speeds. It is caused by the narrow alias-band that is present between 20 and 24.1kHz. Removing this band prior to playback restores naturalness and focus.

...

1. The aliasing problem can be solved at once, anywhere in the audio chain, using a single lowpass filter that enters stop-band before the alias band ie before 0.4535fs. A good place to do this is at reproduction or before final dithering. This means that halfband filters as in 1 may be used throughout without deleterious effects. I find that running a CD through an ultrasteep filter (pb to 18.5kHz, sb from 20kHz, eliminating all aliases that were created anywhere in production) results in an improvement in contrast, depth and precision of the stereo image.

Same here, I don´t understand how the filter curve should be looking like.
Can someone please give me an idea about how it should be for 96k?




Also it is being suggested to cut out PCM above 20 kHz before dithering.
Could it not be of advantage to do such on indiviual tracks too before them going into any plugin for processing?

Thanks for the help in advance,

Ruphus

[Sinewave]

I suppose the workaround would be a HF filter.
Can someone tell how this would be looking like for converting DSD to a PCM 96k environment?
( It appears from this informative interview like staying within PCM format for tracking seems advisable, but if I knew of the workaround for the DSD HF noise I would like to try that and compare the result to PCM recorded example.)

You can stay within the DSD enviroment when tracking, but if you need to mix on an analog board and your tracks were first recorded into a DSD daw and you use a DAC to bring it into the analog world again, and then mix into the analog console and
then record the final mix again into DSD, they say there might be problems with the HF noise, but I'm not sure since many Audiophile record companies do things this way and as far as i know there has not been any complaints about lost of transparency.
But DSD is digital and constant conversion will harm the sound, Look on the net for info regarding the recording of john Hiatt's master of disaster, when they tried to convert the recorded tracks back to analog into an SSL board the headroom was so huge that the SSL could not handle it, only when they tried a Neve board where they able to get the signals into the analog domain and begin mixing.

[Ruphus]

Thanks, Sinwave!

I suppose the problem would persist if the recorded DSD material was converted into PCM and after that ( repeatedly ) send through DA / AD convertors again in order to have single tracks going through outboard during mixing with a DAW?

- One would have the build up of HF noise still, right?
- And couldn´t ged rid of the problem with appropriated EQ curve on a LP up from above 18,5 kHz?

Ruphus

[Sinewave]

The Product manager of Korg had this to say about the MR -1000 in the Korg forums

Regarding Sonoma, they invited us to bring the MR-1000 into their "listening room" at AES, partnered with Telarc. Superb ATC speakers in a 5.1 configuration - the best of everything. We moved a few of their files onto the MR-1000 and had a listening sessions and we passed with flying colors. This was a playback only session, of course.

Then when I brought up one of the 5.6 demos I had recorded we stopped people in their tracks. Die-hard analog people...

So we breathed a big sigh of relief and knew that we really did deliver on our promise, even with a pre-production unit.

[Remoteness]

Here's part of what Jerry from Korg had to say back on 10/07/06 on the forum...



jerrythek
Product Manager, Korg USA

Joined: 28 Jan 2002
Posts: 1891


Posted: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:12 pm Post subject:

And thanks for the kind words about the pdf document - a group of us worked very hard to get the info together in what we hope is a clear and informative fashion. Lot's of emails flying back and forth between the various continents!


Regarding pricing, we don't have final costing, but we expect the MR-1 to street price for between $700-800. The MR-1000 between $1,000 and $1,200.


Remember, when comparing the MR-1 to the other products you mentioned, we offer 1-bit recording, 20 GB internal HD (they use Compact Flash media), and the superb AudioGate software. So we're not really in the same league.


I did a bunch of recording sessions earlier this week for the internal demos and the fidelity and imaging we got was just stunning.


Regards,


Jerry

[Remoteness]

And, what about AudioGate?


hayashi
Korg Japan


Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 195
Location: Japan

Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 7:42 am Post subject:


Have you seen a screen shot of AudioGate?


Basically, this is the highest quality audio file format converter. You can convet from/to any formats you use.


And also you can preview any format audio source including 1bit audio on your Mac/PC using your audio cards/interfaces or built-in audio devices. In the offline exporting, it uses highest quality converter algorithm. In the preview playing, it uses fast better quality algorithm.


CoreAudio system is used to play audio on Mac, ASIO2 or DirectSound is used on PC.

Masa

[lagoausente]

Do any of this DSD recorders allow multitrack recording? or just can record a sterero file?

[Sinewave]

Do any of this DSD recorders allow multitrack recording? or just can record a sterero file?

If you are asking about the korg the answer is no. However there are other DSD multitrack recorders out there that can do the job, genex is one of them, an 8 track genex is a lot cheaper than the others, you can write to them an ask for a brochure of thier products, they have added a lot of new stuff.

[crna59]

I'm using a 48-track Genex GX9048 into a Pyramix system via MADI. Can't get any better than that!

Regards,
Bruce

[lagoausente]

At what price start those multitrack DSD recorders?

It seems interesting the Autogate. Maybe we can get better result with this than with a current actual ADC converter?
Till I know, actual converters use 1 bit recording at the AD input, and it has a inside converter to PCM, but what I find more interesting on DSD, is that the sofware that converts DSD to PCM can be improved, and the built-in one on a normal ADC can´t, and also, could be convert to any other bit output, for example, new 64bit when will be standard..

[lagoausente]

Prices for those Genex multitrack recorders are over 4200 euor??

[SiliconAudioLab]

Originally Posted by crna59

I'm using a 48-track Genex GX9048 into a Pyramix system via MADI. Can't get any better than that!

Regards,
Bruce

[16/44.1]

Originally Posted by charlienyc

am i the only one blown away that Korg is putting out these units?

Don't let that put you off.
I'm a person who is blown away with the old Sony PCM 701 A/D converter.
So nothing is new.

[hughesmr]

Does anyone know the audio capacity (in minutes) of a 40GB drive with stereo DSD 5.6MHz material? How about with 2.8MHz material?

Also, looking at the back panel, can one bypass the onbaord mic pres of the Korg? I don't see a bypass switch (other than that "GAIN: L/H" switch .... not sure if that's a pad or a bypass).

[jcarley2]

40MB per stereo minute at 2.8MHz, double that for 5.6MHz.

[digital_wiz]

Originally Posted by hughesmr

Also, looking at the back panel, can one bypass the onbaord mic pres of the Korg? I don't see a bypass switch (other than that "GAIN: L/H" switch .... not sure if that's a pad or a bypass).

I had the same thought. The Korg website says only this:

"The table-top MR-1000 includes combination XLR/ 1/4" input connectors with top quality microphone preamps"

If you cannot use external mic pres then the success or failure of this unit will depend in part on the quality of the built-in pres. If they're crap, this product will be of limited use. They really should provide balanced line level inputs on a product like this.

[charlienyc]

Originally Posted by digital_wiz

If you cannot use external mic pres then the success or failure of this unit will depend in part on the quality of the built-in pres. If they're crap, this product will be of limited use.

This is true... All of these "el cheapo but convenient-o" pocket recorders seem to be afflicted with this problem. Or they have a mic in/line in which I don't trust to not color the sound when using either.

Originally Posted by digital_wiz

They really should provide balanced line level inputs on a product like this.

Yes they should. On the other hand, that would add to the cost. Seems like they spend a lot of time and effort making these recorders cheap and small. Why not make a less portable version (1 or 2 rack space) aimed at those doing remote recording? Then the manufacturers could focus less on cramming it into a tiny box and use pro I/O instead of 1/8" prosumer BS connectors. I still feel there's a void to be filled next to the Masterstink and Tascam units out there. Just a thought...

[Plush]

You guys have got to be kidding me. You *actually* believe that this unit will produce high quality sound??

You get what you pay for.

Looks like Chinese Junque to me.

[SiliconAudioLab]

Originally Posted by charlienyc

This is true... All of these "el cheapo but convenient-o" pocket recorders seem to be afflicted with this problem. Or they have a mic in/line in which I don't trust to not color the sound when using either.



Yes they should. On the other hand, that would add to the cost. Seems like they spend a lot of time and effort making these recorders cheap and small. Why not make a less portable version (1 or 2 rack space) aimed at those doing remote recording? Then the manufacturers could focus less on cramming it into a tiny box and use pro I/O instead of 1/8" prosumer BS connectors. I still feel there's a void to be filled next to the Masterstink and Tascam units out there. Just a thought...

Been eyeballin' this http://www.tascam.com/Products/hdp2.html for a bit. Might not replace my Deva...then again....

[charlienyc]

Originally Posted by SiliconAudioLab

Might not replace my Deva...then again....

Still, why not have something like this but rack mount-able and a front panel interface like a DAT machine? Yes I said the D-word.

[SiliconAudioLab]

Originally Posted by charlienyc

Still, why not have something like this but rack mount-able and a front panel interface like a DAT machine? Yes I said the D-word.

Yes. I agree. My remote rig is all rack mounted in SKB cases, so your point makes makes perfect sense to me.

I just got a session from a reputable location audio company. They captured dialog from a good sized budget shoot in Hollywood (Burbank actually), and they sent me a DVD-Ram disk and a DAT tape.

Works.

[Robobo1]

Originally Posted by SiliconAudioLab

Been eyeballin' this http://www.tascam.com/Products/hdp2.html for a bit. Might not replace my Deva...then again....

Not to hijack the thread... but...

We've tested various portable rigs (SD 722, Tascam, Fostex, Marantz) here and the 722 sounds better hands down!

[lagoausente]

Can you confim me the multitrack DSd prices?

[Kees de Visser]

Originally Posted by lagoausente

Can you confim me the multitrack DSd prices?

Don't forget that if you want to do post production (editing, mixing etc.) in the digital domain, DSD is't an easy format. I once had to add some reverb to a surround DSD recording and that was quite complicated. IMO it makes more sense to record in DXD or say 24/96 or 24/192. I like SACD as an end product, also for pcm sources.

[Sinewave]

Originally Posted by Kees de Visser

Don't forget that if you want to do post production (editing, mixing etc.) in the digital domain, DSD is't an easy format. I once had to add some reverb to a surround DSD recording and that was quite complicated. IMO it makes more sense to record in DXD or say 24/96 or 24/192. I like SACD as an end product, also for pcm sources.

I think Chesky has shown, once you are careful along the signal path and do a good job, 24/96 PCM could be used to make great SACD's.

[fifthcircle]

Originally Posted by Plush

You guys have got to be kidding me. You *actually* believe that this unit will produce high quality sound??

You get what you pay for.

Looks like Chinese Junque to me.

Actually, listening to this box at AES, I was very surprised at how good the sound was. I see other issues with it, but I think it likely is a pretty good sounding box. I wouldn't mind giving it a demo, but the lack of disc space and digital input for PCM for me a deal-killers.

--Ben

[lagoausente]

Sure it will no posbile to edit DSD in a computer?
Something make me suspect than when the 192khz fervour decrease, and decrease the sales, a "new magical" solution to use DSD on the PC will apear sudenly as a totaly revolucionary new, and will start then the fervour to move to DSD as the "final" sound solution, but... one day, those new "laser mics" will can get take each air particle presure movement, and will be capable of convert the data to a super-high-speed-photon numeric rate, and so we will have to move all our gear to get the sonic purity to the top, reality, and that way, over and over.
Just a pity that within some years, we will quite old, and will be no able to discern a preamp, from another.