BDP-3 => is the limitation to DSD-128 hardware or a software issue

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 484 times.

Hoiman

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 215
I wonder if the BDP-3 will be able to play DSD-256 in the future, is this a software issue or hardware issue?

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 16279
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
I wonder if the BDP-3 will be able to play DSD-256 in the future, is this a software issue or hardware issue?

Its software but there is so little material available that we have not had much interest in it.

james

Hoiman

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 215
Quote
Its software but there is so little material available that we have not had much interest in it.

I have some, not that much, but is it comming in the future or you don't know yet?

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 16279
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
I have some, not that much, but is it comming in the future or you don't know yet?

Its a good question - we have a lot of contact with studios being Bryston and most are telling me that it looks like 96/24 is what most studios are moving towards. 

Also I think there is a realization among many that the mastering and Production quality (no compression) is far more important that the sample rate used.

james

unincognito

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1541
    • bryston.com
I have some, not that much, but is it comming in the future or you don't know yet?

technically its both, kind of

The BDP-2/3 will output up to DSD512, but only via DoP and most if not all DAC's only support DSD above 128 via using one of the native DSD protocols (not that DoP isn't pure DSD, it is).  Our next major release (S3.XX) will contains native DSD support for our BDA-3 and a handful of other DAC's which already have native support baked into the kernel.

MoPac

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 121
Quote from Chris:
 Our next major release (S3.XX) will contains native DSD support for our BDA-3 and a handful of other DAC's which already have native support baked into the kernel.
[/quote]

Chris:
 Is the native DSD support only for the BDP-3?

unincognito

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1541
    • bryston.com
likely be BDP2&3

witchdoctor

Its a good question - we have a lot of contact with studios being Bryston and most are telling me that it looks like 96/24 is what most studios are moving towards. 

Also I think there is a realization among many that the mastering and Production quality (no compression) is far more important that the sample rate used.

james

EVERY major studio is converting their catlogs to MQA and Universal has announced they want future releases in MQA. 3 streaming services are on board, Tidal, Deezer and a new service from HD Tracks. The MQA ship has already sailed and in 12-24 months the number of MQA tracks available will leave DSD and hirez PCM in the dust. If you feel 96/24 is sonically better more power to you, this is just where the puck is going.

Notice the headline here and the use of "mass adoption" in the article:

http://musically.com/2017/09/04/major-labels-hi-res-audio/

CanadianMaestro

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 893
  • Skepticism is the engine of true progress
    • Hearing Everything That Nothing Can Measure
The MQA ship has already sailed

Yeah, and it is called the Titanic II.
Destined for the bottom of the audio junk heap.

Mass adoption? Mass stupidity, that's all.   :lol:

witchdoctor

Yeah, and it is called the Titanic II.
Destined for the bottom of the audio junk heap.

Mass adoption? Mass stupidity, that's all.   :lol:

Don't blame the witchdoctor, you should protest by not buying any more music from a label that supports MQA (good luck with that) :roll:

Hoiman

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 215
Quote
Yeah, and it is called the Titanic II.
Destined for the bottom of the audio junk heap.

Mass adoption? Mass stupidity, that's all.   :lol:

LOL  :thumb:

Mike in NC

Leaving aside the question of MQA, which is being vigorously debated in other threads and places, people might be interested to hear what Anthony Cordesman of TAS said in a recent review of a high-end DAC.
Quote
When the only difference in recordings is the bit and sampling rate used by two different machines to record the same music at the same moment ... I find the sonic differences [above 96/24] are subtle and often musically insignificant compared to the choices made in microphone, mike placement, mix, and venue.
and

Quote
I have yet to hear a convincing demonstration that hi-res recordings above 24-bit/96kHz—or from PCM to DSD64 and 128—really improve musical realism in even the best players. Even when I feel I can hear a difference, it requires a level of attention to upper-octave detail that can detract from the musical listening experience, and the level of difference—real or imagined—has no impact on the other, far larger aspects of musical sound quality.
My more limited experience (but with a highly resolving system) says he's right.