Members Anderton Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 Okay, I got one of these suckers to do a review in EQ, and all I can say is...DSD, baby, DSD. The quality of sound is something you have to hear to believe. It's not so much that it's "clearer" or "cleaner" or "quieter," but that it sounds more natural and organic...almost "sweet." It's making me seriously re-consider the virtues of mastering using analog gear again: I'm still using a PCM multitrack of course, but I could mix down through my favorite analog mastering toys right into the MR-1 and have a really great archived version...then run it through the AudioGate software to generate versions that work in the real world. I dunno...it's been a very, very long time since a piece of digital audio gear impressed me so much. Keep your eye on this one!! It makes me want to check out their MR-1000 tabletop recorder, which samples as twice the SACD rate (5.6MHz). I don't think it's out yet, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MorePaul Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 This is a form of delta-sigma encoding - yes? any tech specifics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 1-bit recording. Supposed to be really sweet sounding. And only around $700. Really looking forward to the review! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted January 13, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 Well there's a white paper that you might find helpful. The main thing is it doesn't mess with the signal much: No input or output decimation or brickwall filters, just a gentle analog output filter to keep the 2.8MHz clock signal out of your audio. It seems like the digital audio equivalent of "minimally invasive surgery." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted January 13, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 Here's a picture... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MorePaul Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 thanks! looks like they are talking D/S any reason why they decided to go single bit D/s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 This from Korg's web site:http://www.korg.com/mr/ 1-bit technology equals pristine fidelity1-bit recording is the latest advancement in audio, and has been adopted for use in the critically acclaimed SACD recording format. It offers a frequency response of DC to 100 kHz and dynamic range of 120 dB. This uncompromising fidelity, low noise floor, extended dynamic range, lifelike imaging and analog quality depth has been praised by top experts. But there are other important advantages to the format that are of benefit to all recording professionals, regardless of their tracking platform. Future proof flexibilityToday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 This technology makes sense, the PCM approach is really from an earlier era in which storage and processing power was at a cost premium. Now with digital chipsets being commodity items and storage cheap, the 1 bit approach makes perfect sense. There is such a high sampling rate that you, in effect, appear to have an effective analog of the original signal. I am very excited and plan to buy one when they become available. Now we just need to get them in multi-track! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 I'm also really interested in how the unit sound as a field recorder, with its own microphones as well as using other mics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 Wow, I definitely wanna check this puppy out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 13, 2007 Members Share Posted January 13, 2007 At AES, the said that both would likely be shipping around January, soooo.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted January 13, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 13, 2007 1-bit recording. Supposed to be really sweet sounding. And only around $700. Really looking forward to the review!I doubt that I'd use it in the DSD mode unless I had a client with a big ego who thought his recording should (and could) last forever, but it has everything I want in a portable recorder - hard disk for extended recording time (DSD cuts into the time big time) and mic inputs with XLR connectors and phantom power (on the big model). I wanted to get one to review for Pro Audio Review but it's Korg's policy that they get a credit card deposit before sending out something for review. EQ probably has deeper pockets than PAR and put it up (or maybe they have more clout). I was going to put up my own credit card to get my hands on one, but I'm still waiting for the OK. I'll be talking to them at the NAMM show. DSD isn't that new. Sony has been using it for several years to archive their own recordings, and it's used for some high resolution audio mastering. The schtick with the Korg recorders is that it comes with a software application that creates a more conventional audio file format from the DSD file. If you want a 192 kHz 24-bit PCM file for DVD-A, you can make that. Or a 96 kHz file for DVD, or 48 kHz for a video project, or 44.1 kHz 16-bit for a CD, or an MP3 file. Since they're all derived from the same raw data stream, each format is like an original recording at that sample rate and word length. So (with exception of the data destruction going to MP3) there's no change due to sample rate or word length conversion. Presumably when new file formats are invented, the software can be updated to accommodate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 14, 2007 Members Share Posted January 14, 2007 some of the things that I wonder about: Is DSD implemented the same way by different manufacturers? The Korg pdf names the converter parts that are used. Usually you have to invest at least in a screwdriver to learn stuff like that. Was this choice dictated by the Sony/Philips specification? Is the DSD recorder at Korg fundamentally like the DSD recorder at Tascam or Sony? What's the Audiogate software like (in intent and in function)? Maybe most importantly, I can understand Sony promoting and using this as an "archival" standard.They hold the keys. Archivists outside of Sony are not going to feel completely comfortable with a digital format that is pretty much locked down even though this format might functionally be like a tape master. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted January 14, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 14, 2007 Is DSD implemented the same way by different manufacturers? The Korg pdf names the converter parts that are used. Usually you have to invest at least in a screwdriver to learn stuff like that. Was this choice dictated by the Sony/Philips specification? Is the DSD recorder at Korg fundamentally like the DSD recorder at Tascam or Sony?The concept of DSD is pretty simple, but like the difference between M-Audio and Lavry PCM converters, there's a difference in the quality of the recording based on the quality of the design of the converters. And unlike a PCM recorder like the TASCAM HD-P2, if you don't like the converters that are built in, there isn't a "DSD" input for an outboard converter. People who use DSD for master recording generally consider Meitner converters to be the best of a very small crop, and they're several thousand bucks. I don't expect that the Korg is quite up to that quality, but it's bound to be pretty good, just like most products above entry level in this field. What's the Audiogate software like (in intent and in function)?That's what makes other audio file formats from the DSD data file. It's really simple - just specify what you want and point to the source file. At least that's how the demo I saw looked. Maybe most importantly, I can understand Sony promoting and using this as an "archival" standard.They hold the keys. Archivists outside of Sony are not going to feel completely comfortable with a digital format that is pretty much locked down even though this format might functionally be like a tape master.It's been long enough since I read about DSD (near its introduction) that I've forgotten about whatever licensing, if any, is involved. But there's nothing basically proprietary about the format, no enconding scheme like lossy-compressed audio. It's just a string of data that says whether the current sample is greater or less than the previous one. The reason why it didn't immediately catch on was because there wasn't a mass-marketable storage medium for the volume of data that's created. And high resolution audio formats that are avaiable to consumers today aren't exactly jumping off the shelves. So it will probably remain a professional format for a while yet, which will keep the price of hardware up fairly high because of the relatively small market. As I said, the value of a DSD archive is its ability to be converted to whatever playback format is needed at the moment, and to be able to do it without loss (up to the limitations of the original and converted recording of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 14, 2007 Members Share Posted January 14, 2007 a little bit of apples and oranges is creeping in - and maybe we just don't have all the information yet: 1. The Tascams that I was thinking of were the DSD recorders like the: http://www.tascam.com/Products/dvra1000hd.html and the http://www.tascam.com/Products/dvra1000.html not the compact flash portable like the HD-P2. 2. The plug-ins that have been offered in the past to inline DSD sources ran from 500USD to 999EU which suggests that some unseen licensed hand is getting greased. I haven't seen a screenshot or a demo of Audiogate. I was wondering primarily if there was any editing capability. 3. Wikipedia collected links to the DSD papers. have at 'em. DSD was introduced side by side with SACD. The high price of DSD tools might have been intended to raise the threshold of SACD entry. That is why you could find DSD tools for SADiE or pyramix but not much for the middle market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted January 14, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 14, 2007 a little bit of apples and oranges is creeping in - and maybe we just don't have all the information yet:1. The Tascams that I was thinking of were the DSD recorders I figured that's what you were talking about but the point I was making was about the digital interface. The DV-RA1000 can only record DSD with an external converter. It's either awkward or impossible to even move DVD-A files to it from a computer for storage and playback, though at the AES show TASCAM said that they recognized this as a useful function and would be working on an operating system update to accommodate it. My point was that the Korg has no provision for that. If you want to record DSD you have to do it through the recorder's analog input and that puts you at the mercy of their converters. I used the HD-P2 as an example of a portable recorder of about the same size. It doesn't have a hard drive, and it doesn't have DSD, but it does have digital inputs so you can use a higher quality A/D converter with it. 2. The plug-ins that have been offered in the past to inline DSD sources ran from 500USD [Philips PCM-to-DSD/SACD conversion plug-in for ProTools] which suggests that some unseen licensed hand is getting greased.Talk about mixing apples with oranges. I suspect that the license fee, if it's there, is for the SACD converter. But then software isn't cheap any more. SADiE was indeed a pioneer in SACD production. When it was first introduced, there was no means of editing DSD audio other than to first convert it to PCM. This may still be what SADiE is still doing. Philips has done some work on a direct DSD editor, but I'm not sure where they are on it yet. I'm afraid that I can't get very excited about using it as my day-to-day recording format yet so I haven't been following it very closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 29, 2007 Members Share Posted January 29, 2007 Maybe most importantly, I can understand Sony promoting and using this as an "archival" standard.They hold the keys. Archivists outside of Sony are not going to feel completely comfortable with a digital format that is pretty much locked down even though this format might functionally be like a tape master. I found my answer in part re: archivists. Below is a link to the Library of Congress. They list DSDIFF 1.5 as "relatively transparent". http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/fdd/fdd000245.shtml looking forward to the Pro review! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted May 25, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted May 25, 2007 I've just got one to play around with. Pretty nice, certainly one of the easiest tiny recorders I've used. The time-stamped broadcast wave files it creates are, but they all have a starting time of 0:00:00, so when you have a recording that it's split because it's too long, or when you've kept the project open but paused the recording (these both close the current file and start a new one) you can't stick them together simply by importing into a DAW that can align files to their time-stamped position. It's too small, though. I still want to try out the MR-1000 when it's available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted May 25, 2007 Members Share Posted May 25, 2007 originally posted by MikeRiversThe time-stamped broadcast wave files it creates are, but they all have a starting time of 0:00:00, so when you have a recording that it's split because it's too long, or when you've kept the project open but paused the recording (these both close the current file and start a new one) you can't stick them together simply by importing into a DAW that can align files to their time-stamped position. What app are you opening these with? Sequoia, perhaps? Is the MR-1 clock time set? http://www.ebu.ch/en/technical/publications/userguides/bwf_user_guide.php OriginationTime This field should be treated similarly to the date. The time is that retrieved from the real-time clock in the computer exactly when the recording begins. This will make it possible to seek files based on date and time-of-day. The accuracy depends on the stability of the real-time clock in the computer used for recording the file. Date and time should be inserted into the corresponding fields in the database. OriginationTime is not necessarily the same information as the "time" field in the file directory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MitchG Posted May 25, 2007 Members Share Posted May 25, 2007 I've got one of each model. In a word, I've been THRILLED with them. I use the small one for ultra-portable recording. As Mike said, very simple to operate. I was concerned that the hard drive in the MR-1000 would be too physically noisy for my applications, but it's not a problem. I have a TASCAM HD-P2, and love it. I use both the internal converters/pres, and also have Benchmark and UA converters that I use with it with Millennia, A Designs, and other preamps. It's an awesome machine, and I am completely satisfied with it. But the MRs offer a nice combination of great sound, great price, and cool user interfaces. My $.02.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted May 25, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted May 25, 2007 What app are you opening these with? Sequoia, perhaps? Is the MR-1 clock time set?Yes, the files had the correct clock/calendar time and date, and that information was in the file header correctly. I tried importing the files in Sequoia, Wavelab, and Tracktion with the same results - when I put them somewhere other than at Time 0 and told them to go to their time stamped positions, they jumped to 0. I confirmed what the time stamp actually is using the utility BWF-Wiidget. Here's the money shot: You'll note that the start time code is 00:00:00:00. This is the "continuation" of a recording the first file of which ended at 01:07:38:14, so that should have been the start time code of this one. What's curious about this is that the Time of Day field is identical on both the first and second file of this set, and that's the time that the recording (the first file) started. On a series of three test files which were generated by pausing the recorder, they all have the start time code of zero, but each one has the actual clock time (Time of Day) when the recorder was taken out of Pause, separated by a few seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted May 26, 2007 Members Share Posted May 26, 2007 excerpted What's curious about this is that the Time of Day field is identical on both the first and second file of this set, and that's the time that the recording (the first file) started. On a series of three test files which were generated by pausing the recorder, they all have the start time code of zero, but each one has the actual clock time (Time of Day) when the recorder was taken out of Pause, separated by a few seconds. Thanks. That looks pretty fishy. Korg has posted OS and firmware updates and rev'd their Audiogate software on their support page. Maybe that helps. They made a note re: Ver.1.0.1 ? A bug that caused internal clock to not keep accurate time has been fixed. in the release documents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted May 26, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted May 26, 2007 Thanks. That looks pretty fishy. Korg has posted OS and firmware updates and rev'd their Audiogate software on their support pageI'm running the latest version of the MR1 software, and I haven't been using the AudioGate program other than to see how it looks and that it works. The clock keeps time just fine. It's not fishy, it's just wrong. I suppose that when someone points it out to them, it'll eventuallly get fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lozada Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 PLease, tell us about file size per minute!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted May 26, 2007 Author Members Share Posted May 26, 2007 PLease, tell us about file size per minute!!! Gus, you may not have heard of a publication called EQ but in the March 2007 issue, some guy named Greg Anderson reviewed the MR-1 and wrote the following: "As the MR-1 is hard disk-based with 20GB of storage, there are the usual fragility, noise (although very minor, on the order of an iPod), and reliability issues compared to solid-state memory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.