x－アプリにDSEE HX

x－アプリにDSEE HXを搭載(PCへポート)したら、もっとたくさんの人がウオークマンを使ったり、ほかの人におすすめすると思います。さらにはDSEE HXの処理をした後、そのまま保存できるようになったらいい。ぜひもう一度検討してみれば？すでに3年たっていますし、デジオンもCurioSoundを出しています。今こそがいいタイミング：x－アプリ7.0を出しましょう！DSEE HXをウオークマンユーザーのみの機能にしてもいいと思う。そしてClear Audio+ and Clear Phaseなども搭載していいと思う。

 DSEEが20～22kHzまでであったのに対し、DSEE HXでは40～50kHzあたりまで拡張しています。サンプリングレートは整数倍にしているので、44.1kHzのMP3やCDの音の場合は176.4kHzとなります。

 おうかがいしたいのは、このDSEE HXのPCでの利用についてです。ユーザーとしては、せっかくいい技術があるのなら、ウォークマンでの利用だけでなく、PCでの再生でもこの技術を使っていい音にしたいと思うわけですが、そういう利用法はできないのでしょうか?

小野木：DSEE HXはウォークマン本体に搭載されている機能であるため、現時点ではPCでの利用はできません。ただニーズがあるようならば、今後検討はしていきたいですね。

知念：プログラム的にはAndroid上で動かすCPUベースの処理であるため、PCへ移植すること自体は簡単です。あとは、どう活用していくかですが、ぜひ、今後にご期待ください。2013/12/16

 本来の非圧縮の波形と比較すると、やや各ピークがズレているようではある。これだけを見ると、YAMAHAのミュージックエンハンサーや日立マクセルのBit-Resolutionに似た雰囲気の結果になっている。 これまで見てきたポータブルオーディオなどと比較して、最高といってもいいものだった。ただし、それでも原音から変質してしまった音色を元に戻せたわけではない。あくまでも全体の雰囲気がよくなるというだけであるので、その点については過度の期待は禁物だ。 DSEE, which stands for Digital Sound Enhancement Engine, is a technology developed by Sony, to enhance the sound quality of compressed audio files by restoring high-range sound removed by the compression process.

• The DSEE (Sound Enhance) setting does not affect videos and FM programs.
• The DSEE (Sound Enhance) function is not effective for songs with a file format that is not compressed, or songs that are of high bit rate with no treble loss.
• In the case of songs of very low bit rate, the DSEE (Sound Enhance) function will not be effective.

By activating the DSEE (Sound Enhance) feature, you can hear a rich and natural sound which is almost exactly like the original source.
 You guys as engineers, you're about purity and the purity of high-res audio. So how do you feel when you see a claim that any music file can be upscaled to near high-res audio quality? Do you believe that?
Some discussion followed before an answer. Koji Nageno, Chief Sound Architect, had already explained in his answers to my earlier LDAC questions what they meant by “near high-res audio”. When they use DSEE HX to upsample the 990kbps Bluetooth transmission of LDAC and then compare the waveform and listen, they can’t see or hear a difference, he had said. Now he continued the theme.

Koji Nageno: As I explained, our experience, our test method, the waveform and listening to the image of music, it has no difference. But if we cut off the higher frequency and then compare the sound, we can feel the difference. So we believe it is near high-res audio.

Sound+Image: So if we can upscale any file to high-res audio, we do not need high-res audio.

Koji Nageno: Oh. [Pause.]

Sound+Image: Clearly you can't. I mean you can't upscale an MP3 to high-res audio, and you say you can't hear the difference? Then we don't need high-res audio.

Koji Nageno: It depends on the original sound quality. Of course if the original MP3 rate is too low it is impossible to upscale to very very high quality. But we can improve to some extent.

Sound+Image: So what file can you upscale to near high-res audio? What level — 256, 320, CD quality? What file can you not hear the difference? Really, this is a statement that is damaging to high-res audio.

[Long group discussion.]

Koji Nageno: Sorry. DSEE HX upscales, but original bit-rate should be 248kbps, can be upscaled to near high-res audio result. So if original sound source is lower than that it can't be near high-res.
Sound+Image: Wow. So Sony says that 256k can sound like high-res audio.
Koji Nageno: Near high-res audio, yes.
Nageno-san is not saying they can’t hear the difference between 256k and 24-96, he’s saying that Sony’s DSEE HX upsampler delivers results which they cannot distinguish from 24-96 by waveform or listening.Note, importantly, that Koji Nageno had said some rare files could be differentiated: “...Some risk maybe for deep bit-depth and high frequency sound — in that kind of case it has some possibility to make a loss…” But “normal music, sound wave check and listening check, there's no difference.” Hence their use of the term “near high-res audio” — nearly, but not always. There are exceptions.

So what must we do, to be sure our high-res house doesn’t fall down? We over-specify. We use excessively large containers to ensure that we never spill a drop of information. Indeed one might say that high-end hi-fi in general is absolutely driven by enthusiastic overspecification. Isn’t that the point, to catch every drop? Up to the point of affordability, anyway.

So it makes sense
So, there we have our justification for high-res audio — and it was inherent in the very creation of Sony’s phrase “near high-res audio”. By “near”, they mean “nearly, but not always”. Sony’s DSEE HX upsampler can produce results from files of 248k upwards which are usually but not always indistinguishable from high-res, partly no doubt because of the quality of Sony’s upsampler, and partly simply because there’s so much redundant information in high-res files.

But if you want to avoid that “nearly” tag, if you want to make sure you always catch that extra drop, then stick with the actual high-res. It seems a fair and useful conclusion.

Which leaves us feeling a tad flushed at having delivered such impertinent questioning, a novice palm-slapping the high table. But it took us on an interesting journey, and perhaps highlights a neat possibility for Sony’s audio teams to demonstrate DSEE HX at hi-fi shows or in Sony Centres — can you tell Sony’s “near high-res” from actual high-res?