Hi-Rez Highway

New high resolution SACD releases, players and technology.

Return to Hi-Rez Highway


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?

152.132.10.193

Posted on November 2, 2016 at 10:47:40
Iczerman
Audiophile

Posts: 118
Joined: July 23, 2000
Could it be my DAC? Ayre Codex?
Could it be the DOP type "packaging"? ( Any DAC anyone know of a DAC that plays DSD files without DOP?)
Compared Norah Jones (Come away with Me) 24/192 and DSD single rate and liked the 24/192 better.
Or is it my aging ears?

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
You missed the DSD hate-fest a couple of weeks ago on the Computer Audio forum here, posted on November 2, 2016 at 12:54:00
Chris from Lafayette
Bored Member

Posts: 9764
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since:
February 6, 2012
Just to reiterate my own feeling about DSD (once again - LOL!), I feel that many outstanding recordings have been made via DSD, but, on the whole, I also feel that DSD is completely unnecessary as a digital vehicle for sound, compared to the far more prevalent hi-rez PCM. I also feel that DSD acceptance/enthusiasm was a way for analog listeners (i.e., the ones who used to scream about how their ears used to bleed when they listened to CD's) to "save face" before the digital revolution had completely passed them by. Yeah, I'm cynical about it, but I don't deny that Jared (and other DSD partisans) make some awfully fine recordings in DSD.

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on November 2, 2016 at 12:54:46
stereo5
Audiophile

Posts: 811
Location: New England
Joined: June 22, 2008
I only have one DSD selection but I found that I like the DSD version of Roger Waters "Amused To Death" much better than the SACD disk I also have. The music seems more at ease and the bass seems better in all regards. I play the DSD on a Sony HAP-Z1ES Music Server and the SACD on an Esoteric UX-3 player, both using the exact same brand of interconnects and power cords.

"everything under the sun is in tune but the sun is eclipsed by the moon."
R. Waters

 

Could it be the DOP type "packaging"? ( Any DAC anyone know of a DAC that plays DSD files without DOP?), posted on November 2, 2016 at 13:05:32
Kal Rubinson
Reviewer

Posts: 10459
Location: New York
Joined: June 5, 2002
Any USB-input DSD DAC or HDMI-input preamp/processor should be capable of native format input.

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on November 2, 2016 at 14:39:57
rrob
Audiophile

Posts: 726
Location: Kansas
Joined: February 7, 2010
Contributor
  Since:
February 7, 2010
I'd rather have favorite recordings than favorite resolutions. I can play all resolutions. I have favorite recordings in each of them.

 

Words to live by [nt] ;-), posted on November 2, 2016 at 17:42:48
Chris from Lafayette
Bored Member

Posts: 9764
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since:
February 6, 2012

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on November 2, 2016 at 18:36:01
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 27467
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since:
February 2, 2002
A well recorded and mastered release will sound outstanding whether in DSD or PCM. While I don't hate DSD I didn't find it to be substantially better than many of my favorites in PCM. So I agree with you in that I was less than impressed. Not impressed enough to go gaga (excessively and foolishly enthusiastic) over it.



 

Come away with me, posted on November 2, 2016 at 18:54:38
Posts: 879
Location: Orange Co., Ca
Joined: September 19, 2001
IIRC, the DSD-layer of the original SACD of this album was made from the 16/44.1 master. I haven't followed developments since then, I hope the present hi-res offerings of this album have been made from the master and not that original DSD file!

13DoW

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on November 3, 2016 at 01:59:11
PAR
Audiophile

Posts: 1799
Location: South London
Joined: April 15, 2013
Contributor
  Since:
January 12, 2014
Just to point out that the album that you are using for comparison was not originally recorded in either 24/192 or DSD. Therefore both versions are upsampled. Upsampling involves the use of algorithms, some of which are more succesful than others. So there is another variable to add to your list.

If you want to judge DSD v. PCM I would suggest that you start by finding and comparing material in "native" format building up a general picture over many different recordngs in both media.

Of course as Abe points out, whatever the medium it is always trumped by how good the recording was in the first place.

Yes my DAC does DSD both by DoP and from SACD. As I currently don't have any duplicate recordings in both formats I cannot make a direct comparison. However my overall impression is that DoP may sound slighly superior. However there are yet more variables involved in my system as DSD from SACD is delivered via AES/EBU and DoP via SP/dif.

Meantime I have written before on this forum that I don't like upsampled DSD in my particular setup i.e. where my equipment is doing the upsampling. This should not be confused with my opinion on DSD per se.

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on November 3, 2016 at 02:14:00
Disbeliever
Audiophile

Posts: 1486
Joined: June 1, 2012
I totally agree with Abe Collins.

 

RE: Come away with me, posted on November 3, 2016 at 04:20:53
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 8778
Joined: September 24, 1999
They did make a second version of the SACD, from the original master tape. There was a lot of flak about the first one.
Jack

 

I'll handle that... nt, posted on November 3, 2016 at 08:17:21
oldmkvi
Audiophile

Posts: 6153
Joined: April 12, 2002
/

 

RE: Come away with me, posted on November 3, 2016 at 08:20:53
Iczerman
Audiophile

Posts: 118
Joined: July 23, 2000
According to Acoustic Sounds....The DSD file was made from the Analouge master tape. No such designation was mentioned in the 24/192 file.

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on November 3, 2016 at 09:50:31
John Elison
Audiophile

Posts: 20310
Location: Central Kentucky
Joined: December 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since:
January 29, 2004
I fell in love with DSD the first time I heard a DSD(128) recording of a vinyl record. It just sounded more accurate and real than my hi-res PCM recordings. I bought a TASCAM DA-3000 DSD recorder to replace my aging Alesis Masterlink and I would never go back. The TASCAM DA-3000 can record PCM up to 24/192 as well as DSD(64) and DSD(128). It also can serve as one of the best sounding DACs I've ever heard. Additionally, it can be used as an autonomous digital player by plugging a USB flash drive into it front-panel USB port for playing PCM and DSD files directly. It's the best thousand dollars I ever spent.

I love the sound of DSD. In my experience it sounds noticeably better than hi-res PCM. To each his own!

Best regards,
John Elison

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on November 3, 2016 at 11:04:00
smargo77@yahoo.com
Audiophile

Posts: 2
Location: Pennsylvania
Joined: November 2, 2016
to me the dsd recordings are all over the place - some cd's sound better - some 24/96 sound better/some 192/24 sound better - it all depends on the recording and site that it is downloaded from - so many variables it makes my head spin.

no rhyme or reason
stewart margolis

 

RE: You missed the DSD hate-fest a couple of weeks ago on the Computer Audio forum here, posted on November 4, 2016 at 15:36:23
Jared
Industry Professional

Posts: 7
Location: Holland
Joined: August 16, 2003
I agree that a good recording and music making in any format is what matters, but after 16 years of working with DSD recordings (and since starting nativedsd.com) listening to recordings of my colleagues, there is nothing to surpass the depth of sound, the sound being free of the speakers, stereo imagery. Don't be fooled by upsampled recordings. any kind of sample rate converters (up or down) are filters. You might even like what these filters are doing in your specific system - and that is your own taste. no one will dispute that as that is what you hear. But DSD recordings have the sense of emotion and life that I have not heard in pcm material. I appreciate Chris for mentioning me in his blog. I have been working with format because I enjoy it. enjoy the challenge of every recording in trying to pass on this emotion in the music that I hear and try to recreate for the listeners. Sometimes I even succeed!

 

"Sometimes I even succeed!" - You do indeed! [nt] ;-), posted on November 4, 2016 at 20:34:42
Chris from Lafayette
Bored Member

Posts: 9764
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since:
February 6, 2012

 

I love the Mahler 9 and Tchaik #6, wonderful. Thanks. nt, posted on November 5, 2016 at 22:13:21
oldmkvi
Audiophile

Posts: 6153
Joined: April 12, 2002
/

 

Chris and I met you at Robert Lang's, in Oakland, Ca! nt, posted on November 5, 2016 at 22:14:28
oldmkvi
Audiophile

Posts: 6153
Joined: April 12, 2002
/

 

RE: And the funny part of this fiasco..., posted on November 6, 2016 at 06:03:40
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 27467
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since:
February 2, 2002
The funny part about the "Come Away with Me" fiasco when first released was that unsuspecting audiophiles swore that the SACD layer sounded significantly better. ;-)



 

45 downloads, roughly half 24 bit other half DSD, and I'd give DSD a slight edge with orchestral strings, posted on November 6, 2016 at 08:21:21
jdaniel@jps.net
Audiophile

Posts: 18549
Location: No. California
Joined: December 16, 2003
Going from a pcm recording to DSD doesn't distract at all, but I find myself just ever so slighlty aware of coarseness when coming back to PCM from DSD, but it's so negligible that I'm desensitized within a few minutes.

Solo and chamber works in 24 bit are fine; full orchestra recordings are more variable. Imho Bissie got a better string sound with 44hz with the Netherland's orchestra than the Bergen in 96. Different halls, string sections of course. But whe in comes to orchestral sound being "all of a piece," DSD has pleases me more often thus far. Pentatone and Channel are jewels in the crown. I'll be listening to my first LSO Live recorded at the Barbican in DSD in minutes: Davis' Sibelius 2nd.

I even have a few "double DSD" recordings of reel to reel tapes from HDTT, but no wow factor.

 

RE: 45 downloads, roughly half 24 bit other half DSD, and I'd give DSD a slight edge with orchestral strings, posted on November 6, 2016 at 18:03:51
oldmkvi
Audiophile

Posts: 6153
Joined: April 12, 2002
Do you use or turn off the remastering Engine?
I always use it and like the DSD 128 playback best, whether from PCM or DSD sources.

 

Listener psychology - the ultimate determination of sound quality! [nt] ;-), posted on November 6, 2016 at 19:11:07
Chris from Lafayette
Bored Member

Posts: 9764
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since:
February 6, 2012

 

RE: 45 downloads, roughly half 24 bit other half DSD, and I'd give DSD a slight edge with orchestral strings, posted on November 7, 2016 at 09:20:38
jdaniel@jps.net
Audiophile

Posts: 18549
Location: No. California
Joined: December 16, 2003
I do turn off the remastering engine, honestly could t hear a difference. I'm assuming less work for processor if off?

Also have fluid in one ear driving me crazy. Doc prescribed decongestants for occular allergies but no better.

 

RE: And the funny part of this fiasco..., posted on November 28, 2016 at 13:44:11
theaudiohiffle
Audiophile

Posts: 1128
Location: New England
Joined: July 6, 2002
It did sound better .... the "master" may well have been recorded/encoded in PCM, but it doesn't follow that it was downloaded at 16/44. In fact, it could well have been upsampled and converted to DSD without the limiting digital-to-analogue conversion that the 16/44 CD went through.
Harry

 

RE: You missed the DSD hate-fest a couple of weeks ago on the Computer Audio forum here, posted on December 21, 2016 at 02:19:20
Disbeliever
Audiophile

Posts: 1486
Joined: June 1, 2012
Despite Sony technical saying the STR-DA5400ES (UK version with HATS) at the final stage converts to PCM, after 7 years of using this excellent AVR & the excellent STR-XA5400ES SACD player, I have only just discovered that there is provision on the remote to enable the receiver to output 5 channel DSD which is displayed on the AVR screen as DSD 3/2 , I now agree with Jared for a change.

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on December 26, 2016 at 01:56:14
flood2
Audiophile

Posts: 1250
Joined: January 11, 2011
With DSD, the amount of ultrasonic noise due to noise shaping can influence/upset the analogue stages and it is possible that you can be hearing some of those subtle effects.

As with everything audio, everyone will have a different take.
However, it is worth noting that a considerable number of DSD titles were never recorded natively in DSD to begin with. You are simply hearing a converted format from a PCM original recording which is due to the difficulty of editing DSD natively.
Linn is one record label that records in 24/192 PCM then produces SACD titles subsequent to the PCM editing and mastering.

It is also of interest to read the paper by Stanley Lipschitz :"Why Professional 1-Bit Sigma-Delta Conversion is a Bad Idea" which was presented at the AES in 2000 which discusses the requirement of dither and the inability to add sufficient levels of dither with DSD.

The take home point of the paper is that DSD is fundamentally flawed.

Regards Anthony

"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats

 

The Barbican is an issue. (NT), posted on December 27, 2016 at 16:57:43
Kal Rubinson
Reviewer

Posts: 10459
Location: New York
Joined: June 5, 2002


 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on December 29, 2016 at 00:26:54
Disbeliever
Audiophile

Posts: 1486
Joined: June 1, 2012
If DSD is fundamentally flawed, why is Jared so enthusiastic.

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on December 29, 2016 at 00:42:02
flood2
Audiophile

Posts: 1250
Joined: January 11, 2011
No idea...

Note, that when I say DSD is fundamentally flawed (or should I say Stanley Lipschitz et al and with whom I agree as a mathematician), I am referring to the recording process i.e the ADC.

As you know... Audio is the analogue of wine tasting....full of Group Think tinged opinions.

How long have the Analogue vs Digital debates raged? At least things have settled down to "it may be flawed but I still like it".
I think that will be applied to DSD in future.


Regards Anthony

"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats

 

RE: DSD not for ME...who else is less than impressed?, posted on December 29, 2016 at 01:47:37
Disbeliever
Audiophile

Posts: 1486
Joined: June 1, 2012
" Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" as someone once said. regards Gerald

 

LSO Live, posted on December 29, 2016 at 04:04:35
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 1392
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
Many of the SACD recordings from the Barbican have poor audio--acoustically dry and a flat soundstage. But there are some exceptions, my favorite being the Haitink/LSO recordings of the Beethoven symphonies.

 

RE: LSO Live, posted on December 29, 2016 at 05:26:34
Disbeliever
Audiophile

Posts: 1486
Joined: June 1, 2012
I have the Beethoven/Haitink Barbican collection whilst OK nothing special, will have another listen now that I can get DSD all the way to final stage,however Haitink is not as good as Kleiber.

 

RE: LSO Live, posted on December 29, 2016 at 05:50:56
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 1392
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
Carlos? There are recordings of him conducting only four Beethoven symphonies (4, 5, 6, 7). I like those recordings. The sound quality isn't as good as the Haitink LSO set.

 

RE: LSO Live, posted on December 29, 2016 at 07:12:19
Disbeliever
Audiophile

Posts: 1486
Joined: June 1, 2012
just played Carlos Kleibers Beethoven 7th digitally remastered SACD Orfeo and prefer it to Haitinks 7th sound, better performance, not easy to adjust for volume. Barbican has a more closed in sound

 

RE: LSO Live, posted on December 29, 2016 at 16:08:34
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 1392
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
I don't know that recording of Kleiber's Beethoven 7, only the DG CD with Vienna and the DVD with Amsterdam Concertgebouw. They are thrilling performances with adequate, not great sound.

On the Haitink Beethoven set, the sound (to me) isn't closed in, but it's a little less reverb-y than any of the Kleiber recordings I've heard. Yet to my taste, it isn't dry but just right for the Haitink set.

I don't want to have an argument; it's a matter of personal taste.

 

RE: LSO Live, posted on December 29, 2016 at 23:08:54
Disbeliever
Audiophile

Posts: 1486
Joined: June 1, 2012
You should listen to the Orfeo SACD remastered recording of Kleibers Beethoven 7th then I expect you may change your opinion.

 

RE: LSO Live, posted on December 30, 2016 at 13:48:21
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 1392
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
Thank you for pointing me in that direction. If I run across it in my local library, I'll check it out. I'd rather spend $40 on some other music right now.

 

RE: LSO Live, posted on December 31, 2016 at 00:58:00
Disbeliever
Audiophile

Posts: 1486
Joined: June 1, 2012
$12 from Zoverstocks

 

RE: LSO Live, posted on December 31, 2016 at 05:54:49
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 1392
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
zoverstocks.com: The domain is listed as for sale.

In any case, I am not shopping for any new Beethoven symphony recordings. Let's move on.

 

Page processed in 0.058 seconds.