Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
In Reply to: RE: That's all very well if you ignore the associated noise of DSD posted by Chris from Lafayette on September 03, 2020 at 18:45:14
I'm a firm believer in letting my ears be the judge. With respect to audible sound quality, there's nothing better than DSD128 and DSD256. At least that's what I hear in my system.
With respect to PCM, DXD would be my choice relative to sound quality.
The few tracks I have in DSD 256 are the best sounding tunes I've ever heard. I prefer it to DXD. The problem is that most of what I find in DSD 128 or 256 is just audiophile stuff that I'm not interested in.
Well, if you like vinyl, you can always copy your favorite LPs in DSD128 with a TASCAM DA-3000 DSD recorder . That way you can have DSD128 recordings of music you like. However, I've found a lot of commercial DSD256 recordings from places like Native DSD sound good to me.
I'd rather just play the LP instead of spending $900. That's 5x above what I paid for my entire digital setup.
I've downloaded all of the NativeDSD and SoundLiaison samples, plus I tried the Carmen Gomes in both DXD and DSD256. And that is the problem. I can't stand her voice and much of the other stuff on there is also recorded for audiophile recording's sake. It just isn't music I like and just think of it all as the "Norwegian Sound". And having recently been to Norway on a family vacation, that's what the music there sounded like to me even performed live. Always just a bit too laid back.
> I'd rather just play the LP instead of spending $900. That's 5x above what I paid for my entire digital setup.
Okay! Different strokes for different folks!
To me, $900 is downright cheap.
My turntable with arm and cartridge cost more than $16,000 and my phono-stage cost $4,200. My speakers combined with Rythmik servo subs cost over $17,000. I just bought a $3,000 Mytek Brooklyn Bridge and a pair of $6,000 PS Audio 1200-watt monoblock amplifiers . Therefore, $900 is downright cheap to me.
To each his own!
I doubt I could afford the turntable mat for your system ;)
And certainly not the electric bill!
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
Which format do you like best?
I have more than 40 DSD256 albums and I think DSD256 really sounds awesome. I also own a TASCAM DA-3000 DSD recorder and I've made 65 DSD128 recordings from my vinyl records. Recently, I've heard some DXD recordings and I think they sound very good, too. Actually, I like the sound of most hi-rez digital formats including some of the newer 16/44 CDs. I've been collecting hi-rez digital recordings for several years now.
I'm not questioning your preference for DSD playback vs PCM. Personally I have settled on 24/176 for convenience in editing and format conversion.
However, out of interest, have you converted your DSD files back to PCM using the Tascam software and compared the result? If so, do you still prefer the DSD version? Similarly have you converted a redbook file to DSD and compared back to the original and had the same preference? If so, then what you are hearing has more to do with the decoding phase rather than any inherent advantage of recording in DSD. dCS introduced DSD conversion in the Purcell (IIRC) and reviews were mixed between DSD and PCM upsampling of redbook. This could well have been due to changes in jitter through the additional set of transmission lines. WIth the Tascam software, this issue is eliminated.
The ADC in the DA-3000 samples the signal identically whether you select DSD or PCM - the difference is the whether the bitstream is fed to an additional decimation plus HPF stage or not.
Although PDM/PEM/PWM DACs were introduced in the 90s to overcome the linearity issues with the multi-bit DACs, in theory, 1 bit coding is fundamentally flawed due to the inability to adequately dither the signal without saturating the modulator - a multi-bit modulator is needed to properly dither the signal and avoid saturation. Lipshitz published a paper with the AES (2001) providing the proof to his assertion.
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
I generally feel the same way you do about the hi-rez formats, although my own general preference is for PCM. I believe I was early on the bandwagon with hi-rez, as I started around 2000 with both DVD-Audio and SACD (two separate players at the time). As time has gone on though, I've come to feel more and more that the MCh experience makes a huge difference in my own enjoyment (in addition to the various hi-rez formats), and I feel that I'll soon make the move to a Dolby Atmos capable system. And, like you, I still enjoy many plain old CD's and CD-resolution files.
EDIT: Actually I thought I'd list a couple of my faves in each of the highest rez formats.
DSD256: Bach Cello Suites (Eijlander)
Rimsky-Korsakov et al Band Music (Netherlands Navy Marine Band)
Mahler Third Symphony (Fischer, BFO)
DXD: Berlioz Symphonie funebre et triomphal, etc. (Staff Band of the Norwegian Armed Forces)
Mahler Seventh Symphony (Jansons, Concertgebouw)
Bruckner Ninth Symphony; Wagner Parsifal Excerpts (Gatti, Concertgebouw)
(I guess this is pretty conventional "sonic blockbuster" repertoire, except for the Bach Cello Suites.)
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: