So here's the thing. Paul could make 1000 videos about the same topic, repeated questions, and I could watch all over and over. This is how good he is. Love it.
I've read with great interest about this and may have an easier/cheaper way to dip your toes into DSD: I happened to have an old Sony DVD/CD/SACD player I got in the early 00s. Never had a SACD disc, so picked one up used on eBay. Since this was an older unit, it had only optical/coaxial/analog (RCA) output (no HDMI). After a bit of more reading found that this unit only output SACD audio through the analog outputs (probably for copy protection/IP purposes). So you're essentially stuck using a DAC that's about 20 years old. As luck would have it, I needed to upgrade my AV receiver at the time. I picked up a well-reviewed Denon unit at Costco. After a bit of reading on this unit, I found that it could playback native DSD (*.dsf) files using the internal DAC. These files can come from many sources (phone/network share, etc.), but the easiest was via USB flash drive plugged into the front of the receiver. I did more research and found an older Sony blu-ray player that did have HDMI and coaxial outputs that would allow me to send the audio out the HDMI to the receiver and even had a setting for DSD output. It also allowed me to rip the SACD files (with a bit of hacking required) and I used those to test the USB flash drive method described above. So check the documentation on your amp/pre-amp/receiver, it may just have a built-in DAC that works with DSD. If so, you might just be a USB flash drive and the purchase of some DSD music away from trying it yourself! This could be a "poor man's" method to check out DSD before making a huge investment. All in, I've spent less than $500 (for the new AV receiver and a used Sony blu-ray player) Your mileage may vary - Good Luck! Bob
My understanding of this, is you need to run the DSD signal through an i2s input from player to amp/ receiver with HDMI. Otherwise you're not getting native DSD. The whole process is confusing to me.
@@troyvan6952 Well I'm thinking that if you are playing the DSD files (*.dsf) from a flash drive plugged directly into the receiver you're getting the "native DSD" playback. I could be wrong - It's all so complicated! If anyone has additional input - I'm all ears! Thanks! Bob
@@troyvan6952 I'm not sure if that gives you the "native DSD" playback you are after - might be using the DAC on the blu-ray player instead of an external one or the one in the pre-amp/receiver. Maybe someone else some better insight? Bob
Finally! Listening for a few minutes to one who knows (you) can save someone who knows not (me) save hours of useless web research. Unfortunately in my case, the web effort has happened, your video came late 😉 Amazing how much confusion is out there in the www. Now I understand why there are no further settings in roon about "pure" DSD: DoP is (!) pure DSD. Love your explainer videos! Carry on with these!
DoP is rarely pure DSD. In order to mix and edit recordings DSD must be converted to PCM. 98% of DSD files available are DSD recordings of PCM files. In order to create a false illusion that you are listening to some "audiophile" material the PCM is then converted back to DSD. In order for you to listen to the DSD it must then be converted to DoP, which is essentially a DoP container, then converted back to DSD, where it is then converted to analog. Each conversion adds distortion to the original file. The best way to get the best listening experience is to record in PCM and to listen in PCM. No conversations are required and no distortion is added.
Thank you, that’s just awesome to have it put across like that in layman’s terms, so helpful, I am going to buy a DAC with DoP and I2S input, the latter to use with a hdmi to I2S converter, playing sacd’s from my Sony blu-ray player. Much appreciated from Leicester UK
MY journey was as follows : 1. Get a networked SACD player + SACD layered SACDs... then you are playing DSD files on the analog out of the player; 2. Buy DSD files online, put in some type of USB or network storage or computer (w/ Audirvana) and have your DSD DAC reach out to it if it can OR plug in laptop to DSD capable DAC using USB cable. BTW, I still have not found an elegant, legit and legal way of ripping DSD's out of SACDs so I've given up on that. I've seen numerous posts and they seem to be very hodge podge in their implementation of ripping SACD's DSD files....
Thought it was a great question, however the answer just confused me. Does one stream DSD if so from where does one do this? Sorry Paul some of us just want to listen to music in it's best form but we are not computer nerds or electronics engineers. Usually you are very good at expressing things in layman's terms, but i'm no wiser after your answer than when I started. (If that makes me a dummy I can live with that, I just love music). Thanks for your effort though.
You cannot stream DSD as the files are too large.You have to purchase the files and then "stream" them locally from your PC to your DoP or native DSD Dac.I use the Zen One Signature from ifi...inexpensive and hassle free.That being said you could also just stream from the likes of Tidal who have a lot of master recordings.Simple,very inexpensive,and I daresay...sounds amazing.I got tired of all the cost and relatively tiny sound differences.Red book,or cd, sounds wonderful as well.Hope that helps.
Love Paul's response. I agree with what he said, just adding few cents... DSD and cheap is an oxymoron. Sure, lots of modern receivers, AVRs, even amps, have built-in DAC able to decode DSD. Many SONY Blue-Ray player reads SACDs. For a PC you can get Foobar2000 for free. And it where the "cheap" part ends. SACDs are expensive. Legit DSD downloads are expensive. In average SACD is $50+. And of course you have to have system which would allow to actually hear the difference.
Paul, my Denon AVR X-4700H receiver preamp output voltage is 1.2 volts, and I'm thinking of getting an Emotiva XPA 5 GEN3 five-channel power amp with an input sensitivity of 1.5 volts, will the receiver drive the amp to the full power of 250 watts all channel driven?.
Accurate answer: no. Practical answer: Hearing is logarithmic, not linear. So although 1.2 vs 1.5 seems a lot, it's less than 1dB and will be inaudible.
I am a frequent viewer of your short videos and, on occasion, learn something in spite of myself. Although I have enjoyed my system for decades, I don't know much. I get lost quickly when you start uttering acronyms one after another. So when you started talking about D.S.D, I Googled it. Imagine my surprise when the first response was, Disorders of Sexual Development! While I agree that those of us who are cursed with Audiophilia are dabbling in the O.C.D. arena to some extent, I had not associated sexual development as being part of the equation. It might help if you dumb down your responses by explaining what your acronyms stand for, enabling those of us who are not members of Mensa to understand what you are talking about. Thanks.
I was under the impression that Fanless PC’s built for silence & low latency coupled with the right Audio cards & quality speakers (maybe sometimes on Screens?) were usually best for Audio experiences without the Vinyl in general. Allegedly FreeBSD has better Audio quality than Linux, if you’re into Open Source OS’s.
So once again I request a sample of something recorded directly to DSD and the same music converted to PCM please. You said a million times about how much better DSD is. Let us hear it please?
I have a bunch of ripped SACD’S on my laptop and I use foobar to send it out to my dac that’s hooked up to my system. I feel that’s the easiest way to do it.
Wasapi or Asio?I presume Asio.I had a trial version of Audirvana which used Asio,sounded amazing and was so irritation free.Expensive program,so Foobar it is.
Chasing DSD is a bit like chasing that whale. Whilst you spend your days chasing it a lot of great sounding music is passing you by on the PCM boat going the other way. Hifi for hi-fi's sake. Personally I'd rather enjoy that vast stream of music on a $10 radio with a crappy speaker than spend my time chasing that whale.
It isn't mutually exclusive! I might listen to music from my cheap earbuds/ Chromebook, F/R 4 speaker PC setup, the multi-media 4.1 sound bar in the living room, my Audi's B&O system, TV speakers in the basement, the old school JBL/ Sansui also down there, my Maggi/ ADCOM/ turntable only system, ... all in one day. Each for different reasons. And I enjoy them all. Each for different reasons.
@@glenncurry3041 My comment wasn't particularly aimed at you or those like you - it was aimed more at those, and I think we all know someone like this, who have become so obsessed with sound quality that they miss the bigger picture. The guys who will only listen to and buy very specific audiophile releases on specific labels to listen to, who prioritise sound quality over content. I've met far too many people like this.
@@Toymortal I was in the Audio industry in it's hey days, the 70's. Selling some higher end stuff as well as the more popular. I got so burned out that I could not listen to an album side without cleaning the stylus between cuts because I could hear the dirt build up. Dropped out for over a decade. But kept listening to music, radios, car, ... Bought some Maggies (again) about 7 years ago (kids all moved out) and started the process again. An even more resolving system now exposing how bad some of the recordings actually are/ were. e.g. one album I love the music on is just mushy, fuzzy sounding. I even bought a 180G reissue which is a better pressing but the original recording flaws still show thru. Especially the vocals. Like something is wrong with the system. So I've learned to sit and enjoy the music, but actually put a known better record on immediately after to assure my OCD my system is OK! So yes I can be one of those extreme lunatic audiophiles. However I am also fine streaming low bit rate mp3's to a modest soundbar to enjoy music when not in my "concert" mode.
What's also confusing to me is this. My Denon DCD-A110 says it plays DSD discs. Many of my SACD's have the DSD logo on them. BUT, when I'm playing those SACD's, the display of the Denon says SACD. Denon's manual says I need to play DSD discs, as if they come from me, something I've made.
Im gonna disagree. Grabbing a used & working SACD player is the simplest way to go for the beginner. You can find TONS of Sony units in all kinds of flavors for around $100, DAC bullt in and good to go. Yes.... a USB DAC thats DSD compatible is the same price, but the initial setup and acquiring DSD files is a bit hairy.
Equilibrium! DSD over a phone, a tablet or most computer is just toooo much… if you have a pretty good sound system, and the room, and all the whistle that match your listening gear… may be, in some case, DSD may be a great experience… but every track you buy is a guess… some are good… some are great… too expensive for the good (you have cheaper alternatives)… some are just great! This is the $$$ way of audiophile? 🤓
But... You cannot actually record DSD! Or can you? DSD is, say, an 11 MHz sample. Above 50% is ON, below is OFF. Feed a sine wave in, and you'll get a "perfect" DSD square wave. 50% ON, 50% OFF. So you need a ton of processing to get back the "original" sound, if even possible. Think about converting a B&W photo to greyscale for a newspaper. Maybe ok for mass market, but maybe missing the magic? Ivor/Linn missed one point, which you continually rant about: if you have cr*p speakers, whatever you play will sound cr*p - or not very good. So you need a "balanced" system, unless currently upgrading. I never liked Linn's cartridges; I used a Decca London until I couldn't get it replaced ansd now use an ADC ZLM which was "designed" for CD4.
Oh, boy here goes Paul again with a bunch of misinformation designed to make you believe that DSD is somehow superior to PCM, which it is not. The truth of the matter is that 98% of the DSD material out there available for purchase is DSD recordings of PCM. Paul wants you to believe that DSD is more accurate than PCM but this is absolutely not true. Because PCM uses multi-bit words to record each sample the recording and playback are more accurate than DSD samples. DSD must add large quantities of noise to the original recording in order to create timing accuracy of the samples, PCM does not require this large quantity of noise. Paul also falsely states that DSD is a constant stream of ones and zeros, which it is not. DSD takes samples just like PCM and no information, ones, and zeros, are recorded between samples so the flow IS NOT constant. Paul would also try and fool you into believing that DSD is somehow superior to PCM at the initial recording stage, but as you can see by the above information DSD is actually worse because of the need to add large quantities of noise, the need to convert to PCM to mix and edit, the need to reconvert back to DSD to give the illusion that the file is a DSD file, and the need to reconvert to a PCM container file, and back to a DSD file in order to playback. Each of these conversions creates more distortions from the original file. A cleaner more accurate way to record is to record in high-resolution PCM, mix and edit in high-resolution PCM, and deliver the final product in high-resolution PCM. Less distortion, fewer conversions, less cost, and better quality.
Please show us all the math behind "Each of these conversions creates more distortions from the original file" when converting from DSD to DoP and then back to DSD. Show us all exactly how that captured bit stream encapsulated into a PCM packet is changed once reconstructed by the dual conversion process.
This is not true in my first hand experience. Recording in DSD 128 sounds exactly like the output of whatever instrument I'm recording. Recording in PCM (even 176 or 192) adds noticeable glare when comapred to DSD. The noise in the DSD file is far above the frequency of human hearing, and only relevant when looking at a graph, not when listening to the music. After capturing in DSD, careful conversion to PCM makes for a more clear, 3 dimensional result than going straight to PCM. This is my experience as an engineer and musician.
@@arthurkillen396 Great! As an Engineer can you please explain for everyone what "glare" is and what causes it? When converting from DSD to PCM why does the "glare" not occur? What exactly in the conversion process prevents the "glare" from happening in the PCM file? I'm sure that as an Engineer you know that the high-frequency noise must be filtered out to prevent equipment damage and that when a filter is inserted the phase of the original signal is altered and distortion is created. Can you explain scientifically, or from an engineering perspective what exactly happens in the conversion process that would cause the PCM file to become "more clear" and "3 dimensional"? Thank you.
@@glenncurry3041 Yes. When recording both DSD and PCM a clock is used to tell the AD converter when to take a sample. To ensure accurate playback both types of samples must be quantized to ensure that the samples are played back at the appropriate time. DSD does this by adding a large quantity of noise to the DSD file and PCM does this by adding a very low-level noise to the file. In order for DSD to be wrapped in a PCM file, the DSD file must be sliced into PCM-sized (clocked) pieces. This sliced DSD file information must contain all of the bit information (number of 1 bits at the point of the PCM wrapper is applied along with all the noise needed to quantize the DSD file. This means that the DSD timing is sliced into PCM file size timing. Alterations in the timing of the DSD noise cause jitter and even drop out. When the DoP (PCM) file is sent to the receiving device it is seen as a PCM file because the file header says it's a PCM file. The receiving device will unpack the DoP file based on the quantization information in the PCM file and based on the clock in the receiving device which is not coordinated with the original clock(s) that either file was created with. So now the timing of the DSD file is not only dependent on the timing of the "unpacking" of the DoP (PCM) file but also the reconstruction of the quantization information (the noise) of the DSD file also based on the same clock being used to unpack the sequential DoP files and by the same D to A converter. Timing and quantization errors cause audible distortions.
@@JonAnderhub Sorry, that was far from the actual question. Red Herring? DSD > DoP is merely taking an appropriate length of the DSD bit stream 1's and 0's and encapsulating them in that order in a PCM packet. Extracting DoP > DSD just provides that continual stream back to the DAC. It's a simple parsing operation. Grab a string of bits out of a bit stream, encapsulate them in order, extract them and reassemble the bit stream. DoP would be just as able to transport a stored DSD file and often is. Just like decompressing a RAR. The resultant bitstream file after the DSD > DoP > DSD should be identical. If the clocking of the reassembled bitstream is not correct, that is not part of the processes problem. It is the part of the external devices.
![MISSING: SLIM SHADY [Expanded Mourner’s Edition Trailer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xh8qgHrOO1g/mqdefault.jpg)
So here's the thing. Paul could make 1000 videos about the same topic, repeated questions, and I could watch all over and over. This is how good he is. Love it.
And he does! So you'll never need worry about content!
Yes he is knowledgeable,but it is mostly his pleasant manner and demeanor that keep us watching.
@@spandel100 agree 100%
he has a soothing voice and nice delivery.
I've read with great interest about this and may have an easier/cheaper way to dip your toes into DSD:
I happened to have an old Sony DVD/CD/SACD player I got in the early 00s. Never had a SACD disc, so picked one up used on eBay. Since this was an older unit, it had only optical/coaxial/analog (RCA) output (no HDMI). After a bit of more reading found that this unit only output SACD audio through the analog outputs (probably for copy protection/IP purposes). So you're essentially stuck using a DAC that's about 20 years old.
As luck would have it, I needed to upgrade my AV receiver at the time. I picked up a well-reviewed Denon unit at Costco. After a bit of reading on this unit, I found that it could playback native DSD (*.dsf) files using the internal DAC. These files can come from many sources (phone/network share, etc.), but the easiest was via USB flash drive plugged into the front of the receiver.
I did more research and found an older Sony blu-ray player that did have HDMI and coaxial outputs that would allow me to send the audio out the HDMI to the receiver and even had a setting for DSD output. It also allowed me to rip the SACD files (with a bit of hacking required) and I used those to test the USB flash drive method described above.
So check the documentation on your amp/pre-amp/receiver, it may just have a built-in DAC that works with DSD. If so, you might just be a USB flash drive and the purchase of some DSD music away from trying it yourself!
This could be a "poor man's" method to check out DSD before making a huge investment. All in, I've spent less than $500 (for the new AV receiver and a used Sony blu-ray player)
Your mileage may vary - Good Luck!
Bob
My understanding of this, is you need to run the DSD signal through an i2s input from player to amp/ receiver with HDMI.
Otherwise you're not getting native DSD.
The whole process is confusing to me.
@@troyvan6952 Well I'm thinking that if you are playing the DSD files (*.dsf) from a flash drive plugged directly into the receiver you're getting the "native DSD" playback. I could be wrong - It's all so complicated!
If anyone has additional input - I'm all ears!
Thanks!
Bob
@@bobhickey77 I'm thinking about SACD playback will blue ray player
@@troyvan6952 I'm not sure if that gives you the "native DSD" playback you are after - might be using the DAC on the blu-ray player instead of an external one or the one in the pre-amp/receiver.
Maybe someone else some better insight?
Bob
Fantastic! More dsd stuff, my favourite subject
YES, just ask MoFi and Jim Davis about “capturing” original master tapes with DSD…
Finally! Listening for a few minutes to one who knows (you) can save someone who knows not (me) save hours of useless web research. Unfortunately in my case, the web effort has happened, your video came late 😉
Amazing how much confusion is out there in the www. Now I understand why there are no further settings in roon about "pure" DSD: DoP is (!) pure DSD.
Love your explainer videos! Carry on with these!
DoP is rarely pure DSD.
In order to mix and edit recordings DSD must be converted to PCM.
98% of DSD files available are DSD recordings of PCM files.
In order to create a false illusion that you are listening to some "audiophile" material the PCM is then converted back to DSD.
In order for you to listen to the DSD it must then be converted to DoP, which is essentially a DoP container, then converted back to DSD, where it is then converted to analog.
Each conversion adds distortion to the original file.
The best way to get the best listening experience is to record in PCM and to listen in PCM.
No conversations are required and no distortion is added.
Thank you, that’s just awesome to have it put across like that in layman’s terms, so helpful, I am going to buy a DAC with DoP and I2S input, the latter to use with a hdmi to I2S converter, playing sacd’s from my Sony blu-ray player. Much appreciated from Leicester UK
Excellent
MY journey was as follows :
1. Get a networked SACD player + SACD layered SACDs... then you are playing DSD files on the analog out of the player;
2. Buy DSD files online, put in some type of USB or network storage or computer (w/ Audirvana) and have your DSD DAC reach out to it if it can OR plug in laptop to DSD capable DAC using USB cable.
BTW, I still have not found an elegant, legit and legal way of ripping DSD's out of SACDs so I've given up on that. I've seen numerous posts and they seem to be very hodge podge in their implementation of ripping SACD's DSD files....
Have u tried EZ CD Audio Converter?
Being an Audiophile seems to me to be a full time job constantly spending money to keep your job. 😳
Thought it was a great question, however the answer just confused me. Does one stream DSD if so from where does one do this?
Sorry Paul some of us just want to listen to music in it's best form but we are not computer nerds or electronics engineers. Usually you are very good at expressing things in layman's terms, but i'm no wiser after your answer than when I started. (If that makes me a dummy I can live with that, I just love music).
Thanks for your effort though.
Dont worry you are not alone in trying to understand all this complication
You cannot stream DSD as the files are too large.You have to purchase the files and then "stream" them locally from your PC to your DoP or native DSD Dac.I use the Zen One Signature from ifi...inexpensive and hassle free.That being said you could also just stream from the likes of Tidal who have a lot of master recordings.Simple,very inexpensive,and I daresay...sounds amazing.I got tired of all the cost and relatively tiny sound differences.Red book,or cd, sounds wonderful as well.Hope that helps.
Love Paul's response. I agree with what he said, just adding few cents... DSD and cheap is an oxymoron. Sure, lots of modern receivers, AVRs, even amps, have built-in DAC able to decode DSD. Many SONY Blue-Ray player reads SACDs. For a PC you can get Foobar2000 for free. And it where the "cheap" part ends. SACDs are expensive. Legit DSD downloads are expensive. In average SACD is $50+. And of course you have to have system which would allow to actually hear the difference.
Paul, my Denon AVR X-4700H receiver preamp output voltage is 1.2 volts, and I'm thinking of getting an Emotiva XPA 5 GEN3 five-channel power amp with an input sensitivity of 1.5 volts, will the receiver drive the amp to the full power of 250 watts all channel driven?.
Accurate answer: no.
Practical answer: Hearing is logarithmic, not linear. So although 1.2 vs 1.5 seems a lot, it's less than 1dB and will be inaudible.
VOX player is free and plays DSD.
Get a media player/DAC like an SMSL DP5 or Eweat DMP20 or DMP50. These will playback and convert DSD to analogue straight into your amplifier.
I am a frequent viewer of your short videos and, on occasion, learn something in spite of myself. Although I have enjoyed my system for decades, I don't know much. I get lost quickly when you start uttering acronyms one after another. So when you started talking about D.S.D, I Googled it. Imagine my surprise when the first response was, Disorders of Sexual Development! While I agree that those of us who are cursed with Audiophilia are dabbling in the O.C.D. arena to some extent, I had not associated sexual development as being part of the equation.
It might help if you dumb down your responses by explaining what your acronyms stand for, enabling those of us who are not members of Mensa to understand what you are talking about. Thanks.
I was under the impression that Fanless PC’s built for silence & low latency coupled with the right Audio cards & quality speakers (maybe sometimes on Screens?) were usually best for Audio experiences without the Vinyl in general.
Allegedly FreeBSD has better Audio quality than Linux, if you’re into Open Source OS’s.
So once again I request a sample of something recorded directly to DSD and the same music converted to PCM please. You said a million times about how much better DSD is. Let us hear it please?
I have a bunch of ripped SACD’S on my laptop and I use foobar to send it out to my dac that’s hooked up to my system. I feel that’s the easiest way to do it.
Wasapi or Asio?I presume Asio.I had a trial version of Audirvana which used Asio,sounded amazing and was so irritation free.Expensive program,so Foobar it is.
Chasing DSD is a bit like chasing that whale. Whilst you spend your days chasing it a lot of great sounding music is passing you by on the PCM boat going the other way. Hifi for hi-fi's sake. Personally I'd rather enjoy that vast stream of music on a $10 radio with a crappy speaker than spend my time chasing that whale.
It isn't mutually exclusive! I might listen to music from my cheap earbuds/ Chromebook, F/R 4 speaker PC setup, the multi-media 4.1 sound bar in the living room, my Audi's B&O system, TV speakers in the basement, the old school JBL/ Sansui also down there, my Maggi/ ADCOM/ turntable only system, ... all in one day. Each for different reasons. And I enjoy them all. Each for different reasons.
@@glenncurry3041 My comment wasn't particularly aimed at you or those like you - it was aimed more at those, and I think we all know someone like this, who have become so obsessed with sound quality that they miss the bigger picture. The guys who will only listen to and buy very specific audiophile releases on specific labels to listen to, who prioritise sound quality over content. I've met far too many people like this.
@@Toymortal I was in the Audio industry in it's hey days, the 70's. Selling some higher end stuff as well as the more popular. I got so burned out that I could not listen to an album side without cleaning the stylus between cuts because I could hear the dirt build up. Dropped out for over a decade. But kept listening to music, radios, car, ... Bought some Maggies (again) about 7 years ago (kids all moved out) and started the process again. An even more resolving system now exposing how bad some of the recordings actually are/ were. e.g. one album I love the music on is just mushy, fuzzy sounding. I even bought a 180G reissue which is a better pressing but the original recording flaws still show thru. Especially the vocals. Like something is wrong with the system. So I've learned to sit and enjoy the music, but actually put a known better record on immediately after to assure my OCD my system is OK!
So yes I can be one of those extreme lunatic audiophiles. However I am also fine streaming low bit rate mp3's to a modest soundbar to enjoy music when not in my "concert" mode.
What's also confusing to me is this. My Denon DCD-A110 says it plays DSD discs. Many of my SACD's have the DSD logo on them. BUT, when I'm playing those SACD's, the display of the Denon says SACD.
Denon's manual says I need to play DSD discs, as if they come from me, something I've made.
If your Denon display is saying "SACD", then it's most likely reading the DSD layer of the disc.
@@arthurkillen396 Thanks for the info, and reply
Why not stick to FLAC?
Im gonna disagree. Grabbing a used & working SACD player is the simplest way to go for the beginner. You can find TONS of Sony units in all kinds of flavors for around $100, DAC bullt in and good to go. Yes.... a USB DAC thats DSD compatible is the same price, but the initial setup and acquiring DSD files is a bit hairy.
PS3 gen1 and 2 can read SACDs. Can be had for 50-100 bucks used and old ofc but hey.
Equilibrium! DSD over a phone, a tablet or most computer is just toooo much… if you have a pretty good sound system, and the room, and all the whistle that match your listening gear… may be, in some case, DSD may be a great experience… but every track you buy is a guess… some are good… some are great… too expensive for the good (you have cheaper alternatives)… some are just great! This is the $$$ way of audiophile? 🤓
But... You cannot actually record DSD! Or can you?
DSD is, say, an 11 MHz sample. Above 50% is ON, below is OFF. Feed a sine wave in, and you'll get a "perfect" DSD square wave. 50% ON, 50% OFF.
So you need a ton of processing to get back the "original" sound, if even possible. Think about converting a B&W photo to greyscale for a newspaper. Maybe ok for mass market, but maybe missing the magic?
Ivor/Linn missed one point, which you continually rant about: if you have cr*p speakers, whatever you play will sound cr*p - or not very good. So you need a "balanced" system, unless currently upgrading. I never liked Linn's cartridges; I used a Decca London until I couldn't get it replaced ansd now use an ADC ZLM which was "designed" for CD4.
Oh, boy here goes Paul again with a bunch of misinformation designed to make you believe that DSD is somehow superior to PCM, which it is not.
The truth of the matter is that 98% of the DSD material out there available for purchase is DSD recordings of PCM.
Paul wants you to believe that DSD is more accurate than PCM but this is absolutely not true.
Because PCM uses multi-bit words to record each sample the recording and playback are more accurate than DSD samples.
DSD must add large quantities of noise to the original recording in order to create timing accuracy of the samples, PCM does not require this large quantity of noise.
Paul also falsely states that DSD is a constant stream of ones and zeros, which it is not.
DSD takes samples just like PCM and no information, ones, and zeros, are recorded between samples so the flow IS NOT constant.
Paul would also try and fool you into believing that DSD is somehow superior to PCM at the initial recording stage, but as you can see by the above information DSD is actually worse because of the need to add large quantities of noise, the need to convert to PCM to mix and edit, the need to reconvert back to DSD to give the illusion that the file is a DSD file, and the need to reconvert to a PCM container file, and back to a DSD file in order to playback.
Each of these conversions creates more distortions from the original file.
A cleaner more accurate way to record is to record in high-resolution PCM, mix and edit in high-resolution PCM, and deliver the final product in high-resolution PCM.
Less distortion, fewer conversions, less cost, and better quality.
Please show us all the math behind "Each of these conversions creates more distortions from the original file" when converting from DSD to DoP and then back to DSD. Show us all exactly how that captured bit stream encapsulated into a PCM packet is changed once reconstructed by the dual conversion process.
This is not true in my first hand experience. Recording in DSD 128 sounds exactly like the output of whatever instrument I'm recording. Recording in PCM (even 176 or 192) adds noticeable glare when comapred to DSD. The noise in the DSD file is far above the frequency of human hearing, and only relevant when looking at a graph, not when listening to the music. After capturing in DSD, careful conversion to PCM makes for a more clear, 3 dimensional result than going straight to PCM. This is my experience as an engineer and musician.
@@arthurkillen396 Great!
As an Engineer can you please explain for everyone what "glare" is and what causes it?
When converting from DSD to PCM why does the "glare" not occur?
What exactly in the conversion process prevents the "glare" from happening in the PCM file?
I'm sure that as an Engineer you know that the high-frequency noise must be filtered out to prevent equipment damage and that when a filter is inserted the phase of the original signal is altered and distortion is created.
Can you explain scientifically, or from an engineering perspective what exactly happens in the conversion process that would cause the PCM file to become "more clear" and "3 dimensional"?
Thank you.
@@glenncurry3041 Yes.
When recording both DSD and PCM a clock is used to tell the AD converter when to take a sample.
To ensure accurate playback both types of samples must be quantized to ensure that the samples are played back at the appropriate time.
DSD does this by adding a large quantity of noise to the DSD file and PCM does this by adding a very low-level noise to the file.
In order for DSD to be wrapped in a PCM file, the DSD file must be sliced into PCM-sized (clocked) pieces.
This sliced DSD file information must contain all of the bit information (number of 1 bits at the point of the PCM wrapper is applied along with all the noise needed to quantize the DSD file.
This means that the DSD timing is sliced into PCM file size timing.
Alterations in the timing of the DSD noise cause jitter and even drop out.
When the DoP (PCM) file is sent to the receiving device it is seen as a PCM file because the file header says it's a PCM file.
The receiving device will unpack the DoP file based on the quantization information in the PCM file and based on the clock in the receiving device which is not coordinated with the original clock(s) that either file was created with.
So now the timing of the DSD file is not only dependent on the timing of the "unpacking" of the DoP (PCM) file but also the reconstruction of the quantization information (the noise) of the DSD file also based on the same clock being used to unpack the sequential DoP files and by the same D to A converter.
Timing and quantization errors cause audible distortions.
@@JonAnderhub Sorry, that was far from the actual question. Red Herring? DSD > DoP is merely taking an appropriate length of the DSD bit stream 1's and 0's and encapsulating them in that order in a PCM packet. Extracting DoP > DSD just provides that continual stream back to the DAC. It's a simple parsing operation. Grab a string of bits out of a bit stream, encapsulate them in order, extract them and reassemble the bit stream. DoP would be just as able to transport a stored DSD file and often is. Just like decompressing a RAR. The resultant bitstream file after the DSD > DoP > DSD should be identical.
If the clocking of the reassembled bitstream is not correct, that is not part of the processes problem. It is the part of the external devices.