Topic: DSD over PCM

[F.O.Bean]

So, from quality perspective, if you're a live music taper and you're not currently recording at 24/192, why would you be concerned about potential future upgradability or potential sonic improvements of DSD?  Asked another way, if you're not currently taking advantage of the resolution capabilities available to you with your current rig, why would you be interested in upgrading to DSD?

I'll answer my own question from my perspective...please tell me if my logic is flawed. 

Relative to a higly controlled and quiet studio environment, I record sh**ty sounding shows in sh**ty sounding venues.  Since I have sufficient resolution to do anything in post that I need to do to my 24 bit recordings without loss of sonic quality, nothing I record is gonna sound any better if I record it with higher resolution anyway. 

To me, it's kinda like having a super high quality one million megapixel camera body, but you're using your camera with low quality lenses to make kodak moment snapshots.  Beyond a certain point, concerning yourself with the megapixels might be nice, but in practical application, it makes no practical sense relative to the end game.

After texting back and forth with tonedeaf, I am starting to see the light at the end of his tunnel! I have thought about it long and hard, and believe it or not, I am 100% HAPPY with BOTH of my rigs right now. I'm just LUSTING. Over things, and that's it! if I do anything with my gear, it would prob be to add another m10 and a femto preamp for now. But if I don't upgrade anything for a couple years, then I'll be fine with that!

Like tonedeaf said, recording noisy PA systems in shitty rooms doesn't really warrant DSD or 24/192 recording capabilities! I recorded my 4 year old nieces Xmas concert today acapellaa, at 24/96! That's the MAX resolution I plan on recording for awhile, and that's only at certain shows!

Sorry I can't get into the technical talk. It just confuses me

[H₂O]

From what I have read one approach is for a DSD DAW is to convert the DSD into a separate PCM audio file for editing visualization for the user but perform the desired operations or rendering on the DSD stream directly based on choices made on the PCM edits.  The the output DSD stream is never converted into PCM but directly processed from the original DSD file. 


Another approach is convert to DXD which is 32bit (integer) 384Khz audio which would be a PCM format.




Korg Audio gate has some simplistic editing functions (i.e. level changes and tracking) but there is no visualization and this is all in the DSD realm.

[Genghis Cougar Mellen Khan]

Remember that when your audience taping your also taping the room not just the band - I find my DSD recordings sound more open and have more of the room ambience then my 24 96khz PCM recordings

The DSD recordings give you a more of being there feeling

I did feel the same way. I recorded a bunch of shows in DSD, some in DSD and PCM (V3 analog>Tascam DVRA/digital>bit-bucket).

I think all I discovered is that I much preferred the Tascam's A/D much more than the V3.

After recording a few shows on the Tascam in PCM format it was obvious (to my ears at least) that the variable was the A/D and not the format. YMMV

[Chilly Brioschi]

I don't mean to rain on any parades, but personally I don't get the DSD thing.  It seems to me to be an unecessary complication, difficult to manipulate for creators and editors

           ^
This----| ^^

With all of the filters, controls, and utilities already built-out for PCM , DSD will remain the "BetaMax" of digital audio.
I have over a dozen high quality editors (several Freeware) from which to choose to manipulate Hi-Res PCM, none of which require that Twitter be involved intrinsically(!).
Korg does not get it.   

http://www.korguser.net/audiogate/en/download.html

[capnhook]

I don't mean to rain on any parades, but personally I don't get the DSD thing.  It seems to me to be an unecessary complication, difficult to manipulate for creators and editors

           ^
This----| ^^

With all of the filters, controls, and utilities already built-out for PCM , DSD will remain the "BetaMax" of digital audio.
I have over a dozen high quality editors (several Freeware) from which to choose to manipulate Hi-Res PCM, none of which require that Twitter be involved intrinsically(!).
Korg does not get it.   

http://www.korguser.net/audiogate/en/download.html

Wha?  Twitter each time the program is used?

Stupid korg

[voltronic]

Along the lines of additional complications with DSD...

As I understand it, unless you are listening through a DSD-capable DAC, the DSD data is first converted to PCM by your playback software and then the PCM data is sent along to your DAC.  While this seems obvious, I feel like anyone who is commenting on the sound of DSD vs. PCM would have to be listening through a DAC which can decode DSD directly in order for any comparison to be valid.  Yes, there are big differences in how the original data is recorded and maybe that changes the sound somewhat, but with a typical DAC most of us have hooked to or computers, your playback is an additional generation removed from that original data.  All the .dsf files I've listened to through Foobar sound great, but what my Focusrite interface is "seeing" is a 24-bit/88.2kHz PCM data stream.

DSD-capable DACs are typically much more expensive, as you can see here:
http://www.audiostream.com/content/dsd-resources-dsd-dac-list

Also, check out this comment from the above linked page for those who use the Korg AudioGate software:
http://www.audiostream.com/content/dsd-resources-dsd-dac-list#comment-503186

From that list though, it now seems that there is actually one inexpensive option for DSD decoding, but it ONLY does DSD - no PCM at all:
http://schiit.com/products/loki