Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: DSD Myth  (Read 8668 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 12658
  • Gender: Male
Re: DSD Myth
« Reply #30 on: October 01, 2015, 09:14:09 AM »
Given equally adequate implementations, both fully and faithfully reproduce an analog signal which fits within their bandwidth.

IMO, DSatz nailed it-
Quote
the attempted (and not very successful) introduction of DSD was the behavior of a company trying to preserve its revenue stream by means of planned obsolescence--whether or not that was in the interest of the public or the rest of the recording business.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline SBW

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: DSD Myth
« Reply #31 on: October 01, 2015, 06:42:41 PM »
So from what I gather, it sounds like the old situation where the root of all the arguing is "in practice" vs "in theory".

In *practice* both PCM and DSD are the same so DSD is a total waste of time because it's a pain in the ass to work with.

However, in *theory*, DSD should be more accurate because all ADC's start with a delta sigma modulator anyways, then they convert PCM.  PCM is just an unnecessary step.  Does that make sense?

 
« Last Edit: October 01, 2015, 06:46:29 PM by SBW »

Offline SBW

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: DSD Myth
« Reply #32 on: October 01, 2015, 09:14:58 PM »
Ah, ok so DSD is worse in practice *and* in theory.  Which I see now was the whole point of your post.

Offline F.O.Bean

  • Is a 4 channel slut and
  • Trade Count: (125)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 40663
  • Gender: Male
  • Taperus Maximus
Re: DSD Myth
« Reply #33 on: October 09, 2015, 03:38:45 AM »
NP.  I posted these because they support my belief that DSD is a waste of time and money, unless you are trying to sell SACDs or DSD recorders. ;)  Some people swear by it, but as soon as you edit DSD or listen through a DAC that doesn't decode it directly, you would have been better off using PCM in the first place.

I'm curious, have you actually listened to a DSD recording played natively through a DSD recorder?  I can't say that I've done any A vs B testing, but damn the recordings I play back through my D100 that I've recorded in DSD sound sweet and they definitely have an added layer of 'real' than what I get from my other recorders.  But maybe it's the ADC of the recorder rather than the format that's making the difference. 

Anyway, the article doesn't say anything about DSD being a waste.  My read on the article is that it simply says that you need to be careful about how you process a native DSD file.

Looks like we were typing at the same time.  I've listened to native DSD/DFF files, but only transcoded to PCM as I don't have a DSD DAC.  So you're right, I can't really cast to many stones here.  But unlike you, there are people out there extolling the virtues of DSD who don't have the means to decode it directly, and may or may not be aware of that fact.  That's why I was asking what you hear, because I know you own a couple devices that can do native DSD.

Regarding my "waste of time" comment, maybe that was a bit harsh.  But what I don't understand is where the extra hoops DSD editing makes you jump though are worth it.  Again, I think your situation is different than most because it sounds as though your editing is very minimal.

Actually, Steve's DSD@2.8mHz files, are SMALLER than my recordings at 24/96 ;)
Recording Rigs:
Schoeps MK4's & MK41's ->
Schoeps | NBob 250/0 KCY's ->
Naiant +60v/Low Noise PFA's ->
DarkTrain Right Angle Stubby XLR's ->
Sound Devices MixPre-6 & MixPre-3 ->
SanDisk 128gb Extreme Pro & 2x 64gb Ultra Plus

Portable Playback Rigs:
Campfire Audio Andromeda & Dorado | Westone (2nd Generation) UM Pro 30 IEM's ->
Linum G2 SuperBax & Bax |  2x CA/ALO SPC Litz | Sony MUC-M2BT1 LDAC MMCX Cables ->
Shanling M5s & M0 | Sony NW-A35 DAP's

DAW:
Dell Inspiron 5570-5521 SLV Laptop
(Pentium i5 Processor/8gb RAM/256gb SSD)

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/diskobean | http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/Bean420 | http://bt.etree.org/mytorrents.php

Offline F.O.Bean

  • Is a 4 channel slut and
  • Trade Count: (125)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 40663
  • Gender: Male
  • Taperus Maximus
Re: DSD Myth
« Reply #34 on: October 12, 2015, 09:28:23 PM »
Great Benchmark article DSatz! It really opened my eyes to how converters work. With them doing the 1-bit parallel in the newer chips and everything was really cool!
Recording Rigs:
Schoeps MK4's & MK41's ->
Schoeps | NBob 250/0 KCY's ->
Naiant +60v/Low Noise PFA's ->
DarkTrain Right Angle Stubby XLR's ->
Sound Devices MixPre-6 & MixPre-3 ->
SanDisk 128gb Extreme Pro & 2x 64gb Ultra Plus

Portable Playback Rigs:
Campfire Audio Andromeda & Dorado | Westone (2nd Generation) UM Pro 30 IEM's ->
Linum G2 SuperBax & Bax |  2x CA/ALO SPC Litz | Sony MUC-M2BT1 LDAC MMCX Cables ->
Shanling M5s & M0 | Sony NW-A35 DAP's

DAW:
Dell Inspiron 5570-5521 SLV Laptop
(Pentium i5 Processor/8gb RAM/256gb SSD)

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/diskobean | http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/Bean420 | http://bt.etree.org/mytorrents.php

Offline jb63

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Taperssection Member
  • *
  • Posts: 620
  • Gender: Male
  • if not now when?
Re: DSD Myth
« Reply #35 on: October 21, 2015, 06:52:42 PM »
I both love and hate this thread.
I have maybe 500 korg mr1 field recordings made as dsdiff files and some of them are under the perfect circumstances and stand out to bear re-listening hundreds of times over. Others are just so-so.
On the right system I swear that they sound better than the comparable pcm recordings I made, but everything I'm reading here says no.

Worst part is the archive space and editing process. But the best part is the MR1 was still my favorite deck.

I guess I'll just have let my ears stop caring as much. Because they are all pretty nice recordings and I doubt knowing the facts will make me switch the settings to 24/96 pcm when I tape next, but that Dsatz quote about obsolescence is so spot o. It makes me want to.
this is definitely not normal

beenjammin

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: DSD Myth
« Reply #36 on: October 24, 2015, 04:24:35 PM »
I haven't heard DSD or DXD and so remain skeptical in the true sense of the term and have found the earlier cited articles informing and persuasive.

My question: what about pulse response?

In an article on the benefits of DXD, M. Vest claims DSD provides "perfect pulse transparency," stating further that, "[t]wo factors define the pulse response — the roll-off frequency of the sampling filter (anti-alias filter) and the slope of the filter roll-off. A high roll-off frequency gives a high amplitude pulse because of more high frequency content being present. A slow roll-off slope will produce less pre and post ringing of the pulse and thus a more precise time point for the pulse."

(This article may found here: http://www.lindberg.no/english/collection/004.pdf)

Any thoughts on this claim? I'd also like to know more about pulse response and, if possible, hear it. I guess (read: I have no idea!) this would mean running a PCM/DSD test on various sound sources with different attack transients and comparing how they each render.

Any sources where I might read up on this? Might this be the last holdout position for a possible advantage to DSD or DXD over PCM? (I know DXD is PCM, but apparently it has advantages here). 

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.152 seconds with 34 queries.
© 2002-2018 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF