Topic: DSD users, notice anything different?

[rokpunk]

Listen to my RCMH & compare it to last year or the year before, besides the brightness (thanks to the Mix Pre) listen to the mids/bass & tell me there isn't more presence or dynamics

This is not a valid compairison at all. You are assuming that the tonal differences are in the recorder, when the fact is, it's a different PA system, different weather conditions, different everything. How humid was this show last year as opposed to this year? The weather can effect your recording just as much, if not moreso, than your recorder can. I'm not saying that DSD recordings don't sound different or better than PCM recordings, but I am saying that you telling someone to listen to two recordings from two different sources to make the compairison is not valid (IMNSFHO).

[carlbeck]

Listen to my RCMH & compare it to last year or the year before, besides the brightness (thanks to the Mix Pre) listen to the mids/bass & tell me there isn't more presence or dynamics

This is not a valid compairison at all. You are assuming that the tonal differences are in the recorder, when the fact is, it's a different PA system, different weather conditions, different everything. How humid was this show last year as opposed to this year? The weather can effect your recording just as much, if not moreso, than your recorder can. I'm not saying that DSD recordings don't sound different or better than PCM recordings, but I am saying that you telling someone to listen to two recordings from two different sources to make the compairison is not valid (IMNSFHO).

It was indoors at a venue & spot we have both recorded at recording the same band, nor was it meant as a total scientific test. I was also speaking directly with the previous owner of the microphone, we are both obviously very comfortable with the recordings we have been making for the past 7 years prior to DSD.

[rokpunk]

It was indoors at a venue & spot we have both recorded at recording the same band, nor was it meant as a total scientific test. I was also speaking directly with the previous owner of the microphone, we are both obviously very comfortable with the recordings we have been making for the past 7 years prior to DSD.

All I'm saying is that you are ASSUMING the differences you are hearing are the DSD recorder, when in reality, you are listening to two completely different recordings. As far as this being an indoor show, there is still humidity at indoor shows.....and I'm sure you realize how much effect humidity has on recordings....especially on the highs and lows, like you are discribing sound different. I understand that this was not ment to be a scientific compairison, and I'm not saying that your results are not interesting....but I am saying that this compairison is not a valid way of compairing a DSD recording to PCM recording.

modify: upon thinking this over...who is to say that the sound company didn't get a new console or a new EQ from one year to the next, and *that* is the tonal differences you are hearing? I can tell you first hand that different consoles have much different sounds....my Midas boards sound much different than my Yamaha boards do. Again, I'm not saying that your compairison isn't interesting, I'm mearly saying that it's not a fair compairison.

[Stagger]

rokpunk,
Part of the issue here is that I owned the mic Carl has now for about 4-5 years so I am very farmiliar with its sound. I also have a schoeps copy of the show in question from another rig I am pretty farmiliar with so it helps. Granted, it would be eaier to have the output from the pre amp split, this still works better for me than it would most people.

[Nick's Picks]

so..why does DSD > PCM sound better than just PCM?

Look at it this way.
If you master something at 24/96, and then use the best software you have available to dither/shape/resample to 16/44, will it sound better than something you just mastered at 16/44 to begin with?
If you say yes, then you understand.
DSD at 1bit / 2.8 or 5.6mHz is a much higher resolution than 24/96.  And when you dumb it down to that PCM resolution (no matter what resolution), it still sounds better than if you mastered at the "target" resolution to begin with.

Same argument for R2R really.  that is higher fidelity, and most people would prefer to master w/the highest resolution possible...which yields better sounding results after the fact.

[Stagger]

so..why does DSD > PCM sound better than just PCM?

Look at it this way.
If you master something at 24/96, and then use the best software you have available to dither/shape/resample to 16/44, will it sound better than something you just mastered at 16/44 to begin with?
If you say yes, then you understand.

The answer is no actually... I only record in 24/96 because I can play it in both my home and my car. If I could not I would only record in 24/96 for archival purposes with the expectation of getting 24bit playback. If I was never planning on making the move to 24bit, I wouldn't bother recording on 24bit (see: Jeff Frank...did I just say that?).

After all of the dithering and resampling, I would say that you will, at the very best, get a file that sounds the same as a 16/44.1. At the worst, it will be worse.

[Nick's Picks]

I see.
aaahh well.
I was very content with 16bit recording and a good upsampling DAC.

Just one of those things Stagger.  You know what your recordings sound like, and you know when they sound better than par.
DSD took my par to more of a scratch game.

[Stagger]

Upsampling DACs and downsampling recordings aren't the same thing though. You use an upsampling DAC to improve the noisefloor and frequency response to aviod "bounce back" at the frequency and volume extreems in the D>A stage. You aren't adding or eliminating any usable music simply the environment that it is decoded in.

The very nature of downsampling music, however, is a subtractive one. You are fundimentally altering every aspect of the file. DSD>PCM is not quite the same as PCM>PCM because of the difference in word legnth vs. frequency and that is why I was trying to make it simple by calling it "noise shaping" (don't really feel like trying to find my copies of "The Physics of Sound" and the "Complete Guide to High End Audio" and formulate a more specific answer as its probably in storage after the move ). The content of downsampled music is different from the original. Put it this way. If you took down sampled music and put it in an upsampling DAC, would you get the original recording?

[Nick's Picks]

either way...
it all goes to show how foolish we are.
where is that old D5?

[Stagger]

either way...
it all goes to show how foolish we are.
where is that old D5?

Gimmie 2" reels any day!