DSD ?

Some people say DSD is brilliant, some not. I have yet to make the distinction because there is such a scarcity of material on DSD I want to listen to. People in my acquaintance whose ears seem reliable have so far all dismissed DSD on audition. If DSD has turned out well sonically, this is a nice coincidence, given that the driving force for its development was copy protection and watermarking.  DVD-A was just fine. Why go to all that extra trouble? Lots of technical arguments were put forward. The usual numbers and other data – impressive but meaningless. Distrust of the legitimate music buying public remained the obsession.

The audiophile end of the sales curve is really tiny. We may feel big and spend big but we don't account for a lot of volume.  Multiple formats in multiple delivery systems only serves two purposes for the people who want our money; they can sell us the same safe and low profit risk  stuff many times over and they can also not commit to significant output of high resolution, high quality material across the board because it’s all too confusing and split too many ways.

Thanks Harry - i've heard some DSD material but it was music i didn't know and more 'audiophile' demo material than anything musically satisfying.

It looks to be a bit of a PITA so i'll watch from the sidelines and see how things develop 

James

I am plenty happy with well-mastered CDs.

SACD, DVD-A or high resolution downloads have on occasion sounded better to my ears. But I am now convinced that was due to improvements in the remastering process, and not necessarily to more frequent sample rates or larger sample sizes.  IMO, higher resolution is absolutely needed for the recording side of things, and I will continue to record my vinyl in DSD128. But I will continue to convert  to 24/88.2 PCM for playback, and even that is very likely overkill. My records don't need the dynamic range of 24 bit samples, and a sampling rate of 44.1kHz captures more range than my ears can hear.

IMO, if the quality of high resolution playback (i.e., anything beyond CD) were immediate and obvious, then it would already have full adoption in the audiophile community, and at least partial acceptance beyond. Instead, it remains a topic of debate on audio forums and, truthfully, anything beyond 320kbps remains overkill in the mass consumer world.  I think there are two main reasons for this: 1) it is relatively hard to hear these differences (even if you've spent a lot on audio equipment), and 2) the cost of downloads is way too high.  

Let's see, we can stream millions of songs at 320kbps through Spotify for $9.99/month, or we can buy one 24/192 download for 3x that amount? Really? And we don't get to know the provenance of the download, nor can we resell it should we decide later that we don't like it. Really??  What a deal! 

Finally, I would refer you to some of the recent comments by Robb Watts of Chord Hugo fame, and how the design of this new dac basically eliminates any advantages (beyond improved remastering) of high resolution PCM versus Red Book standard (i.e., he claims to have invented an algorithm that nearly perfectly reconstructs an analog wave signal from 16/44.1).  He is also no fan of DSD -- the Hugo converts DSD to PCM internally, and has extra work to do filtering out DSD's high frequency noise. It's just one guy's opinion, but Watts has become very influential recently because of Chord's recent success (not to mention his earlier successes with Chord, along with his 30 year history of selling IP to chip manufacturers).

Sorry for the long, and less than enthusiastic reply. I must be getting old, because I am finding that I have less and less tolerance for what I see as format/resolution hype -- a chase for bigger numbers with no real payback in better musical recordings. But if others perceive higher value than I do, and are enjoying high resolution playback, please don't let my comments concern you! My only wish is for all of us to enjoy music as much as possible.

ATB.

Hook

So it is better to upgrade your current systems to a better one then investing in highres for your current system.

I'm in the same place as the very well stated post by Hook. I've dabbled in some of the high-res and DSD files, but as others have found, they are often performances outside of the mainstream, so there is no handy reference point. I have downloaded and compared several of the works on the 2L site, and I do find improvements going up the resolution scale. The issues of price and lack of a physical object have been highlighted and have discouraged me from investigating further.

Of my approximately 2000 CDs, I can think of perhaps a handful that are dual layer CD / SACD. I would like to be able to extract the SACD layer, since I've paid for it, but I don't know anyone with the requisite Playstation. Wat is fortunate in that he has access to such a device and seems to have constituted quite a collection of DSDs. And that is what it comes down to, the format of your collection.

My cassette collection is sitting in a suitcase in the basement, my LPs are stacked (vertically) unused waiting for the day when I (perhaps) decide to do something with my LP12. Meanwhile, I've never been buying as many CDs wherever I can find them. Amazon is your friend ! CDs remain, for me, the handiest format in which to own a physical object (it is after all a collection), to lend to a friend, to bring in the car or to carry to work. And I get a neat little printed booklet to study, well for the classical stuff anyway. Ripped to the UnitiServe, the disc becomes available to the household, with the occasional MP3 version dropboxed to my son.

The quality of the sound I'm getting from 16/44 has steadily improved as I've moved from the CDX to the CDS2 to the UnitiServe with the Naim DAC. The Naim DAC was an eye-opener for me in 2010, because I finally felt that I was at last "hearing right to the bottom of the bits" and I thought at that time that any better resolution could only be had by going high-res. I didn't really understand that it is all about reconstruction of the original signal, i.e., reconstructing the missing information. As many digital designers are now eloquently demonstrating, there is better listening through better algorithms. You only have to look as far as cellphones to note the improvement in voice reconstruction algorithms. My previous phone was a sonic disaster, the sound physically hurt my ears.

I like what Rob Watts has done with the Hugo and I'm really looking forward to hear what the mathematicians at Naim will come up with. 16/44 hasn't had it's last word.

Jan

I agree with both of you. When I was trying to find some DSD files for the PS Audio DAC/Hugo trial I was very disappointed by the type of music available. Most seemed to be acoustic music and I could find nothing by any artist I recognised. So, I see little point in even thinking about DSD ATM.

Steve

I also agree with the last 2 posts.

If there was a plethora of material available on DSD then I might make more of an effort.

I own approx 40 hi res albums in 24 bit 96, 192 Hz and in general they are very impressive.

However,  the sound quality I am achieving from red book cd is amazing and I cannot stop buying CDs. 

I only have 500 albums ripped at the moment, so many hundreds/thousands still exist out there for me. 

Not to mention the artists not in my catalogue yet!

I will be very happy to buy CDs for the foreseeable future and enjoy 

Anton

 Steve , Anton

I don't know what you are looking for, but with this search engine here 

http://www.findhdmusic.com/alb...rch?q=&fmt_dsd=1

you can check who has what artists/albums in DSD format.

cheers

Aleg

I'm afraid I disagree totally with Hook. My HD downloads, now numbering about 100, are entertaining me far more than their red book equivalents, despite the hardware deficit, US/V1Dac  versus CD555 and 2*555ps. It's a bit like the 'Old Grey Whistle Test' - the music is imprinting itself on my brain anew. 

In my view, there is something significant going on!

I understand where Hook is coming from. The reality check is by no means confined to Hires, providence has always been and will always be paramount regardless of format. But there is some Hires stuff which is truly wonderful and kicks its 16/44 siblings into the weeds. Sadly not nearly enough of it. Since the DAC/555PS moved in, CD has never sounded so good to me, and the NDS which now rules my roost has taken 16/44 replay to places that I never knew existed. But 24bit can be better still - if the material is well recorded. Moving Pictures Hook? 

Harry, are you saying that 16/44 via NDS is better, in your opinion, than CD555? 

From a purely subjective POV David, yes.Your mileage may vary. But I haven't lived with a CD555. I've spent a total of a little over three afternoons with one, over a few years. The thing about the CD555 for me is that impressive and capable though it obviously is, Helen and I have never really warmed to it. Had streaming not left turned us, we would have had a CDS3, lived happily with the comparatively soft edges and kept a lot of money in our pockets. The NDS is a kind of spiritual successor to the CDS3 but it swaggers with more ability and confidence. And on well rendered 16/44 it's the best I've heard. For what that's worth.

Hi Harry -

Rush's best IMHO, but I only have it on vinyl!

Are you comparing the CD versus the DVD-A from the 2011 "Deluxe" remaster? 

ATB.

Hook

There you go man, keep as cool as you can. Face piles of trials with smiles; it riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave. That's what I say anyway.

Sorry Hook. For some reason I thought you had Moving Pictures in 24bit. Yes, I'm comparing the ripped 24bit version from the DVD deluxe edition with all my other CD versions (most of which are now sold). I never got hold of the MFSL CD. The last tranche of remasters were a travesty, although some albums suffered more than others, Moving Pictures seemingly unaffected.

I would like to add that the well recorder hd material I have does easily surpass my red book titles.

Im currently listening to the HD Tracks sample album, I converted it to WAV before copying to NAS. 

Its excellent I will say. Truly wonderful sound! 

Anton