Merlot DAC and Syrah Music Server

[Bruce B]

FWIW a friend of mine and I some years ago (2011 by memory) converted 3 natively recorded DSD64 files to PCM 16/44, 24/44, 24/88, and 24/176 and played them randomly back to each other blind.

We used Weiss Saracen for the conversion and paid particular care wrt dithering etc.

Neither of us could reliably distinguish between the DSD file and the higher bit rate PCM conversions. ie 24/88 and above. 16/44 could be reliably distinguished from 24/88 and above and unreliably from 24/44..

You wouldn't....

Weiss Saracon

 

[LarsS]

That mirrors my experience as well with Audio Gd product (eg the Reference 7) - they make very good mid fi products but are not what I regard as higher tier product. Good but not great is how I would categorise it. But even their entry level kit offers amazing value for money, however, and you get alot of sound for £, and alot of pounds for your $$ (just about everything Audio Gd makes is huge and heavy). I don't think Kingwa makes a bad product.

Yes, I agree, very good value for the investment. Machining, transformers (excellent) and all the other parts made it all worth it, sometimes thinking of replacing the analogue stage with something better and just see how good it eventually can be ...

 

[Blizzard]

it might be interesting to compare redbook or even dsd64 files upconverted to dsd256 by HQplayer with those same files up converted to dsd256 by Channel Classics or other dsd centric recording labels. might these pro's outdo the freeware from Jussi?

I have a bunch of those upconverted dsd64 to Quad files. but none redbook to Quad.

It might as long as you have the same source files they started with before the conversion. For example, the Doors "Infinite box set" was resampled to DSD 64 from the 24/96 PCM files that were created from master tape for the "Perception box set" They used the Weiss Saracon software. I prefer the 24/96 Perception box set resampled to DSD 64/128 and 256 with HQPLAYER, over the Infinite box set played natively. But to be fair, they may have applied a bit more EQ to the Perception releases.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/83212/The_Doors-Infinite-SACD_Box_Set

And BTW, it's not freeware. Just a free trial. It cost's $140 to buy. But it can enable lower priced DAC's to sound like DAC's costing $1000's more. So may just be the best deal in high end audio. And they are very close to having integration with Roon. This means once ready, the best GUI yet (PC and mobile app based), with Tidal integration, can be processed through Jussi's engine. The best of all worlds

You can follow the progress here:

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/hq-player-integration/1656

Another one I'm on the fence about buying and comparing is the DSD 64 version of The Oscar Peterson Trio's "We Get Requests". It was sourced fro 24/96 PCM files that were sourced from master tape. I have the 24/96 version and sounds stunning resampled to DSD 256 via HQ player.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/9...t_Requests-DSD_Single_Rate_28MHz64fs_Download

 

[andrew_stenhouse]

You wouldn't....

Weiss Saracon

I obviously wasn't aware of that. Thank you. Interesting thread.

Mind you, I'm not sure I can hear any benefit to PCM in advance of 24/88 (or 24/96) in any event. No doubt the limitations in my system and what's between the ears.

I'll quietly retire and leave the experts to it.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

.....
Another one I'm on the fence about buying and comparing is the DSD 64 version of The Oscar Peterson Trio's "We Get Requests". It was sourced fro 24/96 PCM files that were sourced from master tape. I have the 24/96 version and sounds stunning resampled to DSD 256 via HQ player.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/9...t_Requests-DSD_Single_Rate_28MHz64fs_Download

I do have a low gen amazing sounding 15ips, 1/4" master dub of 'We Get Requests' as well as a dsd128 and dsd64 from that tape. I also have the 45rpm pressing of that from that tape's earlier dub, as well as a couple of original pressings and even a mono original. and....a 2xdsd rip from the 45rpm.

it's a fine recording. the tape kills everything and shows just how far digital has to go. a very long ways.

 

[Blizzard]

I do have a low gen amazing sounding 15ips, 1/4" master dub of 'We Get Requests' as well as a dsd128 and dsd64 from that tape. I also have the 45rpm pressing of that from that tape's earlier dub, as well as a couple of original pressings and even a mono original. and....a 2xdsd rip from the 45rpm.

it's a fine recording. the tape kills everything and shows just how far digital has to go. a very long ways.

Which equipment was used to make the DSD copies? Perhaps if Bruce made a DSD 256 copy from the master 3 track tapes using his R2R connected to the Merging Hapi/Pyramix combo, your opinion would be a bit different.

This is where SOTA digital is at today. Any lesser gear is yesterday. Tomorrow will be even better.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Which equipment was used to make the DSD copies? Perhaps if Bruce made a DSD 256 copy from the master 3 track tapes using his R2R connected to the Merging Hapi/Pyramix combo, your opinion would be a bit different.

I've got 18 Quad dsd album files sourced from tape and dsd64 from some other good sources using that same gear. it's not what I hear from tape or vinyl.

This is where SOTA digital is at today. Any lesser gear is yesterday. Tomorrow will be even better.

'lesser gear'...hummmm?

maybe at some point you can describe your analog (vinyl and tape) references so I can understand where you are coming from.

 

[Andre Marc]

It might as long as you have the same source files they started with before the conversion. For example, the Doors "Infinite box set" was resampled to DSD 64 from the 24/96 PCM files that were created from master tape for the "Perception box set" They used the Weiss Saracon software. I prefer the 24/96 Perception box set resampled to DSD 64/128 and 256 with HQPLAYER, over the Infinite box set played natively. But to be fair, they may have applied a bit more EQ to the Perception releases.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/83212/The_Doors-Infinite-SACD_Box_Set

And BTW, it's not freeware. Just a free trial. It cost's $140 to buy. But it can enable lower priced DAC's to sound like DAC's costing $1000's more. So may just be the best deal in high end audio. And they are very close to having integration with Roon. This means once ready, the best GUI yet (PC and mobile app based), with Tidal integration, can be processed through Jussi's engine. The best of all worlds

You can follow the progress here:

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/hq-player-integration/1656

Another one I'm on the fence about buying and comparing is the DSD 64 version of The Oscar Peterson Trio's "We Get Requests". It was sourced fro 24/96 PCM files that were sourced from master tape. I have the 24/96 version and sounds stunning resampled to DSD 256 via HQ player.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/9...t_Requests-DSD_Single_Rate_28MHz64fs_Download

That is incorrect information regarding the Doors SACDs. They were NOT created from the 9624 files. They were done from the original analog tapes that Bruce Botnick personally
flew to Chad Kassem. The MULTI CHANNEL mixes were indeed done from 2496 files created from the multi-tracks.

 

[Blizzard]

I've got 18 Quad dsd album files sourced from tape and dsd64 from some other good sources using that same gear. it's not what I hear from tape or vinyl.



'lesser gear'...hummmm?

maybe at some point you can describe your analog (vinyl and tape) references so I can understand where you are coming from.

My question was what equipment was used to make the DSD copies? This matters. Just like the DAC's you use to play them back matter. The pro's who use the best equipment available today to make DSD 256 copies, have opinions that differ from yours. Just trying to figure out why.

 

[Blizzard]

That is incorrect information regarding the Doors SACDs. They were NOT created from the 9624 files. They were done from the original analog tapes that Bruce Botnick personally
flew to Chad Kassem. The MULTI CHANNEL mixes were indeed done from 2496 files created from the multi-tracks.

I've been trying to find more details on this for the last couple of years. Do you know what equipment was used to make them then?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

My question was what equipment was used to make the DSD copies? This matters. Just like the DAC's you use to play them back matter.

most of them came from here;

https://www.nativedsd.com/homepage/quad_dsd_music

mostly Yarlung tape sources,

and here;

http://spiritofturtle.com/

all dsd64 sources.

you can investigate what they used to up sample to Quad.

I also have a few HDTT Quad files described here;

http://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/pages/dsd-256

 

[Andre Marc]

I've been trying to find more details on this for the last couple of years. Do you know what equipment was used to make them then?

I have interviewed Chad Kassem several times and I spoke to Bruce Botnick as well. The tapes were flown in by Bruce, and the capture was done direct to DSD. I never did ask what ADC/workstation was used. You don't want to know how much Chad paid for those tapes.

I am not sure why posted as fact the stereo portion was upsampled from PCM. The great Doug Sax did the mastering along with Botnick from the analogs.

the Doors first album was the only one that was not analog. the reason being, as Botnick explained, is the original master runs fast, and was finally corrected after some 40 odd years with a digital remix.

FYI:
The surround sound program on the Doors SACDs comes from the original 96K, 24-bit files mixed and mastered by Bruce Botnick for the DVD Audio Doors/Perception release. Those mixes were made from the original 8-track, 15 i.p.s. analog master tapes, with the exception of The Doors, which was recorded on 4-track. For the SACDs, the mixes were then up-sampled without filters to DSD using the Weiss Saracon format converter and authored by Gus Skinas at the Super Audio Center.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

My question was what equipment was used to make the DSD copies? This matters. Just like the DAC's you use to play them back matter. The pro's who use the best equipment available today to make DSD 256 copies, have opinions that differ from yours. Just trying to figure out why.

but your perspective on analog performance matters, so your personal reference for tape and vinyl matters. what might that be?

no big deal if you'd rather not get into that. but understand that I'm comparing my digital performance to my analog. it's what I'm always asked about because that is what people want to know about. so if you are questioning my opinions on how my digital and analog compare, then I'd like to understand your reference for that same question.....so I can better understand your perspective.

 

[Blizzard]

I have interviewed Chad Kassem several times and I spoke to Bruce Botnick as well. The tapes were flown in by Bruce, and the capture was done direct to DSD. I never did ask what ADC/workstation was used. You don't want to know how much Chad paid for those tapes.

I am not sure why posted as fact the stereo portion was upsampled from PCM. The great Doug Sax did the mastering along with Botnick from the analogs.

the Doors first album was the only one that was not analog. the reason being, as Botnick explained, is the original master runs fast, and was finally corrected after some 40 odd years with a digital remix.



FYI:
The surround sound program on the Doors SACDs comes from the original 96K, 24-bit files mixed and mastered by Bruce Botnick for the DVD Audio Doors/Perception release. Those mixes were made from the original 8-track, 15 i.p.s. analog master tapes, with the exception of The Doors, which was recorded on 4-track. For the SACDs, the mixes were then up-sampled without filters to DSD using the Weiss Saracon format converter and authored by Gus Skinas at the Super Audio Center.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm not sure why it's not clearer on the Acoustic sounds website. Either way I do like the perception box set better. But it may be due to sprucing it up a bit with remixing and EQ.

 

[Blizzard]

most of them came from here;

https://www.nativedsd.com/homepage/quad_dsd_music

mostly Yarlung tape sources,

and here;

http://spiritofturtle.com/

all dsd64 sources.

you can investigate what they used to up sample to Quad.

I also have a few HDTT Quad files described here;

http://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/pages/dsd-256

There's very little DSD 256 selection out there so far. And it's really hard without having the same tape as the DSD 256 was sourced from, to compare. And if your using Jriver to play them back, that it a bottleneck as well adding another veil to the sound. Try Hqplayer. I only use Jriver for parties because of Jremote.

 

[Andre Marc]

Thanks for the clarification. I'm not sure why it's not clearer on the Acoustic sounds website. Either way I do like the perception box set better. But it may be due to sprucing it up a bit with remixing and EQ.

The 96/24 files in my opinion are the definitive version of the Doors studio albums.

It is a noble gesture to produce SACDs with minimal tweaking from original masters, but the lack of any compression imo makes these, and the Norah Jones SACDs sound dull, and powerless. I compared the Norah SACDs to the 24/192 downloads and the 24/192s were much preferable.

As I said it sounds good on paper, but craftily applied compression during mastering is basically essential on all but the most zippy tales.

 

[Blizzard]

but your perspective on analog performance matters, so your personal reference for tape and vinyl matters. what might that be?

no big deal if you'd rather not get into that. but understand that I'm comparing my digital performance to my analog. it's what I'm always asked about because that is what people want to know about. so if you are questioning my opinions on how my digital and analog compare, then I'd like to understand your reference for that same question.....so I can better understand your perspective.

I personally don't have any analog gear in my system. I'm just basing the state of where digital is at today on the opinions of pros who work with master tapes on a day to day basis. I put a lot of weight on their opinion. The reason why is because if you don't have all the gear at your disposal, there's no way to really compare.

 

[Blizzard]

The 96/24 files in my opinion are the definitive version of the Doors studio albums.

It is a noble gesture to produce SACDs with minimal tweaking from original masters, but the lack of any compression imo makes these, and the Norah Jones SACDs sound dull, and powerless. I compared the Norah SACDs to the 24/192 downloads and the 24/192s were much preferable.

As I said it sounds good on paper, but craftily applied compression during mastering is basically essential on all but the most zippy tales.

Yeah that's what DxD is great for. As far as DSP for DSD, the next gen multibit DSD editing gear will be a game changer.

 

[Blizzard]

So I took the plunge and bought the DSD64 version of "We Get Requests" By The Oscar Peterson Trio. With our Canadian monopoly money that's decreasing in value on a daily basis, it cost me $35! The DAC used for the audition is a new DAC I had built using the AK4490 chip. I have it setup to completely bypass all internal filtering and SDM modulation in the chip with DSD. It just goes straight to the lowpass filter with no processing for the purest sound possible from a DAC chip.

Well I must say if I could return it back I would. It sounds great, But I'm getting better sound from the 24/96 PCM version using HQplayer to resample to DSD 64, 128 and 256. This is the last time I ever buy an DSD album that's sourced from PCM.

 

[amirm]

Well I must say if I could return it back I would. It sounds great, But I'm getting better sound from the 24/96 PCM version using HQplayer to resample to DSD 64, 128 and 256. This is the last time I ever buy an DSD album that's sourced from PCM.

I am wondering why the first time happened