Paul McGowan/PS Audio DSD is all about FOMO

[Andre Marc]

FOMO:

By Paul McGowan/PS Audio

"Fear Of Missing Out. Yes, there’s a new acronym in town and one that seems to be applicable here at CES. Today’s my last day in Las Vegas at the Consumer Electronics Show and just about every manufacturer I speak to asks me the same question: “Why is everyone so anxious about DSD in their DACS?”

It’s not like there’s an overwhelming amount of music available in DSD just waiting to be played. In fact, there’s not a lot. Sure, some folks have it available for download. Sure, most of my readers know I think DSD is the better of the formats in digital audio and recording. Sure, I think new DACS should have it available. But to get obsessed with it right now? Why? How many pieces of DSD music do you actually own? I think I have a total of about ten loaded onto my computer.

Fear Of Missing Out is a powerful motivator in any field. Whether we want or need something doesn’t always enter into the equation. What does get in is that we don’t want to miss out on the latest technology or the newest thing. I am not suggesting that’s a bad thing, heck I fall into that trap as well.

Just an observation."


http://www.pstracks.com/pauls-posts/foma/12955/

 

[sc53]

Yeah and FOMA should have been FOMO from the get go. He's changed the title of his post now.

 

[garylkoh]

Ha! Absolutely!

It was the question most frequently asked when I demo'ed digital music this CES was "What's the format?" Because I want the listener to focus on the music and not just the sound, my G-Source does not display format/sample-rate info. About the only hint would be the cover art being shown. I demo'ed one well-performed, well-recorded mp3 among my playlist, and it sounded like high-rez to appreciative audiences. Switching from that particular mp3 track to a 24/96 or DSD immediately after was never an issue if the listener did not know that it was an mp3.

 

[Andre Marc]

Yeah and FOMA should have been FOMO from the get go. He's changed the title of his post now.

Me too!!!

 

[Andre Marc]

Ha! Absolutely!

It was the question most frequently asked when I demo'ed digital music this CES was "What's the format?" Because I want the listener to focus on the music and not just the sound, my G-Source does not display format/sample-rate info. About the only hint would be the cover art being shown. I demo'ed one well-performed, well-recorded mp3 among my playlist, and it sounded like high-rez to appreciative audiences. Switching from that particular mp3 track to a 24/96 or DSD immediately after was never an issue if the listener did not know that it was an mp3.

Yes, Gary, this hobby is filled with formatists.

 

[mep]

Who wants to plunk down money for a new component only to find out it's really obsolete with regards to capabilities? Even if you currently don't have any DSD files, do you really want to buy a new DAC that isn't capable of playing DSD files? Maybe if you turn your gear every month like some people do it doesn't matter. If you normally keep your gear for at least several years, it might matter.

 

[Elberoth]

It is again like in mid 90's, when every DAC had to be 24/96 capable to sell, even though there was almost no software that could be played (that were the pre-PC audio times, and the only format on the horison was DVD-Audio and regular DVDs with 24/96 soundtrack).

 

[microstrip]

Who wants to plunk down money for a new component only to find out it's really obsolete with regards to capabilities? Even if you currently don't have any DSD files, do you really want to buy a new DAC that isn't capable of playing DSD files? Maybe if you turn your gear every month like some people do it doesn't matter. If you normally keep your gear for at least several years, it might matter.

Mep,
Sometime ago I had the same idea as you. However, after I got informed about DSD I bought a top PCM player. If I need a DSD player by 2017, I am sure that a $500 DSD only DAC will sound better than the current $5k ones.

 

[Andre Marc]

It is again like in mid 90's, when every DAC had to be 24/96 capable to sell, even though there was almost no software that could be played (that were the pre-PC audio times, and the only format on the horison was DVD-Audio and regular DVDs with 24/96 soundtrack).

There is a huge difference. In the mid to late 90s they started to archive master tapes at 48/88.2/96 Khz 24 bit, which meant that there was a back catalog of
music in that format that was built up. Not so with DSD.

 

[Elberoth]

Not arguing with that. What I'm saying is that there was almost no software then, and there is almost no software now. It will take years to DSD to get popular (if ever), and in that time, as Microstrip commented - $500 DSD only DAC will sound better than the current $5k ones.

I have the MSB DAC, which is DSD capable, and I'm not sure if I played more than 10 DSD tracks on it (just to see if it works).

 

[Andre Marc]

Not arguing with that. What I'm saying is that there was almost no software then, and there is almost no software now. It will take years to DSD to get popular (if ever), and in that time, as Microstrip commented - $500 DSD only DAC will sound better than the current $5k ones.

I have the MSB DAC, which is DSD capable, and I'm not sure if I played more than 10 DSD tracks on it (just to see if it works).

I guess what I am saying is that it was simply a matter of time before the 24 bit vaults opened up..these were the digital files that the last 20 years of CDs
were mastered from.

Agree, that a $500 DSD DAC down the road will probably out perform units today with a built in FOMO premium.

 

[Lee]

I guess what I am saying is that it was simply a matter of time before the 24 bit vaults opened up..these were the digital files that the last 20 years of CDs
were mastered from.

Agree, that a $500 DSD DAC down the road will probably out perform units today with a built in FOMO premium.

Depending on how "real" Sony is (the $64K question), there are tons of DSD files as well, even well beyond released SACDs.

I'm excited about DSD. It sounds too damn good not to be excited.

 

[mep]

Depending on how "real" Sony is (the $64K question), there are tons of DSD files as well, even well beyond released SACDs.

I'm excited about DSD. It sounds too damn good not to be excited.

+1 which is why I wouldn't consider any DAC that couldn't play back DSD files.

 

[thedudeabides]

Isn't DSD the format used on SACD's?

GG

 

[Elberoth]

I guess what I am saying is that it was simply a matter of time before the 24 bit vaults opened up..these were the digital files that the last 20 years of CDs
were mastered from.

Agree, that a $500 DSD DAC down the road will probably out perform units today with a built in FOMO premium.

And yet, it took good 12-15 years before the first HiRes downloads become available, and even now, almost 20 years later, most available downloads are still 16/44.

 

[Al M.]

Isn't DSD the format used on SACD's?

GG

Yes it is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD

 

[Bruce B]

Isn't DSD the format used on SACD's?

GG

Yes, and I've been ripping them for HDtracks for about 4yr. now.

 

[Andre Marc]

And yet, it took good 12-15 years before the first HiRes downloads become available, and even now, almost 20 years later, most available downloads are still 16/44.

Well, there was a very good reason. There was no high speed internet in most homes, no bandwidth, and storage was expensive..NOT the case today.

I just bought a 2TB drive for 100 bucks.

And you nailed it, the reason most lossless downloads (which are a TINY fraction of commercially available downloads) are 44.1 is total indifference.

 

[Al M.]

I have never had the fear of missing out. I have never owned an SACD or a hi-rez file. In fact, I have always avoided to even hear an SACD or a hi-rez file. Why? Because as a fervent music lover I always hated the idea that one day I might have my music choices dictated by format preferences rather than interest in the musical performance itself (I also listen to crappy sounding recordings like Dorati's cycle of Haydn symphonies, because I find the music making more important than sound). And I never wanted to have the sad feeling of knowing "what could have been" had CD been a higher resolution format from the get-go. Instead, I chose to optimize playback of the standard music format of our time, which is CD for better or for worse. I consciously chose to align my audiophile instincts with my musical ones.

Certainly, I would have loved for SACD to succeed, and I would have been ready to replace my CDs with SACDs if it did. But I never bothered with the format since I knew that, even after that billion-dollar investment by Sony, it would still be a flop. And I was right. The digital train had long left the station for most ordinary listeners, and that train was CD.

Audiophiles who believe that hi-rez will ever catch on are absolutely deluding themselves. This will never happen. Sure, even major labels may continue to put out 'teasers' for audiophiles, like DGG classical does with some performances, because that way they might make some money too. But this is a niche market and always will be, and the major labels know it -- putting everything out in hi-rez would lose them money. That is why the bulk of their output will always be CD. Record labels know what the real world wants, and that is CD (or mp3, heaven forbid). That is also why, when the Zappa Familiy Trust decided to put out in 2012 new remasterings of Frank Zappa albums (30 of them), remasterings that are gorgeous with a number of them done in DSD format, they put them out on CD only -- no SACD or 24/192. And guess what, I have the CD player combo to actually play them, how's that?

Audiophiles who claim there is already a substantial catalog of SACD or other hi-rez are kidding themselves as well. Let's see: 99.5 % of the musical performances that I have are not available in higher-rez than CD. Even if I would take any other interpretation of the classical music that I listen to, rather than the specific interpretations that I have, on SACD or other hi-rez, 90-95 % (closer to 95 %) of all my music would still only be available on CD (I listen to a lot of modern, contemporary and avantgarde classical music). And no, I am not interested in just "any" interpretation of the standard repertoire.

Thus, I rather chose to be pleasantly surprised by what CD, the format of all my music, can do. And in the last two years my jaw has dropped several times on CD performance, first with acoustic treatment of my room, then with the acquisition of the Berkeley Alpha DAC 2, and most recently with BorderPatrol MB external power supplies for my amps which allow the unbelievable resolution from CD through my Berkeley Alpha DAC 2 to be heard much more fully, see my review of the BorderPatrol power supplies for the incredible amount of information that can be extracted from CD on my system:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...trol-MB-external-power-supplies-for-tube-amps

I am now a really happy man with CD, the standard music medium of our time, and I am even less than ever interested to know "what could have been". I will probably die without ever having heard hi-rez, and I'll do so being happy to have led the musical life I lead.

 

[mep]

II am now a really happy man with CD, the standard music medium of our time, and I am even less than ever interested to know "what could have been". I will probably die without ever having heard hi-rez, and I'll do so being happy to have led the musical life I lead.

As long as your happy with your head stuck in the CD sand, that's all that matters.