Floored by the quality of these DSD masterings

[b345t]

Rare Classical and Jazz music in Audiophile Sound

High Resolution Downloads, Classical Music, Jazz Music, Rare Audiophile, DSD Downloads, Pure Audio. Blu ray Audio

www.highdeftapetransfers.ca

I just stumbled upon High Definition Tape Transfers by luck and for some reason had never heard of them before. They are not usually mentioned when comparing the 'best' masterings version of certain albums. On many albums they are transferring directly from tape to DSD and mastered in DSDX4 with no PCM step. In the cases where the tape may be damaged or there is an important aspect to edit, they convert the DSD to DXD (and then back to DSD). They have a variety of sample rates and versions to choose from. I bought four albums to test last night:

Stan Getz & João Gilberto
Duke Ellington & John Coltrane
Bill Evans Trio - Waltz For Debby
Billie Holiday - Lady In Satin

Let me preface my thoughts on these by letting you know that I don't have a vinyl rig and am only comparing them to other Digital versions I have have. All four are the best version of the album I have heard. The stand-out album from these is the Ellington Coltrane. It is hauntingly good. It makes the AP SACD version sound 'broken' in comparison. Outstanding clarity. And Billie Holiday's voice, amazing silence around her.. Makes the vocal bloom so naturally.

Just sharing my recent find, they have ALOT of classical music too.

 

[RCanelas]

Rare Classical and Jazz music in Audiophile Sound

High Resolution Downloads, Classical Music, Jazz Music, Rare Audiophile, DSD Downloads, Pure Audio. Blu ray Audio

www.highdeftapetransfers.ca

I just stumbled upon High Definition Tape Transfers by luck and for some reason had never heard of them before. They are not usually mentioned when comparing the 'best' masterings version of certain albums. On many albums they are transferring directly from tape to DSD and mastered in DSDX4 with no PCM step. In the cases where the tape may be damaged or there is an important aspect to edit, they convert the DSD to DXD (and then back to DSD). They have a variety of sample rates and versions to choose from. I bought four albums to test last night:

Stan Getz & João Gilberto
Duke Ellington & John Coltrane
Bill Evans Trio - Waltz For Debby
Billie Holiday - Lady In Satin

Let me preface my thoughts on these by letting you know that I don't have a vinyl rig and am only comparing them to other Digital versions I have have. All four are the best version of the album I have heard. The stand-out album from these is the Ellington Coltrane. It is hauntingly good. It makes the AP SACD version sound 'broken' in comparison. Outstanding clarity. And Billie Holiday's voice, amazing silence around her.. Makes the vocal bloom so naturally.

Just sharing my recent find, they have ALOT of classical music too.

Thanks for sharing.

Have you been able to compare the higest grade dsd download to a 24/96 pcm version? I assume it is the same tape transfer, so it would be a really cool comparison.

 

[b345t]

Thanks for sharing.

Have you been able to compare the higest grade dsd download to a 24/96 pcm version? I assume it is the same tape transfer, so it would be a really cool comparison.

I'll be back home tomorrow and will download a 24/96 to test it out.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

if given a choice for the native resolution of the transfer, i very slightly prefer 24/352 dxd to 4xdsd 256. but once it's transferred to either, i want that file. not wanting any more processing.

stay native from the original transfer.

i'd guess every server and dac, and maybe even each system, has their sweet spot. some systems benefit from the little bit more smooth dsd. other systems can enjoy the slightly higher resolution of pcm. and there is personal preference. both can be outstanding.

 

[b345t]

if given a choice for the native resolution of the transfer, i very slightly prefer 24/352 dxd to 4xdsd 256. but once it's transferred to either, i want that file. not wanting any more processing.

stay native from the original transfer.

i'd guess every server and dac, and maybe even each system, has their sweet spot. some systems benefit from the little bit more smooth dsd. other systems can enjoy the slightly higher resolution of pcm. and there is personal preference. both can be outstanding.

Yes I agree, if the pcm step has taken place, no need to add another step again. Just keep the 24/352 DXD file.

I don't have enough experience to say that I prefer a 24/352 file to 4xdsd on the original transfer from tape. But I am guessing like you said that it is system dependant and subjective.

On paper, the 4xdsd should be 'higher resolution' being 256x44.1 vs DXD which is 8x44.1 . But then there is the question of gear and such, referring to the original ADC from tape and finally the playback in a system's DAC.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Yes I agree, if the pcm step has taken place, no need to add another step again. Just keep the 24/352 DXD file.

I don't have enough experience to say that I prefer a 24/352 file to 4xdsd on the original transfer from tape. But I am guessing like you said that it is system dependant and subjective.

On paper, the 4xdsd should be 'higher resolution' being 256x44.1 vs DXD which is 8x44.1 . But then there is the question of gear and such, referring to the original ADC from tape and finally the playback in a system's DAC.

use to be pcm dac chips had lots of noise. so dsd had an advantage. now that advantage is gone, and the additional tools and ease of use with pcm pushes it a bit ahead. the only remaining advantage of dsd is it's smaller files.

then there is the issue that streaming is pcm only at this point.

but some just like dsd. it's all good. not a night and day difference at the top of the food chain.

 

[b345t]

I agree, I have some amazing DXD files and I love them. But the mastering does make a profound difference. I wanted to share how good these files sound. I don't personally mind if it is a 44.1 or a 4xDSD. The majority of time, the best formats are higher resolution; but if for some reason I like a lower resolution master, that is the one I am listening to.

 

[matthias]

On paper, the 4xdsd should be 'higher resolution' being 256x44.1 vs DXD which is 8x44.1

Not quite correct. In comparison DXD would be 192x44.1

Matt

 

[b345t]

Not quite correct. In comparison DXD would be 192x44.1

Matt

Interesting, how did you find that ? I'm just quoting what I read at nativedsd.com

• DXD: 24 or 32/352.8 kHz PCM .wav or .flac, aka 8 times redbook
• High Res PCM: 24 or 32/384 kHz .wav
• DSD 64 (aka DSD) is a 2.8 MHz .dsf file, which is 64 times 44.1 kHz
• DSD 128 (aka Double (2x) DSD) is a 5.6 MHz .dsf file, 128 times 44.1 kHz
• DSD 256 (aka Quad (4x) DSD) is a 11.2 MHz .dsf file, 256 times 44.1 kHz

 

[matthias]

@b345t
DXD 24bit/352.8kHz is (24 x 352.8)kbps is 8.4672Mbps
DSD256 is 11.2896Mbps

So the difference in the bit rate per second between DXD and DSD256 is not so big.

Matt

 

[Alrainbow]

Native most times rules keeping less artifacts
Now what mike is using I’ll bet shows lesser dacs what might be best
I’ve tried Dxd it’s good but I’m not what’s correct

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I agree, I have some amazing DXD files and I love them. But the mastering does make a profound difference. I wanted to share how good these files sound. I don't personally mind if it is a 44.1 or a 4xDSD. The majority of time, the best formats are higher resolution; but if for some reason I like a lower resolution master, that is the one I am listening to.

seems like the simplest signal path for recording and mic'ing, and live type venue, along with native resolution is more significant than the format.

but all other things being equal, the sampling rate and bit depth does matter. they rarely are equal.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

@b345t
DXD 24bit/352.8kHz is (24 x 352.8)kbps is 8.4672Mbps
DSD256 is 11.2896Mbps

So the difference between DXD and DSD256 is not so big.

Matt

one is single bit with less math (simpler), one is 24 bit with more math (potentially more bits/data).....which takes more space to store.

so they are really different levels of data.

 

[matthias]

one is single bit with less math (simpler), one is 24 bit with more math (potentially more bits/data).....which takes more space to store.

so they are really different levels of data.

...and now is mixing in pure DSD possible:

Mixing in Pure DSD - No PCM Allowed - NativeDSD Music

Written by Rushton Paul for Positive Feedback Original Source: Positive Feedback For years I’ve been told that it is not possible to mix in DSD—that this is one of the major limitations of recording in DSD. Well, I’m now learning from Tom Caulfield, mastering engineer for NativeDSD, and Gonzalo...

www.nativedsd.com

Matt

 

[Bruce B]

Yes I agree, if the pcm step has taken place, no need to add another step again. Just keep the 24/352 DXD file.

I don't have enough experience to say that I prefer a 24/352 file to 4xdsd on the original transfer from tape. But I am guessing like you said that it is system dependant and subjective.

On paper, the 4xdsd should be 'higher resolution' being 256x44.1 vs DXD which is 8x44.1 . But then there is the question of gear and such, referring to the original ADC from tape and finally the playback in a system's DAC.

I'm not going into semantics, but you can not master in DSD without going to PCM... UNLESS, you take a signal from the tape machine directly into an analog console and capture in DSD. Once it's in DSD, any changes will convert to PCM at some point!

I mastered 24 albums in DXD for FIM and the files sizes are huge! 24 and 32bit at 352kHz is a VERY large file. This is the format that DSD is converted to in the workstations that most use.

 

[Alrainbow]

from what I’ve read and ill
Take Bruce totally as true. I did read where they stop the stream before adjusting and then continue
now Bruce is this true or more bull. I will trust you

 

[RCanelas]

I'll be back home tomorrow and will download a 24/96 to test it out.

Do you have a way to do the compare 'blind'? I would expect to hear only the difference (if any) of the dac implementation, but bias is a tricky thing that sits above us all, looking down with an ill conceived, yellow smile.
Given the amount of positive mystical praise anything slightly more exotic than what common mortals consume gets in our hobby, I always try to remove the expectation bias from my comparisons. It has served me well IMO.

 

[matthias]

I'm not going into semantics, but you can not master in DSD without going to PCM...

What do you think about the link I posted in post #14. It seems to be possible with HQPlayer Pro...

Matt

 

[Bruce B]

What do you think about the link I posted in post #14. It seems to be possible with HQPlayer Pro...

Matt

You can not alter a 1-bit DSD signal without adding bits.... they are not altering the original signal, just using HQPlayer to do the routing. They are using the same software I use... Pyramix and HQP...

 

[microstrip]

one is single bit with less math (simpler), one is 24 bit with more math (potentially more bits/data).....which takes more space to store.

so they are really different levels of data.

I think it is not so easy as that. In order to convert analog to one single bit you need a lot of math ... DSD conversion is intrinsically math intensive, as it needs digital filters to remove oversampling noise.

I remember that when DSD was presented, independently of opinions on sound quality, there were strong debates and some professional audio experts considered that DSD was intrinsically flawed.

Surely, high.end audiophiles are known to appreciate processes that add noise to the signal.