Why do high up-sampling/ over-sampling rates (DSD,) kill PRAT and aliveness of music? Any ideas?

[microstrip]

(...) There must be some reason why SONY converted its master tapes to quad DSD. The vinyl versions are quite listenable, but the quad DSD is just real.(...)

Is it expected that Sony will release quad DSD recordings to consumers?

 

[Al M.]

Rob is a very nice guy, but hates DSD. He has never heard proper DSD and Chord Dacs dont sound good on DSD. I know, as I have one and heard them all. Nobody who has beard DSD doen right can say it that it does not sound good and indeed BETTER than PCM on some genres.

Finally, upsampling to DSD256 in Linux and DSD512 in Windows is extraordinaryly good on a lot of material.

Define "good" and "better" please. By which criteria? Tonality, dynamics, soundstage, presence, timbral resolution, rhythm & timing, and so on?

Also, do you experience too much softness with DSD, or you find it sound right? Or do you experience too much hardness with PCM, or do you find it sound right? Or does it depend more on the recording/mastering than the format? And how does all this compare with unamplified live music, in your view?

You see, if all these questions are not addressed, then "good" or "better" becomes mere personal taste, and meaningless in terms of an objective assessment of quality.

 

[Fiddle Faddle]

I first thought it a bit odd that the originator of the Chord Dave DAC, Rob Watts, decided to post his very erudite thoughts on a headphone blog.

I was wondering the same thing myself. When I use headphones it is only out of necessity. When Rob goes on about the merits or otherwise of DSD soundstaging I cannot reconcile such considerations at all to headphone use! And yes, I have heard the very best of the world's headphones and the soundstaging is as flat as a pancake or non-existent regardless (take your pick). It just makes any mention of DSD soundstaging as all but irrelevant in that context to my way of thinking. But I do understand Chord products have become extremely popular with headphone users thanks to their latest portable devices.

 

[TBG]

Define "good" and "better" please. By which criteria? Tonality, dynamics, soundstage, presence, timbral resolution, rhythm & timing, and so on?

Also, do you experience too much softness with DSD, or you find it sound right? Or do you experience too much hardness with PCM, or do you find it sound right? Or does it depend more on the recording/mastering than the format? And how does all this compare with unamplified live music, in your view?

You see, if all these questions are not addressed, then "good" or "better" becomes mere personal taste, and meaningless in terms of an objective assessment of quality.

It would be lovely to be able to say that system A gets a 57 while system B gets a 93, but THD has shown that is just nonsense.

My standard is that the sound stage I have now is very precise in all three dimensions and that often the recording is good enough to make be feel the performers are before med or alternatively the recording was made in the room just behind my speakers.

Along time ago I had Infinity ServoStatic 1s with ARC Dual 75s and a SP-3 with a 'good' phono stage and Technics table and arm and Decca London cartridge. I thought I was at the point of realism with my system although it was through two windows to the recording studio.

Now I know I was nowhere near realism. I find the H-Cat X-10 preamp and amp, the Tripoint Troy Signature and Thor SE grounding cables, High Fidelity Cables and PCs, the Star Sound Tech Rhytm racks and platforms, and Audio Points, BMC Arcadias speakers, and the Avari JFet dac with a music player providing quad DSD mainly from SACDs allowing this. Of course I have CDs that have been upsampled to DSD.

 

[wisnon]

Define "good" and "better" please. By which criteria? Tonality, dynamics, soundstage, presence, timbral resolution, rhythm & timing, and so on?

Also, do you experience too much softness with DSD, or you find it sound right? Or do you experience too much hardness with PCM, or do you find it sound right? Or does it depend more on the recording/mastering than the format? And how does all this compare with unamplified live music, in your view?

You see, if all these questions are not addressed, then "good" or "better" becomes mere personal taste, and meaningless in terms of an objective assessment of quality.

I won't get drawn into any long debate but I spent a whole day comparing Hugo to 3 other Dacs via HPs and thee Hugo was horrific on DSD...worse than the Qute even. Chord murders DSD with their heavy processing approach that works for PCM but not for DSD. All these formats can sound good, but DSD is harder o encode and easier to playback. PCM is the opposite. I have heard he DAVe which I like, but not specifically the DSD which I expect is at best decent. DSD requires no additives, no preservatives. Imbibe it straight!

Also, most of the PCM days out there go thru DS processing, so they would be subject to the same info cutoff that Rob alludes to.
I have a Satchmo vinyl rip to DSD128 that I have never heard sound better on any megabuck system in PCM than I have heard on my system via chipless DSD. If you seek of DSD, make sure its DSD done right. I know MSB does it right.

Better? By that I mean the full auditory illusion like thinking there is the ghost of Louis in the room singing to you!

 

[wisnon]

If somebody brings one, I'll put it against the Aqua + SGM. Again, I love to be proven wrong, as I've never been impressed with anything made by Chord, much on the contrary actually...


cheers,
alex

Dave is the best they made and somehow comparable to the Select 1 on PCM. The Select II is a different planet and "streets and lanes" ahead now.

 

[wisnon]

I was wondering the same thing myself. When I use headphones it is only out of necessity. When Rob goes on about the merits or otherwise of DSD soundstaging I cannot reconcile such considerations at all to headphone use! And yes, I have heard the very best of the world's headphones and the soundstaging is as flat as a pancake or non-existent regardless (take your pick). It just makes any mention of DSD soundstaging as all but irrelevant in that context to my way of thinking. But I do understand Chord products have become extremely popular with headphone users thanks to their latest portable devices.

Rob has simply never heard DSD done right. I challenged him about this a few years back and he didn't take me on. He is a PCM guy and hey, I am OK with that...but as such, he should not talk about great DSD.

Sony archives all to DSD and even vinyl is cut from that, so it all that low info is lost, how is a PCM Dac supposed to recover it? If all this was as he claims, then all the PCM lovers should not that Sony music sounds like crap and there would be endless threads about this. LoL

 

[wisnon]

Define "good" and "better" please. By which criteria? Tonality, dynamics, soundstage, presence, timbral resolution, rhythm & timing, and so on?

Also, do you experience too much softness with DSD, or you find it sound right? Or do you experience too much hardness with PCM, or do you find it sound right? Or does it depend more on the recording/mastering than the format? And how does all this compare with unamplified live music, in your view?

You see, if all these questions are not addressed, then "good" or "better" becomes mere personal taste, and meaningless in terms of an objective assessment of quality.

On my Dac, BOTH PCM and DSD sounds great. I have TBs of music and recently a decent PC to upsample to dsd512 too. I have DSD256, DSD512 chipless and R2R Ladder PCM in a single box. Great platform to try everything.

I recently send a great precision sample to a pal. It's RBCD, but I played back in DSD512 and it was spectacular. My Pal insisted that the music was good but the recoding quality was lacking. We were at loggerheads until I recalled that I was upsampling! Big difference.We have similar Dacs.

My point is AL, don't close your mind!!!

I am not an Yggy fan at all, but my pal Joe keeps insisting, so next visit, I will make sure to hear it in his system. Perhaps that new dynamic can change my mind.

 

[Al M.]

On my Dac, BOTH PCM and DSD sounds great. I have TBs of music and recently a decent PC to upsample to dsd512 too. I have DSD256, DSD512 chipless and R2R Ladder PCM in a single box. Great platform to try everything.

I recently send a great precision sample to a pal. It's RBCD, but I played back in DSD512 and it was spectacular. My Pal insisted that the music was good but the recoding quality was lacking. We were at loggerheads until I recalled that I was upsampling! Big difference.We have similar Dacs.

My point is AL, don't close your mind!!!

I am not and Yggy fan at all, but my pal Joe keeps insisting, so next visit, I will make sure to hear it in his system. Perhaps that new dynamic can change my mind.

I am not closing my mind. I have heard good or perhaps even great DSD. Actually, I'm pretty sure it was great (and not obviously soft).

My point was about "good", "better" and now, with this post of yours, "great". It seems to me that it simply means, coming from you -- "I like it", or "I like it better". Can't do much with such info unless I know your exact tastes and/or what areas of reproduction you are referring to.

 

[Al M.]

Better? By that I mean the full auditory illusion like thinking there is the ghost of Louis in the room singing to you!

Ok, just saw that post of yours now. That's certainly a criterion, but a bit more specificity would be welcome.

 

[wisnon]

AL, I am no poet. All I can say its that its more solid/tangible/palpable. The ghost in the machine...rich/full/dripping with believability. Musical and detailed enough, certainly pulling the emotional strings.

 

[Al M.]

AL, I am no poet. All I can say its that its more solid/tangible/palpable. The ghost in the machine...rich/full/dripping with believability. Musical and detailed enough, certainly pulling the emotional strings.

Well, that seems pretty poetic to me

 

[wisnon]

I am not closing my mind. I have heard good or perhaps even great DSD. Actually, I'm pretty sure it was great (and not obviously soft).

My point was about "good", "better" and now, with this post of yours, "great". It seems to me that it simply means, coming from you -- "I like it", or "I like it better". Can't do much with such info unless I know your exact tastes and/or what areas of reproduction you are referring to.

Perhaps???

Nononono! LoL

The stuff I am talking about is unequivocally superb! You would be in no doubt if you heard it done right.

When all these formats are done right, the debate is over, you just sit back and enjoy!

 

[wisnon]

Well, that seems pretty poetic to me

LoL

I tried ...just once, for you! I wonder if Srajan will contact me now. Hehehe

 

[audio.bill]

If somebody brings one, I'll put it against the Aqua + SGM. Again, I love to be proven wrong, as I've never been impressed with anything made by Chord, much on the contrary actually...


cheers,
alex

Just to be fair regarding that proposed comparison, the DAVE DAC now retails for US$10,600 while the Aqua Formula DAC & SGM combo is about three times that price. Still might be interesting since they have completely different engineering approaches to digital conversion.

 

[wisnon]

Just to be fair regarding that proposed comparison, the DAVE DAC now retails for US$10,600 while the Aqua Formula DAC & SGM combo is about three times that price. Still might be interesting since they have completely different engineering approaches to digital conversion.

He would use the SGM to feed to DAVE too. The SGM is just a very good transport. Aqua is $14K which is the old DAVE price.

Some people don't like the DAVE. I quite liked it when I heard it. Bass is one area of complaint for some. SS Depth is a normal positive often highlighted.

 

[bibo01]

Here you go - its the thumbnail at the bottom of this post - http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/blogs/abraxalito/943-noise-modulation-subjective-performance-dacs.html

Thanks.
I could not confirm on a ES9018, but on a ES9038 (Matrix Pro) this problem does not happen - I have tried all steps at -0,5db increments and this phenomenon does not appear.

 

[audio.bill]

He would use the SGM to feed to DAVE to. The SGM is just a very good transport.Aqua is $14K which is the old DAVE price.

Some people don't like the DAVE. I quite liked it when I heard it. Bass is one area of complaint for some. SS Depth is a normal positive often highlighted.

Not trying to be argumentative but that's not what he said about the DAVE: "If somebody brings one, I'll put it against the Aqua + SGM".

 

[asiufy]

Just to be fair regarding that proposed comparison, the DAVE DAC now retails for US$10,600 while the Aqua Formula DAC & SGM combo is about three times that price. Still might be interesting since they have completely different engineering approaches to digital conversion.

The Aqua is $14k by itself, and I have other streamers we could hook up to both, like an Aries or Aurender. Heck, I can compare it to a $3k Aqua La Voce too while I'm at it.

 

[bmoura]

Rob is a very nice guy, but hates DSD. He has never heard proper DSD and Chord Dacs dont sound very good on DSD. I know, as I have one and heard them all. Nobody who has heard DSD done right can say it that it does not sound good and indeed BETTER than PCM on some genres.

Finally, upsampling to DSD256 in Linux and DSD512 in Windows is extraordinarily good on a lot of material.

I'd agree. For DSD material, the Chord wouldn't be my first choice.