EuroDriver Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 DoP is native DSD without conversion to PCM and the conversion from PCM to DSD is NOT lossless. Matt Permit me to rephrase according to my understanding DoP is the packing of native DSD into PCM data containers. The unpacking of these PCM data containers results in the identical DSD bit stream. The conversion of PCM to DSD via software such as JRMC, Foobar + SACD and HS Player results in a multitude of different DSD bit streams depending on the filters and modulators used. These various DSD bit streams when converted back to PCM are unlikely to be the same as the original PCM data values, I think lossey would be an unfair characterization, "subtly modified" would be a more appropriate description Sound Test, Monaco Consultant to Sound Galleries Monaco, and Taiko Audio Holland e-mail [email protected] Link to comment
ted_b Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Matt, Of course! And a PCM can be poor, and a DSD can be poor. "We're all bozos on this bus"....F.T. My JRIver tutorial videos Actual JRIver tutorial MP4 video links My eleven yr old SACD Ripping Guide for PS3 (needs updating but still works) US Technical Advisor, NativeDSD.com Link to comment
Hiro Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 DSD natively means without conversion to PCM on its way to analog. Matt It really is that simple. Surprised to see claims that DoP is not native DSD, when in fact it doesn't have anything to do with the D/A conversion process at all. Link to comment
matthias Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Permit me to rephrase according to my understanding DoP is the packing of native DSD into PCM data containers. The unpacking of these PCM data containers results in the identical DSD bit stream. The conversion of PCM to DSD via software such as JRMC, Foobar + SACD and HS Player results in a multitude of different DSD bit streams depending on the filters and modulators used. These various DSD bit streams when converted back to PCM are unlikely to be the same as the original PCM data values, I think lossey would be an unfair characterization, "subtly modified" would be a more appropriate description Let me clarify: The conversion DSD to PCM to DSD is not lossless. Matt "I want to know why the musicians are on stage, not where". (John Farlowe) Link to comment
kumakuma Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Let me clarify: The conversion DSD to PCM to DSD is not lossless. Matt You are correct but DoP is not "conversion" of DSD to PCM. It is simply wrapping the DSD data in a PCM wrapper and it is a lossless process. Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley Through the middle of my skull Link to comment
matthias Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Matt, Of course! And a PCM can be poor, and a DSD can be poor. Another question: Do you think a pure DSD recording is better than a pure PCM recording when all other parameters are the same and the bitrate of both is comparable? Matt "I want to know why the musicians are on stage, not where". (John Farlowe) Link to comment
matthias Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 You are correct but DoP is not "conversion" of DSD to PCM. It is simply wrapping the DSD data in a PCM wrapper and it is a lossless process. As I told above. Matt "I want to know why the musicians are on stage, not where". (John Farlowe) Link to comment
ted_b Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 It really is that simple. Surprised to see claims that DoP is not native DSD, when in fact it doesn't have anything to do with the D/A conversion process at all. Simple? Surprised? Have you been reading these forum posts since DoP was announced? Many folks (who understand DoP) are calling ASIO playback "native" (simply to differentiate from DoP). The term is used as a convenience, not as a proclamation that any PCM is involved (or course there are those that don't understand DoP but that is another issue). So when we call stuff "native" it means more than one thing. Native DSD recordings (not using PCM in the recording process); native DSD DAC processing (not converting to PCM on its way to analog); native DSD USB playback (ASIO as opposed to DoP, neither of which use PCM conversions...I prefer the term "raw" to "native" in this context, but that's me). And there are folks that obsess about native DSD DAC processing but ignore native DSD recording. Seems a weird random differentiation. "We're all bozos on this bus"....F.T. My JRIver tutorial videos Actual JRIver tutorial MP4 video links My eleven yr old SACD Ripping Guide for PS3 (needs updating but still works) US Technical Advisor, NativeDSD.com Link to comment
PaulF Posted March 15, 2015 Author Share Posted March 15, 2015 DoP is native DSD without conversion to PCM and the conversion from PCM to DSD is NOT lossless. Matt Damn it Link to comment
kumakuma Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 As I told above. Matt Sorry, your sentence confused me. It seemed like you were referring to the DoP in both parts of your sentence. Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley Through the middle of my skull Link to comment
ted_b Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Another question: Do you think a pure DSD recording is better than a pure PCM recording when all other parameters are the same and the bitrate of both is comparable? Matt Depends entirely on the playback device. All DACs have sweetspots, and the trick is to match as often and as "natively (sorry, couldn't help it) as possible. Our 2xHD Jazz At The Pawnshop is a perfect example; analog tape transfers done at DXD, DSD64 and DSD128 independently. Each DAC will have it's favorite. Even the separately mastered and sold Norah Jones boxset (24/192 and DSD64). My Meitner loved the Analogue Sound SACD rips; my Chords love the 24/192s better. Early listening to my DS was the 24/192s. Now, with the latest PP OS, the DS shines with the DSF files, with slightly better timbres. (Note: we are talking nitpicking in many cases). "We're all bozos on this bus"....F.T. My JRIver tutorial videos Actual JRIver tutorial MP4 video links My eleven yr old SACD Ripping Guide for PS3 (needs updating but still works) US Technical Advisor, NativeDSD.com Link to comment
PaulF Posted March 15, 2015 Author Share Posted March 15, 2015 You are correct but DoP is not "conversion" of DSD to PCM. It is simply wrapping the DSD data in a PCM wrapper and it is a lossless process. Isn't it true that what some might call "conversion to PCM" inside a DAC is actually something similar? Perhaps I am wrong - I am not sure. So, we take 16 or 24 1-bit DSD samples, call it a "word", and we've got something that "looks" like PCM, but clearly is NOT, since one of those "words" is NOT an amplitude level. Are there DAC chips that do that sort of thing internally, just to move data from one step to another? Of course, you could not process such a data stream as PCM in any way, since it is not PCM. Link to comment
kumakuma Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Another question: Do you think a pure DSD recording is better than a pure PCM recording when all other parameters are the same and the bitrate of both is comparable? Matt A question back at you: What are the equivalent PCM bitrates for various DSD formats? Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley Through the middle of my skull Link to comment
Hiro Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Simple? Surprised? Have you been reading these forum posts since DoP was announced? Many folks (who understand DoP) are calling ASIO playback "native" (simply to differentiate from DoP). The term is used as a convenience, not as a proclamation that any PCM is involved (or course there are those that don't understand DoP but that is another issue). So when we call stuff "native" it means more than one thing. Native DSD recordings (not using PCM in the recording process); native DSD DAC processing (not converting to PCM on its way to analog); native DSD USB playback (ASIO as opposed to DoP, neither of which use PCM conversions...I prefer the term "raw" to "native" in this context, but that's me). And there are folks that obsess about native DSD DAC processing but ignore native DSD recording. Seems a weird random differentiation. Yes, simple, the definition of native DSD (not converted to PCM) is not rocket science, it's as simple as it gets. And yes, I'm surprised that after some 3 years? since its introduction, DoP is still considered by some readers of the forum to be not native DSD. As for DSD recordings that are not native DSD it's still better to have as streamlined path as possible for their playback. When one is using, for instance, a DSD upsampler to upsample 44.1kHz PCM recordings to 11.2896MHz/256Fs DSD and passes the signal to a native DSD DAC, this DAC is able to convert the signal to analog without additional PCM steps. Link to comment
Norton Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 In terms of choosing a DAC for the enjoyment of music, which I presume is the OP's objective, Ted's definition of "DSD capable" seems spot on to me, in other words can it accept a DSD file input and does it sound great? Link to comment
PaulF Posted March 15, 2015 Author Share Posted March 15, 2015 LOL. The DS review was as honest as I could be; I did not like the DAC until I used it with the Rendu and I2S. Then I freakingly loved it. Since then the latest Pikes Peak OS upgrade has made USB a close (but not tied) second and worthy of loving praise too. And it's DSD presentation (via both I2S and USB) has gotten much more alive (DSD playback was too polite before PP) for me. It's really quite amazing. I don't know what Pike's Peak is, but if you happen to be talking about the DAC's firmware, Dudley had a similar report pre & post upgrade: too smooth & laid-back before. What, exactly, are you saying is "quite amazing" - the DAC's current performance (in absolute terms) or the transformation made by this upgrade? Thanks. (I'll be pushing it with HQPlayer from a Mac Mini.) Link to comment
matthias Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 A question back at you: What are the equivalent PCM bitrates for various DSD formats? The order is descending bitrates: DSD256 DXD DSD128 24/192 DSD64 24/96 Matt "I want to know why the musicians are on stage, not where". (John Farlowe) Link to comment
kumakuma Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 The order is descending bitrates:DSD256 DXD DSD128 24/192 DSD64 24/96 Matt Ranking them like this doesn't seem to help answer your original question: "Do you think a pure DSD recording is better than a pure PCM recording when all other parameters are the same and the bitrate of both is comparable?" Should you be asking how DSD64 compares to 24/96 and DSD128 compares to 24/192 if you consider these to comparable? The problem with this line of inquiry is that others will disagree with what is comparable. For example, some will consider DSD64 to be closer to 24/192 than 24/96. Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley Through the middle of my skull Link to comment
fritzg Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 And folks wondered why I asked a while back if one drop of PCM ruined DSD. What is pure anything in audio? Link to comment
PaulF Posted March 15, 2015 Author Share Posted March 15, 2015 And folks wondered why I asked a while back if one drop of PCM ruined DSD. What is pure anything in audio? Getting PCM in your DSD is a little like getting pee in your pool; it ain't coming out, but you might as well still go swimming. Link to comment
elcorso Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Ranking them like this doesn't seem to help answer your original question: "Do you think a pure DSD recording is better than a pure PCM recording when all other parameters are the same and the bitrate of both is comparable?" Should you be asking how DSD64 compares to 24/96 and DSD128 compares to 24/192 if you consider these to comparable? The problem with this line of inquiry is that others will disagree with what is comparable. For example, some will consider DSD64 to be closer to 24/192 than 24/96. Tom, The problem with your question is we have to go to each listener taste, so you would get a lot of answers and more confusion to those no experienced in DSD listening. As Ted I own several DACs DSD capable and my three favorites has a different music presentation to my ear / brain & gear system, from DSD alone, or PCM vs DSD. Which is the best and in which format, I can't tell you this because it would not be honest from my side, because is my side. Anyway I endure the opinion of many, garbage in, garbage out. Although personally I love DSD and find the closest thing to analog, the most important thing for me is always the recording. Roch Link to comment
elcorso Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Getting PCM in your DSD is a little like getting pee in your pool; it ain't coming out, but you might as well still go swimming. If you don't have pee coloring detector in your pool Roch Link to comment
PaulF Posted March 15, 2015 Author Share Posted March 15, 2015 I just had a really good vinyl experience (Miles' Workin'), and am now following it up with Art Pepper's Gettin' Together DSD64 (ripped from SACD by Ted himself so generously some years ago!) converted to 24/176 by HQPlayer on my Mac Mini and played by my Metrum Octave, and now I am thinking: - Why bother with vinyl? - Why the hell did I just buy another expensive DAC? This music is perfect. Link to comment
elcorso Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I just had a really good vinyl experience (Miles' Workin'), and am now following it up with Art Pepper's Gettin' Together DSD64 (ripped from SACD by Ted himself so generously some years ago!) converted to 24/176 by HQPlayer on my Mac Mini and played by my Metrum Octave, and now I am thinking: - Why bother with vinyl? - Why the hell did I just buy another expensive DAC? This music is perfect. Then, why you started this thread? From your example, conversions are conversions, after all...! Roch Link to comment
PaulF Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Then, why you started this thread? From your example, conversions are conversions, after all...! Roch How do you know if I was listening with my left brain or right? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now