Do the rich guys like DSD or PCM?

[skatbelt]

In all seriousness, I am merely trying to decide my next upgrade path in the way of DACS if there is any upgrade at all.

 

I guess that i am just amazed that anyone would buy a PCM only dac anymore and I am having difficulty understanding the thinking unless the SCHIIT really is that good. I mean there has to be something to it, if someone would buy something that wouldn't at least give them the flexibility of playing with both PCM and DSD...i guess I am just having a difficult time wrapping my head around it.

 

I have already tried several dacs, and none seem to do anything for me, and just curious if i am missing something.

 

As I stated in another thread, DAC manufactures only introduced DSD because there is a market for it and their primary goal is to make money. Technically DSD is (proven to be) inferior to PCM. Things get smeared in the time domain.

 

To me it is no wonder DSD is loved by old school 'analog people'. In the analog era, smeared playback was the norm. It is their reference, it's baked in their system, in their way in listening to and perceiving musical content. It probably will take one or two generations of audiophiles before this phenomenon cures itself.

 

There are manufactures that don't bow to market forces. Berkeley Audio Design for example. Same counts for Metrum. I can imagine Schiit also hopped of the DSD-bus for the same before mentioned technical reasons. Chord (which I love since Hugo) also stays away from DSD more or less.

 

What makes things complicated is that there are some very, very good recordings in native DSD. This is not because of the recording format but because of the effort, craftsmanship, equipment, location etc. that has been put into the proces of capturing the performances. All things equal but recorded in PCM would have led to even higher quality.

 

A third reason why I think so many of us are biased towards DSD is because PCM became a dirty word due to the direct association with the CD as a physical medium. We now all know that it wasn't the content that led to bad SQ but the negative feelings stays in the back of our minds. It is the other way around with DSD because of SACD-players introduced better sound. Actually, if I listen to the (ripped) content of the cd-layer of a hybrid SACD in my current setup it sounds pretty darn good.

[master]

In all seriousness, I am merely trying to decide my next upgrade path in the way of DACS if there is any upgrade at all.

 

I guess that i am just amazed that anyone would buy a PCM only dac anymore and I am having difficulty understanding the thinking unless the SCHIIT really is that good. I mean there has to be something to it, if someone would buy something that wouldn't at least give them the flexibility of playing with both PCM and DSD...i guess I am just having a difficult time wrapping my head around it.

 

I have already tried several dacs, and none seem to do anything for me, and just curious if i am missing something.

 

You are going about it all wrong. How does it matter why anybody buys anything? Maybe they like how it looks.

 

Take me for instance. I cannot understand why anybody would buy anything Apple in this day and age. But they do and lots of it in fact.

 

iTunes does not even pass AccurateRip when ripping CDs, but folks (even on this forum) use it for ripping CDs and for playback. Does not mean I launch a smear campaign against them.

 

I have a Synology NAS and over 12 TB ripped content of movies and music. I can stream all of that content to any device in my home - TV, monitor, smartphone, tablet, phablet, etc. But I also have 2 iPads and an iPhone that cannot stream any of that content. Go figure... but till date I've not found a way of streaming content from a NAS to Apple h/w. Not without additional Apple h/w or s/w. At least I could not do it with Windows sharing and I never got around to bothering to finding out for my NAS.

 

My friend who is heavily invested in Apple h/w and the Apple ecosystem like iTunes and Apple Music had to end up buying an Airport Express to stream music. There was no way about it, but he actually had to buy an Apple router (which was lower specced than his current router) just so he could stream music. Left me scratching my head, but folks buy and do this kind of stuff all the time. And they even love it.

[sandyk]

Actually, if I listen to the (ripped) content of the cd-layer of a hybrid SACD in my current setup it sounds pretty darn good.

 

Likewise.

[Sal1950]

You are going about it all wrong. How does it matter why anybody buys anything? Maybe they like how it looks.

 

Take me for instance. I cannot understand why anybody would buy anything Apple in this day and age. But they do and lots of it in fact.

 

Taking for granted that most users of this forum have at least some computer knowledge I can't understand why anyone is running anything but a open sourced OS and applications?

[sandyk]

Taking for granted that most users of this forum have at least some computer knowledge I can't understand why anyone is running anything but a open sourced OS and applications?

 

Many members will be using their computer for general duties including emails and perhaps have paid Usenet subscriptions for downloads, as well as using it for video and audio editing.

How many open source programs are there capable of editing, using various colour filters , sharpening detail etc. and converting videos of different formats including 4K video for example ?

Some members also have internal Audio and Video cards that need a particular OS to perform all functions including A.S.I.O. with Audio cards.

BTW, many members only use a computer as a tool, and have very little interest in it's internal workings, let alone learning and stuffing around with a non mainstream OS.

[wgscott]

Many members will be using their computer for general duties including emails and perhaps have paid Usenet subscriptions for downloads, as well as using it for video and audio editing.

How many open source programs are there capable of editing, using various colour filters , sharpening detail etc. and converting videos of different formats including 4K video for example ?

Some members also have internal Audio and Video cards that need a particular OS to perform all functions including A.S.I.O. with Audio cards.

 

Pretty much anything available on GNU/Linux, for starters. Some of the Nvidia drivers are closed-source, but Ubuntu for example decided to distribute them anyway. Apart from that, open source versions of the equivalent of photoshop and video and audio editing software are readily available, not only for Linux, but also for OS X and Windows. Remarkably, you can also read your emails with linux software.

[sandyk]

Pretty much anything available on GNU/Linux, for starters. Some of the Nvidia drivers are closed-source, but Ubuntu for example decided to distribute them anyway. Apart from that, open source versions of the equivalent of photoshop and video and audio editing software are readily available, not only for Linux, but also for OS X and Windows. Remarkably, you can also read your emails with linux software.

 

I have an internal NVidia card with a Spurs Engine which assists in speeding up video processing when using Filters, as well as an Asus Xonar D2X soundcard. I also have Photoshop CS2 and Soundforge 9 as well as TMPGEnc Mastering Studio Works 5 and Corel Video Studio Pro. I doubt that there are suitable replacements for all those,with my exact requirements, or applicable drivers for Linux either. Neither do I wish the steep learning curve associated with some video programs to utilise them fully.

[esldude]

To the OP original question:

Do rich guys like PCM or DSD?

 

Yes.

 

One reason pure DSD generally sounds better is you can't do processing with it. A case of less is more. You can also record PCM while choosing to do no precessing. But it is rarely done that way.

 

If you own ten DACs, sell them and take one of three approaches. Spend it all plus whatever you can comfortably add to buy one good DAC that does both. Or spend half on a DSD only DAC and half on a PCM only DAC. Or buy a DSD only DAC and convert everything else with software.

[firedog]

i certainly do not give any credence to an opinion of a company that only manufactures PCM that suggests pcm is better, just like i would discount a company that only made dsd dacs any credence that dsd is better.

 

Schiit doesn't specialize in DSD, and it would cost them a lot of money to go in that direction. They are likely a small shop that doesn't have the DSD engineering available to them. That is also likely why they discontinued the one dsd dac they did have, because they realized they couldn't keep up their reputation if they were slaughtered in the dsd realm. It makes sense for them to stay where they are at and to say pcm is better than dsd "for the record".

 

The notion that Schiits dsd opinion is relevant is laughable.

 

Nonsense. It is just as relevant as any other makers opinion. Your logic is screwed. They don't like the sound of SACD, therefore there is something wrong with them if they don't want to produce a DSD DAC?

Actually, they've said that if DSD ever catches on beyond a very narrow audiophile niche, they will make DSD DACs in order to meet market demand for DSD. You do realize that DSD is a fraction of one percent of music sales? Even if we only count Redbook and hi-res, that's still true. Schiit isn't in favor of delta-sigma technology. And since about 99% of DACs are made using delta sigma chips, THAT is the easy and inexpensive way to make a DAC. Schiit could easily do it if they wanted to.

 

And no it wouldn't cost Schiit a lot of money to make a DSD DAC. DSD DACs are made using chips like Burr Brown or ESS and it is actually a less expensive way to build a DAC and takes less R&D than what Schiit is doing. They were very upfront about why they discontinued the inexpensive DSD (DSD only, BTW, did you know that?) DAC they did make - they produced one run of product and barely managed to sell the existing inventory. As it was their worst selling product, it was a money loser to keep it in stock and think about procducing more.

[beerandmusic]

Actually, they've said that if DSD ever catches on beyond a very narrow audiophile niche, they will make DSD DACs in order to meet market demand for DSD.

 

As long as any company is in business, they will make decisions based on what they "believe" will be most profitable and sustaining given their expertise...and small shops will also have personal reasons more often than the larger shops also dictate their business decisions.

 

Do you even read what you write.... "99% of DACS use dsd chips..... if DSD ever catches on..."

 

Nonsense. It is just as relevant as any other makers opinion.

 

As I clarified in my other post, Agreed. A PCM ONLY DAC maker's opinion that PCM is better is as important as a DSD DAC maker's opinion that DSD is better.

 

I am content with my "screwed logic".

[juanitox]

when all the recordings and music catalogs will be in DSD why not give it a try ? but if it"s just to listen some sweedish flutist on esoteric labels i'll pass ..

[beerandmusic]

 

One reason pure DSD generally sounds better is you can't do processing with it.

 

If you own ten DACs, sell them and take one of three approaches. Spend it all plus whatever you can comfortably add to buy one good DAC that does both. Or spend half on a DSD only DAC and half on a PCM only DAC. Or buy a DSD only DAC and convert everything else with software.

 

I said i have tried 10 dacs. I am always experimenting. I had 2 different come in this week (bifrost multibit and teac nt503).

My main effort in these threads is curiosity if i should expand my budget and consider either a PCM only yggy or MYTEK brooklyn from my current 1K budget and expect something more than subtle.

[firedog]

As long as any company is in business, they will make decisions based on what they "believe" will be most profitable and sustaining given their expertise...and small shops will also have personal reasons more often than the larger shops also dictate their business decisions.

 

Do you even read what you write.... "99% of DACS use dsd chips..... if DSD ever catches on..."

 

I am content with my "screwed logic".

 

No perfectly logical. I actually meant to write delta sigma chips, but it doesn't change the meaning. The DACs use delta sigma chips, but DSD still hasn't caught on in a commercial sense. Some of those "DSD capable DACs" have even been setup not to playback DSD. It is a small niche of a niche market. Can your streaming device phone or mobile device play it back? Many can't.

 

Other than some classical recordings, basically nothing is being recorded in it. It's not at all for sure it will even exist commercially in a few years, like several other now forgotten formats. I own a lot of it, but 99% of people have never even heard of it. Sales of DSD, again, are a fraction of one percent of the music market. Not what I call "caught on".

 

Schiit have made a logical decision at this time that they are losing next to no business by not making DSD DACs. They've already tried making a DSD DAC (that at the time was the least expensive DSD DAC available) and have seen that they didn't make money on it. Since they have what they consider a superior - and a superior sounding - DAC technology, why should they?

 

Other manufacturers use delta sigma chips in the DACs, so making the DAC DSD capable is a trivial matter. For DACs that are marketed to the audiophile segment, DSD capability can help sales, as audiophiles are afraid of not having a technology - even if they don't use it or own music in the format. But understand those sales are tiny in numbers. There are a few other DAC makers who also use non-delta sigma technology and the DACs aren't DSD capable. Because there's also a small market of audiophiles that explicitly don't want delta sigma based DACs.

[orgel]

My main effort in these threads is curiosity if i should expand my budget and consider either a PCM only yggy or MYTEK brooklyn from my current 1K budget and expect something more than subtle.

 

Given that you like to audition a lot of different things, this seems worthwhile. That way you can form an opinion as to whether you perceive an improvement in quality with more expensive DACs. To me, both the Yggdrasil and the Brooklyn present a good value proposition at their price point.

 

I do agree with esldude that at some point you need to decide which way you want to go — PCM only, DSD only, or tutti-frutti. As mentioned, there's a strong interaction between which approach you take to the DAC hardware and what kind(s) of software you favor. For example, if you decide to go DSD only, then you'll need software that lets you convert PCM to DSD. Or if you decide you like digital room correction, then that pretty much points you in a PCM direction.

 

--David

[beerandmusic]

Given that you like to audition a lot of different things, this seems worthwhile. That way you can form an opinion as to whether you perceive an improvement in quality with more expensive DACs. To me, both the Yggdrasil and the Brooklyn present a good value proposition at their price point.

 

I think I agree...they seem to be the current popular ones in that price range.

 

 

I do agree with esldude that at some point you need to decide which way you want to go — PCM only, DSD only, or tutti-frutti.

 

Yes, i will decide, that is clear...but i doubt i will consider a DSD only. Most DSD dacs will do both.

 

if you decide to go DSD only, then you'll need software that lets you convert PCM to DSD. Or if you decide you like digital room correction, then that pretty much points you in a PCM direction.

 

--David

If i want digital room correction, i can go either, right....either PCM only or PCM/DSD

And i can either let the hardware or the software do the conversion when i don't prefer listening to native. I almost will always choose native over upsampled, and usually software vs hardware upsampling (but i may feel differently with a schiit than sigma delta>?).

 

Really, The main and only question at hand is am i willing to ditch dsd capability for schiit.

[jumper]

Really, The main and only question at hand is am i willing to ditch dsd capability for schiit.

 

What playback software do you use? You can convert your native DSD to PCM with something like Jriver, you don't have to trash your DSD collection and never listen to those files again. Jriver converts DSD to something like 352.8 PCM I believe, hardly unlistenable.

[orgel]

If i want digital room correction, i can go either, right....either PCM only or PCM/DSD

 

Right, but from what I've seen, pretty much all digital room correction (absent roll-you-own convolution filters in HQPlayer) only works with PCM, so you would need to use software that (1) does offline high-quality DSD->PCM conversion or (2) does the same thing on the fly as part of playback. (I vote for Option 2.)

 

And i can either let the hardware or the software do the conversion when i don't prefer listening to native. I almost will always choose native over upsampled, and usually software vs hardware upsampling (but i may feel differently with a schiit than sigma delta>?).

 

I prefer to upsample the crap out of stuff in HQP (and sometimes Audirvana), but that's all up to you.

 

Really, The main and only question at hand is am i willing to ditch dsd capability for schiit.

 

To me, the ideal solution is a DAC that does both PCM and DSD really well. I haven't heard it yet, but it looks to me like the T+A DAC 8 DSD could be the answer to my prayers. When I look at the price, though, I start to sweat a little. The Mytek Brooklyn seems like it could be a somewhat lesser, but more affordable, alternative for me. I'm in no rush to buy a new DAC, though.

 

--David

[beerandmusic]

What playback software do you use? You can convert your native DSD to PCM with something like Jriver, you don't have to trash your DSD collection and never listen to those files again. Jriver converts DSD to something like 352.8 PCM I believe, hardly unlistenable.

 

I know i wouldn't have to ditch the music, just the dsd capability. I have played with most of the players except for mac, which i have also considered trying one day. I have a licensed Jriver, have tried hqplayer, foobar, and a few others. The one i like the most, many laugh at, but to my ears sounds the best. Audiogate.

 

but agree, that is the question. will I enjoy downsampled dsd on a schiit more than dsd natively.

I intend to find out, albeit on a lesser expensive schiit (bifrost multibit). If the signature sound is marginally better for pcm, then i may consider the yggy.

[beerandmusic]

 

I prefer to upsample the crap out of stuff in HQP (and sometimes Audirvana), but that's all up to you.

 

--David

 

Sounds like a lot of time. can you script it or program it, like convert all the flac files in this folder with these settings and let it go to town?

 

I would think native DSD64 would sound better than upsampled 44.1K though, right? Or the fact that you can add your own flavors to the upsampling, still makes it sound better? Something else for me to think about...thanks, i will ponder this more in future projects.

[orgel]

Sounds like a lot of time. can you script it or program it, like convert all the flac files in this folder with these settings and let it go to town?

 

HQPlayer does all the upsampling/filtering on the fly, during playback, so no extra work on my part (other than learning how to use HQP).

 

I would think native DSD64 would sound better than upsampled 44.1K though, right? Or the fact that you can add your own flavors to the upsampling, still makes it sound better? Something else for me to think about...thanks, i will ponder this more in future projects.

 

I'm currently experimenting with a different playback setup, but up until very recently, I've been upsampling everything (both PCM and DSD) in HQP to DSD128 (which is the highest DSD rate I can do with my current DAC). When I use Audirvana Plus, I upsample all PCM to 24/192 and DSD64 is left alone. Both of these setups sound good to me (with filter settings for each that I've spent some time playing around with), but noticeably different. Subjectively, I would give the edge to HQP. All this stuff is just what I do; other people here like different software and have different thoughts about upsampling/filtering. The only reason I bring this up is to show how software usage and DAC hardware are tied to each other.

 

--David

[beerandmusic]

HQPlayer does all the upsampling/filtering on the fly, during playback, so no extra work on my part (other than learning how to use HQP).

 

 

 

I'm currently experimenting with a different playback setup, but up until very recently, I've been upsampling everything (both PCM and DSD) in HQP to DSD128 (which is the highest DSD rate I can do with my current DAC). When I use Audirvana Plus, I upsample all PCM to 24/192 and DSD64 is left alone. Both of these setups sound good to me (with filter settings for each that I've spent some time playing around with), but noticeably different. Subjectively, I would give the edge to HQP. All this stuff is just what I do; other people here like different software and have different thoughts about upsampling/filtering. The only reason I bring this up is to show how software usage and DAC hardware are tied to each other.

 

--David

Thanks

 

you bring up another interesting point. If i did go with a "PCM ONLY" dac, i would lose the abiilty to use software to upsample to higher DSD resolutions....i think that, in of itself, i don't think i am going to continue considering the yggy as a potential upgrade path. I know that my ultimate goal is the best possible listening experience within my budget, but I also like to experiment. And who knows, maybe future software improvements down the road may be bigger than the hardware improvements....hmmm....

[17629]

No perfectly logical. I actually meant to write delta sigma chips, but it doesn't change the meaning. The DACs use delta sigma chips, but DSD still hasn't caught on in a commercial sense. Some of those "DSD capable DACs" have even been setup not to playback DSD. It is a small niche of a niche market. Can your streaming device phone or mobile device play it back? Many can't.

 

"Do you even read what you write.... "99% of DACS use dsd chips..... if DSD ever catches on...""

 

 

 

You had it right to begin with. This is what you really said.

 

"And since about 99% of DACs are made using delta sigma chips"

[beerandmusic]

"Do you even read what you write.... "99% of DACS use dsd chips..... if DSD ever catches on...""

 

 

 

You had it right to begin with. This is what you really said.

 

"And since about 99% of DACs are made using delta sigma chips"

 

 

I already noticed that. Sorry i made a mistake. I understand what he is saying....I am still thinking that these days there are more dacs made with dsd support than without Whatever..i am over this topic.

[17629]

I already noticed that. Sorry i made a mistake. I understand what he is saying....I am still thinking that these days there are more dacs made with dsd support than without Whatever..i am over this topic.

 

 

Did you read the rest of his post? There was some good info in it.

[beerandmusic]

Did you read the rest of his post? There was some good info in it.

 

do you really want to debate with me about my opinion. i got the impression you didn't even want to talk with me, and i am comfortable dropping the topic. I think i have got all the information i wanted at this time on this topic. If you "really" want to continue to discuss with me, i will offer my honest opinion. but more than likely it will just upset you or others, and i am not very charismatic. I don't want to upset anyone. i would rather just drop it than to share my opinions that may not be the same as yours. I won't get upset or take it personal if someone else has different opinions than me. I am also open to change my opinion...but i really don't want to debate what i believe some owners reasoning is for doing what they do. I would be happy to ask him questions if he was here and didn't mind me asking him questions. If i had a first hand conversation with him, i would be more open to his opinion, than what someone else states is his current opinion.

 

In short, i am happy to offer my opinion on anything if someone was open to listening to it without getting bent out of shape or feel the need to resort to name calling or worse. I am also perfectly content with agreeing to disagree on any subject without taking things personal.

 

The only thing i have a real issue with is if someone purposely tries to cause grief to others.

 

Lastly, I apologize to you or anyone I may have offended. It certainly was not on purpose unless i felt i was jabbing back after someone jabs me first, and I even apologize for that. This life is too short and there is too much other chaos going on in the world for that sort of nonsense.