Native DSD versus DOP comparison

[yamamoto2002]

On 5/5/2016 at 3:51 AM, audiventory said:

 

May be random values was at part of last DoP's frames because real audio stuff can't fill the last frames to end?

 

Or maybe the USB DAC firmware has a bug when incoming stream's DoP marker abruptly ends and PCM silence (zero sequence) starts and DAC plays the PCM zero sequence with 1bit audio mode and DAC output voltage descent perpendicularly to lowest possible voltage. This can be prevented and not DoP's limitation

 

[Kal Rubinson]

2 hours ago, AMR/iFi audio said:

They are not up samplings, for there are no PCM or DXD conversions involved in their production. They are re-modulations of the original DSD 256 encoding modulation that produced the DSD 256 releases.

I question the semantics.  They are, effectively, up-samplings even though there is no intermediate PCM conversion and are accomplished via a different method.  Not that it concerns me.......................

[mikey8811]

A friend sent me a 5 channel rip of the earlier Yuko Mabuchi Live SACD in DSF files.

 

My streamer seems to have downmixed it into 2 channel. Other than the files being large, am I losing any fidelity or sonic quality with my streamer downmixing it into stereo? Should I ask my friend to rerip it into 2 channel for me?

 

Thanks

[firedog]

45 minutes ago, mikey8811 said:

A friend sent me a 5 channel rip of the earlier Yuko Mabuchi Live SACD in DSF files.

 

My streamer seems to have downmixed it into 2 channel. Other than the files being large, am I losing any fidelity or sonic quality with my streamer downmixing it into stereo? Should I ask my friend to rerip it into 2 channel for me?

 

Thanks

I'd say it's likely your streamer downmix won't sound as good as a "proper" 2 channel mix, if the SACD has such a layer. Usually these 5 channel to two channel algorithms do some funny stuff to the result. 

[mikey8811]

3 hours ago, firedog said:

I'd say it's likely your streamer downmix won't sound as good as a "proper" 2 channel mix, if the SACD has such a layer. Usually these 5 channel to two channel algorithms do some funny stuff to the result. 

 

Can I use the 5 channel .dsf files and convert them into 2 channel? Is there a free programme or app that does it?

 

Thanks

[Kal Rubinson]

9 minutes ago, mikey8811 said:

Can I use the 5 channel .dsf files and convert them into 2 channel? Is there a free programme or app that does it?

See below quote of the preceeding post.

4 hours ago, firedog said:

I'd say it's likely your streamer downmix won't sound as good as a "proper" 2 channel mix, if the SACD has such a layer. Usually these 5 channel to two channel algorithms do some funny stuff to the result. 

There are stereo tracks on that recording/SACD and that is probably the only way to obtain a proper stereo version.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, mikey8811 said:

 

Can I use the 5 channel .dsf files and convert them into 2 channel? Is there a free programme or app that does it?

 

Thanks

There are but they sound like stereo with some, shall I say, "sound effects" added. Will just sound odd.  If the SACD has a stereo layer, just ask him to rip that for you.

[Miska]

Biggest difference is in overhead. With the rare DACs that do 24-bit (3-byte) transfer per sample, DoP transfer has one third of the data redundant. With more typical 32-bit (4-byte) transfer - like all XMOS based, half of the data transferred is redundant. So it is mostly matter of wasted bandwidth.

 

Practically UAC2 protocol with DoP limits you to stereo DSD256. Without DoP, with native encoding you can get DSD512. If you want something like 8 channels of DSD256 you need to find something completely different outside of UAC2 in general.

 

[Miska]

5 hours ago, mikey8811 said:

Can I use the 5 channel .dsf files and convert them into 2 channel? Is there a free programme or app that does it?

 

I'm doing that with a downmix matrix and works well. I can adjust the downmix the way I want and I can also "3D" process it for headphone listening. Most of the time it sounds less flat than a regular stereo version to me. But depends on what kind of target the person creating stereo version had (speaker or headphone listening, etc). If you can get binaural version for headphone listening, that's probably the best one.

 

For stereo and headphones the best is if you can get M/S version of the source instead of regular stereo. Because then you can adjust the scene in M/S decoding matrix.

 

[mikey8811]

6 hours ago, Miska said:

Most of the time it sounds less flat than a regular stereo version to me

 

That was exactly the impression I got from the downmixed 5 channel dsf files - but downmixed by my Auralic Aries.

 

The gain was lower than the Hi Res FLAC files I originally had for the same recording though and sounded less forward so I wondered if the downmixing screwed up the sound.

[Chopin75]

7 hours ago, Miska said:

Biggest difference is in overhead. With the rare DACs that do 24-bit (3-byte) transfer per sample, DoP transfer has one third of the data redundant. With more typical 32-bit (4-byte) transfer - like all XMOS based, half of the data transferred is redundant. So it is mostly matter of wasted bandwidth.

 

Practically UAC2 protocol with DoP limits you to stereo DSD256. Without DoP, with native encoding you can get DSD512. If you want something like 8 channels of DSD256 you need to find something completely different outside of UAC2 in general.

 

Hmm, perhaps the may explain why I cannot do DSD512 as I am using DoP only. I am not able to do DSD native for some reason from Euphony stylus. 

[mikey8811]

On 10/5/2019 at 10:17 PM, Kal Rubinson said:

See below quote of the preceeding post.

There are stereo tracks on that recording/SACD and that is probably the only way to obtain a proper stereo version.

 

OK my friend has gotten the stereo tracks of that SACD in DSF files for me.

 

Problem is they are DSD256 but my DAC can handle only up to DSD128.

 

I understand TEAC has a free converter programme. If I use it to convert the DSD256 DSF files to DSD128 DSF files will it also do something funny?

 

I just didn't want to bother my friend and have him rerip the files again.

[Kal Rubinson]

1 minute ago, mikey8811 said:

I understand TEAC has a free converter programme. If I use it to convert the DSD256 DSF files to DSD128 DSF files will it also do something funny?

I do not know that program but, if all it does is downsample to DSD128, it should be quite fine for use.

[ted_b]

Just now, mikey8811 said:

 

OK my friend has gotten the stereo tracks of that SACD in DSF files for me.

 

Problem is they are DSD256 but my DAC can handle only up to DSD128.

 

I understand TEAC has a free converter programme. If I use it to convert the DSD256 DSF files to DSD128 DSF files will it also do something funny?

 

I just didn't want to bother my friend and have him rerip the files again.

He won't need to rerip the files cuz they are DSD64 (SACD native).  For whatever reason he sent you remodulated files in DSD256.  His orginal files from the ISO are DSD64.

[mikey8811]

Just now, Kal Rubinson said:

I do not know that program but, if all it does is downsample to DSD128, it should be quite fine for use.

Thanks I'll try that.

 

I thought I read somewhere that DSD was non-editable, unlike PCM.

[Chopin75]

1 minute ago, ted_b said:

He won't need to rerip the files cuz they are DSD64 (SACD native).  For whatever reason he sent you remodulated files in DSD256

Yah, SACD are all DSD64. so there is no way to have a DSD256 rip from it. 

[ted_b]

Just now, Chopin75 said:

Yah, SACD are all DSD64. so there is no way to have a DSD256 rip from it. 

If he got Bob's files from our NativeDSD site then yes they could be the original DSD256's from the Merging-based recording....but that's not what the OP said.

[Chopin75]

1 minute ago, mikey8811 said:

Thanks I'll try that.

 

I thought I read somewhere that DSD was non-editable, unlike PCM.

Correct, but non-editable is nothing to do with upsampling. DSD64--> DSD256 is upsampling and not editing. The same music file, just sampling rate has increased x4.  PCM editing really is when you taking the sound track and cut it, change the balance, reattach different sections of the track or a different track from another recorded session etc. DSD master recording is very limited in such editing.  It has to be converted to PCM to do editing.

[Chopin75]

7 minutes ago, ted_b said:

If he got Bob's files from our NativeDSD site then yes they could be the original DSD256's from the Merging-based recording....but that's not what the OP said.

Yah, agree. I know native DSD has the original masters and that can be in DSD256 but that is not SACD rip as stated above. Perhaps the source is really not a SACD rip after all? 

BTW DSF files should be master files where as SACD rip should be .iso correct ? So if it were a DSF file then it was probably not a direct SACD rip correct ? 

 

[mikey8811]

13 minutes ago, ted_b said:

If he got Bob's files from our NativeDSD site then yes they could be the original DSD256's from the Merging-based recording....but that's not what the OP said.

 

They are from a SACD.

 

But just for my education, if they were original DSD256's, downsampling them to DSD128 so I can play them will not result in a loss of fidelity?

 

I've started to use the programme - it's tedious as it only does single files at a time and the meta tags are lost but better than not being able to play them.

 

The files are literally half the size.

 

The programme asks if I want to apply a short fade - I presume "No" for gapless playback right?

[jcn3]

1 hour ago, mikey8811 said:

 

They are from a SACD.

 

But just for my education, if they were original DSD256's, downsampling them to DSD128 so I can play them will not result in a loss of fidelity?

 

I've started to use the programme - it's tedious as it only does single files at a time and the meta tags are lost but better than not being able to play them.

 

The files are literally half the size.

 

The programme asks if I want to apply a short fade - I presume "No" for gapless playback right?

 

if they are rips from an sacd, then they are DSD64 unless whoever ripped them did something to them.

 

what player are you using?

[Kal Rubinson]

4 hours ago, mikey8811 said:

They are from a SACD.

Then somebody must have upsampled it.

4 hours ago, mikey8811 said:

But just for my education, if they were original DSD256's, downsampling them to DSD128 so I can play them will not result in a loss of fidelity?

No, especially since it contains only DSD64 data.

4 hours ago, mikey8811 said:

I've started to use the programme - it's tedious as it only does single files at a time and the meta tags are lost but better than not being able to play them.

Cheesy program.

4 hours ago, mikey8811 said:

The files are literally half the size.

128 is half of 256.

4 hours ago, mikey8811 said:

The programme asks if I want to apply a short fade - I presume "No" for gapless playback right?

No to any changes other than from 256 to 128 (or to 64).

[ted_b]

Just now, Kal Rubinson said:

39 minutes ago, mikey8811 said:

But just for my education, if they were original DSD256's, downsampling them to DSD128 so I can play them will not result in a loss of fidelity?

No, especially since it contains only DSD64 data.

Kal, he is asking if the files originated from NativeDSD DSD256 downloads (the originals) and not the SACD rip (which is of course DSD64) would downsampling (bad term) them to DSD128 reduce the quality at all.  The answer would be an oversimplified yes (but don't worry about it too much, especially if your dac can only do DSD128 max).

[Chopin75]

1 hour ago, ted_b said:

Kal, he is asking if the files originated from NativeDSD DSD256 downloads (the originals) and not the SACD rip (which is of course DSD64) would downsampling (bad term) them to DSD128 reduce the quality at all.  The answer would be an oversimplified yes (but don't worry about it too much, especially if your dac can only do DSD128 max).

yah the difference between DSD64, DSD128 and DSD256 is not a whole lot. There is certainly no true loss if the original recording is made in DSD64. But even if the master is in 256, down to 128 is hardly going to make you feel it sounds much worse. Some DSD64 recordings are great and some DSD256 are crap. The difference with PCM upsampling is much bigger. Eg. there is a clear difference between 16/44 and 24/96 and also quite a difference with 24/352.

The server/software has to work much harder to play DSD256 which sometimes makes it sound worse than DSD128 if it is not up for the task 

 

 

[Kal Rubinson]

2 hours ago, ted_b said:

Kal, he is asking if the files originated from NativeDSD DSD256 downloads (the originals) and not the SACD rip (which is of course DSD64) would downsampling (bad term) them to DSD128 reduce the quality at all.  The answer would be an oversimplified yes (but don't worry about it too much, especially if your dac can only do DSD128 max).

Yes.  I typed "No, especially since it contains only DSD64 data" in error since I meant to type "No, especially if it contains only DSD64 data.