Native DSD - First Impressions

[matthias]

8 hours ago, BrianLS said:

 All I can say is that I can hear the difference without any difficulty, as can everyone who has heard me demo the new Aurender feature.  

 

This is the proof that SQ of native DSD is superior to that of DoP.

 

Matt

[matthias]

49 minutes ago, firedog said:

I understand that your main point was talking about what you heard with the Aurender. I don't comment on what other people hear-I accept they hear what they claim, becuase even if the sound is based on expectation bias, that's what they are hearing. That's a general comment, not directed at you. 

But you framed your conclusion as being a result of native DSD as opposed to DoP and explained why. Your explanation, as stated originally, is based on a misundertanding of what DoP is, as it doesn't require "reassembly" of the DSD. If you didn't mean that, fine.

But it's an oft repeated (false) myth among audiophiles that DOP somehow isn't native DSD-it is. "Native" DSD originally meant DSD not converted to PCM for playback. Both what you call native and DoP fit this definition.

Manufacturers and marketers have promoted a misunderstanding, tied to redefining "native" as "not DoP" in order to create an incorrect idea that implies that DoP DSD streams are somehow altered and that the processing of them in a DAC is somehow fundamentally different from those used to process what they call "native" DSD. It's not. DoP doesn't add a "processing burden" to the DAC. They just want to make is seem that way in order to claim/imply an illusory SQ advantage for their DACs.

 

Related question: are you familiar with uncompressed (distinct from 0 level compression) flac? It a PCM file in a flac shell.  It's essentially the same size as the equivalent wav file - both are uncompressed. It's the same data. A wav file is a PCM file in a wav shell. Do you think the two  sound different because the flac shell requires "processing" that the "wav" shell doesn't? The same thing is true o the two types of DSD you are talking about. 

 

 

DoP places a burden of additional 50% on the CPU in comparison to "native" DSD. Surely it is DSD but the CPU has more work to do anyway. For DSD256 for example you need PCM768 as carrier for DoP. I am sure @BrianLS is right in hearing differences in favour of "native" DSD.

 

Matt