DSD to Vinyl Versus Analog Tape to Vinyl

[Bruce B]

Paul never said or implied that the DSD ADC processs has “zero“ effect on the sound. The DSD ADC process is subject to implementation and Grimm Audio, dCS, Meitner, Digital Audio Denmark, Mytek, Prism Sound, Neve, Genex and Korg DSD ADC‘s all have their own sound.

I've had/have every one of these ADC's mentioned at one time or another (plus others not mentioned). I've done shootouts just like Mike, and with Mike. You also have to realize where Paul is and who he associates with, whether this is out of convenience or not. Sure he is a DSD fanboy.... as I am. But I know the limitations of each format and have worked extensively with all of them. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. It's not gospel. You don't need to drink the Kool-aid. Paul has something to sell. Remember all the hoopla that came from Waldrep? You need to have worked extensively with each format to get the best out of it. All formats can play on a level field if one heed's the limitations of that format and carefully selects the proper tools to needed for the job!

 

[Carlos269]

I've had/have every one of these ADC's mentioned at one time or another (plus others not mentioned). I've done shootouts just like Mike, and with Mike. You also have to realize where Paul is and who he associates with, whether this is out of convenience or not. Sure he is a DSD fanboy.... as I am. But I know the limitations of each format and have worked extensively with all of them. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. It's not gospel. You don't need to drink the Kool-aid. Paul has something to sell. Remember all the hoopla that came from Waldrep? You need to have worked extensively with each format to get the best out of it. All formats can play on a level field if one heed's the limitations of that format and carefully selects the proper tools to needed for the job!

Bruce you were the biggest DSD fanboy over at Gearslutz for years, wow the above statement coming from you must mean that you must have had some sort of a revelation.

Are you still the using the Neve Masterpiece mastering set in a box? Or have you taken the training wheels off yet?

 

[Bruce B]

Bruce you were the biggest DSD fanboy over at Gearslutz for years, wow the above statement coming from you must mean that you must have had some sort of a revelation.

Are you still the using the Neve Masterpiece mastering set in a box? Or have you taken the training wheels off yet?

I'm still a big proponent of DSD and prefer to use it over any other format. That being said, If someone gives me tape, vinyl or 44.1, doesn't mean I can't make it sound as good as any other format.

Yes, I still have the Neve Masterpiece.... as well as all the other tools I use.

 

[mtemur]

well I think the answer lies in the nature of components used in the devices. since audio signal tends to get the characteristics of the element it’s passing (such as copper cable sound vs silver cable and capacitors etc) it gets the plastic-kind-of-sounding characteristic of ICs. there are a lot of ICs in digital systems. it’s impossible to totally eliminate them in digital systems. on the other hand it’s possible on direct to disc or from-tape-to-vinyl transfers and if it’s done properly both sound better than digital-source-to-vinyl transfers. for me best sounding recording format is properly done 45rpm direct to disc.

 

[Bachtoven]

Has anyone compared the DSD256 file to the LP of this recording? I have the LP, which sounds good, but I don't like it enough to also buy the DSD version!

 

[Bachtoven]

Thanks to one of our members, I was able to compare the LP to a DSD64 file. At first it was pretty close, but the more I listened, the LP sounded slightly softer (not exactly warmer) and less transparent as the DSD. Overall, I prefer the DSD, which is odd since I normally prefer analog.

 

[marslo]

Thanks to one of our members, I was able to compare the LP to a DSD64 file. At first it was pretty close, but the more I listened, the LP sounded slightly softer (not exactly warmer) and less transparent as the DSD. Overall, I prefer the DSD, which is odd since I normally prefer analog.

I have this album in DSD 128 fs, imo good but not outstanding SQ.
If you wish I could send you a file via We transfer , pls let me know.
m

 

[sbo6]

Here's my 2 pesos FWIW and a bit after the crowd left. I get the science argument and even have a technical background (for whatever that's worth) - dynamic range, noise floor of digital versus vinyl or tape: digital wins. However, out of the best of the best systems I've heard analog always sonically wins. So, how important is the extra dynamic range and noise floor? I'd say to our human ears not much. So WRT format specs, it's mostly meaningless IMO.

With regard to human preference, there are clearly conditions / artifacts in analog formats that alter the recording that pleases the ear. This goes beyond format and recordings and into hardware - just listen to tubes. One could argue it's scientific - psychoacoustics, one could argue it's human bias / preference - I think it's both. The importance of this in our hobby should not be overlooked IMO. It's not a good or bad thing, it's simply reality and personal preference.

WRT the recording format and process - While digital wins in terms of specs, what's skewed in translation from the analog input to digital (ADC), and then again digital to analog (DAC)? Versus for example analog tape - what's skewed in translation from the analog input to a magnetic format, and then again magnetic tape to analog out? While digital has come a looong way in a short time I'd wager the complexity / transference of ADC to DAC outweighs any noise and range advantage. And IMO may be why on a system like Mike's with high resolution and very capable dynamic range aligns to my hypothesis.

One last thought - In source component comparisons it should always be noted what's being compared. It's all too common to read "analog trounces digital" while the owner's TT setup is 5 figures while his DAC is a Schiit BiFrost (no offense to Schiit owners, great budget products). The opposite is also often true.

And BTW - I'm only digital but I recognize that in cost no object systems the capabilities of analog, tape or vinyl still reign king over digital IME. That may change with the speed that digital is improving, who knows. I'm just happy we have so many incredibly high quality component source choices and an explosion of new / renewed music. YMMV.

 

[Carlos269]

Paul Is incorrect besides why would you want audio that sounds like analog "you can't fake the real thing"

????? As I understand it, audio IS an analog transmission. Are you able to hear digital pulses?

 

[dan31]

Paul is probably more right than wrong. It depends on the tape stock, machine and experience. DSD does not have the physical issues tape has, but the DSD has to be converted to analog. I would still choose tape as I like the way it sounds.

 

[tima]

A new era is upon us. It is now possible to create direct-to-disc quality vinyl without requiring the musicians to play live.

I have not read the entirety of this thread, but Ron's quote from Paul McGowan struck me as both perverse and funny.

TOID. the Tasmanian Orchestra from the Isle of the Dead.

 

[Lampie519]

I think we need to make a distinction between recording and playback first. The first is up to the engineer... High quality gear exists in the analogue and digital domain.

Once the "file" is converted to either format it is up to the listener what is prefered to reproduce this file.

I think here lays the issue as most audio enthausiasts have not yet auditioned a "near perfect" playback system (digital or analogue) even if it is claimed so....

And here we have the reason why we have so many opinions on formats and equipment as no playback source is good enough to be able to judge the quality of anything !

 

[Atmasphere]

Paul is probably more right than wrong. It depends on the tape stock, machine and experience. DSD does not have the physical issues tape has, but the DSD has to be converted to analog. I would still choose tape as I like the way it sounds.

He is incorrect about that bandwidth thing... To my understanding the LP has the widest bandwidth of any format (we can record 35KHz on our lathe, which is equipped with a Westerex 3D cutter head, no worries). Its hard to imagine something causing it high frequency problems outside of the audio passband unless there's an acute noise issue like a bad ground, oscillation or the like.

 

[Lampie519]

I understand that the recording lathe needs to have a wide bandwidth but that does not make a record better.
Music is recorded using microphones and mixing consoles (never exceeding 15Khz at best) when the signal arrives at the lathe.

The most beloved mic is the Neumann .... (you name it) and they all have a roll off (intentionally so) !!

 

[Atmasphere]

The most beloved mic is the Neumann .... (you name it) and they all have a roll off (intentionally so) !!

My Neumanns get beamy above about 12KHz but they go all the way to 20KHz. I can't hear it but we can see that they work. But your point is well-taken; since there is so little output at those frequencies what was freaking out the lathes that Paul spoke of? The only thing I can think of is a malfunction, like an oscillation, digital noise, that sort of thing.

 

[Lampie519]

A cutter amp must be very powerfull , having it oscillating must be a scary sight...

Like reversing feedback in a 1k Watt amp (direct drive ESL's) ! You catch my drift...

 

[Atmasphere]

A cutter amp must be very powerfull , having it oscillating must be a scary sight...

Yes, but I'm sure whatever was causing the problem wasn't the cutter itself.

 

[Solypsa]

I understand that the recording lathe needs to have a wide bandwidth but that does not make a record better.
Music is recorded using microphones and mixing consoles (never exceeding 15Khz at best) when the signal arrives at the lathe.

Maybe the best ( vintage ) mics were band limited but the console should not be. I used to own a VMS70 / SAL74 cutting system. Not limited to 15k...

Btw would love to learn more about your v series recording suite one day...

 

[Lampie519]

I am not talking about the console alone but the entire chain starting with the mic's and ending at the lathe.

I just wanted to make a point that vinyl is not better because of the bandwidth of the lathe alone.

Digital files are created with the same mic's and consoles (i am talking about vintage consoles here) and most of the time the music is first recorded on tape anyway before it is cut on vinyl.

So every part in the chain needs to exceed the -3dB point of 30Khz if you like to make use of the high bandwidth of the lathe.

 

[Atmasphere]

So every part in the chain needs to exceed the -3dB point of 30Khz if you like to make use of the high bandwidth of the lathe.

The bandwidth is helpful to reduce phase shift. Even if you have a digital source file, you can often produce something that sounds better than the digital release for the simple reason that the latter is often compressed so it can be heard in a car. When we do an LP project, we try to get a digital file master that does not have any DSP except normalization- no compression. I've found that if you are careful and spend time with the project, you can usually find a way around using processing, even if you have out of phase bass notes. I've yet to find a recording that required compression.