Today, Merging Technologies released Pyramix version 8.1, supporting DSD sampling rates up to 11.2MHz. This release also enables Horus owners support of DSD and DXD recording and playback, and DXD editing. Before this release, Horus was limited to 192KHz operation.
Also, an interesting exchange to many here appeared on the Merging Forum site:
http://forum.merging.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=9874
where it was pointed out that 2L had examples of DXD and DSD formats to sample. Below is a response from stephanc:
Re: DXD or DSD that is the question
by stephanc » Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:17
Morton's/2L's test bench is an excellent idea and very interesting!
But be aware that DSD derived from DXD will sound different than a native DSD recording. DXD with 24 Bit might cover well the data rate of DSD, even 128fs DSD. But it is a filtered signal. Further, from my experience, (down)converting from any format into another means a considerably audible effect by the SRC algorithm, even if it is Hepta or Saracon. In the end, it's difficult to say: "This format sounds superior to that format", unless one records natively within the formats.
While there seem to be few reasons (from a technical point of view) to work in DSD besides using it as an archive format, I have to say that I am totally addicted to the sound of DSD, since the first recordings I listened to. I always prefered it over DXD or lower FS PCM, and had quite a few situations where musicians compared a PCM format to DSD and chose DSD, without knowing what they were listening to. Needless to say it was the same setup, converter, clock, etc.
I always found the manual for the Grimm AD1 converter to give a nice and profound insight of DSD. Chapter 3 is of interest.
http://www.grimmaudio.com/product_info/Manual AD1.pdf
As stated above, there are many theoretical reasons NOT to record in DSD, and after some years of recording in DSD, I still notice some very odd things. But in the end, the result is what counts. And for me and some other people here, recording in DSD is the way to go.
However, the combo before and behind the mic is far more important to the overall sound quality than choosing either format.
So, take a mic preamp with parallel outputs and try it yourself!
Best wishes, Stephan
Stephan Cahen
sempre la musica
International Recording Services
& Music Production
The important point is that the release of P8.1 now opens the possibility for professional recording using higher sampling rates than 64fs DSD, and the post processing opportunities that can bring.
Also, an interesting exchange to many here appeared on the Merging Forum site:
http://forum.merging.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=9874
where it was pointed out that 2L had examples of DXD and DSD formats to sample. Below is a response from stephanc:
Re: DXD or DSD that is the question
by stephanc » Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:17
Morton's/2L's test bench is an excellent idea and very interesting!
But be aware that DSD derived from DXD will sound different than a native DSD recording. DXD with 24 Bit might cover well the data rate of DSD, even 128fs DSD. But it is a filtered signal. Further, from my experience, (down)converting from any format into another means a considerably audible effect by the SRC algorithm, even if it is Hepta or Saracon. In the end, it's difficult to say: "This format sounds superior to that format", unless one records natively within the formats.
While there seem to be few reasons (from a technical point of view) to work in DSD besides using it as an archive format, I have to say that I am totally addicted to the sound of DSD, since the first recordings I listened to. I always prefered it over DXD or lower FS PCM, and had quite a few situations where musicians compared a PCM format to DSD and chose DSD, without knowing what they were listening to. Needless to say it was the same setup, converter, clock, etc.
I always found the manual for the Grimm AD1 converter to give a nice and profound insight of DSD. Chapter 3 is of interest.
http://www.grimmaudio.com/product_info/Manual AD1.pdf
As stated above, there are many theoretical reasons NOT to record in DSD, and after some years of recording in DSD, I still notice some very odd things. But in the end, the result is what counts. And for me and some other people here, recording in DSD is the way to go.
However, the combo before and behind the mic is far more important to the overall sound quality than choosing either format.
So, take a mic preamp with parallel outputs and try it yourself!
Best wishes, Stephan
Stephan Cahen
sempre la musica
International Recording Services
& Music Production
The important point is that the release of P8.1 now opens the possibility for professional recording using higher sampling rates than 64fs DSD, and the post processing opportunities that can bring.
Last edited:
