Merlot DAC and Syrah Music Server

[Blizzard]

I am wondering why the first time happened

Well there's not too much in my collection. If using media player software other than HQplayer, you can get better sound from albums like this that are upsampled to DSD. This is because it allows bypassing of sound degrading steps inside SDM DAC chips. As well as being able to take advantage of chipless DSD only DAC's such as the GG. So for those too stubborn to try HQplayer, it can still be a decent solution. It can also a good solution if your using an SD card transport, CD transport or DAC with Ethernet renderer that's only DLNA/UPnP compatible. Unless of course you have superior offline resampling software at your disposal. But of course, you must have a DAC that preforms better with DSD than with PCM.

 

[Andre Marc]

So I took the plunge and bought the DSD64 version of "We Get Requests" By The Oscar Peterson Trio. With our Canadian monopoly money that's decreasing in value on a daily basis, it cost me $35! The DAC used for the audition is a new DAC I had built using the AK4490 chip. I have it setup to completely bypass all internal filtering and SDM modulation in the chip with DSD. It just goes straight to the lowpass filter with no processing for the purest sound possible from a DAC chip.

Well I must say if I could return it back I would. It sounds great, But I'm getting better sound from the 24/96 PCM version using HQplayer to resample to DSD 64, 128 and 256. This is the last time I ever buy an DSD album that's sourced from PCM.

Anyone with one eye open would have a cynical stance on DSD downloads. The audiophile music vendors will surely get the "DSD" light on your DAC to flash..regardless if the original source is analog, Redbook CD, 24 bit PCM, or mp3.

The audio press has worked in concert with these vendors to create a mystique around DSD, and audiophile bought it....and are running around like chickens without heads to start DSD collections, of which many had PCM stages. The biggest laugh i get is when i hear about "DSD only" DACs. What a hoot.

 

[Blizzard]

Anyone with one eye open would have a cynical stance on DSD downloads. The audiophile music vendors will surely get the "DSD" light on your DAC to flash..regardless if the original source is analog, Redbook CD, 24 bit PCM, or mp3.

The audio press has worked in concert with these vendors to create a mystique around DSD, and audiophile bought it....and are running around like chickens without heads to start DSD collections, of which many had PCM stages. The biggest laugh i get is when i hear about "DSD only" DACs. What a hoot.

I'm definitely not against DSD. I know it can sound better. But being DSD doesn't automatically mean it will sound better.

What do you use for a DAC(S)?

 

[Andre Marc]

I'm definitely not against DSD. I know it can sound better. But being DSD doesn't automatically mean it will sound better.

What do you use for a DAC(S)?

Same here...the format is great. The cynical way it is marketed is not.

We were told a massive bill of goods..if DAC manufacturers did not have that "DSD Ready" sticker on their product it was DOA..because there going to be 10,000... No, 20,000 DSD downloads of major rock, pop, and jazz titles.

What do have a full 3 years later after the so called DSD Revolution? 200 popular titles on superhirez...roughly 550 in total...about 50 on ProStudio Masters...

There were a few blowhards and carnival barkers here and in the press making absurd proclamations about content availability.

I use both a iFI Micro iDSD DAC...same as you, no processing..DSD straight out via low pass filter to analog outputs..and a Simaudio 280D.

 

[Blizzard]

Same here...the format is great. The cynical way it is marketed is not.

We were told a massive bill of goods..if DAC manufacturers did not have that "DSD Ready" sticker on their product it was DOA..because there going to be 10,000... No, 20,000 DSD downloads of major rock, pop, and jazz titles.

What do have a full 3 years later after the so called DSD Revolution? 200 popular titles on superhirez...roughly 550 in total...about 50 on ProStudio Masters...

There were a few blowhards and carnival barkers here and in the press making absurd proclamations about content availability.

I use both a iFI Micro iDSD DAC...same as you, no processing..DSD straight out via low pass filter to analog outputs..and a Simaudio 280D.

I know it's been slow to take off. But I think this is mainly due to file size, and editing capabilities. DxD is a great solution. But how many studio's use Pyramix? Multibit DSD editing may be the game changer that converts all the mastering houses. Who doesn't want their digital masters archived in the best format possible? The record companies sure should if their currently not. You can't go back in time are re-record this stuff. File size will become less of an issue as time passes.

 

[Andre Marc]

I know it's been slow to take off. But I think this is mainly due to file size, and editing capabilities. DxD is a great solution. But how many studio's use Pyramix? Multibit DSD editing may be the game changer that converts all the mastering houses. Who doesn't want their digital masters archived in the best format possible? The record companies sure should if their currently not. You can't go back in time are re-record this stuff. File size will become less of an issue as time passes.

Slow to take off? That is the understatement of the decade. 300 popular titles in 3 years. Yes I know there are more if you include classical, tiny labels, and esoterica. But a revolution that does not make. And of the pop titles available they are all DSD64 with one or two exceptions and we have people here blowing smoke about DSD256.

FYI, a DSD album is absolutely no bigger than a 24/192 album. So file size is of no consequence unless you are talking DSD128 +.

I think it is a pipedream if you think that anything beyond a thimble full of artists are going to start multitracking, mixing, and mastering in DSD.

I will repeat, I think it is a terrific technology, but let's get real.

 

[Blizzard]

Slow to take off? That is the understatement of the decade. 300 popular titles in 3 years. Yes I know there are more if you include classical, tiny labels, and esoterica. But a revolution that does not make. And of the pop titles available they are all DSD64 with one or two exceptions and we have people here blowing smoke about DSD256.

FYI, a DSD album is absolutely no bigger than a 24/192 album. So file size is of no consequence unless you are talking DSD128 +.

I think it is a pipedream if you think that anything beyond a thimble full of artists are going to start multitracking, mixing, and mastering in DSD.

I will repeat, I think it is a terrific technology, but let's get real.

I'm a bit more optimistic about the future of DSD. There's piles of new ADC's coming out with DSD capabilities. There's new chips like the AKM ADC's that have the potential to raise the bar for DSD ADC's.

http://www.akm.com/akm/en/product/detail/0055/

There's also another game changing ADC chip that's going to be announced in Q1 2016. 2016 is the year we are going to see multibit DSD editing capabilities introduced. All of these factors are going to make DSD the #1 choice over PCM. Eventually every premium ADC will be DSD 256 capable. Prices of this gear is also going to keep dropping.

It's a superior way to do things. We are not going to stay frozen in time for eternity.

 

[Andre Marc]

I'm a bit more optimistic about the future of DSD. There's piles of new ADC's coming out with DSD capabilities. There's new chips like the AKM ADC's that have the potential to raise the bar for DSD ADC's.

http://www.akm.com/akm/en/product/detail/0055/

There's also another game changing ADC chip that's going to be announced in Q1 2016. 2016 is the year we are going to see multibit DSD editing capabilities introduced. All of these factors are going to make DSD the #1 choice over PCM. Eventually every premium ADC will be DSD 256 capable. Prices of this gear is also going to keep dropping.

It's a superior way to do things. We are not going to stay frozen in time for eternity.

I think you are WAY over optimistic. 99% of all recording projects are, and will continue to be PCM. Period. ADC/DAC chips do not change the recording industry or have
any effect on artists methods. Hate to rain on your parade, but this is a fantasy world you are creating.

 

[amirm]

For the few of us who have reel-to-reel tape decks, DSD library looks massive . To the extent captures of such tapes can provide transparency to the source and yet, the convenience of digital, I am all for it.

I have a set of transfers from Blue Coast Music from tape in both DSD and PCM and one of these days, I will get around to comparing them .

 

[Blizzard]

I think you are WAY over optimistic. 99% of all recording projects are, and will continue to be PCM. Period. ADC/DAC chips do not change the recording industry or have
any effect on artists methods. Hate to rain on your parade, but this is a fantasy world you are creating.

The chips might not. But when the majority of ADC's that the studios own sound best with DSD, and editing capabilities are available, what would be the reason for sticking with PCM? There's simply too little selection of DSD ADC's today. Next year swarms are gonna hit the market.

 

[Andre Marc]

I'm a bit more optimistic about the future of DSD. There's piles of new ADC's coming out with DSD capabilities. There's new chips like the AKM ADC's that have the potential to raise the bar for DSD ADC's.

http://www.akm.com/akm/en/product/detail/0055/

There's also another game changing ADC chip that's going to be announced in Q1 2016. 2016 is the year we are going to see multibit DSD editing capabilities introduced. All of these factors are going to make DSD the #1 choice over PCM. Eventually every premium ADC will be DSD 256 capable. Prices of this gear is also going to keep dropping.

It's a superior way to do things. We are not going to stay frozen in time for eternity.

If you want a real world example of the disconnect between audiophile flights of fancy and reality..I know someone who was involved in the new massive
Van Morrison remaster series after Sony acquired his entire catalog. They archived all the master tapes to 24/96 PCM. This is SONY. I mentioned DSD
to him and he scoffed, saying that that was not even on the radar for a number reasons. The catalog, btw, is available, in its entirety, in 24/96, on 7Digital,
and a few titles on HDTracks. The last decade worth albums are in 24/44.1.

EDIT: Another massive example: The entire Bob Ludwig Springseen remastering project, again in 24/96, using the Plangent Process. SONY owned catalog. Ding Ding.

 

[Andre Marc]

The chips might not. But when the majority of ADC's that the studios own sound best with DSD, and editing capabilities are available, what would be the reason for sticking with PCM?

I don't think you know how most pop projects are recorded.

Jose Gonazalez, who I just saw live, and had the number 1 album in Europe this past month, recorded the album, Vestiges & Claws, on his laptop workstation at home.
Most bands and artists record parts in multiple locations. I hate to throw cold water on you.

DSD recording WILL and SHOULD have an impact on purist 2 channel recordings.

 

[Andre Marc]

For the few of us who have reel-to-reel tape decks, DSD library looks massive . To the extent captures of such tapes can provide transparency to the source and yet, the convenience of digital, I am all for it.

I have a set of transfers from Blue Coast Music from tape in both DSD and PCM and one of these days, I will get around to comparing them .

As a FLAT tape archiving format, DSD128 can't be beat.

 

[Blizzard]

If you want a real world example of the disconnect between audiophile flights of fancy and reality..I know someone who was involved in the new massive
Van Morrison remaster series after Sony acquired his entire catalog. They archived all the master tapes to 24/96 PCM. This is SONY. I mentioned DSD
to him and he scoffed, saying that that was not even on the radar for a number reasons. The catalog, btw, is available, in its entirety, in 24/96, on 7Digital,
and a few titles on HDTracks. The last decade worth albums are in 24/44.1.

EDIT: Another massive example: The entire Bob Ludwig Springseen remastering project, again in 24/96, using the Plangent Process. SONY owned catalog. Ding Ding.

But your talking about yesterday and today. I'm talking about tomorrow. These studios don't have the gear for high quality DSD recording and editing. It's going to become commoditized. This starts at a hardware level. First at the chips available, then to the ADC's. Combine that with editing capabilities and it's a no brainer. These guys your talking about are only blowing off DSD because of drawbacks that will be nonexistent in the future.

 

[Andre Marc]

But your talking about yesterday and today. I'm talking about tomorrow. This studios don't have the gear for high quality DSD recording and editing. It's going to become commoditized. This starts at a hardware level. First at the chips available, then to the ADC's. Combine that with editing capabilities and it's a no brainer. These guys your talking about are only blowing off DSD because of drawbacks that will be nonexistent in the future.

I am talking about today and tomorrow. Remasters released in 2015. Enjoy your obsession with DAC chips.

 

[Blizzard]

I am talking about today and tomorrow. Remasters released in 2015. Enjoy your obsession with DAC chips.

Tomorrow is 2016 and beyond. 2015 will soon be yesterday. Innovation starts on the hardware and software level. Until the studio engineers have hands on experience with this hardware and software, their opinions won't change from today. It's up to the hardware and software manufacturers to make DSD the #1 format. The studio engineers and recording artists will accept DSD as #1, if the hardware and software manufacturers can make their products have the full capabilities of the PCM equipment they are using today.

 

[Andre Marc]

Tomorrow is 2016 and beyond. 2015 will soon be yesterday. Innovation starts on the hardware and software level. Until the studio engineers have hands on experience with this hardware and software, their opinions won't change from today. It's up to the hardware and software manufacturers to make DSD the #1 format. The studio engineers and recording artists will accept DSD as #1, if the hardware and software manufacturers can make their products have the full capabilities of the PCM equipment they are using today.

As I said, enjoy the fantasy.

 

[Blizzard]

As I said, enjoy the fantasy.

You'll see. Your talking to the wrong people for advice in this area. The end users are the last in the chain. It goes hardware-software-end user. If the hardware/software guys do a good job, the end user accepts. It's clear why PCM is 1# today. When all of those factors become non existent, the end users will change their opinions.

 

[Andre Marc]

You'll see. Your talking to the wrong people for advice in this area. The end users are the last in the chain. It goes hardware-software-end user. If the hardware/software guys do a good job, the end user accepts. It's clear why PCM is 1# today. When all of those factors become non existent, the end users will change their opinions.

Ohhhhhhkay.

 

[bmoura]

For the few of us who have reel-to-reel tape decks, DSD library looks massive .

Yes, the DSD downloads catalog continues to grow. Native DSD just passed the 800 albums mark on their site.
Find HD Music is showing over 1,500 DSD downloads in their search engine which indexes many, but not all of the sites selling DSD music.

Glad to see the growth continuing.