Jump to content

digimuse

  • Posts

    1
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United States

Retained

  • Member Title
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Charles, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to enlighten us in this thread. There is a lot of misinformation in public forums about the superiority of DSD. It's fine to posit opinions, likes/dislikes, but to confuse one's opinions with truths is only self-serving. This is especially problematic when (false) technical claims are made. Unfortunately, there is no review by experts to correct these errors, or to have an intelligent debate on the tradeoffs. The problem is compounded by commercial interests which benefit from propagating lies, which are all too easily accepted as truths by non-specialists (like me). The result is that we are left with a sea of non-expert proclamations and rants from which the truth is impossible to discern. However, at least in this thread, you have shed some light. I want to thank you for your educational postings, and debunking: proof by volume (I make bold claims, and I post often, so I'm right) proof by blathering (I'm great at putting together words and sentences that appear coherent and intelligent) proof by repetition (we +1 each others' postings, and keep repeating the same untruths, so it must be true) proof by I'm an expert (I build systems with DAC components, so I'm right) proof by I'm a (small) businessman (I'm going to create a brand new format/standard for doing digital audio right) proof by attacking the messenger (it's so much harder to defend a position that is shown to be incorrect - much easier to deflect and question the person contradicting your cherished beliefs). Computer audio is a hobby for all of us. We strive to move forward and continually make improvements (although perhaps it would be better to spend more time listening to music). We research various alternatives, audition different systems, and go forward with a purchase that we think is the best way to move our hobby forward. A new opportunity, like SACD/DSD, sounds appealing, especially with the marketing BS put forth by Sony. Having committed to a choice, it's very deflating to accept criticisms of this choice (how could I have made a sub-optimal choice?). It would be very helpful if record companies/music retailers were clear about exactly what was done in the recording, editing, and mastering process. Without this, there are too many variables to know why a recording sounds good or bad (DSD/PCM, bit rate, sample rate, filters used, etc.). I myself have fallen prey to the exaggerated claims of SACD/DSD. I have one of those "ringy-ding" DACs that has an upsampler box upstream transmitting encrypted DSD signals (they're driving two Ayre monoblocks made of some billeted metal). However, after reading all your posts in this thread, I'm convinced that the only value DSD provides is when all mixing/editing is done in the analog domain, and this final analog signal is directly fed to a DSD D/A converter (and on playback a DSD D/A converter is used). I don't believe I have any such recording. Converting from DSD to PCM, doing the editing/mastering, and then converting the PCM to DSD degrades audio quality (especially if you go between DSD and PCM repeatedly). Perhaps future high-resolution PCM recordings will abandon brick-wall filters, and we can have more recordings showing what the best of digital audio has to offer. I tried out the John Marks demo of "Jul" in 192 kHz/ 24 bit and thought it had a very natural, warm, realistic, and un-harsh sound (digital recordings often sound grainy - like an unnatural over-sharpened photo). Keep up the great work!
×
×
  • Create New...