arw

Lastly of note, one of the beautiful things about DSD is that it doesn't take a rocket scientist to find the last word in decoding it so most receivers that do native dsd will sound very nice indeed, another reason this template works quite well. Cheers.

Yash, Playback from an HD (specifically DSF MC)->HDMI is only possible as far as I know from BDP-S6200 and BDP-S7200 (undocumented feature). There may be more but those are the ones I know about. I don't think the oppo does this, its setup to accept a computer usb output (as a dac) requiring a dedicated source computer. It may have other dsd compatible inputs so you'll have to check (sd card slot?), I don't have one. Many HDMI transports exist (ted's list) but only those I have listed above work sans computer and or discs which is, again, the point of this template. Yes Ted, if one has a huge collection, a dedicated computer is probably your go-to (or have a really well organized and executed disc library, kind of 20th century stuff there though . At that point you probably have the resources to afford a proper MC dac as well and a pre with balanced MC inputs. However, one of the goals as stated above is direct access to your amplifiers so as to minimize time distortions which you minimize on a receiver directly off of hdmi, eliminating cords and so on. Note that both the players I've listed here have two usb inputs so that one can have a total of 4gb of storage (you could also probably just get multiple bluray players as well at <200 a pop) which moves the max library one may access somewhat.

Even the baseline Yamaha RX-V377 (299 msrp) will decode DSD over HDMI. Others will too, just read the manual to make sure. I'm not arguing for Yamaha, however, my point is that this can be done rather cheaply; you don't need to be rich to enjoy this hobby and good music in general. I've gravitated towards direct to amplifier decoding (i.e. receiver via HDMI) for MC because I've noticed that even with the best outboard analogue 5ch transport there are sufficient timing errors introduced (esp with such detailed music as MC dsd) that you can tell a big difference when you switch to HDMI.

My DSD Template Hello, Like you I’ve made the leap to deal with a technology oft maligned but which consistently sounds the best to my ears. It is a big investment in time and money to achieve full advantage of DSD in your system so buyer be ware. In a years time we may see shift to 32 bit music at which point PCM may reign supreme again, however, the file size vs quality leads me to say DSD will be relevant long into the future. I though it might be valuable to some of you to share the way I’ve maximized use of SACD and DSD material to enjoy the music I love best. Template 1: Surround Sound- DSD Surround Jute box via HDMI I believe this is the real killer feature of DSD material. In order to enjoy DSD in surround, however you need a system capable of reproducing surround music (ie 5.1 speaker system or 5.0 I suppose) and probably SACD ripping capability (not easy) as most surround material is on physical discs (although you can purchase surround files from native DSD but they are usually more expensive than the discs). Many receivers, especially ones designed in Japan are capable of decoding DSD natively over HDMI. I think this is the crux of my blog post: how to get a DSD jute box going to store and reproduce surround DSD. So here it is, my template for doing so: Hard drive 2TB or less with DSD rips in surround DSF format (formatted NTFS or Fat 32)-> usb input of Sony Blu-ray player capable of playing DSF files (ie BDP-S6200 cheap!)-> HDMI output to DSD native receiver-> 5.1 surround (its magic, really) One could purchase a 4k+ dac and try to play from the computer but you can get a hold of a cheap Yamaha receiver with HDMI DSD native playback and a Sony Blu-ray player (check that it has this capability first) for pretty cheap. Spend the rest on good speakers. Template 2: Stereo My best stereo system is attached to my computer via a PCM only Dac that I bough last year for a considerable sum and I don’t really want to go through the hassle of trying to sell it in favor of a dac that can do dsd but probably not PCM as well (especially where most material is in PCM still). So here is my stereo template DSD download or SACD rip in Stereo-> Hybrid DSh file using DSD Master-> iTunes -> PCM Dac -> rotel/b&w stereo system Both of these setups allows on-demand play of music which was my aim and while the surround setup is a bit of a hack it is native playback and sounds amazing. Can’t wait for my SACD shipment from hong-kong to arrive. Keep it up Sony Hong-Kong! Enjoy the music, arw

As it relates to the hardware, mac mini vs pc/CAPs, i would suggest that it would be very hard to make a firm decision because it may perform differently depending on the environment and software you use. However, as a mac person for 25+ years, I’m starting to lean more towards the PC for music storage and playback. Three things have changed my mind. For one, with my dac at least, MacOS only offers 24bit output. That means, every time I listen to a song (most of mine are 16bit) there is bit padding going on which necessarily means that it doesn’t sound as intended. This is something I recently noted through listening. Second, windows 8.1 is really the best PC operating system Microsoft has made so far. Its fast and rather nice to use once you set it up to your liking. Finally, I’m starting to appreciate JRiver and would do so more if I had a DSD capable dac. I would probably use the mac version if I could get 16bit output but it's native on the PC. Where I want to host music for my home, I can use iTunes running in the background to serve up all my files across the network. Moreover, and to my surprise, iTunes for the PC lets you set the output frequency and bit rate–you can even choose WASAPI output. Surprisingly it is more advanced and more capable than its mac counterpart, at least for now. Just don't expect me to use a PC for anything else... except the occasional game or two.

DSD is great: http://www.muszeroldal.hu/assistance/sacd.pdf even if it uses 1 bit sampling Library of congress overview (DSD): One-bit Delta Sigma Audio Encoding (DSD)

More resolution is better: Quantization error: Definition from Answers.com

I'm new to the blog, but here it goes: On File Resolution and Audio Capture (DSD and PCM) - Blogs - Computer Audiophile There are samples in my DSD bit stream, 1 yes or no every 2822400 seconds.

<p><a href="/monthly_2014_05/58cd9bc6c5394_OnResolution.jpg.8f214bf6c62d0ee84a80eb89b5161be9.jpg" class="ipsAttachLink ipsAttachLink_image"><img data-fileid="28251" src="/monthly_2014_05/58cd9bc6c5394_OnResolution.jpg.8f214bf6c62d0ee84a80eb89b5161be9.jpg" class="ipsImage ipsImage_thumbnailed" alt=""></a></p><p><a href="/monthly_2014_05/58cd9bce6cacf_OnResolution.jpg.42e8d119b80f99d967decec28dde4134.jpg" class="ipsAttachLink ipsAttachLink_image"><img data-fileid="28501" src="/monthly_2014_05/58cd9bce6cacf_OnResolution.jpg.42e8d119b80f99d967decec28dde4134.jpg" class="ipsImage ipsImage_thumbnailed" alt=""></a></p>

Since computer audio reproduction is digital sampling, this is a topic worth discussing at CA. Even though certain members are prolific in posts, CA has a wide audience. And I write for them equally. Saying 2L is ripping people off because they don’t know what they are doing may be right or wrong, but keep in mind that the sign says forum, it doesn’t say fight.

I understand your position better now. Thanks for taking the time to make that clear. I found a couple more things to take a look at, if you are interested that speak more to the benefits of higher frequencies and capturing complex wave forms. Understanding nyquist and its application. See 'Nyquist and signal content' Pg 10-13: http://www.wescottdesign.com/articles/Sampling/sampling.pdf Square waves and sampling frequencies: Craigman Digital - PCM vs DSD

If music was a perfect sine wave, your interpretation would be accurate. But, because of critical frequency errors (see above) in reproduction, more resolution is always better. Although, because human perception of sound varies on an individual basis, you alone must determine whether it has value.

I'm not sure what you mean. How does it work then? If you can overcome the potential timing errors of more data (and the original analogue signal is accurate), higher sampling rates are always better. Lower sampling is more susceptible critical frequency errors: more wave forms possible for the same digital data (the original is thereby obscured): Nyquist

Don't think of it as 'filling' something, rather it's more like brail on a curve, the more data points the more accurate the reproduction. More data points are always better, this is the concept behind sampling the curve at 2.8MHz+ (DSD). The curious fact that generating an aiff file format generates data 'noise' at higher bit rates is simply a product of the math. If your system produces frequencies above 50,000hz, and you can hear it, perhaps you're the only canine member of CA? Note the first audacity picture you posted shows, accurately, an output of 'real data' from the file only up to about 48khz. From Sony's website: High-Resolution Audio

You know, I’m going to have to disagree. About 20 years ago, Sony was on top of the world and I had the privilege of visiting their New York store for a bit and was astonished by all of the high end audio equipment they made. Understandably, those products had relatively low circulation as it was all quite expensive. I saw things there I’d never heard of before such as open headphones and top-loading cd trays that weighed 10lbs. Then Apple stepped in (ala the late Steve Jobs) and walked all over the consumer electronics. Fast-forward to today and we have a new PS4 that is leading, the A7 camera with the best sensor out there, and DSD (a Sony format) is starting to gain a bit more traction. I understand that Apple is even going to enter high-resolution market this summer. Simply put, I see Sony leading again in several areas and I hope that they continue to push the envelope because we will all benefit. Finally, I just have to say that my favorite recordings of late are not PCM HDtracks downloads, though I do have a few, but DSD->PCM conversions (especially live or remastered albums from master audio tapes). All 2 channel. If you know how to manhandle AudioGate and have bit-perfect playback software, its peerless. Those with DSD dacs obviously do one better.