Boy Howdy Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Folks: Having perused a couple of the "which is better DSD or 24/192 PCM" discussions, I decided to try to find out for myself whether or not DSD is worth the effort and expense. Please note that I have several hundred SACDs and so most of what I like is represented there. So, I "helped" my wife come up with a Schiit Loki for me as a Christmas present. I am waiting for a powered USB expander to actually set it up with my Bifrost on my desktop system (iMac --> Bifrost --> Yamaha CA 610 II --> Tannoy Mercury 2 speakers). I will then set up a few comparisons with different integrated amps and different speakers to determine if I have any preferences. One thing I have already noticed is that the supply of DSDs overlaps the availability of SACDs, i.e., everything I see on DSD is either already in my collection or else the DSD will be released six months AFTER the SACD is released. I have seen a few references to recordings that are being made via DSD (e.g., Blue Coast) but no stampede yet... So, in addition to any aural differences I might perceive, I am interested in availability of material especially where the lineage of the material is clear. If there are recordings that can only be obtained in DSD, then the evaluation questions may have to be modified. Right now, I'm just playing around. Would love to hear others' experiences with both aural and availability issues. Mike Link to comment
Paul R Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 I have been listening to a borrowed Loki, having JRMC transcode (on the fly) all our PCM based music to DSD as it plays. The sound is wonderful, so much so that I am suspicious of some kind of trick i the Loki. (*sigh*) Paranoia perhaps, but still... It is good enough to make me order one of the beasts, even though I am embarrassed to have something with that name in my rack. A Mythological Schiity Trickster... just what I need. -Paul Folks:Having perused a couple of the "which is better DSD or 24/192 PCM" discussions, I decided to try to find out for myself whether or not DSD is worth the effort and expense. Please note that I have several hundred SACDs and so most of what I like is represented there. So, I "helped" my wife come up with a Schiit Loki for me as a Christmas present. I am waiting for a powered USB expander to actually set it up with my Bifrost on my desktop system (iMac --> Bifrost --> Yamaha CA 610 II --> Tannoy Mercury 2 speakers). I will then set up a few comparisons with different integrated amps and different speakers to determine if I have any preferences. One thing I have already noticed is that the supply of DSDs overlaps the availability of SACDs, i.e., everything I see on DSD is either already in my collection or else the DSD will be released six months AFTER the SACD is released. I have seen a few references to recordings that are being made via DSD (e.g., Blue Coast) but no stampede yet... So, in addition to any aural differences I might perceive, I am interested in availability of material especially where the lineage of the material is clear. If there are recordings that can only be obtained in DSD, then the evaluation questions may have to be modified. Right now, I'm just playing around. Would love to hear others' experiences with both aural and availability issues. Mike Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
sandyk Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 I have been listening to a borrowed Loki, having JRMC transcode (on the fly) all our PCM based music to DSD as it plays. The sound is wonderful, so much so that I am suspicious of some kind of trick i the Loki. (*sigh*) Paranoia perhaps, but still... It is good enough to make me order one of the beasts, even though I am embarrassed to have something with that name in my rack. A Mythological Schiity Trickster... just what I need. -Paul Paul That suggests that there is nothing wrong with the PCM format itself. It appears to demonstrate that there is something very wrong with most typical PCM playback if it can be further improved by simply transcoding it to DSD on "the fly". Perhaps Charles Hansen may be correct after all, with his very different approach ? Regards Alex How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
Boy Howdy Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 Paul: I didn't know that the Loki could transcode everything to DSD on the fly. Interesting… I should get my powered USB device today and so will set up my Loki and fool around with this feature. I'm jazzed! (Pun intended). Mike Link to comment
Paul R Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 The Loki cannot, but JRMC (J. River Media Center)can transcode everything to DSD and send it to the Loki. With that input, the Loki is, possibly, good enough to be the only DAC one really needs. Other players, like Audirvana+ can do that also. -Paul Paul:I didn't know that the Loki could transcode everything to DSD on the fly. Interesting… I should get my powered USB device today and so will set up my Loki and fool around with this feature. I'm jazzed! (Pun intended). Mike Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
Paul R Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Yes, there is actually nothing "wrong" with the PCM format, it is just a little more difficult to reconstruct than DSD. Why there is such a sonic difference is a hotly debated question of course. -Paul Paul That suggests that there is nothing wrong with the PCM format itself. It appears to demonstrate that there is something very wrong with most typical PCM playback if it can be further improved by simply transcoding it to DSD on "the fly". Perhaps Charles Hansen may be correct after all, with his very different approach ? Regards Alex Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
Allan F Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 So, in addition to any aural differences I might perceive, I am interested in availability of material especially where the lineage of the material is clear. If there are recordings that can only be obtained in DSD, then the evaluation questions may have to be modified. Right now, I'm just playing around. Would love to hear others' experiences with both aural and availability issues. Mike You might want to visit: dsdfile.com | Highest Fidelity through DSD and https://nativedsd.com/ Native DSD is currently in beta testing. "Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron Link to comment
LBob Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 The Loki cannot, but JRMC (J. River Media Center)can transcode everything to DSD and send it to the Loki. With that input, the Loki is, possibly, good enough to be the only DAC one really needs. Other players, like Audirvana+ can do that also. -Paul Paul, Am I reading this correctly? Audirvana can convert PCM to DSD? So I could play a redbook file and out put DSD to my dac? 2012 MacMini 8G ram -> Audirvana + 3.0 -> Mcintosh MHA 100> Nordost > Audeze LCD X Link to comment
lmf22 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Are you guys saying that setting JRiver so upsample PCM to DSD (or DSD128) is better than outputting native sample rate (44.1kHz) to a DSD capable DAC? I assume the quality of the DSD upsample is dependent on JRiver. So is JRiver's DSD upsampling engine good? And how does it compare to hardware upsampler (e.g., the Meitner upsample everything to 5.6MHz). Link to comment
Paul R Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Yep - looks to me like it is in there with the SRC. At least there are options for it. JRMC can absolutely do it. -Paul Paul, Am I reading this correctly? Audirvana can convert PCM to DSD? So I could play a redbook file and out put DSD to my dac? Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
Paul R Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Yes, in fact, that is EXACTLY what I have been doing with a little borrowed Loki. I am not so sure there is any quality issues with any SRC that converts to DSD, it is just a format conversion after all. I have not studied the algorithms used to do that, but I would guess that there is little room for error. Going into a Meitner, I suspect it would sound even better. I know it sounds amazing going into a Benchmark DAC2, a MyTek, and a Teac UD501. -Paul Are you guys saying that setting JRiver so upsample PCM to DSD (or DSD128) is better than outputting native sample rate (44.1kHz) to a DSD capable DAC? I assume the quality of the DSD upsample is dependent on JRiver. So is JRiver's DSD upsampling engine good? And how does it compare to hardware upsampler (e.g., the Meitner upsample everything to 5.6MHz). Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
One and a half Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Are you guys saying that setting JRiver so upsample PCM to DSD (or DSD128) is better than outputting native sample rate (44.1kHz) to a DSD capable DAC? I assume the quality of the DSD upsample is dependent on JRiver. So is JRiver's DSD upsampling engine good? And how does it compare to hardware upsampler (e.g., the Meitner upsample everything to 5.6MHz). See also AS Profile Equipment List Say NO to MQA Link to comment
Boy Howdy Posted January 16, 2014 Author Share Posted January 16, 2014 Paul: I am running Audirvana + so I will try to figure out how to get it to transcode. I am excited bu the possibilities! Thanks, Mike Link to comment
Paul R Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 I just tried A+ and for the life of me, I cannot get it to transcode TO DSD - it will easily transcode DSD to PCM, but the other way around seems difficult... Apologies if I steered you wrong there. I suggest trying out JRMC, where it is much easier to do that. Damian will, I am sure, put that capability into A+ in the next release or so. -Paul Paul:I am running Audirvana + so I will try to figure out how to get it to transcode. I am excited bu the possibilities! Thanks, Mike Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
LBob Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I just tried A+ and for the life of me, I cannot get it to transcode TO DSD - it will easily transcode DSD to PCM, but the other way around seems difficult... Apologies if I steered you wrong there. I suggest trying out JRMC, where it is much easier to do that. Damian will, I am sure, put that capability into A+ in the next release or so. -Paul Thanks Paul. I scoured the manual and was thinking that I must be really dense. 2012 MacMini 8G ram -> Audirvana + 3.0 -> Mcintosh MHA 100> Nordost > Audeze LCD X Link to comment
lmf22 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Yes, in fact, that is EXACTLY what I have been doing with a little borrowed Loki. I am not so sure there is any quality issues with any SRC that converts to DSD, it is just a format conversion after all. I have not studied the algorithms used to do that, but I would guess that there is little room for error. Going into a Meitner, I suspect it would sound even better. I know it sounds amazing going into a Benchmark DAC2, a MyTek, and a Teac UD501. -Paul I tried PCM to 2xDSD (5.6MHz) using JRiver, into my Yulong DA8 DAC. Sounds very good! I noticed increased soundstage (both depth and width; a singificant difference from PCM) and more clarity like a veil had been removed. These are my settings: JRiver (Yulong ASIO driver, buffer at 100ms with "Use large hardware buffers" checked. Anything lower than 100ms would result in studdering); 50kHz DSD filter on the DAC. I had a different experience when I had the TEAC UD-501. No matter which of the four DSD filters I tried on the UD-501, the treble just sounded weird to me. I was never able to put my finger on it. So I reverted back to to upsampled 352.8/384kHz PCM. Perhaps the Yulong's Sabre ESS9018 DAC handles DSD better than the TEAC's BurrBrown PCM1795? Or the Yulong has better DSD filter? Link to comment
lmf22 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I saw these two posts over at Head-Fi, saying that PCM to DSD using JRiver results in a smoother sound and is less resolved. Ranking of 21 DACs and DAC Configurations (and why DSD must die) - Page 22 Ranking of 21 DACs and DAC Configurations (and why DSD must die) - Page 22 Link to comment
Paul R Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 This is interesting. I know that 44.1K rebook here sounds much smoother and enjoyable when converted to DSD than it has any right to. And hires music just sounds more relaxed and right. I attribute that to DAC PCM filtering more than anything else. But it is early days yet - who knows how this will play out? -Paul I saw these two posts over at Head-Fi, saying that PCM to DSD using JRiver results in a smoother sound and is less resolved. Ranking of 21 DACs and DAC Configurations (and why DSD must die) - Page 22 Ranking of 21 DACs and DAC Configurations (and why DSD must die) - Page 22 Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC. Robert A. Heinlein Link to comment
lmf22 Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 I did some more listening last night, comparing native versus PCM-to-DSD. I found that with PCM-to-DSD I get fatigue after about 2 albums. When I switched back to native, I felt better. There is definately increased details with PCM-to-DSD, but maybe because I am not used to the increased details. Anyways, like Paul.Raulerson said, it is still early days. And my Yulong DA8 DAC has only about 200 hours on it. I will need to do more extensive listening (and burn in). Link to comment
Boy Howdy Posted January 18, 2014 Author Share Posted January 18, 2014 Okay folks, dumb question time. I've got the Loki set up and it is doing fine passing audio from my computer (iMac) through the Bifrost and Audirvana + (v. 1.5.12) is set up for DSD (I think - who knows). I have a DSD file which I bought from Acoustic Sounds and downloaded to my computer. This file is a bunch of alpha-numeric characters followed by ".zip.download" and I can't get any further than that. Double clicking on the file does nothing. Dropping the file in Audirvana's "Playlist" window does nothing… Called Acoustic Sounds to see if there is possibly an issue with the file - again, who knows? - this is my very first DSD file - but no techies on duty today - maybe Monday. I can't stand it!!! You know how it is - got a new toy and you want to play with it. But I can't. Advice anyone? Thanks, Mike Link to comment
Freann Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 ".zip.download" indicates the file did not download completely. Can you download it again? Roon client on iPad/MacBookPro Roon Server & HQPlayer on Mac Mini 2.0 GHz i7 with JS-2 LPS-1 & ultraRendu → Lampizator Atlantic → Bent Audio TAP-X → Atma-sphere M60 → Zero autoformers → Harbeth Compact 7 ES-3 Link to comment
Allan F Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Okay folks, dumb question time. I've got the Loki set up and it is doing fine passing audio from my computer (iMac) through the Bifrost and Audirvana + (v. 1.5.12) is set up for DSD (I think - who knows). I have a DSD file which I bought from Acoustic Sounds and downloaded to my computer. This file is a bunch of alpha-numeric characters followed by ".zip.download" and I can't get any further than that. Double clicking on the file does nothing. Dropping the file in Audirvana's "Playlist" window does nothing… Called Acoustic Sounds to see if there is possibly an issue with the file - again, who knows? - this is my very first DSD file - but no techies on duty today - maybe Monday. I can't stand it!!! You know how it is - got a new toy and you want to play with it. But I can't. Advice anyone? Thanks, Mike Did you try to unzip the folder? Most of Acoustic Sounds DSD downloads are to a .zip compressed folder requiring that the files be extracted or "unzipped". However, I don't recall seeing ".zip.download" rather than just ".zip". "Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron Link to comment
kumakuma Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Did you try to unzip the folder? Most of Acoustic Sounds DSD downloads are to a .zip compressed folder requiring that the files be extracted or "unzipped". However, I don't recall seeing ".zip.download" rather than just ".zip". As Freann indicated above, a file ending in "zip.download" on a Mac is a zip file that hasn't been fully downloaded. It is either still downloading or downloading was interrupted before it completed. Once downloading finishes, the ".download" extension disappears and you should be able to unzip it and then play the files. Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley Through the middle of my skull Link to comment
Allan F Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Thanks for the explanation. I don't speak Mac so "zip.download" is something I've never seen before or likely to see again. "Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now