POLL: WHO IS/HAS USED DSD?

[Kal Rubinson]

The question was if DSD sounds better than PCM and not if multi channel is better than stereo.

Nope. The question was: "IS DSD IMPORTANT, TRIVIAL, OR A WASTE in home audio?"

 

[MrSoul4470]

Oh okay.... True. Just checked again. My bad.

 

[Trell]

The question was if DSD sounds better than PCM and not if multi channel is better than stereo.

As @Kal Rubinson wrote that is not the question, and I'll add that the poll just asks "Have you used DSD files or media?" so you missed that too.

 

[Desertpilot]

I love multichannel "classical" music. A decade ago, SACD was the only way to get surround music. Up until now, I've moved to downloading DSD as available. Lately, I prefer downloading the "master" DXD file (typically FLAC 24/352.8). Why? I use JRiver which will not apply my DSP Convolution Filters to DSD files. So, I've pretty much moved away from DSD.

Marcus

 

[jhaider]

DSD is audibly inferior to other lossless multichannel in actual use (unless converted) for reasons @Kal Rubinson referenced at the top of the thread.

However, there are recordings on 3+ channel SACD not available in other formats, so on that basis it’s worth having the playback capability.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

However, there are recordings on 3+ channel SACD not available in other formats, so on that basis it’s worth having the playback capability.

I've stopped obsessing over DSD vs. PCM and simply choose my recordings on the basis of content, performance and sound quality. The formats are not significant to me as they are effectively interconvertible. If there are options, I try to pick one that is closest to the format used in mastering.

 

[Galliardist]

I've stopped obsessing over DSD vs. PCM and simply choose my recordings on the basis of content, performance and sound quality. The formats are not significant to me as they are effectively interconvertible. If there are options, I try to pick one that is closest to the format used in mastering.

Though I could easily imagine the situation where a stereo PCM master is screwed up and over compressed in all the multibit formats, but properly converted to DSD/SACD. I’ve come across the attitude that PCM is for streaming and DSD is for audiophiles in a few places online.

 

[Mr. Widget]

I've stopped obsessing over DSD vs. PCM and simply choose my recordings on the basis of content, performance and sound quality. The formats are not significant to me as they are effectively interconvertible.

+1

I don't bother with surround music and am an old school 2 channel guy, but this thread inspired me to dig through my CDs. I realize I am probably of a minority opinion here on the topic of multi-channel.

I found around 25 multi-channel DSD discs in my collection. These range from remastered "Living Stereo" RCA Red Seal classical discs which are barely surround and actually sound quite good, but I am not sure there is much benefit from their being multi-channel. I also have a multi-channel recording of solo piano by Conrad Tao recorded at Skywalker Sound. It is truly multi-channel of a solo piano and it sounds great, but similar stereo recordings also sound great.

On the other hand I have two multi-channel recordings of Steely Dan Gaucho. One is a DTS CD and the other a DSD multi-channel disc. They appear to have the same mix but different mastering. The bottom is punchier on the DTS disc compared to the DSD or Red Book stereo discs, and the DSD disc has an overall fatter or fuller bottom end. While I like the punchier bottom end on the DTS disc, I am really NOT a fan of having my head in the middle of the performance. It is not like I am on stage with the band, it is like part of some instruments are in front of me and the rest of the instrument is behind me. I find it very distracting. To greater or lesser degrees I find this to be the case with most of the pop/rock recordings and some classic jazz recordings I have.

That said, I have to admit Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon is pretty damned compelling in surround. As most here, I have heard this album innumerable times. The surround mix really works with this surrealist album.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I found around 25 multi-channel DSD discs in my collection. These range from remastered "Living Stereo" RCA Red Seal classical discs which are barely surround and actually sound quite good, but I am not sure there is much benefit from their being multi-channel.

In a properly set up comparison, the difference between the stereo and the 3-channel versions is significant. I have used that as a demonstration many times.

That said, I have to admit Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon is pretty damned compelling in surround. As most here, I have heard this album innumerable times. The surround mix really works with this surrealist album.

I agree but, in general, I prefer realism to surrealism for my music.

 

[Mr. Widget]

In a properly set up comparison, the difference between the stereo and the 3-channel versions is significant. I have used that as a demonstration many times.

I agree but, in general, I prefer realism to surrealism for my music.

I think I know what you mean. The Red Seal discs all seem to be 3.0 mixes and do sound open and spacious. As I mentioned earlier I do like these. I don't have the conventional stereo versions to compare, but I can see what's available via Qobuz or Tidal. It would be interesting to compare.

Regarding the surreal... that is my point. For me virtually all of the pop/rock surround discs are "interesting" at best and typically more like a distraction from the music. Maybe someday we will be able to have a slider between that lets us choose between surreal and simple added ambiance. I just put on Frampton Comes Alive, I was surprised to see it in the pile as I rarely play this sort of thing and doubt I ever played it, but playing it now, it is actually pretty good. The rear crowd noise might be a bit more than I would choose, but overall fairly convincing. I found myself wishing I had one of those '70s quadraphonic joy sticks.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

The Red Seal discs all seem to be 3.0 mixes and do sound open and spacious.

They are 3-track recordings, not mixes. The stereo content on the discs (and the original Living Stereo releases) are down-mixes from them.

 

[Mr. Widget]

They are 3-track recordings, not mixes. The stereo content on the discs (and the original Living Stereo releases) are down-mixes from them.

Thank you for the info! This totally makes sense.

I was confused because my display was telling me that the source was 5.0... I imagine it because the Oppo doesn't differentiate between 3.0 and 5.0.

In any event, I fully agree with you, the 3.0 playback was quite good. I will take your word for it that it is better than a down mixed 2.0 version.

 

[Mirya]

Anyone successfully rip SACD from Sony UBP-X800M2? I have copied the AutoScript folder with three files in USB (FAT32 format), using the SACDExtractGUI, it does not detect my bluray IP address, just wonder if this model is in AutoScript list?

 

[Deleted member 19122]

Mostly for multi channel but since storage is cheap I have a fair bit of stereo SACD as well since the mastering tends to be top notch

 

[SoundsGood64]

Any one enjoy gapless playback of multichannel DSD files over network, and what method do you use?

 

[Yearofthegoat]

I play multichannel DSD from a NAS using Foobar on an HTPC. Would have to check if it stays gapless. I think not (slight, tiny, pause), but I haven't fiddled with settings much.

 

[Yearofthegoat]

I have DVD-Audio discs and SACDs, and they're great. I do like multichannel. Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds is superb. I ripped my collection, but only really to be able to keep listening. DVD-Audio disc players are hard to find, last I looked.

 

[SoundsGood64]

I play multichannel DSD from a NAS using Foobar on an HTPC. Would have to check if it stays gapless. I think not (slight, tiny, pause), but I haven't fiddled with settings much.

Ok thank you Yearofthegoat, and please let us know if you find gap vs gapless for your Mch playback. For your set up, are you transcoding DSD->PCM with the HTPC (Foobar) and then sending Mch PCM over HDMI to an AVR, or do you have something different?

 

[Yearofthegoat]

Ok thank you Yearofthegoat, and please let us know if you find gap vs gapless for your Mch playback. For your set up, are you transcoding DSD->PCM with the HTPC (Foobar) and then sending Mch PCM over HDMI to an AVR, or do you have something different?

That's it. I was hoping that my AVR (Yamaha RX-A3050) would take DSD over HDMI but it won't. Takes it fine off the disc of course

I found out just tonight that Kodi 19.5 will play the DSFs. And transcode them to AC3 for SPDIF-ness in my other room, which is nice (but a bit pointless as I already have them in MCH FLAC, but hey).

 

[SoundsGood64]

That's it. I was hoping that my AVR (Yamaha RX-A3050) would take DSD over HDMI but it won't. Takes it fine off the disc of course

I found out just tonight that Kodi 19.5 will play the DSFs. And transcode them to AC3 for SPDIF-ness in my other room, which is nice (but a bit pointless as I already have them in MCH FLAC, but hey).

I think you mean that you can send DSD derived directly from SACD playback on a disc player, but not DSD from HTPC (foobar), over HDMI to your AVR. Based on my reading on forums, the reason you cannot play DSD over HDMI from HTPC is because of the lack of necessary DSD drivers for HDMI on PCs and 'computer hardware'.

For gapless Mch playback on Kodi (post 14), a report of gapless on Foobar using mConnect app (post 15), and one method to get DSD over HDMI via DoP (restricted to rare hardware, posts 19-21), please see posts 14-21 from another thread:

Multi-channel DSD playback

Hi guys, in my collection I have a few multi-channel DSD albums, when I play from Audirvana looks like it’s been down sampled to 2 channels. My question is how to play multi-channel DSD in bit-perfect way (I have 5.1 setup)? Most DACs seem to only support 2 channels. Maybe an AV receiver is...

www.audiosciencereview.com