There has been some discussion on what DAC's are doing internally. If you get a DSD DAC (many out there these days), there is no conversion to PCM, at least in theory. SQ during a conversion from DSD to PCM to multi-bit SDM. It seems difficult to me to keep track of what is responsible for what w.r.t. All final judgments should be qualified with equipment used such as whether the DAC uses multi-bit SDM or is a resistance ladder (does anyone make a resistance ladder anymore?) All judgments are valid but keep in mind may not translate across different technologies. 1 above, then next they would have to consider their equipment. DSD, without, of course, converting to the other and back again.Ģ. Perhaps there is simply more that can be done with processing in one format than with the other, PCM vs. But then you would have to compare separately the amount of contribution or lack thereof that comes from processing. I'm not sure if this still happens but what if the capture is to 15 ips or even 30 ips tape that is then converted to PCM and DSD? Would the limitation of the capture media in such cases impact the comparison? And, btw, I don't think it would be at all a fair comparison if someone tried to do a simultaneous dual recording using two independent setups, one for each format (solely for comparison purposes) since now you can't be sure if the minute separation of the setups or any differences in processing/mastering between the two are responsible for any of the differences UNLESS the actual microphone feed is somehow split precisely, each split sampled using a different format, AND no further changes/processing made at all to the resultant captures. For instance, is it a fair comparison if the recording was originally recorded in DSD with the "official" Redbook version being a down-conversion of that? And vice versa, what if the original capture was in high-rate PCM that is then converted to 1-bit DSD? How do you compare that? (I imagine some consideration has to be made also for what workstation and format is used to do the mastering.) As you said, you or anyone else conducting the comparison would have to be fairly certain of the provenance of the comparison files. There are a few variables that you would have to control in order to be fair in your final judgment:ġ. That said, I would caution about the difficulty of adequately conducting the comparison as you prescribed. I have a few DSF files from Blue Coast that I have used A+ to convert but unfortunately don't have the corresponding "official" Redbook mastering-equivalent versions from Blue Coast to make the comparisons you need (and fwiw, the conversions through A+ sound pretty good with no discernible identifying characteristics that I can detect). One of my favorite subjects! I haven't posted in a long time but thought I'd chime in on this one just to keep the discussion going. A+ makes it convenient and easy to try at no expense except for the $25 for the DSD album. I would strongly recommend buying one of the DSD album from Acoustic Sounds and see for yourself. The other DSD albums that I have bought from Acoustic Sounds (Nat King Cole, Muddy Waters, Rickie Lee Jones) all sound fantastic IMHO. This is well recorded album in general and the DSD is really nice even with the DSD to PCM conversion. The only comparison to a Redbook CD is Shelby Lynne's "Just a Little Lovin". There are a number of options in "Preferences" but I am using the default settings in this area. It automatically does the file conversion. Just drop the DSD files (folder) into the playlist and A+ plays just as it does PCM files. Still, I very much like what I hear from DSD.Ī+ converts the DSD file to 24/176.4 PCM data. My DAC (Metric Halo LIO-8) does not handle DSD directly so I have not bought that many DSD titles except a few from Acoustic Sounds and Blue Coast.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |