(my mistake, DXD is 352.8kHz 24bit, not 384k)
DSD to 352.8kHz PCM (DXD) maybe is not fully 'lossless', but it should be good enough. Because studios actually first convert recorded DSD to DXD, do editing on DXD, then convert back to DSD and sell it to consumers (via SACD). because DSD format is not editing friendly, while DXD (PCM) is. So the final DSD file we get shouldn't contain more information than DXD. Unless the DSD was not edited / mastered by the studio, e.g. directly converted from analog tape, and the mastering was done on the analog tape.
Found an article saying DXD actually is better than DSD. well, i am not sure:
"DXD is the recommended recording format “when setting up systems for the absolute highest sound quality”. It turns out that DSD AD conversion is just not up to the task because of the lack of tools and the high noise levels that are generated. So what the Sony and Phillips folks are actually saying is that HD PCM at 352.8 or 384 kHz and 24 or 32-bit word is the “best” system for capturing audio.""
I'd agree with most of that - other than to say that whenever a conversion occurs (even if one is converting to a "better" format - let's say an 8 track crappy tape to DXD) there will always be a loss - which you have acknowledged. It is probably not a huge loss, as you state, but it will be there. Converting a DSD to DXD will suffer some loss (which - I think - is a part of why DXD is "superior" - it is the original format for many new recordings as DSD is not generally used for mixing purposes - blame Sony ... I certainly do).
It is interesting to look at a company which does record in DXD to garner their opinions on DXD versus (converted) DSD:
http://www.2l.no/ (click on "about" if this doesn't take you to the right page)
This is largely irrelevant for most of our recordings, but it is still interesting as it may provide a hint of what the future will bring (hopefully for ALL music, not just recordings of Nordic Nose Flutes) !