[Whitigir]

Thank you for this!

Hello, look the same track without DSD (FLAC 24/96) and with DSD512

 

[singleended5863]

Subscribed...

 

[Lurker0]

how does that work? where does the garbage from the original flac/cd file go?

This is high school math - Kotelnikov's theorem, or, you can try Nyquist–Shannon version, though delta-sigma DACs (or DSD convertors) use exactly the proof by Kotelnikov: a sum of sync function values. The more values are taken into account, the more precision, and the closer the result to the original analog signal. For the perfect result, the sum must have infinite number of members.

In real life, DACs use some tens to hundreds members ("taps"). Chord programmed their FPGA-based DAC to some thousands, and recently announced a million. Unlike DACs, software converters don't need to operate in real time, and therefore may have much better precision.

a 16/44 file has some finite representation of an analog wave

Yes, but, to extract all the good that it has, infinite number of calculations is required. Offline converter does more than real-time converter, leading to closer to original result.

 

[Whitigir]

This is high school math - Kotelnikov's theorem, or, you can try Nyquist–Shannon version, though delta-sigma DACs (or DSD convertors) use exactly the proof by Kotelnikov: a sum of sync function values. The more values are taken into account, the more precision, and the closer the result to the original analog signal. For the perfect result, the sum must have infinite number of members.

In real life, DACs use some tens to hundreds members ("taps"). Chord programmed their FPGA-based DAC to some thousands, and recently announced a million. Unlike DACs, software converters don't need to operate in real time, and therefore may have much better precision.

Yes, but, to extract all the good that it has, infinite number of calculations is required. Offline converter does more than real-time converter, leading to closer to original result.

Thank you @Lurker0 ! Awesome information

 

[Mizukage]

Subscribed. I'll try this out this weekend. I'm willing to pay hundreds of dollars for a cable for better sound $20 is a steal

 

[Whitigir]

Subscribed. I'll try this out this weekend. I'm willing to pay hundreds of dollars for a cable for better sound $20 is a steal

You will be paying hundreds later for a MicroSD 512gb or 400gb . If you are able to hear cables differences, you will drop jaws with DSD512

 

[Mario Samek]

Hello means, this DSD512 file from Xivero XiSRC only play in USB Audio Player Pro, LurkerHiby not support this file and NEUTRON Player not react on my SDCARD formated to ExFAT

 

[Whitigir]

Hello means, this DSD512 file from Xivero XiSRC only play in USB Audio Player Pro, LurkerHiby not support this file and NEUTRON Player not react on my SDCARD formated to ExFAT

It is best played in Dx200 Native Mango Mode

 

[Mizukage]

You will be paying hundreds later for a MicroSD 512gb or 400gb . If you are able to hear cables differences, you will drop jaws with DSD512[/QUOTE

One way or another this hobby sucks you in, but the joy I get from it is priceless

 

[natemact]

This statement by itself is useless...

Well considering all I asked was for people to be polite, I'm gonna assume Canadians and Russians have slightly different view points of how to exactly be it And ya, I'm just bustin' yer balls back

Just so I'm walking away from this without being misinformed, the reason why we prefer an upsampled D512 file to the original has zero bearing on the fact that a DSD file sees less processing than a PCM file (only filter DSD sees is the LPF) and all to do with the sample rate converter SW applying a higher precision filter to the file, correct? This may show my digital ignorance (I was exclusively vinyl for the last 10+ years is my excuse but I had no idea filters were used in sample rate conversion..don't laugh at me. ADC/DAC was the only place I thought I'd find them in the recording/playback chain. For the sticklers out there: I realize noise gates, EQ, et al. are filters themselves but clearly I'm not talking about production chain filters.
I gotta say though, your reasoning for your clarifying post was to describe how a DAC works and if even one person who was uneducated with the inner workings of DAC now has a decent understanding after reading your post I'll eat this adorable Still happy to have you here tho : )

Everything affect the sound quality, but playing PCM, your Sigma Delta is doing a live conversions of it own, and it is dependent onto a plethora of everything’s that build up around it (which becomes your own DAC), where as offline conversion of DSD512 is processed at it best.

Offline converter does more than real-time converter, leading to closer to original result.

¡Confirmed! So I just tested a 16/44 file upsampled to D64 VS letting the ESS9028Pro's upsample the file to D256 and I preferred the offline upsampling at D64. I did not have to strain to hear the difference either. It took me all of 5 seconds listening to hi-hat click.

So it would seem to reason that the uptick in SQ is a combination of:

• Higher precision filter. As per @Lurker0; the higher output bitrate, the better the filter

• Offline upsampling to DSD (can't say for HQPlayer/JRiver) is a superior method to the D256 upsampling built into the ESS9028Pro

Now everyone get out there and try it : )

 

[Whitigir]

There are an oceans of people prefer to put up a knuckles before they go out and try it, these folks will put their knuckles up and ask you to explains, and explains 0_0 I have encountered many lol...

If it was that easy when people simply following their ears first instead , but this is why we have this thread

 

[Vitaly2017]

Hehe hi guys.
Nicely done @Whitigir creating this thread.

Reading all your explenations make me believe yes dsd512 is the only best way to go...

Ok I tried it and the trial software only gives you like 30sec to listen. Fine
K here I heard a difference but I didnt find it being better just sounded different. Like some parts was better others not.

Some reason dsd512 elevated the tracks floore noise while in the original flac I cant hear it.

Dsd512 felt more relaxed and less energetic.

I think I felt more warmth and width slightly more bass with dsd512.

The original flac was more dynamic live and active. I overall felt that original untouched or oversampled flac vs dsd512 sounded more appropriate.

I have aorus x5 gaming laptop and I used xivero with dff dsd512 1bit.

Is my laptop affecting the sound quality of my oversampling xivero and make me hear those things... ?


Also I have to add the dsd512 blown up a chip in my dx200 cause its a very demanding file format and it did such a huge pop. Now when ever I touch the screen it hisses and buzzs. I have sent it to ibasso for repaires.
So my experiments with dsd512 ended bad lol.

 

[Whitigir]

I don’t know what you used to hear DSD512 with, but theoretically it is not possible for DSD512 to have less dynamic than pcm, period. Beside, i hear more dynamic and visceral impacts on DSD512.

If you prefer and think pcm is more appropriate, that is just fine. Kudos to you as you get to save money and spaces

Keep in mind, different device has different way to express the performances of DSD512 they are not made equal. For example, an Amanero is not going to be as good as an Xmos DSP for DSD512. So, some devices are worse at playing DSD and some are better

 

[Vitaly2017]

Hmm we clearly have heard 2 different things then.

I used my dx200 + amp8 + shure se846.

 

[Mario Samek]

Hmm we clearly have heard 2 different things then.

I used my dx200 + amp8 + shure se846.

Hello, I have Too Shure se846, but I can not to tell, that they play good sound! better awesome sound on my ibasso produce my new headphones Audio-Technica MSR7SE Special Edition!