How do you master a DSD recording?

[bigshot]

I remember seeing a report on formats and how many new titles were released in a year on that format. SACD and DVD-A each had less than 30 titles as I remember. BIS may be the only label releasing SACDs any more.

 

[Chimmy9278]

There’s a few logical and factual problems with your post. If as you (correctly) state: “PCM is audibly transparent (meaning audibly perfect) so there is no problem to use it” - But DSD sounds different (better or worse) then DSD must be audibly imperfect. Logically therefore, if you prefer DSD, it must be because you prefer imperfect, lower fidelity, reproduction.

This is certainly the case with analogue, which is not more accurate, it is far less accurate, which is why digital audio was invented in the first place to replace analogue. The “analogue more accurate” thing was invented by Sony when they released SACD and is complete marketing nonsense. As is the assertion that a higher sample rate/density should be able to recreate the wave form more accurately.

In practice, there’s no audible difference between DSD and PCM, so what you’re hearing is either a perceptual error/placebo caused by the false marketing you’ve quoted or a difference in mastering as mentioned previously.

G

Sorry about that, the statement “PCM is audibly transparent (meaning audibly perfect) so there is no problem to use it.” was really meant to be a quote from the person above with the markdown quotation notation of >, so I wrote in response to that.

I did not mean to assent to that statement’s perfection of PCM, but rather I mean to say that PCM has its own advantages and I have no qualms with using it.

PCM is a good format. But analog is still sometimes preferred. Therefore analog is still sometimes subjectively better than PCM.

Here, DSD should be a faithful representation of analog. And since analog is sometimes better than PCM subjectively, therefore DSD should be better than PCM.

But like you said, PCM is still involved in DSD production, making the whole situation messy. Resorting to a blind test for myself would be best, yet I do not have the proper gear to do it. Maybe there are other options to do so I cannot think of yet.

 

[Roseval]

DSD is one bit pcm.

No.
PCM is Pulse Code Modulation and DSD is Pulse Width Modulation.

 

[Roseval]

BIS may be the only label releasing SACDs any more.

There a a couple more:
2L
Blue Coast Records
Channel Classics Records
Cybele Records
HighResAudio
Native DSD
The Spitit of Turtle

As others pointed out, DSD is a non-editable format.
Makes you wonder how many of this recordings are true DSD (a direct mike feed) or have been converted to DXD first (24 bit / 352.8 kHz PCM)
Even if genuine, do you have a DAC able to play DSD or is a converted to multi bit first?

Personally I wonder why people wants a format producing such an high amount of quantization noise.

 

[Chimmy9278]

Well a quick update. Just asked a friend to help me do a pseudo AB blind test.

Did my best to match levels, and tracks start randomly. Quiet environment with iems. Source is my dap with mango player which does native DSD and power amp which converts it to PCM for play back.

Out of 12 runs I got 7, 58.33%.

But there are interruptions and gear was not optimal. Still I am pretty happy with this result.

 

[bigshot]

It is very hard to find native DSD recordings. Most have been converted to PCM to mix.

Here in LA, there’s one- maybe two studios capable of all analog recording and mixing. It’s basically a novelty at this point. Digital has replaced analog pretty thoroughly.

 

[Chimmy9278]

It is very hard to find native DSD recordings. Most have been converted to PCM to mix.

A sad fact.

 

[bigshot]

A sad fact.

There is a good reason for it. It’s a huge PITA for no benefit.

 

[71 dB]

At one time, many commercial studios were recording SACD format and many labels were releasing them. Now very few are, and SACD sales are a fraction of what they were a decade or more ago. So if not quite dead yet, at least in critical condition.

G

There was obviously (bad) mistakes made with predictions of what kind on market segment SACD format will fill. SACD has since found its natural niche market that is considerable smaller than what was over-optimistically predicted 2 decades ago, but the market is not non-existing.

For people who are into classical music, the availability of hybrid SACDs is pretty good actually. Because of the hybrid format there is no reason to kill the format.

 

[gregorio]

PCM is a good format. But analog is still sometimes preferred. Therefore analog is still sometimes subjectively better than PCM.

Sometimes it’s subjectively preferred and that can often be traced back to the false marketing. Generally though it is not subjectively preferred and objectively, analogue is significantly worse than PCM, it’s significantly lower fidelity.

Here, DSD should be a faithful representation of analog.

Technically, DSD is slight less of a faithful capture of an analogue signal than PCM, although not audibly so.

And since analog is sometimes better than PCM subjectively,

Analogue is never better than PCM, it’s always lower fidelity but some people prefer the lower fidelity (the additional noise and distortion) of analogue. Therefore …

therefore DSD should be better than PCM.

This statement is a non-sequitur, does not follow logically. In fact DSD is marginally worse, as mentioned.

Out of 12 runs I got 7, 58.33%.

Yep, well within what one would expect from pure chance.

Personally I wonder why people wants a format producing such an high amount of quantization noise.

To be fair though, quite a bit of that dither noise that was removed in the original implementation. All Sony’s SACD players had an analogue filter after conversion that removed everything above 50kHz (because of all that ultrasonic noise).

G

 

[Roseval]

All Sony’s SACD players had an analogue filter after conversion that removed everything above 50kHz

Not only Sony.
It is simply the SACD standard prescribing to apply a lowpass filter at 50 kHz.
Still I don't understand why you want this garbage.
I would say if quantization noise of DSD 64 starts at 22 kHz, apply you low pass filter there, not at 50 kHz.
Basically you are bombarding your tweeters with frequencies that is not music at all but quantization noise and way above their breakup point so they start to distort.

 

[gregorio]

Still I don't understand why you want this garbage.
I would say if quantization noise of DSD 64 starts at 22 kHz, apply you low pass filter there, not at 50 kHz.
Basically you are bombarding your tweeters with frequencies that is not music at all but quantization noise and way above their breakup point so they start to distort.

I agree entirely!

Although, I do understand why some people “want this garbage”: They believe the marketing BS that it’s Hi-res and therefore they hear it as better even if it’s audibly the same or even if it’s worse.

G

 

[Chimmy9278]

I agree entirely!

Although, I do understand why some people “want this garbage”: They believe the marketing BS that it’s Hi-res and therefore they hear it as better even if it’s audibly the same or even if it’s worse.

G

So this was the album I used to listen. https://www.nativedsd.com/product/40318-le-quattro-stagioni/

Turned out it is indeed done fully in DSD without PCM conversion. Which means that I am indeed hearing real DSD, at least for this one album.

Whether it is superior or not from this point on should be a subjective matter. I am not knowledgeable enough to know the math and actual digital processes that happen at playback, and I have seen very little technical review about it.

I have read your points made on quantization noise, but truly I do not know how this will affect the DAC converting process, and for that we will all have too learn electrical engineering and read up on research papers.

Maybe someday golden sound will make a video comparing these two formats with his professional testing gear and in depth analysis, but till then, I will leave it up to my subjective preference.

 

[gregorio]

So this was the album I used to listen. https://www.nativedsd.com/product/40318-le-quattro-stagioni/

Turned out it is indeed done fully in DSD without PCM conversion.

I couldn’t see in your link where is specifically states that.

Whether it is superior or not from this point on should be a subjective matter.

It’s a subjective matter whether you like that particular recording/production/mastering but it’s not a subjective matter whether DSD is better or “more analogue” than PCM. Your blind test indicates you couldn’t tell a difference and so does all the formal reliable evidence.

I am not knowledgeable enough to know the math and actual digital processes that happen at playback, and I have seen very little technical review about it.

There’s actually a great deal, not so much in the purely audiophile press and what there is, is usually incorrect.

I have read your points made on quantization noise, but truly I do not know how this will affect the DAC converting process, and for that we will all have too learn electrical engineering and read up on research papers.

Or have already read the research papers and done our own measurements and tests.

Maybe someday golden sound will make a video comparing these two formats with his professional testing gear and in depth analysis, but till then, I will leave it up to my subjective preference.

There are countless tests and analysis going back many years, using professional testing gear, plus various studies of audible differences.

This was all put to bed 15+ years ago!

G

 

[Chimmy9278]

Then I suppose it is a multi week research time. Time to dig up them papers.