[kugino]

It is a bit unusual for the smallest DSD DAC to have a  usb->SPDIF output on it. You been selling them and wanted another?

P.S. My Nano DSD should come in soon.

Yeah, I had one and didn't really need it b/c I had other sources. But I just sold my last two DACs and didn't want to wait for my geek pulse in July so thought is pick another one up.

 

[john57]

Have a question on the S/PDIF output while I understand it is PCM only my question is what happens when the iDSD receives a DSD siganl will it convert it to PCM on the S/PDIF output?

 

[kugino]

Hi,

No output. 

We apply NO processing or DSP to the DSD and DXD signals and DSD cannot be transmitted via SPDIF. Neither incidentally can data rates greater than 192KHz, so no output with DXD either.

To have any kind of output from DSD, it would have to be transcoded to PCM. In this case it is definitely more preferable to do that in the PC (via JRMC which has this feature for example).

An alternative scenario would be to use the existing SPDIF DAC would handle PCM up to 192KHz and the iDSD is used to handle DSD/DXD:

- the iDSD to input DSD/DXD via USB Input to put out an analogue signal to an existing setup
- the existing DAC receives PCM

This would allow to "dip one's toe into the DSD/DXD water" without abandoning existing and preferred setups.

In such a case the iDSD is connected to the PC Source and drives the existing DAC via SPDIF and both DAC's are connected to separate inputs of the Preamplifier/Amplifier or use a analogue switchbox if (for example) single input active speakers are used.

PM or email us for more info for recommendations.

thank you

Here's ifi's answer

 

[john57]

Thanks I tried the search function and I miss it twice.

 

[koolas]

So you saying that the iDSD is the end game for vinyl? If so that is fine with me.

Nope... I still prefer vinyl. But more because of this feeling that you can almost touch it. On laptop you just use mouse and click something the on screen, but with vinyl you physically grab tonearm with your hand and put it in place where from you want to listen

Sound quality-wise DSD on iDSD is something out of this world, but still it sounds too perfect, while sound from vinyl has this weird unperfectness that I do like.

 

[john57]

Trying to wrap my head around the idea of DSD being too perfect. Vinyl has its one noises like clicks and pops and wow and flutter that does not happen in a live concert. Each time I play the record the sound will slowly deteriorate each time. By the third time it is obvious reduction of quality regardless of the amount of tender living care I put on with the record. I had all kinds of good record cleaning products and good cartridges. My favorite was the Blue Point.  I had specialized tools for turntable alinements.  I went through 6 turntables, no more. I enjoy perfection but recording engineer choices and the performances are still the biggest limiting factor not the equipment. I received my iDSD today. Got it all setup and watching videos with it for a day  with a bit of break in and battery charged before circuital listening.

 

[earwaxxer]

I donned some old Sony cans the other day for the hell of it to compare redbook, 24/192, DSD, 2x DSD. This was the same redbook file played native or massaged with JRiver etc. On quick comparison, I was a bit surprised that the 'differences' were quite difficult to hear in some cases, although I have experienced that phenomena before when doing quick comparison. What I did notice was that 2x DSD sounded the best with DSD second and 24/192 third. Not huge though. The differences were in the subtleties, but the subtleties are what make music enjoyable. Its about realism. Ex. symbols sound like symbols etc. I can understand how many still think that CD's dont sound better upsampled etc., due to the subtle nature of the differences. They do though. The big question is - is it worth re-buying everything in a DSD remaster, assuming it was remastered from the original tape?

 

[kugino]

I donned some old Sony cans the other day for the hell of it to compare redbook, 24/192, DSD, 2x DSD. This was the same redbook file played native or massaged with JRiver etc. On quick comparison, I was a bit surprised that the 'differences' were quite difficult to hear in some cases, although I have experienced that phenomena before when doing quick comparison. What I did notice was that 2x DSD sounded the best with DSD second and 24/192 third. Not huge though. The differences were in the subtleties, but the subtleties are what make music enjoyable. Its about realism. Ex. symbols sound like symbols etc. I can understand how many still think that CD's dont sound better upsampled etc., due to the subtle nature of the differences. They do though. The big question is - is it worth re-buying everything in a DSD remaster, assuming it was remastered from the original tape?

Count me in the camp that believes most cannot hear differences between WELL MASTERED files at different bitrates. I believe the main reason DSD and 24/192 files sound better than redbook counterparts is that more care was given to them in the mastering process. There are a lot of really good redbook titles that I most likely cannot distinguish against their higher bitrate brethren...but the reason I like the option of DSD and 24/192 FLAC is that the source material tends to be better. If the same care was given to redbook files, I think I wouldn't care about DSD, etc. of course, as they say, YMMV...carry on.

 

[koolas]

Just out of curiosity, can you guys use Audacity and generate a tone like 7.5kHz using 44/16 and then do the same using 192/24? I'm pretty sure all of you will hear difference very very well. Don't tell me that it is just one tone, and music contains plenty of tones mixed together, because this way you simply neglect the facts. Simply, if you can hear the difference for that tone, you will hear the difference in the music as well. From vinyl you can play any tone you like without any limitation, because there is no bits and no sample rate - signal is perfect. The DSD tries to be digital vinyl, and when I heard it (on iDSD) first I obviously understood from first few seconds how much are we missing in PCM recordings. PCM recordings could still sound very good, or maybe better than DSD, but you would have to use DAC like DaVinci!

 

[john57]

I did a experiment just recently using a master DSD file with three instruments on it and convert to different PCM sample rates I can heard the differences quite clearly on the various PCM rates. Still checking out the iDSD i received. 

 

[john57]

Just out of curiosity, can you guys use Audacity and generate a tone like 7.5kHz using 44/16 and then do the same using 192/24? I'm pretty sure all of you will hear difference very very well. Don't tell me that it is just one tone, and music contains plenty of tones mixed together, because this way you simply neglect the facts. Simply, if you can hear the difference for that tone, you will hear the difference in the music as well. From vinyl you can play any tone you like without any limitation, because there is no bits and no sample rate - signal is perfect. The DSD tries to be digital vinyl, and when I heard it (on iDSD) first I obviously understood from first few seconds how much are we missing in PCM recordings. PCM recordings could still sound very good, or maybe better than DSD, but you would have to use DAC like DaVinci!

Ever played with the filter switch specifically with DSD?

 

[earwaxxer]

  Ever played with the filter switch specifically with DSD?

I have found the filter switch does make a difference, even with the DSD - The down position seems a bit more 'expansive' in sound, possibly a bit more emphasis on mids. I think I like it the best with my system. With the PCM the up position is, I believe the min phase filter. I think I remember liking it the best.

 

[john57]

  I have found the filter switch does make a difference, even with the DSD - The down position seems a bit more 'expansive' in sound, possibly a bit more emphasis on mids. I think I like it the best with my system. With the PCM the up position is, I believe the min phase filter. I think I remember liking it the best.

Before I ask you this question I already made a opinion on this and what you are hearing is also what I am hearing. WE are in agreement on this. What surprised me was how well the iDSD did with Red Book files. With the min phase filter is how natural PCM playback is. Even with watching Netflix videos is how natural and clear the dialog is. I have tried DAC's  up to the $2k range do not do as good in this area.  WIth DSD using the expansive mode I noticed a much more open "space" in the sound. There is a bit more sound in the upper mids but that is fine with me because when i go to a live classical concert there is a aliveness or a special kind of brightness in the dynamic range that is missing on many of the PCM files or CD's I have.

 

[iFi audio]

  Before I ask you this question I already made a opinion on this and what you are hearing is also what I am hearing. WE are in agreement on this. What surprised me was how well the iDSD did with Red Book files. With the min phase filter is how natural PCM playback is. Even with watching Netflix videos is how natural and clear the dialog is. I have tried DAC's  up to the $2k range do not do as good in this area.  WIth DSD using the expansive mode I noticed a much more open "space" in the sound. There is a bit more sound in the upper mids but that is fine with me because when i go to a live classical concert there is a aliveness or a special kind of brightness in the dynamic range that is missing on many of the PCM files or CD's I have.

 
Hi,
 
For all of you guys on this thread, there is an online interview to be published sometime this week where our Thorsten Loesch lifts the lid on what AMR/iFi R&D think of the whole PCM/DSD recording/playback debate. Covering the history of digital recording and playback including the two main camps of chipsets. Also, how and why we chose the Burr-Brown chip. And a bit of an expose on why we shun digital volume controls.
 
Most ignore the 1st half, the recording aspect. The DAC is only the 2nd half of the equation yet many are fixated on this aspect.
 
It is the whole end-to-end recording>playback chain needs to be considered and kept True Native so as not to lose data.
 
Sure will be a very interesting and eye-opening read!

 

[mfmahler]

   
Hi,
 
For all of you guys on this thread, there is an online interview to be published sometime this week where our Thorsten Loesch lifts the lid on what AMR/iFi R&D think of the whole PCM/DSD recording/playback debate. Covering the history of digital recording and playback including the two main camps of chipsets. Also, how and why we chose the Burr-Brown chip. And a bit of an expose on why we shun digital volume controls.
 
Most ignore the 1st half, the recording aspect. The DAC is only the 2nd half of the equation yet many are fixated on this aspect.
 
It is the whole end-to-end recording>playback chain needs to be considered and kept True Native so as not to lose data.
 
Sure will be a very interesting and eye-opening read!

 
I believe you refer to this online interview:
http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-thorsten-loesch-amrifi