[anroj]

I use PS Audio 1.4 firmware. Ive tried PS Audio 1.6 firmware, but it reversed the channel, I dont know why.
Nevertheless, 1.4 sounds great.
If I understand correctly, you are streaming Tidal 44.1 PCM converting and upsampling it to DSD 256 with Roon on Windows 10. Am I correct?
If so, do you get better sound than just playing PCM directly to the R8? Are you sure?
As I understand, Ladder DACs are the best for PCM and not so good on DSD. Also if you upsample on a PC you could increase jitter as the computer has to work more to do it and that means more noise inside.
Ive read that the best and cleanest way to do it is to minimize the work done by the processor, not upsampling and minimizing internal signal processing as most HQ players do.
May be someone here, with more knowledge than me, could add some light on this issue.

I was not able to use v1.61 previously but I tried it last night and it worked. I did not notice that the channels were reversed.
I stream Tidal 44.1 and any other bitrate that is available on Tidal. I also stream Qobuz via Tidal and some of those files are up to 24/192, that are then converted to DSD.
In my system, and to my ears, I prefer DSD. PCM sounds really good through the R8, but it sounds a little exaggerated in the bass and midrange. To my ears, DSD seems to give me a better balance and much more realistic musical presentation. That said, bad recordings are bad recordings, no matter the format. The R8 is so revealing that it is like hearing some of my music for the first time. Some songs I enjoyed before don't sound so good any more. Well recorded music sounds amazing.
I don't know about the technical merits of ladder DACs vs. ESS/AKM DACs, but I did get my R8 because I was curious as to what benefits a well implemented Ladder DAC would provide in contrast to the ESS DACs I have owned in the past in sound quality. I am not disappointed. This may sound strange, but the main thing I notice is that I am so much more relaxed and I just want to enjoy music. My previous ESS DACs seem much more analytical in contrast and I always seemed to suffer listener fatigue. This was really brought home the first time I fired the R8 up, and it has only gotten better as the R8 burns in.

 

[FredA]

OK. But there's something I dont understand.
Even if you didnt get any data lost or jitter converting and upsampling PCM 44.1 to DSD 256 on the computer and even if your Audio-gd DAC could play DSD perfectly, what do you get doing it?
If I listen to ALL of my music streaming Tidal PCM 44.1, will I really upgrade the sound quality doing it?
Can you really better the sound of PCM converting it to DSD?
Has anyone done it? If so, is the upgrade really noticeable or worthwile?

The sound is different. Dsd is smoother but is less dynamic. A matter of tastes and match with the system.

 

[Chopin75]

Making my way home to California and just checking in while waiting on the plane. I will be so happy to get home. My audio equipment has been turned off for 9 days and looking forward to relaxing mornings listening to music!

Has anyone returned their V1 DAC modules to Kingwa after swapping for V2s? I need to work on that next week.

I believe V2S and V3S NOS modes are identical?? Only V3A NOS was changed if my foggy brain cells remember correctly. Does TDA support NOS? Never attempted...

@FredA Congrats!! Probably best R7 (HE) on the planet. If anyone one here deserves the finest it is you. Looking forward to a review...

I thought both VA and VS have the NOS changed ?? But Not the Ox8 ? Can't remember either. I will get to switching V3S soon as I am using V2S currently.

 

[DACLadder]

I was not able to use v1.61 previously but I tried it last night and it worked. I did not notice that the channels were reversed.

Hmmm. I use the U16 1.61 firmware with I2S and the channels are correct only if you change the front panel DAC mode to "PSA". Default has the L-R channels swapped and absolute audio phase 180 deg. out with AGD DACs. May be why you don't enjoy PCM as well.

But there is no right or wrong and one reason I like the versatility of Audio GD DACs. Everyone has different equipment and tastes. Pick the mode you like best! I am the polar opposite with DSD vs. PCM. Started converting DSD files to PCM with the Master 7 and still prefer to do so.

 

[Chopin75]

I was not able to use v1.61 previously but I tried it last night and it worked. I did not notice that the channels were reversed.
I stream Tidal 44.1 and any other bitrate that is available on Tidal. I also stream Qobuz via Tidal and some of those files are up to 24/192, that are then converted to DSD.
In my system, and to my ears, I prefer DSD. PCM sounds really good through the R8, but it sounds a little exaggerated in the bass and midrange. To my ears, DSD seems to give me a better balance and much more realistic musical presentation. That said, bad recordings are bad recordings, no matter the format. The R8 is so revealing that it is like hearing some of my music for the first time. Some songs I enjoyed before don't sound so good any more. Well recorded music sounds amazing.
I don't know about the technical merits of ladder DACs vs. ESS/AKM DACs, but I did get my R8 because I was curious as to what benefits a well implemented Ladder DAC would provide in contrast to the ESS DACs I have owned in the past in sound quality. I am not disappointed. This may sound strange, but the main thing I notice is that I am so much more relaxed and I just want to enjoy music. My previous ESS DACs seem much more analytical in contrast and I always seemed to suffer listener fatigue. This was really brought home the first time I fired the R8 up, and it has only gotten better as the R8 burns in.

If one were to choose only single format, DSD would be my choice too. However DSD is best only if it is natively recorded, at least for me. The R2R DACs can now implement PCM so well that PCM sounds almost as good as DSD at times. DSD at its best is still unbeatable but there are not many of them. Main issue with DSD is that there is no way edit native DSD masters so all or part of the track has be converted to PCM, usually as DXD (if the engineers are great). The limited editing ability ironically often makes the recordings better since they need to balance everything right from the start (like the old school analogue days).
Strictly speaking, there is no true PCM recordings as all recordings are made via signa-delta A-D converters so at some point when recordede they are DSD/1 bit but just get converted immediately to PCM at chosen rate of 24/96. 24/192 or 24/352 etc,....
I dislike ESS type SD chips as you described quite accurately their sound quality.
R2R DACs are making digital PCM recordings great again! (as you know sony used to have those R2R chips inside their players before their DSD invention that has destroyed the sound of PCM)

 

[DACLadder]

@Chopin75

Thanks for keeping me honest. V3 NOS changes for both S and A. It is OS that does not change going from V2S to V3S. NOS is new for both V3S and V3A.
--------
Dear Scott,

The V3 S only changed the NOS modes.
The V3 A not only changed on the NOS modes but all modes included the OS modes.

Kingwa

 

[anroj]

Hmmm. I use the U16 1.61 firmware with I2S and the channels are correct only if you change the front panel DAC mode to "PSA". Default has the L-R channels swapped and absolute audio phase 180 deg. out with AGD DACs. May be why you don't enjoy PCM as well.

But there is no right or wrong and one reason I like the versatility of Audio GD DACs. Everyone has different equipment and tastes. Pick the mode you like best! I am the polar opposite with DSD vs. PCM. Started converting DSD files to PCM with the Master 7 and still prefer to do so.

Hi, I might not have stated what I meant very clearly in my last post. The channels are not reversed in my use of v1.61.

 

[anroj]

If one were to choose only single format, DSD would be my choice too. However DSD is best only if it is natively recorded, at least for me. The R2R DACs can now implement PCM so well that PCM sounds almost as good as DSD at times. DSD at its best is still unbeatable but there are not many of them. Main issue with DSD is that there is no way edit native DSD masters so all or part of the track has be converted to PCM, usually as DXD (if the engineers are great). The limited editing ability ironically often makes the recordings better since they need to balance everything right from the start (like the old school analogue days).
Strictly speaking, there is no true PCM recordings as all recordings are made via signa-delta A-D converters so at some point when recordede they are DSD/1 bit but just get converted immediately to PCM at chosen rate of 24/96. 24/192 or 24/352 etc,....
I dislike ESS type SD chips as you described quite accurately their sound quality.
R2R DACs are making digital PCM recordings great again! (as you know sony used to have those R2R chips inside their players before their DSD invention that has destroyed the sound of PCM)

Very interesting. Thank you for that great explanation. I have some really good native DSD recordings, but as you mentioned, there are not a lot of DSD recordings and most of my personal library, as well as the streaming content is PCM. I'll try the native format option with HQPlayer and see what I think of the comparison.

 

[Chopin75]

Very interesting. Thank you for that great explanation. I have some really good native DSD recordings, but as you mentioned, there are not a lot of DSD recordings and most of my personal library, as well as the streaming content is PCM. I'll try the native format option with HQPlayer and see what I think of the comparison.

Do use HQplayer without using the filters, I think you can select direct DSD playback mode. This I think sounds most natural and best. Now if you have crappy DSD recording the filters will help to clean it up but it sucks the air out of the recording. I have never really found PCM--> DSD that helpful in sound improvement. DXD-->DSD is better and that is the chosen format to switch back/forth for recording engineers in editing.
Digital recordings are hard to get right and modern ones can be worse due to too much editing. If you listen to PCM or DSD recordings back in early 2000 they often sound the best and most naturalistic as there were limited editing tools back then. (some even used digital tapes for recording!) part of the reason why analogue recordings are/were so good is because they couldn't edit much, they did entire tracks/takes of the whole song or piece of music, since it was a pain to cut and paste tapes! But now we can manipulate every single second of the track!

 

[DACLadder]

Hi, I might not have stated what I meant very clearly in my last post. The channels are not reversed in my use of v1.61.

You are correct. Wrongly comprehended. Many apologies!

 

[FredA]

Do use HQplayer without using the filters, I think you can select direct DSD playback mode. This I think sounds most natural and best. Now if you have crappy DSD recording the filters will help to clean it up but it sucks the air out of the recording. I have never really found PCM--> DSD that helpful in sound improvement. DXD-->DSD is better and that is the chosen format to switch back/forth for recording engineers in editing.
Digital recordings are hard to get right and modern ones can be worse due to too much editing. If you listen to PCM or DSD recordings back in early 2000 they often sound the best and most naturalistic as there were limited editing tools back then. (some even used digital tapes for recording!) part of the reason why analogue recordings are/were so good is because they couldn't edit much, they did entire tracks/takes of the whole song or piece of music, since it was a pain to cut and paste tapes! But now we can manipulate every single second of the track!

Yep,. Most modern recordings, except with some genre, like classical and jazz, have much editing and it tends to compress the sound, make it less lively. The best recordings are mostly oldies in my collection, like Oscar Peterson Tenderly. What a gem. It's full of defect but it keeps the essence of this tremendous live performance. And dynamics are just great.

 

[anroj]

Do use HQplayer without using the filters, I think you can select direct DSD playback mode. This I think sounds most natural and best. Now if you have crappy DSD recording the filters will help to clean it up but it sucks the air out of the recording. I have never really found PCM--> DSD that helpful in sound improvement. DXD-->DSD is better and that is the chosen format to switch back/forth for recording engineers in editing.
Digital recordings are hard to get right and modern ones can be worse due to too much editing. If you listen to PCM or DSD recordings back in early 2000 they often sound the best and most naturalistic as there were limited editing tools back then. (some even used digital tapes for recording!) part of the reason why analogue recordings are/were so good is because they couldn't edit much, they did entire tracks/takes of the whole song or piece of music, since it was a pain to cut and paste tapes! But now we can manipulate every single second of the track!

I will try that and thank you for the additional information.

 

[anroj]

You are correct. Wrongly comprehended. Many apologies!

No problem.

 

[anroj]

Yep,. Most modern recordings, except with some genre, like classical and jazz, have much editing and it tends to compress the sound, make it less lively. The best recordings are mostly oldies in my collection, like Oscar Peterson Tenderly. What a gem. It's full of defect but it keeps the essence of this tremendous live performance. And dynamics are just great.

I agree. I find that a lot of modern recordings don't "breathe" due to compression.

 

[FredA]

I agree. I find that a lot of modern recordings don't "breathe" due to compression.

Exactly. Which makes me wonder how Tenderly will sound with the R7-HE. Really, this is my benchmark album. First time i listened to it on a real high-end DAC, i was blown away. I did not think much of it before. This album is hard to reproduce properly, but boy does it scale up when an upgrade is done.