[twinkle]

I gotta say, all this talk from Jason & Mike about DSD got me curious. I don't know, maybe the lady doth protest too much? (or the lads in this case).
Call me a contrarian, but if you insist I shouldn't go there, chances are I'm gonna want to at least investigate.
 
Before I'm torn to shreds in this Schiit thread, let me point out that I'm not interested in the format by itself, as a recording and/or music file sale format, only in what it can do to PCM 44.1kHz files after computer upsampling. Can it get me closer to analog formats, as some have suggested?
 
So I read about it here and there, and from what I gathered, DSD128 would be the minimum entry ticket to seeing the benefits. With DSD64 you can't filter out all the ultrasonic noise without affecting the audio band. So DSD128, so that you can use a 30 kHz low-pass filter and enjoy music without ultrasonic interference (my speakers amp is ruler flat from 5 Hz to 70 kHz, even if my speakers are not).
 
Value proposition? not sure, as converting PCM to DSD128 or even DSD256 on the fly requires a bit processing power, so part of the cost goes to a good computer otherwise it'll sound like crap.
Now, I already own a beefed up computer (not for audio), so no investment needed for me on that side.
 
I like to form my own opinion, so I just went ahead and ordered a DSD DAC, one that can do at least DSD128. I didn't break the bank in the process.
PCM 16/44.1 files : Foobar with asio and sacd plugins --> DSD256 on the fly --> DSD DAC --> integrated amp and speakers.
 
It's only got about 24h of burn-in, but I have to say, there may be something to this DSD malarkey after all. Most striking is the high frequency range, which is a problem area for all the PCM DACs or players I have tried, be they SD, NOS, bitstream legato link etc... Maybe less so for NOS, but at the expense of some HF roll off on standard def files.
Doesn't seem to be much trace of digititis left, which I guess is what triggers the analog tape and/or vinyl comparisons. At this point in the burn-in process, I would not say it sounds like vinyl though. Mostly because of a midrange suckout and a certain lack of deep bass. And maybe there is some unique distortion in vinyl (and tape?) that no digital playback system can yet reproduce and that you can get addicted to. Hand claps and cymbals texture are very right with DSD256, but there's tonal richness missing lower in the frequency range. 
 
I tried DSD128, sounds almost as good as DSD256. However DSD64? doesn't cut the mustard. I bet this is why people get on Jason's and Mike's case about the Loki.
 
We'll see how this experiment develops, but I now agree that if you're gonna do DSD, then do it right.
 
That said, I'm still curious about Yggdrasil, I want a DAC that does it right on coax SPDIF and doesn't require my computer. So for my own reasons, I concur with this:
 
 

  .. If I had enough money to get the Ygdrassil and the DSD256 Loki mkII, I would likely get both. 

 
Ok you can shred me now.

 

[Defiant00]

<snip>  
Ok you can shred me now.

 
As long as it sounds good to you go for it, I doubt you'll get much shredding here.
 
I'd say the sound quality probably has more to do with the DAC implementation than the format (DSD vs PCM) though.

 

[jeremy205100]

I'm confused about a few things. First of all, this person is talking about the "Loki MkII" as if it's a done deal. Although I've never heard DSD, I think it's very clear from what Jason has said that we will never be seeing another Schiit product that does DSD. It seems as if he regrets doing the Loki. I have to agree with this, because my 12000 song lossless iTunes is sort of necessary for me to enjoy my music. A dozen songs in some archaic format won't increase my enjoyment. 
 
Also, it wouldn't be the Loki MkII. It would be Loki 2. It's clear from Schiit's naming conventions that this is how they name their products.
 
But mostly, we should drop this DSD thing. I think the vast majority of people, even audiophiles, have zero interest in it. And want to know why? It's exactly as Jason said: there is barely any music available, and even most of the available options aren't native DSD. If there's one thing I've learned, it's that upsampling digital files just takes up more space with no benefit in sonic quality. The point Jason is trying to make, is this: I bought Schiit and other audio products, as well as nice speakers and headphones, to enjoy the music that I like. If the music that I like isn't available in this "new and better" format, it is useless to me. And considering the native files are apparently in PCM (don't know enough about digital encoding to confirm this) it seems useless to even bother downloading any DSD versions that became available.

 

[geogga]

   
Assuming you already have an amp for your speakers:
 
Source > Modi > Y Splitter > Magni > Headphones
                                    > Speaker Amp > Speakers
 
Turn on the Magni for headphones, speaker amp for speakers, or both / neither for extra or lack of sound.

Thanks. But few questions:
Y splitter? would that be like 2 rca to 4 rca male or...?

Could I use something like the Audioengine N22 if I wanted to save money to use it for both the headphones and speakers?

 

[nick n]

   
Seriously, you need to back these statements up with some links or something. All PCM ADCs are discontinued and no new ones are coming to market? Source please. Or maybe you're using some other definition of "native" PCM (not delta sigma?)

isn't all that at the bottom of Chapter 33, at least what they are referencing.

 

[twinkle]

  But mostly, we should drop this DSD thing. I think the vast majority of people, even audiophiles, have zero interest in it. And want to know why? It's exactly as Jason said: there is barely any music available, and even most of the available options aren't native DSD. If there's one thing I've learned, it's that upsampling digital files just takes up more space with no benefit in sonic quality. The point Jason is trying to make, is this: I bought Schiit and other audio products, as well as nice speakers and headphones, to enjoy the music that I like. If the music that I like isn't available in this "new and better" format, it is useless to me. And considering the native files are apparently in PCM (don't know enough about digital encoding to confirm this) it seems useless to even bother downloading any DSD versions that became available.

Jeremy, it's good that you read the memo, but this isn't about buying into a new format. It's about listening to all your existing files with on-the-fly resampling. Yes, even your favorite 128kpbs mp3s.
Edit: = no need to change or upsample the files you have stored.

 

[Defiant00]

 
isn't all that at the bottom of Chapter 33, at least what they are referencing.

 
Yep, it does look that way (that it's all a delta sigma approximation before it spits out either PCM or DSD). Also reinforces that the rest of the chain is typically PCM, even for albums eventually released in DSD.
 

  Thanks. But few questions:
Y splitter? would that be like 2 rca to 4 rca male or...?

Could I use something like the Audioengine N22 if I wanted to save money to use it for both the headphones and speakers?

 
Yeah, you've got it on the splitter.
 
I'm not familiar with the Audioengine, but if it can drive both speakers and headphones then...sure?

 

[wahsmoh]

   
So buy the mk1 Loki and replace the chip yourself. Problem solved!

That is possible? I'd like to see someone take apart a Loki and replace the DAC with the new AKM 4490EQ

 

[audioholik]

  Or maybe you're using some other definition of "native" PCM (not delta sigma?)

 
Yes, precisely.

 

[StanD]

Why is veryone going Loco over Loki? Jason might just as easily convinced to make an 8 Track Tape player as he would an update to the Loki. 

 

[audioholik]

  That is possible? I'd like to see someone take apart a Loki and replace the DAC with the new AKM 4490EQ

 
 I think it would have to be done professionally by Schiit in their lab. 

 

[Baldr]

I have never published my DSD opinions.  Here they are.  I say opinions because the design of audio gear should adhere to hard science. The user's response however, is totally in that user's psyche. When I worked in Peru, there were tribes in the Amazon region who spoke in vocabularies limited to grunts and delighted in eating insects they found under logs. Then there are people like myself who prefer meat, coffee, dairy, sometimes things green or fruity, starches, and lots of salt.
 
In the early days of digital audio, multibit reigned. It was suitable, but expensive, derived as it was from weapons guidance and medical science. Note the use of the word science. Analog numbers were converted to digital, and the reverse yielded the same number. Nothing was averaged, no noise was added, no economic engineering geniuses were allowed to make anything cheaper with smoke and mirrors.
 
The earliest DACs were pretty marginal, but natural selection led to the Burr-Brown PCM-63, an amazing multibit DAC, still pretty good today. About that time, Burr Brown was sold to Texas Instruments. There began to appear delta-sigma dacs, which is a fancy name for reduced bit width DACs which used the above alluded to tricks of averaging and noise shaping to make up for the data they threw away. Soon we had TI, Wolfson, Crystal Semiconductor, Phillips, and many more manufacturers of these (now marketed as audio – read dogschiit) DACs. Why stoop to make them?? Simple – they're cheaper! Never mind they can't be used in medical imaging or defense applications because of their inherent data loss/hallucination. Too late, the audio customer had far cheaper gear. The chip makers sold lots of parts.
 
Enter DSD, the ultimate extension of this idea. More noise and less bitwidth. You get for free with the bargain, the elimination of the nasty anti-alias filter effects used in the recordings. Cool, huh. This idea works well just as soon as every recording studio on the planet switches over. When that happens (right), what about the old recordings like all of those from SACD days of yore!! Oops, they are already recorded with the filter in place... Unfortunately, they are the bulk of the current DSD catalog available. Can you get DSD from iTunes?? Download DSD from Amazon?? Oh...
 
What about 1, 2, 4, or 87.6x native DSD recordings. Yeah there's a few – I really loved the Folsom Prison Castrati Singers doing Handel soprano motets. My all time fave is the Orkney Island shepherd's Poems and Cries of Ecstacy with the sheep. The plaintive cries and bleats of all involved were immaculately suspended in perfect panoramic image. Even the subtle sounds of the shepherds gently placing the sheep's rear legs in their boots were clearly audible.
 
Nobody ever explained to me how to design a multi-rate 1x, 2x, etc DSD DAC without a real expensive adaptive filter. Do you optimize it for 1X? 2X? 5.76X? Trouble is, then all of the other rates are compromised. Maybe the over $10K DACs do that. I haven't figured out how to make an over $10K DAC yet, maybe someone will teach me.
 
In conclusion – this is opinion, mine with respect to DSD: How can I express just how underwhelmed I am. Adjectives such as stillborn, faith-based, and ludicrous come to mind.
 
But wait - I actually built the Loki DSD DAC! How can I be such a hypocrite! The answer is that I will try almost anything once. If I don't like it, I won't do it again. But I could be wrong - if servers ever get big/cheap enough that iTunes and Amazon offer DSD downloads AND major label music providers begin to provide native DSD recordings in substantial numbers – then I will cook and eat a crow at RMAF. Meanwhile, all you DSDers – enjoy the grubs!! Buy a Loki!

 

[Insidious Meme]

And Mike beats me to it. Good to see you in fine form.

 

[StanD]

Does that mean we can still hope for that 8 Track?

 

[twinkle]

.... Unfortunately, they are the bulk of the current DSD catalog available. Can you get DSD from iTunes?? Download DSD from Amazon?? Oh...

 
You keep repeating that argument, but what about resampling?

I'll repeat myself: This isn't about buying into a new format. It's about listening to all your existing files with on-the-fly resampling.
 
Harping on about niche pure DSD recording increasingly feels like a strawman argument to me. Since this is all about opinion, have you even tried listening to on the fly PCM --> DSD128?