[RRod]

   
I believe there are ways for it to play DSD natively. My Google link is there for anyone who's interested.
 

 
It still has to send the data to the sound card / DAC…

 

[RRod]

According to this. It seems all the musical instruments, sound effects in existence are from 20-16khz ? If so most of every headphones out there with more than 20khz are all marketing gimmicks ? Because even if you can and proven able to listen to above 20khz, there are no notes, instruments or anything at all to be recorded, and composed in a song ? Please somebody help me.

Is this the reason why people who claims to have good hearings, can not tell the differences ?

 

 
It's basically always percussion instruments, esp. cymbals and snares, that are propped up as examples of instruments that sound different in hi-res. Also things like muted trumpet, that have a relatively larger amount of high harmonics.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  It still has to send the data to the sound card / DAC…

 
And what of it? Since he has a DSD-capable DAC, it's not an issue.

 

[RRod]

   
And what of it? Since he has a DSD-capable DAC, it's not an issue.

 
Because it's already a no-no in testing these things to have the DAC switching between PCM formats, let alone between DSD and PCM. analog wants everything to be native, so there really isn't a way to test anything.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Because it's already a no-no in testing these things to have the DAC switching between PCM formats, let alone between DSD and PCM. analog wants everything to be native, so there really isn't a way to test anything.

 
Hm, good point. (Unless it can switch with no issues.) Ah well.
 
I suppose two DACs could be used.

 
The Schiit Loki DSD DAC (which can also integrate with any other DAC) is very affordable, but I guess he wouldn't want to buy any new gear for the test. Doesn't matter anyway, since he can also test between all the other stuff he claims to hear differences with.

 

[RRod]

   
Hm, good point. (Unless it can switch with no issues.) Ah well.
 
I suppose two DACs could be used.

 
The Schiit Loki DSD DAC (which can also integrate with any other DAC) is very affordable, but I guess he wouldn't want to buy any new gear for the test. Doesn't matter anyway, since he can also test between all the other stuff he claims to hear differences with.

 
Yeah, hardware really isn't the issue. Also, Loki only goes up to DSD64, which evidently "isn't enough." The rabbit hole really delves down in this case.

 

[cjl]

   
His concern is that the kajillion kHz of the original DSD file is somehow relevant to what we hear and that audible data would be lost upon conversion.
 
Your proposal is one of the tests I'm interested in seeing, though!

That's the point. I'm assuming it will be lost on conversion.
 
You have your original, kajillion kHz DSD file, and you have a second file which was made by taking the original DSD, converting it down to 16/44.1 (losing the kajillion kHz in the process), then converted back up to DSD (for file compatibility). You now have two identical size and format DSD files, one of which has been effectively limited to redbook and one which hasn't. You can then compare at will, without having to worry about playback of two dramatically different formats for the ABX.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  That's the point. I'm assuming it will be lost on conversion.
 
You have your original, kajillion kHz DSD file, and you have a second file which was made by taking the original DSD, converting it down to 16/44.1 (losing the kajillion kHz in the process), then converted back up to DSD (for file compatibility). You now have two identical size and format DSD files, one of which has been effectively limited to redbook and one which hasn't. You can then compare at will, without having to worry about playback of two dramatically different formats for the ABX.

 
Okay, in the context of DSD vs PCM, you're right. I think I just misinterpreted when you said "Both are DSD in the same format, eliminating your concern." Although it wasn't your intention, the way it was worded implied that the file converted back to DSD would somehow retain the original data. (Since it isn't native DSD anymore.)

 

[analogsurviver]

   
foobar2000 is capable of playing DSD. Click here to learn how.

Yup. I use it for at least half a year - but it is NOT my favourite DSD player. Both jRiver 19 and Korg Audiogate 3.x are better sounding. And no, there is no ABX for software players comparisons either.
 
What f2k it is NOT capable of is ABX in native DSD and PCM. For the ABX , it will convert DSD to PCM - and it can be PCM as far your DAC & hardware will allow, even 24/384 - if you select the appropriate settings in foobar.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Yup. I use it for at least half a year - but it is NOT my favourite DSD player. Both jRiver 19 and Korg Audiogate 3.x are better sounding. And no, there is no ABX for software players comparisons either.
 
What f2k it is NOT capable of is ABX in native DSD and PCM. For the ABX , it will convert DSD to PCM - and it can be PCM as far your DAC & hardware will allow, even 24/384 - if you select the appropriate settings in foobar.

 
Can you at least do an ABX with 24-bit / whatever kHz and 16-bit / 44.1 kHz PCM?

 

[analogsurviver]

   
Yeah, hardware really isn't the issue. Also, Loki only goes up to DSD64, which evidently "isn't enough." The rabbit hole really delves down in this case.

OK, although I might be meandering between ifi audio nano and micro, even nano can do DSD256 and DXD384 kHz. micro goes to DSD512 and DXD7XY ( getting tired of multiples of 44.1 ...)
 
What IS the problem is the software to play DSD - either for playback only but much more problematic one that would allow ABX natively.

 

[analogsurviver]

   
Can you at least do an ABX with 24-bit / whatever kHz and 16-bit / 44.1 kHz PCM?

Of course.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Of course.

 
Thank you. Looking forward to it. Make sure to convert the files yourself, do at least twenty trials, and document everything. The more info we have, the better.

 

[analogsurviver]

According to this. It seems all the musical instruments, sound effects in existence are from 20-16khz ? If so most of every headphones out there with more than 20khz are all marketing gimmicks ? Because even if you can and proven able to listen to above 20khz, there are no notes, instruments or anything at all to be recorded, and composed in a song ? Please somebody help me.

Is this the reason why people who claims to have good hearings, can not tell the differences ?

From which millenium is this chart ?

 
Seriously, although I am familiar with it, it has been established WELL before measuring microphones and recorders capable of  100 kHz+ bandwidths have been invented. Percussion of one sort or another will likely FAR exceed 20 kHz limit, and you can include here dulcimer type of instruments. The trumpet is also a likely candidate - there is independent research published online and linked to threads here on head-fi.
 
DISCLAIMER: I do not have any affiliation with any manufacturer - just linking what may be of further help to understand why > 20 kHz does make sense .
 
http://recordinghacks.com/articles/the-world-beyond-20khz/
 
The above link and links within should keep you busy for some time... - but I know what I can hear or "hear" if ability to hear a sinusoidal wave of a single frequency does not fully describe what at least some of us can "perceive" as sound. The lack of this ability has turned me from the CD from day one - for me that was the prototype of Philips CD player in 1979 or 1980 at our Electronics Fair. Although improved over time, its INHERENT limitation will forever keep it the "downstair maid" in my eyes - pardon, ears.

 

[bigshot]

That chart is accurate. Even the upper harmonics on acoustic instruments don't reach beyond 15 or 16kHz. The exception is cymbals and triangles, but the upper harmonics aren't audible anyway because they are masked by much louder lower frequencies. Naturally, synthesizers can produce very high frequencies, but in practice, they usually stick in the same range as real instruments.