There is one thing it had goes on my mind the latest days; and it is this:
Is really the quality of dsd128 better than the same file in dsd64 or in a sacd disc?
And for those of low budged (poor poeple) what do you recomend:
To buy a cheap dsd dac or a bluray that plays sacd in the same price?
Had someone compare a sacd disc whit the same remastering in dsd128?
If a DSD64 recording is remodulated to DSD128 or higher it will make it ‘easier’ for the DAC to convert back to analog (depending on the DAC…). It does not in any way make the original recording ‘better’, but may improve the sound quality depending on your gear.
ps. i have only dsd dac now
I have SACD Channel Classics (Rachel Podger) Le Quattro Stagioni and DSD 128 file (free demo file to download:
https://nativedsdpresents.nativedsd.com/albums/NDSD012-welcome-to-nativedsd-sampler/). You better not compare and stay convinced that you have the best possible sound.
DSD 128 is definitely better. I’ve used it for making recordings with the Tascam DA-3000 and Korg MR-1000, and there is no question that 128 is more accurate to the source.
ps. can people also do dsd vinyl needle drops whit the Tascam DA-3000 or Korg MR-1000
i have this sacd but didnt knew it was also in 128 dsd, i will buy it soon but then it seems that is is in original dsd 512?
ps. my dac can handle dsd 512
Yes, the DSD 128 file is noticeably better than SACD. Knowing that the quality of the sound can be even better is a bit frustrating for the owner of many SACDs.
I have a DS DAC, it only reads DSD 128.
I have this recording in DSD 128. Nice sound and I always enjoy Rachel Podger’s baroque interpretations.
SACD uses a certain amount of compression to get it on the disc particularly on multi channel so arguably a DSD64 download may have slightly better fidelity?
It certainly makes sense to record at a higher bit-rate than DSD64 but don’t confuse that with remodulation to higher bit rates. The Rachel Podger recording was originally captured to DSD256 and is available remodulated to DSD512.
I highly recommend reading this explanation
My own experiences have led me to conclude that it’s generally best to get the recording in the res that it was recorded. YMMV.
Agreed and most logical starting point IMHO
i agreed both down or up: sound litle “less” at least the pcm i try, i guess is the same with dsd;
better the original 256 than a “compression” to sacd!
what i had experience is that dsd 512 sound more clear and clean
according to nativedsd . com there is no a native dsd 512 or dsd 1024 !
it seems nobody can reproduce dsd 512 today
but what you think could be a sound improvement 512 vs 1024? it feels 256 is enought and for the very litle clean “touch” of 512 i dont know if it really matters
i think 1024 can do nothing at all for the sound IN ALL CASES in the end