I don’t care about DSD128 content (there is none that I am interested in musically). 90% of what I am listening to is 44/16. I have some good MCH classical / jazz and BR concert movies. I’m already spending a disproportionate amount of time / money getting my MCH up to the highest standard considering. My top priority is squeezing the most out of 44/16.
The “new product” will probably be a MSB server with I2S pro output. Think $15k minimum - just for the source! This is why I like to explore the directstream route. If the DAC is truly source agnostic, I can run MCH audio into a stack of three DACs from a $1000 media server running Jriver and Dirac (or a $1000 modded Oppo if I forgo the DRC) and be done.
Well they are crazy. I have down sampled the dsd 128 so I can play it from iPad with no CPU. And I agree with you red book if done well is all we need . As there is a difference from redbook to dsd but not that much. And as for money yes the 3 k Paul’s wants is a bargain. Lol. Thanks
Al
@elk
Awesome! Heck, that appears to be me? 
I do not that much hair .
Al
I’ve watched the videos and have a few questions for those who auditioned the DirectStream and/or Ted.
1. Ted, you say the DS is input neutral, i.e. toslink, s/pdif, usb, etc. are all equal in quality through the DS. But, what about source resolution? After the DS does it’s magic, does 16/44.1k sound as good as 24/192 or 3.62 DSD source, or is there still a large difference in source? I would assume that the biggest improvement would be in the lower resolutions sources but I could be way off.
2. Again, since input connection is neutral, is the physical source then equal as well, such as toslink from a SONOS vs. USB from a computer vs. s/pdif from a high end transport?
3. For those that auditioned it in person, what are your impressions of redbook sound quality via DS verses DSD via a high quality SACD player or DSD capable server?
The reason I ask is that for $3k upgrade, if I can make my large library of redbook the sonic equivalent of SACD then it is certainly a real bargain, especially if I could use any physical source and achieve the same quality (i.e. SONOS or computer or transport). This really could be the great equalizer but I may just be dreaming.
@speeddeacon
I tried my level best to make sure that the incoming connections didn’t make any difference. I’ve succeeded better than anyone I know of. There just isn’t any difference when you change inputs or digital cables, etc. or sources of the digital signal (provided all of the bits are there.)
I haven’t done gobs of listening tests in the sense of trying to quantify the improvements on differing bit widths or differing sample rates, but the kinds of difference you’ll hear isn’t an incremental improvement. The result is just a lot more real sound that involves you deeper into the music. That happens for any input. Higher resolution inputs can still beat low resolution inputs, but everything is much better.
You should certainly audition for yourself if possible but I suspect most people can get rid of expensive digital cables, dejittering boxes, fancy audio cards, etc. I did all of my prototype demos with a cheesy USB -> S/PDIF converter thru a S/PDIF to TOSLink converter. One DAC that was brought to my house couldn’t even lock on the output of that combination.
Remember the first time that you saw HD television?
Yes wglenn, they were $6000 and $7000…now there $1300…
Are there any fuse considerations for the DirectStream DAC? Upgrades or even need?
@badgerbob
Certainly “better” fuses can always help.
It is possible, well would be great, if PSA is shipping the DS with the premium fuses that were shipped with the MKII upgrade.
For those with the upgrade, you already have good fuses. Anything more falls in the subjective category.
dave03hd said: Yes wglenn, they were $6000 and $7000...now there $1300...
Yep. That's the price we pay to be first kid on the block to have the latest.
@speeddeacon: Sorry, I don't have any experience with SACD and have only heard one DSD player in the past. The DirectStream was much better than the DSD player that I heard. I don't recall the manufacturer but people were making a big deal about it at Axpona last year. I thought that it was soft and lifeless- probably why I don't remember who made it.
I thought that it was soft...
IME a classic problem even with many of the better SACD solutions. Had a short conversation about this with Ted in the "DirectStream DAC video posted" thread.
wglenn said: The DirectStream was much better than the DSD player that I heard.
And you heard it in a completely different system ;)
What’s that got to do with anything?? 
J.P.
dave03hd said: Yes wglenn, they were $6000 and $7000...now there $1300...
Yep. That's the price we pay to be first kid on the block to have the latest.
@speeddeacon: Sorry, I don't have any experience with SACD and have only heard one DSD player in the past. The DirectStream was much better than the DSD player that I heard. I don't recall the manufacturer but people were making a big deal about it at Axpona last year. I thought that it was soft and lifeless- probably why I don't remember who made it.
To me that's exactly how I would describe vinyl relative to digital, soft and smooth, which is why DSD sounds so much better than redbook to my ears. It takes the hard edge off of digital. But, I don't find either to be lifeless at all.
Thanks for the impressions, keep 'em coming guys.
I think it was smart not to play vinyl in comparison. As it would only muddy thE waters . As for PCM to dsd
Of given the recordings are the same dsd does have a more replacing sound to it. It almost slows the music down so you can hear more details. The most realistic instruments are heard on dsd At least this is how I feel.
Al
Alekz said: And you heard it in a completely different system
@Alekz/wingsounds: Alekz's point is a relevant point. The DSD player was at Axpona on speakers/amps that I was not familiar with so what I heard was no doubt the sum total of the whole system. I was not impressed but this may not have been the fault of the DSD player.
@speeddeacon: Just what I heard in that room at Axpona, nothing more.
DirectStream is a good name, by the way. =D> :-bd
It is a good name, but I'm surprised Sony doesn't take issue with it?
@capzark
I think the term is pretty generic by now.
The “rights” are there to protect inventors and as well as to avoid confusion with consumers.
When used with “PerfectWave DirectStream”, PSA identifies it as a generic adjective and probably safe on both counts.
ELK, is our expert on this and may have a paragraph or two for us.