DSD mastering and quality

Octave Records
102

Sounds very reasonable. On the one hand this relativates the hype about 1xDSD compared to high PCM sampling rates a bit and confirms the practical experiences of recording quality strongly dominating hires format differences up to 1xDSD…on the other hand it rises expectations for the high DSD sampling rates (which I so far just heard from Mofi LP’s)…nice :wink:

It also seems to mean, that digital releases will get another reincarnation, causing everyone to buy at least analog sourced digital releases again as soon as they are transferred to 2x or 4x DSD, which is still rare. All other digitally recorded releases so far then have a clearly inferior format than it could be. Then the future of great digital sound will be high sampling rate DSD…and it won’t be available for online streamimg too soon and not on discs. Not very mass suited unfortunately, but for audiophiles with large hard drives on their NAS like me :wink:

103

Hi all, it’s hard to know where to jump in, but I’m going to start here… and probably repeat the same information a dozen times as I have in the past. There is a lot of misinformation being spread and mixing/mastering cannot be generalized.

For Blue Coast Records, we only record to tape (early days) and DSD256 (more recently). We don’t record to PCM. We mix through an analog console and DO NOT go to DXD or PCM of any kind for eq or gain in the mix.

Whatever you’re hearing about DSD having to go to DXD is a choice by the mixing engineer. It happens I hear a very audible difference and choose not to use DXD for mixing, adding EQ or gain.

I have a deep respect for all those working in DSD… Like Paul, Jared (Nativedsd), Morten and others who choose to use DXD or PCM for their mixing. I don’t question their methods. If they feel there isn’t a strong enough difference to stay in analog, then that’s up to them. I only object to rumors running around that every DSD recording is EQ’d in PCM. Very much NOT TRUE.

It happens I do hear a difference that I can’t tolerate in DXD. So I choose to stay in DSD, go analog mixing console and back out to DSD256 to mix Blue Coast Records music. I’m not questioning other people’s methods.

Consumers don’t buy our music because we don’t go to DXD for EQ. They either like the music we offer at Blue Coast Records or they don’t buy. I’m sure it’s the case for everyone’s label. It would be a shallow world if people only bought music because it was recorded to DSD.

Jared, Morten and Paul choose their metods to mix … same as Beyonce, Butch Vig or Billie Eilish. I choose the recording and mixing methods for Blue Coast Records.

So… please don’t generalize that all DSD goes to DXD for Eq and Gain… it’s not the case.

Thank you all for even talking about this, now please go to your favorite store and buy something.

Cookie Marenco
Blue Coast Records and Music

ps, here’s an album recorded to DSD, mixed and mastered to DSD256, no DXD EQ or gain.
https://bluecoastmusic.com/fiona-joy-hawkins-rebecca-daniel/to-the-wind

104

So this (the DXD mastering/editing) seems to be the compromise with DSD.

I remember you said, the Sonoma conversion is theoretically better…but I remember it can just do 1xDSD, so not better than high sampling rate DSD via DXD probably…then there’s the analog mastering option for DSD, which may or not be better than both.

If DXD can’t keep all the DSD information, how can a DXD mastered DSD recording keep more information than a native DXD recording contains and be better than it (even more as native DXD would need no conversion inbetween for mastering)?

105

Yes I remember that Cookie!

Is it more expensive to maintain an analog mastering chain than a DXD one? I don’t want to imply that those who use DXD for mastering do it for money reason, but I thought about the necessary effort for an analog chain when I read about Mofi‘s Paravincini one.

What I could imagine as a goal when using DXD is to keep everything in the digital domain for a reason of principle and trying to make the best possible of it.

106

You are asking the wrong person. I never said anything like that, and I don’t know who might have.

I can speculate that perhaps some people are confused by things that happen in the digital world and things that happen in the analog world. There are some DACs that do a more faithful job playing PCM and some which do a more faithful job playing DSD. In this case doing the conversion digitally to the “preferred” format of a DAC will give a more faithful system overall. It’s also possible that people mastering have access to better tools than the average consumer (tho certainly not always) and will lose less going from DSD to DXD to DSD than the consumer will with some DACs. Another way DXD recording, DXD processing and DXD releases might not be as faithful as DSD recording followed by DXD processing, followed by DSD distribution might simply be that DXD recording is not as faithful as DSD recording. I don’t think things are as simple as that, but it’s possible and probable with certain combinations of equipment and software tools.

107

It’s correct, you neither said that DXD processed DSD is generally better than native DXD, nor other PCM, nor that DSD of any kind is generally better than PCM. I read this elsewhere :wink: You always make very conservative statements and say what it depends upon, which I respect very much.

108

But I did say that in my experience DSD recording and minimal processing (usually without any digital processing) gives the best result to my ear (I didn’t say it as directly in this thread, but I certainly repeatedly have in the past.)

109

Definitely, I also remember and understood this!

110

Rudolph… thank you for the mention… but where on my website to I say that ‘format doesn’t matter’?

Let’s be clear and please don’t misquote or take my words out of context.

I do believe that a bad recording in ANY format can’t be salvaged by mixing it to DSD. And a bad recording in DSD won’t matter what you do to it.

I choose DSD256 for Blue Coast Records where I own the copyrights to the music and have final say.

I do believe in making myself happy when I’m working for my own label, Blue Coast Records. I choose to record in DSD256 because I don’t like the sound of PCM. Afterall, I’m paying for it.

As an independent engineer, I’m not going to turn down a sizeable $$$$$ to mix from any format. But those albums will not be on Blue Coast Records, my label.

Blue Coast Music is our STORE. It is not a label. We sell music recorded to any format by other labels like Mack Avenue and San Francisco Symphony because that’s how they choose to record. We remaster to DSD, it’s clearly labelled in all the provenance and we make 9 or so formats (including Gold CDs) for our customers to enjoy THE MUSIC. It’s a concept… enjoying the music. :wink:

You’re right that there are no standards in music. There are no standards as to what happens to music delivered to Spotify or Qobuz. It happens, there are a lot of shenanigans going on before the music goes to streaming services. But that’s for another day.

Sadly, Apple is deciding the standards for the mainstream which determines what manufacturers stay in business. There was no reason for tape machines and tape to get worse in quality except that few people can repair the machines or make good tape these days. The cost of upkeep is prohibitive for most young engineers. Believe me, there is a lot of frustration in pro audio.

Don’t be fooled… there were not and are still not standards for vinyl or CDs.

My advice is to buy the music you enjoy… at the price and format you choose to enjoy.

Cookie Marenco
Blue Coast Records and Music

111

Well said, Steven. Most consumers are very confused.

What I objected to with the MoFi issue was the repeated reference to DSD as “only being EQ’d in PCM”. That’s not true and regardless of this being a vinyl issue, it shed a negative light on DSD and that was wrong.

It was a statement repeated countless times by people that should know, but sadly did not. I contacted these folks directly, got statements from other engineers that misunderstanding had happened in trying to ‘simplify’ and generalize DSD mixing. Except for a few, I’m not sure audiophile consumers want the details of true information. It requires listening and education and a want to learn. Most people don’t care enough except to repeat the words of their favorite journalist or engineer.

Which is why any one with a label that specialized in DSD is a warrior. No matter how any of the other DSD labels choose to record, we are all in this together. No matter how many labels go to DXD for EQ, I’m not going to settle for that as a generalized standard. I’m going to do what sounds best to me.

And as you said, if you like the sound (and the music), isn’t that enough for a consumer?

Cookie Marenco
Blue Coast Records and Music

112

Thanks Cookie!

113

I remember really inferior PCM sound compared to today, from my last PCM players. Since I have the Directstream, this was gone to a degree that let me forget format topics. I’d really be interested in a true PCM to DSD comparison on equipment that doesn’t convert PCM to DSD anyway, but I probably never will be able to. Anyway based on the many discussions I probably will do a suitable comparison on the DS when I feel I have enough time for it. Will look out again for such files then, recorded in parallel DSD/PCM.

114

I didn’t recognize this discussion Cookie…in contrary a main topic was, that they use the gain2 all analog mastering chain and just the tape was copied to DSD256. The publication that they used their analog mastering chain was a main contribution to their implication that the whole process was all analog.

But maybe I missed that confused side discussion about DSD/PCM. I think except for those who hate digital anyway, DSD256 for pure digital media benefits from the Mofi topic in its reputation on the long run…for vinyl releases it might take a while (unjustified sonically).

115

Dear jazznut…
I’m celebrating 40 years of owning a studio this year… here’s what I know.
In 1982, I spent $40,000 on equipment to get going… can you imagine what that would cost today? Even the mic stands were made better and I’m still using them.

In 1985, I bought a Lexicon 224XL reverb for $10,000… I could have bought two new Volkswagen cars instead. Later that year I bought an AMS reverb for $9000. Independently wealthy? NO… Crazy, passionate and in debt? YES. I won’t talk about the other gear.

In 1986 I purchase my 2" tape machine for $30,000 … plus various SR noise reduction and other gear. By 2000, I had added 2000 sq feet to my house as my studio.

Until a bad reel of tape broke my machine just before Covid, that machine was still working. And it still does work, but I’m more cautious about tape. That’s almost 35 years of use for that machine. I still have many of the reels I recorded and can still play them back. Yes, we do archival work for a lot of people

At the same time, we were early beta testers for digital audio workstations (since mid 1980’s). If I add up the cost of ADDAs, computers, software, add ons, plugins, etc to maintain protools… the cost is more than double for digital audio and (for the most part) when a software update occurs, few things work again, Sadly, we can’t open files from the 1990s that are protools files. The systems old don’t work. When we got the Sonoma in 2002, we made sure never to put it online and are still setup for Window 7 (?) to keep it operational.

So the answer to your question… until the techs are gone and parts no longer made (which might be sooner than later), analog still beats out digital for maintenance costs over a long period of time. In the short term, I wouldn’t advise anyone to get into the studio business… and for quality I would advise a Pyramix, as quirky as it is. If someone wants clients/artists to book the studio, you have to have Protools… very, very sad but true.

Krieg Wunderlich, one of the MoFi mastering engineers interviewed, was our studio tech more than 25 years till Covid hit. Then he went full time to MoFi and stopped doing tech work. Whether they go to DXD or not, I can’t answer but I can say they have the gear to do a DSD to analog EQ back to DSD if they needed and are more than capable of aligning a tape machine to provide the sound they want.

I choose not to go to DXD. I prefer the sound of DSD and analog EQ but I’m in the minority, Plus, I have access to the analgo gear in my studio which makes it a reasonably cost effective choice. I’m still using that Lex 224XL and AMS reverbs… no plugin will sound like that.

Thanks for the great questions. I hope to provide the details of what we do and hope those interested can digest it all. Not easy.

Cookie Marenco
Blue Coast Records and Music

cookie 116

:+1:

2 Likes
117

Jazznut,
We always have a free test download to compare all formats. You can compare the same song from the same mix and mastering for you to compare the formats.
It’s free.
https://bluecoastmusic.com/hifilife/test-your-music-systems-for-high-resolution-audio-dsd-wav-flac-and-mqa-with-free-downloads

In September we plan to offer a day long class on zoom of a live mastering session. We will be mastering DSD and offer the files for download afterwards. You’ll be able to download the same file in the original DSD, the DXD and the render back to DSD so that you can compare at home.

Since it will be live, we can take questions from the audience. The workshop date and price will be announced shortly.

Hearing is believing. You can make your own judgements.

Cookie Marenco
Blue Coast Records and Music

118

Yes, I watched about 10 hours of video until I contacted the people directly who were mentioning this. We resolved it to a good conclusion.

Frankly, none of us has enough time to disect this any more. I need to get back to making music. :slight_smile:

Cookie

119

Oh I can imagine that’s a hell lot of money for a small label. But what you described is mainly the recording HW, right? What analog gear (how many boxes) is needed to master DSD? An EQ and any amps and separate reverbs? If you’d master in DXD, what’s then needed in comparison?

Didn’t he master for Mofi since their 2008 releases?

120

It’s possible Krieg was working there in 2008. He did a lot of part time work for them for a long time. We didn’t talk about it much. For a while he could only come on the weekends and with Covid the 1.5 hour drive was too much.

When we started Blue Coast Records in 2007, we did much less actual studio recording for the public so there were long stretches we didn’t need him to come down. I think the MoFi work became overwhelmingly good for him. He’s a good guy and straight forward. We liked him better than most techs.
Cookie

121

L.O.L…