DSD256 and how it's being played

Try aaronm@psaudio.com

And if it were coming through wired over a network it’d be “packets are packets.”

Everything makes a difference.

1 Like

My first impression of the 256 version versus the 64 version played thru a DSDAC using the I2 buss… of the Jeremy Mohney Dreams of You recording.

  • More lower level detail especially in the guitar strings picks and string slide - cymbals had more shimmer and trailed off more naturally - the mouth piece blow by (on the sax?) was more distinct and discernible.
  • More air and a slightly better sound stage in the 256 version
  • A certain long term ‘smoothness’ of the 256 version

It may not be the most ‘technically correct’ recording (too close mic’d?) but is a great choice in hearing what a 256 version of the recording can bring out in relation to the original 64 version.

The differences weren’t of the ‘stand on the hill and shout’ variety , but subtle. They are very discernible in a direct track by track comparison. It was easier for me to pick the differences by listening to the 256 version of any given track 1st and then the 64 version. (Easier to hear a loss or less distinct of something instead of a small gain?)

I’m certainly no reviewer or good writer, and quite frankly, not one who enjoys constant critical listening to pick out differences. Rather someone who likes to listen for a couple hours at a time when the opportunity presents its self and enjoy music I like.

Equipment wise (I consider things pretty modest)

  • A Mac with JRivers or Pure Music
  • A Matrix USB to I2 converter
  • DSDAC with Sunlight
  • KSL pre
  • M700’s amps
  • Apogee Centaur Major speakers supplemented by 2 SVS micro subs
2 Likes

Very nice, high-value system, IMO…

Welcome back, so to speak.

Thanks for the kind words words Scott

The system sounds good - but the itch for improvement is always there. Value or not :sweat_smile:

As far as being back, I read more than participate. Mostly time management issues - being a working stiff still and on the road 200+ nights a year.

Well, you would not be welcome on this forum if that was NOT the case.

:laughing:

I’ll bet the music is sweet most of those other 165 or so nights a year.

Cheers.

Great to see PS Audio ditching the limited DSD64 Sonoma system and embracing the technically better Merging Hapi and Pyramix DXD and DSD256 system

I asked why limit things to DSD64 back in 2020 before the thread was sillily closed

As far as I read this thread was not closed for DSD discussion reasons but for other ASR stuff reasons.

The ASR video was discussing DSD noise, smack bang on topic of the thread. Seems a bit silly have a blanket ban anything from ASR.

Anyway lets not make this thread also about ASR

Finally DSD128 and DSD256 are available from Octave - for objective (measurements !!) reasons :slight_smile:

Correct. At the time of that thread (2 years ago) we went through a period of ASR bashing which was destructive and contrary to the spirit of this forum. Previous posting of the same ASR video had already immediately engendered this behavior. Additionally, the question posed by the OP in the thread was already answered by Paul. It was thus time to move on.

There is no blanket ban of discussing ASR, but any such discussion needs to be polite and constructive, not a bash-fest. We are not going to engage in the behavior which is unfortunately often witnessed on ASR.

4 Likes

Well said.

1 Like

OK, my brother was just by to hear the DSD256 version and he echoed what I heard. He says the DSD64 is flatter sounding because some of the spacial information evaporated. Don’t get me wrong, the 64 version is really, really good, just the 256 is better.

1 Like

Thanks, guys. They are not “the same bits”. Remember, when we remaster something we’re kind of starting over by interpreting what’s there into a new and higher sample rate.

Just for a moment, think about the original process of how it was mastered: going from DSD to analog, then back again to DSD. It’s like re-recording all over again.

1 Like

You are right, they’re not the same bits, I listen again today and the difference is not small, the DSD256 blows away the DSD 64 version! The 64 version really thins out the sound.

1 Like

Does this mean that original DSD256 should be upsampled to DSD1024? Many of us don’t have a DSD1024 streamer/DAC, so I’ll amend the question to ask, should Octave’s DSD256 be converted to DSD512?

I believe @tedsmith posted elsewhere before the sweet spot is above DSD128 and a little below DSD256, so DSD512 should not sound any better. DSD256 is as good as it’s gonna get.

1 Like

Indeed. Thanks. I am glad folks are downloading the higher sample rate versions. They really are a lot better.

3 Likes

Hi @Paul Is Gus still involved now that Octave have switched from Sonoma to Merging Pyramix ?

I did listening experiments and found DSD256 to sound best of the formats my Bryston BDA3 will play. Through JRiver MC28, external HD, Win11 Intel CoreI5 HP Compact Desktop, the BDA3 plays all DSD formats it is capable in Native without DoP conversion. I connect through Transparent Premium USB.

As for buying, I have a subscription to NativeDSD plus. For the annual fee, Download prices are discounted and will include lower rate DSD versions. This allows me to download the DSD128 versions for my PS Audio NuWave DAC in the bedroom.

I am seeking the best sounding digital music (regarding format and recording) to download these days. To my ears the modern well recorded DSD recordings sound best. I haven’t seen better from other Download retailers. So, that would be a “yes” to interest in DSD256.

Cheers!

2 Likes

I am definitely interested in DSD256 especially those that are recorded at the sander bitrate. I have quite a few albums so far. I download them from various services (NativeDSD, Channel Classics, Eudora, NativeDSD etc) and play them through a Lumin T2 over Roon.