How I do my random listening …
From what I read, the inferior SQ of as far as I understood more or less any online streaming provider vs. local streaming is undisputed and reproducible/demonstratable. Just as the differences between server SW like Roon, Jriver etc.
I think it won’t take long anymore until it will be revealed what the streaming providers do with their content and what has influence. But the real problem is, we never know what changes and will happen. I guess there will come a time of small audiophile streaming providers and I guess none of the big ones will have audiophile interest above a certain level long term.
@stevensegal I appreciate your opinions. Good news about opinions, we can agree to disagree and still remain friendly.
As I said, this wasn’t the point of my original question in this thread.
I’ll leave this whole thing here.
2 Likes
Hmmm, actually, the common denominator for most of the niche music labels I write about is that they are founded by recording or mastering engineers who have a perfectionist attitude about making recordings. So, indeed these founders have a strong interest in making recordings and working with musicians. This is how they intend to make their livings. As a result, I would say they are vested in delivering a product that is of very high quality – and they do. And while I advocate for DSD256 recordings, I am also very much a proponent of labels recording in DXD. Just not so much for labels who insist on staying in lower resolution PCM.
For the most part these niche labels do not own a studio. Eudora, Cobra, Channel Classics, Hunnia, and TRPTK all capture their channel tracks in DSD256 (for the most part). Northstar Recordings, Lawo, Sound Liaison, Sono Luminus and 2L all capture their channel tracks in DXD. All release in both DXD and DSD256.
All make their recordings in concert halls, churches, or rented large space commercial recording venues (such as MCO, Studio 1 and Studio 2, Hilversum, The Netherlands), but only Hunnia, Sono Luminus and Sound Liaison have their own recording studios in which small ensembles or solo instrument recordings may be recorded. Sono Luminus’ studio is actually a large church building which they purchased, it has beautiful hardwood floors and ceilings and lovely acoustics. But even here these labels do a large number of on site concert hall recordings as well.
And for context, Lawo, 2L, Northstar Recordings, Sono Luminus, Sound Liaison, Hunnia, and Cobra all have long-standing relationships with their artists. Eudora and TRPTK are the youngest of these labels.
By the way, Channel Classics’ founder, producer, recording engineer and mastering engineer Jared Sacks, has long been the preeminent proponent of DSD and now DSD256. I’ve asked him for an interview article why he channel tracks to DSD256 and he replied, “It sounds better.”
I purchased 24/192 PCM downloads of some of Rachel Podger’s magnificent recordings that I can now stream in the same 24/192 PCM on Qobuz. I’ve compared and cannot tell any difference at all.
This may be due to deafness or a rubbish audio system, but comments like “recordings from labels such as Linn and Hyperion, who remain mired in somewhat low resolution PCM” are frankly condescending and just plain wrong. Their master formats (24/192 and 24/96 respectively) have vastly more resolution than we can hear.
The irony is that Linn were a leading advocate of DSD and issued more SACD than anyone, finally giving up about 5 or 6 years ago. There simply wasn’t enough interest to make it worthwhile. They chose 24/192 as their master format and stuck with it. It has not stopped them making many award-winning recordings, not least due to their fabulous roster of clients, and also won Gramophone Label of the Year.
I wouldn’t expect it to be so if Qobuz is getting the original masters from Channel. (BTW I have many of her albums on both DSD and PCM downloaded from Channel and now Out-There.)
My point about snake oil on streaming services wasn’t that reputable streaming services like Qobuz are creating snake oil. They take what the recording company says is the resolution and they try their best I expect to find out the upsampled ones etc. But it does get through if the recording company isn’t transparent.
BTW another label I like that does mostly in PCM is Ondine. They take great care in their recording processes.
Yes, @stevensegal, that comment is condescending and I should not have said it that way. What I should and will say it that they could do so much better but choose not to do so. And 24-192 is only at the threshold of what can sound good today. It is well less resolution than we (or at least I and quite a number of other listeners) hear. When I think of the wonderful artists these labels record, and the great recordings they make, I am saddened by their technology decisions.
You’re right. But you see, for most of these labels, the audience isn’t listening on discriminating audiophile equipment. If you’re lucky Sennheiser headphones is probably the highest audio quality the average listener has known. So for them, they probably can’t hear between 24/48 and 24/192! If their ears haven’t been destroyed by loud music first. 
Financial decisions driving choices, which is fair since this is a business after all. And still… 
This is why DSD256 will never be other than a niche product as far as released music is concerned. The majors see no financial advantage to doing so, and so it will not happen except among the niche labels. Same with DXD, but to a bit lesser extent.
So, the niche labels are where I devote my energies. If I can help more people become aware of the excellent releases from these smaller perfectionist labels, I think that’s a worthwhile expenditure of some time and some writing. The big labels have sufficient marketing budget to do this on their own.
I am delighted by their technology decisions and so are a huge number of very satisfied customers, just not you. They are now part of a stable of audiophile labels that includes Channel Classics.
You may be confusing input and output formats. Linn Records were using 32/384 DXD on Pyramix from at least 10 years ago. They decided to output everything to 24/192 PCM as their master format. From what I read they were using Pyramix long before that as well, don’t know what format.
There is more than enough data in a 16/44 CD. Just about the best audio I’ve ever heard was a 16/44 Linn CD played through dCS Vivaldi when that system was launched in 2013. The advantage of DXD for recording is only limited by file sizes, for which Pyramix have their own .PMF (max 32/384) format. You can output it to much lower resolution without losing sound quality.
The elephant in the room is the near impossibility of editing DSD, as it can’t be attenuated. Jared Sacks gets around this by effectively making every recording a live recording. It works because he is a genius, despite DSD’s limitations for recordings.
Jared isn’t the only genius. There are fabulous pure DSD recordings coming from Octave, Cobra, Blue Coast etc.
It can be done. Just depends on whether the label cares. The results can be amazing.
From what I understand, DXD is extremely widely used. Remember that DSD recording is a bolt-on package to Pyramix, which is basically a DXD based system.
The problem with DSD is it’s near impossible to record, you can’t edit it without converting to DXD and next to no one wants it or has equipment to play it. Worse, you have to filter DSD when converting to PCM to get rid of high frequency noise, so you are better off using DXD in the first place, as Pyramix recommend.
Worse still, unless you have very expensive hifi, playing very large files requires lots of data processing, generates heat and noise and downgrades playback sound quality.
This is all extremely irritating and annoying for lovers of DSD, but the world isn’t going to change for a few thousand people.
You have made my day! I had not been able to discover that they were recording in 32/384. There is yet hope and my faith in their technology decisions is restored. That they release in 24/192 is now simply a business decision that one may still hope can result in later remasterings for release in DXD.
Those labels rarely get more than 4 people playing at once.
Jared Sachs is the only one that I know of that does “studio” orchestral DSD recordings, the studio being a concert hall. From what I read he does them in one take, like a live recording. There are DSD recordings of live orchestral performances, Liverpool Phil, London Symphony etc. I think Jared Sachs mainly works with one orchestra, so they must have it sorted.
It’s a decision based on their considering it the highest quality format audio master files and that all all their customers can play it.
This is what Linn Records says on their website:
“With a Studio Master, you get to hear more of the music. It’s the closest we can get to capturing the artist’s original performance. In fact, it’s recorded with such accuracy that you’d think the artist was performing in your room. Customers tell us that the quality of sound on our recordings has encouraged them to expand their listening habits. They find themselves exploring new music and enjoying classical as well as rock, pop, electronic and jazz. Today, our Studio Masters set the music standard for digital recordings.”
Of course you will probably disagree with that as well.
They will not release DXD because when they decide on something they stick to it, hardly anyone can play DXD files anyway and as stated above their current masters are just fine.
It seems a common refrain that if you don’t do DSD you don’t care.
It’s just as easy to argue that if you insist on using a format that you can’t edit you don’t care, or use a format your customers can’t play you don’t care.
Besides, my system benefits from DSP and you can’t use it with DSD.
Well said.
I would agree that Jared is a genius for the wonderful recordings he achieves. Today, all of his orchestral recordings are laid down in DSD256 channel tracks and then mixed in post via DXD in Pyramix. Some solo and small ensemble recordings, and his jazz recordings for his Just Listen label, are mixed on capture and then released as Pure DSD256.
Oh, and DSD can be mixed and EQ’d, but not sliced and diced as PCM easily allows. Doing this in DSD is a pain and it takes more time. Jared knows how to do it and likes the sonic results. But he doesn’t have the time for most of the classical recordings he releases, some of which require that additional slicing and dicing to get into final form.
I’ve been holding out for the DSD version of this particular one! 
Seriously though, I choose based on performance and let sonics fall where they may. If the performance is there and a better sonic alternative is available in a playback format my system can contend with I’ll give it a try. Charlie Patton is actually a good example of this with the Yazoo CD reissues being a sonic step-up.
1 Like