You can run DSD512 via USB with just the latest Stream Length drivers. You will need to compile them yourself. I am not saying anything more about this.
Tedās right. The chassis is so different that it makes it nearly impossible to do any kind of āupgrade kit.ā Nothing much has been discussed, but Iām sure weāll do a generous trade-up from DSD to TSS.
2 Likes
jamesh : can I assume this trade-up would include Canadian DSD owners?
1 Like
Most of our distros do participate in some kind of trade-in/trade-up program, but I canāt guarantee it. I have no say nor control over their markets.
No, not really. From a purely pragmatic level even simply having multiple FPGA releases available to choose from isnāt possible in the DS: the memory that holds the FPGA code was stolen from the graphics storage memory and the PWD only had so much memory. So a change in hardware would be required for multiple choices.
Even with more hardware the best we could do in practice is simply choosing one FPGA release or another.
There is no concept of this from one release and that from another. The FPGA code is one big blob of hardware interconnections. No piece from one release is separable from the rest of the release.
Differing releases arenāt designed based on subjective assessments of sound quality. On the other hand a given release is built 20 ways and one of those is chosen by careful listening.
I choose a place or places in the code to make things technically better, e.g. fix a bug, use more precision, use a new algoā¦ I usually also try to find some more places in the code to lower the noise generated in the FPGA. The net result is each release more accurately delivers the audio described by the input bits.
So the effective difference in the source code is that over time there are more refined algoās, fewer bugs, and more carefully chosen use of the resources available.
Now, itās always the case that some people will prefer one release over another, the idiosyncrasies of one release or another might have more synergy with the rest of a given system or user preferences.
6 Likes
Thanks Ted
The PS Audio has been known to be ā smootherā, less dynamic and more rolled off than most other dacs. Iām hoping to see something that moves away from the smooth and more to the dynamic side. What Is the TCC I see spoken about above? A new model coming out?
The TSS stands for Ted Smith Signature. It is a forthcoming DAC from Ted. You can read all about it in this thread. TSS Two Chassis Super DAC
Whatās great about the DSD is that it is smoothā¦but it is not rolled off or less dynamic. It provides great detail and resolution too. The frequency response measures quite flat.
14 Likes
Totally agree. DSS is a perfect balance of all these, especially in this price point.
Regards,
Sourav
8 Likes
First, welcome to the community.
Regarding the quote: Says who/āhas been known to beā by whom?
This is an awfully broad/sweeping statement to make. No ill-will intended to you personally, but I canāt help but respond and note that there are people on this forum that have never heard the DS Sr. (in any firmware incarnation) and if they were to be considering auditioning or buying one, your statement would be very off-putting (especially the so far unsubstantiated āthan most other dacsā declaration).
So, if you have any support for such a claim (including your listening experience, published reviews, comparisons to most other dacs, published objective testing results, etc.), I think that would be helpful for potential purchasers.
That said, subjectivity and individual preferences are at the heart of our passion for music and kit and it is perfectly acceptable for you to hold this opinion, personally.
12 Likes
I couldnāt agree more!
2 Likes
Kinda reminds me of the phrase weāre hearing on the news all the time; āmany people are saying.ā
6 Likes
I wouldnāt mind having capability to decode high sampling rate files properly. However I definitely agree that most of good sound quality albums donāt necessarily have to be high rate sampling. What matters most depends on the recording quality itself rather than the sampling rates.
2 Likes
exactly, same here
I find it fascinating the difference good mastering makes. Take the Patricia Barber album Cafe Blue, to me, the mastered version is far better than the unmastered version that was released a few years ago. Having said that, Iāve no idea how important it was that the basic recorded tracks were of a particular standard.
1 Like
While recording quality is imperative, the mastering is really the most important part of the process by far. A poor mastering can ruin an otherwise great recording while a great mastering can make even a less than stellar recording sound pretty darn good.
Generally speaking, this has been my experience as well. And, when you here great music that is of superior production/recording quality, you KNOW it!
Cheers.
J. Gordon Holtās Law: the better the recording, the worse the musical performanceāand vice versa
3 Likes
I think that was true back in the 60s or 70s when he coined it, but Iām not so sure it applies today.
1 Like