Elk that is an answer and I do appreciate the response .
al
alrainbow said But neither one of you has answered the question does dsd 128 sound better or more natural to your ears. I have found that if I take a good dsd 128 and convert to 24/192 it looses something . So my understanding would lead me to think there is something to dsd being better in some ways. Now if the change is totally due to the conversion software being used and not just the down sample and conversion Then I would be wrong. Either way dsd 128 recordings I have shown me it sounds better . Ted when you say lower jitter makes your toes start to tap I agree but what does this mean . To me it means it's closer to what makes our ears happy and just what is this. Recordings I have heard or own that were from analog tape from the 50 or 60,s and converted to dsd sound above almost all dsd 64 and most PCM .Does anyone here agree or disagree not arguing but asking ? All of this is subjective anyway .
Al
One way to compare DSD64 and DSD128 is to visit the DSD File downloads site operated by Opus 3 Records. There you can download DSD64 and DSD128 versions of the same recordings and the same converter (Korg) and compare. The Yamina EP is very reasonably priced so that could be a starting point.
As to whether recordings made with a pro Analog to Digital Converter (ADC) at DSD64 like the Grimm sound better than ones on another pro ADC, say the Mytek or Meitner at DSD128, well that’s a different question - and one with fewer easy comparisons.
I did this comparison when I downloaded a dsd 64 by accident. And thence dsd 128. Regarding opus 3 I have a bunch of there stuff . I also own the the audio gate software by kong. More of reason for my statement . I also own the mytek and a msb stack. I did several post regarding this topic on computoraudiophile . I got bashed by someone there in the industry for pointing out dsd 128 being better. As they did not argue if better but said it’s. Bad buisness model. The website claim need to use master analog tapes to make there dsd 64 downloads . My argument was why not dsd 128 as it’s better . It seems to me the more our audio reproduction gets the more I realize the music is the weak link. I have a dsd of Elvis essetional stereo 57 . It is a fantastic Elvis album. Now I heard the analog and that recording was a tad better than my dsd. So my thinking is dsd 128 would of put it on par . The new opus3 no 3 dsd is fantastic too but if you convert in jriver on the fly or audiogate or download the dsd 64 and compare to 128 the shine is less . That easy relaxed sound of analog or dsd 128 is clearly less . Now go to PCM 24/192 and it looses more. Now I am not pro reviewer and do not want to make points that no one cares about . But most pros have to know this better thN I do . But do not talk about it. I do not want to start a rant but what gets done to us as we buy our music not once but three or four times is just not cool. I own a few hundred sacd,s and I have ripped them all for me . Guess hiw many really sound like a dsd 64 . Not many. So my guessing is a 1950 to 1960 year old analog master can sound that good in dsd 128 why done we have many more of them. Another fact is this did you know reel to reel is better than some vinyl or overall is just better. And it is pure analog second or third generation. How can this be. My reasoning is we never get to hear the analog master dsd conversion on almost anything we buy digital. I was told on the forums that dsd is such a small format that it will be years for us to have our dsd 128 or even dsd 64. Didnyounwatch the video and see the part they say no analog masters were used . The whole thing just stinks
al
The differences between DSD64 and DSD128 also depend on the DAC. Any given DAC may do one better than the other. There’s no technical reason that DSD64 should be better than DSD128 - but people have argued forever things like is 24/192k really better than 24/96. Once again (among other things) it depends on the DAC.
Coming from you I will shut up a listen , but what part of system resolution do you think plays into this. As some dacs may be better than another and having only a few dsd capible dacs to play woth I would take your experience way above mine and must correct. But as some do not hear even something changed to 24/96 i would think system resolution is must to hear improvements
Al
alrainbow said Coming from you I will shut up a listen , but what part of system resolution do you think plays into this. As some dacs may be better than another and having only a few dsd capible dacs to play woth I would take your experience way above mine and must correct. But as some do not hear even something changed to 24/96 i would think system resolution is must to hear improvementsAl
There are many things that play into it including the listener’s mood and confirmation bias (if they don’t think the will hear a difference they probably won’t.)
Most DACs that are out there have DAC chips inside them that do the actual digital to analog conversion - but the makers of the whole box can help or screw things up in many ways. Just one minor example: perhaps they use the crystal differently between DSD64 and DSD128 and isn’t as good at higher frequencies… (Probably not a real problem, but it’s just an example of what could be a problem.)
I don’t always hear the difference between DSD128 and DSD64, but to me the differences I hear are a sense of ease from DSD128 over DSD64. That doesn’t necessarily require an extremely resolving system, tho it couldn’t hurt.
1 Like
The more you answer with true cander the more I feel I am not crazy but maybe just too extreme. I,is ten to my music hours a day on trains
and I guess I need to step back and enjoy the music and not be so critical. Part of my issue is when someone puts up a post Bout some faily new music download and hiw they are the one who is going to fix the music download issues . It gets me going . Anyway thanks all for the answers good nite
al
Ted Smith said The differences between DSD64 and DSD128 also depend on the DAC. Any given DAC may do one better than the other. There's no technical reason that DSD64 should be better than DSD128 - but people have argued forever things like is 24/192k really better than 24/96. Once again (among other things) it depends on the DAC.When this topic came up at RMAF last October, there are people in the recording industry who do think that a top DSD ADC like the Grimm at DSD64 can outperform competitors at DSD128. So it is dependent on the converter and implementation.
It’s also worth noting though that Jan Eric-Persson at Opus 3 was quite firm in his feeling that when using his Korg systems, the DSD128 Korg clearly tops the Korg at DSD64 during the DSD panel at RMAF. I got the feeling that some of the other recording folks may re-visit their feeling that DSD64 is good enough in light of Jan-Eric’s findings. We will see.
bmoura saidTed Smith said The differences between DSD64 and DSD128 also depend on the DAC. Any given DAC may do one better than the other. There's no technical reason that DSD64 should be better than DSD128 - but people have argued forever things like is 24/192k really better than 24/96. Once again (among other things) it depends on the DAC.When this topic came up at RMAF last October, there are people in the recording industry who do think that a top DSD ADC like the Grimm at DSD64 can outperform competitors at DSD128. So it is dependent on the converter and implementation.
It’s also worth noting though that Jan Eric-Persson at Opus 3 was quite firm in his feeling that when using his Korg systems, the DSD128 Korg clearly tops the Korg at DSD64 during the DSD panel at RMAF. I got the feeling that some of the other recording folks may re-visit their feeling that DSD64 is good enough in light of Jan-Eric’s findings. We will see.
Gus sure likes DSD128 better than DSD64. Technically DSD256 might be better still (or not), but somewhere along there the jitter starts swamping other improvements.
1 Like
Ted Smith saidWhen I listen to the Opus 3 downloads, I prefer DSD128. Others say the difference, if any, is too close to call.bmoura saidTed Smith said The differences between DSD64 and DSD128 also depend on the DAC. Any given DAC may do one better than the other. There's no technical reason that DSD64 should be better than DSD128 - but people have argued forever things like is 24/192k really better than 24/96. Once again (among other things) it depends on the DAC.When this topic came up at RMAF last October, there are people in the recording industry who do think that a top DSD ADC like the Grimm at DSD64 can outperform competitors at DSD128. So it is dependent on the converter and implementation.It’s also worth noting though that Jan Eric-Persson at Opus 3 was quite firm in his feeling that when using his Korg systems, the DSD128 Korg clearly tops the Korg at DSD64 during the DSD panel at RMAF. I got the feeling that some of the other recording folks may re-visit their feeling that DSD64 is good enough in light of Jan-Eric’s findings. We will see.
Gus sure likes DSD128 better than DSD64. Technically DSD256 might be better still (or not), but somewhere along there the jitter starts swamping other improvements.
On DSD256, that’s still pretty scarce - Pyramix Horus has it along with a couple of the exaSound Stereo DSD DACs and their Multichannel e28 DSD DAC. Since the Pyramix system is aimed at the pro market, at least for now, there are now some recordings that have been recorded in DSD256. We’ll see if they make it to the DSD Download sites for purchase and comparison some day.
And then there is the Grimm Audio developer who is working on a future 2 Channel DAC under the Mola-Mola brand that is said to be beyond DSD256. We’ll see how all that turns out - and sounds !
bmoura saidTed Smith saidbmoura saidTed Smith said The differences between DSD64 and DSD128 also depend on the DAC. Any given DAC may do one better than the other. There's no technical reason that DSD64 should be better than DSD128 - but people have argued forever things like is 24/192k really better than 24/96. Once again (among other things) it depends on the DAC.When this topic came up at RMAF last October, there are people in the recording industry who do think that a top DSD ADC like the Grimm at DSD64 can outperform competitors at DSD128. So it is dependent on the converter and implementation.
It’s also worth noting though that Jan Eric-Persson at Opus 3 was quite firm in his feeling that when using his Korg systems, the DSD128 Korg clearly tops the Korg at DSD64 during the DSD panel at RMAF. I got the feeling that some of the other recording folks may re-visit their feeling that DSD64 is good enough in light of Jan-Eric’s findings. We will see.
Gus sure likes DSD128 better than DSD64. Technically DSD256 might be better still (or not), but somewhere along there the jitter starts swamping other improvements.
When I listen to the Opus 3 downloads, I prefer DSD128. Others say the difference, if any, is too close to call.
On DSD256, that’s still pretty scarce - Pyramix Horus has it along with a couple of the exaSound Stereo DSD DACs and their Multichannel e28 DSD DAC. Since the Pyramix system is aimed at the pro market, at least for now, there are now some recordings that have been recorded in DSD256. We’ll see if they make it to the DSD Download sites for purchase and comparison some day.
And then there is the Grimm Audio developer who is working on a future 2 Channel DAC under the Mola-Mola brand that is said to be beyond DSD256. We’ll see how all that turns out - and sounds !
Great read this morning. And I am glad I am not the only one to hear the difrerance . I know I am becoming what a hate about some people and that is wining. I cannot stand people who complain about everything. But the my point is made and some do get it.
And I never thought it could be dac dependint or even ADC as well. I guess in my own ingnorence I felt things are all equal and they never are.
Al
Al, you are not whining, just expressing a preference. If DSD128 sounds better to you it is better.
In my experience there are too many variables for me to express a preference between DSD64 and DSD128. I have heard both excellent and mediocre recordings in each format. I have yet to hear DSD256.
And you are right; it is good to step back, stop obsessing, and just listen to the music. 
2 Likes
Thanks elk. But I was whining I just can’t spell it correct . If I tell you I tried to spell it correct and picked that one honest .
Oh well listening to billy joel iso image dsf 64. And it’s all great. And on our amp too all the better .
al
United Electronics 596 USAF rectifier tubes on that Woo!
Elk
Matched Pair Tung-Sol NOS/NIB 6F8G/VT-99 Black Plates plates tubes - 1942
MATCHED PAIR UNITED ELECTRON USAF-596 RECTIFIER TUBES 5Z3 - WE 274A - 274B - #2
SUB FOR YOUR WE 274A
emission labs 300 B
i figured you would know and like seeing them. The amp with the HE6 i like better than my stax rig. It sounds very close to my speaker rig minus the vibrations anyway .
al
Didn’t know this guy is one of the „Mr. DSD‘s“
The Playback Designs room was one of my favorites at the Munich High End show, so it was interesting to see this video.
Taken out of the latest Native DSD newsletter.
1 Like
Andreas is a good egg. I first met him in '88(?) at a small startup in Boulder. When I was thinking about doing a DAC I called him a few times to brainstorm. On one of those calls he said that “DSD is whatever stream that when filtered gives you what you want” His sentence was better, but that idea is what broke me lose and let me add PCM to my DAC.
4 Likes
I guess even among all those brains who never had to learn at school for good grades, your way to get into the DAC business with a first product that bettered everything existing so far (at least at the price point and far sbove) was special
What’s funny to observe is that in their outward appearance geniuses either look more than adapted, rather square (like Andreas or Bill Gates) or unadapted (like you) 
2 Likes
Been listening to a DSD512 album from Vanessa Fernandez that I purchased yesterday. Sounds good indeed however didn’t quite ‘blow my wig away’ 
or seem notably better than your typical DSD64.
Ted -could it be what you said? That after DSD256 and higher the improvements are cancelled out by jitter aggravation and I would guess even more so with 512, 1024?
It depends on what you listen on. If you were using a PS Audio DAC something must have been converting the DSD256 to something else: DSD128, DSD64 or some PCM. If you are using a DS what does the display say?
1 Like