DSD vs. PCM vs. MQA - Group listening experiment
It is nearly impossible to do pure DSD without either analog tools or PCM in the loop. It has been said that recording direct to a dsd master bypasses all the analog and/or pcm processes. Anyway, noise issue aside, some dsd versions of the same file sound better and some worse than the hires pcm versions. |
@jon2020 Yeah, but we never want that. :) Well, almost never. Most recordings we hear are from multi-track masters with quite a bit of post-recording work. At the very least you want some control over the dynamic range of the performance. This makes true direct to DSD recordings exceedingly rare. Go to Blue Coast Records and read the provenance of their recordings if you want a really good view as to how much goes into even "simple" production. Best, Erik |
@erik_squires Just been there before your post and found out that they transfer from 1/2" tape masters. :) On the home page, it also says, "We specialize in recording direct to DSD and tape to capture the natural acoustic sounds of our artists." On one new DSD256 release :- "Provenance: Recorded to 2" Analog Tape or DSD64 and mixed through analog console to DSD256. All conversions were made from the DSD256 original source mixes. After several blindfold tests, it is our opinion that the DSF256 files sound the best, followed by DSF128. The best PCM sound is the WAV192. The difference is minimal. We suggest you purchase files for your best performing home DAC. The DAC will make more difference than the file type. Some DACs are not compatible with DSD256." 2 note-worthy points :- 1. The difference is minimal 2. The DAC will make more difference than the file type (with regard to DSD in this context, lest someone pops his head up to.....) |
reads like an appropriate article. this may have been posted previously elsewhere in the forum http://www.mojo-audio.com/blog/dsd-vs-pcm-myth-vs-truth/ |
