I think the delineation between the two formats is diminishing.... "originally encoded" DSD stuff is now available as well, so the unfair head-strat PCM enjoyed for so long will soon(?) be gone. Which will not help one single bit in this instance... we'll all miss these threads greatly...
Not according to Google, long way off PCM is still the standard for studio recordings.
Simple question asked "studio recordings PCM v DSD % ratio"
"In terms of studio recordings, the vast majority are done in PCM format, with only a small percentage utilizing DSD, meaning the ratio is heavily skewed towards PCM, likely around 95% PCM to 5% DSD"
I'm direct streaming this atm with no attached rez robing meta data, if it doesn't play for you straightway when you click on it, it's down converting or your using apple junk and it wants to change it to aac (mp4)
http://server9.streamserver24.com:18910/motherearth.klassik
Cheers George
Last edited:
Or if you want Jazz at 32bit 192khz from the same as above( remember if it doesn't play straight away when you click on the link, you'll never hear it at that rez)
https://motherearth.streamserver24.com/listen/motherearth_jazz/motherearth.jazz
Cheers George
https://motherearth.streamserver24.com/listen/motherearth_jazz/motherearth.jazz
Cheers George
You forgot the third member stuck in the middle. But please don't exaggerate as I have posted measurements only in a handful of threads some of which are my own threads. But be assured I won't post any measurements in your threads anymore.
Unless you have a 32 (or more) bit R-2R DAC, you have to round it to the DAC wordlength first, which would not be bit perfect - althoug bit perfect doesn't mean much anyway when each bit weight is wrong due to component tolerances.
Why? The less I post measurements the less Marcel has to worry about seeing discussions between Markw4 and a certain other member about measurements vs. listening.
This was not about measurements vs. listening but I just have to conclude that we live in different worlds. You may find my measurements useful but sighted subjective listening (by anybody else than me) does not bring any new insights to me.
In the end that's what it always comes down to, unless one is just a measurement freak like others are here, and never listen to music for pleasure it gives.
Cheers George
Strange, why would you and bohrok2610 trust your own sighted listening impressions any more than anyone else's?
I listened more DSD devices with MCU/CPLD bit arranging on board. Every of them was with digital noise fatigue, lifeless sound - empty, low level of bass body, different songs played almost the same with sound signature... 🙁 Impossible to listen without higher order LC HF filter...
.
DSD dacs WITHOUT mcu control, or other of these little powerful devices in the heart, played better. Less audible damaging artefact... Smaller order HF filter needed.
.
Tried with discrete and battery PS. PS is not responsible for disappointing sonic results...
.
On measurements are behaving without significant difference...
.
DSD with MCU are just for smaller dimensions - but the sound suffers.
.
That is my subjective observation on DSD topic.
Means you're doing something or multiple things wrong, is all (like putting MCU/CPLD there). Bruno Putzeys' Mola dacs are DSD, and only around $12,000. Do you think they sound like you describe.
Moreover, we have some people building MarcelvdG's RTZ dac with Cestrian's clock board, Iancanada clocks, etc. These guys have been working on dacs for decades. Never heard better sound from any dac. Just need the right output stage to finish it up, and there is progress being made on that.
My own personal opinions follow:
Does it cost more than $150 to build? Yes, it does. Can be done for some hundreds of dollars, probably under $1,000. Maybe around half that, if someone has some stuff already around from prior projects, and or if willing to settle for lower cost clocks initially. However, for the $1,000 cost it can rival more expensive dacs. I wouldn't worry too much about being able to better the sound of $5,000+ dacs. If willing to go for the very best clocks (Acko), wouldn't be surprised if it could compete with some pretty great $10,000 dacs. This of course assumes the output stage finally settled on as recommended is satisfactory.
Last edited:
It's simple, to the "subjective R2R sound" deniers.
You obsessed measurement "guru's" should have a listen to probably the "best ever" measured dac, the Topping D-90se (<$1300), then have the ***** to come back here and say it's the best dac you've ever heard.
Cheers George
You obsessed measurement "guru's" should have a listen to probably the "best ever" measured dac, the Topping D-90se (<$1300), then have the ***** to come back here and say it's the best dac you've ever heard.
Cheers George
Last edited:
Who are you referring/talking to? Did anyone say what you are accusing them of, to the effect that Topping D90se sounds best? Nobody said anything like that, did they? If they did, in what post?
Last edited:
The ones in this thread that "think" R2R is old technology and that's bettered by delta Sigma technology because it "measures" far better.
Cheers George
Cheers George
Oh. Well the reason to go to upsampled and modulated to DSD256 with MarcelvdG RTZ DSD dac is because it sounds better (if well implemented, that is). It doesn't measure better.
Maybe the "Topping D90 III Discrete" measures better, but I doubt if it sounds better.
Regarding R2R, it is old technology but some people still like the sound of it best.
Maybe the "Topping D90 III Discrete" measures better, but I doubt if it sounds better.
Regarding R2R, it is old technology but some people still like the sound of it best.
Last edited: