Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[fliptwister]

I have a SoundblasterX AE-5 sound card I got for Christmas and I was doing some testing on it with some DSD files (*.dsf).

When I play DSD files with MC23 the program informs me when playing a 64 bit DSD file that playback could not be at higher sample rate but could be played back at 176.4 kHz 64 bits (up to 6 channels). I choose to do so and MC23 plays back the files.

Is MC23 converting the files to PCM or playing back the DSD files natively? Is there any way in software to confirm how the files are being handled?

Thanks!

[Awesome Donkey]

Enable DSD bitstreaming to playback DSD files as native DSD. Otherwise MC will convert DSD to PCM on-the-fly by default.

https://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/DSD

EDIT: Upon researching the Sound BlasterX AE-5 sound card and reading its manual, it doesn't mention anywhere that it supports DSD. So there's a chance it may not playback DSD files without first converting DSD to PCM on-the-fly.

[fliptwister]

Thanks for the quick reply. I did not see your edit before I tried and obviously it did not work. Do you know what are the downsides of converting to PCM vs. native support are?

Are there any computer sound cards that support DSD files natively? I'm not going to buy another sound card I'm just curious. I did an internet search and could find nothing. I really like the AE-5 a lot.

   

[Awesome Donkey]

Well, converting DSD to PCM is a matter of preference when it comes to downsides. Some users want to keep DSD as DSD, others believe there's either an audible improvement or an audible degrade of quality when converting DSD to PCM (or vice versa). Just a matter of preference, honestly. But if it sounds fine or great to you, convert away!

I'm not aware of any sound cards that support native DSD playback (IMO, I avoid sound cards due to past experiences) but there's quite a few USB DACs which do.

[tyler69]

Lynx cards do DoP according to their support: https://www.lynxstudio.com/forum/dsd-with-e22-e44_topic6230.html

[fliptwister]

Thanks. It really is not that important to me to play DSD files. I'm playing Flac-HD files and they sound simply amazing. I imagine that with my gear I could not tell the difference if I listened to the same song in a higher res DSD file compared to a 192/24 flac file. I'm really enjoying the headphone amp on the AE-5. I may get a USB DAC at some point for listening to music but I need the sound card for 5.1 movie watching and gaming. 

[sandrei]

I had my own struggle with DSD files and I'd like to share my experience.
I do not think there is any internal sound card that supports DSD, I would immediately buy one if there is.
DSD files can be played on the computer only using players with software DSD decoding, and all the players I have seen have limitations of some kind. The only way to experience the full range of music in DSD format is from a SACD using a SACD player. Any conversion is with some loss, because of how the conversion process works. It is true that if you do not have a high end audio system and/or high hearing acuity you will not feel the difference between a SACD and a converted file.
Personally I converted all my DSD files to multichannel PCM wav files and that's how I'm playing them in MC23. Using multichannel FLAC files I found a little difficult to deal with, because not all the renderers support them, mine does not for example, it does support stereo FLAC but not multichannel FLAC.
Now, coming back to your first post I do not know how you get the message that a "64bit" DSD file cannot be played, because DSD is 1bit by default. The format is called DSD64, but that does not mean that is 64bit. "64" from DSD64 designation means that the recording was done at 64 times the standard CD sampling rate , which is 44.1 kHz (meaning 2.8224 MHz sampling rate), but in no way DSD64 means is at 64bit sampling rate.
The source of most if not all the DSD files is a SACD and SACD's are recorded at maximum 176.4 kHz and 24bit, there is no point to play them at 176.4 kHz and 64bit, as you say, 24bit will suffice without losing anything from the original file.

[DJLegba]

The only way to experience the full range of music in DSD format is from a SACD using a SACD player.

Sorry, this is not true.

[kr4]

DSD files can be played on the computer only using players with software DSD decoding, and all the players I have seen have limitations of some kind. The only way to experience the full range of music in DSD format is from a SACD using a SACD player.

There are DSD-capable DACs which can attach to the computer by USB or by DoP.

[Fitzcaraldo215]

I had my own struggle with DSD files and I'd like to share my experience.
I do not think there is any internal sound card that supports DSD, I would immediately buy one if there is.
DSD files can be played on the computer only using players with software DSD decoding, and all the players I have seen have limitations of some kind. The only way to experience the full range of music in DSD format is from a SACD using a SACD player. Any conversion is with some loss, because of how the conversion process works. It is true that if you do not have a high end audio system and/or high hearing acuity you will not feel the difference between a SACD and a converted file.
Personally I converted all my DSD files to multichannel PCM wav files and that's how I'm playing them in MC23. Using multichannel FLAC files I found a little difficult to deal with, because not all the renderers support them, mine does not for example, it does support stereo FLAC but not multichannel FLAC.
Now, coming back to your first post I do not know how you get the message that a "64bit" DSD file cannot be played, because DSD is 1bit by default. The format is called DSD64, but that does not mean that is 64bit. "64" from DSD64 designation means that the recording was done at 64 times the standard CD sampling rate , which is 44.1 kHz (meaning 2.8224 MHz sampling rate), but in no way DSD64 means is at 64bit sampling rate.
The source of most if not all the DSD files is a SACD and SACD's are recorded at maximum 176.4 kHz and 24bit, there is no point to play them at 176.4 kHz and 64bit, as you say, 24bit will suffice without losing anything from the original file.

I have a very large library in JR of SACD rips of over 4,000 discs, mostly Mch, stored as DSFs, and also some DSD128 and DSD256 downloads.  I use an Exasound e28 DAC via USB.  I can play all the files with no problems as pure DSD or converted to PCM 176k on the fly, the latter so as to apply bass management and Dirac Live EQ via the DST plugin.  I am quite happy with the arrangement, and I use an Oppo 103 for only SACD ripping but never for direct playback.

Actually, many DSD files are recorded natively in DSD64,128, 256 or possibly higher.  Others are recorded natively at various PCM sampling rates from 44k to 352k, then converted to DSD64 as the last step in mastering for release on SACD.  It all depends on the label and their engineering choices.

JR supports management and playback of all this easily, as well as comprehensive tagging of DSF files, though not other DSD formats like ISO or DFF.  Users can make their own judgements about which playback format to use.  I prefer the 176k PCM conversion from DSF with bass management and Dirac Live, myself.

The JR conversion from DSD64 to PCM actually takes place at 352k/64 bit internally.  However, I agree there is no point in trying to use anything other than 24 bit output.  And, for 176k or lower sampling rate output, JR uses SoX for the downconversion from 352k PCM.

[sandrei]

Sorry, this is not true.

What do you mean? My own opinion is not true? I think I was clear and if not I am stating it again, all my post was my own opinion, my own experience. I am not a guru or by no means a specialist in this matter. My source of information is internet, mainly Wikipedia, and if they are wrong I guess I am wrong too. One thing I am not wrong though: the way different files sound into my ears. Same music sounds to me much better directly on SACD than extracted in DSD files. Somebody else may have a different listening experience than mine. It is true that I do not have a high end DAC that supports DSD files, but I'm not planning to buy one, because lets face it they are extremely expensive.

[sandrei]

There are DSD-capable DACs which can attach to the computer by USB or by DoP.

And are those DACs DSD-capable able to read a multichannel DSD stream? All the DACs I have seen up to now read only dual channel files, maybe there is one, the World is a large place after all. But a SCAD player for sure can read both dual and multichannel streams from the disk. And I don't need some very expensive DAC to do that, a regular 100$ or less Bluray player can do that. I am always looking at the price I am paying for the quality and if it is worth it.

[sandrei]

I have a very large library in JR of SACD rips of over 4,000 discs, mostly Mch, stored as DSFs, and also some DSD128 and DSD256 downloads.  I use an Exasound e28 DAC via USB.  I can play all the files with no problems as pure DSD or converted to PCM 176k on the fly, the latter so as to apply bass management and Dirac Live EQ via the DST plugin.  I am quite happy with the arrangement, and I use an Oppo 103 for only SACD ripping but never for direct playback.

Actually, many DSD files are recorded natively in DSD64,128, 256 or possibly higher.  Others are recorded natively at various PCM sampling rates from 44k to 352k, then converted to DSD64 as the last step in mastering for release on SACD.  It all depends on the label and their engineering choices.

JR supports management and playback of all this easily, as well as comprehensive tagging of DSF files, though not other DSD formats like ISO or DFF.  Users can make their own judgements about which playback format to use.  I prefer the 176k PCM conversion from DSF with bass management and Dirac Live, myself.

The JR conversion from DSD64 to PCM actually takes place at 352k/64 bit internally.  However, I agree there is no point in trying to use anything other than 24 bit output.  And, for 176k or lower sampling rate output, JR uses SoX for the downconversion from 352k PCM.

I tried JR to convert DSD files to PCM and I was very disappointed by the results. Actually I tried most of the conversions JR has and I was not happy with the results. I am extremely pleased with other features JR has though, so I am happy to use JR for playback and other programs for file conversion.
Careful though when you say "Actually, many DSD files are recorded natively in DSD64,128, 256 or possibly higher." I have a problem with the term "native DSD" files. The term is used to describe music recorded directly in DSD format. But if you have a look at the music market in DSD format for most of it the source comes from SACDs, there are not many stores to offer DSD's. And SACDs most of them are not "native DSD" recorded, but either analog or PCM converted to DSD, so a conversion already took place before delivering the DSD files. There are some native DSD recordings, mainly symphonic music, recorded fairly recent, but older music re-issued in DSD format the source was analog or PCM, simply because DSD was not there when the recording was done.

[kr4]

What do you mean? My own opinion is not true?

But you stated it as if it was fact even though you do admit that "It is true that I do not have a high end DAC that supports DSD files." 

So, you need to insert the qualification that you have never made a direct comparison between DSD playback from a file and DSD playback from a disc/player.

[kr4]

And are those DACs DSD-capable able to read a multichannel DSD stream?

They do.

[sandrei]

But you stated it as if it was fact even though you do admit that "It is true that I do not have a high end DAC that supports DSD files." 

So, you need to insert the qualification that you have never made a direct comparison between DSD playback from a file and DSD playback from a disc/player.

No, I don't need to make that qualification. Yes sir, I did that direct comparison.

[sandrei]

They do.

I'm not going to ask you the brand because I think this is not the right place to advertise other products. Anyways I am pretty sure that the price for such product is pretty steep, it's not on my shopping list.

[Fitzcaraldo215]

I tried JR to convert DSD files to PCM and I was very disappointed by the results. Actually I tried most of the conversions JR has and I was not happy with the results. I am extremely pleased with other features JR has though, so I am happy to use JR for playback and other programs for file conversion.
Careful though when you say "Actually, many DSD files are recorded natively in DSD64,128, 256 or possibly higher." I have a problem with the term "native DSD" files. The term is used to describe music recorded directly in DSD format. But if you have a look at the music market in DSD format for most of it the source comes from SACDs, there are not many stores to offer DSD's. And SACDs most of them are not "native DSD" recorded, but either analog or PCM converted to DSD, so a conversion already took place before delivering the DSD files. There are some native DSD recordings, mainly symphonic music, recorded fairly recent, but older music re-issued in DSD format the source was analog or PCM, simply because DSD was not there when the recording was done.

It is true that most of my library is classical music.  But, you seem to have some misunderstandings and some confusion.

SACD is merely the name for a particular Sony/Philips commercial format which exists on specially encrypted optical discs. Strip away the encryption during ripping of the SACDs and you have DSD64, which is the fundamental basis for the format.  So, SACD is merely a proprietary container format for DSD64.   The ripping process merely places the DSD64 into the user's choice of other, unencrypted container files on the hard drive, DSF being the most popular because it is taggable.

No, there is no such thing as stores selling DSDs.  They sell SACDs, or download sites sell DSD files in containers, like the DSF or DFF formats.  DSF and DFF files may be DSD64,128, 256 or higher.

It is in many ways analogous to CDs, which are just an optical medium.  But, CDs may be ripped to FLAC, WAV, or other container formats for the 44k/16 bit PCM which underlies the CD.  But, FLAC, WAV, etc. are also capable of higher resolutions than 44k or higher bit depth than 16, hence those containers are also used for the distribution and storage of hirez PCM.

There are a number of recording companies that record exclusively in DSD, such as Channel Classics, PentaTone, Telarc(now defunct) and numerous others.  There are other companies like BIS, 2L, Linn and many others that record exclusively in PCM, with a final translation to DSD64 for distribution on SACD.  Contrary to what you say, it looks more like about 50/50 to me.  Some people care deeply about this distinction and avoid SACDs or DSD files not originally - natively - recorded in DSD.  There is even a website listing many downloads recorded in pure, native DSD, many in Mch:

https://www.nativedsd.com/

One other pertinent point.  I do no "file conversions".  I consider that a waste of time and disc space.  I rip my SACD files to hard drive as DSF, tag them, and I normally play them with conversion in JR DSP Studio to 176k PCM.  There is no new PCM version of the file created.  I can change those playback parameters or play bitstreamed DSD directly from the files, but never do I create a new resampled or reformatted version of the original DSD file.

[kr4]

No, I don't need to make that qualification. Yes sir, I did that direct comparison.

Do you have a DSD DAC?  Your posts suggested that you do not.

[dtc]

Sandrei - Your original statement seemed to be that a software decoder of DSD could not be as good as the decoder in a SACD player. That did not sound like a statement about your personal preference but more of an absolute.  If it was a statement of personal preference based on your experience, that is fine. However, before making  such a generalization you probably want to listen to some more sophisticated systems.  And, yes, DSD playback does sound different on different systems, just like SACD players sound different from one another, just like other audio components. Some people are more sensitive to those differences than others. But, if your SACD player sounds better to you than DSD playback through a computer, then stick with your SACD player.

There have been some criticisms of the MC's DSD to PCM conversion algorithm, but it is a standard one that many companies use.

Blue Coast Music is another company that records directly in DSD. They then edit with analog devices and convert back to DSD, with no PCM involvement.  Here is link to a set of DSD and PCM files for comparison, but you need a 4X or 8X DSD DAC to listen to them.

https://bluecoastmusic.com/free-downloads

By the way, the original comment about a 64 bit DSD was just a mistake in nomenclature from the original poster. I am sure he meant DSD64, which is the format used on SACDs.

[sandrei]

It is true that most of my library is classical music.  But, you seem to have some misunderstandings and some confusion.

SACD is merely the name for a particular Sony/Philips commercial format which exists on specially encrypted optical discs. Strip away the encryption during ripping of the SACDs and you have DSD64, which is the fundamental basis for the format.  So, SACD is merely a proprietary container format for DSD64.   The ripping process merely places the DSD64 into the user's choice of other, unencrypted container files on the hard drive, DSF being the most popular because it is taggable.

No, there is no such thing as stores selling DSDs.  They sell SACDs, or download sites sell DSD files in containers, like the DSF or DFF formats.  DSF and DFF files may be DSD64,128, 256 or higher.

It is in many ways analogous to CDs, which are just an optical medium.  But, CDs may be ripped to FLAC, WAV, or other container formats for the 44k/16 bit PCM which underlies the CD.  But, FLAC, WAV, etc. are also capable of higher resolutions than 44k or higher bit depth than 16, hence those containers are also used for the distribution and storage of hirez PCM.

There are a number of recording companies that record exclusively in DSD, such as Channel Classics, PentaTone, Telarc(now defunct) and numerous others.  There are other companies like BIS, 2L, Linn and many others that record exclusively in PCM, with a final translation to DSD64 for distribution on SACD.  Contrary to what you say, it looks more like about 50/50 to me.  Some people care deeply about this distinction and avoid SACDs or DSD files not originally - natively - recorded in DSD.  There is even a website listing many downloads recorded in pure, native DSD, many in Mch:

https://www.nativedsd.com/

One other pertinent point.  I do no "file conversions".  I consider that a waste of time and disc space.  I rip my SACD files to hard drive as DSF, tag them, and I normally play them with conversion in JR DSP Studio to 176k PCM.  There is no new PCM version of the file created.  I can change those playback parameters or play bitstreamed DSD directly from the files, but never do I create a new resampled or reformatted version of the original DSD file.

Look, if a site is named "nativedsd" does not mean it is providing native DSDs.
I understand "native DSD" as music recorded directly in DSD format, not analog music digitized than converted to DSD, maybe you have a different understanding of the term. And yeah, the labels you quote are recording music directly in DSD format, and yeah those are classical music labels, so I don't understand why you are debating on it, you actually confirmed what I said, thank you.
The link you providing contains music originally recorded in 1962. Please, don't you realize that DSD was commercially available in the 1990's, not even digital recording was commercial at that time?  So how can someone claim that it is native DSD? Unless they use the term for a different meaning.

[sandrei]

Sandrei - Your original statement seemed to be that a software decoder of DSD could not be as good as the decoder in a SACD player. That did not sound like a statement about your personal preference but more of an absolute.  If it was a statement of personal preference based on your experience, that is fine. However, before making  such a generalization you probably want to listen to some more sophisticated systems.  And, yes, DSD playback does sound different on different systems, just like SACD players sound different from one another, just like other audio components. Some people are more sensitive to those differences than others. But, if your SACD player sounds better to you than DSD playback through a computer, then stick with your SACD player.

There have been some criticisms of the MC's DSD to PCM conversion algorithm, but it is a standard one that many companies use.

Blue Coast Music is another company that records directly in DSD. They then edit with analog devices and convert back to DSD, with no PCM involvement.  Here is link to a set of DSD and PCM files for comparison, but you need a 4X or 8X DSD DAC to listen to them.

https://bluecoastmusic.com/free-downloads

By the way, the original comment about a 64 bit DSD was just a mistake in nomenclature from the original poster. I am sure he meant DSD64, which is the format used on SACDs.

If I expressed my not so happy attitude with the results of a MC conversion I did not mean to be a criticism. In a lot of cases all of this depends on the preferences of a certain person, and I recognize, I am a very picky person when it comes to music. Speaking of conversion, I have seen better results but I have seen worse and much worse results than MC, so yeah, I agree MC conversion is standard, as you say, I would go further and say that it is above the average.
I am pretty sure that my opinions are biased, like any other person here, I am judging everything through my own experiences , like any other human being on this planet.

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Look, if a site is named "nativedsd" does not mean it is providing native DSDs.
I understand "native DSD" as music recorded directly in DSD format, not analog music digitized than converted to DSD, maybe you have a different understanding of the term. And yeah, the labels you quote are recording music directly in DSD format, and yeah those are classical music labels, so I don't understand why you are debating on it, you actually confirmed what I said, thank you.
The link you providing contains music originally recorded in 1962. Please, don't you realize that DSD was commercially available in the 1990's, not even digital recording was commercial at that time?  So how can someone claim that it is native DSD? Unless they use the term for a different meaning.

Yes, I realize that there are some remasters to DSD directly from original older analog recordings at that site.  There are also numerous entries natively recorded to DSD done in past 15 years.  Those may indeed claim to be native DSD, if you wish to get picky.  But, to some people, native DSD simply means there was no intervening PCM in the recording process, and that is true of the recordings at that site, including the remasters.

And, actually, that site does not list all available recordings made directly to DSD, only a subset.  My point was there are quite a few more true digitally recorded albums in native DSD than you seem to want to acknowledge.  And, yes, many if not most are classical.  Sorry if that bothers you.

I personally have no overwhelming preference for only native DSD recordings.  I am also quite happy with many recordings done natively in hirez PCM. 

[sandrei]

Yes, I realize that there are some remasters to DSD directly from original older analog recordings at that site.  There are also numerous entries natively recorded to DSD done in past 15 years.  Those may indeed claim to be native DSD, if you wish to get picky.  But, to some people, native DSD simply means there was no intervening PCM in the recording process, and that is true of the recordings at that site, including the remasters.

And, actually, that site does not list all available recordings made directly to DSD, only a subset.  My point was there are quite a few more true digitally recorded albums in native DSD than you seem to want to acknowledge.  And, yes, many if not most are classical.  Sorry if that bothers you.

I personally have no overwhelming preference for only native DSD recordings.  I am also quite happy with many recordings done natively in hirez PCM.

It looks like both of us have the same understanding of the term "native DSD", meaning no PCM conversion involved.
I am sorry if I sound that it bothers me that most of the DSD native recordings are classical, but really does not bothers me at all. As a matter of fact I mostly listen classical music.