Print

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

Extremely

Very

Not too important

Never understood what DSD was about or cared much

[TheShoe]

given my exasound e38 DAC is on its way, please continue to support

[pschelbert]

I do not understand, many here mention the mp3 format. What for? No studio, no one artist released releases in this format. It is always possible to get any record in lossless format.

soem shops sell only mp3

[pschelbert]

Not sure why your library can contain "only Flac", etc. 

onyl one lossless format and one lossy format, thats it, no need for anything else.
Only standards no prorietary (SACD, ALAC etc.)

I was always right to keep standards. I have some "Sony" corps so I decided not to have more..

[pschelbert]

I do not understand, many here mention the mp3 format. What for? No studio, no one artist released releases in this format. It is always possible to get any record in lossless format.

itune , googleplay: mp3

[michael123]

The point I believe here is not to abandon the support, but to improve it.
We mentioned revised UI for settings of DAC capabilities and rate conversion, also was mentioned more options and improved conversion quality to PCM and DSD

[pschelbert]

Conversion is lossy, and depends on many things. In this case, JRiver's algorithm and filters.

right, I do not understand why studio do it.

[pschelbert]

Sonoma does DSD editing.

Convert to PCM , edit, convert to DSD what they do

[pschelbert]

more options and improved conversion quality to PCM and DSD

yes, good if improvment is needed why not

[michael123]

Convert to PCM , edit, convert to DSD what they do

No, they stay in DSD, multibit DSD

[JimH]

The point I believe here is not to abandon the support, but to improve it.

Who said DSD might be abandoned?

[michael123]

Who said DSD might be abandoned?

I said 'it won't' .. hopefully

But reading the feedback here I understood people didn't catch the idea of the poll properly.

[cookiemarenco]

We have no intention of discontinuing DSD.

Good news, Jim!  This is Cookie Marenco from Blue Coast Records (and now) Blue Coast Music (our official DSD download store).  I'm glad to hear that you are not discontinuing support of DSD. 

As an update to the poll, today it says 49.8% of the 151 poll takers say DSD is extremely important or very important.  (Up from previous reporting I saw)

From our end (as a reseller of DSD downloads and other formats of music) we are seeing an increase in DSD interest -- especially in DSD256.  We are seeing more women purchasing DSD and more musicians wanting to record in DSD.  Great news.

In order to increase content in our store, we have created a process called SEA (Systems for Exceptional Audio) that allows us to transform a PCM file into a DSD file.  It's not a simple conversion but a  lengthy process that helps to restore dynamics lost in PCM. 

We clearly offer the provenance of the recording so the customer can choose whether to buy the much less expensive PCM or the SEA processed DSD file.  To our surprise, most people are buying the DSD files (even in DSD256).  We realize many people have an opinion about buying the original file as to how it was recorded which is why we clearly notate the original format of recording.  It is surprising how many people buy the DSD files.

We haven't officially announced SEA to the public.  We wanted to test first.  The results have been amazing.

We believe DSD will have a future much like vinyl.  Not over taking the mass market but the passionate listener will want to buy large DSD files for their enjoyment and preservation of the sound.

Thank you, Jim, for all you do!

Cookie Marenco
https://bluecoastmusic.com
Blue Coast Music

 

[Axilian]

For me -very important - I have various DSD versions of albums that I also have in 24/192 flac and there are differences. In general (and it could be the way my audio is set up) I find the DSD just tends to flow beter.

[Finder]

As many others, I have various music formats and found after listening to quality DSD recordings for a time, there is something missing going back to other formats.

[Lossless]

DSD support is why I first bought MC. It's a great product that I use for all my music now. Not to mention video and more.

[JimH]

Hi Cookie,
Thanks for stopping by.

Jim

[fitbrit]

DSD features are essential to my customers and business. Of course there are competitors to MC that we can use, but I personally like MC the best, and most of my customers grow to appreciate what it can do. Very happy to hear you have no intentions of discontinuing DSD support.

[JimH]

Split DSD Mastering

[audioriver]

Voted 'Not too important' because I don't use it, but as a high-quality audio player MC should always fully support it.

[pschelbert]

importance of MC and DSD is the availiability of MC to convert DSD to PCM.
Its already in MC and works for DSD256, DSD128, DAS64 and for stereo and multichannel.
So all what I need is already there.

[michael123]

So all what I need is already there.

Even if that's what you need, there are more recent algorithms for conversion, more options for filtering
As PCM to DSD is lossy, then DSD to PCM is a lossy algorithm, and the sound quality, besides your audio system and your ears, affected by the algorithm and the settings

[JimH]

Please move DSD discussion to another thread.  Controversial statements can generate a lot of noise and they are unrelated to the topic of the poll.

[pschelbert]

discussion of technical DSD is here (conversion, filtering etc.):

https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,116802.0.html

[EfeTe]

DSD is my absolute preference. If there's anything I'd like to see added -but not sure if technically feasible- that would be some kind of DSP and volume leveling although I'm not sure that can be applied to DFF/DSF files.

[Awesome Donkey]

If there's anything I'd like to see added -but not sure if technically feasible- that would be some kind of DSD and volume levelling although I'm not sure that can be applied to DFF/DSF files.

If you're bitstreaming DSD, not possible. DSP, including volume leveling, can't be applied unless you're converting DSD to PCM.

[EfeTe]

If you're bitstreaming DSD, not possible. DSP, including volume leveling, can't be applied unless you're converting DSD to PCM.

Obviously I meant DSP (typo), sorry.

Cheers, AD!

[furutech]

PCM is lossless.
The source (mastertape and mastermix) of recordings is mostly PCM as DSD can not be edited.

I convinced myself of the quality of formats here, just make the test yourself:
http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html

For me quality of music is in this order:
1) music
2) Interpretation (artist): sometimes its the same 1) and 2)
3) recording
4) format

Format is clearly last in the list.
Thats why mp3 is possible while its certainly the worst format concerning technical quality .

It is really very seldom that all four criteria will be on top level.

"It is really very seldom that all four criteria will be on top level.". That may be true, but when they are all on top, it's worth everything. It's what kept audiophiles going. There are still recordings out there that are direct to DSD.

[JimH]

Split Starting with DSD
https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,116826.0.html

[TheShoe]

"It is really very seldom that all four criteria will be on top level.". That may be true, but when they are all on top, it's worth everything. It's what kept audiophiles going. There are still recordings out there that are direct to DSD.

the format is less important than the origin of the source material and the care and method taken to master it when it comes to lossless as by definition, it is lossless.

i have found personally DSD produced SACD sounds often better to my ears than same on CD or DVD-A or flac.   i believe this to be a result of the care taken to produce the end product and not a result of DSD.   i appreciate when online sites peddling this stuff state where, how, and who worked on the product.   

scientifically speaking, 44.1/16 is perfect for the range of human hearing.  it’s the journey to the destination that is most important.

[dtc]

 
scientifically speaking, 44.1/16 is perfect for the range of human hearing.  it’s the journey to the destination that is most important.

A common fallacy or at least a debatable statement.

Humans cannot hear a continuous tone about 20K. However, there is significant evidence that humans can perceive transients at higher frequencies. And quick transients from attacks are definitely part of music.

It is important to recognize that human hearing is far more sophisticated than just listening to sine waves.

[Gatherum]

I voted "not too important" because everything I've read suggests to me that DSD was an experiment tailored to SACD's and was quickly superseded by DVD-A and BD-A after that. None of these formats attained the market traction needed to depose regular CD's and at this point, I doubt any format will because the music and video industries are moving away from physical ownership towards streaming at the expense of platform agnosticism.

Additionally, DSD seems to require its own dedicated, costly hardware to have any technical merit. If it were available on services like Bandcamp and Qobuz and wasn't more or less relegated to classical music and mainstream classic rock and pop (I'm a twenty-six-year-old metalhead and my library only extends backwards to the late '80's), I might have given it more of a chance but as it stands, I'm more than happy with my PCM-compatible A/V receiver. I think I'm through with buying metal boxes for a while.

It's worth keeping for those who do care about DSD. Compatibility and useability are good descriptors to apply to oneself, if nothing else.

[Awesome Donkey]

Huh, looks like DSD is more important to users than I even realized, though the poll sample size is likely a drop in the bucket compared to the number of overall MC users. I'd be interested to see the poll expanded to a larger sample size.

Additionally, DSD seems to require its own dedicated, costly hardware to have any technical merit.

To be fair, there's a good number of DACs these days that support DSD along with PCM - especially if they have one of the Sabre ESS chips with some of the newer chips supporting both native DSD and DoP.

If it were available on services like Bandcamp and Qobuz and wasn't more or less relegated to classical music and mainstream classic rock and pop (I'm a twenty-six-year-old metalhead and my library only extends backwards to the late '80's)

Acoustic Sounds comes to mind, though granted it's not as big as Bandcamp, Qobuz, CD Baby, HDtracks, etc. But.. now that you've mentioned it and got me thinking, I haven't seen a metal SACD/DSD release yet (well, *maybe* Nine Inch Nails' The Downward Spiral, if that counts). I might have to look into that.

One of the main things about SACDs is that they're a good source for multichannel versions of albums that don't have an equivalent released in PCM (yet). If anyone doesn't have a DSD-capable DAC and you would like to try listening to an album in DSD you can just let MC convert DSD to PCM on-the-fly, I know some people who do that and are happy with the results.

[MikeyFresh]

DSD support in MC is more important to me than ever before, with the now easier way to rip SACDs via certain model Blu-ray players, much easier and cheaper than the previous somewhat kludgy PlayStation 3 method.

[RK]

For me DSD is of little importance at most. Even though I am a truly crazy audiophile!
However the fact that JRiver offers those who have / use DSD files decent playback options is a good thing.
A strong multi faceted platform is what we need!

[JimH]

Split MQA Support

[Bow]

Good news, Jim!  This is Cookie Marenco from Blue Coast Records (and now) Blue Coast Music (our official DSD download store).  I'm glad to hear that you are not discontinuing support of DSD. 

As an update to the poll, today it says 49.8% of the 151 poll takers say DSD is extremely important or very important.  (Up from previous reporting I saw)

From our end (as a reseller of DSD downloads and other formats of music) we are seeing an increase in DSD interest -- especially in DSD256.  We are seeing more women purchasing DSD and more musicians wanting to record in DSD.  Great news.

In order to increase content in our store, we have created a process called SEA (Systems for Exceptional Audio) that allows us to transform a PCM file into a DSD file.  It's not a simple conversion but a  lengthy process that helps to restore dynamics lost in PCM. 

We clearly offer the provenance of the recording so the customer can choose whether to buy the much less expensive PCM or the SEA processed DSD file.  To our surprise, most people are buying the DSD files (even in DSD256).  We realize many people have an opinion about buying the original file as to how it was recorded which is why we clearly notate the original format of recording.  It is surprising how many people buy the DSD files.

We haven't officially announced SEA to the public.  We wanted to test first.  The results have been amazing.

We believe DSD will have a future much like vinyl.  Not over taking the mass market but the passionate listener will want to buy large DSD files for their enjoyment and preservation of the sound.

Thank you, Jim, for all you do!

Cookie Marenco
https://bluecoastmusic.com
Blue Coast Music

Keep up the good work !!
Isnt Sonys (or others pantents) running out ?
I have like 3 players that can load a DSD audio disk but all downmix it to stereo.
It would be nice to be able to extract the DSD track on PC but can only do that with a old PC I Have and only to PCM.
A general way to do that would be nice even if I had to buy a (?usb) DSD capable DVD drive.
(as far as I remember the protection is also made at HW level in the drive)

[michael123]

You probably confuse between SACD and DSD, it is like a Compact Disc and PCM.

You don't need any drive to playback DSD, and no need to downmix, as it is stereo today in 99% of the cases

[kr4]

It would be nice to be able to extract the DSD track on PC but can only do that with a old PC I Have and only to PCM.

Yes, it can be extracted to files from the disc with certain PCs and several disc players.  The file format can be DSD stereo or DSD multichannel (depending what is on the disc) and, optionally, converted to PCM stereo or PCM multichannel.   
https://docs.google.com/file/d/1syTPLOlvmMz2ii_IvZx3unLwNRP7oTatKA0bEkwDPJMd0mc0W5nsOUnwyTd4/edit
https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/28569-sacd-ripping-using-an-oppo-or-pioneer-yes-its-true/?tab=comments#comment-559449

JRiver can play any of those formats.

[Shasta Mike]

I love great sounding music and have a Class D audiophile system.  For my ears, standard FLAC is fine and the higher 24 bit FLAC and beyond has no discernible difference to my ears.   Since I may come across a DSP recording that piques my interest one day it is great JRiver supports it. 

If I was prioritizing JRiver future projects in an engineering/marketing meeting, further DSP feature enhancement would be way down on the list unless a very easy, low hanging fruit, type of project.   

[Bow]

You probably confuse between SACD and DSD, it is like a Compact Disc and PCM.

You don't need any drive to playback DSD, and no need to downmix, as it is stereo today in 99% of the cases

Nope look below

[Bow]

Yes, it can be extracted to files from the disc with certain PCs and several disc players.  The file format can be DSD stereo or DSD multichannel (depending what is on the disc) and, optionally, converted to PCM stereo or PCM multichannel.   
https://docs.google.com/file/d/1syTPLOlvmMz2ii_IvZx3unLwNRP7oTatKA0bEkwDPJMd0mc0W5nsOUnwyTd4/edit
https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/28569-sacd-ripping-using-an-oppo-or-pioneer-yes-its-true/?tab=comments#comment-559449

JRiver can play any of those formats.

Thank You Very much just the info i need.
Cause if possible I want to have the original track in the original format on the server and convert later in chain.

[Bow]

DSD is important because the format exists and people listen to it, but I have no special love for it.

This paper:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289595500_Subjective_evaluation_of_high_resolution_recordings_in_PCM_and_DSD_audio_formats
suggests a listener preference for DSD. I personally can't hear a difference.

Suggest you maybe need better recordings and/or better gear if you can not hear the difference

[pschelbert]

the paper is rather confusing. Setup and results are not clear and not really shown (measurment values). Quality of recordings, IM, THD is not measured.

May be that DSD just has high IM and THD, its well known hat distortion is perceived as "richness".
Has nothing to do with precise sound reproduction, where no additon is wanted.

[Bow]

the paper is rather confusing. Setup and results are not clear and not really shown (measurment values). Quality of recordings, IM, THD is not measured.

May be that DSD just has high IM and THD, its well known hat distortion is perceived as "richness".
Has nothing to do with precise sound reproduction, where no additon is wanted.

No but they must have compared to the live jazz orchestra they had as a source so maybe that was not so important ?
The ear is mostly sensitive in the time/domain area, most speakers have like two digits THD when they perform at the same sound level as the jazz orchestra.
So the paper is a good indicator so i am considering loan a Marantz NA8006 and/or NA11S1 to find out if I need a substitute for my Trusty NA7004.

[pschelbert]

yes try it.

I tried various recordings to compare. My conclusion is clear. The technology is good enough even CD, the art is in the recording and mixing.

An issue with DSD is the ultrasonic noise, that causes IM in electronics (amps) which is audible. See Griesigner's research (Lexicon, now HK respectively Samsung).

Paper:
The chain is not characterized in the paper, way less than the chain of Meyer Moran which they criticize.
Doing better is obviously difficult even years later

[JimH]

Someone's been stuffing the ballot box since at least July 20:

https://dsd-guide.com/jriver-runs-poll-importance-dsd-time-vote-we-think-so

I think her initials are Cookie Marenco. 

[JimH]

So I think the earlier snapshot stands:

With 54 votes cast, about 59% of people say that DSD is not very important or don't care.

The other 41% say it's very important or extremely important.

I'd guess that this means that about 40% of our customers are hard-core audiophiles and the rest are videophiles, TV users, or just like music.

And, just to repeat myself (again), we have no intention of removing or de-emphasizing JRiver's support for DSD.

[michael123]

So I think the earlier snapshot stands:

And, just to repeat myself (again), we have no intention of removing or de-emphasizing JRiver's support for DSD.

That's for sure, but will you add the improvements we discussed so many times in the forum, Jim?
If yes, then when?

[felix2]

I am an audiophile (and thus Media Center) and I voted Extremely.

Commercial DSD titles are few, expensive and I have bought only a few. So direct DSD playback is of no importance.

I play my library of thousands of FLAC files converted by DSP Studio to DSDx2 output in DoP format. My DAC process them in DSDx2. And therefore it is Extremely important this way.

Why? A big clear performance improvement over 16/44.1. Biggest of which is cut down of that nasty 'digital' distortion which PCM will create in the analog conversion stage of the DAC. This is a fundamental problem of PCM and no engineering way around it. The only way is simply not to feed PCM to the DAC. Thus convert PCM in Media Center to DSD and let the DAC process it as DSD. Chop off the PCM distortion. Clearly discernible improvement, close to that nice liquid analog sound audiophile love.

[JimH]

Split PCM vs. DSD