Is it really DSD?

[@keithlevkoff8579]

According to the actual Decca release notes, this is a Hybrid SACD, with the SACD portion: "Transferred and remastered in HD sound at 24bit / 192kHz from the original two-track stereo mastertapes". Amazon SHOWS the two-disc version as SACDs, with the SACD logo on the front, but garbled the description. Note that this will supposedly ALSO be released in other formats, including vinyl, and Dolby Atmos on Blu-Ray.

[@gotham61]

It was recorded in 1965, so clearly it wasn't "recorded in DSD" He calls it a "DSD disc", so presumably that means it's an SACD. Plenty of SACDs were mastered from high rez PCM files. In fact, I'd expect you'll find that most were. This has been pretty much normal practice for SACD reissues of older analog recordings, allowing them to edit, de-noise, and use things like Plangent processing. . That Perfectwave Preamp looks sweet, When is it coming out?

[@uccelino]

Yupp, you are right there. I’d say 99,99% of all SACDs (I own several hundreds) are processed HD PCM converted to DSD. I buy these SACDs because many of my favourite classical artists record with labels that often/always produce theire recordings as SACDs. The SACD has been thriving in Classical music for two decades, and continue with that (though to a lesser extent in the last seven years or so). Paul is right that these SACDs are sonically inferior to the true DSD recordings at Octave, and I’ve been dismayed that so many record companies do not really know that true DSD recordings are the way to go.

[@ThinkingBetter]

It would be nice if Paul could admit that any well mastered audiophile music can shine equally as well in a 192kHz 24 bit format.

[@get-the-joke]

Recorded analog, processed in PCM, sold on SACD which is encoded in DSD. The only question is, was it first transferred from analog to DSD and would that make a difference?

[@AmazonasBiotop]

For each decade that passes buy.😮 There a lot off new music is produced each decade after decade. 😊 So forty or fifty years of new music production and there is nothing?! Of interest produced in the last 40 years? Well we humans has a quirk that: The music that we were imprinted on, in our younger years. We get stuck in that era and still listening to that "old" music..😅 Nothing wrong with that. But I wont stop believing that we today and the last hand full of decades have not yet done and recorded any better tunes than those times when it WERE analog recorded. 😅😮❤ I hope all this analog talk is just a lot of boomers stuck in time and they like what they like. But there is new and later generations that get stuck in music productions that were born digitally and we will eventually not need those hypothetical questions but or if it is from Analog then to xxxx.😅 It will not matter when there will not be any degrading analog recordings at all. 😅 The best thing with digital is that while all the Beatles as a example, original master tapes are falling APART and turn to dust.😮 Is turning that cultural tressure to garbage beoind salvation 😢 (think of it it is rather tragic comic. Looked in at abbey road studios that NOBODY are allowed to see or touch (Wonder why..😊) those tapes. Is actually not magnetic tapes anymore.. The magnetic media that were adhere to the plastic track/string. Is gone and falling of. By itself due to their age.. So in practice abbey road studio dont have the master RECORDINGS any longer.. They just have a lot of reels with plastic tracks and all the adhere magnetic material that stored the tunes are gone! Forever.. And if it is not the case then it will be more and more true for each year passing by! What a WASTE!) Is that will not happen to all the digital stored music the last half century. 🎉👏 It is sad that the great artists lived and recorded at the analog era when digital don't exist. When the recorded medium were not archive resistant. 😢

[@scottwolf8633]

At 2:23 in, are those large black caps in the upper left of the frame, with the gold lettering, bypass caps?

[@SuperMcgenius]

The Prototype looks like a balanced preamp.

[@johnmarchington3146]

The Solti "Ring" cycle has been released on SACD, so DSD must be involved in the remastering for that format at some stage. They were all originally analogue recordings, so I guess the engineers made 24/192 PCM masters first before transferring them to DSD.

[@MiMi-06130]

no hear dsd comparaison audio ?

[@AMGOSUK]

Thanks Paul - I heard from a DCS tech rep saying (I paraphrase greatly) that Classical style music is better on DSD whereas ROCK is better on DSX -- and of course the filters they have built/use in their premium DACs/up samplers support this. Give this and other comments it would be worth a short overview of these high-res formats - what is an SACD, DSD, DSX, MQA, etc.. and YES of course the recording a should be captured either entirely analogue or at a higher sample rate/ larger bit depth than is then delivered to us physically. But then we have the "trend" of upsampling. Same for upsampling - SACD should come as Direct Stream digital (DSD) - but there are different types of DSD sample rates - Single Rate DSD (DSD64) is the standard used for most SACD discs - (2.8224 MHz 64x normal CD "quality). The format used for SACD media.. But then there is Double-rate DSD128 (5.6448 MHz 128x). Since its establishment, content creators have made DSD128 recordings available, such as the audiophile label Opus3), Quad-rate DSD256 (11.2896 MHz 256x); Octuple-rate DSD512 (22.5792 MHz 512x) and last but not least Sexdecuple-rate DSD1024 (45.1584 MHz 1024x). The best and certainly most expensive up-samplers will take a signal (even a DSD64) and upsample it to a higher standard -- yes they upsample but they all apply a "filter" and this combination seems (well in some cases) to make a big "improvement" -- yes in the highest end (already ridiculously great) systems. Can you provide some guidance - lets damp down the snake oil. If one has to spend $80-100,000 to hear the benefits then OK. If one only hears a difference at this level and there is little benefit upsampling or even DSD without a matching quality system then OK as well. But for the majority - CD quality (44.1Hz heard on spks or bluetooth headphones/ear buds) is really all you need and will be able to hear.

[@BrentLeVasseur]

Hey Paul, have you compared 32bit float PCM capture to DSD? Xoom offers a 32bit float microphone amp/recorder for XLR microphones. 32bit float is similar to Raw image format for cameras.

[@davidclarke6658]

I'm guessing Hi-Res PCM files would be better sounding converted to SACD than it would be to 16Bit 44.1khz CD. Otherwise, like you say having the original Hi Res PCM file would be the best option without any conversion.

[@bikdav]

That brings up another question. What’s the point of putting a DSD recording onto vinyl since vinyl doesn’t have the resolution and dynamic range? Is there something that I don’t understand?

[@Soras_]

DSD is better at reproduce the origin vinyl than PCM if i remember correctly.

[@ptg01]

@@Soras_ That's most likely true but for my ears, I can't ascertain much difference... in short, I believe we are splitting hairs....

[@teknolojigundemi]

Hope you persuade more artist make records at your studio. If you succeed an international artist like yo yo ma , it will be great.

[@Fastvoice]

He's already done a video about the special problems with that - contract issues etc. - despite the fact, that they could use the studio for free.

[@davemeyers2633]

many many many HD recordings are nothing but upsampled 44.1K 16bit files. many SACD recordings are just other files transferred to DSD. they do this same thing with old movies on blue ray. the movie company's in most cases....are NOT going back to the original master tapes and RE-SAMPLING to the new container format. its the same content, just put into a different container. Be it, HD tracks, DSD, Blue Ray, 4K Blue Ray etc etc etc etc often times is the same old content, just repackaged into a new container. huge scam

[@louisperlman8030]

New preamp?

[@hmsworcester]

Looked it up, it’s an SACD. “Sound format: 24 bit/192kHz (Hybrid)” To confuse things further it says in the description:”can also be experienced in Dolby-Atmos for the first time.” I guess the text refers to another release, maybe Apple music has an Atmos version.

[@Fastvoice]

A stereo recording could never be transferred into real Dolby Atmos - maybe just a gimmicky version of it.

[@tedhersh9095]

@@FastvoiceI’m not sure if that’s correct. Dark Side of the Moon was recorded 50 years ago, long before Dolby Atmos, and yet it has just been released in Atmos. Can’t recording engineers take all the raw channels from the original recording and re-mix any way they want? I mean if you’ve got 8 or 16 tracks of original material can’t they create 4 channel (quad) or 5.1 or anything they want by assembling the 8 or more tracks in the proper configuration?

[@Fastvoice]

@@tedhersh9095 You're talking about recordings that were originally made with more than two tracks before downmixing. So there are still four or 8 or more tracks to play with - even when it's 50 odd years old (as long as they kept the multitrack tapes). But in the case of the question in this video it was clearly stated on the record sleeve that they transferred it from a two track (stereo) analog recording. So not much to play with.

[@steveodian6008]

Looks like a new Perfect Wave preamp is on the way😄👍

[@finnstender9552]

I Think it is a int amp in the ney stellar Gold Series.

[@gotham61]

@@finnstender9552 If you zoom in on the picture it says Perfectwave Preamp on the back.

[@christiansieder9338]

To my knowledge, every piece of digital music, no matter whether recorded live or transferred from an analog tape, are first born as DSD (or at least in a very similar bitstream format), since all modern A -D-converters (Delta-Sigma-converters) output a bitsream format, which then needs to be converted to PCM for mixing. Why and how reconverting this PCM back to DSD should sound superior than the original PCM-mix remains a mistery to me.

[@ThinkingBetter]

It doesn't. Obviously any transcoding from PCM to DSD is lossy. It's nonsense to claim DSD superiority to PCM if the DSD track indeed came from PCM. It's like claiming a photo copy is better than the original. I rather get half the DXD sample rate (176.4kHz) than DSD if the topic is amount of data. I'm running a 1Gbps optical connection to my house and a raw DXD audio stream via FLAC encoding is only around 1% of my total internet bandwidth. I currently subscribe to Amazon Music HD providing up to 192kHz 24 bits. I'm not sure I can see any point of DSD in a modern audiophile streaming system. When used properly, I don't believe anyone can hear DSD sounding any better than 192kHz 24 bits. DSD was born to beat CD quality with the bandwidth available from the disc media 20 years ago when DXD was way too high on data bandwidth.

[@Soras_]

True. I was wonder people would record in 32bit/384 and edit then transcode into dsd. beside it is easier to edit in PCM,I want to know if there is any advantage.

[@monsterrun]

Only if you can use the full extent of the frequency range above 22 khz all the way to 44 khz during recording.

[@monsterrun]

Many ripped audio played thru are limited to 22khz maximum range. Per channel.

[@hagaygodovanik4334]

1965 no digital recording

[@johnnytoobad7785]

The vast majority of SACD's come from "edited and/or altered PCM" files. Those in turn may come from 2nd or 3rd generation analog "master" tapes. DSD is just used as another format to encode the data for the SACD "layer". (and a great marketing gimmick....)

[@salmonline]

dang. Look at the size of those caps...

[@brianmoore581]

The problem with the Ring - the Ride of the Valkyries - SACD is that it needed restoration because it is an old analog recording. You can't do that restoration in DSD. They had to use PCM for the restoration. Afterwards they transferred it to DSD, which is what you are hearing on every SACD. It isn't "pure" DSD, but it's the best they could do with this particular release. Over the past few years, things are becoming fixable in audio that were never fixable before thanks to more advanced software - that works only in PCM. It's a trade-off, but the benefits outweigh the one minor drawback, unless you would prefer to listen to a damaged tape in glorious DSD. DSD is great. Pure DSD recordings are great. All the old stuff was recorded in analog and transferred to DSD, but any editing or restoration of damaged original sources must be done in PCM. That's not really a problem. The end result is still DSD on your stereo, which is the weakest link in the chain. DSD is a far simpler source for the end user (you), and simpler usually sounds better.

[@hogwildmotorcycleadventures]

You have to have the right tools and equipment to edit in DSD, which usually means paying up for those tools. So saying it can only be done in PCM is kind of not correct. Editing done in PCM is for cost reasons.

[@glenncurry3041]

Are you suggesting there are advantages to transcoding PCM to DSD for storage/recall? Why would transcoding be better than just using the original PCM file? There have to be transcoding errors regardless of the process, pure number crunching or through analog. And the file size would be dramatically larger with fewer systems designed to transport it.

[@herrbonk3635]

@@hogwildmotorcycleadventures I know PCM, "puls code modulation", is a (very strange) old name for ordinary linear digital sampling. But what is DSD? I've been out of the electronics design business for most of the 2000s, so never heard about DSD.

[@hogwildmotorcycleadventures]

@@herrbonk3635, DSD stands for Direct Stream Digital. It's a high-resolution format that produces a high-resolution signal as a stream of single bits compared to that employed by the PCM system which is done in bit chunks of 16, 24, or 32.

[@richardsoffice9176]

More: Restoration: The, just released, "Last Beatles recording," with Paul McCartney, is from an old cassette recording by John Lennon, in his living room. For many years this was considered unusable, as it originally had the sound of a television set, in the background. Modern technology, including, purportedly, AI, has enabled this to be, `cleaned up,' & the sound, `sweetened,' by the surviving Beatles ~ "Free As A Bird," was originally from a, `cleaner,' cassette tape.

[@ThinkingBetter]

DXD is PCM and I would argue that it's better to transcode to half the sample rate PCM than to DSD being a totally different codec. When you hit a sample rate of 192kHz and 24 bits, I don't really see much value in getting any higher. In fact, 192kHz 20 bits would be just as good due to how much you can actually reproduce in any audio gear. Saving a recording track as sigma delta DSD makes some sense but as you need to mix and master the tracks, any modern studio process will end up with a PCM output. I rather have the native mastering output (call it DXD) than some lossy transcoded DSD format of the PCM DXD file.

[@carlubambi5541]

This whole thing does not make sense .You would need the original 24 track and sample that not the final 2 track .Or be fully recorded in DSD format for it to be DSD ..It's like the claimed made on many of the first CDs sold that were AAD .And they would clearly show the limitations of the tape and mixing abilities and equipment.How much would it cost for a 24 track DSD recorder and mixing console and so on .

[@AmazonasBiotop]

Instering how the mind works. First "oh, seams a good idea to put my hand in the electronic withe a lot of caps.." Then after realizing and analyzing that the stack of prototype with naked electronics is actually unsteady and wobbly. And the mind keep on pushing.. "I want to keep stuffing my hand into that.. Where should I stuffit somewhere?" So I look cool and relaxed as a clamp.. Ööö maybe "nowhere".. There inside when it is not designed for KZbinrs.. Poking around.. I GUESS if it where OK then we don't need a lid at all on that box.. Try to get that trough the regulations 😂

[@ptg01]

One thing that would have cleared things up: No such thing as DSD layer in CD's, only in SACD's. He gets distracted so much... reminds me of the a bunch of dogs in the movie UP where they so easily get distracted by a squirrel...

[@gotham61]

In the letter it talks about a recording made in 1965, and within a minute Paul is saying he should check to see if it says "recorded in DSD".

[@shipsahoy1793]

There are CDs out there that say “DSD remastered” and they’re basically recordings from the old analog days, which use “utilize dsd encoding” according to the record company; to tell you the truth, they don’t sound as good as the way they’re marketed.. they actually sound worse than if they were just normally produced AAD type CDs. Studio recordings are artificially bright and old live recordings seem to get exposed with the worst nuances from the original recording. Avoid these. In fact, newer remasters of all recordings seem to be getting worse and worse these days, not just the volume wars era. Over compression is still a disgustingly prevalent tactic. On some of these remasters, the possibility exists that there’s no way to go back and redo a better master either, which is really sad, and the worst stupidity of all of it.

[@harackmw]

I heard one example of this problem with remasters. I was excited to see Paco De Lucia had one of his first albums out that was remastered, so I bought it and compared to the original. This is a recording of a single instrument, so the issues were very obvious. yes, they cleaned up the background hiss and noise, but at the expense of the guitar timbre now sounding overly bright and wonky;not what was in the original.

[@shipsahoy1793]

@@harackmw Thank you ! I really appreciate your comment..👨🏻

[@artyfhartie2269]

Music processed using DSD technology sounds crisp, clear and bland. To me. The audio signals are processed using electronic wizardry. The sound comes out like through a sieve. Me no likey not very much.

[@keithlevkoff8579]

I would advise people in doubt to look for the little round SACD logo. (That should prove that you have an SACD or Hybrid SACD disc... which is really DSD.)

[@hogwildmotorcycleadventures]

SACD is DSD, but the mastering was not done in DSD. It was PCM converted into DSD. That's like taking a picture in JPEG format and converting it to PNG. Still a good result, but what was lost during all those conversions? Simply put, the chain of digital work was not consistent. In this case, I'd probably go find the PCM/FLAC version of this recording than the SACD version.

[@keithlevkoff8579]

@@hogwildmotorcycleadventures I'm inclined to agree... the original was actually on analog tape, but since the original conversion to digital was to 24/192 PCM, that's the new version that is closest to the original. They seem to be saying that we can expect all sorts of releases of this content in the future, including Dolby Atmos, and "Blu-Ray audio". With luck one of those will include that first generation 24/192k PCM version. It seems obvious to me that someone at the record label "just feels like the audiophile market prefers their music on SACD"... and that releasing them in that format will convince audiophiles that "they must sound better".

[@hogwildmotorcycleadventures]

​@@keithlevkoff8579, this is where the desire for a physical media version in comparison to a digital download version or streaming service is changing the landscape. The only current hi-rez physical digital media format generally supported is SACD. So that's why this recording is being sold the physical format it is. There were attempts with DVD and Blu-ray disc formats, but those never gained any traction, mostly because the audio components in blu-ray and dvd players are not quite up to the level as Hi-Fi SACD/CD players let alone the latest generation of DAC chips in digital audio components.

[@ChiefExecutiveOrbiter]

That "amp" looks like a SCHIIT product

[@BlAcKpHrAcK]

The MOST important revelation, Wilhelm Nagel (Nazi war criminal) being the father of the CIA man I had to face in front of a French Canadian hospital (Chris Costa, aka. General Hayden, aka. "Hans") ..by myself, in my second pair of leather Canadian military boots (one per decade, deserters wore plastic boots without Vibram soles ..unpaid patent license). "Hans" seemed up to no good, voice trembling while asking for directions out of town. Guy named Brant (has a Nazi war criminal father, BranDt ..also a patent holder of paper-making technologies), buys my father's pension along with a paper mill after 911 (the attack of the Muslim-eating pick-pockets, the Swedish ASSA ABLOY, SECURITAS, GARDA WORLD that bought ALL North American security companies, including one-hundred years of Pinkerton incident reports (beginning in the 1800s, train robberies etc).