DSD Myth Article

So, at the end of the day, record everything analog and convert to DSD for SACD and DSD downloads? No arguments here. As a great example of this, I have the SACD of Vanessa Fernandez Use Me. Recorded to tape and transferred to DSD-SACD. It sounds sublime.

History would also show that when these technologies and accompanying formats were conceived, that's exactly what most studios were doing - recording in analog. So basically, things have only become more discombobulated, resulting in poorer results, because of too much digital and to some degree, conflicting digital at that. Yup, makes perfect sense to me.

Bottom line: if studios became more concerned with quality and less concerned with volume/doing what is easy, we would have not only better recordings, but better digital.
 
Yes, we have been having great success with direct analog to DSD (or DSD128) over at NativeDSD. Bob Attiyeh at Yarlung Records and Rene Laflamme at 2XHD both do this and the results have been wonderful. We'd love to get the plethora of analog tapes laying around at all these DSD labels we've partnered with...and get them transferred carefully and lovingly. :) Sony? Since you've been digitally hacked don't forget you are sitting on a treasure trove of analog!
 
Hahahaha. True Ted, I have a few needle drops to DSD2x from quality Vinyl and Korg and they are wonderful, so I must assume that the tape masters to DSD4x with like a Grimm will be sublime!!!

Now, if we can just get Todd to release the MA stuff....
 
Interesting and logical.
Agree with Ted about Rene's quality results. He is obsessive in the best ways :)
Chris
 
Interesting that the conclusion suggests 24/192 PCM is preferable to DSD (although it's not totally clear whether that means for recording or for storage)? Also along the lines of what Peter McGrath says in his Back Page interview in TAS 249, perhaps the biggest problem with much of the music with at least one A>D>A step in its provenance is the amount of digital signal processing used (or not). In both cases it is suggested that one digital step (with or without any analog storage involved) and minimal digital processing (as opposed to analog) may not sound as bad as Myles (for example :hide:) repeatedly claims. And of course as time and technology march on DSP itself may become much better sounding.
 
I'm only only going to focus on the rather parochial, somewhat misleading statement on page four about noise and DSD. Yes as you can see in post #6 and graphs from Bruce Brown, there is the aforementioned noise at 1X DSD. But many studios/engineers are now doing 2, 4X -and even playing with 8X DSD - that increasingly pushes that noise up by octaves. So that noise is hardly an issue.

Http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?16338-DXD-versus-DSD
 
Myles B. Astor said:
I'm only only going to focus on the rather parochial, somewhat misleading statement on page four about noise and DSD. Yes as you can see in post #6 and graphs from Bruce Brown, there is the aforementioned noise at 1X DSD. But many studios/engineers are now doing 2, 4X -and even playing with 8X DSD - that increasingly pushes that noise up by octaves. So that noise is hardly an issue.

Http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?16338-DXD-versus-DSD
Click to expand...

The noise starts at 24kHz and I doubt there is a single person here that could here 24kHz when they were 14.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top