2. digital
  3. 151699-18279

A good taste of DSD--what is your experience?

Over the last year or so I've pushed to get my digital front end to sound better.  I loosely define better to mean just that and "a touch more analog sounding."

My tube DAC is DSD 256 ready.  I had to use third party software to stream DSD to the DAC from my Mac Air.  I bought 6 DSD albums from Acoustic Sounds. 

While I generally think Redbook sounds great on this DAC and 96kHz files don't sound that much better and Redbook.  With DSD, the margin is greater for the better.  Everything still depends on how good the original recording is though.  

Some older recordings I tried, such as John Lee Hooker and Elvis, sound superb in DSD.  And through a 300B amp the vocals are scary real in the listening space.  The downside to me is cost of the albums, limited DSD library available, and the age-old problem for me of not having an album to hold and read.  I'm not fond of doing the ritual exclusively on a laptop.  

I'm curious as to the experiences of others.  If you have embraced this format, how do you run it and what changes to your system or listening habits have you made ,if any, to accommodate it?

128x128jbhiller

Showing 3 responses by tomcy6

tomcy6's avatar
tomcy6
2,544 posts
 
To the OP, I’d say if you like DSD and classical music there are a lot of SACDs or downloads available, dive right in. If you’re looking for pop, rock, jazz, etc. it’s a tougher recommendation.

Japan still releases a lot of nonclassical SACDs, but the prices are high and they don’t press that many so when they go out-of-print the prices go higher still. Many of the most popular albums have been done and are OOP.

DSD downloads is anther option. Many people think Roon is the greatest thing going. It gathers information about your album from all over the web and has other functions as well.

The downsides are that I have read complaints about DSD downloads being compressed and they may also disappear in the streaming onslaught. So, as I said, it’s a tough recommendation.
tomcy6's avatar
tomcy6
2,544 posts
 
I've got Let It Bleed on one of those DSD remastered CDs.  From reading the notes on the remastering in the booklet, it sounds like they transferred the tapes to digital as DSD  and they feel that this resulted in a better A/D conversion.  Or, if you are cynical, they want you to believe it resulted in a better conversion.  They then converted the DSD to 16/44.1 for the DSD CDs.  When I put it in my SACD player the CD light comes on, not the SACD light.
tomcy6's avatar
tomcy6
2,544 posts
 
The 1994 Virgins and the 2002 ABKCOs are both remasters of the Stones catalogs and both are said to be improvements over the 1986 ABKCO original release on CD. The 2002 remasters were done in conjunction with the Stones' catalog release on SACD

I haven’t compared the 1994 Virgins to the 2002 ABKCOs, but what I’ve read is that the 1994 Virgins sound fine and if you own them there’s no need to upgrade to the 2002 ABKCOs. Of course some people feel that the 2002 ABKCOs sound better.

The 2002s are compressed by about 1db over the 1986 CDs. Some people always prefer the least compressed CD release, others do not.
More to discover