MoFi controversy

@moonwatcher it is probably best to learn from people who understand how this technology works and people who think they do. There are too many philes that fall into the latter camp.

DSD samples more often, but its sample size is much larger. It needs to apply sophisticated noise shaping to move the noise out of the audio band to higher frequencies. Guess what, virtually every PCM ADC and most PCM DACs do exactly the same thing as their interior structure is a sigma-delta converter. Most PCM converters on playback upsample to a higher frequency as well. This allows simpler analog filter. Interpolation happens in the digital domain but it is a mathematical process and effectively perfect. In the analog domain there is no interpolation. It is simply a low pass filter. That low pass filter makes sure all the steps connect into as perfect an analog waveform as possible. Feeding in a DSD signal does not result in any better analog waveform on the output.

Here is the crazy thing about the phile world. They will believe many things are are inherently at conflict. For instance they talk about the superiority of DSD, while shunning sigma-delta ADCs. Sigma delta DACs are PCM mathematically converted to something that is effectively like DSD but using multiple bits to improve performance. They could do single bit, but the results would be worse.

Why not use DSD in computers? Because speed or not, it is a poor mathematical description of a signal to work with. 24/96 already represents everything perfectly up to past 40KHz. 24/192 already represents everything perfectly past 80KHz. It is already very hard, some argue well impossible, to tell the difference between 16\44.1 and 24\96 if you do the testing properly. Using TIDAL/ Qoboz as a comparison would not be considered an adequate test. Under no conditions will anyone be able to tell the difference between 24/96 and 24/192 data (note use of the word data). We aren't bats.  So absolutely it can be argued that a higher resolution file cannot sound better. We are simply not equipped to hear the difference.

There is a whole lot of phile beliefs that were perhaps one time true as well, but no longer are if they ever were. Whole product categories have rised out of these misconceptions. DSD is in many ways no different.

@aberyclark , neither Philips nor SONY invented DSD. Philips was the first to work on applying it to modern audio. Sony jumped on and they created the SACD standard.

@theaudioamp I guess that is the "thing"...Are we kidding ourselves that our ears can hear the difference in CD quality versus anything with more resolution? But if studios are recording in 24/96 it would seem best if we could buy the files in that native format or stream them. 

But then again, if TV manufacturers ever start making 32K super-super-duper resolutions and enough color depth for a trillion shades of grey, you can bet people will buy them.

Advertising hype works.  Not too many went broke using the ideas of Edward Bernays. 

I note that while many have their panties in a wad over this MoFi controversy (and perhap rightly so), they aren't quite as bent out of shape knowing MoFi used DSD256 instead of PCM at 24/96, so maybe it does come down to "impressions, perceptions, and misconceptions".

I was dopped into believing I had something special so I unloaded a lot of money buying them and know feel raped and will go in a different direction in the future.

For all the digital guys here’s something to have a cup of coffee over! https://www.atrtape.com/sound-of-tape  

To understand why, a professional tape recorder provides the most lifelike reproduction revolves around a couple of important factors. The key lies in the inherent technology of the tape itself. Audio tape in use during the 1950s and ’60s provided approximately 65,000,000 magnetic particles per second of recording a quarter inch format at 15 inches per second (ips) tape speed. Each magnetic oxide particle or groups of particles takes on either a north or south orientation after exiting the recording head. Starting to sound like digital bit stream? Well yes and no. However there is one huge difference between analog tape recordings and even the best digital recordings.

RESOLUTION

The highest digital resolution today offers 4,608,000 bits switching per second. Not bad. Big improvement over the standard Red Book CD but it is not even close to sub-micron particle resolution of ATR Master Tape.

RANDOM PARTICLE STACKING

Quarter inch, two track ATR Master Tape running at 15 inches per second (ips) involves approximately 80,000,000 oriented and randomly stacked particles per track second. It’s not just the particle count but the random stacking that turns this super binary resolution into pure analog playback. This is why even a narrow track width recording still sounds so detailed despite the lower surface area.

Music is an intrinsic part of the human soul. It plays to our emotions, it talks to us, it calms us, it makes us rise to our greatest accomplishments and brings back our warmest memories. Why not record it on the best medium to achieve the best quality of sound?