Converting DSD Files to FLAC

[ted_b]

Practically nothing is natively recorded as DSD. It all starts life as PCM. So in the strict definition of the term, the conversion of PCM to DSD is also lossy. It doesn't matter so much if a conversion is lossy. What matters is if its audible. I can hear no difference between DSD and a 24/88.2 conversion of the same file. What is easily audible though is the DSP room correction that can be applied to PCM. And I can most certainly hear that.

I live in a different world, as US Tech Editor for NativeDSD dot com. We have thousands of DSD-recorded albums, some of which bypass any post sweetening in PCM (even DXD) or editing. Also, everything doesn't start as PCM. Many A to D converters start off in SDM, frankly. But I get your point...especially in a hostile environment like a car.

 

[par4ken]

If DSF sounds different than FLAC, that's placebo.



That's a choice, not a requirement.

24/88.2 would be more than sufficient for any set of ears.



That's should tell you it's audiophool nonsense right there.



In your car, even 24 bits isn't going to matter.

Incorrect on all counts! Well I do suppose that a conversion rate for the FLAC of 24 bit/352.8Khz would be unnecessary overkill. Back to my Holy Cow thread there is a huge difference between DSD/DSF and DSF converted to PCM/flac, no double blind testing is necessary as the difference is not subtle at all!

When converting to PCM from DSD just look at all the various options, filtering of the high frequency noise is necessary in the conversion process. I would theorise that, that is likely where the degradation in sound quality is coming from. People who listen to modern DSP based equipment will never hear a difference because at some point the DSD has to be converted to PCM. DSD is not superior to PCM but the conversion of DSD to PCM produces inferior results! If the conversion process could be improved / tweaked in some way perhaps tha sonic degradation could be reduced or eliminated.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I live in a different world, as US Tech Editor for NativeDSD dot com. We have thousands of DSD-recorded albums, some of which bypass any post sweetening in PCM (even DXD) or editing. Also, everything doesn't start as PCM. Many A to D converters start off in SDM, frankly. But I get your point...especially in a hostile environment like a car.

I should have qualified my post to say:

"Practically nothing is natively recorded as DSD except for Classical and Jazz"

Can you name even a half dozen of titles in the mainstream Pop/Rock genera that is native DSD?

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Incorrect on all counts! Well I do suppose that a conversion rate for the FLAC of 24 bit/352.8Khz would be unnecessary overkill. Back to my Holy Cow thread there is a huge difference between DSD/DSF and DSF converted to PCM/flac, no double blind testing is necessary as the difference is not subtle at all!

When converting to PCM from DSD just look at all the various options, filtering of the high frequency noise is necessary in the conversion process. I would theorise that, that is likely where the degradation in sound quality is coming from. People who listen to modern DSP based equipment will never hear a difference because at some point the DSD has to be converted to PCM. DSD is not superior to PCM but the conversion of DSD to PCM produces inferior results! If the conversion process could be improved / tweaked in some way perhaps tha sonic degradation could be reduced or eliminated.

I keep reading your references regarding the superiority of DSD. A couple points...

I don't see many others making the same claims on here. Do you?

One mans "huge difference" is another's "I don't hear a difference". It happens all the time.

In my system DSD converted to PCM will always sound better than straight DSD as I cant apply any room correction to the straight DSD. And the enhancing effect of REQ DSP is easy for me to hear.

 

[par4ken]

I keep reading your references regarding the superiority of DSD. A couple points...

I don't see many others making the same claims on here. Do you?

One mans "huge difference" is another's "I don't hear a difference". It happens all the time.

In my system DSD converted to PCM will always sound better than straight DSD as I cant apply any room correction to the straight DSD. And the enhancing effect of REQ DSP is easy for me to hear.

You are missing out!

 

[ted_b]

I should have qualified my post to say:

"Practically nothing is natively recorded as DSD except for Classical and Jazz"

Can you name even a half dozen of titles in the mainstream Pop/Rock genera that is native DSD?

No, but that's quite a caveat!

 

[LuvMyQuad]

No, but that's quite a caveat!

Perhaps, but much less so on this forum as evidenced by the lack of classical listings in the polls section?

 

[ted_b]

Perhaps, but much less so on this forum as evidenced by the lack of classical listings in the polls section?

Expand your horizons! Classical, jazz and world music are wonderful new genres you could explore.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Expand your horizons! Classical, jazz and world music are wonderful new genres you could explore.

I've tried. There are a few dozen large scale classical works I own, and some Jazz. Mostly holdovers from my analog days when everyone told me how the true worth of audio components can only truly be appreciated and judged by evaluating them with un-amplified music. Its just not my cup of tea.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

no double blind testing is necessary as the difference is not subtle at all!

It is always necessary.

 

[par4ken]

It is always necessary.

It certainly is not! Do you have to do double blind testing to hear the difference between AM and FM radio? Between a standard cassette tape and reel to reel at 7.5ips? Between a scratchy LP record and a clean CD source. I think, in fact I know NOT!

Double blind testing is more useful for distinguishing subtle differences between components.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

no double blind testing is necessary as the difference is not subtle at all!

I agree 100% with Kal.

I know from your past posts that you are adamant about how big the perceived difference is for you. Have you looked into the possibility of something sub optimal in the way your equipment reproduces PCM?

 

[par4ken]

I agree 100% with Kal.

I know from your past posts that you are adamant about how big the perceived difference is for you. Have you looked into the possibility of something sub optimal in the way your equipment reproduces PCM?

Nothing suboptimal. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself on this topic, but I'll keep preaching the Gospel. PCM sounds excellent, as does analogue. DSD sounds excellent in its native format. Blu-Ray audio and DVD-Audio all sound excellent. The problem is the conversion of DSD to PCM!

Originally my universal players all converted DSD to PCM and SACD sounded fine, that is until I got the Oppo when I was blown away by the sound quality of the DV discs, in their native format. When listening to the DV discs (DSD converted to PCM) I originally thought that I was hearing amoralities from the original analogue master tapes. The sound had a bit of a tapeish quality to it. That dullness was all gone listening to native DSD!

Shortly after getting the Oppo I was listening to the same discs but at a low level as I was talking to a friend at the time and not paying much attention to the music, but eventually I realised that the sound had been much better the night before. Sure enough I had set the output for SACD's to Auto instead of DSD. Because I had the TV monitor turned on connected via HDMI the output was changed to PCM to be compatible with the TV. Changing the setting to DSD that magical sound was restored! Another day I was listening to the Mr. Big SACD on the living room system. Being only 4.0 I had to change the BDP-95's output to PCM so that the 5.1 disc would be converted to 4.0, otherwise I had no vocals. When I next went to use the 95 some time latter, I thought to myself this SACD just doesn't sound right. I looked at the display and it showed SACD playing as PCM. Switching back to DSD brought that wonderful sound back again!

To sum up, there is nothing wrong with PCM. But DSD should be kept in its native format, the conversion process to PCM is lossy in some way. DSD via PCM very noticeably, loses sound quality!!! Even the Oppo manual says to set the output to give the sound quality that you prefer, a reference to the fact that they sound very different!

 

[Kal Rubinson]

To sum up,

all anecdotal.

 

[jimfisheye]

Real time on the fly sample rate conversion and DSD to PCM conversion are certainly prone to corruption! But that's live conversion. On the fly conversions for this kind of thing might seem convenient but are kind of considered operator error in critical settings. (And another reason not to like AVR combo style products with potential mysteries like that inside!) The 32:1 decimation transcode is lossless quality. With proper gain matching the results null down to 100db. Much like a sample rate conversion. You aren't going to hear artifacts unless you use really old software that can't really do it correctly.

I still bet at least a few AVRs are transparent with this. If you match the volume anyway. There will always be a window for a volume mismatch with this transcode. That's why 32 bit floating point is recommended for the initial conversion. There could be 6db or more difference. Pretty hard to A/B without a computer and transcoding one of them.

 

[sbrom]

Pardon my naïveté here. Where and how within your system does the DSD (in its native form) sent by the OPPO get converted to analog?

I have an AVR that converts DSD. I haven’t noticed a difference in the SQ whether the OPPO converts, or the AVR. It could be my old ears….

Thanks,
Steve

Nothing suboptimal. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself on this topic, but I'll keep preaching the Gospel. PCM sounds excellent, as does analogue. DSD sounds excellent in its native format. Blu-Ray audio and DVD-Audio all sound excellent. The problem is the conversion of DSD to PCM!

Originally my universal players all converted DSD to PCM and SACD sounded fine, that is until I got the Oppo when I was blown away by the sound quality of the DV discs, in their native format. When listening to the DV discs (DSD converted to PCM) I originally thought that I was hearing amoralities from the original analogue master tapes. The sound had a bit of a tapeish quality to it. That dullness was all gone listening to native DSD!

Shortly after getting the Oppo I was listening to the same discs but at a low level as I was talking to a friend at the time and not paying much attention to the music, but eventually I realised that the sound had been much better the night before. Sure enough I had set the output for SACD's to Auto instead of DSD. Because I had the TV monitor turned on connected via HDMI the output was changed to PCM to be compatible with the TV. Changing the setting to DSD that magical sound was restored! Another day I was listening to the Mr. Big SACD on the living room system. Being only 4.0 I had to change the BDP-95's output to PCM so that the 5.1 disc would be converted to 4.0, otherwise I had no vocals. When I next went to use the 95 some time latter, I thought to myself this SACD just doesn't sound right. I looked at the display and it showed SACD playing as PCM. Switching back to DSD brought that wonderful sound back again!

To sum up, there is nothing wrong with PCM. But DSD should be kept in its native format, the conversion process to PCM is lossy in some way. DSD via PCM very noticeably, loses sound quality!!! Even the Oppo manual says to set the output to give the sound quality that you prefer, a reference to the fact that they sound very different!

 

[par4ken]

Pardon my naïveté here. Where and how within your system does the DSD (in its native form) sent by the OPPO get converted to analog?

I have an AVR that converts DSD. I haven’t noticed a difference in the SQ whether the OPPO converts, or the AVR. It could be my old ears….

Thanks,
Steve

Your AVR converts to PCM so that your DSP functions can work, unless you output analog from the Oppo (converts DSD to analog) into your amplifiers analog inputs. My systems are all analog, audio processing in my system doesn't require conversion to PCM.

I can see a real schism coming to audio (if it's not already here) between those who love their DSP effects, room correction ect, and the purists. The purists would tend to be more in the stereo only camp, valuing sound quality above all else, using analog and SACD in native form and a minimum of analog signal processing. I find myself more in the purist camp but extended into the surround world, primarily quad/four channel only.

 

[sbrom]

Your AVR converts to PCM so that your DSP functions can work, unless you output analog from the Oppo (converts DSD to analog) into your amplifiers analog inputs. My systems are all analog, audio processing in my system doesn't require conversion to PCM.

I can see a real schism coming to audio (if it's not already here) between those who love their DSP effects, room correction ect, and the purists. The purists would tend to be more in the stereo only camp, valuing sound quality above all else, using analog and SACD in native form and a minimum of analog signal processing. I find myself more in the purist camp but extended into the surround world, primarily quad/four channel only.

Thanks! I love multichannel, taking full advantage of bass management and room correction. I use a separate stereo-only setup in the living room to kick back and listen to 2-channel titles. Currently the stereo system is PCM-only, with no way to play DSD. I may consider moving my Oppo 103 from the multichannel system to the stereo living room, to get at some DSD titles on my NAS and/or play SACD’s.

Regarding “Native DSD” direct conversion to the Oppo’s analog outputs vs. DSD->PCM>Analog: I’m skeptical of perceptible differences, but in theory direct DSD could sound different, since the direct DSD route has one less conversion. I doubt my ancient ears could hear any difference induced by (if any) digital artifacts. Perhaps if the analog chains of the two processes are different, I might perceive a difference in frequency response. But, I will check it out

 

[par4ken]

My ears are getting old as well but I can hear a big difference when the Oppo outputs DSD instead of PCM from SACD. I believe that the problem is in the conversion process, I'm not one who thinks that DSD is inherently better than PCM.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Real time on the fly sample rate conversion and DSD to PCM conversion are certainly prone to corruption! But that's live conversion. On the fly conversions for this kind of thing might seem convenient but are kind of considered operator error in critical settings.

So are you saying that on the fly conversion (as would be done in a disc player or AVR at the time of playback ) vs file conversion from DSD to PCM may yield different outcomes? And that the on the fly conversion would be the one that suffers?

Interesting.

Everything I have compared is DSD to PCM file conversions vs DSD disc playback through an Oppo using analog out. Its the only way I could facilitate a reasonably valid A/B test at the time. I could hear no detectable difference at 24/88.2kHz. I did dozens of trials. I used only quad sources to avoid any LFE channel level issues.