Considering how good that vinyl rip LFF posted is I find myself even more firmly on the mastering over format side.  I have collected a bunch of different versions of my favorite albums in PCM and the differences are startling.  I find it very hard to believe that DSD would provide me as big of a gain in sound quality as finding the best quality mastering available.

DSD vs PCM is one of those debates that I just don't care that much about anymore.  When I was first looking at buying a DAC, DSD was a huge selling point for me.  After the experience I described above and the discussion we had in another thread, I didn't even consider it as a criteria.  I consider SACD/DSD to be similar to vinyl...one day I will collect it for the variations in mastering, not the inherent sound quality of the format.

It might be possible but there's no known mechanism behind why and how this should happen

Current audio theory and current digital theory are equivalent to:



Objectivists are simply the result of the Ego thinking "I live in the advanced era.  Just look at the past, it is technologically inferior.  So this is the advanced era !  We understand everything now.  (because I am here now)."   not referring to anyone here, btw.

When something puts a lot of ultrasonic stuff, there is every opportunity for it to generate IMD products in the audible range, which may or may not account for perceived differences. There might be something else to it that we don't know.

Since instruments are tuned to the frequencies of human hearing the ultrasonics comprise harmonics which are bound to be lower in level and their IMD products lower still. There could be a bunch of ultrasonic noise due to poor conversion or electronic ultrasonic sources unintentionally present during recording, but those would result only in unwanted distortion.

Objectivists are simply the result of the Ego thinking "I live in the advanced era.  Just look at the past, it is technologically inferior.  So this is the advanced era !  We understand everything now.  (because I am here now)."   not referring to anyone here, btw.

To paraphrase the great audio expert Donal Rumsfeld - there are known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns. It's wishful thinking to opine that because you personally don't know something that it must belong in the category of unknown unknowns. This fallacy is present more in the self-labeled subjective camp. The fallacy the self-labeled objective camp falls prey to occasionally is to disregard the possibility of unkown unknowns. Both fallacies are a detriment to understanding.

When it comes to the great mysteries of life audio reproduction is fairly trivial compared to the mysteries of music, meaning and perception.

Considering how good that vinyl rip LFF posted is I find myself even more firmly on the mastering over format side.  I have collected a bunch of different versions of my favorite albums in PCM and the differences are startling.  I find it very hard to believe that DSD would provide me as big of a gain in sound quality as finding the best quality mastering available.

That's definitely the way I look at it. I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with DSD, and all other things being equal, I'd choose it over 16/44. If the better master is on CD though, chances are the CD will sound better, despite Fremer saying 16/44 is the devil. Provided you have a DAC that's adept at handling standard Res, it's perfectly adequate. Not ideal, but it doesn't ruin music either. Bad mastering ruins music. Also, unless I'm wrong, no one makes 1-bit DSD DACs anymore, and supposedly standard "DSD capable" DACs aren't as good as what used to be in SACD players.

Been enjoying the format debate from the last few days here, gents. It never occurred to me 24/192 could introduce problems, and that 24/96 seems to be the best compromise. I was interested in the DSD thing when I got the X-Sabre, but it was not a deciding factor, more of a bonus. I was attracted to the chipset, having thought the Invicta and HD800 was a decent pairing, and the Concero was impressive. Also the looks and build.

When I loaded up some DSD on it, I thought it sounded very good, but after discussion I realized most, of not all, the improvement was just the mastering. I listened to the DXD version when available and it was the same. I never tried a lower version, though, such as 24/96. I will have to see if it's available.

Interesting how Laserdisc supported 24/96. Wonder if there are any unique masters for what little content made it on that platform.