My hardware device supports DSD512 and DSD1024 decoding, and I also have some DSD512 and DSD1024 audio sources, I hope Audirvana will also update the support for DSD512 and even DSD1024 as soon as possible
What computer OS are you using? If you are on an Apple macOS platform, you need to enable DoP 1.1 (DSD over PCM)ā¦
There are no recordings produced at sampling-rates of 22.4MHz (DSD512) and 44.8MHz (DSD1024), these are all modulations (up-sampled iterations) of lower sample-rate DSDxxx recordings (2.8, 5.6, 11.2MHz)ā¦ There is extremely limited product available as DSD1024, and DSD512 ā¦ Just know these are not native recordingsā¦
If you are using DoP 1.1, the PCM carrier sample-rate for DSD512 = 1411.2kHz and the DoP 1.1 PCM carrier sample-rate for DSD1024 = 2822.4kHz (It is very unlikely that your DAC supports PCM sample-rates beyond 768kHz) More likely, DSD512 and DSD1024 are supported via IĀ²S and USB as raw native signals.
1 Like
NativeDSD and High Definition Tape Transfers for example produce recordings in DSD256.
Matt
1 Like
Yesā¦ You are correctā¦ I was going to change that, but you beat me to itā¦ 
However, the catalog is extremely esotericā¦
1 Like
Some DSD256 recordings are edited in DXD and then remodulated to DSD256, DSD128, DSD64 or PCM. There do exist some terrific sounding direct DSD256 recordings without transfer to DXD from HDTT.
Matt
2 Likes
True for the majorityā¦ However the native 11.2MHz recordings are very esoteric products and the catalog is inconsequential in sizeā¦ Itās my opinion these native DSD256 recordings are primarily a demonstrationā¦ It is also my opinion, there is little to be gained for the average consumer playback system, in auditioning DSD sample-rates beyond 5.6MHz, where the Nyquist is pushed way out to 2.8MHz, the dynamic-range far exceeds the majority of DACsā¦
1 Like
A leading recording engineer from NativeDSD posted on AS:
āI perceive a noticeable difference between recording at DSD64 and DSD256, on Merging systems. I canāt comment on DSD128 recording, for I can not see a benefit of even experimenting.
While I record only DSD256 surround, (the very low level spatial cues become more apparent and perceivable), an example mixed to stereo mp3 from the DSD256 demonstrates a minimal Decca Tree like alignment.ā
The big advantage of DSD256 or DXD is that you can get the lower rates in DSD or PCM easily and technically both are now standard for audiophile productions. The latest Patricia Barber productions for example are all made in DXD.
Matt
2 Likes
The editing of any DSDxxx production, mandates the transfer to DXDā¦ I do it all the time with the DSDxxx recordings I have that are not natively recorded binauralā¦ I down-sample to 352.8kHz so that I can apply HRTF and then modulate this PCM iteration to DSD128.
The fact that a Fs of 11.2MHz and Nyquist of 5.6MHz will capture finer detail (given the recording components) is a pretty much a foregone conclusionā¦ Whether or not the average DSDxxx playback system can resolve these nuances is the salient questionā¦ And inside of this, is the rationale for the monetary and artistic resources expenditures versus return on the investment.
1 Like
TBH, the DSD128 restriction is caused most certainly a lttle bit because you are on Mac platform. You get the same difference going from DSD128 to DSD256 like from DSD64 to DSD128. When the quality of the source is very high then even the same tracks on Spotify can sound very good. I compared tracks recorded in DXD, remodulated to 24/192 on Qobuz and to 320kbps on Spotify and both sound very good.
Matt
1 Like
Aurally speaking there is no restrictionā¦ Spatial cues are easily conveyed by 2.8MHz DSD signalsā¦ the Nyquist is 1411kHzā¦ The salient question in this is, whether or not the recording contains contextual harmonic and dynamic energy in that spectral region, that are contextually perceivable, if they existā¦
1 Like
IMO, to approach the SQ of the best analog tape recorders it is useful to have a very high sampling rate and I believe the recording engineers when they report that DSD256 sounds better than DSD64. So when the topic is UHQ it makes sense to go for DSD256 or DXD.
Matt
1 Like
Wellā¦ I knew your were going hereā¦ Itās a matter of return on investmentā¦ Of course, if working with modern analog-tape formulations the resolution is fantastic:
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
Sound of Tape ā ATR Magnetics
The key is in capturing both ultra-high-frequency energy and the level of low-frequency and dynamic energy, that is restricted by tape-speed.
Perhaps further into the future 1-bit, 11.2MHz ADC will be the production standard, which must be down-converted to DXD (352.8kHz) for post-production editingā¦ However, there is only a handful of record label producers of high-resolution content and masters in DSD that are creating any new content using modern analog-tape as the primary recording format.
1 Like
Yes, 80.000.000 particles per second is nearly the the same as DSD2048 for comparisonā¦
HDTT is very interesting, they produce their digital files from analog tape masters so they must know which sampling rate is necessary to get the same quality.
AFAIK, the best ADCs are limited to DSD256, so we can argue if DSD512 when technically feasible can approach the tape even better in all aspects.
Matt
1 Like
2xHD does the sameā¦ However, no matter the 1-bit Delta sigma ADC sample-rate, they are stuck with the original tape formulation and tape-speed and the frequency and dynamic limitations imbued in that tape-master sourceā¦
Iām speaking to the labels that are producing new content via any high-resolution formatā¦ Very few are making new recordings using modern analog-tape formulations and ultra-high end machines, etcā¦ Even then, they are loath to making edits to the physical tape (a fine art) so they are destined to archive at some DSD sample-rate and down-convert to DXD.
DSD512 recording is superfluousā¦ Aurally speaking, there is little to nothing gained, especially if it requires editingā¦ The advantage to modulating any DSDxxx file to 11.2MHz or 22.4MHz, is the refinement in signal resolution, making it extremely compatible with a simple Delta sigma analog output circuit that translates this into a more refined analog signal waveform.
1 Like
Maybe the sweet spot for recording is DSD256 with or without editing in DXD.
A typical example for this procedure model is the label 2L.
Matt
1 Like
Maybeā¦ but itās very esoteric as we see in these labelsā¦ if they can support their endeavor, recording DSD256, greatā¦ however their catalog leaves me flatā¦ no greater resolution will change this for me personallyā¦ Sorry, if you are associated to the labelā¦ just my personal tasteā¦ I donāt buy recordings just because they are higher-resolution, however, I am always curious and will purchase samplers.
3 Likes
Not associated to the label at all, further they are advocates of MQAā¦, you knowā¦
The musical performance of the artist always trumps the recording, it is the same for me as well. Even Spotify sounds very good through my set-up. Good nightā¦
Matt
3 Likes
If you mean upsampling and modulating to these resolutions, hereās the situation at the moment:
Limit from MacOS is DSD256 with most DACs, DSD512 from Windows or Linux. (Linux if you are using UPnP/DLNA to a Linux endpoint.) MacOS does DSD over PCM, which halves the bit rate used for music, so unless you have a DAC with a custom driver that allows native DSD on MacOS, DSD256 is the limit.
There are very, very few DACs that will accept DSD1024, so unless you have one of them youāre not missing anything. What DAC do you own?
3 Likes
@Jud ā¦ ??? The only limit for macOS is the DoP 1.1 PCM sample-rate the DAC is capable of supportingā¦ The DoP 1.1 Standard tricks the macOS system by disguising the DSD bit-stream as a PCM file that is later decoded/extracted in the DAC architectureā¦ Delivering the DSDxxx file fully intact as encoded.
Quoted from:
DoP open Standard
Method for transferring DSD Audio over PCM Frames
Version 1.1
Since the Apple OS only allows a PCM path we have to find a way to put DSD audio data into PCM frames that then get sent via the native USB driver. DSD(64) has a sample size of 1 bit and a sample rate of 2.8224MHz. In other words the data rate is 2.8224Mbits/sec. This is equivalent to 16 bit PCM at 176.4kHz (data-rate). In order to clearly identify when this PCM stream contains DSD and when it contains PCM we will need additional bits. The PCM format with the next higher bit rate is 24 bits at a sample rate of 176.4kHz. This gives us 8 bits for this marker of identifier. It seems a bit overkill if all we need is 2 states (8 bits give us 256 states), but we will see that this extra overhead comes in handy. Here is how we can use the 24 bits in each sample and for each channel:
The 8 most significant bits are used for the DSD marker and alternate with each sample between 0x05 and 0xFA. Each channel within a sample contains the same marker. This has been chosen to minimize the click that might be experienced when the receiving hardware misinterpretes the data as PCM when it really is DSD. If this should happen it would create a tone around 88kHz and roughly -34db, nothing harmful and something that most D/A converters would suppress to some degree before it even reaches the loudspeaker. It should be pointed out that hardware manufacturers and software developers alike can easily use common safeguards to prevent such cases of erroneous format switching and that they may only be limited to times during development of hardware and software. It is their responsibility to prevent misinterpreted cases and to test their products thoroughly before release. Misinterpreation of PCM data as DSD may create less predictable clicks.
The remaining 16 lower bits are then used for the DSD data, first or oldest bit in slot t0. The USB Audio specification assigns each PCM Frame to a specific channel (left, right etc.) and when used for DSD streaming each PCM Frame contains only DSD data corresponding to its assigned channel.
3. Solutions for double rate DSD (128FS) and beyond
Two solutions are possible depending on whether the used PCM transmission scheme is capable of supporting the PCM rate of 352.8kHz or not:> 1. The solution described above for 64FS DSD can easily be extended for 128FS by simply
> raising the underlying PCM sample rate from 176.4kHz to 352.8kHz. All the marker bytes
> and bit ordering remain the same.
> 2. For those conduits that do not support 352.8kHz (such as AES/EBU) an alternative
> method can be used without raising the PCM sample rate:
> A PCM channel pair (for instance L/R) is used to transmit 128FS DSD for a single DSD channel. The lower PCM frame number contains the 16 older DSD bits in the same order as in the 64FS case. The higher PCM frame number in the pair then contains the newer 16 DSD bits. A different marker byte is used to distinguish this method from the first one.
Solution 1 can easily be extended to support even higher DSD rates by raising the underlying PCM rate.
https://dsd-guide.com/dop-open-standard#.ZE892y3MJB0
1 Like
The DAC I am using is Da-artās recently released Aquila ā ¢, which supports hardware decoding of DSD1024 and PCM1536kHz capability. However, after reading the above replies from all of you I understand the situation related to DSD1024 resources and no longer pursue Audirvanaās support for DSD1024, thank you for your discussion and replies.
2 Likes