The DAC supports PCM up to 768KHz, what I’m writing is that this is the rule for 99% of DACs.
That’s what I said:
A DAC needs to support PCM up to 1411.2kHz to playback DSD512 via DoP 1.1 
1 Like
I’m not disagreeing with you, just that for today’s DACs this is practically a rule.
Yes… In my opinion DSD128 is the practical limit for DSD playback… the esoteric DSD256, DSD512 and DSD1024 recordings are extreme examples of the potentials of DSD technology… It will take a very sophisticated playback system to extract the sonic information captured in those extreme recordings… 
2 Likes
Measurements for most modern 768k-capable DACs show either DSD256 or DSD512 is the “sweet spot” for lowest noise and distortion, depending on the particular DAC.
3 Likes
Yes… but how many recordings actually are produced at those DSD sample-rates…? The answer is very few… Now modulating (up-sampling) PCMxx to DSDxxx will not exhibit the noise-floor of the native DSD256 or DSD512 recording… and the Nyquist of the PCMxxx is going to be the limiting factor of frequency response… The noise-floor of the DAC topology affects all signals it is operating on…
1 Like
A long time ago I decided to play the files in their original resolution.
The important thing is that the disc has a great recording.
I have 16/44Khz files with excellent quality.
3 Likes
So do I… However, I modulate all PCMxxx to DSD128 because it provides a more appropriate 1-bit signal for the PDM or PWM D/A circuit of any DAC…
So you’re converting everything to DSD128.
A bad recording even with DSD1024 will not play well.
1 Like
They are what they are…
1 Like
What you are saying was effectively corroborated by measurements that were discussed on a lengthy thread on Audiophile Style some months ago.
I remember that I posted excerpts from this discussion on a thread on the forum of Audirvana on which this point was also discussed.
With DSD64 and DSD128 there’s a lot of ultrasonic noise that remains.
1 Like
Yes… however the actual result is a function of the FIR filtering applied to the DSD signal… What we hear and assess in the playback sound-quality is the reality,…
1 Like
Why does DSD128 sounds better with your DAC than DSD64?
I had a doubt.
In this case are you referring to original DSD256 and DSD512 files or remastered ones?
Or even for up-sampling?
I don’t refer to original recording, but to upsampling.
1 Like
I will try. 
When I play native binaural DSD128 vs native binaural DSD64… I’m going to say the audible difference is in the feel of the recording… This is probably because more information being captured in the 5.6MHz A/D than the 2.8MHz A/D… This is analysis is biased by the fact that there is no way to compare native a DSD64 recording with a native DSD128 or DSD256 recording… One is either up-sampled or one is down-sampled.
You said a few days ago that you exctract your DSD tracks from SACDs. These are DSD64 tracks. Upsampling them to DSD128 does not generate “more information”. The improved sound quality that you hear results, among other things, from the reduction of noise.
And yet, there’s still a lot of noise in DSD128. If you could play them at DSD256, you would have reached the sweet point.
What @Jud said is proven by measurements.
I posted excerpts already about that on a thread on this forum to which you were participant.
2 Likes
I had a doubt.
Correct me if I understood wrong.
Do you take the DSF file and convert it to PCM and then to DSD128?
Forget about the neural thing for a moment…
Upsample with Audirvana a 44.1 kHz track to DSD64 and to DSD128, and tell us what sound better with your DAC.