Barry Hufker wrote on Sat, 05 July 2008 20:57 |
I had no idea what to expect when I recorded the same live music onto DSD and PCM. I didn't think one might sound better than the other. I simply had no clue. I understand DSD is the root of modern PCM recording, but I was surprised at how much better (in that situation) DSD sounded than the PCM version of it.
I have no idea why it sounded better and no idea as to why it might sound better. As I thought about it afterwards, I would have thought the PCM version to sound better because its A/D-D/A is so highly regarded. The 1/4" recording on a nicely tweaked tape recorder beat out PCM as I recall but not DSD in terms of clarity and a general "definition" of the sound.
|
Well if you're comparing two different convertors you have to remember that you are comparing two different convertors, whatever system they are using.
But let's say that perhaps you are hearing more than just the difference between two convertors, and that there is something about the unadulterated DSD stream version that you prefer, we could then have to look at what it might be.
The thing is that a DSD stream is a sample stream, it follows the same rules as any other sample stream, therefore when converted to higher word width lower sample rate PCM (and back again, so we can use the same convertors for a proper comparison)if there was an audible difference it would tell us one of two things... either the implementation of the decimation filters is substandard, or there is something missing from our understanding of hearing, in what we can perceive.
My suspicion is that with properly implemented decimation and interpolation filters, you would not hear the difference in a blind test of an unadulterated stream to one which passed through 44kHz/24 bit (maybe even 16 bit, going by the results of at least one test) and certainly 96kHz... but I'll acknowledge the possibility that we're missing something in our understanding of what we can hear.