Hi there Matt,
There's hardly a single word from me in my own forum about DSD, because there's not much "need" so to speak from current customers. Anyway, you did find that one topic about it I guess.
If I understand you correctly we get a Phasure pure DSD DAC without DSD to PCM conversion.
That would be brilliant.
Whether that's brilliant ... OK it should be because of all the additional design work to make it the best out there right out of the box. But whether it's the best in absolute sense, meaning compared to PCM ...
By now I have spend maybe a 100 posts about this (indeed the last one in Stereo.net.au) and they all come down to the same : I don't know. The reasoning for that is always a bit different and it reflects the date of writing, but in the end it only gets worse (for good merits as I see them) when time passes. I mean, the more time passes the more better DSD DACs come about, and the more get compared to the NOS1 and the more loose. I can't help that, and it doesn't help good motivation.
If you followed me on CA somewhat, you have seen that Miska and me alwats concur in the best fashion, or better said : that me and him try to work out the unexplored fields with his explicit target DSD and mine ... well, the unknown but maybe the same. Point here is, the other day I finally tried HQPlayer myself and I did not see (measure) at all what was promised so to speak. This was preconfirmed by listeners (everybody is invited to use the playback software of choice) and I wanted to check the "why". I
think this all is because what we (I) see from Miska are theoretical plots (read : in the digital domain) while I measure the real output (analogue domain) *and* it needs a "non touching" DAC in the first place wich Miska does not own.
So mind you please, this is far from bashing one which whom I ever and always concur with, but things just don't seem to work out. And so :
So this is another kind of demotivation because it seems that I now need to make all this software myself while indeed it is so that I can't be in every place at the same time. The only thing I could do is design (and make - this is ready but untested yet) the hardware volume control in best fashion, of which I have always said it molests. So this one should not.
At least I now don't need to make that in software, of which I wouldn't know where to begin (I'd say it is impossible when all needs to stay native DSD, but Miska made it (FWIW but no real reason to distrust that)).
For priorities (and motivation) it remains a huge struggle, for example referring to the latest XXHighEnd version, which to me clearly brings more than any hardware change (like DSD would be that). Also it is and remains so that there's just no native DSD around (relatively speaking) while I 100% know that once even the slightest has been in the PCM domain, it will loose forever (from the NOS1). It is mainly this what makes me think all it totally moot, and it is only that almost nobody gets this (which creates a theroretical market).
There is much more, like many people being convinced that when they convert a PCM album to DSD with their Korg Audiogate software, it sounds better. Well, I don't think I told it anywhere (no real reason to) but that software s*cks so much (measurements !) that it is already guaranteed to me that those people like DSD because it just sounds different (and now with way more distortion (6dB)).
What I also never told is that we all depend so heavily on the (marketing of) Blue Coast, with a. the notice how they relate to Korg and b. my notice to you that even their DSD recordings see PCM (don't tell Cookie because I like her very much). Mind you, DSD recordings - not tape recordings transferred to DSD (now wonder the merits of *that*).
And so whatever I do with DSD costs a LOT of time and money, and it is against all odds as I see it. But then I am stupid.
Regards,
Peter
