You didn't understand hardly anything I wrote. When DSD is converted
to PCM, which is how people without DSD DACs listen to DSD, the
equivalent sampling rate (FOR PCM NOT DSD) is a multiple of 44.1 kHz.
As I stated, DSD64 (SACDs) are converted to 24 bits sampled at 88.2
kHz, DSD128 176.4 kHz. etc. When people convert DSD to PCM using
sampling rates other than what I just listed, such as a multiple of 48
kHz (96, 192 kHz, etc.), that causes more distortion than using a
multiple of 44.1 kHz. Converting DSD to PCM or vise versa is not
distortion free. If the math confuses you, then learn something about
converting DSD to PCM.
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 17:23:18 -0500, SuperAudioLabs <Super@udio.labs>
wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:31:11 -0500, Puffer Belly wrote:
>
>> I'd just like to point out that DSD sample rates are based on multiples
>> of 44.1 kHz, so DSD64 is equivalent to PCM sampled at 88.2 kHz, DSD128
>> 176.4 kHz, etc.
>>
>
>That is actually entirely incorrect. That is just some modern bullshit
>some anti-DSD guys came up with to bash the format.
>
>DSD is not the equivalent to anything PCM....the two are basically like
>gasoline and diesel...similar products with an entirely different level of
>operation.
>
>Equivalence in PCM is made up...much in the same way we make up a
>horizontal resolution for analog video back in the day when there really
>was no such idea.
>
>IF what you said had any kind of truth to it; than the CD players of
>yester-year which worked with 2x, 4x, or 16x oversampling would not have
>been able to produce the sound quality they did....as you yourself said
>DSD64 is the equivalence of 44.1khz.
>
>BTW, any time you see something like "oversampling", or "MASH", of "Pulse
>Edge Modulation" on a CD player...it means it's using a delta-sigma 1-bit
>modulator internally. It's taking the 16-bit data from CD and modulating
>it at 1-bit....at a much slower rate than DSD.
>
>DACs up till about 10 years ago were using 1-bit DS modulation; these days
>the higher end models are using multi-bit delta-sigma.
>
>No one has made a DAC that can handle more than 16-bit samples that's not
>an oversampling design.
>
>DSD64 just means it's sample rate is 64 times the normal CD rate. Why was
>the CD sample rate held to a standard? Because it was the first time they
>actually standardized a sample rate.
>
>Actual performance of any DSD rate depends on what created the DSD stream
>and what is playing back the DSD stream.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
|