DSD vs PCM and which is better

As a recording and playback medium, which digital audio format is better sounding?

[audiononsense]

Agree 100% Paul- I have quite the collection of SACD's and everyone I own from Octave has outstanding balance and resolution.

[spandel]

If the original recording is good there is nothing wrong with 16bit 44.1 (Redbook).I find it rich, warm and detailed and very pleasing to the ears.

[SOLDATT]

Excellent discussion, there is the 8bit DSD in the DSD official specification designed for editing, both 64 and 128FS, 8bits per sample is enough to do all the editing maths. It is a matter to implement it natively on the chip and it was also done a few times, Sony e-chip for instance. DSD by nature is very ambient and warm, however, it tends to saturate at high volumes just like analogue audio when PCM would exhibit digital harshness. High volume is the ultimate test to appreciate the difference and essentially hear it. 7:02

[Hi-EndAudioGuy]

So basically all of Octave Records material has been through DXD (24/352.8kHz) which is hi-res PCM. That means at least 2 conversions from DSD capture -> DXD mixing/editing -> DSD final purchase. Why not just DSD capture (since you believe this is better) -> DXD and then sell the final album as DXD PCM without getting it back to DSD and save yourself another lossy conversion step???

This also implies that the best quality recordings from Octave Records should be the 24/352.8kHz download option, not the DSD ones!

[Fastvoice]

What you described as the last point is exactly what has been done as "high-end" in the analog era: "Direct-to-disc". It's basically the same principle as the early recordings - where there was no mixing at all and the needle just scratched the original recording into wax or whatever material.

[NoEggu]

@1:44 "If I said..."
Paul, you never said that.

@4:31 "If you start with DSD..."
That is what you have said in the past.

@5:40 "If you were to record..."
That is also what you have said in the past.

[Mark-lqsb]

Absolutely amazing how all these "experts" in the comment section constantly try to correct each other. I know Paul encourages people to comment on the topics and have a pleasant exchange of ideas, but it gets down right comical some times.

[jimrogers]

Hey Paul... I don't know if you ever knew Brad Miller who at one time way back when ran Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs. Back in the late 80s or early 90s he came to the studio I was working at in Portland, Oregon with his Colossus Digital Recorder... a 4 channel unit with single ended (unbalanced), discrete electronics that sounded incredible. At the time we had a Mitsubishi X-86 two track that I had replaced the filters with Apogees. I have to say that Brad's recorder was markedly better, but I still believe that it was a PCM unit. Unfortunately Brad passed a few years later and I believe that nothing ever happened with the Colossus. I also remember the Soundsteam digital recorder... wasn't that a DSD unit? Anyway... great video, Paul! Cheers!

[tristanjones]

I don't think people will ever understand the difference between PCM and DSD without explaining to people that there is a digital domain and an analog domain. In the digital domain, PCM vs DSD almost doesn't matter. It's just a band limited signal, and with enough processing power you can recover the EXACT analog waveform with either method. The trick with DSD is that you don't actually need a "DAC" per se. The digital signal can be directly used as an analog signal. Generally speaking you would want to use a lowpass filter at the end of the digital stream, but you don't have to. This is the whole magic of the direct stream digital. Spend all your time and energy perfecting the digital domain where it counts, and keep the analog stage simple and clean.

[air]

Interesting to find out what changes were made to have the PCM sound better and then what changes were made to have DSD sound better

[RectifiedMetals]

Why not just stay analog? Seems that we have no R&D into the ADC’s

[Evertb]

As always I enjoyed your offering Paul. And I certainly enjoy al the comments you trigger. At the same time I wonder when some of the people reacting here will start with listening to their music and stop chasing the ultimate sound. It's almost pathetic in some cases. No matter how much money and time you spend finding the ultimate system, it's just not there. Often good is good enough.

[aadarshkumar]

Dear Paul sir, it's my humble request to listen old 90's or 20's bollywood music and all songs i e dsd and dxd or doP will fail in battle between pcm flac. Please try 🙏

[frenzy]

Hey Paul... I think the letter writer may have misunderstood your talk about DSD & DoP... i forgot the video title but I remember you talking about it... so to be clear you never said what the letter writer mentioned. :)

[CANKRAFTWERK]

So the best would be to record completly analog on twenty four tracks and them record the mix down in DSD

[Hondacber]

Where do I buy DSD music like country music artist like Reba Mcentire, Alan Jackson etc... I cant find much music in DSD.

[davidf]

Thanks Paul, I had no idea that DXD was actually a PCM format. I have always mistakenly thought that DXD was just a more professional (higher resolution) of a DSD format. Thanks for teaching something.

[georgebliss]

DSD sounding better than PCM is likely too small to hear.
Blind listening comparisons would be the way to test this.

[AnimusInvidious]

Seems like DSD vs hi-res PCM comes down to a matter of extended frequency response (DSD) vs lower noise floor (PCM). Which is more important to you? Regarding sample vs bit rates, in general, higher sample rate yields more audible benefit (as long as you are at or above 16 bit or so and don't plan on processing or boosting the signal in any way subsequently).😮

[musicman]

Its close but DSD has a more analog, real sound. When someone is singing its like they're in the room. I get the same sound I get from analog recordings from the 50's, early 60's