Should DSD audio have been supported? POLL

[KG10]

I think it would have made DSD 128 releases much more available and common.

But it also would have been very niche and maybe caused some compatibility concerns.

 

[jaap74]

No

 

[Sonik Wiz]

Common vs niche you say? Either way nope.

 

[Dynamic Editor]

Supported by what? To what extent?

 

[Sal1950]

Don't we have enough compatibility issues already?

 

[barfle]

While I have several delightful DSD discs and files, I don’t really see that there’s any advantage to the format over PCM. Players for the format are pretty rare, so it’s sort of a red-headed stepson to the rest of the digital recording industry, with no real advantage at this time.

When it was developed, it had some advantages over RBCD, and there was no blu-ray for lossless MCH audio, so it did make a little sense at the time. While I love the work Dutton-Vocalion is doing, they would probably have more sales if they changed to blu-ray.

And that’s my $.02.

 

[DrKlahn]

I voted no. Not because I have any issues with DSD. But the format war helped no one and I often wonder where we would be without it.

 

[KG10]

I voted no. Not because I have any issues with DSD. But the format war helped no one and I often wonder where we would be without it.

Do you think this unified format could have been as popular and common as vinyl and cd?

 

[DrKlahn]

Do you think this unified format could have been as popular and common as vinyl and cd?

My gut says no, but I feel like it could have survived as a premium format. Something like the Laserdisc model. I certainly would have sought them out and paid a reasonable premium over CD. I did buy both back in those early days when I could find them.

I should add, some of the enthusiasts I knew back then sat out both simply because of the format war.

 

[jimfisheye]

On day 1?
No! Genuinely no advantage over PCM. Just a different digital language for the exact same data. Sony should have been called out more loudly for the format war attempt. They more or less were. Recording studios did not start replacing their PCM converter units for DSD. Protools didn't rewrite their DAW for DSD.

Today with releases out in the world in the format?
It should be mandatory to support and there needs to be demand for unlocking the restriction on computer optical drives reading them.
As well as a drive to liberate the batch of DSD releases by transcoding to PCM. (And releasing in the original PCM for the ones that were transcoded from PCM to DSD for SACD release.)

I'd put this a few pages in on the priority list though. It is genuinely as capable a format as PCM and the music releases in the format are as full quality as their mastering engineer was able to deliver. And they transcode to PCM elegantly and allow the audience to listen with better quality PCM DACs than were ever made for DSD. Having to rely on firmware hacked stand alone disc players to read these things is maybe not exactly elegant though.

 

[par4ken]

Should DSD audio have been supported? Based on that statement alone obviously yes. Oh, but this is about putting it on Blu-ray!

There is likely little reason to do so, unless you insist that DSD is inherently better than PCM. Still It wouldn't hurt my feelings if it were to be done, if it made DSD fanatics happy. On the other hand that would make another largely unsupported format.

What do I love about SACD has little to do with DSD vs PCM. I love the lack of menus, just plug and play like a regular CD. Most disc's are hybrids as well and so play as regular CD's. You can't do that with a Blu-ray. Maybe add a CD layer to a Blu-ray?

I will abstain from voting for now, there should be an undecided vote. Do I think that it is necessary, no. Do I think that it is a ridiculous idea that should be rejected right from the start, also no!

 

[Owen Smith]

What do I love about SACD has little to do with DSD vs PCM. I love the lack of menus, just plug and play like a regular CD. Most disc's are hybrids as well and so play as regular CD's. You can't do that with a Blu-ray.

I'm pretty sure you can author a blu ray so it starts playing the audio on inserting the disc. I could swear some of the Quadios do this, but I may be confused.

 

[par4ken]

I'm pretty sure you can author a blu ray so it starts playing the audio on inserting the disc. I could swear some of the Quadios do this, but I may be confused.

You likely can but with different mixes like original, remixed, 2.0 5.1, 4.0 Atmos, you still most likely require the menu. I played Soft Cell without using the menu but didn't realise that there was also a totally instrumental version on the same disc!

 

[Owen Smith]

You likely can but with different mixes lix original, remixed, 2.0 5.1, 4.0 Atmos, you still most likely require the menu. I played Soft Cell without using the menu but didn't realise that there was also a totally instrumental version on the same disc!

Yes, but saying SACD has an advantage because it just plays can also translate into a disadvantage in that it cannot easily accommodate all those different mixes.

 

[par4ken]

Yes, but saying SACD has an advantage because it just plays can also translate into a disadvantage in that it cannot easily accommodate all those different mixes.

True, the advantage of Blu-ray is that it can hold all those mixes. The accompanying disadvantage is that you have to navigate the menu. Some of those menus are very poorly designed indeed.

 

[Mr. Afternoon]

True, the advantage of Blu-ray is that it can hold all those mixes. The accompanying disadvantage is that you have to navigate the menu. Some of those menus are very poorly designed indeed.

You don't HAVE to have a menu...

 

[Owen Smith]

You don't HAVE to have a menu...

The Quadios are pretty minimal. On most discs they just play, and you press the coloured buttons to change which mix you're hearing. That's only possible when the tracks are all the same length though.

 

[barfle]

Yes, but saying SACD has an advantage because it just plays can also translate into a disadvantage in that it cannot easily accommodate all those different mixes.

I have a handful of SACDs that carry three programs. MCH DSD, stereo DSD, and RBCD. I stumbled on the stereo DSD by accident, pressing the channel change button while playing MCH on my Oppo 105. I haven’t dug into this, simply because the stereo SACD program is redundant to the RBCD program, and I default to the MCH.

Edit: DTS was incorrect.

 

[hi-res_edition]

I only voted NO because I see the formats as entirely different. Blu-ray is not just audio but a video medium, and SACD were only designed as an advancement in audio reproduction. Furthermore, DSD as ingenious as it is, is effectively not used in audio recording as others have already noted. This means literally all DSD recordings came through PCM and transcoded to DSD for that medium. I really do like SACDs for their simplicity of playback, but prefer Blu-ray discs. I must say that finding a player that supports SACD is easy, all three of my optical players, Oppo, Sony, and Denon support SACD. I see no reason why an audiophile would not have an SACD player in their rig and support labels that offer that format.

But, to be clear, when it comes to the Blu-ray disc, I see no reason for DSD to be supported on that format. PCM based audio sounds great and is very flexible.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I have a handful of SACDs that carry three programs. MCH DTS, stereo DTS, and RBCD. I stumbled on the stereo DTS by accident, pressing the channel change button while playing MCH on mu Oppo 105. I haven’t dug into this, simply because the stereo SACD program is redundant to the RBCD program, and I default to ehr MCH.

There is no DTS on an SACD. It's DSD