Because of the nature of sigma-delta converters, one cannot make a direct comparison between DSD and PCM. An approximation is possible, though, and would place DSD in some aspects comparable to a PCM format that has a bit depth of 20 bits and a sampling frequency of 96 kHz. PCM sampled at 24 bits provides a (theoretical) additional 24 dB of dynamic range.
Yes, DSD is essentially dead for various reasons, one of which was how well PCM works.
DSD is a kind of pcm.
Quote from: saratoga on 11 January, 2014, 01:34:44 PMYes, DSD is essentially dead for various reasons, one of which was how well PCM works.It is not really dead anymore, with recent CES I've attended this year, I saw a tons of new DACs and stuffs supporting DSD, DXD and other unicorn audiophile formats.You can grab one that can capable of playing DSD for as low as 150 USD from Schiit Audio.
Quote from: Woodinville on 16 January, 2014, 06:37:55 PMDSD is a kind of pcm.Please elaborate on that. It's certainly not obvious, for at least all of the online sources I searched so far differentiate between PCM and PDM.
@lvqcl: Thanks so that I can do some experiments @[JAZ]: Then it seems that DSD is less efficient than PCM (at least in the research mentioned in wikipedia)?
You can see a slide deck at www.aes.org/sections/pnw/ppt.htm on conversion that will help explain this.
However, I'd say that excellent R2R DACs (say, old AKM or TI PCM series) are better than some otherwise excellent sigma-delta DACs (such as Cirrus Logic, Wolfson or ESS; sigma-delta AKM is indistinguishable to me from R2R). The difference is minor, but there and ABXable.
In fact, I didn't. I only did a single-blind test there, as I had contact with the helper during the test. (but still didn't see what was connected where)The test was Presonus FP10 (older AKM) against Lynx Hilo (CS), both used as DAC, line out to Eddie Current Super 7 amplifier, Hifiman HE-500 (modded) - switchbox in my hands, free switching until a decision. Chiptune samples.That got 11/12 tries.Generally I was unable to properly rate either, both sound extremely good in DAC capability, but different in timbre. FP10 sounding "thicker" while Lynx sounding "lighter", both very detailed but I'd say Lynx getting the upper hand there. Noise floor difference was masked by EC S7 noise floor, which is slightly audible (-90 dB or so) - but few amplifiers do better than -108 dB anyway which is the FP10s DAC limit. (Tested via loopback into Lynx, which is superior there.)I've checked whether frequency response matches, it was linear on both. Volume was matched using a voltmeter on 1kHz sine to within 0.5% - the knobs on FP10 didn't allow a better match.The "better" part is kinda in air quotes in the above post. The only clearly audibly inferior DAC was the Anedio D2 loaner based on ESS Sabre 9018 - but I didn't bother to blind test it. I haven't heard such grainy treble in a while - something must be messed up in the filter.Considering all the reviews, I bet Sabre 9018 is just a terrible chip, even in the best of implementations. Unfortunately many DACs use it.