Single mic is so damned INTIMATE! and yes, DSD is a magical format. Ive literally listened to 32-bit flac files and DSD back to back and dsd just has so much more EARTH, silk and a velvet blacknes in its sound. Ive been a fan of DSD since 2015.
Thanks for posting this fantastic presentation. I haven't read the other comments, but it occurred to me that sending the stereo mic feed also to the RADAR would give us an apples to apples comparison. In any case, WOW how the DSD recording jumps out of the speakers and sounds so wonderful!
Good Lord the difference is massive. Thank you for posting this. Both versions sound good. Once having heard the single-mic-DSD - it FEELS better to my ears, even through the degradation into the TH-cam stream. Significant difference.
The soundstage is quite different between these formats. The setting of the voice in DSD sits embedded in a much wider soundstage and delivers a much stronger wider stereo image in this format. The left and right channels have lots more dynamics and dynamism, tone is richer in DSD too.
Great Video , Black and white , night and day difference DSD for me please , frquency range is filled out more solidly in terms of fullness of tone right across the range. Definitely closer to Analog recordings, theres flesh on bones.
I would love to hear more dual-setup recordings like this. Moreover, I think it'd be interesting to experiment with different mics for the Blumlein pair, and to split the outputs three ways so that the same performance could be captured to PCM, DSD and analog simultaneously. Of course, the results could only really be experienced in person because DSD and analog must be converted to PCM in order to be shared online. I'd be curious to know how each recording fares in a double-blind, ABX test. This could be tricky to set up correctly but it sounds like a fun day.
I would like to do another session with the type of setup you suggest. Doing that during a pandemic is difficult, but hopefully later this year it will be possible. The DSD has to be converted to PCM for most uses, but it is possible to provide the original DSD files for download to those who have the ability to play it. For those of us recording in DSD, there is little question of the superior sound. But even after conversion to PCM (or even MP3), there is something about the pristine quality of the DSD capture that is preserved.
@@DWFearnHazelriggIndustries I've been a fan of DSD for many years now and I always mix to DSD (also Tascam DA-3000) in my studio, even though I record in PCM (96kHz). I run everything through my desk (using its EQ), TubeTech compressor and I also have my (real) echo chamber. I think it definitely makes a difference, even when converting back to PCM. I love it!
The DSD is more wide and natural to my ears, im probably testing this tascam recorder, but with some Sony C-100 high res mic, to do a real difference, don't get me wrong ribbon mic and tube amp are amazing for silky mid range frequency, but the lack of resolution above 16 k can make also a huge difference, im a huge fan of the old school mid/side recording technic, so maybe a mix between a Royer for the figure 8 and the Sony a central mic, can make something interresting... Thanks for this demo, we could litteraly ear the difference.
I really wish DSD was more accepted I love the way it sounds. I feel like the difference is more about dynamics, and for me the emotional response I get for some tracks I listen to. PCM is a bit more brittle. DSD is smooth
Im curious, would it make a difference to record analog masters to DSD then converting to PCM (for distribution and streaming) vs. recording the analog master straight to PCM? Even though they end in the same format, I imagine that higher quality source material would have an impact on sound.
It's worth a try to hear if it makes a difference. We find that the DSD capture improves the quality when the music is converted to PCM, even in reduced-data formats like mp3. The difference isn't dramatic, but if you are striving for the best possible quality, it's worth it. Whether the same would apply to a transfer from an analog master (presumably tape). It makes sense to preserve the recording in the highest resolution (DSD), but also in a more common format, for the future.
Hi Doug, when converting DSD files to PCM (192 kHz) for editing in the DAW and ultimately converting back to DSD, is the sound still better in your opinion than recording directly to PCM? I heard you comment on the "magic" that you hear with unadulterated DSD. Is there still some magic left after the aforementioned process? Thanks.
excellent recordings. l'm not sure i understand what can be magical about 'the format'. the math behind any format either provides enough resolution/dynamics or it doesn't. what's enough? :) as i understand it, the digital recordings these days surpass the hearing abilities of even young ears.. i can't hear anything above 16KHz, and that's fine and perfectly natural...
The frequency response with DSD is not significantly different from 96kHz or higher PCM, but many people think the lack of artifacts in the audio make DSD sound better. It is still not a practical format for many people, but under the right circumstances, the sonic improvement is worth it to me.
D.W.: Why can one not mix down from multi-track DSD directly to 2 track DSD? I have been a fan of the format for quite some time and, if I can ever afford it, would purchase a multi-track system in a heartbeat. Until then, I am quite pleased with the sound of my RADAR system. Did you use the internal converters in the Tascam or did you use some other A/D... Meitners, Myteks? Thanks for posting this.
Everett -- Certainly you can mix down to DSD, and we have done that on some older recordings and it works well. But the original capture in DSD seems to hold the magic. We used the Tascam DA-3000 internal converters on this project. The RADAR converters are great, about the best PCM I have heard. I'm still learning about DSD and this experiment is part of the learning curve. Thanks for the comments.
I would also suggest a mix of the spot mics go to DSD too, then you could compare the mic techniques AND the recording format differences. Perhaps you could do the multitrack mix in analog, live to DSD to make this practical/feasible
Good question. My experience has been that the DSD capture improves the sound of the ultimate PCM mix. I'm not alone in this observation. The difference is dramatic to some, minimal to others, and non-existent to many. This tends to get beyond how the music "sounds" and more into how the music "feels." DSD is not the right choice for many people.
hisuppboio. i am tommy mcintyre. and i am sorry i haven't answered you sooner, but i thought all comments were for dw. contact me if you are still interested
@@errvega2705 i will probably have to do a lyric video. i only have an audio of the song at the moment. i will let you know. the file i have of the song is a wav file and it's probably too big to do direct to you tube. i'll do some research
Single mic is so damned INTIMATE! and yes, DSD is a magical format. Ive literally listened to 32-bit flac files and DSD back to back and dsd just has so much more EARTH, silk and a velvet blacknes in its sound. Ive been a fan of DSD since 2015.
Thank you for your listening and your comment. We agree.
This sounds so good. 1 mic recording is so smooth and realistic. The voice is like the balm for the soul.
Enjoyed watching this ! 😎🎶.. Thank you.
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it.
Reminds me the Buena Vista Social Club and Folk Singer by Muddy Waters.
Viva stereo recording :)
Thanks for posting this fantastic presentation. I haven't read the other comments, but it occurred to me that sending the stereo mic feed also to the RADAR would give us an apples to apples comparison. In any case, WOW how the DSD recording jumps out of the speakers and sounds so wonderful!
I really like this song
Good Lord the difference is massive. Thank you for posting this. Both versions sound good. Once having heard the single-mic-DSD - it FEELS better to my ears, even through the degradation into the TH-cam stream. Significant difference.
Someday I will do a complete DSD to PCM comparison with the same mic(s). Thanks for the comment.
This sounds fantastic
Thanks, Frank, and to the others who found this project interesting.
The soundstage is quite different between these formats. The setting of the voice in DSD sits embedded in a much wider soundstage and delivers a much stronger wider stereo image in this format. The left and right channels have lots more dynamics and dynamism, tone is richer in DSD too.
Hello Doug ,I’ve heard so much about your for years, what a pleasure to meet you.
What a mind !
I can’t believe I’m choosing a single mic dsd. It sounds amazing and real
Great video ! Very informative and very pleasing, Thank you for sharing.
Great Video , Black and white , night and day difference DSD for me please , frquency range is filled out more solidly in terms of fullness of tone right across the range. Definitely closer to Analog recordings, theres flesh on bones.
Volume levels are apparently lower in single mic DSD and need to be heard on headphones and adjusted for realistic comparison.
Both were normalized to -2dBFS peaks, but subjectively the loudness is different. Thanks for pointing that out.
I would love to hear more dual-setup recordings like this. Moreover, I think it'd be interesting to experiment with different mics for the Blumlein pair, and to split the outputs three ways so that the same performance could be captured to PCM, DSD and analog simultaneously. Of course, the results could only really be experienced in person because DSD and analog must be converted to PCM in order to be shared online. I'd be curious to know how each recording fares in a double-blind, ABX test. This could be tricky to set up correctly but it sounds like a fun day.
I would like to do another session with the type of setup you suggest. Doing that during a pandemic is difficult, but hopefully later this year it will be possible.
The DSD has to be converted to PCM for most uses, but it is possible to provide the original DSD files for download to those who have the ability to play it.
For those of us recording in DSD, there is little question of the superior sound. But even after conversion to PCM (or even MP3), there is something about the pristine quality of the DSD capture that is preserved.
@@DWFearnHazelriggIndustries I've been a fan of DSD for many years now and I always mix to DSD (also Tascam DA-3000) in my studio, even though I record in PCM (96kHz). I run everything through my desk (using its EQ), TubeTech compressor and I also have my (real) echo chamber. I think it definitely makes a difference, even when converting back to PCM. I love it!
The DSD is more wide and natural to my ears, im probably testing this tascam recorder, but with some Sony C-100 high res mic, to do a real difference, don't get me wrong ribbon mic and tube amp are amazing for silky mid range frequency, but the lack of resolution above 16 k can make also a huge difference, im a huge fan of the old school mid/side recording technic, so maybe a mix between a Royer for the figure 8 and the Sony a central mic, can make something interresting... Thanks for this demo, we could litteraly ear the difference.
I really wish DSD was more accepted I love the way it sounds. I feel like the difference is more about dynamics, and for me the emotional response I get for some tracks I listen to. PCM is a bit more brittle. DSD is smooth
Im curious, would it make a difference to record analog masters to DSD then converting to PCM (for distribution and streaming) vs. recording the analog master straight to PCM? Even though they end in the same format, I imagine that higher quality source material would have an impact on sound.
It's worth a try to hear if it makes a difference. We find that the DSD capture improves the quality when the music is converted to PCM, even in reduced-data formats like mp3. The difference isn't dramatic, but if you are striving for the best possible quality, it's worth it. Whether the same would apply to a transfer from an analog master (presumably tape). It makes sense to preserve the recording in the highest resolution (DSD), but also in a more common format, for the future.
Hi Doug, when converting DSD files to PCM (192 kHz) for editing in the DAW and ultimately converting back to DSD, is the sound still better in your opinion than recording directly to PCM? I heard you comment on the "magic" that you hear with unadulterated DSD. Is there still some magic left after the aforementioned process? Thanks.
excellent recordings.
l'm not sure i understand what can be magical about 'the format'. the math behind any format either provides enough resolution/dynamics or it doesn't. what's enough? :)
as i understand it, the digital recordings these days surpass the hearing abilities of even young ears.. i can't hear anything above 16KHz, and that's fine and perfectly natural...
The frequency response with DSD is not significantly different from 96kHz or higher PCM, but many people think the lack of artifacts in the audio make DSD sound better. It is still not a practical format for many people, but under the right circumstances, the sonic improvement is worth it to me.
Correction: DSD to PCM conversion
D.W.: Why can one not mix down from multi-track DSD directly to 2 track DSD? I have been a fan of the format for quite some time and, if I can ever afford it, would purchase a multi-track system in a heartbeat. Until then, I am quite pleased with the sound of my RADAR system. Did you use the internal converters in the Tascam or did you use some other A/D... Meitners, Myteks?
Thanks for posting this.
Everett -- Certainly you can mix down to DSD, and we have done that on some older recordings and it works well. But the original capture in DSD seems to hold the magic. We used the Tascam DA-3000 internal converters on this project. The RADAR converters are great, about the best PCM I have heard. I'm still learning about DSD and this experiment is part of the learning curve. Thanks for the comments.
DSD is amazing!! Still need to patch my VT-2 into Pyramix when recording at DSD256! Wowza!
Hi Doug, why not just record the single mic to both DSD and PCM for a straight comparison of the formats?
That's the plan for the next project!
D.W. Fearn that's great news!
I would also suggest a mix of the spot mics go to DSD too, then you could compare the mic techniques AND the recording format differences. Perhaps you could do the multitrack mix in analog, live to DSD to make this practical/feasible
This would be easy if the DA-3000 could record DSD and PCM simultaneously. Maybe that can be added in firmware.
nice video :) would love to hear that dsd high res file on my system compared to the dsd anyway you can sent me those files? cheers and thx janosch
Can you edit without PCM to DSD conversion, like, correct me if I am wrong, Merging Pyramics Horus?
In order to edit DSD you have to convert it to DXD, then convert it back to DSD. So why not record as DXD to begin with?
Good question. My experience has been that the DSD capture improves the sound of the ultimate PCM mix. I'm not alone in this observation. The difference is dramatic to some, minimal to others, and non-existent to many. This tends to get beyond how the music "sounds" and more into how the music "feels." DSD is not the right choice for many people.
DSD sounds better to me. Bigger, fuller, more presence, stronger bottom end, better cohesion of elements.
Dsd sounds more natural and rich
I noticed a lot of life in the sound.
where can i find my molly malone?
hisuppboio. i am tommy mcintyre. and i am sorry i haven't answered you sooner, but i thought all comments were for dw. contact me if you are still interested
@@uncletommy i really like it too
@@uncletommy let me know how i could get it. Honestly you should just upload it on ur yt channel
@@errvega2705 i will probably have to do a lyric video. i only have an audio of the song at the moment. i will let you know. the file i have of the song is a wav file and it's probably too big to do direct to you tube. i'll do some research
@@uncletommy yeah just keep that wav file even after. Wavs are valuable. Your song is really great i liked it a lot
if youtube could play dsd 😅
wish it could play .wav first