v1.2.22, v1.2.22_G Beta version for Z9X 8K/Z30 PRO/Z3000 PRO/UHD8000 (UPDATE)

Well, if I understand yamaha's specs properly, it's states that it should support DSD up to 11.2 MHz, which is DSD 256... But yeah, DSD 64 (SACD) works fine.
Btw, is there any place, where I can see what options Zidoo received from my AVR over audio hdmi?

 

Hmm... Yes, seems you are right Time to find a new receiver then

 

I'm still looking for a good source. Dsd128 is not the only demand i have. Flac multi-channel is not working properly. My AVR not handling native dsd128 over hdmi is a very very very small inconvenience.

 

I think you don't have to do so, because only DSD64 is the HDMI standard limitation as I know.
You might find a new player instead, UHD8000 for example, that equipped ES Sabre DAC with DSD512 capability.

 

I've spent a great deal of time trying to get the highest level DSD files to play and the support I have had on this forum over the past few years has been superb. Has this been rewarding though? No!

I challenge anyone middle-aged or higher to hear the difference between say a std SACD (64) and a DSD128 file or higher. So what's the point? Is it so you can brag to your friends online or do you really have super-human hearing lol?

Convince me I'm wrong

 

It's not a matter of hearing a difference or not. People just want to play the tracks they have natively, without converting to PCM.

 

100% agree, as that's the road I've gone down with an external dac, but I think the point @rozel was making was re the laws of deminishing returns.

Often the differences with DSD releases and normal 44.1 are a mix of studio remastering and the higher bandwith.

Just my experience, anyways, when new firmware?

 

You could of course convert your 128's to 64's or listen to the PCM versions - can you tell the difference sonically between the 3? That's the question I'm raising.

 

192/24 FLAC is better than any version DSD. Just convert the darn DSD files and enjoy. You'll be able to use proper tagging too.

 

A lot of good technical comparison stuff there but you're missing my point - "can you hear any difference between these 3" ?

 

My point was that you can't hear the difference since all the specs are past what people can hear.

But even if someone is the type that must have "technically superior" solutions, FLAC 192/24 beats DSD anyway.

 

Shhh - don't say that too loud, you'll be burned at the stake for blasphemy

 

Hello glGentlemen, perhaps you could avoid the argument and test DXD, which is what DSD is most often made from. Have fun.

 

So my point is accepted ! Thank you

 

No argument, it's just a bit of fun whilst we wait for new firmware. If anyone here want's an argument on audiophile grade quality, go over to the ASR forum and say good DAC's can sound different....and duck for cover.

I understand RCA voltage /Volume matching for fair comparison, but......

So, when new firmware

 

I don't know why but i am very pleased i don't have to listen to DSD converted to PCM on a windows machine outputted by a hdmi port.
I could do that before with the opo 203 but less convenient then the zidoo
Between DSD and PCM on the same ziddoo i don't notice any difference (over HDMI)
And last time i heard an external DAC it only seem to really come alive with a DSD track!

I will never pretend to hear a difference between PCM 192/24 and DSD but most of the DSD track are different mixes then the PCM mixes !
I don't care about space so i will NOT compress my originals!
The companies MUST keep the original tracks playable ! Music is almost dead as it is. Giving in to spotify (and the like) with there compression madness would be the neck shot!

 

Yep, and the rabbit hole goes deeper....which studio master was used?....which is why I have stepped back a little from the audiophile scene....it's not worth my sanity

If it sounds good to me, then it sounds good to me.

 

Well, that was the point - I want to listen to different formats myself to make a judgment which format is better for me and I didn't expect that there can be any issues with DSD 128...
Also, at least theoretically, I wasn't able to find any of such limitations in HDMI specifications... Even in HDMI 1.3a it should support DSD up to 256 (176.4 kHz) without any issues.
I have different rips of the same album (Flac and DSD128). DSD (even with conversion to PCM on Zidoo side) sounds way better for me. Perhaps it's also depend on what system you are listening and where?
Flac specs as follow:

Will also try to compare sound of DSD128 played from USB drive directly on yamaha receiver (it's dac can handle DSD up to 256)

 

Firstly, you have provided a very meager set of characteristics and perhaps you are not interpreting them quite correctly from a technical point of view. Technically, DSD is still a more advanced method of recording and playing music.

Secondly, the best format in each specific case is the format that can be played without conversion "on the fly". That is, DSD should play like DSD, PCM should play like PCM, without changing the sampling rate and bit depth.

Thirdly, there is only one purely musical physical high-resolution medium left - SACD - and for this reason, DSD is also very relevant.

 

Just grab one of the Eversolos for all the DSD / DSF stuff, and keep the Zidoo just for video