Why do DSD files sound better than flac?

Submitted by Dani3L_1917 t3_10py4hx in headphones

Alright, So I'm running Hd 560s powered by a fiio k3, and in the search for "better sound" I heard about DSD files which people claimed sound better because higher bitrates, but I have done some shallow research into the DSD, which was very inconclusive, it appeared that what most people I encountered agreed that the higher bitrate of DSD files compared to flacs make no audible difference in regards to the quality of the music and other flaws with the DSD format may actually hinder the sound. So my assumption walking in was that DSD would sound similar or worse than flac.

Then I tried it. I was shocked because not only did it sound more resolving but I could swear the soundstage improved, it just sounded slightly bigger with better instrument separation.

I have yet to perform a blind test so it may just be a placebo, but the difference feels so night and day. It may also be that I am not comparing the same mastering of the albums. This experiment is by no means controlled but a common trend is that my ears believe the DSD version sounds better than their flac counterparts.

So is there actual merit to DSD? Or is the placebo effect stronger than I thought?

3

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Titouan_Charles t1_j6mrnbz wrote

The answer is very easy : it's a different mastering, made solely for audiophiles. The file itself matters very little, it's just a better product from the start

36

Dani3L_1917 OP t1_j6mslvc wrote

That makes sense. But that would mean the studio would master the record a second time but better for dsd. If so why not just use the better master for everything instead of using different mastering for the different file. Would save time and money and result in a better end product

6

klogg4 t1_j6mwhau wrote

Because "better mastering" doesn't equal "sound that you like better".

10

OldManNiko t1_j6nadzh wrote

Much of DSD was recorded for archival purposes, the idea being that new formats could be derived from the DSD master.

9

Tanachip t1_j6mw0v3 wrote

All I can say is that I doubt anyone can tell a difference between DSD and Flac. Hell, I can't even tell a difference between 320kbs MP3 files and 24/96 flac files. Nor can I tell a difference among different dacs.

12

Shoddy_Basket_7867 t1_j6n6j87 wrote

I subscribe to this. 3 different dacs playing from different sources/files can’t find a difference. Only difference for me is the set of headphones/iem I use

5

BoysenberryFluffy671 t1_j6n91e0 wrote

DACs can sound slightly different, but in my experience most sound the same. I have heard some that are different, but they were older, from a different company, etc. Again only slightly different. An ear pad swap on a pair of headphones would change the sound more dramatically.

I think there's just zero point to buying a DAC expecting an upgrade unless it's for what it can do technically like MQA or DSD etc. Not for how it sounds because you likely won't be able to tell.

1

Shoddy_Basket_7867 t1_j6ncq5c wrote

That and interface (knobs, ins and outs and features like that). And form factor/design

5

BoysenberryFluffy671 t1_j6ndkzz wrote

Yes, I was thinking about that after I posted and didn't update it. Inputs/outputs a serious reason to upgrade or just change. Also balanced vs unbalanced and I say that not from a sound quality perspective but if there's noise and such. I had to get a balanced DAC or amp to help remove some feedback/ground loop type static. I didn't try one of those $1,000 power cables though 😂

2

Realistic_Cry642 t1_j6p9a93 wrote

This.

Also, let’s not forget decent drivers for my usb boys out there. Software can make or break a system in my experience

2

Chew-Magna t1_j6mqqtl wrote

Would you be able to tell the difference if you didn't know they were different file types? I'd try to do a blind test if possible. Knowing beforehand which is which is a very powerful subconscious persuasive tool, something that has been proven in various studies.

10

Joseph_HTMP t1_j6mqua6 wrote

Which is why a null test is the only way to know for sure :)

5

PhoenixRisingtw t1_j6mtpzw wrote

By null test you mean blind test?

5

Joseph_HTMP t1_j6mzn5k wrote

No. Put both files into an audio editor, flip the polarity on one of them, and if they're the same they should cancel out into silence. If they don't, what you're hearing is the difference between the two files.

It is literally the most scientific way of finding out if there's a difference between two bits of audio.

9

MachineTeaching t1_j6p0zvm wrote

That falls apart rather quickly. You wouldn't expect a regularly mastered flac and a dsd file to actually be identical.

6

PhoenixRisingtw t1_j6n4ntd wrote

That's definitely interesting. How do you flip polarity? But even if the're not the same, you might still not be able to hear that difference and placebo might be in place.

3

zoinkability t1_j6p9ckw wrote

Wouldn’t that show a positive for both reasons why an audible difference would exist? Either a different master or a difference due to format would be audible via a null test.

3

verifitting t1_j6myy2i wrote

Doesn't help that DSD tends to be 6dB softer so you need to compensate in volume.

2

AggravatedAutist t1_j6mu5ma wrote

I don't have the technical knowhow to describe why it sounds better but in my limited experience DSD sounds more like analog than PCM. I love it but it's impractical.

6

Joseph_HTMP t1_j6mq52h wrote

Have you done a null test on them? That's the best way of finding out if there is actually a difference.

3

Dani3L_1917 OP t1_j6mr9rr wrote

Cannot say I have heard of a null test. Care to explain how they work?

2

Chew-Magna t1_j6mugpz wrote

Take the two files, put them in an audio program (you can probably do it with Audacity), flip the polarity of one of them. When played, if the result is silence, the two files have cancelled each other out. This would mean that they are completely identical at a digital level. It's a way of testing if there is any actual difference between two files. If they cancel each other out, it means they were identical. Exactly the same. Thus, meaning that if you think you hear a difference between them, it's pure placebo.

However, if these are different masterings as others are suggesting, then this test is moot. You end up with a different file altogether. But it could still be worth a try.

10

Joseph_HTMP t1_j6n013e wrote

>However, if these are different masterings as others are suggesting, then this test is moot.

No, because you can still hear the net difference between the two. So if one has "wider soundstage" you should be able to hear that in the result. If they are actually mastered completely differently, then you will get a net difference. But it would be interesting to find out what that difference actually is.

3

klogg4 t1_j6mwcqw wrote

Do they?

2

Dani3L_1917 OP t1_j6mx5tz wrote

I don't know. That's why I'm asking if there's any real benefit and not just placebo

1

klogg4 t1_j6naivm wrote

I mean, you're very likely to hear the difference, because it rarely happens that DSD and PCM releases have the same mastering, but to me it's a mixed experience - I often find PCM releases done more professionaly and having more thoughtful mastering.

2

roladyzator t1_j6n1q8w wrote

The format itself is quite flawed as it is 1-bit encoding with very high sampling rate.

The high sampling rate is required to apply noise shaping to move the noise outside of the audible band (over 20 kHz) and increase the signal-to-noise ration within the audible band.

DSD files have a lot of noise above 20 kHz. In best case you won't hear it.
In worst case, that noise can intermodulate with the audible frequencies, causing the noise to be added to the audible band, shifted in frequency and lowered in volume to the point it could cause some sensation of brightness.

That's theoretical.

You could convert the DSD file into high bitrate PCM (24/44.1 would remove the ultrasonic noise, 24/192 would keep some of it) and do a volume-matched double-blind test.

2