DSD vs. PCM vs. MQA - Group listening experiment

SACD of things like the Stones, Doors, Carly Simon, Carole King, Fleetwood Mac and the like is so much better than redbook or even hi-res downloads it’s not funny. It’s awesome and I’m greatful whenever a new SACD is released, something far too rare.

On a great SACD player like EMM, Esoteric, or Playback Designs, it’s astounding, especially through headphones. The vocals and texture and imaging and transparent bass are a glorious thing to behold, natural as can be.

No matter how well a non-DSD recording is mastered, it does not compare to a true SACD to my ears.

@rgs92 do you mean to say you are able to hear a difference in a BLIND test between PCM and DSD? If yes, that has never been known to have been achieved, nor is that documented by an applicable and recognized scientific study. 

this is a great topic. i hope many contribute. 

@gdhal You are right, but I personally seem to slightly like DSD better so far. No idea why.  not sure I'd pay for the extra hard disk space for it yet.

What I do know is that I've never heard a difference between PCM and MQA encoded PCM.

From "Real HD Audio" 

"DXD is the recommended recording format “when setting up systems for the absolute highest sound quality”. It turns out that DSD AD conversion is just not up to the task because of the lack of tools and the high noise levels that are generated.
So what the Sony and Phillips folks are actually saying is that HD PCM at 352.8 or 384 kHz and 24 or 32-bit word is the “best” system for capturing audio."

Cheers George