Is DSD download already an extinct format?

Sony's problem is not that they are greedy, it is that they are tactically stupid. The beauty of capitalism, done right, is that it is a win-win proposition. The company, its employees, its stockholders, and its customers all benefit. So much for the economic viewpoints of Brownsfan.

I received the CD corollary of the native DSD Appalachian Journey album, and uploaded wav, ALAC, AIFF, and MP3 files of the Cloverfoot Reel track (redbook) for comparison with the native DSD file supplied with the HAPZ1. As I expected, the native DSD file was better (across the board) than the redbook CD files uploaded in the 4 formats, then converted on the fly to 2x DSD by the Sony. But--- the difference was not profound. There was more sweetness in the violin, more edge in Ma's cello, better depth in the double bass, but it was not an overwhelming difference. I've heard far more difference from redbook cd to redbook cd. I paid $7 for the CD shipped, vs $25 for the DSD download.

Now, if I didn't have a machine that converted to DSD on the fly, what would the difference be, and would it warrant 3.5 x the cost of a CD? Tomorrow, I will compare the 4 transferred files with the DSD engine turned off, and see what that reveals.

Sony music is again not paying careful attention to what the Sony ES division is doing. Come on, guys, we are not idiots. Release your native DSD files, make a couple bucks over what you make on CDs, and we will all be happy. I'm pretty sure you will net more based on volume than what you are doing now. Forget trying to save your ancient treasures and focus on your current offerings, some of which are excellent.

Or, you can kill one more strategic initiative that deserves to succeed with a business plan that won't fly.

Just glad the ES guys have their act together.

Sony is coming off a colossal failure in terms of mainstream acceptance...SACD...even when they attempted a hybrid CD layer...point being...Sony will probably drag its feet in terms of hi rez again....the real market is the non dsd Downloads...most non audiophiles are happy with "a" download...and I don't see the advantage...of Quad DSD if that is the case...that seems like an odd choice...but Sony does some odd decisions

Phasecorrect, There is a good deal of interest in native DSD especially at the pro level and in doing recording. I have listened to 192/24 PCM versus double DSD of the same material using SACDs as the source and double DSD wins hands down.

SONY does have a poor record but also owns 40% of master tapes. If they make their quad DSD at a good price and somehow distribute it, I think they will be an audiophile's friend.

TBG, I agree with your take. I'm sold on native DSD being better than PCM, and I am confident there is a large latent market waiting for the software to be released at a reasonable price. I am just afraid that there is a narrow window for capitalizing on that latent market, and I fear, with good reason, Sony is once again poised to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I'm a Cleveland Browns fan, so I am an expert in reading the signs!

Equipment like the new PS Audio DSD DAC and Sony's own HAPZ1, not to mention other similar devices, may make the difference in downloaded native DSD and DSD converted on the fly too small to justify buying the native DSD at a premium. Based on my listening with my ModWright Sony HAPZ1, I just don't see the price differential being worth it.

If my assessment of the difference between the DSD master of Ma's Appalachian Journey is typical, the DSD master is like 1.03 compared to 1.0 for the AIFF redbook up sampled to 2 x DSD by the MW Sony. The DSD is $25, the redbook CD was $7.00 shipped. I have a large budget for new music, but it is a budget, and I can buy a lot more music, with a very small sonic compromise. They are going to have to offer more music at a better price and do so quickly, or people are going to move on.

.
+1 Brownsfan
.