What is better: FLAC or DSD? 

over 40 people that down voted, do not have a clue about the effort involved in creating this video, nor do they appreciate the content. TY Hans!

This is the best explanation I've heard yet. You have a gift for making complex issues clear without oversimplifying. Thanks for the effort you put into this.

I’m attaining you class regularly because you easily solved audio questions/myths in simple but accurate informative ways

I've spent most of my audio engineering life (when making comparisons) trying to decide if various differences are better, worse or err, just different. It can be very subjective. As you state clearly here with digital, what and how digital data is handled as well as the quality of processing involved really does account for differences heard. The quality of recording/replay equipment I own does allow me to resolve these sound differences. This might sound funny, I found in storage an old but immaculate Phillips 256 times over-sampling 1bit CD player. It became a talking point in the studio as it sounded incredible - better than our vastly more expensive Red Book mastering CD burner with its dual BURR BROWN DAC converters, which is still occasionally used. I've found creating the highest possible digital master (DSD or PCM) will create far better Down sampled copies. Works the same in the digital filming world. Film in high end raw @ 4K, 6K or 8K and down sample to 1080p for superior image quality.

Excellent & informative! One of the best succinct explanations on this topic by anyone yet. Thank you!

Thank you for this marvelous lecture and lesson. I like, "trust your ears."

This video has cleared up a few points for me. This week I ordered a DSD DAC .Plus with other advice I have got it should sound.. smokin :)

Thank you Meer Beekhuyzen for your utilitarian ability of making very complex subject matter somewhat understandable to an Redbook CD file player! I think most, if not all your "mini" seminars are the exception rather than the rule here on RU-vid (regardless of subject content!) Be well and many thanks!Marco B.Brooklyn, NY

Nyquist was a mathematician, not and electronics engineer. The nyquist theorem assumes an infinitely sharp cutoff filter. Something that does not exist. Therein lies the problems.

wwwoooowwwww,,,i mean what???? slowly slowly,, you puted in 15 minutes more information than other persson in 15 videos, i really aprecciate, thanks for your time

This is an amazing explanation I get it now :) thank you I have literally watched this five times

*Simply* great....

An utmost excellent video. Superb explanation. Totally subscribed and liked!

Mr. Beekhuyzen, I really enjoy your videos. They are very informative, and I particularly appreciate you always ending with "enjoy the music." It's simple, but such a good reminder that we're all in this hobby for a reason, and not to lose sight of it or get in fights about different ideas. Thank you!

Excellent video. As usual :-) BR, Per

Very informative

Hans, you are the Man!

Interesting video - well said and explained. However I do disagree that higher sampling rates can improve sound quality (especially if the source or original rate was 44.1/48kHz). Using a well constructed modern filter which is able to fit any artefacts into the 2-4kHz bandgap - or alternately as you said, downsampling to 44.1/48 kHz is key.

PS ... Love your detailed observations, Hans 👍

Thank you

He lost me at "investigating the flaws in these theorems journalistically, not scientifically." At that point, it's just opinion.

When converting from SACD to Flac what is the best conversion type to use? I see options ranging from Integer Multistage to 64Bit Extreme Precision Direct. Thank you

I enjoyed this but I am completely lost about the "nasties" that occur in the 3kHz spectrum as a result of filtering above 20khz. As far as I can tell, you haven't offered any explanation as to why that is. If you could elaborate I'd really appreciate it.

So how many Albums can you get in DSD and how many in FLAC ????,

What are these 'nasties' at 3k at cd sample rate?

All of these relevant video links... I have stuff to do! At least it looks like you'll save me time digging for more info in the long run, though. Great video, very informative! Thanks!

I just had no idea of the complexity of the issue.

Trust your ears...Great advice that many overlook

What an excellent video. Thank you for your clean, professional presentation.

I doubt DSD has any significance in the world

did you ever do any analysis on/with BURR BROWN DACs ?

In some download sites, the choice is not DSD vs FLAC. The choice is often FLAC, AIFF, and a few others. Assuming disk space is not an issue, would AIFF be better than FLAC since there is less work for the playback computer?

Fantastic video.

It’s all about the ,,,DAC’’’

A beautifully concise video that thoroughly debunks the snake oil in the audiophile community.

very informative. thank you.

Very well explained. Thank you.

Good explanation. Stay safe and stay healthy.

My files are in FLAC but when I play them, the DAC says DSD 2.8 Mhz. Does my receiver convert the FLAC into DSD on the fly? Or is the file being played using FLAC implementation but the DAC only says DSD because it was converted into DoP?

Sound advice.

Bedankt Hans! 👍

Thank you for taking the time to make this video

FLAC. Since most DSD recordings, with the exception of some archived analog master tapes, are made from DXD (i.e. 24-bit 352.8 kHz PCM) there is no rational reason to use DSD 😊

Thank you!

Maybe, just maybe, one day the audiophile community will stop blaming the format but instead blame the real culprit, the filters, the DAC.

EXCELLENT explanations, Hans. All the best, Rob

There are too many good things I could say about this video. Thank you for all your work, Hans. You have made the rabbit hole that much easier to navigate.

Thanks for the "no BS" approach.

Thank you so, so much for adding English subtitles so as to understand technical terms with your native accent.

Wonderfull explanation that I think will helping a lot of Audiophile People. Thanks so much !

I've listened to Hotel California in FLAC and the same file in DSD and the DSD sounded a little better and more 3 dimensional.

Excelente explicación. Muy profesional y asequible para los que no somos cientificos en el tema pero apreciamos el audio con calidad. Este canal es mi favorito en el tema del audio musical. Muchas gracias.

should i bother getting dsd if i'm listening to music from my phone, not player?

a humble question to add is, if you had a SACD or mastering source .ISO disc file, and if you convert to DSD, and then using the same source to FLAC without any compression, which will sound better? running the properly DAC which could run natively both format. :)

Hans the type of homie that your turn off your Adblock for 👍

What are your thoughts of software such as HQplayer upsampling 44.1 to say DSD 512?

Have you had a chance to try the Chord Mscaler? I am interested to hear you thoughts on it and the effects it has on the final sound.

Technical details are well explained, much less if a difference is audible or meaningful, which are what really matters, the second much more over the first. For that I would not dismiss compression so easily.

Thanks for your detailed wisdom good sir.

Woah Thank you for this educational video.

Great explanation. There are other youtube videos that dont like dsd and flac is enough for them. So i tried it... got a better dac that plays dsd natively. There is a difference and no one could tell me other wise. The dsd and sacd sounded better to me, while 24bit flac sound fine. If i didnot hear any difference, i would be happier to listen to flac. Listen and trust your ears is the best advise for people going in to the hobby.

Great video..It's funny it takes me a few minutes to adjust to his accent

Excellent material and presentation.

Thanks for the amazing information and video.

very well explained Sr !

Superbe 👍♥️

so what does dsd do/ is used for?

The theorem was not really about sampling with numerical values (digital) but sampling with pulses ( dirac delta). Storing the pulses with numerical values is not the core of the theory. An overlooked part of the theory is the reconstruction part. It is often said that all you need is to sample at twice the sampling rate of the highest signal frequency and you are fine. Just add a HF filter at the input to limit the frequency. One problem is that signal that start and stop have a wideband spectrum compared to the steady state signal that the theory deals with. The reconstruction of the signal assumes a sinc filter or a brickwall filter at the output. It is a part of the mathematics that the reconstructed signal is an addition of endless sinc pulses. This is never done in practice and various type of HF output filters are used. Sometimes none, an approach by Audio Note. No wonder digital does sound non natural to many ears.

Hans I need a good computer to run my Brooklyn DAC and sotm 200 ultra thxs