Sony (yes, who has the license) and Korg provide DSD recording softwares for their devices.

I would be very happy to see RME's own software for this, even an attempt to create an open source version of it.

Sure, but 1-bit AD capability of ADI-2 Pro is one of the major features, that should be supported.

Although this features is not used by Thousands, it is used by some and is critically important.

And finally recording (plus playback) alone would not be enough - what about editing? No way this will ever happen, sorry. Solutions are available, use them.

I have 700+ records, at least 100 of which I intend to record in DSD 11 Mbps. I understand that many/most people cannot hear the difference above CD-quality. I am 73, with some hearing loss, and I can still hear the difference between 192 kHz and 384 kHz. The difference is in the high frequency harmonics, and for me it makes the difference between background music, and music that I really want to listen to. I purchased some classical in 11 Mbps DSD, and I love it. I will get an RME ADI-2 Pro in a few days. I run Ubuntu Linux, and am looking for software to record the DSD from the ADI-2 Pro. Can one of you tell me how you record from the ADI-2 Pro on Linux? Thanks.

Storage is cheap these days, so why not.

Might happen the high samplerate limits your options in connectivity.

Could be the DA-Converter you used up to now really has a problem and sounds better with higher bit/sample-rate.
Maybe you like to re-evaluate this once you got the ADI-2 Pro.

In the 1980's, I put together a high end stereo system. I listened to records (Sota Star Sapphire with Spectral Reference cartridge) and high end CD players, side by side, and invited others to an A-B comparison where I did not tell them which they were listening to. We all agreed that the CDs are not as realistic. I know there are those who think that a human is unable to hear the difference, and you have my condolences on your hearing. For myself and other audiophiles, we hear and appreciate the true sound of the instruments and human voice, as they include high frequency harmonics. To me, a CD sounds like I'm listening from behind a blanket. Maybe you would not notice the blanket, but I do. My speakers in the 80's were Magepan MG3's with frequency response 40 Hz to 40 kHz. They were wonderful. Now I have Koss headphones that are capable of reproducing most of what the MG3's could do. And, yes, my hearing is still better than average even at 73.

As a recording engineer that started in the 80s and did several thousand productions, I can assure you that the masters for CD and Vinyl discs never are identical.

Specially, during cutting the lacquer disc, high frequency are boosted to counteract tracking losses of average (elliptical needle) pickups.
If you now play the Vinyl disk with a better than average pickup (i.e. van den Hul, Micro Ridge needle), you will hear this boosted high frequency range, specially in the inner grooves.

So it’s not possible to 1:1 compare Vinyl to CD.

BTW: The absolute highest frequencies some special Vinyl disc pickups can track (i.e. Dynavector KARAT 17D3) are about 100kHz.
The upper limit for studio microphones and analog tape machines is about 30 kHz, where both drop off by 20 dB at least

Personally I would not argue against CD and Vinyl discs sound different.
They do!
But I would never try to simply explain that based on differences in frequency range.

Furthermore I would never record in DSD, it’s a very strange and unhandy format.
Go for PCM 96 or 192 KHz and use the “Slow” filter in both AD and DA.
Will be an ear opener I bet.

I have been to concerts, and I know what the instruments are supposed to sound like. That is what I want in reproduction. That is why I have Spectral preamp and power amp to go with my Sota Star Sapphire turntable with Spectral Reference cartridge. 96 and 192 kHz are certainly better than CD's, yes. But why would I want to stop at ALMOST my capacity to hear? Why wouldn't I want to exceed it? That's what I'm aiming at. There are differences in people's ability to hear. I have been noticing that I can hear things that most other people can't, e.g. I heard something in the street, and told my young house keeper. She heard it when the noise got closer. And there are subtler sounds like small sounds my cat makes that no one else seems to hear. My point is that you should not try to judge what other people can or cannot hear, based on what you can hear.

True, but it always depends a bit on the individual case and here you often have to relate theoretical knowledge and practical experience and sometimes also clear up some HiFi myths. But it is also very important to have a common basis for discussion, for example, that known sources of error are excluded in sound comparisons to rule out that sound differences are not simply due to psychoacoustic effects.

In this particular case that you make e.g.
- blind test and
- quick A/B comparisons at exactly the same volume levels.

Our brain can not good remember / differentiate small sound differences over a longer period of time and louder sounds better to our ears.

I won't argue with you if you believe higher sample rate format is better. Rather, I'll answer your original question.

If you are asking how to record dsd under linux, you must be tech savvy. Then you must know how to record DSD as DoP (any recording software can do it, such as Audacity) then convert the DoP to DSD (by removing the DSD marker in each frame).

It also doesn't hurt that you just save whatever you recorded (in DoP) to disk, and play it back in a bit perfect way. ADI-2 (and other DACs that support DoP) will recognize what you are sending is a DoP format, and switch to DoP mode automatically.

DoP is just DSD data wrapped in a PCM package. There's zero difference between DSD and DoP when you play it back --- for ADI-2, even if you have a raw DSD file, your software has to convert that data to DoP for playback anyway.

In short --- the easy route is in ADI-2 Pro, set Input to DSD mode, record using a PCM software, and you'll get a DoP encoded DSD file in WAV package. Play that Wav package bit perfectly, and your DAC will recognize it as DoP(DSD).

I actually tested this in my previous experiment and it worked.

If you really want to trim the DoP marker, writing a simple C program will do that. Or just record in Windows if you're not that good in programming.

On linux SoX might be able to record in higher sampling rates. I did not try it though.
Also here is some source code that might be of help: https://github.com/dhalsimax/dsf2flac

I expect to get my ADI-2 Pro early next week. I plan to do lots of experimenting, and I plan to get back here late next week and respond with things I have learned. Thanks for your inputs/info.

Not only for Vinyl recording.
I selected it by ear, but there is a reason why it sounds better (to me):

Quote from manual page 81:
”... Slow [filter generates] a near perfect impulse response.
... Slow works best at 88.2/96 kHz [and above], because the decrease in the high frequency area then happens outside the audible range.”

I prefer “Slow Filter” for DA even at 44.1 kHz.

The better impulse response more then compensates for the treble rolloff above 14 kHz (see manual page 84).
I can hear a better separation of high frequency instruments, like Hihats from Shakers, and a better ambience definition.

Nice to have the selectable filters in ADI-2, everyone can easily dial through and find the personal favorite!

This reminds me to a shootout I once did between six then TOTL CD-players.

One of them stood out, sounding more transparent, as if it had a slightly boosted high frequency response.
After doing the (blind) comparison, I measured all of them and found the specific one in fact having a treble rolloff, no boost.
I remember, the company had a marketing name for it – which I didn’t care for.

They had opted for better sound in favor of looking better on measurements, a courageous decision at the time of marketing ruler-flat 20Hz-20kHz frequency responses as HiFi-ideal.