Izotope SRC

[Superdad]

I'm pretty sure Fidelia Advanced, also from the same company, will do the offline resampling using iZotope.

 

Thanks for the suggestion David, but as near as I can tell from playing with the trial and reading the manual, it looks like Fidelia Advanced only offers realtime SRC with iZotope. Do you know of a way to use it to upsample and save the resulting file?

Fidelia is certainly a well crafted and lovely looking piece of s/w. I wonder how many people on are their development team. Definitely more than just the one part-time Damien we have with A+!

 

I am pleased to see that the Fidelia trial does now include (maybe it always did) the Advanced add-on w/iZotope. So I should probably give it a spin on my music server to see how it stacks up sonically versus A+.

 

Ciao,

ALEX

[Bob Stern]

it would be great if a developer would license the iZotope engine and create an easy interface for batch interpolating music files.

 

You can use AppleScript to automatically run Triumph on a large selection of files.

 

(Audiofile Engineering also sells a batch counterpart to Triumph called Sample Manager, but it uses only 32-bit math while Triumph uses 64-bit, so it would not seem as desirable. I imagine they will get around to updating Sample Manager eventually.)

[orgel]

Do you know of a way to use it to upsample and save the resulting file?

 

I was able to do just that some time ago with a previous version, but I subsequently hosed my Fidelia Advanced installation while fooling with a beta and then never got back to it, since I became obsessed with A+. I will try to find time this weekend to sort this out, and I'll post if I can get the offline resampling working again.

 

--David

[Geoffrey Armstrong]

I'm pretty sure Fidelia Advanced, also from the same company, will do the offline resampling using iZotope.

 

(Links are a little weird on the Audiofile Engineering site, so you'll need to click on "Fidelia Advanced" at right, after following the link.)

 

--David

I could be wrong; but I don't believe Fidelia Advanced will do offline up-sampling.

 

I have it! It's the only other player to have licensed iZoptope for on the fly up-sampling.

 

I believe if Fidelia had more supporters they would get it out of simply "bug-crushing mode".

 

A+ has benefitted from that suppprt, and it deserves the popularity it enjoys. I think Fidelia should be up there as a contender though. It has great potential; but as with Amarra, they got a few crucial usability; etc. pieces wrong, so now it's languishing.

 

Regarding offline up-sampling. How long does it take?

 

I can imagine doing a few albums as preparation for listening. Trashing them afterwards, then repeating the exercise for the next critical listening session. If that is, the benefits would really be worthwhile. As for up-sampling, offline my entire library. Forget it! I don't want to invest in all the extra hard disk real estate and time.

 

geoff

[Superdad]

Thanks everybody. I'll keep watching here to see what you all discover. I really should just buy a license to Sample Manager 3. It does seem easier and more batch oriented than Triumph.

Geoff, I like your idea of converting a bunch of files in a playlist prior to a listening session and just deleting them afterwards.

--Alex C.

[Melvin]

I am pleased to see that the Fidelia trial does now include (maybe it always did) the Advanced add-on w/iZotope. So I should probably give it a spin on my music server to see how it stacks up sonically versus A+.

 

Alex, for the most part I think Fidelia is under-appreciated here. 1.3.1 is quite nice with one recently discovered caveat that you should know about. This brief thread will explain:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/fidelia-1-3-1-upsampling-static-16990/

[wwaldmanfan]

I have owned this software for a year, since before Audirvana was known to me. I used it mostly to change bit depths, sample rates, raise or lower a track's gain, and also to check/repair corrupted files. I was playing my music with iTunes, and my intent was to upsample all my music files to the same 24/96 so I would't have to go into the Audio MIDI Setup utility and keep changing the output settings. SM does a great job of batch-converting your files, but it has a number of limitations. It does not recognize FLAC, ALAC (Apple Lossless), AAC, or MP3. Your files have to be transcoded to AIFF or WAV just to get started.

 

It can easily batch-convert a dozen or more albums with one click of the mouse, however if it encounters what it considers to be a corrupted file with, say, an incorrect word length, it might freeze, and then you have to completely reboot your computer, or SM will not re-launch. This can occur even if the file seemingly plays fine with your music player program.

 

It has a feature called "Audio File First Aid" to repair damaged files. Useful, however, this will not run in batch mode. Song files have to be selected and rebuilt one at a time. So, if you have lots of "damaged" files, this is extremely tedious.

 

Now to the upsampling features: You are offered a choice of 48kHz, 88.2kHz, 96kHz, or 196kHz. So if you are hoping to do "powers of 2" upsampling to all your 44.1kHz redbook CD rips, you can't. And, there are no iZotope SRC custom parameter settings, just the basic slider from fastest to best, as seen in Audirvana.

 

You can purchase an upgrade, called "Sample Pack" for another $20, which will give you more SRC options. But, I think it is three parameters, not the five that A+ incorporates. I didn't buy the upgrade, so I don't know for sure about this.

 

So, does upsampling in advance sound better than on the fly? I cannot make that call. This is a subjective judgement, best left to your own ears. I will say that due to the huge file sizes, I found this pre-upsampling technique to be impractical. I use a bus-powered 1 TB Firewire drive to store and load my files. Other than the HD music I buy from HDtracks, I keep most of them in their original redbook form. Otherwise I would have run out of HD space long ago. And, when I do upsample using A+, I find that I prefer the sound with a very low steepness rate (4db) anyway.

 

If you have no qualms about spending $100 for the "deluxe" version of Sample Manager, and have multiple-gigabytes of HD space, it might be worth purchasing. Otherwise, don't feel like you are making a huge compromise by using the on-the-fly upsampling you have now in A+. Heck, I just replaced my old integrated amp with a new NAD power amp, and am adjusting the volume with Audirvana's iZotope MBIT+ dithered volume control during playback. It works great! No downside at all, so far. Haven't even bothered to alter the default settings.

Now, I don't even own a stereo preamp or DAC with a volume control, and don't need it, as long as Damien is around...

[Superdad]

I have owned this software for a year, since before Audirvana was known to me. I used it mostly to change bit depths, sample rates, raise or lower a track's gain, and also to check/repair corrupted files. snip, snip...

 

Nice post Mike! Thanks for the info.

--AJC

[Geoffrey Armstrong]

Thanks everybody. I'll keep watching here to see what you all discover. I really should just buy a license to Sample Manager 3. It does seem easier and more batch oriented than Triumph.

Geoff, I like your idea of converting a bunch of files in a playlist prior to a listening session and just deleting them afterwards.

--Alex C.

Thanks also Alex, for giving me the idea to try Sample Manager.

 

geoff

[Musicophile]

If you're interested in off-line SRC, Amarra 2.5 now has included Sonic Studio Process.

 

Sonic Studio : Pro Audio : Sonic Studio Process

[Geoffrey Armstrong]

If you're interested in off-line SRC, Amarra 2.5 now has included Sonic Studio Process.

 

Sonic Studio : Pro Audio : Sonic Studio Process

 

Thanks as well. I have a license for an older version, so I'll also give it a try.

 

geoff

[Geoffrey Armstrong]

I could be wrong; but I don't believe Fidelia Advanced will do offline up-sampling[/Quote]

 

I was wrong. Apologies Orgel. The advanced version of Fidelia will do offline upsampling if you check "create preferred formet when adding to library" in the output prefs.

 

geoff

[orgel]

Apologies Orgel. The advanced version of Fidelia will do offline upsampling if you check "create preferred formet when adding to library" in the output prefs.

 

No apologies necessary. I was able to do a clean install today and verified that the offline upsampling works, just as you say. It's a little fiddly, so if anyone wants, I can post detailed instructions.

 

(While fooling with Fidelia I was reminded how much I like those meters, even though I still prefer A+ for many reasons overall. Maybe when Damien has nothing better to do, he can think about some pretty meters for A+?)

 

--David

[Bob Stern]

I was able to do a clean install today and verified that the offline upsampling works, just as you say. It's a little fiddly, so if anyone wants, I can post detailed instructions.

 

That would be very helpful!

 

Fidelia Advanced seems like a more convenient and less expensive tool than Triumph or Sample Manager. Fidelia uses 64-bit SRC like Triumph, which should provide lower distortion than the 32-bit SRC in Sample Manager. Fidelia avoids the hassle of writing an AppleScript as required for batch processing in Triumph. Also, Triumph has a very confusing user interface, although that would not be an issue if running it only via AppleScript.

 

 

While fooling with Fidelia I was reminded how much I like those meters, even though I still prefer A+ for many reasons overall. Maybe when Damien has nothing better to do, he can think about some pretty meters for A+?

 

I find that the meters on my Metric Halo console software significantly increase CPU load on the music player computer when controlling it via VNC, presumably because the bouncing meters require constant transmission of video updates to the VNC client.

 

I would not want meters unless there is an option to turn them off.

[Bob Stern]

If you're interested in off-line SRC, Amarra 2.5 now has included Sonic Studio Process.

 

Does anyone know what their SRC algorithm is? It could be proprietary, or it could be the one built into OS X.

 

In any event, it does not permit tuning the parameters as finely as iZotope. (This could be a blessing to avoid driving one's self crazy!)

[Musicophile]

Does anyone know what their SRC algorithm is? It could be proprietary, or it could be the one built into OS X.

 

In any event, it does not permit tuning the parameters as finely as iZotope. (This could be a blessing to avoid driving one's self crazy!)

It's proprietary:

Sonic Studio : Pro Audio : Sonic Studio Process

[Superdad]

It's proprietary:

Sonic Studio : Pro Audio : Sonic Studio Process

 

Sonic Studio used to license iZotope for Amarra. In fact their logo is still listed on iZotope's "Audiophile Tools" page: Powered by iZotope | MAC/WIN: Audio Repair Tools

[Miska]

It's proprietary:

Sonic Studio : Pro Audio : Sonic Studio Process

 

"Sonic HD" is also listed on the SRC comparison page:

SRC Comparisons

[Superdad]

"Sonic HD" is also listed on the SRC comparison page:

SRC Comparisons

 

Interesting: Based on the passband and transition plots (on the SRC comparison page) of the Sonic HD filters, they are all "apodizing" filters--in that they cut off quite a bit before Nyquist. Unless I am still mis-understanding the properties of an apodizing filter.

 

And if anyone here has Amarra with the Sonic HD SRC engine, can you tell us what parameters it allows you to control?

[Bob Stern]

It's proprietary

 

The marketing fluff on Sonic Studio's web page does not prove they are not using someone else's SRC algorithm.

[Jud]

The marketing fluff on Sonic Studio's web page does not prove they are not using someone else's SRC algorithm.

 

Though if you look at the SRC comparison page, the results from Sonic HD look different than either of the iZotope algorithms at least.

[Superdad]

The marketing fluff on Sonic Studio's web page does not prove they are not using someone else's SRC algorithm.

 

I have confirmed that the SRC engine they are using is no longer iZotope's. But it used to be.

[bdiament]

Hi Alex,

 

I have confirmed that the SRC engine they are using is no longer iZotope's. But it used to be.

 

As a soundBlade user, I can confirm they didn't, then they did, and now they no longer do.

(That is, they have created a new algorithm of their own.)

 

Best regards,

Barry

http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com (new blog)

http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com

[bdiament]

Hi Bob,

 

...Fidelia uses 64-bit SRC like Triumph, which should provide lower distortion than the 32-bit SRC in Sample Manager...

 

To the best of my knowledge, the iZotope SRC algorithm runs at 64-bits (internally) in both Triumph and in Sample Manager.

 

It is important to differentiate between 64-bit addressing and 64-bit internal processing of the audio. Not to be confused with what occurs inside of the iZotope plug-in, Triumph does the former, not the latter. I don't know that the increase in *efficiency* will have any impact whatsoever on the sonic results. That said, I have not yet tried to convert the sample rate of a file, using identical settings in both programs and then comparing the results.

 

Where there *is* a difference is in the other processing these programs might do (such as level adjustments, etc.). Like many audio applications and DAWs, Sample Manager keeps its internal temporary files at the word length of the source. This means something like a level change for say, 24-bit source files in Sample Manager will be processed at 24-bits, even though the internal math of the program runs at 32-bits -- i.e., the temp files created along the way in the process will be at the same word length as the source, in this case, 24-bits. Theoretically then, to take advantage of the full capabilities of the program, one should start any change by first creating 32-bit versions of the source file(s) and using those for any processing. Performing the same change with Triumph will *not* require such preparation because it converts all assets to 32-bit float on import.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

[Bob Stern]

To the best of my knowledge, the iZotope SRC algorithm runs at 64-bits (internally) in both Triumph and in Sample Manager.

 

According to the first 10/27/2012 post in this thread from the Audiofile Engineering forum, Audiofile Engineering stated that they use only 32-bit floating point arithmetic in Sample Manager:

http://www.audiofile-engineering.com/support/forums/read.php?3,4904

 

In contrast, they use 64-bit floating point arithmetic in Triumph and Fidelia.

 

Because SRC requires millions of arithmetic steps (note the option to increase the filter length to 2 million taps), higher precision arithmetic reduces rounding errors. That's why Metric Halo DSP uses 80-bit arithmetic even though its A/D converters are "only" 24 bit precision. Do you think BJ would say that 32-bit DSP would have been just as good?