Jump to content
IGNORED

Offline Upsampling


Jud

Recommended Posts

For some time I've used and been happy with software that allows me to upsample in the computer, such as Audirvana Plus on the Mac, XXHighEnd on Windows, and HQPlayer on both, that allows me to avoid the upsampling filters in the DAC chip. They each offer slightly different "takes" on their upsampling filters. Audirvana Plus allows users to vary the parameters used by the bundled iZotope sample rate conversion software. HQPlayer provides a choice of several different types of filters created by the developer. XXHighEnd offers one filter created by the developer, plus numerous settings to modify the operation of the software and the computer on which it runs. These software players upsample inline, i.e., as part of the process of playing a music file.

 

For the past week or two I have been beta testing offline sample rate conversion software, Audiophile Inventory (AuI) ConverteR 48x44. AuI ConverteR had provided the ability to downsample files from higher sample rates and/or word lengths to lower ones - 24/88.2 to 16/44.1, or what have you. The developer, Yuri Korzunov, has now built in the ability to downsample or upsample between any word length and sample rate combination from 16/44.1 to 24/384. I have been using it to upsample lower resolution files to 24/352.8 or 24/384 files. Those are "native" resolutions for my DAC; it doesn't upsample those resolutions any further in PCM.

 

I compared offline upsampling to inline upsampling with iZotope, and I preferred offline. Not that the inline upsampling was bad at all, but music was clearer with offline upsampling. This wasn't shocking, because the inline upsampling uses the filter parameters I've tuned by ear, and someone who actually knows something about filters should be able to do better. Using a demo version of iZotope RX3, I compared the offline version of my filter parameters to AuI ConverteR 48x44. It came closer than the inline version (in other words the same filter sounded better offline than inline), but AuI ConverteR was stlll better. Again, not surprising. I then compared the very good new beta of HQPlayer for OS X. AuI ConverteR still sounded better - clearer, easier to follow individual instrumental and vocal lines. As Barry Diament has mentioned with regard to iZotope, and as I confirmed for myself by comparing my iZotope filter settings inline and offline, it appears offline filtering has a sound quality advantage. It would be interesting to listen to the HQPlayer filters applied offline, but as far as I know they're not available that way. I also do not have Windows on my MacBook Pro currently, so I wasn't able to compare XXHighEnd.

 

The "PROduceR" version of AuI ConverteR 48x44, the one with the ability to upsample or downsample to or from any rate/word length between 16/44.1 and 24/384, currently sells for $147.80 US for either Mac or Windows (or both at a discount for the bundle) at samplerateconverter.com. Either a linear phase or a minimum phase (no pre-ringing) filter can be used for conversion. I preferred the linear phase filter.

 

There are some disadvantages to offline oversampling. The resulting files are very large (near 1GB in some cases). It's a two-step process, first converting the file(s), then playing on other software, so it's not quite as convenient as all-in-one player software that upsamples inline. And there may be a potential disadvantage for developers, as I imagine it might be easier to reverse engineer an offline upsampling filter than an inline one. With regard specifically to AuI ConverteR, it doesn't offer the ability to upconvert to DSD right now, though that may be considered for addition in the future.

 

But overall, to me this is the best I can remember hearing my PCM files sound on the Mac, so I bought a license.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Have you compared this to Audiophile Engineering Triumph? Or Sample Manager?

 

Yes and no. :) Here's what I mean:

 

Both Triumph and Sample Manager use iZotope, but both, as far as I could tell, are limited to 24/192. My DAC will take input at 352.8/384 resolution, and that is the "native rate" in PCM to which my DAC chip interpolates (as it is for most). So I needed software that would get me to that resolution, which excluded Triumph and Sample Manager.

 

I did try the RX3 demo, which also uses iZotope and does upsample to 352.8/384kHz resolution. So the results with it are equivalent to the results I would have gotten with Triumph and Sample Manager if they were capable of the resolution I wanted. The sound quality was superior to inline conversion with iZotope as used in Audirvana Plus, but was not as good to my ears as the result with AuI ConverteR. That is reasonable because Yuri knows a great deal more about filters than I do.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
That is awkward ...there should be no differences whatsoever.

 

Not awkward at all, Leonardo, just different than perhaps you would expect. :) And of course this was not scientific, so I could easily be imagining things - I will never claim anything like infallibility, or "golden ears," or any of that.

 

I am sure you have access to RX3 or a demo, and the trial of Audirvana Plus is available if you don't already have it, so it is easy to try for yourself, though I imagine any differences would be most apparent if your DAC accepts 352.8/384kHz input resolution.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Ah OK. I don't know why I thought AE did DSD. Is DSD in the works with AuI?

 

As noted in the OP, "With regard specifically to AuI ConverteR, it doesn't offer the ability to upconvert to DSD right now, though that may be considered for addition in the future."

 

So let Yuri know in this thread if you want the ability to upconvert to DSD offline (I do), and perhaps if he sees there is a market he will consider doing the work necessary to add it sooner.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Another option is to split out conversion and playback to separate computers while still doing it on the fly (or inline as you call it). That's what I did with the NAA thingie.

 

I believe main reason for any differences is due to isolation issues and that can be improved at the DAC side (such as exaSound) or to lesser extent using a separate isolator like iFi iUSB/iPurifier or NAA.

 

Main issue I have with offline conversion and one of the reasons for NAA is the hassle to maintain two sets of files and extra effort needed whenever there are advances/improvements to the filters/dithers/modulators. Also some of my DACs support DSD256 while others support only DSD128 or 384/32 PCM, so I would need multiple different conversions of the same content... So that would expand the required maintenance effort by several times.

 

Hi Miska, appreciate your input in the thread. Does that mean you have compared on the fly and offline upconversion, and feel NAA and/or a DAC like the exaSound gets you some or most of the advantage of offline conversion?

 

Don't you offer "multiple different [on the fly] conversions of the same content" now for different DACs? How would this be different with offline conversion?

 

With regard to two sets of files and changes when there are changes to filters, etc. - so it's not as simple as just plugging the same filters, etc., into an inline and an offline version, eh? :)

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Yes, DSD128 would be nice. What is Yuri's moniker on CA?

 

audiventory

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Jud: Your post makes complete sense, but it does raise the question of "how much more storage will I need?" Are you up-converting everything or just part of your library?

 

Yep, that's certainly the issue foremost in my mind. I'm not upconverting everything, and I'm also not keeping all the files I upconvert. I only retain a few. The rest I feel that I can convert again whenever I want, so why take up the space (until storage becomes even cheaper than it is now)?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Hi Alex. I did not try to reverse engineer Yuri's filter. :) What I did was listen to A+ with my iZotope settings; iZotope RX3 playing the same track converted offline with those same settings; and the same track converted offline with AuI played back with RX3. With my settings I preferred offline to inline. I preferred AuI to both.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Thanks for the explanation Jud. But why did you play back your AuI-converter files with RX3 instead of with A+ (with SRC turned off of course)? Tha that should yield the best SQ overall.

 

Jason: AuI only gives a choice of two filters, and Jud said that he prefers the linear phase one.

 

That's the way I play them now. :)

 

But I wanted a fair comparison between AuI and my iZotope settings first to tell what I preferred. The RX3 demo doesn't allow saving converted files, so I couldn't play both with A+.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Hey Jud, you mentioned you compared this method of offline up-sampling with HQPlayer and preferred the result of the offline samples.

 

Do you have a DSD capable DAC? If so did you compare the offline up-sampled PCM with the original PCM files converted to DSD realtime in HQPlayer?

 

I ask because I'm preferring my PCM converted to DSD right now.

 

I have tried offline up-sampling with AE's sample manager, which uses iZotope and the offline up-sampler supplied with Amarra. I got some good results.

 

I also did some offline up-sampling using the Japanese "Bug Headed Emperor" Although here I was limited to upping to 88.2. Bug Head produces raw files and I couldn't find a way of converting these to a playable format such as flac at higher sample rates.

 

For me the interesting aspect of this, is that you can take the resulting file and play it in any player you choose. The player itself will, obviously have an influence. Since you are offline up-sampling to the max PCM sample rate, you obviously wouldn't want to try any further PCM up-sampling with the resulting files (except perhaps up to 705.6 in XXHighEnd).

 

I'm also wondering if you had the "Dither" option turned on or off.

 

What you could do though is take those files and convert them inline to DSD using HQPlayer, if you have a DSD capable DAC.

 

One other point to bear in mind is that when using inline/realtime up-sampling with or without conversion between PCM and DSD, it might push your CPU too hard and I found this does detrimentally effect the sound.

 

On the Mac you could check Activity Monitor when doing inline up-sampling and see what CPU reading you get. On the Windows side I use Process Explorer.

 

I have considered creating a separate library on its own drive with offline up-sampled files of select music. It is a lot of work and additional expense though. I'd have to be convinced the results were really worth it.

 

With good immunity as Miska mentioned and a powerful enough CPU to handle the up-sampling and conversions inline, I question if it really is worthwhile.

 

geoff

 

- My mid-2009 MacBook Pro does not have sufficient CPU resources to convert PCM inline to DSD128 via HQPlayer without audible defects. It will convert inline to DSD64 via HQPlayer without identifiable audible defects, but the result doesn't sound as good as HQPlayer upsampling to 352.8/384kHz PCM. Perhaps this is due to the CPU operating near its limits, because most DSD files sound superb. - I always use dither when upsampling 16 bit word length files to 24. When going from 24 bit to 24 bit I have tried both with and without dither, but haven't really paid attention to determine whether I think there's an audible difference. - Please note Miska's response in this thread where he says that for a given filter offline conversion will sound better, but use of an NAA or particular DACs such as the exasound can make up a good part of the difference. - AuI does not currently do offline conversion to DSD, but I think Yuri may be open to adding that capability if he sees a demand. If you think you'd be interested, let him know in this thread or via private message (member name audiventory). - For me AuI is more useful than Sample Manager or Triumph, and perhaps even the more costly RX3, for two reasons: (1) Sample Manager and Triumph are limited, as far as I am able to tell, to 24/192kHz max. That would leave me still having to use inline filtering to get to the "native" rates of my DAC chip (and the "native" rate of most other folks' DAC chips as well), 352.8/384kHz. So I would not get the benefit of eliminating inline filtering. (2) For all three, Sample Manager, Triumph, and RX3, I would be using my own filter settings and thus not taking advantage of the expertise of someone who really knows about filters.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Jay-dub, makes absolute sense for your goals. "Of course phase-linear" is interesting, since there is a lot of discussion of minimum phase filters and a number of good ones out there.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I tried it out yesterday and the results were quite impressive when listening to up-sampled PCM.

 

There does appear to be a greater ability to listen into the music. The sound is richer with more detail than up-sampling PCM inline.

 

With offline PCM upsampling played back as PCM I am impressed with the level of detail and really admire the sound. It's a bit more like "looking into" rather than "listening into" the music for me though. I can see why someone who listens to PCM as PCM would prefer this method to inline upsampling.

 

I also compared several Holly Cole tracks from her best of album. Offline upsampled PCM played as PCM allowed me to hear more of Holly's chest and words were more clearly articulated.

 

geoff

 

This describes well what I hear with offline PCM upsampling. As for upsampling to DSD, I think it, too, may sound better if done offline; and of course with my present audio computer I don't really have a choice, since it doesn't have quite the CPU resources necessary for good inline conversion to DSD. I therefore hope to start a mini-groundswell of support for Yuri to include this capability in AuI, or Miska to go through the additional hassle of making offline conversion available, or both. :)

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Thank you, my friends, for so many useful info and warm replies about my work.

 

I'm not once thought about DSD encoding. Until last time many people (include audio pro) said me what DSD encoding is interest, but is not quite useful for instant releasing. May be will useful voting with discussion for research demand to converting PCM to DSD? Possible DSD encoding lead to increasing of the software price (due buying of DSD encoding patent license) - new "supercharged" :) version with DSD, as example. By same reason fine hardware intreface HDMI don't used for hi-end DAC (no big number of sales) as wrote some time ago in CA.

 

Yuri

 

This is what we call a "chicken and egg" problem. Hard to gauge interest without any current offline upsampling to DSD available (Korg Audiogate did so before the recent increased popularity of DSD, but has now changed its licensing so you need to buy Korg's DAC), but hard to spend the money on a license before knowing what the interest level is!

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I follow your logic Jud, because if offline PCM up-sampling sounds better than inline PCM up-sampling, it seems to follow that offline conversion to DSD would too.

 

Consider the following though: I've carried out extensive listening with some of my audiophile and musician friends here and the consensus we've come to is that conversion to DSD64 is not necessarily an improvement over Redbook. It sounds very different, yes and to some listeners quite nice, to others a little "soft and fuzzy". The softness makes some people feel it's more "analogue like" and they prefer it to Redbook CD for that reason. Others will prefer the greater apparent clarity and precision of Redbook, left alone.

 

DSD64 is, of course, the limit for SACD's and I've ripped a number of them using a PS3. I never play them back at DSD64 now that I've ripped the files though. I think the softness of DSD64 is what has got DSD a bad name among a lot of listeners. Although there is obviously more information on a native DSD64 file than redbook CD, that softness has stuck in some people minds and they've decided they don't like DSD as a result.

 

Fast forward to modern DSD sound where the softness (that is the result of noise which has not been adequately filtered out) disappears, and the situation changes dramatically.

 

DSD128 sounds as though a blanket has been lifted to reveal far more detail, which includes ambient cues of the recorded space.

 

DSD256 is even better; not as dramatic as DSD64 to DSD128; but still quite significant improvements in the same direction as above.

 

These improvements hold true for both PCM converted to DSD and DSD64 upped to DSD128 and DSD256.

 

It is even possible to do this with lossless flac streams from Qobuz and other internet streams, as I've posted about here.

 

Where to stop though? … and that brings me to the problems I have with the idea of converting to DSD offline. You can do it now, with free software using the foo_sacd plug-in on Windows, or using J River Media Center on Mac or Windows. I believe Audiogate will also allow offline conversion of PCM to DSD. If you go to DSD256 though, the resulting files will be huge. Just look at the sizes of the native DSD256 files on NativeDSD.com.

 

… and although DSD256 might seem like the holy grail now, it won't be long before DSD512 becomes common and then beyond that to PWM or "muti-bit DSD".

 

In the meantime you've gone to all the trouble and expense of creating offline conversions from PCM to DSD at whatever DSD level, only to find it's all obsolete and needs to be done again.

 

I think offline up-sampling PCM to 352.8 may well be worth doing and then playing it back with a player that can convert that file to DSD at the max level your DSD DAC can support.

 

For the music collection stored on your hard drive though, I really feel something special is going on with HQPlayer when converting PCM to DSD128 or DSD256, today.

 

Time to do offline conversion (not really "trouble," it's clicking a button and you can do an entire directory/album at once if you like) and storage space are indeed issues, same for PCM as DSD, as PCM files can be comparable in size to DSD, converted or un-. What I've decided, and others may want to consider, is that I won't keep nearly all the converted files, for just the sorts of reasons you give: What if there are improvements to the conversion filtering, to my DAC's capabilities (currently limited to DSD128), etc.? Why should I try to "push the envelope" on my storage space right now, when it's as easy as clicking a button next time I want to do another conversion? So it's likely I'll keep the converted files for those tracks I know I'll want to return to frequently, while zapping those I probably won't get around to again for a while. (It's convenient for this purpose that AuI puts converted files in their own separate folder within the directory/album where you're doing the conversion - just send that folder to the trash and everything's back to the way it was.)

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
You're right of course, it's really no trouble. With a license and the ability to do batch conversion of more than one file it would be even more convenient.

 

In terms of file sizes, I've been using AuI to produce flac files. If I further convert those to DSD128 using J River (DSD128 is the limit) a 352.8 up-sampled flac file at a size of just under 100mb becomes a DSD128 file of just under 246mb. I prefer DSD256, so if I could do that offline it would come to a whopping 500mb for a 3 - 4minute song. Yikes!

 

* * *

 

When HQP does all the work, the results really are not that far behind what can be achieved by doing these offline processes first imo.

 

File size - yes, that's why I've decided for the time being to keep only the "crown jewels" (as you put it) in converted form. But storage is getting cheaper....

 

Sound quality - I agree, we are not talking night and day here. For many occasions I will continue to use inline conversion - parties, casual listening while doing other things, etc. On the other hand, when settling down with a favorite piece of music or album for dedicated listening, I want to hear it at the absolute best my system can provide. ("I'll Follow the Sun" from the Beatles For Sale 2009 stereo remaster is less than two minutes, but you've never heard the boys' - as they were then - harmonizing voices so clearly on those old tracks. Just beautiful.)

 

Edit: For those of us who have older computers, offline conversion is the only alternative if we are talking about DSD. Inline's too difficult for the CPU, unfortunately.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

From yesterday I intensive think about including DSD into AuI. Of course, DSD encoding must appear in AuI.

 

Yuri

 

:D

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Are these the correct settings for the best sound quality? I've downloaded the "Lite" version to try first.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]13562[/ATTACH]

 

Looks fine, though if you're doing Redbook you may want to try 352800.

 

What's your DAC's max input resolution?

 

Does the Lite version upsample?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Thanks for posting the results!

It would be interesting to do this comparison in a blind ABX test (ask a friend to switch the tracks).

I wonder if you can 100% differentiate your favorite upsampling method...

 

Please do the test and let us know how you scored.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Yuri, I can't comment on the legal or technical issues. It sounds like it could be more interesting to create your own algorithm.

 

There is an attempt here to compare Audiogate, J River and Saracon, doing offline conversion to DSD. Not surprisingly Saracon came out the winner; but the author of this blog questions whether the differences between the 3 would actually be audible.

 

Getting the distortions as low as Saracon would be worth aiming for.

 

The author of the blog has questioned whether higher sample rates/resolutions make any audible difference; whether different software players do; and whether various other changes do. That's pretty much what he does. :) Edit: I see what the blog post is about is conversion from PCM to DSD and back, and whether the PCM results are audibly different than the PCM files prior to conversion. That's a little different than quality/audibility of conversion from PCM to DSD.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Geoff, quick question: Can foo_asio be used as a standalone (separate from JRiver) offline converter?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

EuroDriver - Yes, and hopefully we will get at least one solution that will allow conversion to DSD64, -128, -256 (my DAC's max is -128) completely offline, which might even be better yet. (I have yet to compare upsampling to max res PCM to the same for DSD with my DAC, which should be interesting.)

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I also wonder if HQ Player's NAA option will level the playing field between offline and inline conversion. All of the computational heavy lifting is done in one beast, whilst the delicate act of quietly extracting the analog audio from the bit stream is done in another barebones CPU with a sound friendly OS

 

Miska has said he thinks NAA makes up at least some of the ground between inline conversion sans NAA and offline. I could actually do that from my upstairs Win desktop through an NAA, but I don't know how practical that arrangement would be - control a remote computer presumably via screen sharing/VNC to have it upconvert to DSD and send the result via Wi-Fi through the NAA - or how it would affect the sonic results. Offline conversion just seems a little more simple to me, and frankly a process that would promote more of the mood I like to be in when enjoying music, rather than having to worry about whether multiple parts of a more complex process will all mesh correctly.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I began builtin to AuI 1-bit audio resolution on 2,8 and 5,6 MHz. Result of the convertion will *.dsd file.

 

As I understand DSD is trademark by Philips. This standard use pulse-dencity modulation. Patented decoder only. I will create own (other than Phillips's algorithm) decoder for converting multibit sequence to on-bit sequence for any sampling rate.

 

Thanks, Yuri, this is very encouraging and welcome news. When you say the result will be a *.dsd file, do you mean rather than .dsf or .dff (which, as far as I know, are the file types my software players will play - .dsf preferred because it is better for metadata)?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Jud, I just want to make sure you are aware that you can do this already in J River, 'cos it's not so obvious. Take a file that's in J River, right-click on it and choose Library tools -> convert. The action box appears at the bottom left of J R's window. Here you choose what format you want to convert to, which will be DSD and you can further choose whether DSD64 or DSD128 by clicking on the … for options.

 

You could do this with a file not already in J R's library by right clicking on it in Windows explorer or Mac's finder and choose to open the file with J R. The file will then be accessible by clicking in J R's "Playing Now" Zone in the upper left panel of JR's window.

 

It should work on both Mac and Windows versions of JR and, yes you can perform this on a file already up-sampled by AuI.

 

This is the method I applied in EuroDriver's description above, then I played the resulting file with HQPlayer, using poly-sinc and DSD7.

 

Hope it helps!

 

Thanks Geoff, I appreciate the info. At some point I may try this (other than the part where you play the resulting file with HQPlayer :) ).

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Jud, *.dff file demand license fee. I plan bought it in the future due it's popular format.

 

DSF fine support standard id3 metadata. And I process input dsd files. Now I will process output dsd also. DSF already has part of programming code, so release 1-bit stream via DSF will faster.

 

As I right understand you have player for DSF?

 

Yes, I know Audirvana+ will play .dff, .dsf or .iso (the latter is all the tracks on a DSD album in one compressed .iso file). HQPlayer will I believe play at least .dff and .dsf, don't know about .iso. And I haven't used JRiver, so I can't comment - but there are plenty of other people in the thread who will know. :) I don't know if any of them will play a DSD file with a .dsd file name extension. My preference is .dsf for various reasons (metadata support, I like dealing with individual tracks better than a whole album as an .iso file).

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...