Using Audirvana or Amarra

[Barnaby]

Hi

 

Can someone please tell me. Is it better to "upsample" your music when using Audirvana or other players? What does this actually achieve? Also are there any other advanced settings for either Audirvana or Amarra you use to enhance quality?

 

Thank you

 

B

[church_mouse]

Hello Barnaby, since no one else has replied to your question I will, although you may feel it is a cop-out answer.

 

I suggest that you try up sampling and see if you like what it does. I have tried it in Audirvana, Pure Music and Amarra - for a long time I went through variations on some of the suggested Audirvana up sampling settings others kindly posted on this site. However, after months of listening I concluded that I didn't like what it was doing to the sound (often more apparent space, but increased edginess and a lack of coherence).

 

Of course, my feelings are purely personal for my tastes in my system.

 

I settled for no up sampling using Pure Music.

[audiventory]

Barnaby,

 

 

I agree with Church_mouse. Here can not unambigous answer due different settings of resampling algorithms.

 

Qualitative resampling algorithm try optimize incompatible things: high steepness - low ringing, flatness - low number of calculations, etc.

 

Here balance of the incompatible things matter.

 

Possibly different approaches:

 

- use filters with several user conrolled parameters, or

 

- use manually tuned (by developer) filters for each combination of sample rates.

 

First approach hardly do without measurements (can't see real picture of changings). But it give experiment possibility for user.

 

For second approach user have only factory settings. However this approach allow achieve best of possible (for released algorithm) features balance via measurements.

 

Both methods must be.

 

Me seems, better compare sound in free demos for own taste. Also try play with settings.

 

 

Best regards,

Yuri

[wwaldmanfan]

What is being said here is it depends on your DAC. Most DACs upsample the incoming signal, but there are as many different hardware implementations as there are DACs.

My NAD DAC upsamples to 844kHz (16x redbook), so it doesn't accomplish anything to upsample with software ahead of time. Doing so colors the sound, but it does not improve the SQ--on the contrary.

Nothing wrong with you trying it out for yourself, though. You may like it, but unless someone else has the exact same equipment as you do, their "recommended" settings are meaningless.

[audiventory]

What is being said here is it depends on your DAC. Most DACs upsample the incoming signal, but there are as many different hardware implementations as there are DACs.

My NAD DAC upsamples to 844kHz (16x redbook), so it doesn't accomplish anything to upsample with software ahead of time. Doing so colors the sound, but it does not improve the SQ--on the contrary.

Nothing wrong with you trying it out for yourself, though. You may like it, but unless someone else has the exact same equipment as you do, their "recommended" settings are meaningless.

 

wwaldmanfan,

 

Are possible NAD DAC's mode put 844 kHz upsampled file to the DAC for avoiding upsampling on fly in hardware?

 

Best regards,

Yuri

[wwaldmanfan]

wwaldmanfan,

Are possible NAD DAC's mode put 844 kHz upsampled file to the DAC for avoiding upsampling on fly in hardware?

Best regards,

Yuri

 

If I understand your quesion, the NAD M51 automatically converts all incoming audio (up to 24-bit/192kHz PCM) to 35-bit/844kHz PWM. The user has no option to bypass or disable this function.

[audiventory]

Thank you for explanation.

[Barnaby]

Thanks you all for your help and explanations. I guess the answer is to try it out which I will this weekend when I get time