Audirvana Plus 2.5.1 with PCM->DSD Conversion

[MrTHX]

I'd try for at least a 4.1 which can easily be firmware upgraded to a 5.1. You'll get a lot more mileage.

 

Yea but the 4,1s are rare .... and the price rises [emoji1]

Seen a 3ghz 8 core 32gb RAM FOR £295 .... Surely that should do DSD256 without a heat issue like my current MM [emoji45]

[OldBigEars]

Nope, definitely prefer the sound of non-upsampled PCM to DSD128 on my system. Richer sound, more body and detail. And best of all, no CPU issues. Tried DSD for an hour - no need to continue. PCM works beautifully.

[odelay]

This is only part of what's already available in Audirvana Plus for music browsing & discovery. I'll make a tutorial/demo video this week about these TIDAL browsing features.

 

Ah!

But is only for those using streaming services?

Would it be possible to add such a feature inside A+? (Without needing a streaming service).

 

I will check it out. I first read it only for streaming....

 

It would be awesome to enjoy such a feature through the iOS remote for non-streaming folk like me. [emoji448]

[watercourse]

Damien: it's been really a suffered decision but... in the end I pulled the MacMini from my music system and replaced it with an Aries

 

as I deeply miss Audirvana (and still have a Mac server on the network)... any hope A+ will, in the future, support external network renderers?

 

Yes, please!

[Dyson]

Nope, definitely prefer the sound of non-upsampled PCM to DSD128 on my system. Richer sound, more body and detail. And best of all, no CPU issues. Tried DSD for an hour - no need to continue. PCM works beautifully.

 

+1

[stewartg]

Nope, definitely prefer the sound of non-upsampled PCM to DSD128 on my system. Richer sound, more body and detail. And best of all, no CPU issues. Tried DSD for an hour - no need to continue. PCM works beautifully.

 

It must depend on your dac as to whether you prefer PCM or DSD

In my case a file up sampled to DSD128 sounds noticeably better than when played back in PCM but up sampled PCM is better than raw 44.1

My Lampizator is a very very good PCM dac but whether it's an even better DSD dac or whether the PCM > DSD file is better I don't know.

BTW both PCM and DSD work beautifully if they don't you need a better computer.

[Jud]

Nope, definitely prefer the sound of non-upsampled PCM to DSD128 on my system. Richer sound, more body and detail. And best of all, no CPU issues. Tried DSD for an hour - no need to continue. PCM works beautifully.

 

Or rather, you prefer the ESS chip inside the Concero upsampling from PCM to ~44.1MHz to A+ initially upsampling to DSD128 and that bitstream being internally upsampled in the Concero to ~44.1MHz.

[orgel]

Yea but the 4,1s are rare .... and the price rises [emoji1]

Seen a 3ghz 8 core 32gb RAM FOR £295 .... Surely that should do DSD256 without a heat issue like my current MM [emoji45]

 

I have a 4,1 8-core 2.26GHz Mac Pro at the office, and it upsamples to DSD256 with no problem. No temperature issues, and I can do other work while music is playing. Normal fan noise on these machines might be a little more than is optimal for the ultimate listening room.

 

--David

[Lee Henley]

Just upgraded to the 2.5.3 version and I'm not sure if it's me but I certainly do prefer the previous version, anyone else prefer the previous version?

[damien78]

Ah!

But is only for those using streaming services?

Would it be possible to add such a feature inside A+? (Without needing a streaming service).

 

I will check it out. I first read it only for streaming....

 

It would be awesome to enjoy such a feature through the iOS remote for non-streaming folk like me. [emoji448]

 

I'll see what I can do, though for now, enjoy the tutorial video on TIDAL navigation: https://audirvana.com/?p=4040

[OldBigEars]

Or rather, you prefer the ESS chip inside the Concero upsampling from PCM to ~44.1MHz to A+ initially upsampling to DSD128 and that bitstream being internally upsampled in the Concero to ~44.1MHz.

 

Jud, I use the upsampling settings on the Concero....think it converts redbook to 176.4. To my ears, this sounds better than the DSD128, for whatever reason. Maybe it's the peace of mind knowing that I'm not frying anything in my mac :-)

[OldBigEars]

It must depend on your dac as to whether you prefer PCM or DSD

In my case a file up sampled to DSD128 sounds noticeably better than when played back in PCM but up sampled PCM is better than raw 44.1

My Lampizator is a very very good PCM dac but whether it's an even better DSD dac or whether the PCM > DSD file is better I don't know.

BTW both PCM and DSD work beautifully if they don't you need a better computer.

 

Yep, could be that one needs a Lamp grade DAC and something appreciably more sophisticated than a garden variety MBP (8GB /SSD) to experience DSD in all its glory.

[Jud]

Jud, I use the upsampling settings on the Concero....think it converts redbook to 176.4. To my ears, this sounds better than the DSD128, for whatever reason. Maybe it's the peace of mind knowing that I'm not frying anything in my mac :-)

 

I believe, like other ESS chips (the founders of the company that makes the Concero came from the team that developed the ESS chips), it first upsamples to 352.8KHz for RedBook, then upsamples that to a rate of about 44.1MHz.

 

Yes, I'm sure the lack of fan noise has something to do with it.

[aeo12]

Nope, definitely prefer the sound of non-upsampled PCM to DSD128 on my system. Richer sound, more body and detail. And best of all, no CPU issues. Tried DSD for an hour - no need to continue. PCM works beautifully.

 

I've concluded that PCM works better in my system for the same reasons as you state. I get the best sound with non-upsampled PCM and the Dirac plug-in, letting my DAC do the upsampling to 384 kHz. Audirvana-upsampled PCM to 384 kHz is a close second, but unfortunately means I can't use the Dirac plug-in which only works up to 192 kHz. One feature of the DSD upsampling that I really like is that Audio Units are applied before upsampling, allowing the Dirac plug-in to be used. It would be great if Damien could make this possible with PCM upsampling. I wouldn't be surprised that Audivana-upsampling to 384 kHz would provide the best sound if I also had access to the Dirac plug-in.

[Jud]

I've concluded that PCM works better in my system for the same reasons as you state. I get the best sound with non-upsampled PCM and the Dirac plug-in, letting my DAC do the upsampling to 384 kHz. Audirvana-upsampled PCM to 384 kHz is a close second, but unfortunately means I can't use the Dirac plug-in which only works up to 192 kHz. One feature of the DSD upsampling that I really like is that Audio Units are applied before upsampling, allowing the Dirac plug-in to be used. It would be great if Damien could make this possible with PCM upsampling. I wouldn't be surprised that Audivana-upsampling to 384 kHz would provide the best sound if I also had access to the Dirac plug-in.

 

wgscott uses A+ upsampling to 192KHz along with Dirac.

[aeo12]

wgscott uses A+ upsampling to 192KHz along with Dirac.

 

I've tried upsampling to 192 kHz in Audirvana along with Dirac, then letting the DAC upsample up to 384 kHz as it does automatically. That does not sound as good as not upsampling in Audirvana with Dirac with the DAC upsampling to 384 kHz, nor does it sound as good as upsampling to 384 kHz in Audirvana without Dirac. That's why I'd really like to hear what upsampling to 384 kHz in Audirvana with Dirac sounds like. At least in my system, upsampling in two steps does not produce as good a sound as upsampling in a single step.

[dahlberg]

Just upgraded to the 2.5.3 version and I'm not sure if it's me but I certainly do prefer the previous version, anyone else prefer the previous version?

 

I haven't tried all versions in betwen but I still prefer 2.4 I have no need for either streaming or DSD upsampling so.......

[stewartg]

Not sure but I think I prefer 2.5.2 the latest one seems more congested somehow

BTW when up sampling to DSD the isotope filters have been renamed are they any different to 2.5.2

[rickca]

I'd really like to be able to use A+ with a micro rendu. So I'm talking about introducing a component similar to HQPlayer NAA running on Linux.

 

Initially, this didn't make sense to me since A+ is designed to deliver optimal sound quality in an OS X (now macOS) environment. However, now that A+ has good library management (which will be even better in 2.6), excellent Qobuz/TIDAL integration, an iPad remote app, and now PCM --> DSD conversion it is simply the best all round player.

 

With HQPlayer I need to get Roon for a good GUI, a remote app and streaming integration ... but Roon is expensive and really has a lot of function I don't need ... and Roon doesn't have Qobuz integration yet. Muso is an alternative GUI and remote app, but it's not that mature.

 

Damien, please consider extending the reach of A+ in this manner. Your product is just too good to consider switching just to get a network component.

[jvlata]

I'd really like to be able to use A+ with a micro rendu. So I'm talking about introducing a component similar to HQPlayer NAA running on Linux.

 

Initially, this didn't make sense to me since A+ is designed to deliver optimal sound quality in an OS X (now macOS) environment. However, now that A+ has good library management (which will be even better in 2.6), excellent Qobuz/TIDAL integration, an iPad remote app, and now PCM --> DSD conversion it is simply the best all round player.

 

With HQPlayer I need to get Roon for a good GUI, a remote app and streaming integration ... but Roon is expensive and really has a lot of function I don't need ... and Roon doesn't have Qobuz integration yet. Muso is an alternative GUI and remote app, but it's not that mature.

 

Damien, please consider extending the reach of A+ in this manner. Your product is just too good to consider switching just to get a network component.

 

+1

[Krutsch]

I'd really like to be able to use A+ with a micro rendu.

 

...

 

Damien, please consider extending the reach of A+ in this manner. Your product is just too good to consider switching just to get a network component.

 

One obvious solution would be UPnP/DLNA; then A+ could output directly to a Rendu's MPD/DLNA stack (upmpdci). Developing that functionality would be some work, but supporting it would be a TON of work. Just ask Simon at MinimServer about that.

 

Another alternative is to develop a proprietary network audio protocol; but, again, ask Jussi how much fun supporting NAA has been with Roon integration and various devices.

 

Just my $0.02... I am looking forward to whatever is in store for the upcoming version and improvements to library management.

[DomieMic65]

Guys it's off topic but I want to read more about the DIRAC plug in. Any link? Thanks..

[JoseL]

Yes, please!

 

Yes please +!!!

I am currently transitioning to a Sonore uRendu and would love to have A+ as one of the output modes.

S'il vous plaît Damien talk to Jesus (@Sonore)!!!

[Pocobear]

Guys it's off topic but I want to read more about the DIRAC plug in. Any link? Thanks..

Dirac Research - Digital Room Correction, Sound Optimization, Sound Filed Control is their site. It's not an a AU plugin. Data flow is from Player (Audirvana Plus) output to Dirac, Dirac output to DAC, up to 192khz, no DSD. In my system, I think that PCM music corrected for room problems with Dirac sounds better than DSD without room corrections. And my room has a very good response to begin with. + or minus 3db from 26hz to about 15,500khz with a gentle slope to 20khz, with a big resonate spike @71hz which Dirac takes care of very nicely. Need a bass trap for sure. One of these days.

[occamsrazor]

Guys it's off topic but I want to read more about the DIRAC plug in. Any link? Thanks..

 

There is in fact a Dirac AU plugin. It's pretty identical to the Dirac software control panel. It's been in beta for ages and isn't on the website. I think this is the thread you are looking for:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f23-dsp-room-correction-and-multi-channel-audio/dirac-live-1-2-mac-28360/