HQ Player + DSD512 + DSP?

[PhilR]

I've read bits in threads here & there about running HQ Player & Acourate together to process native DSD files without going through a PCM conversion first. Is there a general consensus on this yet? Possible to do without having a job in IT to handle all of the potential complexities?

 

I would eventually like to have a setup that can process room correction on all of my music files from redbook FLAC to 192/24 HD to DSD. Easy to do on all of the non-DSD files that HQ Player would then upconvert, not so easy to do natively on my existing DSD files..

[MikeJazz]

I've read bits in threads here & there about running HQ Player & Acourate together to process native DSD files without going through a PCM conversion first. Is there a general consensus on this yet? Possible to do without having a job in IT to handle all of the potential complexities?

 

I would eventually like to have a setup that can process room correction on all of my music files from redbook FLAC to 192/24 HD to DSD. Easy to do on all of the non-DSD files that HQ Player would then upconvert, not so easy to do natively on my existing DSD files..

I would not bother with DSD on a lyngdorf setup....

[sdolezalek]

I've read bits in threads here & there about running HQ Player & Acourate together to process native DSD files without going through a PCM conversion first. Is there a general consensus on this yet? Possible to do without having a job in IT to handle all of the potential complexities?

 

I would eventually like to have a setup that can process room correction on all of my music files from redbook flac to DSD. Easy to do on all of the non-DSD files that HQ Player would then upconvert, not so easy to do natively on my existing DSD files.

 

I think you are both describing the (hopefully not too distant) future of hi-res audio and the reason why I'm a big believer in the HQPlayer software-based approach. On the computer end, the hardware to do this exists now (but is still somewhat costly, though not in comparison to really high-end audio gear). Getting it from the computer to a DAC capable of using the incoming DSD512 bit stream is still a bit tricky (i.e. there isn't yet a Linux bridge solution for NAA's like the microrendu to do DSD512). But you could have the computer in the same room and do a direct USB connection to something like the T+A DAC 8 DSD.

 

The missing element is the Acourate convolution of DSD information without conversion to PCM (which is really as Miska/Jussi question). But there is a far greater likelihood that we will progress to this kind of solution if we keep the hardware and software separate than if we "productize" the software solution into a branded hardware box.

[PhilR]

I would not bother with DSD on a lyngdorf setup....

 

Agreed, I posted this to look into a future system.

[PhilR]

I think you are both describing the (hopefully not too distant) future of hi-res audio and the reason why I'm a big believer in the HQPlayer software-based approach. On the computer end, the hardware to do this exists now (but is still somewhat costly, though not in comparison to really high-end audio gear). Getting it from the computer to a DAC capable of using the incoming DSD512 bit stream is still a bit tricky (i.e. there isn't yet a Linux bridge solution for NAA's like the microrendu to do DSD512). But you could have the computer in the same room and do a direct USB connection to something like the T+A DAC 8 DSD.

 

The missing element is the Acourate convolution of DSD information without conversion to PCM (which is really as Miska/Jussi question). But there is a far greater likelihood that we will progress to this kind of solution if we keep the hardware and software separate than if we "productize" the software solution into a branded hardware box.

 

I remember reading a forum response from Miska where he says he is already doing this. Would be good to find how it works.

[AudioTragic]

Yes, this is quite easy to process DSD + DSP room correction in HQPlayer. And, no, you don't need to have a job in IT to handle all of the complexities.

 

I use HQ Player and its internal convolution engine for room correction. It works seamlessly with both DSD native source files and PCM source files. I can output all files with room corrections all at DSD128 on a 4 year old iMac (which uses a relatively old i7 2600).

 

I don't have a DAC that supports DSD512, nor would my current processor handle it. But edbk says DSD512 with upsampling and room correction in HQPlayer works on his 6700K, see post #190 in the thread Design a PC/Server for ROON and HQ Player.

 

I use room correction filters generated by Audiolense XO, which is similar to Acourate. You upload the filters (spit into mono channels) into HQPlayer via the Matrix menus option. Miska has previously said that the matrix processing and convolution engine processing are done on DSD source files without any conversion of of the DSD source to PCM.

[tsaett]

In my testings (upsampling to 512 with room correction active and non -2s filters) the 6700k reached it's limit with DSD128 source material.

DSD64 (i.e. 99% of DSD content there is) worked fine.

Miska suggests, that for this kind of load you either need more cores (6 or more) or a graphic card for CUDA offload.

However, I also found that on many occasions I actually preferred the redbook source instead of the DSD version.

This suggests, that HQPlayer actually does a better job on converting the PCM "master" to DSD than the big studios.

 

So, unless you have tons of native DSD128 source material, the 6700k is all you will ever need.

[edbk]

I think however if you use the convolver engine dsd gets converted to pcm, then the room correction is applied, then its converted back to dsd again, seems very suboptimal to me to use room correction on a dsd source, can definately see why a pcm source would do better in this case. Still agree on miska's algorithms being superior to anything else though :-)

[tsaett]

Emile,

it is my understanding that Jussi is able to apply the DSP for DSD contend in the SDM realm, without the need to convert it to PCM in an intermediate step. This was the reason for me to buy HQPlayer in the first place, because to my knowledge he's the only one who accomplished that. Jussi can correct me if I'm wrong, but this is my understanding from having read multiple of his posts regarding this theme.

How he's doing it? I have no idea.

[edbk]

Oh really? I was taught thats impossible! Well with Miska you never know

 

So hey a question if you dont mind as Ive heard you have setup acourate to perfection where I have failed to get a completely satisfying result; What target curve do you use and how much phase correction do you set in Acourate? I settled on measuring at 96KHz and creating a 192KHz filter to use in HQP convolver. Although the convolution test gives better results for say 12/12/12/12 settings I preferred the sound of the default 2/3/2/3.

 

Thanks!

[tsaett]

Yes, I too was taught that you can't apply math to a 1 bit stream, but as you say Jussi is a clever guy and obviously found a way.

I chose my target curve based on many tries I made, kind of trial and error like.

The resulting curve may not look intuitive but it simply sounded best. I began with neutral (i.e. straight line) to slightly tilted, to much tilted, then bottom bump, midbass bump and so forth. It took my about 30 curves to arrive at what I have now.

I too found that the default for excess phase correction sounded better, so I stuck with it. But this probably varies from system to system. I also recorded with 96khz and generated the filters at 192.

[edbk]

Thanks, I'll retry with some different curves then. I always found the end result, although initially impressive from a "technical point of view" to lack prat / involvement. I recently aquired a pair of Rel Gibraltar G1 subs though that do a good job at compensating for the biggest roommode issues so I would probably need much less correction now. Maybe the end result will be more pleasing now aswell.

[mansr]

Yes, I too was taught that you can't apply math to a 1 bit stream, but as you say Jussi is a clever guy and obviously found a way.

 

You can't do maths in 1-bit. What you can do is expand it to however many bits are needed, do the maths, and run the result through an SDM to get it back to 1-bit. This can all be done without downsampling to typical PCM rates, which is probably where the confusion comes from.

[tsaett]

Thanks for the clarification mansr!

[Miska]

You can't do maths in 1-bit. What you can do is expand it to however many bits are needed, do the maths, and run the result through an SDM to get it back to 1-bit. This can all be done without downsampling to typical PCM rates, which is probably where the confusion comes from.

 

The confusion also comes from the thinking of "1-bit" in comparison to multibit samples in similar way to PCM. As such, there is no need to "expand" anything either. The whole concept of talking about "1-bit" is completely wrong, it just demonstrates that someone has their brain stuck to one certain model.

 

With equivalent analog systems nobody is talking about "1-bit" in context of class-D amps or PWM control.

[mansr]

The confusion also comes from the thinking of "1-bit" in comparison to multibit samples in similar way to PCM. As such, there is no need to "expand" anything either. The whole concept of talking about "1-bit" is completely wrong, it just demonstrates that someone has their brain stuck to one certain model.

 

Call it what you want, in order to apply a filter to a 1-bit signal, there must be a multi-bit intermediate representation somewhere, somehow. You can fold some operations into an SDM filter (or some functional equivalent), but that doesn't fundamentally change what you're doing.

 

If you claim to have discovered some new kind if mathematics, I'd suggest you write a proper paper about it instead of insulting people.

[Miska]

Call it what you want, in order to apply a filter to a 1-bit signal, there must be a multi-bit intermediate representation somewhere, somehow. You can fold some operations into an SDM filter (or some functional equivalent), but that doesn't fundamentally change what you're doing.

 

First, what kind of bits are you talking about? Again you are repeating "1-bit signal", I don't know where you find such 1-bit signals. DSD is a bitstream, it is not 1-bit signal and there's a distinct difference between the two.

 

If you claim to have discovered some new kind if mathematics, I'd suggest you write a proper paper about it instead of insulting people.

 

I don't think there's any new kind of mathematics. But why would I go around explaining things in detail? I don't work in academia, so I don't need to write papers for living.

[mansr]

First, what kind of bits are you talking about? Again you are repeating "1-bit signal", I don't know where you find such 1-bit signals. DSD is a bitstream, it is not 1-bit signal and there's a distinct difference between the two.

 

I don't think there's any new kind of mathematics. But why would I go around explaining things in detail? I don't work in academia, so I don't need to write papers for living.

 

You don't need to, but if you don't, why should I take your word over the multitude of people who do, not one of which I've come across making the kind of statements you do?

[Miska]

You don't need to, but if you don't, why should I take your word over the multitude of people who do, not one of which I've come across making the kind of statements you do?

 

You don't have to. But how about spending few years thinking about these things on your own.

 

While arguing here, I just got yet another nice slightly related thing working that I can do. Been thinking about it for a year or so, but finally got to do it.

 

Anyway, I don't want to pollute the thread more with irrelevant hands-waving.

[mansr]

You don't have to. But how about spending few years thinking about these things on your own.

 

Maybe I will. Now if you could point me to some relevant reading, it would surely aid my thinking. Then again, that might not be in your best business interest. Either way, I'd appreciate if you kept the insults to yourself in future.

 

While arguing here, I just got yet another nice slightly related thing working that I can do. Been thinking about it for a year or so, but finally got to do it.

 

Great.

[jacquesr]

@Miska - A bit of humour....

Maybe you should continue arguing here.. Imagine what else you could achieve!

 

 

 

While arguing here, I just got yet another nice slightly related thing working that I can do. Been thinking about it for a year or so, but finally got to do it.

 

Anyway, I don't want to pollute the thread more with irrelevant hands-waving.

[lmitche]

Miska,

 

BTW, the latest HQplayer beta with the T+A DAC sounds fantastic. I look forward hearing your latest innovations.

 

Larry

[cmarin]

You don't have to. But how about spending few years thinking about these things on your own.

 

While arguing here, I just got yet another nice slightly related thing working that I can do. Been thinking about it for a year or so, but finally got to do it.

 

Anyway, I don't want to pollute the thread more with irrelevant hands-waving.

 

Miska,

 

+1

 

As far as I'm concerned, focus your energies on your vision and don't worry about "irrelevant hand waving". The performance of your product speaks for itself. That's proof enough for me and many others; and I for one, fwiw, congratulate you for the wonderful work you've done with HQPlayer. I have done all the research to be fully invested in your vision for digital playback. Thank you for your great work!

[EuroDriver]

Miska,

 

+1

 

As far as I'm concerned, focus your energies on your vision and don't worry about "irrelevant hand waving". The performance of your product speaks for itself. That's proof enough for me and many others; and I for one, fwiw, congratulate you for the wonderful work you've done with HQPlayer. I have done all the research to be fully invested in your vision for digital playback. Thank you for your great work!

 

+1

[hifial]

Miska,

 

+1

 

As far as I'm concerned, focus your energies on your vision and don't worry about "irrelevant hand waving". The performance of your product speaks for itself. That's proof enough for me and many others; and I for one, fwiw, congratulate you for the wonderful work you've done with HQPlayer. I have done all the research to be fully invested in your vision for digital playback. Thank you for your great work!

 

+1

 

On second thought make that +infinity