Your Audirvana preferences

[mac_and_dac]

Hi,

 

I've finally upgraded my old Audirvana 1.x version to the latest software. (No loyalty discount for early adopters, I notice!)

 

I'm using it mainly for Tidal streaming, at the moment.

 

There are of course a wide choice of settings available with Audirvana. I would be interested to know which settings each of you Audirvana+ users prefer, and the reasons why?

 

I know people always mention this in passing in another threads, however I would like to see if there is, say, an overriding preference for a particular mode.

 

cheers

mac_and_dac

[Hailey]

My understanding is that it's DAC-specific. I've found, for example, that it's best to leave the upsampling to my DAC.

[mac_and_dac]

Thanks for the response.

 

Is it really just a case then of 'suck it and see'? Luckily, I'm quite happy with the default sound I'm getting, but there seem to be so many permutations and combinations.

[RunHomeSlow]

i don't know why people don't want to answer this question... you are not the first asking that in A+ threads...

maybe not so many people upsample or they do used the default ones... i don't know.

 

I have read a lot in A+ threads here and gathered many settings from users that are way more competent in tweaking A+ than me.

 

The ones i use now are not the one that i used before upsampling to DSD... that solved ALL my problems trying to upsampling in A+ to PCM 352/384 i always had hiccups and my DAC often when changing sample rates will not lock the signal always... was very annoying.

 

I decided at the beginning to upsample because of a review of my DAC on the net, and the person was blown away upsampling at 32/352 compared to 16/44 of the same file.

 

The settings i used before upsampling in DSD with A+ were: 8 / 1,300,000 / 1,02 / 200 / 0.72 upsampling power of 2 and my sound was excellent... (i didn't found those myself) but when upsampling to DSD with these, A+ was running all the time at 250% CPU without any resting...

 

So i found those from another A+ thread user and the sound was still fantastic (for my DAC) and A+ was resting to 0% CPU use half the time... so way better for MacMini :-)

 

Here what i use now: Yes it is DAC dependant, CPU power, room correction etc :-)

 

[RunHomeSlow]

I use the C filter in DSD upsampling because of Dyson reply on another thread...

love the sparkling with my DAC with filter C. Now they have different names in A+, but are in the same order i think :-)

 

Type A filters: they sound fine nothing really to mention, a kind of "all-round". I can't really tell much differences between the versions (maybe A0 and A4 the best?).

 

Type B filters: they are really very organic, full of body and rounded (attacks are a bit slow). Version 0 sounds the best for me, the other versions are missing a bit of depth (B2 being the best after B0).

Type C filter: keeps the full body and depth of the B0 filter and adds more attack (more sparkling).

[wwaldmanfan]

I'm sure this has been asked many times, but remains a fundamental question. Folks with NOS DAC's, or models that allow internal upsampling to be disabled, benefit from software upsampling, but for the rest of us who's DAC's upsample automatically, how is software upsampling before the fact advantageous? I own three different DAC's, and none of them permit me to disable the internal upsampling.

 

I don't have DSD capability, jsut PCM, but I have experimented at length with the iZotope settings in Audirvana, and with HQPlayer. Most of my files are redbook CD rips, but I also have a number of hi-res downloads. I get the best sound just playing everything unaltered with Audirvana. Even the developer of HQPlayer admits that his software is designed for upsampling to DSD, and offers no benefit when playing files "straight".

I know I'm not the only one here who has traveled this path, and this was a hot topic before DSD DAC's became prevalent.

[Musicophile]

The reason why there is no single answer to all the questions above because the only one really is "it depends".

 

I personally upsample every PCM file under 88.2 to 88.2 and above, as my DAC uses different filters up to 88.2 and above, and I found this to sound slightly better. I'm pretty close to standard A+ Izotope settings (and found the differences to be rather minor)

 

By the way, there are several threads on optimal Izotope settings already here, e.g.

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/izotope-sample-rate-convertor-15352/

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/recommended-izotope-sample-rate-convertor-settings-es9018-dacs-28984/

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/izotope-settings-yggdrasil-29176/

 

Then you have the choice between direct mode on or off, and which of the direct modes. I found Direct mode off to sound best on my system. But this also depends on the rest of the system, and personal preferences (are you looking for more analytic or smoother sound, e.g. )

 

Finally, some folks here have DACs that sound better fed with DSD; so they'll use on the fly DSD conversion.

 

Unfortunately, all you can do is try for yourself, or start a DAC-specific thread on best settings.

 

Any universal thread on A+ settings really doesn't make sense.

[mac_and_dac]

Thanks for the responses.

 

If everyone is really just experimenting themselves to see what sounds best and there isn't any preference or best practice, then I will experiment also myself and move forward that way.

[Jud]

Thanks for the responses.

 

If everyone is really just experimenting themselves to see what sounds best and there isn't any preference or best practice, then I will experiment also myself and move forward that way.

 

The first thing I would suggest trying is upsampling to the maximum input resolution for your DAC with iZotope (not Core Audio), and DSD conversion if your DAC accepts it; having A+ on extreme priority and all other optimizer settings checked; no software volume control unless you have no pre-amp and no volume control on your DAC; standalone (no iTunes integration); direct mode, exclusive mode, integer mode 1; no Audio Units effects; all else in A+ at default settings; and your music library connected by Ethernet rather than USB or FireWire if possible.

 

Then adjust the iZotope and if applicable DSD conversion settings and see whether there's anything you prefer to the defaults.

[mac_and_dac]

Brill - thanks for the tips, Jud.

[Hailey]

Could someone explain how this tweaking affects the data stream sent to the DAC. What bits are changed ?

[Musicophile]

Could someone explain how this tweaking affects the data stream sent to the DAC. What bits are changed ?

 

It depends.

 

You're only changing actual bits if you're using Izotope resampling (any sample rate change) or during DSD conversation.

 

Direct mode et al are, to simplify a bit, just optimizing how the bits (without any change to the data stream itself) are handled within the computer (priority) and handed over to the USB port.

[mikeypas]

I'm very interested in knowing this as well.

 

As its DAC specific, I'll specify i'm using imac 2008 -> usb to ifi idsd nano -> schiit asgard 2 -> hifiman 400i (audirvana 2.5.3)

I wanted to know what other peoples izotope settings were

I also read alot about upsampling pcm to dsd, I tried using dsd128 and various filter settings.

Finally, I gave up because I seemed to get better sound using no upsampling.

 

Because of all the possible izotope filter settings, as well as DSD filters A4-8 B4-8 and C7, the "what sounds best to your ears" comments became difficult, as there are so many permutations.

 

So just looking for someone with similar setup and who can recommend what settings to use

Thanks

Mike

[copy_of_a]

I'm sure this has been asked many times, but remains a fundamental question. Folks with NOS DAC's, or models that allow internal upsampling to be disabled, benefit from software upsampling, but for the rest of us who's DAC's upsample automatically, how is software upsampling before the fact advantageous? I own three different DAC's, and none of them permit me to disable the internal upsampling.

Most DACs (and CD Players) do upsampling (probably most DACs 8x). So when you have a non-NOS DAC you are effectifely hearing the upsampling of your DAC. I assume the vast majority of DACs do linear upsampling. Upsampling in the Music-Player (Audirvana, HQPlayer etc.) allows you to adjust the way/style of upsampling and therefore give you the choice to create a sound you may prefer. I for one mostly prefer non-linear upsampling - I do prefer settings with lower pre-ringing for Rock/Pop/Electronic. Only for classical music I prefer linear upsampling. So in the case of Rock/Pop/Electronic I set A+ to upsample with low pre-ringing and this way the DAC is fed with its maximum samplerate and therefore doesn't perform its internal (linear) upsampling anymore...

[OldBigEars]

Quick question.....when you set A+ to no upsampling - this means that the Isotope settings have no effect, correct? I'm pretty sure this is the case, but it would be nice if someone could confirm. Thanks.

[Booster MPS]

Quick question.....when you set A+ to no upsampling - this means that the Isotope settings have no effect, correct? I'm pretty sure this is the case, but it would be nice if someone could confirm. Thanks.

 

This is absolutely correct. Many have missed that point along that way while thinking they were making changes. Great point to reinforce.

[OldBigEars]

Thanks

[HardrockInMiniMac]

This is absolutely correct. Many have missed that point along that way while thinking they were making changes. Great point to reinforce.

 

I only need to upsample 176,4 to 192 kHz as my DAC does not play 176,4. For the rest I keep 44,1 to 44,1 etc.

 

Question: Does Audirvana tweak the signal for the sample rates I leave untouched when using selective up sampling for only 176,4? Or in other words: Do the settings only apply to the sample rate specified for upsampling or to all of them?

 

Thanks

[jamesg11]

Recently I pretty much followed the Jud methodology above, when I sold on my Mytek dsd192 & dragged an aged Cyrus DacX out of the cupboard. The Mytek had worked well enough on a range of strategies, but the Cyrus was clearly better feeding in all files at its max 192. Cyrus tech info was that this max rate had the least sampling rate management.

(But ... really looking forward to a new & superior dac, which I'm taking time thinking through.)

[Booster MPS]

I only need to upsample 176,4 to 192 kHz as my DAC does not play 176,4. For the rest I keep 44,1 to 44,1 etc.

 

Question: Does Audirvana tweak the signal for the sample rates I leave untouched when using selective up sampling for only 176,4? Or in other words: Do the settings only apply to the sample rate specified for upsampling or to all of them?

 

Thanks

@HardrockInMiniMack Good question, I have not thought about that specific case. I know that the selector for "None" implies that no "Advanced Parameters" are going to apply. Not sure if the "Other" upsampling choices in which the Advanced Parameters affect the filters turns the parameters to be active, even for the special no upsampling cases that you did not change. Good point worth clarifying here if someone has tested that. Is it all or none?

[damien78]

@HardrockInMiniMack Good question, I have not thought about that specific case. I know that the selector for "None" implies that no "Advanced Parameters" are going to apply. Not sure if the "Other" upsampling choices in which the Advanced Parameters affect the filters turns the parameters to be active, even for the special no upsampling cases that you did not change. Good point worth clarifying here if someone has tested that. Is it all or none?

 

There is no iZotope SRC used (so the filters settings are ignored) when the playback sample rate is the same as the file native one.

[ThunderMac]

Hi guys

 

Does anybody knows is it possible, that when I chose one of forced upsampling (for example 2x only) it seems to me that there is a little bit more sibilance in vocals? (It's easier to me "measuring" sound differences in human voice than in instruments). It will be interesting to hear your experience about that.

 

Second Question. Can I somehow have influence on reducing (vocal) sibilance which is appearing on some flac albums? Maybe some one-click "De-essing program" in audirvana settings (... I am afraid to go into Audio Units Effects...)

[Lee Henley]

There is no iZotope SRC used (so the filters settings are ignored) when the playback sample rate is the same as the file native one.

 

Just to clarify if I play a DSD64 file into my DAC thats set at DSD 64 on A+ then I would not get any use of the SRC iZotope settings? however if I upsample from DSD64 to DSD 128 then the settings would be in use?

[Jud]

Just to clarify if I play a DSD64 file into my DAC thats set at DSD 64 on A+ then I would not get any use of the SRC iZotope settings? however if I upsample from DSD64 to DSD 128 then the settings would be in use?

 

Unless something has changed, A+ doesn't upsample DSD input. Upsampling from PCM to DSD or from lower res to higher res PCM uses the iZotope settings. So changing your example to PCM, if you have A+ set to upsample to 192KHz and you provide 192KHz input, the iZotope settings are not used.

[Lee Henley]

Unless something has changed, A+ doesn't upsample DSD input. Upsampling from PCM to DSD or from lower res to higher res PCM uses the iZotope settings. So changing your example to PCM, if you have A+ set to upsample to 192KHz and you provide 192KHz input, the iZotope settings are not used.

 

Your right Jud, DSD files are not upsampled I've just checked it out