Adventures in Upsampling to DSD

[HardrockInMiniMac]

On 1.1.2018 at 1:18 AM, Dr Tone said:

 

Yes this is true.  With the excellent upsampling/filters/modulators in HQPlayer you can get great results.  With JRiver not so much.  I wouldn't even bother turning it on is JRiver.

 

On 31.12.2017 at 10:57 PM, Ron Scubadiver said:

Here is the part that I have trouble understanding.  Upsampling to high PCM rates is supposed to bypass upsampling and filtering by the DAC.  The argument goes a computer can do this better with software because it has more resources.  Upsampling to DSD 64 bypasses even more of the DAC which normally turns PCM into something like DSD.  DSD 128 should provide the  additional benefit of moving ultrasonic noise further away from the audio band.  I don't have any idea why DSD 256 would be better or if I had compatible hardware DSD 512.

 

You are very close to the answer already. Making it short and giving you the direction to search for an answer by the following example:

 

My Lyngdorf is a PowerDAC (DAC+fully digital amp). It resamples all input signals (even analoge) to 24/96 and continues processing them this way. Most people agree that 99% of all DACs do something similar. So if I upsample 44.1 to 192khz my Lyngdorf will resample that to 24/96 every time. Pointless but it works.

 

So you really got to ask yourself: Where and how is your requested optimization going to take place?

 

The point is to apply software filters while upsampling and people believe that these are superior. Let's think this thru:

 

My DAC has filters embedded so assuming I go upsampling with HQP I can turn all of that off in my Lyngdorf because there is no point in applying more filters to already "filtered" music.

 

Following this I would be left with the room perfect (room correction) features of my Amp but for that I can also use software like Dirac Live and that is also working, I had very good results before I purchased the Lyngdorf.

 

Well, that would be "game over" for Lyngdorf and Tinnov and the likes because any standard Amp can do from that point on and there will be better bang for the buck available. So why did I still buy the Lyngdorf? Vinyl.

 

The reason why I decided for a hardware solution is that I was deeply impressed with DIRAC Live and the effect of room correction more than with any other tweak before and there is absolutely no reason and no compelling way to feed a 5k $ analog chain into a computer in order to have its output run through software room correction and then finally into the Amp. That's a no no no go in the analoge world.

 

The only way is to find an audiophile hardware DSP with a highend analogue input and there are less than a handful such Amps in this market niche (Lyngdorf, Tinnov, McIntosh...). Vinyl is driving my decision and that surely makes me kinda non-mainstream on this forum.

 

But for you, still the same rules apply: Computer based solutions are more flexible and less vendor related. Highend hardware solutions offer enough resources to perform upsampling on the fly but with less flexibility for the user - on the other hand source, software etc. become less important. 

 

I have to add that Hardware solutions are much more expensive than -say- Mac mini with HQP and Dirac Live feeding a standard DAC feeding a standard Amp (which is what I had before and it was already pretty nice).

 

Hope this helps a bit,

Chris