Topping D90 great but question future

[OldBigEars]

5 hours ago, ambre said:

Hi NewBigEars,

Please try dsd 256 with HqPlayer and you will notice where the Topping 90 is designed for and a next step SQ and hires via usb.
Very best regards,Andreas

 

 

Thanks Andreas - good to hear about future possibilities. I'm not about to invest in HQ Player at this time, but never say never in this hobby.  As mentioned, I've had brief forays into DSD in the past and didn't much like it - either sonically and especially the way it made my MBPro fry.  I use  an ST i5 these days but nevertheless I didn't find the SQ improvements I was supposed to be experiencing enough to torture my computer  Honestly I prefer the sound running 16/44 or 24/96. 

[barrows]

1 hour ago, OldBigEars said:

 

Thanks Andreas - good to hear about future possibilities. I'm not about to invest in HQ Player at this time, but never say never in this hobby.  As mentioned, I've had brief forays into DSD in the past and didn't much like it - either sonically and especially the way it made my MBPro fry.  I use  an ST i5 these days but nevertheless I didn't find the SQ improvements I was supposed to be experiencing enough to torture my computer  Honestly I prefer the sound running 16/44 or 24/96. 

You already have Roon, it does a good job oversampling to DSD 256.  And it will do it on your ST I5 no problem (Roon oversampling is much more easy on computer power).  Really try DSD 256 input to the D-90 with Roon.  And be sure to run the D-90 in "DAC mode" so that the DSD 256 just goes straight to the conversion stage, I suspect you will have some good results.

 

Yes, HQPlayer is better with the EC modulators, but Roon does quite well with the D-90 at DSD 256.

[OldBigEars]

21 hours ago, barrows said:

You already have Roon, it does a good job oversampling to DSD 256.  And it will do it on your ST I5 no problem (Roon oversampling is much more easy on computer power).  Really try DSD 256 input to the D-90 with Roon.  And be sure to run the D-90 in "DAC mode" so that the DSD 256 just goes straight to the conversion stage, I suspect you will have some good results.

 

Yes, HQPlayer is better with the EC modulators, but Roon does quite well with the D-90 at DSD 256.

 

@Barrows - I did try to test DSD last night. Somehow I screwed things up royally with all the setting changes on different pieces of equipment, to the extent that my Roon app went berserk and appeared by 'forget' all my settings, amongst other scary behaviors.  In the end I dug out of the crisis by rebooting everything.  Must have been user-error.  You are an expert on Sonore / ST / Roon systems - as well as D90 - so if you've got some simple instructions as to what needs to be adjusted and the correct settings, I may give it another try.

 

For the time being I'm preferring the coax /schiit eitr feed to the D90, over USB.

[barrows]

@OldBigEars,  sure!  Here is what gave me the best SQ with the Topping, a Sonore Rendu, and Roon:

 

1.  Go to sponicorbiter.com, find your microRendu, and click "manage"

2.  Go to "settings"-roon-and change the DSD settings from DoP to native DSD, click "save" and make sure you get a confirmation message.

You are done with sonicorbiter,

 

Next:

In the settings menu for the D-90, set it to DAC mode, this disables the D-90 volume control, and for DSD input, enables the direct DSD mode of the D-90, this passes any DSD input direct to the conversions stage, bypassing any DSP, oversampling, or delta sigma modulation by the DAC.  See the D-90 manual for details

 

Next:

 

In Roon, tap the speaker icon in the bottom right corner, tap "DSP".  tap "Headroom Management", and set the value to -5 dB, this lowers the level before oversampling to avoid clipping during the oversampling process.  In the same field, set "Show Clipping Indicator" to "on".  This will tell you if you have an clipping during playback (if you do, you can lower the headroom management a couple more dB, but usually -5 dB is enough).  Tap, "Sample Rate Conversion", and set sample rate conversion to "DSD".  Set "DSD Sample Rate" to 256,  Set "Sample Rate Conversion Filter" to "Precise, Linear Phase" (I prefer this setting, but you can try others of course).  Set "Sigma Delta Modulator" to "7th order CLANS", leave "SDM Gain Adjustment" at "0", set "Parallelize Sigma-Delta Modulator" to "Yes", set "Enable Native DSD Processing" to "Yes".  The DSD to PCM settings are irrelevant.

Before you exit, double check on the left that "Headroom Management", and "Sample Rate Conversion" are enabled.

 

Exit the DSP menus and play some music, the D-90 should indicate DSD 256 as the input sample rate.  Be sure to control your volume via your amps volume control.  If you click not he white dot in Roon, it will reveal exactly what Roon is doing to the signal, and confirm your settings (during playback). 

[Mike Rubin]

I can vouch for Barrows' settings on Roon, which I am using on a trial.  They made both of my DAC's (Topping D90 and Wyred4Sound 10th Anniversary) sound much better in many cases.  In fact, I think that Roon generally and these settings particularly have made the D90 quite listenable in my main system, where I previously found it painfully bright on way too many recordings. 

 

I did find that on many recordings, the headroom management makes the music sound a bit compressed and that, on some, the native format sounds better than the upsampled.  I dig that you can adjust whether to enable headroom and file conversion on the fly, so a/b'ing can occur within the few seconds that I actually have auditory memory. 

 

If you want to set it and forget it, though, just go with what Barrows says. They are a good norm for this DAC and, no doubt, many others. 

[OldBigEars]

@Barrows - thank you.  All working.  Two minutes in and already this sounds much better.

 

I'm excited....and will let you know how it goes.

 

@Mike - you're absolutely right.  This could work....

[barrows]

8 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

@Barrows - thank you.  All working.  Two minutes in and already this sounds much better.

 

I'm excited....and will let you know how it goes.

 

@Mike - you're absolutely right.  This could work....

Nice!

[firedog]

Barrows-

Tried your settings on my ESS streamer/DAC and they sound quite good on that one, too, even though I think ESS DACs don't do direct conversion. 

[barrows]

50 minutes ago, firedog said:

Barrows-

Tried your settings on my ESS streamer/DAC and they sound quite good on that one, too, even though I think ESS DACs don't do direct conversion. 

I use these settings on my ESS 9038 DAC, and indeed you are right, you cannot bypass the DS modulator and DSP with the ESS chip.  Even though there is no DSD direct mode comparable to what is available on the AKM chips, I prefer the 

ESS 9038 with DSD 256 input. 

[Miska]

7 hours ago, barrows said:

I use these settings on my ESS 9038 DAC, and indeed you are right, you cannot bypass the DS modulator and DSP with the ESS chip.  Even though there is no DSD direct mode comparable to what is available on the AKM chips, I prefer the 

ESS 9038 with DSD 256 input. 

 

ESS does fairly minimal processing for DSD, that's why it needs only three MCLK cycles per DSD sample. So it is certainly shortest available path through the chip, especially when run without ASRC/DPLL using synchronous clocks.

 

Hopefully they'll add direct mode in some future version, because their conversion stage architecture would fit that perfectly.

 

[barrows]

2 hours ago, Miska said:

 

ESS does fairly minimal processing for DSD, that's why it needs only three MCLK cycles per DSD sample. So it is certainly shortest available path through the chip, especially when run without ASRC/DPLL using synchronous clocks.

 

Hopefully they'll add direct mode in some future version, because their conversion stage architecture would fit that perfectly.

 

Yes, there is clearly a sound quality benefit to the lower processing.  And yes, I prefer to run synchronous clocking, where the bit clock and master clock are synchronous.  As I only play DSD 256, I have only a single 45.1584 MHz clock in my DIY DAC, just a single beating heart.  With my isolated/re-clocked USB interface I do have to run the 2x clock rate.

[Miska]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

Yes, there is clearly a sound quality benefit to the lower processing.  And yes, I prefer to run synchronous clocking, where the bit clock and master clock are synchronous.  As I only play DSD 256, I have only a single 45.1584 MHz clock in my DIY DAC, just a single beating heart.  With my isolated/re-clocked USB interface I do have to run the 2x clock rate.

 

Yeah, that is enough for Sabre at DSD256 (4x BCLK since minimum is 3x). And gives lower phase noise and less strange noise floor effects than when running from a 100 MHz clock.

 

[OldBigEars]

On 5/14/2020 at 6:52 PM, barrows said:

Please note this is specifically referring to the D-90 in "DAC mode" with DSD 256 input from a Signature Rendu SEoptical, with a Synergistic Orange fuse in the D-90.

 

It is a giant killer.  Not the best I've heard, but very, very good.  It probably needs to be paired with a good preamp to really shine, as the "DAC mode" defeats the volume control, and I do not think the output stage is quite beefy enough (current headroom) to drive amps directly, but at the price, heck, it is a no brainer.

 

There are better DACs, but the ones I know of all cost 10x as much or more...

Quick question about DSD.....when you’re upsampling from PCM to DSD 256 does it matter what quality of file you start with? In other words...any point in 24/96 files as opposed to using 16/44?

[Mike Rubin]

43 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

Quick question about DSD.....when you’re upsampling from PCM to DSD 256 does it matter what quality of file you start with? In other words...any point in 24/96 files as opposed to using 16/44?

I asked this question in another thread just the other day.  The response I got is that there's no way to tell because hi-res files might be remastered or not, i.e., they might just be upsampled in software from the 16/44 or they might in essence be whole new performances. The responder said that the only way to be sure if it does is to try both the Redbook and hi-res versions.   

[barrows]

1 hour ago, OldBigEars said:

Quick question about DSD.....when you’re upsampling from PCM to DSD 256 does it matter what quality of file you start with? In other words...any point in 24/96 files as opposed to using 16/44?

Yes, it matters.  I am assuming the file you start with is legit hi res here, originally recorded at the higher rate.

 

[Mike Rubin]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

 

1 hour ago, barrows said:

Yes, it matters.  I am assuming the file you start with is legit hi res here, originally recorded at the higher rate.

 

Not sure I understand what you mean, Barrows.  Recorded?  Or remastered?  The vast preponderance of hi-res recordings for sale on the web seem to be of records made before there were hi res recordings at all. 

[4est]

6 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

I asked this question in another thread just the other day.  The response I got is that there's no way to tell because hi-res files might be remastered or not, i.e., they might just be upsampled in software from the 16/44 or they might in essence be whole new performances. The responder said that the only way to be sure if it does is to try both the Redbook and hi-res versions.   

Sorry, I meant to respond to yours. It does matter assuming I can hear it correctly. That said, the actual mastering makes more of a difference and I feel no "need" to pursue hiz rez files specifically when upsampling. I feel that I should state that I use one of those DAC chipless DACs akin to the Denefrips or Holo Audio whom have patterned theirs from Miska's DSC.

[OldBigEars]

6 hours ago, barrows said:

Yes, it matters.  I am assuming the file you start with is legit hi res here, originally recorded at the higher rate.

 

 

It would have to be a generalization of Tidal or Qobuz streaming for me.  I'm not in practice going to be able to make this a case by case assessment - life's too short

 

But as Mike says, much of what I listen to was recorded long before such technologies arrived.

 

[barrows]

2 hours ago, OldBigEars said:

 

It would have to be a generalization of Tidal or Qobuz streaming for me.  I'm not in practice going to be able to make this a case by case assessment - life's too short

 

But as Mike says, much of what I listen to was recorded long before such technologies arrived.

 

Even with older recordings (which I am assuming are from analog tape masters), Hi Res transfers of them are very worthwhile IMO.  I especially like DSD transfers from older analog masters.

The reason I feel hi res recordings (or transfers/re-masters from analog) have an advantage is not because of the higher bandwidth and bit depth, but because of the influence the anti alias filter has on the sonics.  When one either lays down tracks digitally, or makes a digital transfer from analog, one has to have an anti alias filter before the A-D converter.  The higher the sample rate of the recording, the simpler and gentler this filter can be, and the less artifacts it will create in the digital result.

 

Of course all the usual caveats apply here as well, the quality of the original recording, and the mixing/mastering there of matter more than the final sample rate, etc, etc.  But given the choice between a hi res version and a redbook version of the same recording, I will always source the hi res version for my self because it can have advantages.  Whether or not one upsamples it later in playback is unrelated to this choice.

[OldBigEars]

Well that’s interesting.....a couple of hours into a fabulous listening session, the music stopped suddenly. 

 

The settings suggested by @Barrows sound fantastic, except I made one tweak: I use the smooth linear filter instead of precise - which blends perfectly with my room, equipment.  Really, the alchemy is special. 

 

But Roon abruptly stopped playing.  A message has popped up saying something like “too many features playing”.  None of my albums will open and play. So I went to the nearby room where I have my router with my STi5 connected. The STi5 was hot. I could touch and hold my hand on it - but it’s hot, rather than warm. 
 

I’ve turned off the STi5 and stopped listening.  Obviously I’m hoping there’s no serious damage to my Sonic Transporter.  I’m assuming there’s a connection between the overheating and the Roon message. I’ll let it cool down and will try again later. 
 

So much for the theory that DSD does not cause an STi5 to overheat.  Any suggestions?
 

 

 

[OldBigEars]

Update -  after cooling down and rebooting the STi5, it restarted and seems to play normally again. 

 

I checked the Roon processing speed on a few albums. It seems to range from 1.5 - 2.0X. This seems low, compared to normal. 
 

I’m going to have to sleep on this.  DVD 256 apparently transforms the D90 but it appears my Sonic Transporter may not have sufficient core capacity to run it safely. 

[barrows]

1 hour ago, OldBigEars said:

Update -  after cooling down and rebooting the STi5, it restarted and seems to play normally again. 

 

I checked the Roon processing speed on a few albums. It seems to range from 1.5 - 2.0X. This seems low, compared to normal. 
 

I’m going to have to sleep on this.  DVD 256 apparently transforms the D90 but it appears my Sonic Transporter may not have sufficient core capacity to run it safely. 

If Roon is only running at 1.5 to 2.0 that is not good news.  I would recommend contacting Andrew at SGC and discussing with him.  I am not sure which I-5 the ST is using.  My Mac Mini is also an I-5 machine, and runs Roon oversampling to DSD 256 and 512 with no issues, and Roon shows always running fast 4X or higher.  Roon says that rates below 4x are getting close to borderline, so the problems which you are having are not that surprising, although, I am surprised the ST I5 is not able to run faster, perhaps it just needs a little more cooling?  A computer will throttle its capability if it gets too hot, anyway, Andrew is the man to consult with on this.

[OldBigEars]

7 hours ago, barrows said:

If Roon is only running at 1.5 to 2.0 that is not good news.  I would recommend contacting Andrew at SGC and discussing with him.  I am not sure which I-5 the ST is using.  My Mac Mini is also an I-5 machine, and runs Roon oversampling to DSD 256 and 512 with no issues, and Roon shows always running fast 4X or higher.  Roon says that rates below 4x are getting close to borderline, so the problems which you are having are not that surprising, although, I am surprised the ST I5 is not able to run faster, perhaps it just needs a little more cooling?  A computer will throttle its capability if it gets too hot, anyway, Andrew is the man to consult with on this.

 

OK I'll try to reach Andrew.  Another factor is that I also run Convolution filters on Roon.  These are the HAF room correction filters.  I typically use the Crosstalk filter, which I've found to be effective.  I could disable the Crosstalk, or I could try DSD 128.  If Andrews got other ideas, that would be great.

[barrows]

5 hours ago, OldBigEars said:

 

OK I'll try to reach Andrew.  Another factor is that I also run Convolution filters on Roon.  These are the HAF room correction filters.  I typically use the Crosstalk filter, which I've found to be effective.  I could disable the Crosstalk, or I could try DSD 128.  If Andrews got other ideas, that would be great.

Ahh, that explains it then.  I can understand how the convolution plus the oversampling could be too much for the I5.  I would see if Andrew can offer you a reasonable upgrade path to an ST I7...

[OldBigEars]

Here's the answer from Andrew at Small Green Computer...

 

The sonicTransporter i5 is designed for DSD 128 max.

 

If you want DSD256 or DSD512 you need a sonicTransporter i9.

 

So that's that.  I'm going to try using @Barrows settings with DSD 128 and will compare with 256.

 

Im finding 128 lifts the processing speed up to around 3.5-4.0X.  In all the experimentation I've also noticed that Tidal 16/44 takes a little less CPU than Qobuz 24/96.  I may well just upsample to DSD 128 from Tidal 16/44 from now on.