Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United States

About vvcv

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Barrows, Thanks for the input. I did not feel to mention only Topping to be adequate to Firedogs' question as he asked about the chips performance and not the DACs performance. In addition, he may be considering another DAC with the AK44XX. And in my description, I noted that only because a chip manufacture states it is capable of certain resolutions, does not mean the DAC manufacture will follow the same guidelines, of sorts, to allow for those resolutions. In other words, his question was about AKM not Topping. Secondly, you are correct and I thought about showing a screenshot o
  2. Hello Firedog, As far as all AKM 449X chips doing up to 512 I can't say for sure that is that case. But, I am only getting this information from one DAC module that came with my DAC which was quickly replaced. Also, not all manufactures are going to use the chip in the same ways. For example, some will over/under sample more than others, others not at all. Some will even be so tricky, (like Benchmark) and say they do not directly over/under sample. However, ALL of their files sent to the DAC will go through the DACs filter, and thus changing it to whatever degree the DAC sees fit.
  3. Thanks a lot for this. Great info. for a buddy that wants to buy my Benchmark -or if i sell it.
  4. Thanks again Solstice380. It may have been one of your first posts, but during reading everything on this thread I called Benchmark. The contact I always speak with when I need something technical taken care of, he is the one that gets me up and running, though he is a sales manager and not an engineer. But, he's fairly certain that the Benchmark would indeed see the DSD64 signal (DACs max rate) and still apply it's own hardware filters. I trust he would know just by the knowledge which he speaks regarding their DACs. Given how much I've learned today, I think it would be great co
  5. Hello Rikhav, After some discussion today on a thread I started, I too was under this same impression. However, I remembered a time when it was suggested I change some jumpers on my Benchmark HGC2 DAC. Before I did, and just today, i remembered reading quickly about something regarding the DACs filter and how it takes in and lets go of a signal. Anyway, after this discussion started to confuse me a bit this afternoon, I called Benchmark and spoke with the lead sales rep. A great guy who has always helped me with every tech problem I've had, and solved them. So, when I gave him a ba
  6. Thanks for the list StreamFidelity. Here's a quick list I found earlier: https://www.audiostream.com/content/non-oversampling-nos-dacs-list I've been very curious about r2r DACs and how it all works. I'd love to make one someday, but i'm sure the Youtube videos make it all seem easier then it would be, maybe some day soon. How do you like the Terminators sound?
  7. Oh, yeah, i see what you refer to. No, it didn't have a question mark, but it was more a question in trying to understand if that was indeed what the poster above was speaking of. Anyway, it seems it's not the case with all DACs. And, unfortunately, as far as a Benchmark rep knows, it will resample HQPs filter(s). But they suggested to ask the players developer due to them not knowing HQ at all, but I suspect they know enough about their hardware to have a definitive answer. Too bad my other DACs were on loan to audio pals during my HQP trial period. But, they're not NOS, though a
  8. Before I asked posted the original question i had no idea about NOS DACs. But, the more i'm reading about them and they do sound interesting. Especially one that AudioNote makes...a kit I think.
  9. I wish part of what you describe were true with my Benchmark DAC (can't say for sure). I thought the same may be true, after reading an above post, regarding feeding a DAC a "native" upsampling rate, however, with speaking to a Benchmark rep, a good sales manager who knows a lot of the engineering inside of their gear, claims that giving the Benchmark a DSD64 file will still be filtered through Benchmarks hardware. Now, he's not one of their engineer's (I've spoken with him before) but he didn't seem to know of HQ player and thought it best to get it straight from the horses mouth. I think, fo
  10. What do you mean "Is that so?" I made no statement only questions. How can you ask a question about other questions?
  11. Thanks Solstice. Geez, this really explains things for me. So, in a sense, or rather a very real actuality, any DAC that does not support NOS should not be used with HQP due to the DACs filters defeating the work the HQP filters do? If this is the case, someone mentioned that I would not need new hardware to use HQP --more accurately, to use HQP with its filters. It sounds like having a NOS DAC is what I need to hear the real benefits of HQP. As a side question to this, do DACs that claim to support Native DSD put a filter in the signals path? The Lampizator DAC looks i
  12. So, this statement is why I asked the questions in the previous post. So, your saying your DAC is running at its default settings (given that some DACs can upsample?) while you use HQP to do any upsample you may want?
  13. No not easy to understand at all, but do keep -3db in Audirvana (as I will in HQP) for any changes I choose to use for headroom as well as for the times my girlfriend listens to music, where 50% of it is very highly compressed stuff. Regarding your post. There are some tracks where I find PCM better too, but most music I listen to i enjoy DSD. So, I thought the whole reason for needing filters, aside from the DACs filters, was during upsampling or resampling to another format. So, if your original file is PCM, and not listening to upsampled PCM, do the HQP filters make any alterat
  14. Wow, yep, and there it is. Just to clarify for others, I found it in the installation directory.
  15. Perfect, thanks a lot Biosailor! I think this at least gives me a direction to look. For me, it's cost is 50% percent of a new 2a3 tube pair or a AudioNote cap which i'm putting into a DAC and two amps -all of which would have immediate and noticeable improvements...and I would know why. I've been trying to equate HQPlayer to what little I've learned about SOX filters in Audirvana, but even there, PhD acoustic engineers have a hard time understanding what an 'open source' piece of software is really doing via it's filters, nonetheless, some information is out there. I wonder why the whole audi
  • Create New...