or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Stello DA100 (show-off/impressions thread)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Stello DA100 (show-off/impressions thread) - Page 30

post #436 of 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post
Up-sampling is controversial, but if you feel the need to up-sample, it is probably better to get a DAC that does it better than the Stello does. USG
I always thought that the upsampling process is just a sequence of mathematical operations (such as interpolation, etc.). So, basically, it's just a formula. It can be implemented either in hardware or in software. It seems to me that it is much cheaper to change upsampling plugins in PC rather than trying different DACs.
post #437 of 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post
I might be wrong, but IIRC the prevailing opinion at Hydrogen is that up-sampling with foobar degrades the sound.
USG
I found this thread on hydrogenaudio.org:
Hydrogenaudio Forums > Upsampling audio before D-A conversion

Here are some quotes from it (from David):

"The resampling in, say, fb2k, is measurably better than the upsampling / oversampling / reconstruction filtering in even a good digital to analogue converter, never mind in a laptop sound card."

"Given that no DAC on the market today (or in the last decade) actually works at the native sample rate of the content, the audio will be upsampled (=oversampled=resampled) somewhere. The questions are where, how well, and in how many stages."

"There's nothing good about the "simple" approach of leaving it to the DAC itself. It might be good enough, but it's certainly not the best that can be done in terms of doing the job properly."
post #438 of 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironmine View Post
I found this thread on hydrogenaudio.org:
Hydrogenaudio Forums > Upsampling audio before D-A conversion

Here are some quotes from it (from David):

"The resampling in, say, fb2k, is measurably better than the upsampling / oversampling / reconstruction filtering in even a good digital to analogue converter, never mind in a laptop sound card."

"Given that no DAC on the market today (or in the last decade) actually works at the native sample rate of the content, the audio will be upsampled (=oversampled=resampled) somewhere. The questions are where, how well, and in how many stages."

"There's nothing good about the "simple" approach of leaving it to the DAC itself. It might be good enough, but it's certainly not the best that can be done in terms of doing the job properly."
What you found, ironmine, was a unresolved debate that went on for 5 days.

The quotes you pulled out of context were just the opinion of one person who then went on to say, "I never once said it would sound better. I said it was measurably better,"....

Which was countered by, "One of my favorite arguments, which I've used here many times, is that just about everything measures differently, because our ability to measure has become so sophisticated."

And off they went.... just like here, point and counter point, with no conclusion other than perhaps the more substantial arguments were made by Krueger.

USG
post #439 of 496
thanks for the info, might be worth a shot.
post #440 of 496
Thanks for your info Ironmine.

I have an old NOS and will be buiding an oversampling DAC in the near future. I will keep your observation in mine and see whether I can listen to any real differences.
post #441 of 496
Here's the datasheet for AKM AK4395 , which is the heart of Stello DA100:

AKM AK4395 datasheet, AK4395 is 192kHz 24-bit DAC

It's 128X oversampling!
post #442 of 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post
Ironmine is quite correct when he says that that engaging the 192 up-sampling switch on the Stello DA100 brings the mids and vocals forward as is shown in his picture , flattening out the depth of the sound stage (although with headphones it doesn't move the entire sound stage from behind your head to in front of it). Disabling the up-sampling restores the depth.

I don't know what the up-sampling switch actually does electronically, so saying "inverting the depth information" may not be an accurate description of how the Stello up-samples.

USG
I was describing only what the picture shows:
1. Upsampling mode, voices are closer than guitars/drums
2. Bypass mode, voices are farther than guitars/drums
Hence, depth information has been inverted. Only one of these can be correct, since they are exactly opposite of each other.

I can't really hear as much difference in the soundstage, except that maybe bypass mode is closer and more diffuse.
post #443 of 496

lol link somehow manged to say Yes gran.

<a href=http://blog.mreza.info/members/Buy-Actos-No-Prescription-Needed.aspx>side effects of actos</a> Actos <a href=http://clr-h.jp/members/Buy-Sinequan-Online-Without-Prescription.aspx>sinequan side effects</a> Sinequan <a href=http://www.robertmclaws.com/members/Buy-Lipitor-Cheap-Without-Prescription/default.aspx>lipitor unusual side effect</a> Lipitor ” link lowered link head and frowned.
post #444 of 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by some1x View Post
I was describing only what the picture shows:
1. Upsampling mode, voices are closer than guitars/drums
2. Bypass mode, voices are farther than guitars/drums
Hence, depth information has been inverted. Only one of these can be correct, since they are exactly opposite of each other.

I can't really hear as much difference in the soundstage, except that maybe bypass mode is closer and more diffuse.
Hi 1x

That's curious. I noticed the effect on jazz combos as well. The treble and mids move forward from their original position. If there is a distant snare drum or cymbal, the 192 mode moves it forward placing everything in more or less an even plane.

Do you notice the bass decrease when going into 192 mode?

USG
post #445 of 496
Hello,
I have the Stello DA100 connected to an Asus notebook with a USB cable.
I read however on this thread that the USB implementation is not that good and that it downconverts to 44.1/16. I have some music in 96/24 and more of it is becoming available.
I wonder if there's any point in buying (for instance) the Transit M-audio so that I can connect through the optical in and get full 96/24 playback. And will this give an improvement for 44.1/16 sources?
I have to say I'm already very happy with the sound, a marked improvement over what I had previously. But I just wondered if there's room for improvement with this relatively cheap purchase.

Theo

My setup is as follows:
External harddisk ->
Asus eeepc notebook 701 with Windows XP and Foobar2000 and ASIO -> USB ->
Stello DA 100 ->
Harman Kardon HK 680 amplifier ->
Bowers & Wilkins DM2000 speakers
post #446 of 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by tj1738 View Post
Hello,
I have the Stello DA100 connected to an Asus notebook with a USB cable.
I read however on this thread that the USB implementation is not that good and that it downconverts to 44.1/16. I have some music in 96/24 and more of it is becoming available.
I wonder if there's any point in buying (for instance) the Transit M-audio so that I can connect through the optical in and get full 96/24 playback. And will this give an improvement for 44.1/16 sources?
I have to say I'm already very happy with the sound, a marked improvement over what I had previously. But I just wondered if there's room for improvement with this relatively cheap purchase.

Theo

My setup is as follows:
External harddisk ->
Asus eeepc notebook 701 with Windows XP and Foobar2000 and ASIO -> USB ->
Stello DA 100 ->
Harman Kardon HK 680 amplifier ->
Bowers & Wilkins DM2000 speakers
Hi tj

I use a Blue Circle Thingee for USB conversion with my laptop. Another option might be the Trends UD10. But I think the real problem is the laptop and USB.

I might be wrong, but I'm starting to get the impression that the Stello sounds better when connected optically to my dedicated music computer than it does when converted from USB.

YMMV, but get as good a USB converter as you can afford.

Regarding 96/24, there are threads explaining why it's useful for recording and mixing but not necessary for playback.

USG
post #447 of 496
Thanks USG, for your reply.

What you mention, however, are d/a converters and I have no intention of changing from my Stello DA100.
What I'm looking for is not another d/a converter, but a device that can be connected to my notebook with USB but outputs optical or coax, to connect with my Stello. By avoiding Stello's usb input I'm not limited to 44/16.
Anyway, back to searching the forums (and enjoying the music, of course)

Theo
post #448 of 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by tj1738 View Post
Thanks USG, for your reply.

What you mention, however, are d/a converters and I have no intention of changing from my Stello DA100.
What I'm looking for is not another d/a converter, but a device that can be connected to my notebook with USB but outputs optical or coax, to connect with my Stello. By avoiding Stello's usb input I'm not limited to 44/16.
Anyway, back to searching the forums (and enjoying the music, of course)


Theo
Hi Theo

One would think that a usb to coax or optical converter only changes the 'carrier' so there should be no point in getting a so called "better" one.

But if that was so easy to accomplish, the native USB implementation of the Stello would sound the same as the optical or coaxial inputs do. Since that is not the case, I still recommend a transport like the Thingee or Trends. (And even though their internal chips possess additional features, they are best used as transports).

USG
post #449 of 496
this is on my shortlist along with the Meier stagedac.
any views on comparisons, anyone?
post #450 of 496
Upstateguy,

Could you please describe more specifically the sound difference between the USB input and other inputs (optical, coaxial) of Stello DA100?

The reason I ask is because I need to understand if I need to invest into a USB-SPDIF converter...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Stello DA100 (show-off/impressions thread)