or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › iFi Audio Nano iDSD discussion + impression
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iFi Audio Nano iDSD discussion + impression - Page 38

post #556 of 1711

I use J.River and it can stream DSD natively in bit streaming without using DoP. J.River can also convert on the fly any PCM to DSD128. Foobar is limited in convert Red Book PCM to DSD. I use J.River also for my DLNA devices. J.River have excellent library, file tagging and tools selection. You can download a 30 day trial. There is also HQPlayer as well that you can look into. Take care   

post #557 of 1711
Quote:
Originally Posted by john57 View Post
 

I use J.River and it can stream DSD natively in bit streaming without using DoP. J.River can also convert on the fly any PCM to DSD128. Foobar is limited in convert Red Book PCM to DSD. I use J.River also for my DLNA devices. J.River have excellent library, file tagging and tools selection. You can download a 30 day trial. There is also HQPlayer as well that you can look into. Take care   

Thanks for keeping it brief - J.River was the "prime suspect" of mine also. 

 

Now HQPlayer also looks promising. I guess I will have to test both.

post #558 of 1711

To add some new discoveries with DSD... I thought I would revisit 2xDSD using JRiver to upsample my redbook library on the fly over ASIO, since that is new with the new firmware. Native DSD over ASIO. No DoP. At first it played slow and a bit choppy so I made sure all my buffers were maxed out and that solved the problem. I have tried SO MANY different combinations (upsample with SoX min filters, native redbook upsampled on the fly with JRiver. Native redbook to the iDSD, redbook upsampled to 24/192, and 24/385 with JRiver.

 

Well crap, one thing im realizing is that a 'difference' sometimes, in and of itself sounds 'good'. - lets just say for right now the redbook upsampled with JRiver to 2xDSD native over ASIO wins. Very natural and clean. Good definition and realism, especially noted in piano

post #559 of 1711
Quote:
Originally Posted by earwaxxer View Post
 

To add some new discoveries with DSD... I thought I would revisit 2xDSD using JRiver to upsample my redbook library on the fly over ASIO, since that is new with the new firmware. Native DSD over ASIO. No DoP. At first it played slow and a bit choppy so I made sure all my buffers were maxed out and that solved the problem. I have tried SO MANY different combinations (upsample with SoX min filters, native redbook upsampled on the fly with JRiver. Native redbook to the iDSD, redbook upsampled to 24/192, and 24/385 with JRiver.

 

Well crap, one thing im realizing is that a 'difference' sometimes, in and of itself sounds 'good'. - lets just say for right now the redbook upsampled with JRiver to 2xDSD native over ASIO wins. Very natural and clean. Good definition and realism, especially noted in piano

+1

 

On OSX JRiver 2x DSD up-sampling sounds sweet as well.

post #560 of 1711

I don't have a Windows machine and don't know anyone who does. Is there no way to upgrade the iDSD's firmware on OSX? 

post #561 of 1711

mink70,

 

iFi support told me "No to OS X" a few weeks back when I was trying to upgrade to 4.0.

alas had to borrow a neighbor's old PC to do the update.

post #562 of 1711

i am using foobar2000 to play all my pcm transcoded to quad DSD with my idsd on v4.0..... and foobar has  the option  
to stream dsd natively or upconvert to 2xDSD or 4xDSD, ASIO direct.... to my ears, the 4xdsd is a step up from 2xdsd, DoP,
on firmware 3.3  and even 2xDSD on v4.0

post #563 of 1711

I thought some of you might be interested in an exchange I'm involved in at audioasylum.com.  I have the iFi Nano DSD and like it very much.  However, Gordon Rankin, with whose work some of you may be familiar, apparently doesn't believe there's any merit in converting PCM to DSD.  In fact, his explanation of the steps involved to make it happen did cause me a moment or two of doubt.  That doubt quickly evaporated after a follow-up listening session.

 

Gordon is a very knowledgeable and skilled designer.  I have nothing but admiration for his accomplishments.  Still, I think he's missing something here:

 

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/messages/13/135381.html

 

Thanks

 

Gary

post #564 of 1711
I'm on Gordon's side here. Just because something is DSD doesn't make it automatically sound better. Same like something in FLAC or mp3. If someone's creating a FLAC file from an mp3, I would say that's garbage. What matters is the mastering and the quality of the original source.

In the micro iDSD thread Thorstens from iFi/ARM gives a nice run-down on how hard it is to convert to/from PCM and DSD. Keep it in whatever the original format was...I don't get why you'd want to convert from PCM to DSD.
post #565 of 1711

I think the grossly simplified rationale behind using DSD is that it is simpler to implement a good DSD dac than PCM dac, and that the reconstruction filters required by PCM are the difficulty which DSD bypasses. DSD presents lots of problems though on the recording and editing end, and then upon playback a lot of ultrasonic noise is created which has to be filtered out. Pretty much all recording (except for some boutique stuff) is done in PCM, and DSD only might be offered as a final delivery format.

 

To me, redbook that is upsampled to 2x DSD does seem to improve in some aspects of sound but causes problems with other areas. Any PCM quality higher than redbook seems to suffer to me if upsampled (but this could be due to the strengths of my specific DAC, note NOT an iDSD.) 

 

For some comparisons, the 2L website offers some free tracks in 352khzPCM, 192kPCM, 96k PCM, DSD64 and DSD128 formats. Their records are sonically superlative so they are great for comparing formats. To try tracks go to their website:

 

http://www.2l.no/   and look at the "2L brand store" in the upper right and select "HD Test Bench Audio Files." The Mozart violin concerto at the top is a fantastic track in any resolution!


Edited by KmanChu - 6/4/14 at 7:53pm
post #566 of 1711
Quote:
Originally Posted by kugino View Post

I don't get why you'd want to convert from PCM to DSD.

 

The reason is that many listeners find that it sounds better. The best sound, by far, that I've experienced from my MacBook is listening to native DSD, followed by PCM upsampled to DSD on the fly via JRiver 19. I don't have the audio design experience of either Gordon Rankin or Charlie Hansen (of Ayre), who seem to have passionately held opinions against DSD, but I don't see how any technical discussion could possibly trump listening. And yet these forums are full of people who just know something must sound bad because it contradicts their belief system. USB cables all sound the same, because they must, and people prefer tube amps because they like the sound of "colorations," and all digital data streams sound identical, because, after all, they're just ones and zeros. The truth is that we still know fairly little about how digital domain changes affect listening. How else to explain talented audio engineers disagreeing with each other about nearly everything pertaining to upsampling, software, DSD, and basic approaches to designing a DAC?


Edited by mink70 - 6/4/14 at 7:44pm
post #567 of 1711
Quote:
Originally Posted by mink70 View Post

The reason is that many listeners find that it sounds better. The best sound, by far, that I've experienced from my MacBook is listening to native DSD, followed by PCM upsampled to DSD on the fly via JRiver 19. I don't have the audio design experience of either Gordon Rankin or Charlie Hansen (of Ayre), who seem to have passionately held opinions against DSD, but I don't see how any technical discussion could possibly trump listening. And yet these forums are full of people who just know something must sound bad because it contradicts their belief system. USB cables all sound the same, because they must, and people prefer tube amps because they like the sound of "colorations," and all digital data streams sound identical, because, after all, they're just ones and zeros. The truth is that we still know fairly little about how digital domain changes affect listening; anyone who claims otherwise is full of it. How else to explain talented audio engineers disagreeing with each other about nearly everything pertaining to upsampling, software, DSD, and basic approaches to designing a DAC?
I have no doubt that people think it sounds better. Like i have no doubt there are people who still think the earth is flat. wink.gif
post #568 of 1711
Quote:
Originally Posted by kugino View Post


I have no doubt that people think it sounds better. Like i have no doubt there are people who still think the earth is flat. wink.gif

Have you actually listened, or are you so sure of your opinions that you just know it can't sound good?

post #569 of 1711
Quote:
Originally Posted by mink70 View Post
 

Have you actually listened, or are you so sure of your opinions that you just know it can't sound good?

The whole point of how computer audio actually sounds is very hard to say - because it mainly runs on personal computers. Which are just that - personal. And can vary in performance and settings almost infinitely. It is impossible they will all sound the same with given software and hardware .

 

It is perfectly possible for one computer to "inaudibly" misbehave - making a superior file sounding worse, because it is not capable enough or set up to play that file well enough - or both. 

 

I will try to compare what various players are actually doing to files, particularly when "upsampling". If players are actually capable of "connecting the line between the dots" - that would be pro for upsampling. That goes particularly for PCM - from MP3 up. If not - there still remains the possibility that now equipment can use less sharp filtering, thus making sound better - but it will be again setup dependent.

 

What I did find to definitely bring dividens is upsampling DSD64 to DSD128 - no, you do not get what was not initially recorded, but the noise above the audible range is considerably reduced. I forgot by hom much - the least 6 dB, the most 20 dB. I was curious about this and "upsampled" a few of my own masters recorded in DSD64 - and they sound better converted to DSD128. I did conversion using Korg Audiogate.

post #570 of 1711

I am struggling to get DSD128 playback with nano iDSD and HQPlayer - it keeps maxing out at sampling rate of 3072000, which is obviously too low to play the required 5644800 - despite setting 12288000 for the bit rate limit, etc. Does anyone know the system requirements for HQPlayer for DSD128 ?

 

It works OK with DSD64 .

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › iFi Audio Nano iDSD discussion + impression