[dericchan1]

Did you try Daphile OS? it`s free, on machine with i5 it can upsample to DSD256 on-fly.
I do not use any audio processing so all I need is Intel Celeron motherboard which I got for 40$ with 4gb of RAM.
Optimization of this OS make it sound better then most reasonably priced streamers (like Eversolo A6, from all digital outputs) .

Well there you go. It means people can indeed go with a dsd only dac and just use a free play back program like foobar or Daphile to do dsd on the fly…

 

[dericchan1]

Did you try Daphile OS? it`s free, on machine with i5 it can upsample to DSD256 on-fly.
I do not use any audio processing so all I need is Intel Celeron motherboard which I got for 40$ with 4gb of RAM.
Optimization of this OS make it sound better then most reasonably priced streamers (like Eversolo A6, from all digital outputs) .

Deleted duplicate message

 

[dericchan1]

Regardless, the cyan 2 is a great dac that honestly makes me feel like I don’t really need to spend more on dacs. I have compared the cyan 2 with my ifi pro sig idsd dac that’s close to 3x the price of the Cyan 2 and I can’t really come up with a winner. Each has it’s strengths it’s a tie in my books!!!

 

[bogi]

Hang on, I can run Spotify through HQPlayer?

You can direct audio output of any app to HQPlayer through a virtual cable type of solution (called as Blackhole on Mac and Linux). No additional computer needed. The only disadvantage is no automatic adaption to changes of source content sample rate. But since Spotify is 44.1k only, it is no issue.

I briefly explained few days ago in HQPlayer thread how I play youtube videos (or any other video content, including local library) through HQPlayer.

 

[flyte3333]

There's one huge issue with this whole cheaper DSD only model idea though, it effectively makes it mandatory to have HQPlayer, a $300 piece of software.

Roon and Audirvana and JRiver (and foodbar) can all convert PCM music to DSD output

Not limited to HQPlayer

 

[reddby]

Does that all mean that a regular PC with HQPlayer is the better source than a 1K Linux streamer without upsampling when used with the NOS dac like this Cyan?

Is the upsampling done by e.g. Roon substantially worse than HQPlayer?

 

[flyte3333]

Does that all mean that a regular PC with HQPlayer is the better source than a 1K Linux streamer without upsampling when used with the NOS dac like this Cyan?

yes

Is the upsampling done by e.g. Roon substantially worse than HQPlayer?

no not at all, nobody said that

 

[dericchan1]

Does that all mean that a regular PC with HQPlayer is the better source than a 1K Linux streamer without upsampling when used with the NOS dac like this Cyan?

Is the upsampling done by e.g. Roon substantially worse than HQPlayer?

In my experience a regular pc with hqplayer is the better source than a $10k streamer when used with ANY dacs not just nos dacs

 

[bogi]

no not at all, nobody said that

Over 10 years I am watching this topic and contributing to it. I see that HQPlayer PCM to DSD on the fly conversion is widely considered to be the best available.

I myself started to use on the fly PCM to DSD conversion with foobar2000 and foo_dsd_asio (ASIO proxy) more than 10 years ago. I experienced it as improvement over PCM output to my DAC. Then I switched to HQPlayer version 3, after trialing and recognizing the improvement HQPlayer brings for my ears. Was it a substantial difference? There is no way to measure it, since it is all about subjective opinions. I'm just not a person who pays hundreds of EURos for nothing. For me it was a substantial difference. Since that time many new and improved HQPlayer filters and modulators were added into HQPlayer.

I tried also JRiver MC and also some offline PCM to DSD conversion tools - from Tascam, Korg, SoX DSD extension by Mans Rullgard, I don't remember all. I found nothing on HQPlayer level. For my ears the best ones among them were the foobar extension and SoX DSD extension, Tascam one being the worst.

About Roon, many HQPlayer users are using Roon for library management and playback control, since HQPlayer is officially supported by Roon. Why would people paying for Roon yet buy HQPlayer license if there would be no substantial difference in sound? HQPlayer trial is fully sufficient to try it with Roon.

Of course, everybody is welcome to compare more solutions and express his own opinion. It can be one of different opinions than most of people have, but that's fine. Perceiving music is a subjective thing where we don't need to agree. No absolute truth exists in this area and I fully recognize this fact. What I complain is your generalization 'nobody said that'.

 

[dericchan1]

Over 10 years I am watching this topic and contributing to it. I see that HQPlayer PCM to DSD on the fly conversion is widely considered to be the best available.

I myself started to use on the fly PCM to DSD conversion with foobar2000 and foo_dsd_asio (ASIO proxy) more than 10 years ago. I experienced it as improvement over PCM output to my DAC. Then I switched to HQPlayer version 3, after trialing and recognizing the improvement HQPlayer brings for my ears. Was it a substantial difference? There is no way to measure it, since it is all about subjective opinions. I'm just not a person who pays hundreds of EURos for nothing. For me it was a substantial difference. Since that time many new and improved HQPlayer filters and modulators were added into HQPlayer.

I tried also JRiver MC and also some offline PCM to DSD conversion tools - from Tascam, Korg, SoX DSD extension by Mans Rullgard, I don't remember all. I found nothing on HQPlayer level. For my ears the best ones among them were the foobar extension and SoX DSD extension, Tascam one being the worst.

About Roon, many HQPlayer users are using Roon for library management and playback control, since HQPlayer is officially supported by Roon. Why would people paying for Roon yet buy HQPlayer license if there would be no substantial difference in sound? HQPlayer trial is fully sufficient to try it with Roon.

Of course, everybody is welcome to compare more solutions and express his own opinion. It can be one of different opinions than most of people have, but that's fine. Perceiving music is a subjective thing where we don't need to agree. No absolute truth exists in this area and I fully recognize this fact. What I complain is your generalization 'nobody said that'.

Of course all comparisons and opinions are 100% subjective. I have a couple of friends who started out just playing bitperfect pcm with roon to their holo Spring 3 and told me they had tried upsampling and absolutely hated it, it sounded soft and artificial…

Then they claimed they started using roon to do upsampling and thought that sounded better, then they moved on to hqplayer upsampling to dsd and never look back. Now they even ditched roon altogether because they felt even using hqplayer with roon sounded inferior than just using hqplayer client app directly…

 

[betula]

If HQPlayer really is like the second coming of audio jesus as so many of you guys say, I might give it a go in the upcoming weeks. Just setting it up seems a bit complicated. Could I use the software with a laptop (Intel i7, 16GB, Win11, Tidal implemented) while also doing other tasks?

 

[dericchan1]

If HQPlayer really is like the second coming of audio jesus as so many of you guys say, I might give it a go in the upcoming weeks. Just setting it up seems a bit complicated. Could I use the software with a laptop (Intel i7, 16GB, Win11, Tidal implemented) while also doing other tasks?

Justing things started is nothing complicated, just download the desktop version on windows on your laptop, change output format to SDM=DSD

Set dsd rates to 256x48
Set modulator as ASDM7EC SUPER

Import a library of music, then use the hqplayer client app for playback

 

[bogi]

Could I use the software with a laptop (Intel i7, 16GB, Win11, Tidal implemented) while also doing other tasks?

Just let us know your CPU model, since i7 is of many generations. I was able to do PCM to DSD256 on 6th gen i7 yet with HQPlayer v4, but it was on border, so not ideal to run other tasks too. But I was (mostly) able to run Firefox during playback. I know that for example 9th gen runs DSD256 very easily. Now I am using i7 11th gen and I have no issues with DSD512, but that's with help of internal nVidia RTX A2000 laptop GPU.

Although some users may prefer higher DSD rates with Cyan2, it measures best at DSD256, so to reach real HQPlayer experience DSD256 it is fully sufficient.

 

[betula]

Just let us know your CPU model, since i7 is of many generations. I was able to do PCM to DSD256 on 6th gen i7 yet with HQPlayer v4, but it was on border, so not ideal to run other tasks too. But I was (mostly) able to run Firefox during playback. I know that for example 9th gen runs DSD256 very easily. Now I am using i7 11th gen and I have no issues with DSD512, but that's with help of internal nVidia RTX A2000 laptop GPU.

Although some users may prefer higher DSD rates with Cyan2, it measures best at DSD256, so to reach real HQPlayer experience DSD256 it is fully sufficient.

Thanks, it is 8th gen i7.

 

[dericchan1]

Thanks, it is 8th gen i7.

My old 6th gen i7 6700k can run dsd256 with 7EC super with default filters and no interruption doing other light work.