[Jmstrmbn]

I currently use Macbook Optical out> Nuforce HDP.  I've been eyeing the hiface 2 since it was announced especially since it is driverless on OSX.  Based on what you said I think that will be my next venture when I get the funds.

 

[tp280]

I would think the Macbook media on optical to HDP would be reasonable quality. When I had my HDP Icon in the den, I used the optical out of a Vizeo LCD (input from HDMI to a cablebox) with good results, (again through the AE5+ speakers).  When I had it in the main room I used the optical to the cablebox there with resullts as the best of the three HDP inputs, (over coax and USB).  I'm not sure you would get a better sound spending for a Hiface to link the Macbook over optical to HDP.

 

[Jmstrmbn]

Ok, are you saying that the hiface is not capable of beating the optical input or that usb to spdif converters regardless of price are not capable?  I have quite a few 24/192 files I've purchased over the past year or two and I can't play them at full quality due to the macbooks 24/96 limited dac chip. Is there another way to play these files that would also provide a bump in sound quality?

 

[danpong]

Quote:

I'm still a newbie on this site still despite I've shared my experiences with the Nuforce Icon HDP, Schiit Bifrost, and M2Tech Hiface 2 to connect my laptop to my home system.
 
Question 1) Answer-Hiface 2 will transfer the native level without upsampling, so you can set your PC soundcard at the highest setting your DAC can decode and your DAC should decode your digital stream at native signal level, so you FLAC material will be at 16/44.1 when decoded by your DAC, unless it performs updampling.
 
Qusetion 2) Answer-From my limited experience as well as from what I have read, I would concur that you will probably like the results of your PC music through Coax into your DAC converted with a product like Hiface 2 over just using a USB cable to your DAC. Other considerations include what other sources you need to connect to your DAC as well, (not too many of them have multiple coax inputs, with switchable inputs). I'd A/B a dsic played from your PC via USB to the DAC against say a dedicated disc player feeding its coax stream to your DAC.
 
Do your comparison with a decent USB cable.  If you like the USB-DAC fed sound, can use your computer for other tasks while listening without sound errors, your DAC's coax input is already used by a dedicated source, get a better USB cable and be happy with USB. If unhappy with the sound or you get clocking issues while doing other tasks on the computer while listening, by all means give a USB converter like the Hiface 2 a shot. I'd have a tough time buying a DAC with USB input without hearing the perfomance and making sure it didn't have any issues while using my laptop with other aps. The fact that Hiface 2 did well means you can probably buy a DAC for its chipset processing prowess and if it doesn't have USB, you win by using Hiface 2 over a unit with a not-so-impresive USB section.

thank you for your reply.  I'm still experimenting all my connection.  That is why I'm trying to get the hang of the real technical behind the thing as I mentions over 95% of my collections are only CD quality 16/44.1 so will it be any different to get this hiface 2 over some other lower price 24/96 solution.  Or maybe even just use USB with better quality cable.  I have kimber usb cable which I think it make the sound a bit warmer and thicker notes.

 

[tp280]

To Jmstrmbn, Good point as I didn't know the sound settings for your Macbook. I would say that if you are only able to send a 24/96 signal over optical to your Icon HDP, it may still be a tough call on what sounds better between optical or adding the Hiface 2 to go USB to SPDIF. Will your Macbook send a 24/192 signal through USB?  Otherwise a mute point, maybe a better sounding DAC in general and still go with optical would yield the best sound. The Hiface 2 to Adcom or Integra in 24/96 still sounded awesome. (The Icon HDP was long gone so unable to compare). I would say try a better sounding DAC to get get better sound using the optical.
 
Other factors to consider, distance from PC to DAC, other uses of your Macbook.

 

[tp280]

To danpong, My thoughts for selection of a Hiface 2 were:
 
That I really liked the sound of digital scources through my Adcom GTP-880's DAC better than the outboard Icon HDP or Schiit Bifrost which were relativly inexpensive DAC's that had good public feedback. Moving from KEF 2's to 4's as mains really showcased DAC performance.
 
Hiface2 was a great way to go through the USB of my Laptop to the Adcom. It sounded best. As a twist, the Adcom died and I picked a more modern pre/pro (Integra) that I feel equal to the sound of a) using the Hiface to SPDIF vs. b) the (Integra's) HDMI connection to my Dell and the self-loading driver from the Integra. Simpler aproach using HDMI.
 
With a good Kimber USB cable, you should be able to decide if your USB input provides the music quality you want. I know that using the Hiface 2 with the 24/48 setting on my laptop still yeilded great results into the Adcom. Adding the Hiface 2 would likely make an improvement with you current DAC. Weigh the costs of updating your DAC to a better sounding unit (perhaps with Asyncronous USB), vs. the cost of adding the Hiface 2 and perhaps a nice SPDIF cable.

 

[danpong]

thank you tp280  yeah I've been trying to weighing the budget as to what to be upgraded first.  I've just bought the silverdragon cable to replace my stock cable as I think that will yield the best bang for the money spent now.  This Hiface 2 sound really promising.  I think I have to go do some store that has it and do some listening test.

 

[Chodi]

Quote:

Ok, are you saying that the hiface is not capable of beating the optical input or that usb to spdif converters regardless of price are not capable?  I have quite a few 24/192 files I've purchased over the past year or two and I can't play them at full quality due to the macbooks 24/96 limited dac chip. Is there another way to play these files that would also provide a bump in sound quality?

I use the Hiface 2 to send 24/192 music files from my computer to my dac using Foobar. It is simple to test the difference between 24/192 and 24/96 by just changing the setting in Foobar. The difference in sound quality is instantly noticeable in favor of the higher upsampling. To me, that difference alone would be reason enough to pay for the Hiface 2. I use the Sox plugin in Foobar to upsample all my music files on the fly through the Hiface and the sound is glorious. I have compared this on my own system to optical out from my Xonar and the Hiface wins hands down. The optical sound thin and bright by comparison. Frankly, at the $200 asking price I think the Hiface Two is a steal.
 
Since you already own many files that are 24/192 you would see an instant improvement that you would not have to strain to hear.

 

[spkrs01]

Quote:

I use the Hiface 2 to send 24/192 music files from my computer to my dac using Foobar. It is simple to test the difference between 24/192 and 24/96 by just changing the setting in Foobar. The difference in sound quality is instantly noticeable in favor of the higher upsampling. To me, that difference alone would be reason enough to pay for the Hiface 2. I use the Sox plugin in Foobar to upsample all my music files on the fly through the Hiface and the sound is glorious. I have compared this on my own system to optical out from my Xonar and the Hiface wins hands down. The optical sound thin and bright by comparison. Frankly, at the $200 asking price I think the Hiface Two is a steal.
 
Since you already own many files that are 24/192 you would see an instant improvement that you would not have to strain to hear.

+1

 

[drez]

Quote:

I use the Hiface 2 to send 24/192 music files from my computer to my dac using Foobar. It is simple to test the difference between 24/192 and 24/96 by just changing the setting in Foobar. The difference in sound quality is instantly noticeable in favor of the higher upsampling. To me, that difference alone would be reason enough to pay for the Hiface 2. I use the Sox plugin in Foobar to upsample all my music files on the fly through the Hiface and the sound is glorious. I have compared this on my own system to optical out from my Xonar and the Hiface wins hands down. The optical sound thin and bright by comparison. Frankly, at the $200 asking price I think the Hiface Two is a steal.
 
Since you already own many files that are 24/192 you would see an instant improvement that you would not have to strain to hear.

 
The SOX plugin is pretty nice - I think CPLay uses it as well.  

 

[danpong]

Hi,
 
I'm new to foobar.  What is sox plugin?  I just install foobar but couldn't find the sox plugin component.  the only thing that I can find is very old version from 2009.  Do you have exact name of the plugin and where can I download it?
 
Thank you

 

[drez]

This is the one I tried out: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=67373

 

[danpong]

ok thank you

 

[leeperry]

Personally I really hate how SoX kills the bass, as previously discussed in this thread: http://www.head-fi.org/t/467853/foobar-sox-resampler
 
if you were looking for 24/192 "magical" SQ improvement, I'd shoot for Reclock in "best sinc interpolation" mode via WASAPI Exclusive 

 

[Chodi]

Quote:

Personally I really hate how SoX kills the bass, as previously discussed in this thread: http://www.head-fi.org/t/467853/foobar-sox-resampler
 
if you were looking for 24/192 "magical" SQ improvement, I'd shoot for Reclock in "best sinc interpolation" mode via WASAPI Exclusive 

It doesn't "kill the bass". Go into Foobar preferences-dsp manager-Sox config and change the phase response slider to 25% and your bass response will return. This has to do with the way particular dacs see the digital signal (pre-echo and post echo). Most people leave this on the default "Linear" setting assuming it is good for everyone. It is not the correct setting for all dacs just a general setting for the majority. Try this and I think your problem will be solved and you can enjoy Sox.