[KamijoIsMyHero]

Quote:

Wasn't there a discussion that upsampling converters virtually do nothing to improve sound as you cannot add bits onto something that wasn't there in the first place?

I thought that was common knowledge already

 

[DefQon]

Well doesn't look like it to me as manufacturers are still doing it. It's a question I ponder from time to time - why? There must people out there still buying upsamplers thinking it will improve sound quality for manufacturers to still making them....

 

[AOmega X]

Maybe it's the idea of "More is always Better" even if it's nothing.

 

[hchanrn]

Wow...impressive numbers.  But this is just my opinion....this is probably for those who listen to sound....not to music.  My point is there comes a time when you pay so much to specs and numbers that you end up enjoying sound...compared to music that may inherently have some flaws that give it character.  But who is to say that higher def doesn't make for better music? 

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

Wow...impressive numbers.  But this is just my opinion....this is probably for those who listen to sound....not to music.  My point is there comes a time when you pay so much to specs and numbers that you end up enjoying sound...compared to music that may inherently have some flaws that give it character.  But who is to say that higher def doesn't make for better music? 

Sound is music, this is for someone who think bigger is better and magically waiting for there mp3 source files to sound like a 24bit SACD source, an extension to their e-peen.

 

[doctorcilantro]

It's not really about the 768kHz. DSD is why folks want this. And, some designers have discussed that upsampling can be beneficial for native DSD e.g. DSD64 > 128 > 256.
 
More importantly, the analog output stage of the GOLD is incredible; going direct to amp on the recommendation of others was an incredible improvement. Mono, mute, remote, and a desktop app to control volume all came in handy. I won't use it, but now they have added support for their Atomic clock and I am happy to hear about the unique volume controls for the headamp as well is resistance settings. The quad chip architecture will no doubt lead to killer PCM; they know how make good sounding kit.
 
As far as DSD, many designers are knocking it, and just as many love it. Listen for yourself to DSD and see. What's the point of sitting on DSD files if you are just going to DSD>PCM, pointless. DSD is affordable now, if you can find the tunes you want to hear. Much is out of print, but rips are out there.

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

 DSD is affordable now, if you can find the tunes you want to hear. Much is out of print, but rips are out there.

 
$5.5k in this case. 

 

[doctorcilantro]

Quote:

 
$5.5k in this case. 

True, but the Gold was already priced at 4.5K with Voltikus, and we haven't seen an official price on the Platinum yet. 
 
Don't get me wrong, I'm on the fence.
 
 
I enjoy my Gold greatly, but I think I stand with many Antelope owners, feeling a bit frustrated. 
 
They kept pushing the "DSD is coming to the Gold" for months and months, only to drop it very quickly and announce a more expensive DAC. Yes, it probably needed hardware upgrades, especially with DSD256, but I wish they had not strung us along.
 
I'm considering another manufacturer. I see folks like Wyred4Sound and Ayre offering upgrades, and MANY more affordable DSD DACs coming out every month.

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

Well doesn't look like it to me as manufacturers are still doing it. It's a question I ponder from time to time - why? There must people out there still buying upsamplers thinking it will improve sound quality for manufacturers to still making them....

 
All regular DACs over-sample before conversion, so the question is rather moot, as over-sampling is, in essense, the same thing as up-sampling. What a higher quality up-sampling algorithm does is, rather than just create more samples in a linear manner between each actual sample, it calculates the actual curve of the waveform from a series of samples and adds a series of extra samples that follow the curve. This is supposed to be more accurate. I would imagine that better over-sampling designs do much the same thing, but the idea of a company programming an FPGA or whatever to do this is that it is supposed to do a better job than the over-sampling chips. It also means that an optimum filter can be created as well, or a series of filters provided for the end user to choose, such as what PS Audio and others do.

 

[magiccabbage]

Quote:

 
All regular DACs over-sample before conversion, so the question is rather moot, as over-sampling is, in essense, the same thing as up-sampling. What a higher quality up-sampling algorithm does is, rather than just create more samples in a linear manner between each actual sample, it calculates the actual curve of the waveform from a series of samples and adds a series of extra samples that follow the curve. This is supposed to be more accurate. I would imagine that better over-sampling designs do much the same thing, but the idea of a company programming an FPGA or whatever to do this is that it is supposed to do a better job than the over-sampling chips. It also means that an optimum filter can be created as well, or a series of filters provided for the end user to choose, such as what PS Audio and others do.

Well said. 

 

[jeffreyfranz]

No balanced HP outputs. Dumb. 

 

[shigzeo]

Quote:

No balanced HP outputs. Dumb. 

It's primarily a DAC, not a headphone amplifier. I don't think it is dumb at all. Plus, balanced signals could be done through dual TRS. The headphone world is a tiny blip on the small planet of HiFi. Antelope are a professional oriented company. I have several mates with studios that run Antelope clocks. Their entry into the home has been well executed, but headphones are still not really on their radar.

 

[DefQon]

+1

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
All regular DACs over-sample before conversion, so the question is rather moot, as over-sampling is, in essense, the same thing as up-sampling. What a higher quality up-sampling algorithm does is, rather than just create more samples in a linear manner between each actual sample, it calculates the actual curve of the waveform from a series of samples and adds a series of extra samples that follow the curve. This is supposed to be more accurate. I would imagine that better over-sampling designs do much the same thing, but the idea of a company programming an FPGA or whatever to do this is that it is supposed to do a better job than the over-sampling chips. It also means that an optimum filter can be created as well, or a series of filters provided for the end user to choose, such as what PS Audio and others do.

 
So how does NOS DACs sound in comparison / are the any less accurate?

 

[shigzeo]

So how does NOS DACs sound in comparison / are the any less accurate?

Would depend on the NOS DAC. A lot of NOS DAC Units are for sounding nice not perfect reproduction b