[R-Audiohead]

Quote:

The problem is that this will still resample everything...

Yea, the real advantage to using ASIO (it seems to me at least) is that you won't "double up" on the upsampling process.  I am currently running a DSP in foobar [Resampler (SoX)] to upsample the output to 88.2kHz (just to be nice on this little netbook I'm using until I gain access to my desktop that can handle it - will run optical then) and to my understanding, since I have the Yulong Audio Device set to 24/96 in the control panel this 88.2kHz upsample product from foobar will AGAIN be resampled to 96kHz.
 
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like converting twice could have some negative effects, but the question is whether or not converting straight to 96kHz in foobar bypasses the win7 conversion or not.  Even then, is the upsampler I am using effective at 96kHz or more accurate at 88.2kHz?  If so, it might be worth it to use ASIO to bypass the win7 conversion all together, and just run ASIO with the foobar DSP.
 
Maybe I don't understand this correctly?

 

[svyr]

The problem is that this will still resample everything...

why would windows resample 44/16 input if the device output is set to 44/16 lol. 16b to 24b it'll stuff the extra 8b (no effect on sound), and 44k+ it will downsample, but not 44/16 to 44/16 (or other matching sr)

at the end of the day, the ASRC chip inside D100 will upsample to was it 132k ... regardless of input into it.

 

[kkl10]

Quote:

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like converting twice could have some negative effects, but the question is whether or not converting straight to 96kHz in foobar bypasses the win7 conversion or not.  Even then, is the upsampler I am using effective at 96kHz or more accurate at 88.2kHz?  If so, it might be worth it to use ASIO to bypass the win7 conversion all together, and just run ASIO with the foobar DSP.
 
Maybe I don't understand this correctly?

You can convert everything to 96Khz and at the same time bypass the Windows dsp or mixer or whatever it is..
You do it by enabling ASIO or WASAPI (Exclusive mode) output on foobar - These components should enable kernel streaming, thus, bit perfect - and enable foobar resampler.
If you want to see the actual sample rate information of the tracks you play on the D100 screen, turn of the resampler dsp in foobar2000.
 
But to be honest, I hear no difference in sound quality, whatever the configuration I choose...
In these knid of configurations I always opt to complicate the least possible - as bit perfect output as possible and no DSPs on playback chain. (except for equalization if word it)
 
Whether I resample everything to 96/88.2/48Khz or not I can't hear a difference... why do you want to resample things?
Can you hear a difference?
 
I've read that the D100 designer recommends resampling everything to 96Khz before it reaches the D100 DAC, but what's the point if it all will be then resampled to 110Khz? or 132Khz? Maybe it is easy or faster for the DAC to upsample from 96 than from 44.1 or 88.2?...
 
I'm using Windows Vista which has an improved audio architecture from XP. Windows 7 audio architecture is similar to Vista... if not the same....

 

[R-Audiohead]

Quote:

You can convert everything to 96Khz and at the same time bypass the Windows dsp or mixer or whatever it is..
You do it by enabling ASIO or WASAPI (Exclusive mode) output on foobar - These components should enable kernel streaming, thus, bit perfect - and enable foobar resampler.
If you want to see the actual sample rate information of the tracks you play on the D100 screen, turn of the resampler dsp in foobar2000.
 
But to be honest, I hear no difference in sound quality, whatever the configuration I choose...
In these knid of configurations I always opt to complicate the least possible - as bit perfect output as possible and no DSPs on playback chain. (except for equalization if word it)
 
Whether I resample everything to 96/88.2/48Khz or not I can't hear a difference... why do you want to resample things?
Can you hear a difference?
 
I've read that the D100 designer recommends resampling everything to 96Khz before it reaches the D100 DAC, but what's the point if it all will be then resampled to 110Khz? or 132Khz? Maybe it is easy or faster for the DAC to upsample from 96 than from 44.1 or 88.2?...
 
I'm using Windows Vista which has an improved audio architecture from XP. Windows 7 audio architecture is similar to Vista... if not the same....

Yea, I understand that ASIO must be used in order to bypass the win7 conversion and I was curious if errors might arise from upsampling numerous times (it really seems like it could happen).
 
I have no way of knowing if there is an underlying variable involved, as I have only had the D100 a couple of days, but I was pretty sure upsampling generated an improvement in soundstaging and imaging.  Again, no way to know if I am just getting used to the D100 still, or even if it was pure placebo, but it was enough for me to want to investigate this whole upsampling bit.
 
I would think ideally I would bypass the win7 (using ASIO) upsampler and upsample the music to 110kHz in foobar (assuming the computer can handle that upsample without taxing the system).  Of course, this will only be possible via optical or coax.  This would "complicate" the chain the least
 

 

[R-Audiohead]

It is also my understanding that software is much better (more accurate) at resampling than any piece of hardward, ASRC chips included... and that the ASRC implementation is mostly for jitter reduction over anything else

 

[R-Audiohead]

Quote:

why would windows resample 44/16 input if the device output is set to 44/16 lol. 16b to 24b it'll stuff the extra 8b (no effect on sound), and 44k+ it will downsample, but not 44/16 to 44/16 (or other matching sr)
at the end of the day, the ASRC chip inside D100 will upsample to was it 132k ... regardless of input into it.

This was my thought, that if I upsample the music in foobar to 96kHz win7 shouldn't then tear it down and try and resample it again to 96kHz... so essentially by using an upsampler in foobar (with the assumption that the foobar resampler (SoX) is a more accurate resampler) to match what the win7 upsample target would be, you'd be kind of bypassing it anyways

 

[svyr]

re 110k, USB on d100 is max 96k.

re foobar - most probably doesn't upsample either if the output format matches the input format

 

[putente]

Can anyone tell me if this DAC would be a good option to pair with a tube amp, the Little Dot MKIII?
 
 
Thanks.

 

[R-Audiohead]

Quote:

Can anyone tell me if this DAC would be a good option to pair with a tube amp, the Little Dot MKIII?
 
 
Thanks.

Analytical D100 + Rich, warm tubey sound?  Interesting.
 
Seems like a real winner or a huge flop.  I'm curious to see what people who have paired this with some tubes have to say

 

[putente]

Exactly! That's why I asked... I've been reading this entire thread, and the D100 is always described as a very detailed and analytical DAC. I'm about to buy a Little Dot MKIII, and I also want to upgrade my DAC, and the D100 is on the limit of my budget. 

 
Quote:

Analytical D100 + Rich, warm tubey sound?  Interesting.
 
Seems like a real winner or a huge flop.  I'm curious to see what people who have paired this with some tubes have to say

 

 

[eimis]

 
Did a little mod..

 
I don't like this guy..

 
Just the bottom..

 

[rawrster]

Quote:

Can anyone tell me if this DAC would be a good option to pair with a tube amp, the Little Dot MKIII?
 
 
Thanks.

I don't see why it would not sound good out of a tube amp. 
 

 

[djevoultion]

 
Anyone know how the DAC section of the D100 compares to the HRT Music Streamer II/+? 
 
Or if the D100 is better than the Audio gD FUN or NFB-12? 

 

[eclipes]

i want to know this too, I've used the HRT streamer II+ and the NFB-12 and want to hear how people compare the d100 with these units.
 
Quote:

 
Anyone know how the DAC section of the D100 compares to the HRT Music Streamer II/+? 
 
Or if the D100 is better than the Audio gD FUN or NFB-12? 

 

 

[Digital-Pride]

Quote:

 
 
Did a little mod..
 
 
I don't like this guy..
 
 
Just the bottom..
 

 
Well?  Don't keep us in suspense.

  How does it sound with your mod?