[audioholik]

  Meanwhile, all you DSDers – enjoy the grubs!! Buy a Loki!

 
Baldr, you've almost convinced me to get it. 

 
But anyway, thanks for chiming in. I guess it was too good to be true, a USB DAC with DSD256 AKM chip in the $150-200 region. 

 

[Maxvla]

How is making a computer interpolate data between known data points going to make the signal more correct than it was before? Resampling can surely change the sound, a useful tool for adjusting a set of gear for your preference, but make it more accurate? No way.

 

[twinkle]

How is making a computer interpolate data between known data points going to make the signal more correct than it was before? Resampling can surely change the sound, a useful tool for adjusting a set of gear for your preference, but make it more accurate? No way.

I suggest you try.

 

[Maxvla]

I have tried. As I said, it does change the sound, but it is mathematically impossible for it to be more accurate.

 

[Ableza]

Resampling a file changes the file's format.  So what?  Unless you add a data synthesis and/or interpolation and/or DSP step you simply end up with the same data in a different format, in which case you have created a different file that is no longer accurate to the original.  No thanks.

 

[audioholik]

   
You keep repeating that argument, but what about resampling?
I'll repeat myself: This isn't about buying into a new format. It's about listening to all your existing files with on-the-fly resampling.

When you come to think about it, all delta sigma DAC chips do on-the-fly resampling, although we don't see it, as the upsampling/oversampling filters are implemented internally on the chip. A DSD DAC equipped with DSD256 input like the AK4490EQ basically gives you the choice to use external software for upsampling instead of its onboard filters. As you said earlier, this resampling requires computer power, and a typical dac chip doesn't offer much processing power (it certainly can't rival a computer processor doing the job).

 

[twinkle]

I have tried. As I said, it does change the sound, but it is mathematically impossible for it to be more accurate.

It is if the downstream treatment is less damaging to the data (eg, no digital anti-aliasing filter, just mild analog filtering instead).

 

[Maxvla]

It is if the downstream treatment is less damaging to the data (eg, no digital anti-aliasing filter, just mild analog filtering instead).

Resampling merely stretches out the original data and either fills with null data between original data points, or fill with synthesized data that is like the original data. Only the first of these forms is as accurate as the original. The second is certainly less accurate.

The second form would be like adding salt to sugar to have a bigger sugar pile. Just because they look almost the same, doesn't mean they will be.

 

[Mach-X]

Kind of getting tired of hearing about pie in the sky formats. Until somebody can prove through objective methods (read: not imaginary) that there is any audible improvement beyond standard rate pcm not related to mastering, it's all rather pointless.

 

[twinkle]

Resampling merely stretches out the original data and either fills with null data between original data points, or fill with synthesized data that is like the original data. Only the first of these forms is as accurate as the original. The second is certainly less accurate.

The second form would be like adding salt to sugar to have a bigger sugar pile. Just because they look almost the same, doesn't mean they will be.

Ok, I guess you're talking about data accuracy at the digital level, and I'm talking about accuracy of reproduction at the output, starting with "first form interpolation" and taking all D/A steps into account.
It's bedtime here in France, but I'll gladly follow up on this exchange at another time

 

[jgreen16]

  Even the subtle sounds of the shepherds gently placing the sheep's rear legs in their boots were clearly audible.
 

Priceless! And oh, I need a new keyboard now after the spit take I just did after reading that.

 

[swannie007]

Why the hell must we over-complicate things? Just press "play" and enjoy the music. Sheesh.

 

[StanD]

  Priceless! And oh, I need a new keyboard now after the spit take I just did after reading that.

I'll never wear a woolen sweater again.

 

[tonykaz]

I always wondered what DAC designers did on Saturday nights ! 
 
I thought DSD was dead , or isn't it dead enough ? , 
 
We don't have to keep sinking nails into it , do we ? 
 
Well , seems Professor Mike M .  is a bit angry at the DSD Priests for leading the Flock to destruction .  Isn't Consumer Audio filled to overflowing with silly stuff ( tip-toes for example ) ( I used to sell tip-toes in one of my Retail Stores , being a bit of a Retailing Whore that I am ) .
 
  But , what about Cookie Morenco at Blue Coast ? , is she giving up ? . The True Believers still clamor for Pure and she delivers .  Cookie has been seen ( by my San Fransisco Spy nework ) eating at micky D's off the Dollar Menu so Success has been avoiding her lately , for some reason ! 
 
  I would much rather have our Dr.Moffat concentrating on standing over those Schiit Parts suppliers , cracking the Whip , fetching parts for my new super-DAC instead of sticking needles into the dead carcas of DSD .  
 
  I have the hope that the Music Industry will notice us Consumers buying good equipment , they may get the idea to product better products !!!
 
 Anyway , thank you Mr.Baldr for writing on this Saturday , I was a bit worried that you might have decided to move onto greener pastures , somewhere where 2+2=4 !
 
  Tony in Michigan  

 

[jcwc]

But anyway, thanks for chiming in. I guess it was too good to be true, a USB DAC with DSD256 AKM chip in the $150-200 region. 

 
Perhaps another brand will make what you want (or not).