Upsampling - Is it really all that good?

[mxs1030]

Just a heads-up, B&H Photo-Video has the 963sa for $320 + shipping.

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch P.S. also using triangular noise shaped dither with triangular distribution. I had trouble deciding on this one as well (probably because dithering has little effect at 24 bits) but decided to go with this after reading somewhere about someone else having good results with it. It's totally inaudible, as far as I can tell.

I don't like dither at 24bit. It adds some noise which I don't like. If you can't hear the difference in dither or 96khz. Why don't you turn them off and save yourself some CPU power?

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan I don't like dither at 24bit. It adds some noise which I don't like. If you can't hear the difference in dither or 96khz. Why don't you turn them off and save yourself some CPU power?

Cuz I just like the idea of it... it's good standard practice to dither when changing the sample rate drastically (like from 44.1 to 96 KHz). Also, it's just the feeling of getting the most out of my card, even if there's no audible difference between 88.2 and 96

.

I just created 10 seconds of digital silence with CEP, saved it and played it back using my usual upsampling WinAMP settings. Unless the card isn't responding at all to digital silence, I can't hear a thing with my amp cranked all the way to max, not even a slight hiss. Might hear something with low impedance, high sensitivity cans but I'm not gonna bother...

 

[boodi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hankins Only on the Philips 963SA did I find upsampling to be weak and thin. I also think the 16/44 is less than average on that player. The upsampling on the Cary and AA is great....I use it on everything I listen to. The Shanling was hit and miss depending on the CD. But never weak and thin. Only the Philips had that honor. When It's done right upsampling is great! It adds treble energy and air to all the music I use it with, without hurting the other frequencies.

Tim sorry to bother , can you remember if the shanling ( supposed you refer toi the s100 mkII ) had a deeeep and good bass department or if it was lacking somewhat the bass stage ?
thanks a lot ( I'm getting a SH. mkII and I'm always aware of bass performance , it will feed my rudistor rp5 / earmax pro amps into zu/cardas-HD650 ).

 

[tom hankins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boodi Tim sorry to bother , can you remember if the shanling ( supposed you refer toi the s100 mkII ) had a deeeep and good bass department or if it was lacking somewhat the bass stage ? thanks a lot ( I'm getting a SH. mkII and I'm always aware of bass performance , it will feed my rudistor rp5 / earmax pro amps into zu/cardas-HD650 ).

My Shanling was modified by underwoodhifi. This answer might differ from what the stock player does.
I found the Shanling to be a beautiful sounding player. It did not have the bass control that the Cary I'm using now has...but good. I would, at least roll in different tubes than the stock ones you get with the player. You only need to get two for the left hand spots. The other two(right hand) are for the headphone section.

 

[steam3642]

I use a musical fidelity a324 upsampling dac which upsamples 44.1khz - 96/192 khz to make the best of the transport at hand, i have found that 96khz setting has fuller bass and a slightly laid back top end but if you switch to 192 khz setting the music takes on a more direct and faster sound but the bass is less prominent, have a read of the review at http://www.stereophile.com/digitalsourcereviews/561/. My transport is a teac esoteric p 700. upsampling is used to push digital distortion and noise out to beyond - 30khz

 

[amol]

From what i read from some Soundcard manuals , upsampling is infact worse for your 44.1 khz music. There is always a loss in your original music samples due to sample rate conversion, some interpolation noise is injected.
Upsampling as such i dont see has any use at all, it would be useful just in the case if the original recorded music itself is in the format of 96 or 192 khz, ,like the high res formats.
Red book is best played in 44.1.

 

[tom hankins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by amol From what i read from some Soundcard manuals , upsampling is infact worse for your 44.1 khz music. There is always a loss in your original music samples due to sample rate conversion, some interpolation noise is injected. Upsampling as such i dont see has any use at all, it would be useful just in the case if the original recorded music itself is in the format of 96 or 192 khz, ,like the high res formats. Red book is best played in 44.1.

I know nothing about soundcards, but this is untrue when it comes to CDPs. It sounds like info you would read from a product that does not offer upsampling.

 

[amol]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hankins I know nothing about soundcards, but this is untrue when it comes to CDPs. It sounds like info you would read from a product that does not offer upsampling.

no man, i read this from some really good soundcard manuals like Terratec DMX fire 6 card and some other high end soundcards. Those sound cards do offer upsampling. I dont see why there would be a difference when it comes to sound from a soundcard or a CDP.

 

[Glassman]

there is a difference, ASRC provides jitter attenuation, not just sample rate conversion.. usually ASRC chips do have better arithmetics too, better then filters integrated in DAC chips..