Upsampling (oversample) from foobar2000, worth it ?!
Oct 18, 2008 at 10:28 PM Post #2 of 15

milkweg

Banned
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Posts
2,840
Likes
15
I've played around with sampling rates but never noticed any real difference to my ears. There is a bit of difference but not what I would call better. Many people prefer to use 44.1khz because then there is no upsampling going on, cd audio is 44.1khz. I use 48khz because that is the default of PC soundcards and DVD so it is just less hassle for me than to have to get my EMU 0404 to sync to a different sampling rate than default 48khz. I don't notice enough of a difference to bother changing it either. YMMV.
 
Oct 19, 2008 at 1:20 AM Post #3 of 15

Lokonsky

New Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Posts
24
Likes
0
There's some card that bennefit with this feature and all of them from creative (audigy range), because they cant handle 44.1khz natively (only 48khz) and their upsampling engine are poor.
 
Oct 19, 2008 at 4:42 AM Post #4 of 15

Planar_head

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Posts
929
Likes
69
Using upsampling on my X-Fi tends to make the decay shorter and smoother. I also find that imperfections in the music tend to get smoothed over, and the highs tend to get less sharp, which is a plus on my Grados.

Oh course, on a more resolving, transparent setup, I would think upsampling would make the music far too unnatural.
 
Oct 19, 2008 at 7:11 AM Post #5 of 15

1UP

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 24, 2004
Posts
1,374
Likes
10
It depends on your DAC (its in-built filters and clocks) - some may respond subjectively better or worse depending on the frequency selected; others not - just try it!
 
Oct 19, 2008 at 7:55 AM Post #6 of 15

HeadLover

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Posts
1,114
Likes
11
amm I have tried, didn't seem to do anything to the sound
frown.gif

(but I am not sure! maybe just a little bit)

I am using ORITEK OMZ 4.2 and ASUS D2X
Anyone else here have one of them and can tell me what oversampling is he using ??
 
Oct 19, 2008 at 4:11 PM Post #8 of 15

craiglester

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 14, 2005
Posts
2,174
Likes
24
While I've never had any crackles or pops, I do find the sound a little TOO smooth for my tastes. I try and keep eveything at it's original sample rate these days, for simplicity.
 
Oct 19, 2008 at 10:18 PM Post #10 of 15

Planar_head

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Posts
929
Likes
69
I know some people that frequent the Computer Forum don't like upsampling... but now, there are also people that prefer ss to tubes, and vinyl to digital.

We can all get along, use whatever you feel is best, or whatever happens to match best with your system.
 
Oct 19, 2008 at 10:31 PM Post #11 of 15

b0dhi

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Posts
2,070
Likes
21
If you can't hear the difference, what does it matter to you? Try it or don't. It's not exactly a huge investment to enable upsampling and listen for yourself. I recommend the SRC or SSRC resamplers.
 
Oct 20, 2008 at 3:04 PM Post #12 of 15

Quaddy

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Posts
7,410
Likes
15
upsampling is a joke, for me at least, i have equipment and software capable of upsampling to their hearts content, but i dont as a rule of thumb like to degrade my music, i like it bit perfect not padded out, so when i am playing 44.1/16 i have every component and software component set to that rate, untouching the master rate.

plus i dislike the false sound derived from upsampling, i like it natural, but each to their own

no upsampling here!
 
Oct 20, 2008 at 5:14 PM Post #13 of 15

Scrith

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 14, 2004
Posts
969
Likes
39
Location
Redwood City, CA
Theoretically, upsampled audio data should sound exactly the same as audio data that has not been upsampled (there is no loss of data, and the new data should be irrelevant to the sound that is being produced).

However, various DACs out there respond differently to data that is at, say, 96K vs. data that is at 44K. Because of this, sometimes it is beneficial to upsample, and sometimes it ends up sounding worse. It is not possible to make a blanket statement like "upsampling always sounds better" or "upsampling always sounds worse" because of this dependency on the DAC (or whatever hardware down the chain is dealing with the modified audio data).

The classic examples here of DACs that can sound better with upsampled data: computer sound cards that upsample to 48K on their own (because they generally do a poor job of upsampling to 48K on their own), and (to some) the Benchmark DAC1 and Lavry DA10 (and other DACs that upsample to something over 100K as part of their jitter elimination process).
 
Oct 21, 2008 at 6:22 AM Post #14 of 15

Tea

Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Posts
56
Likes
0
I am not sure about upsample the KHz, but technically you should benefit by upsample the Bit to 24 since most of the DAC got a lot better spec at 24 bit playback than 16 bit.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top