Upsampling to NOS DAC

[Mrjabba]

hello head-fiers

awhile back when researching on the dac-ah i stumbled upon this webpage.
http://victrolax.blogspot.com/2006/0...okay-i-am.html

the guy played around with an upsampler with his NOS DAC.... i thought it was a bit weird

but looks like he got good results from it. doesn't this defy the purpose of NOS??

has anyone else tried this out?

anyway i'm interested in either of the following:
lite model 1 - http://www.pacificvalve.us/LITEModel1.html
musiland src10 - http://coemaudio.com.au/products.php?product_id=148
monarchy DIP - http://www.monarchyaudio.com/upsampler.htm

edit.
one more thing....
if i did upsample, would it be better to upsample the 44.1khz to 96khz or 88.2khz?

 

[Mazuki]

From my experience playing 24bit/192khz music through a Zhaolu or DAC-AH, there was definitely more noticeable difference with the Zhaolu (24/192 capable).

I don't neccesarily think there's any signal degradation upsampling and then downsampling. However that's rather extraneous and certainly not cost effective.

 

[Mrjabba]

i can't seem to find anyone in aus selling the lite or monarchy so i've arranged to loan the musiland from the guys at coem. will report back with my results

 

[lan]

As with any tweaks, your mileage may vary. A few things.

- 88.2 is even multiple and processing will be easier.
- These hardware upsamplers go to 24bit but the NOS DAC with 16bit chips can't decode it. You'll loose something.
- These devices cost a lot. You're better off spending that $ to upgrade other parts of your system and mod the DAC.

 

[Mrjabba]

so i've had the src10 and md10 for a few days now....

thought i'd post my impressions on it.

the MD10 certainly sounds different to my DAC-AH CAA MOD and i don't think i can say i prefer one over the other. both sound very good in their own way. the MD10 produces a little more bass though, but i don't think it can match the soundstage and allure of the DAC-AH.

at first i couldn't believe what i was hearing with the SRC10, i just didn't expect such a change in sound. the bass was more abundant and seemed to reach lower frequencies. i don't have measuring equipment to say how much improved in numbers, but my ears heard it. detail was also audibley better without being bright or losing musicality. soundstage also improved dramatically, it sounded deeper and wider then before. it also sounds like music has more air-y-ness to it, don't know if that is a good way to explain it but i like it. the high frequencies were much smoother and in some tracks that i couldn't stand listening with the MD10 alone, sounded much nicer with the SRC10.

even my wife heard the improvement! just as she arrived home, she heard the music and commented "hey that sounds good, what did you do?". great isn't it!

i also tried the SRC10 with my DAC-AH and there was also heaps of improvement. i'm not sure if it defeats the purpose of NOS though? but anyway what i noticed was an increase in soundstage (from the already nice soundstage of the DAC-AH), and AMAZING mid-range. i can't believe how nice Norah Jones sounded! bass was also better, but i already fealt that the DAC-AH had plenty of low end.

 

[d-cee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif - These hardware upsamplers go to 24bit but the NOS DAC with 16bit chips can't decode it. You'll loose something.

what about if there's 8 DACs in parallel eg. in the DAC-AH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrjabba /img/forum/go_quote.gif so i've had the src10 and md10 for a few days now.... thought i'd post my impressions on it. the MD10 certainly sounds different to my DAC-AH CAA MOD and i don't think i can say i prefer one over the other. both sound very good in their own way. the MD10 produces a little more bass though, but i don't think it can match the soundstage and allure of the DAC-AH. at first i couldn't believe what i was hearing with the SRC10, i just didn't expect such a change in sound. the bass was more abundant and seemed to reach lower frequencies. i don't have measuring equipment to say how much improved in numbers, but my ears heard it. detail was also audibley better without being bright or losing musicality. soundstage also improved dramatically, it sounded deeper and wider then before. it also sounds like music has more air-y-ness to it, don't know if that is a good way to explain it but i like it. the high frequencies were much smoother and in some tracks that i couldn't stand listening with the MD10 alone, sounded much nicer with the SRC10. even my wife heard the improvement! just as she arrived home, she heard the music and commented "hey that sounds good, what did you do?". great isn't it! i also tried the SRC10 with my DAC-AH and there was also heaps of improvement. i'm not sure if it defeats the purpose of NOS though? but anyway what i noticed was an increase in soundstage (from the already nice soundstage of the DAC-AH), and AMAZING mid-range. i can't believe how nice Norah Jones sounded! bass was also better, but i already fealt that the DAC-AH had plenty of low end.

thanks for the impressions, what settings were you using on the SRC10?

 

[Mrjabba]

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-cee /img/forum/go_quote.gif thanks for the impressions, what settings were you using on the SRC10?

when using with my new MD10 i set the output at 192khz. with dac-ah the max is 96khz but just using it at 88.2khz right now.

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-cee /img/forum/go_quote.gif what about if there's 8 DACs in parallel eg. in the DAC-AH

They're still a 16bit chip so they're just drop the last 8 bit of info from a 24bit signal.

 

[d-cee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif They're still a 16bit chip so they're just drop the last 8 bit of info from a 24bit signal.

i see, assuming all of my music is 16 bit, since it's stuff ripped from redbook. if my upsampler (SRC2496) can increase the bits to 24, and then pass it through my 16 bit DAC-AH, will it necessarily lose data or will it just drop those added bits

i havent critically listened to the difference, but on 24 bit it has less background hiss than on 16 bit, but apart from that i didn't notice too many other major differences

 

[lan]

Because you are processing the music, it's best played back in 24bits. It doesn't matter what the original was. Dropping those last 8 bit is equivalent of losing something. Whether you can tell the difference and if it matters to you is up to you. The way I see it in such a hobby like this, it doesn't matter as long as you like the final outcome.

 

[manhattanproj]

hmm...thx for the impressions...it's quite interesting.

 

[d-cee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Because you are processing the music, it's best played back in 24bits. It doesn't matter what the original was. Dropping those last 8 bit is equivalent of losing something. Whether you can tell the difference and if it matters to you is up to you. The way I see it in such a hobby like this, it doesn't matter as long as you like the final outcome.

right, cos with the SRC2496 it is possible to output it @ 96kHz/16-bit as well

 

[lan]

Ah. I didn't know about that feature. Now the hiss might make sense. Is dithering on? That adds some noise in the requantization back down to 16bit. I'm not a fan of dithering noise. It's readily apparent to me and is somewhat annoying.

 

[d-cee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ah. I didn't know about that feature. Now the hiss might make sense. Is dithering on? That adds some noise in the requantization back down to 16bit. I'm not a fan of dithering noise. It's readily apparent to me and is somewhat annoying.

there is a dither function, but it is also possible to disable, and when i do the background his drops

@ 24 bit though, there's very little to no noise. i don't understand the reasons but those are my observations