1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

USB Audio Recorder PRO (UAPP): 24- and 32-bit playback, ubiquitous USB audio support for Android

Discussion in 'Portable Source Gear' started by nztechfreak, Feb 5, 2014.
First
 
Back
183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192
194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203
Next
 
Last
  1. buonassi
    davy going out of his way for a 'potential' customer, not even a paying one yet. outstanding sir.
     
  2. cat6man
    hi there

    long time paid user, long time since i visited this thread.

    i'm setting up a new music server in my car and would like to have it based on an android phone/tablet running uapp,
    a usb hub (probably powered), a usb DAC (e.g. dragonfly or geekout) and a portable HDD storing a few TB of music.

    i used to set up a streamer and wifi AP but the above would seem to be a lot simpler if UAPP can see both the DAC and the HDD.
    if i use wireless charging of the phone/tablet, i eliminate OTG+power complications.

    any issues i should watch out for or be aware of?
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2019
  3. Davy Wentzler
    Well, the HDD contents have to be read by means of the Storage Access Framework, which is slow and buggy and you cannot build the Library with it. If you can put a large SD card in it, that would be much preferred and saves you some hassle. Of course, that won't be TB's of music though.
     
  4. cat6man
    can i still browse music folders without building a library?
    if so, that is all i really need.
     
  5. m-i-c-k-e-y
    HelloI I am using UAPP via an Android TV (Beelink GT-King) w/ an external 8TB HDD fed to an LH Labs Geek Pulse Infinity.

    I have around 55K Files in 8.9K Albums/Folders at around 3TB of HDD Space.

    Moving around thru the library (Album, Artist etc.) takes 1-2 seconds to refresh the graphics.

    But I don't use it. I browse thru the music folders as you said. And its and instant.

    Hope it helps.
     
    DBaldock9 likes this.
  6. Davy Wentzler
    Yes, I frequently do that during development.
     
  7. Rob Geebivi
    As a newbie here, my sincere thanks go out to Davy for his great work on UAPP and all of the honest comments and feedback from those I've read that encouraged me to purchase UAPP. Imo, UAPP appears to be the best app money can buy an audiophile.
    I've had an LG G7 ThinQ (USA Unlocked version) for almost exactly a year now, but I only started getting in to Hi-Res audio about two months ago, when I realized the benefits of having the MQA-compatible HiFi Quad DAC right in my pocket all this time! (Still on Oreo btw--Pie hasn't been released for the Unlocked USA version... yet)
    I have two more weeks to go in my Tidal HiFi/Masters Free Trial, but I don't plan on continuing... Personally, I'm going to just buy the HiRes music I want to listen to, so I have it forever and don't have to worry about a subscription service. And, as Dannemand has pointed out (please correct me if I'm wrong), [FLAC audio quality] > [MQA audio quality] even when all else is equal in terms of sample rate, number of bits, etc.?

    I'm playing music in bit-perfect mode in UAPP on my LG G7, my HiFi Quad DAC is turned on in Android settings, and for a lossless CD-quality track I see on the bottom: "Direct: 44.1kHz File: 44.1kHz 16bit 930Kbps" I assume this would be expected, as it's indicating it's sending the full quality directly to the DAC.
    For a lot of the MQA tracks in UAPP w/ Tidal, I see this: "Direct: 192kHz [MQA logo] MQA File: 96kHz 24bit 1411Kbps" Is this normal? I would expect to see the sample rate next to Direct be exactly the same as it is listed for the file, like above, but it's not... Given nobody else has mentioned this, I assume it's proper operation, but an explanation would be sincerely appreciated. :)
    What really confuses me is there is one jazz track I have in Tidal right now (Innocence by Hoff ensemble; Polarity -- an Acoustic Jazz Project) that comes up like this: "Direct: 176.4kHz File: 352.8kHz 24bit 1212Kbps" This seems particularly odd, as it doesn't appear the full quality is being passed to the DAC. (Again, please correct me if I'm wrong and guide as able) Especially since I do have a straight FLAC of this piece at 352.8kHz/24bit that plays in UAPP as "Direct: 352.8kHz File: 352.8kHz 24bit 8770Kbps" (from http://www.2l.no/hires/).

    Unrelated to the above, I'm curious to know how DSD works with the LG's DAC & UAPP... Using the same sample song from http://www.2l.no/hires/, I tried out the DSD 11.2MHz/1bit option, and I would argue it's some of the most clear jazz I've ever heard! At the bottom it reads: "Direct: 352.8kHz File: DSD 11.2MHz 1bit." Does this mean the DAC is converting it to 24bit PCM in the process, or how does that work?

    As I mentioned at the beginning, I'm relatively new to this field, so I apologize if my questions are eye-rollers, but I'm very curious to learn more about this stuff. Thanks much!


    PS: I've coded Java for a number of years, and started coding my own android apps 2-3 years ago and have knowledge of Android Studio, ADB, etc., so if there's any debug logs, screenshots, etc. that would be helpful (for this or other G7 questions) please guide me in the right direction, and I'd be happy to oblige!
     
  8. Davy Wentzler
    Nobody was born with knowledge on HiRes, so everybody that is interested in the topic needs to learn, so no worries there. And a lot of this is confusing.

    So, the MQA decoder/renderer in the LG will always output 176.4 or 192kHz, no matter what is put in. That means it can upsample in the process. There is no way to switch that off.

    Whether the DAC is capable of more or not, the system can only play DSD 2.8 and 5.6MHz. So DSD 11.2 would be converted to PCM (352.8kHz). That's a cpu heavy process by the way.

    You cannot conclude in general that flac is better than MQA. MQA is not only about folding higher sample rates into a lower sample rate file. There is much more to it, including correction for ADC and DAC. This information is not present in a non-MQA file. The MQA file, if played through a renderer as on your LG, matches the originally produced audio more closely. Now it starts sounding like I work for MQA, so I'll stop here and refer you to the MQA website for more information.
     
    SoFGR and Dannemand like this.
  9. TooPoorForHiFi
    Would it be possible to add a... " Open Containing Folder " when you press the 3 vertical Dot Next to the Song?
     
  10. Dannemand
    There is a ton a debate around that. Personally I am neither an MQA hater nor an MQA lover; I guess you could call me an MQA pragmatist.

    I am on the record for saying that I would choose HiRes FLAC (176 or 192KHz) over MQA, and I'll stand by that. Even if we assume that the additional time domain response accuracy that MQA claims is actually true and audible (and doesn't have detrimental side effects, as some claim) there is the loss of amplitude detail (where MQA stores the HiRes samples). Plus there is the question of whether I will have MQA hardware on which to play it in the future.

    When it comes MQA vs 44/16 FLAC, I will generally prefer MQA (certainly if it's 24-bit MQA) -- as long as it is a good recording and a good MQA transfer. But even that is the subject of raging debate, with some of the arguments on the critical side sounding valid. In the end, I go with my ears. Some of the critics with whom I have discussed this, haven't actually listened to much MQA (and I am not referring to members on this forum).

    That said, this is not the MQA debate thread :ksc75smile:

    So I'll enjoy Tidal MQA on my V30 while I can. It has the added benefit of playing correctly (Direct path, offloadable) in the Tidal app's offline mode. Of course everything else is always through UAPP.

    And I agree 100% that UAPP is the best $8 any music lover can spend.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
    buonassi likes this.
  11. Dannemand
    I find it tragic that we have to qualify statements about of the merits of MQA with disclaimers like this, lest one wants to be accused of (A) being in the pocket of Bob Stuart or (B) being a dumb lemming. I have been accused of both, more than once, and I am not even a die-hard MQA fan.
     
    buonassi likes this.
  12. Toshu
    Is that a new Android TV box you got?

    One of my problems is that when I switch folders on my external HDD, it takes quite a few minutes to read the subfolders in folder mode. If I go to Library....it takes about 18 hours! I have a few more songs~80,000
     
  13. richardloh
    Hi Mickey,

    Thanks for the good share ...

    Checked that the BeeLink GT King outputs optical toslink .. what will be audio format for both dsd and regular 44.1khz flac to your dac ? Reason to ask is that I had thought uapp preferred because of custom usb audio driver with exceptional quality and will optical input to your dac be up to 192khz for dsd ?

    Cheers.

    Richard
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2019
  14. buonassi
    uh huh...

    Generally, if I can tolerate the HF rolloff, I pick a zero-order-hold or NOS setting to achieve what I believe to be the closest to the original (especially if it's high res). I have never heard the dreaded 'intermodulation distortion' caused by NOS 'leaky filters', or if I have, I rather like it.

    To your point Dan, trust your ears, and go with what you like. At least standard FLAC files allow you to choose how to reconstruct the waveform, and for that reason, remain my preference. If you pick a slow rolloff min phase filter, you'll get that MQA sound "for the most part."
     
  15. m-i-c-k-e-y
    Hello Richard.

    Sad to say the Optical SPDIF/Toslink doesn't work! I am using its USB to connect to my DAC.

    I have also a Himedia Q10 Pro which has both SPDIF and TOSLINK which outputs to 192 kHz. It plays DSD64 and 192 kHz Flacs wonderfully thru this ports using its internal music player NOT UAPP (hence USB Audio Player... ^_^.. )

     
    richardloh likes this.
First
 
Back
183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192
194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203
Next
 
Last

Share This Page