[regal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by recordist /img/forum/go_quote.gif So that's me put in my place then...(!). Hadn't realised that files on a CD were still .WAV files. I do of course realise that many commercial CDs have excellent sound-however I did not assume that using Windows Media player on a home PC would produce exactly the same quality of result that a record company would carry if they were they producing a commercial from the same .WAV files (not likely in my case!). But maybe a .WAV file is just a .WAV file! The output pre-amp on my Fostex FR2-LE is reckoned to be no great shakes and can sound a bit harsh and unmusical at times-and in practise it isn't feasible to use it to play back anything other than my most recent recordings (it can only play from flashcards which are an expensive storage medium). However, recordings made at 24/96 and played back through this thing do sound far more as if one is in the same room as the piano (the resonance and 'life' of the sound is preserved) compared to the same files played back through from a CD made from the same (albeit downsampled) files. The CD players are of good quality (including an Arcam Alpha 5) so I am puzzled, particularly as I don't suppose that the Fostex recorder has a D/A converter that can play 24/96 files without downsampling. (16 bit recordings played back through the recorder from the flashcard don't have the atmosphere or immediacy of 24 bit recordings).

Thats because you aren't dithering. When studios record at 24/192 they dither after downsampling to RBCD 16/44.1. Downsampling without dithering is a no no and gives less than optimal sound.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Roseval /img/forum/go_quote.gif You say CD-R=CD Rom=a data disk. Will there be a loss of quality when downsampling? Almost all recording today are made with 24 bit and often a higher sample rate than 44.1 Do all CD’s sound bad).

Yes they will sound bad if they didn't dither, so all studios dither.

 

[recordist]

Thank you Regal-I am now beginning to get a much better handle on what is going on. There is so much to learn.

I am now thinking that there are three options:

(1) Use USB from laptop to play 24/96 files through V-DAC. The V-DAC will playback at 16 bit when connected in this way. This should sound much better than producing a non-dithered .WAV file on a CD-am I right? Might 24/96 recordings played back at 16 bits through V-DAC sound better than 16 bit recordings played back through the same DAC?

(2) For further improvement in sound quality could use HiFace adapter to convert USB to SPDIF input. Used in this way the V-DAC can play 24/96 files at 24/96 (24/192 as it upsamples).

(3) Go for a much cheaper option in the form of the Audiophile 2496 external soundcard which can play up to 24/96. My gut instinct is to think that the V-DAC used at 16 bits might sound better than the external soundcard used at its high resolution. I am inclined to think that perhaps (a) components in v-dac would be of higher quality (b) some of the money one pays for the 2496 is spent on the input side of the device and all I need is something for the purpose of playback (c) the V-DAC upsamples to 192-as in many high quality modern CD players. Remember I am trying to capture the subtleties of a high quality acoustic piano.

I bet I've got one or two facts wrong so I expect to be corrected!

Finally could Audacity be used to produce a good dithered 16/44.1 .WAV file from a 24/96 file? I could buy a lot of blank CDs for the price of the V-DAC!

 

[regal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by recordist /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thank you Regal-I am now beginning to get a much better handle on what is going on. There is so much to learn. I am now thinking that there are three options: (1) Use USB from laptop to play 24/96 files through V-DAC. The V-DAC will playback at 16 bit when connected in this way. This should sound much better than producing a non-dithered .WAV file on a CD-am I right? Might 24/96 recordings played back at 16 bits through V-DAC sound better than 16 bit recordings played back through the same DAC? (2) For further improvement in sound quality could use HiFace adapter to convert USB to SPDIF input. Used in this way the V-DAC can play 24/96 files at 24/96 (24/192 as it upsamples). (3) Go for a much cheaper option in the form of the Audiophile 2496 external soundcard which can play up to 24/96. My gut instinct is to think that the V-DAC used at 16 bits might sound better than the external soundcard used at its high resolution. I am inclined to think that perhaps (a) components in v-dac would be of higher quality (b) some of the money one pays for the 2496 is spent on the input side of the device and all I need is something for the purpose of playback (c) the V-DAC upsamples to 192-as in many high quality modern CD players. Remember I am trying to capture the subtleties of a high quality acoustic piano. I bet I've got one or two facts wrong so I expect to be corrected! Finally could Audacity be used to produce a good dithered 16/44.1 .WAV file from a 24/96 file? I could buy a lot of blank CDs for the price of the V-DAC!

#2 is a good option. I think however if you are recording at 24/96 you should have the proper software to dither it to RBCD format as this is what the world uses. For Audacity you would want to use the Izotope Ozone VST plugin to dither.

 

[recordist]

Thank you Regal for your advice. Is there anyone else out there (I think Regal has been so helpful he/she deserves a rest!) who might be able to advise me about my questions in (1) and (3)? I'm pretty sure that some of you have experience of playing 24/96 back through DACs that only deal with the information at 16 bit quality.

 

[techenvy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roseval /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm afraid the answer is no. It can reduce it but not eliminate it completely. One day I came across a post that sums it up nicely Bit Perfect Jitter

that is boss, dig it

 

[techenvy]

how about udac vs musiland 02 dac vs dr dac vs hot audio dac extasy USB DACs : HOTAUDIO.COM, It's About the Experience!

ESI - Dr. DAC nano

Nuforce.com | Icon uDAC

leanin towards the udac, or hotaudio

 

[sdotfire]

You want the ultimate solution? I kno these r all relatively cheap resolutions that you are looking for but i wanted to provide my experience finding a way to listen to a digital source producin 'musical bliss', at least i and others think so... When I have experimented with many Digital Sources, all essentially the same: computers, etc. blah blah blah, and many many ways to connect to DAC via USB, optical, USB/SPDiF converters





Anyways, here's my two rigs that use digital sources.





1. Cary Audio Music Server -> CYNOSURE USB -> Diverter v2 -> Core (I also use a special unreleased Digi cable) -> Zodiac + ->Whiplash Ref RCA -> Cary CAD-300-SEI -> HD800, PS1000, E8's


2. MacBook Pro using Ammara player -> Apex USB -> Diverter v1 -> Core-> Opus DAC (put a lot of parts upgraded into it) -> Balanced DIY IC's custom made by me (not the prettiest lol but works/sounds great) -> BUDA -> all my cans but mainly my less expensive sun 1k ones....this is my work rig





Now both of these rigs, especially the first, probable greatly exceeding the OP's anticipated price range I am unsure if he will ever go this route... However, I wanted to let people know that even though USB is 16/44.1 that a Diverter (locus-design.com ,Cryo-Parts.com) acts on the same way...the best I have EVER heard coming from a Digi source...and essentially produces songs at 24/9 better then ANY optical cable or whatever by far!!6. Even though an optical cable can run at 24/96 it never sounded as good as using the Cynosure/Diverter/Core, or even the Apex cheaper version f that matter. Now this is subjective and I kno digital is still in it's infancy related to audio specially. I have tried them all and this combo is the ultimate. Never heard anything this good b4 in my life





Now for OP. Both options seemed good (numbered one n two by OAp post); however, if you ever r potentially looking for the best, or close to it, check out these sites ....and go for the cheapest option if you have to...these produce ultimate sound n am suprised no one has brought it up. I stand by my rigs using the Locus Design variation n implore others to explore this option as well. You can get any cheapo DAC but I would look forward to upgrading, I started just like you and now I have the 'bug' and finally, after Wasting TONs of coin, I am completely n utterly satisfied!

When I close my eyes, it's as if I'm in the Orpheum

 

[grokit]

For me a re-clocking spdif converter is a big improvement when the DAC doesn't have a strong internal clock, but a straight converter is all that's needed if the DAC does. I have experimented with a Bravo and a V-link as well as a straight converter, with a Matrix Mini-i (weak clock, adaptive usb) and a Bel Canto DAC2 (strong asynch clock, spdif only). The Mini-i showed real improvement with the re-clocking converters, the Bel Canto did not.

 

[sterling1]

I'm just a laymen with all this digital conversion stuff: but, wanting to get my computer audio to my home theatre, which was only possible analog to analog or USB to Toslink, I purchased an X-FI HD for digital conversion. This device allows pass though of a 24/96 signal, the highest signal  the Toslink input can accept. So far, my iTunes library, containing material from 256k to 24/96, sent to pre/pro sounds as good as I've heard it from any source sent to pre/pro. The X-FI HD was an inexpensive solution;and, why pay more unless the result is discernible. Since my results are not discernible from SACD I don't think there's any point looking out for something better.