[Scott Kramer]

Yes. The sampling theorem (Nyquist-Shannon) states that any band-limited signal can be completely reproduced if sampled at least at double the frequency of its highest frequency content, which implies that using 44.1k sample rate you could perfectly reproduce content up to 22.05k.

As I understand it this has been mathematically proven already, but still seems to be very much under debate as far as HiRez audio goes.

I stumbled upon this video from xiph.org on the tube a while ago and with the usual YMMV and all that, I can’t find anything wrong with it, at least not with the (albeit limited) knowledge that I have. It’s actually very interesting, if you’re so inclined:




Yes. The theorem might be solid enough, but the real challenge is to band-limit the signal, both before sampling it (ADC/in the studio) and after reproducing it (DAC/at home). To accomplish this perfectly you need to construct a brick-wall filter that lets all content below the limit through unharmed and at the same time completely blocks all content above the limit. All without introducing any aliasing or artefacts of any kind in the audible frequency range.

This is really, really hard to do.

One way to make it a bit easier is to raise the sample frequency as to be able to use a less steep output filter, which is less prone to produce aliasing/artefacts.



Yes. When feeding a DAC at it’s maximum frequency there is nothing to oversample as the content it already is at the frequency that the DAC operates at. This would effectively disable the input filter and, as I understand it for Schiit multibit DACs, the comboburrito filter. This would leave the oversampling to the computer’s audio system or none at all if the file already is at the maximum frequency. These can of course possibly yield a different sound depending on the filter being used, owing to differences (or flaws) in their implementation. The Windows system for example, is not very higly regarded in this department as far as I understand.



I discovered that my MacBook apparently automatically set the output to my BF2 to 24/192, so I’ll have to manually set it to 44.1 and listen if I can hear any difference when the comboburrito can work it’s magic fully (now the computer does 44.1 to 192 and the comboburrito would only double up to 384k)

Your point...? This is well known. What if it's recorded (ADC) at 24/96 properly? It's also bandwidth limited so you can reconstruct that perfectly... can 16/44 (DAC) side reconstruct 24/96 perfectly? (Upsampling for filter simplification, HiREZ shenanigans, audiophile dumbassery, and do humans perceive this are other topics outside this snarky (not really) post).

 

[tafens]

Your point...? This is well known. What if it's recorded (ADC) at 24/96 properly? It's also bandwidth limited so you can reconstruct that perfectly... can 16/44 (DAC) side reconstruct 24/96 perfectly? (Upsampling for filter simplification, HiREZ shenanigans, audiophile dumbassery, and do humans perceive this are other topics outside this snarky (not really) post).

No specific point, just answering a post confirming thoughts put forward and filling in some more information. I think what I said was correct, but I’m no expert so please feel free to correct me if I wrote anything that was not.

 

[Scott Kramer]

Cool, I shoot from the hip when I see that damn vid ref'd for 10,000'th time (it's a good vid).

 

[jkpenrose]

The recorded files I listened to where being “played back.” I grew up in the 70s being raised on loud rock so my hearing is no where near bat ears.

For me, how the playback file came into existence does impact how easy it is to hear the difference between bit depth/sample rates as does the technical, performance and music quality of the recording. Over-compressed, poorly performed and poorly recorded, mixed and mastered files being partially hard to hear a difference with no mater how the different files where created.

If the different sample rate/bit depth files are created from the same analog master tape I find it difficult to hear the difference. If the hi-res files are created by up converting the 16/44.1 CD release file I find it difficult to hear the difference. If I can hear the difference typically the 16/44.1 sounds better. This is a little surprising since most DACs oversample or up-convert but maybe one up-sampling process sounds better than two. If the playback files are down converted from from a higher res file, the differences are subtle but noticeable with the native file sounding better. If the different files are recorded at different depths/sample rates the differences are the most noticeable with the higher res files sounding better.

It is often very difficult to find out “how” the high res files are created so a “Hi-Res” file does not guarantee a better sounding file but it does not make all high res files silly.

YMMV. If you can’t hear the difference enjoy the 16/44.1 music. Would it not be better to let the rest of us spend our money on the music and formats we want than to call us silly?

I don't think you are silly and sincerely sorry if I gave that impression...

Even if 'in theory' 16/44.1 is enough to reproduce the exact analog signal - it is certainly technically harder to design that with a steep filter AND of course, there is a difference between theory and practical reality.

Go for the hi-res files if you like them better

Seriously, whatever helps us enjoy the music better! I know I have all types of biases that play into what I hear... Heck, I just bought an expensive upgrade cable - LOL

 

[earnmyturns]

Yes. The sampling theorem (Nyquist-Shannon) states that any band-limited signal can be completely reproduced if sampled at least at double the frequency of its highest frequency content, which implies that using 44.1k sample rate you could perfectly reproduce content up to 22.05k.

The theorem is for an ideal sampler (the sampling equivalent of a spherical cow). Actual samples are not ideal, both because the A2D is not perfect and because the sampled values are quantized (to 16 bit-linear for Redbook). So you have to look at sampling and quantization distortion and noise as well. The digital filter at the other end has a lot to do to recreate a compelling audio image.

 

[ev666il]

I’ve just googled “spherical cow” and learned something new today

 

[tafens]

The theorem is for an ideal sampler (the sampling equivalent of a spherical cow). Actual samples are not ideal, both because the A2D is not perfect and because the sampled values are quantized (to 16 bit-linear for Redbook). So you have to look at sampling and quantization distortion and noise as well. The digital filter at the other end has a lot to do to recreate a compelling audio image.

Absolutely. There are numerous challenges creating a DAC, the filter being one of them, to faithfully and exactly recreate the signal levels another.. while the theory is sound (pun intended), of course no application of it is or can be ideal, and the same goes for ADCs.

But thankfully it works anyway, and mostly very well too

Of course I had to google “spherical cow” too, and the wikipedia entry led on to “assume a can opener” which was great also

 

[Les Strat]

Upgradeable DAC features are cool, but it's not like taking apart the Yggdrasil and reassembly is a 5 minute job. So something like different selectable DAC flavor modes would be cool for a one time installation, but then there would probably need to be a faceplate upgrade as well.

Honestly, right now I just want that transport! I haven't been able to play CDs for a few years and I am ready to place my order as soon as it's available.

@crazychile
Me too!
I have upgraded my Yggy with a Unison USB input board, bought a Freya S, and now I'm all ready for that CD transport...

 

[SpeakerBox]

I have recently decided to move away from the CD format (my ears tell me something is amiss). Purchased a Bluesound node 2i, and have been running 96/24 files into my Musical Fidelity V90 DAC. The sound is surprisingly good (the DAC in the Bluesound is not to shabby either).

Edit: I am mainly a vinyl listener anyway.

 

[Randolf711]

I have recently decided to move away from the CD format (my ears tell me something is amiss). Purchased a Bluesound node 2i, and have been running 96/24 files into my Musical Fidelity V90 DAC. The sound is surprisingly good (the DAC in the Bluesound is not to shabby either).

Edit: I am mainly a vinyl listener anyway.

The Bluesound is what got me hooked into digital audio and eventually led me to Schiit and then selling all my records and turntable. Now I’m rocking the Yggy, Freya+, mono-Vidars, and Asgard2 with Qobuz. It blew away my fancy record collection and snazzy table (just seconds into my first listen I knew I had found my perfect system). Bluesound makes a hell of a product and I originally got it to supplement my record collection but found myself really intrigued by the quality. I have moved it to my bedroom and use Roon to control everything.

 

[SpeakerBox]

The Bluesound is what got me hooked into digital audio and eventually led me to Schiit and then selling all my records and turntable. Now I’m rocking the Yggy, Freya+, mono-Vidars, and Asgard2 with Qobuz. It blew away my fancy record collection and snazzy table (just seconds into my first listen I knew I had found my perfect system). Bluesound makes a hell of a product and I originally got it to supplement my record collection but found myself really intrigued by the quality. I have moved it to my bedroom and use Roon to control everything.

Sounds really nice! So far I still prefer vinyl, but who knows what the future holds.

 

[Zojokkeli]

I have recently decided to move away from the CD format (my ears tell me something is amiss). Purchased a Bluesound node 2i, and have been running 96/24 files into my Musical Fidelity V90 DAC. The sound is surprisingly good (the DAC in the Bluesound is not to shabby either).

Edit: I am mainly a vinyl listener anyway.

I got a Powernode 2i HDMI when I switched my Genelec + Schiit system to passive speakers. It’s a really nifty little do-it-all.

I’ll expand my current tv-setup to a full home theater and try to make a separate Schiit stereo system at some point, but need to move to a bigger house first.

 

[SpeakerBox]

I got a Powernode 2i HDMI when I switched my Genelec + Schiit system to passive speakers. It’s a really nifty little do-it-all.

I’ll expand my current tv-setup to a full home theater and try to make a separate Schiit stereo system at some point, but need to move to a bigger house first.

The Bluesound stuff is quite a good value for the money.

 

[565hunter]

Very interesting! This is the first time I've read a Bifrost 2 impression that was similar to my experience. I thought that the Bifrost 2 had a bit of a sharp edge to the treble that bothered me (I'm very treble-sensitive) and I ended up reverting to my Modi Multibit. A side-grade like you mention would be very attractive - at least for me.

Are you also using coax inputs or are you noticing the sharpness on the Unison input as well?

 

[Odin412]

Are you also using coax inputs or are you noticing the sharpness on the Unison input as well?

I was using Unison USB from a Windows 10 laptop running J River. I didn't try the coax or optical inputs, so I can't speak to any differences between the inputs.