Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;626896 Wrote: Depending on the setting using a 25% phase response with sox i found it already changing frequencys from 16khz on my impulse samples. So that may play a role here. Edit: Some more food for thought Lets assume these are the factors that change the sound for our Transporter, please correct me if i am wrong: Data 16bit PCM - Data-Bitstream - 20kHz LowPass - Music Data 16bit PCM - Upsampling - 20kHz Lowpass - Data-Bitstream - 40khz LowPass - Music You have to guarantee that Upsampling + 20kHz Lowpass + 40khz LowPass is doing a better job together as just doing 20kHz Lowpass in the DAC I was wondering how that worked! Lets see if I understand this..So, when I convert redbook to 24/96 using soX on my laptop the lowpass filter is applied at 20khz during that process? - or are you saying that the lowpass 20khz filter is applied to the 24bit data when it goes to the server? It seems to me from the Transporter DAC data sheet that it applies the 20khz lowpass to 16bit and 40khz to 24bit. In other words - what I thought occured was upsampling, filtering etc. with done with the software, then this data stream was transmitted AS IS to the DAC, then the DAC of course would apply its filters according to the resolution etc. I dont understand why (or where) the 20k lowpass would be applied to 24bit data Thanks for your help! -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
earwaxer9;627021 Wrote: I dont understand why (or where) the 20k lowpass would be applied to 24bit data Thanks for your help! We mentioned in this thread already that on upsampling from 44.1kHz to 96kHz a lowpass must be applied, thats how it works with all software resamplers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upsampling Intereting point mentioned there The second step calls for the use of a perfect low-pass filter, which is not implementable. And there we go again. What filter to choose... :) -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
thanks Wombat - i will study the link -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;626896 Wrote: Depending on the setting using a 25% phase response with sox i found it already changing frequencys from 16khz on my impulse samples. So that may play a role here. You have to guarantee that Upsampling + 20kHz Lowpass + 40khz LowPass is doing a better job together as just doing 20kHz Lowpass in the DAC I can see how the phase set to 25% could be rolling 16khz on to some extent. I have seen that in some of the intermediate filter setting tests. Its interesting how that sounds a bit more like vinyl to me! It may also be a system thing given I have a lot of silver with the ribbon tweeters etc. More for the tweeker paradise! (I wont even mention that I just swapped out my inductors for 10g North Creek - for another post!) -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Hi guys.
After a bit of testing. I'm more confused then before:
When it comes to sox resampling parameters I'd say that below lines
can do. It's not that far away form the inital post of the thread.
I do output 24bit and a fixed 96khz.
I left out gain adjust. Dithering is gone since I got 24bit on the
output
for now.
I'm not 100% sure yet if to continue with n*44.1 rates.
flc flc * *
# FT:{START=--skip=%t}U:{END=--until=%v}
[flac] -dcs $START$ $END$ -- $FILE$ | [sox] -q -t wav - -t flac -C 0
-rate -v -s -I 96000
flc flc * *
# FT:{START=--skip=%t}U:{END=--until=%v}
[flac] -dcs $START$ $END$ -- $FILE$ | [sox] -q -t wav - -t flac -C 0
-rate -v -s 96000
However. I continued to look for the best resampler. I tried most of
those those freeware types.
Some folks at AA suggested to try iZotope or Audition 3 instead of Sox.
I did some testing with iZotope (soundforge pro trial version).
I also downloaded Samplitude 11 Pro Trial.
All I can say so far is that iZotope seems to do a better job then
Sox.
All files were offline resampled.
Samplitude Trial won't let me save the files. It's not that easy to
compare to the others. Still it sounds very promising.
--
soundcheck
::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0'
(http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html)
::: by soundcheck
soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626763 Wrote:
Hi guys.
After a bit of testing. I'm more confused then before:
When it comes to sox resampling parameters I'd say that below lines
can do. It's not that far away form the inital post of the thread.
I do output 24bit and a fixed 96khz.
I left out gain adjust. Dithering is gone since I got 24bit on the
output
for now.
I'm not 100% sure yet if to continue with n*44.1 rates.
flc flc * *
# FT:{START=--skip=%t}U:{END=--until=%v}
[flac] -dcs $START$ $END$ -- $FILE$ | [sox] -q -t wav - -t flac -C 0
-rate -v -s -I 96000
flc flc * *
# FT:{START=--skip=%t}U:{END=--until=%v}
[flac] -dcs $START$ $END$ -- $FILE$ | [sox] -q -t wav - -t flac -C 0
-rate -v -s 96000
However. I continued to look for the best resampler. I tried most of
those those freeware types.
Some folks at AA suggested to try iZotope or Audition 3 instead of Sox.
I did some testing with iZotope (soundforge pro trial version).
I also downloaded Samplitude 11 Pro Trial.
All I can say so far is that iZotope seems to do a better job then
Sox.
All files were offline resampled.
Samplitude Trial won't let me save the files. It's not that easy to
compare to the others. Still it sounds very promising.
Gain adjust is critical - without it you will get clipping on
upsampling - sox will report all clipped samples in its output...
Also you should try the linear filter (in SOX this is the default:
option
-L (not -I or -M)
Ah - I see that is your second FLC FLC * * line... :-)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103
- full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5),
Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber
8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables
Stax4070+SRM7/II phones
Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything.
Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Phil Leigh;626785 Wrote: Gain adjust is critical - without it you will get clipping on upsampling Most of the modern style high-gain recordings are driven into clipping. They give a sh.. about that. I tried and without gain adjust. I liked without gain adjust best (for now). I'm not really sure if to bother about a couple of samples hitting the ceiling. Still, sox is giving me worse results compared to the other apps I mentioned. Once you've listened to the better stuff, you gotta a hard time to step back again. -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626763 Wrote:
Hi guys.
After a bit of testing. I'm more confused then before:
When it comes to sox resampling parameters I'd say that below lines
can do. It's not that far away form the inital post of the thread.
I do output 24bit and a fixed 96khz.
I left out gain adjust. Dithering is gone since I got 24bit on the
output
for now.
I'm not 100% sure yet if to continue with n*44.1 rates.
flc flc * *
# FT:{START=--skip=%t}U:{END=--until=%v}
[flac] -dcs $START$ $END$ -- $FILE$ | [sox] -q -t wav - -t flac -C 0
-rate -v -s -I 96000
flc flc * *
# FT:{START=--skip=%t}U:{END=--until=%v}
[flac] -dcs $START$ $END$ -- $FILE$ | [sox] -q -t wav - -t flac -C 0
-rate -v -s 96000
However. I continued to look for the best resampler. I tried most of
those those freeware types.
Some folks at AA suggested to try iZotope or Audition 3 instead of Sox.
I did some testing with iZotope (soundforge pro trial version).
I also downloaded Samplitude 11 Pro Trial.
All I can say so far is that iZotope seems to do a better job then
Sox.
All files were offline resampled.
Samplitude Trial won't let me save the files. It's not that easy to
compare to the others. Still it sounds very promising.
These lines still add dither. The second time you offer a commandline
that doesn´t do what you decsribe it to do. You should check before
posting...
I´m really interested how you rate your resampling and why clipping is
a non-issue suddenly. Do you allow aliasing and how much aliasing? If
no aliasing, why not? What bandwith? Steep or slow Filter? What phase
response 10, 25, 30 or even 50? Dither yes or no and what kind?
What is the advantage/disadvantage of using the corresponding setting
with sox against iZotope and what settings exactly you choosed in your
comparison?
Since you give a recommendation i guess you checked all that?
There were several people before that even had deep knowledge about the
mathematics behind that stuff and no one can proclaim to know the best
way doing it because there isn´t.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Correct - there is no best - there is only different. Personally I like SOX. Use rate -D to avoid additional dither. Dither should only ever be used when reducing bit depth (e.g. when going from 24 to 16 bit... not something we are doing here!) -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;626790 Wrote: I´m really interested how you rate your resampling and why clipping is a non-issue suddenly. Do you allow aliasing and how much aliasing? If no aliasing, why not? What bandwith? Steep or slow Filter? What phase response 10, 25, 30 or even 50? Dither yes or no and what kind? What is the advantage/disadvantage of using the corresponding setting with sox against iZotope and what settings exactly you choosed in your comparison? Since you give a recommendation i guess you checked all that? There were several people before that even had deep knowledge about the mathematics behind that stuff and no one can proclaim to know the best way doing it because there isn´t. Oh -- you're still around. 1st of all. Try to understand what's written. My post starts with I'm more confused then before. It continues with I'm not sure yet... and goes on with Some folks at AA suggested to try iZotope... Does that sound like a recommendation to you? You IMO should have stayed out of this discussion. 2nd. Several people with deep knowledge developed the SB Touch and others with potentially even deeper knowledge were trying to talk the effects of my Toolbox down. You know - I couldn't care less. Listening to people doesn't keep me off doing things differently. There are just too many smart people out there (here). People like you, with this kind of negative attitude, I consider destructive. I'm still wondering why I'm responding to something like that. -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Phil Leigh;626798 Wrote: Correct - there is no best - there is only different. Did you try iZotope lately? -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626799 Wrote: My post starts with I'm more confused then before No doubt -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626800 Wrote: Did you try iZotope lately? Not in the last 12 months. However, it will not change my comment that there is only different - there is no correct algorithm here. I will take another look to see how CURRENT iZotope resampling compares with the latest SOX algorithm. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626763 Wrote: Hi guys. After a bit of testing. I'm more confused then before: Lots of room for expectation bias here. Thats ok! We are human after all. I was shaking my head at myself last night as I started to re-resample - once again. I have been listening to soX SRC - 24/96 VHQ linear for some months now. Previous to that I used SSRC (dbpoweramp). I found that soX sounded better. Yesterday I resampled half of Sgt. Peppers using 25% phase leaving the rest at 50% (linear) - using foobar. I think I liked the 25% better. I cant tell you how I like it better. I guess, more natural due to a gentler filtering. So off I go. It gives me something to do and it doesnt cost me anything! IMO, it would be next to impossible to judge if one algorithm is better than the next one in simple A-B comparisons. I believe it takes some listening time. I do believe there is a difference that can equal greater enjoyment. Placebo or not, enjoyment is enjoyment. Sorry for repetition - here is the SRC test for those who havent seen it. Happy OCD'ing! http://src.infinitewave.ca/ -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
earwaxer9;626833 Wrote: Lots of room for expectation bias here. Thats ok! We are human after all. I was shaking my head at myself last night as I started to re-resample - once again. I have been listening to soX SRC - 24/96 VHQ linear for some months now. Previous to that I used SSRC (dbpoweramp). I found that soX sounded better. Yesterday I resampled half of Sgt. Peppers using 25% phase leaving the rest at 50% (linear) - using foobar. I think I liked the 25% better. I cant tell you how I like it better. I guess, more natural due to a gentler filtering. So off I go. It gives me something to do and it doesnt cost me anything! IMO, it would be next to impossible to judge if one algorithm is better than the next one in simple A-B comparisons. I believe it takes some listening time. I do believe there is a difference that can equal greater enjoyment. Placebo or not, enjoyment is enjoyment. Sounds like an honest post to me and i know what you mean :) Depending on the setting using a 25% phase response with sox i found it already changing frequencys from 16khz on my impulse samples. So that may play a role here. One completely different thing is to wonder why Upsampling should be done at all. Indeed some Asynchronous Sampling Rate Convertion that happens in the DAC may have a positive effect on errors that crept in due to jitter on its way into the device. Benchmark Media seems to do well there. With our Transporter that doesn´t happen! We upsample on the Server and send the data on its way. The Transporter just gets more data. I don´t know how it works for the Touch but i doubt it has enough processing power to do good upsampling inside the device. -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;626313 Wrote: Can´t await all the new superlative wordings in describing the earth-shattering improvements coming from upsampling soon... What kind of bullsh*t is this supposed to be. Though that fits the overall picture... If you would have left out that comment, your answer could have been considered constructive. Anyhow: The ones who want to try 1. Linear filters Which come with a little pre-ringing. Skip -M. The debate about those different types goes on forever. 2. Clipping gain -3db might work. That's what the man-page (sox manual) says. Some chose even -8db. -6db might not be that bad either. You'd limit the digital calculation losses. In fact the best choice would be offline upsampling to avoid more impact then needed. On the other hand new style productions are driven into clipping anyhow. People get used to it. 3. Dither I didn't know that noise shaped dither is not applied on 88.2 Pretty weired. If that is the case one could assume that default TPDF is applied. Again. You can skip dither with -D. Sox is a nice playground app. Just one lttle parameter change can change the world. ;) -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
If you are upsampling to 88.2 or 96 you should use a linear phase filter IME. You want SOX to retain the original bit-depth, so if 16 went in you want 16 out and if 24 went in, you want 24 out. The Touch itself will change everything that is 16 to 24 anyway. You should not add any dither when upsampling. With SOX, upsampling from 44.1 to 96 is just as accurate as upsampling to 88.2 - there is no truth in the multiples are better approach. to avoid clipping use the sox volume command. I have found that v0.965 is very effective on the majority of material. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Phil Leigh;626344 Wrote: If you are upsampling to 88.2 or 96 you should use a linear phase filter IME. You want SOX to retain the original bit-depth, so if 16 went in you want 16 out and if 24 went in, you want 24 out. The Touch itself will change everything that is 16 to 24 anyway. You should not add any dither when upsampling. With SOX, upsampling from 44.1 to 96 is just as accurate as upsampling to 88.2 - there is no truth in the multiples are better approach. to avoid clipping use the sox volume command. I have found that v0.965 is very effective on the majority of material. It's not that I want to retain 16 bit. If it is possible to set the the sox output stream to 24bit I'm gonna do that. Dither I wouldn't use if 24 bit output works. The guy who started the thread had no bit-depth change in the commandline btw. That's why I brought the issue up. That the Touch transforms anything to 24bit later on is a different subject. What about there is no truth Anything out there proving your statement. Or do I have to do some listening tests. Cheers -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
One more. Just figured that beside linear and minphase there's an intermediate ( potentially best of two worlds) option. Perhaps it's worth a try. -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626354 Wrote: It's not that I want to retain 16 bit. If it is possible to set the the sox output stream to 24bit I'm gonna do that. Dither I wouldn't use if 24 bit output works. The guy who started the thread had no bit-depth change in the commandline btw. That's why I brought the issue up. That the Touch transforms anything to 24bit later on is a different subject. What about there is no truth Anything out there proving your statement. Or do I have to do some listening tests. Cheers The multiples issue is an old urban myth. When upsampling first became popular, it was done in basic hardware and only done in multiples, using simple doubling of samples. Later, advanced DSP and ASRC chips were used and proper algorithms were developed. These convert anything to anything and do so very accurately - like SOX (but embedded in hardware). However, for some reason I can't explain, many people still cling to the multiples are good myth. If you don't believe me (or Wombat) you should just listen (of course, you should do that anyway!) -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
One more: When testing different SRCs and options I think everybody should exactly know what the DAC is doing in that area. Many of the DACs around do some kind of resampling. Some do it with multiples of the original others not. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be useless to do resampling to 88,2 or 96 on SBS if the DACs SRC does it again to even higher rates. Beside that - at least that's my experience - higher load on the SB environment due to HiRes data has it's own effects. After all, all those differences should be rather subtle. I guess it's not gonna be that that easy to nail it down. IMO too many parameters in the game. I'll give a try. ;) -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Phil Leigh;626364 Wrote: If you don't believe me (or Wombat) you should just listen (of course, you should do that anyway!) It's not about believe. That we do in church. ;) If you want to bust myths - prove it. Believing a '\short-legged,muscular quadruped\' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wombat) is a different story. :D -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626365 Wrote: One more: When testing different SRCs and options I think everybody should exactly know what the DAC is doing in that area. Many of the DACs around do some kind of resampling. Some do it with multiples of the original others not. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be useless to do resampling to 88,2 or 96 on SBS if the DACs SRC does it again to even higher rates. Beside that - at least that's my experience - higher load on the SB environment due to HiRes data has it's own effects. After all, all those differences should be rather subtle. I guess it's not gonna be that that easy to nail it down. IMO too many parameters in the game. I'll give a try. ;) some things to think about: 1) some dacs internally upsample to 384 or 768 using ASRC chips - for these it may make little difference to upsample before the Touch, but... 2) some people believe that driving the s/pdif link (transmitter+cable+receiver) at 96kHz is a good idea. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Phil Leigh;623322 Wrote: The differences between SOX (VHQ) and Weiss are clearly measurable but inaudible in practice and there is NO consensus on which is even theroretically better. Weiss can handle DSD and that is why it is used in pro circles. if Weiss DAC202 uses same algorithm, then I could not match it using Sox. Weiss always sounded fuller, wider yet detailed.. -- michael123 Please fix http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=16814 michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
michael123;626375 Wrote: if Weiss DAC202 uses same algorithm, then I could not match it using Sox. Weiss always sounded fuller, wider yet detailed.. yes but you are listening to the DAC, not just the algorithm... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626366 Wrote: It's not about believe. That we do in church. ;) If you want to bust myths - prove it. Believing a '\short-legged,muscular quadruped\' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wombat) is a different story. :D I already pointed to a place where the issue how sox upsamples was discussed lately. btw. funny how it comes from your side to ask someone for prove :) End of the upsampling debate for me, laters! -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Hi there. How would you guys: 1. configure a 24bit output bitrate to avoid dithering ( Sox usually needs a -D option specified to avoid automatic dithering.) A 16 bit output should be avoided for obvious reasons. 2. configure an appropriate attenuation to avoid clipping 3. stream a PCM stream instead of a flac stream I'd appreciate if anybody could post a working 24/96 config line assuming a 16/44.1 input file. Cheers -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
you can add soX to foobar as an add-on DSP. Then you dont have to use command lines -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626231 Wrote: Hi there. How would you guys: 1. configure a 24bit output bitrate to avoid dithering ( Sox usually needs a -D option specified to avoid automatic dithering.) A 16 bit output should be avoided for obvious reasons. 2. configure an appropriate attenuation to avoid clipping 3. stream a PCM stream instead of a flac stream I'd appreciate if anybody could post a working 24/96 config line assuming a 16/44.1 input file. Cheers There were one or two threads already with some commandlines and magic parameters including polyphase, minimum phase and alike stuff. Only input i may give is that a gain of -1.5dB should be enough on all material with a gentle filter. -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;626235 Wrote: There were one or two threads already with some commandlines and magic parameters including polyphase, minimum phase and alike stuff. Only input i may give is that a gain of -1.5dB for avoiding clipping should be enough on all material with a gentle filter. I know. I've been looking into it earlier too. I skipped it because of other priorities. ;) -- soundcheck ::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html) ::: by soundcheck soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626249 Wrote: I know. I've been looking into it earlier too. I skipped it because of other priorities. ;) The initial line posted in the first post won't attenuate properly, runs 16 bit on the output and will add some triangular dither ( which is the sox default dither if I recall it correctly) to the signal. It can be done better than that. 1) Shouldn't require ANY dither when up sampling. 2) Why do you think the output is being forced own to 16-bit? (are you using SOX 14.3.2?) -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Phil Leigh;626264 Wrote:
1) Shouldn't require ANY dither when up sampling.
2) Why do you think the output is being forced down to 16-bit? (are you
using SOX 14.3.2?)
Pretty much every activity in 16 bit land will pass the borders.
That's why dither should be applied.
However:
The critical question is if an already dithered material should be
redithered again. Tbe big issue is here, you don't know what dithering
was applied to your base material.
If you don't specify 24bit on the sox output. You'll get out what got
in.
I havn't managed to change that outgoing rate. Any hints would be
appreciated.
Here is an example line I just put together:
flc flc * *
# FT:{START=--skip=%t}U:{END=--until=%v}
[flac] -dcs $START$ $END$ -- $FILE$ | [sox] -q -t wav - -t
flac -C 0 - gain -h rate -v -s -M 88200 dither -s
1. on 44.1 base material we should stay n*44.1 - if the dac supports it
as native frequency.
2. I've chosen a steep minimum phase filter.
3. The gain will be automatically adjusted to avoid clipping
4. And I applied shaped dither - sox default is TPDF
Cheers
--
soundcheck
::: ' Touch Toolbox 2.0'
(http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html)
::: by soundcheck
soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
soundcheck;626273 Wrote:
flc flc * *
# FT:{START=--skip=%t}U:{END=--until=%v}
[flac] -dcs $START$ $END$ -- $FILE$ | [sox] -q -t wav - -t flac -C 0 -
gain -h rate -v -s -M 88200 dither -s
1. On 44.1 base material we should stay n*44.1 - if the dac supports it
as native frequency. But even if the DAC doesn't support
it, there might be a chance that the non-linear resampling is done
better by sox.
2. I've chosen a steep (-v-s) minimum phase (-M) filter.
3. The gain will be automatically (-h) adjusted to avoid clipping
4. And I applied shaped dither (-s) - sox default is TPDF
1. Sox does not better with n*44.1. A thread recently on Hydrogenaudio
showed that it keeps as much info from the source as with uneven
numbers.
2. Minimumn phase is not good for audio imho. If you have to use some
non-linear filter you may use an immediate phase thing inbetween.
3. -h can´t be applied with on-the-fly-encoding afaik. How should sox
know without scanning the whole file at first how loud it gets?
4. sox doesn´t apply noise-shaped dither while upsampling to 88.2kHz
Can´t await all the new superlative wordings in describing the
earth-shattering improvements coming from upsampling soon...
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
The differences between SOX (VHQ) and Weiss are clearly measurable but inaudible in practice and there is NO consensus on which is even theroretically better. Weiss can handle DSD and that is why it is used in pro circles. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Phil Leigh;622886 Wrote: I completely agree - all this talk of multiples is nonsense in the context of SOX... Thanks for that Phil Wombat, I'd previously made the same assumption as Gaz R.E. the multiples of... My SB setup is still redbook, as my main DAC is an Audiolab 8000DAX and won't go above 48K so re sampling would be futile. I am however using the FFSoX plugin for winamp in my study (FLAC library, FFSox in, winamp, Directsound out, M-Audio 2496 SPDIF, Beresford TC-7510), I've now set the resampler to 24/96. Can I tell the difference between 24/88.2 24/96? Probably not, but as someone stated earlier it does help my audiophile OCD ;) -- WAD62 Cheers Will WAD62's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=38506 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;622716 Wrote: You should realize that sox sees no advantage in upsampling 2x to 88.2 since with applying the lowpass all relation to a pattern of multiples in the data is gone. In theory upsampling to 96kHz is less lossy... I didn't know that, thanks for the info. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing I guess... :) So in the context of SOX (and thanks Phil too, saw your comment as well) - its actually better on paper to go to 96 rather than 88.2? Less lossy? Thats the ideal I guess. ta. -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
earwaxer9;623011 Wrote: I dont know how many have seen and studied this test... The gold standard seems to the Weiss Saracon 1.6. A bit pricey at $1500. SoX is free. Cant beat that! I don´t know what test you talk about and you may explain to us why the Weiss is superior, please. To me it looks like a polyphase, DSP attempt to spare processing cycles and it allows strong aliasing. Gazjam;623049 Wrote: So in the context of SOX (and thanks Phil too, saw your comment as well) - its actually better on paper to go to 96 rather than 88.2? Less lossy? I don´t like upsampling as healing as some make it look. If you have to, using 96kHz has more headroom and most likely the output filter of your DAC kicks in later as on 88.2kHz -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;623051 Wrote: I don´t like upsampling as healing as some make it look. If you have to, using 96kHz has more headroom and most likely the output filter of your DAC kicks in later as on 88.2kHz To the quality of the different resamplers i think there are several these days that do more or less the same math. You just have to decide what is more important to you. Lowering BW and allowing aliasing gives you less pre-echo, using maximum BW always will give you strong pre-echo. You theoreticaly can archieve all results inbetween if the resampler program gives you the option to. There is no magic. But be aware that this pre-echo you see on these funny graphs happens above the lopwass frequency, so it may look bad on paper but you can´t hear it. Sounds like you have dabbled in upsampling Wombat and know a thing or two about it. Cool. What do you use at the moment...do you just go with native redbook or upsample in your own setup. thanks. -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Gazjam;623221 Wrote: Sounds like you have dabbled in upsampling Wombat and know a thing or two about it. Cool. I still know nothing but not to trust in some marketing and insider super-secret code. There isn´t. I use sox with aliasing and a bw of 90, so i trade garbage above 20kHz against pre-echo above 20kHz. Everyone will have his own holy listening event that convinced someone. But lets face it, we talk about differences that happen above my and most others hearing. I can´t abx garbage against pre-echo done by sox. Weiss for example choosed big garbage above 20kHz but some think to hear it sounding better... Gazjam;623221 Wrote: What do you use at the moment...do you just go with native redbook or upsample in your own setup. I use my Transporter as it is meant to be used. I find the delta-sigma DAC gorgeous. When i played with Upsampling i didn´t find anything that convinced me to use it for all. The soft/sharp roll-off i can choose with my Transporter now is the only thing i switch sometimes. To be honest it is most likely only to adjust the experience to my mood and to satisfy the need to change something. It is funny how often i could swear that this recording sounds better as the other way around. I see it with a smile meanwhile :) -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;623051 Wrote: I don´t know what test you talk about and you may explain to us why the Weiss is superior, please. Did the link work? Here it is again: http://src.infinitewave.ca/ From what I have read - the pro's go with the Weiss software for their SRC work. Its soup to nuts and works the best. It makes sense to me. If I were in the bis I would go with the best as well. In analysis of the SRC testing it looks like Weiss traded some aliasing above 20K for less pre-ring. Their noise floor is also the best tested. From the testing it appears that they have a SOTA SRC. You have to pay for that. -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
earwaxer9;623278 Wrote: In analysis of the SRC testing it looks like Weiss traded some aliasing above 20K for less pre-ring. Their noise floor is also the best tested. From the testing it appears that they have a SOTA SRC. You have to pay for that. Above 20khz it is hefty aliasing and the quality with its wide transition band is how a fast, lower quality resampler works, kind of sox non-vhq. Therefore i bet it does fast resampling. Of cause they did some homework and create files with low noisefloor but i wonder who seriously can argue it sounds better as the other mathematical correct resamplers. I am not sure how it is implemented but the resampler stuff from Weiss is high priced because of its name and most likely because their resampling set can do dsd to pcm the Pros need. This can be expensive still. -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Wombat;622716 Wrote: You should realize that sox sees no advantage in upsampling 2x to 88.2 since with applying the lowpass all relation to a pattern of multiples in the data is gone. In theory upsampling to 96kHz is less lossy... I completely agree - all this talk of multiples is nonsense in the context of SOX... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
So you are all saying that SOX is that good , if true it very well thought out software . I propose experiment to test if if it the process is transparent. A[/B]= ANY 16/44.1 FILE *B*= FILE *A* UPSAMPLED TO 96K VIA SOX THEN -DOWNSAMPLED- TO 44.1 AGAIN *C*= FILE *A* UPSAMPLED TO 88.2 VIA SOX THEN -DOWNSAMPLED- TO 44.1 AGAIN THE RESULT SHOULD BE THAT THE AUDIO CONTENT IN THE FILES ARE BIT-PERFECTLY IDENTICAL: *A*=*B*=[B]C I do not have the computer skills to try , it would be interesting thou. If the process is transparent and do not change any audio data you should be able to reverse the process and get the original data back. -- Mnyb Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: SB3 + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) iPad 64gB wifi +3g with iPengHD SqueezePad Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
michael123;622901 Wrote: it won't be.. for 44.1 to 88.2 and back to 44.1 I'm sure it can be done if the original material is 44.1 this is math so simple that even I can understand it . (remember we are talking material with no content above what 44.1 can sample). And we are not introducing random dither noise when just changing rate or are we ? Going to lower bith depth needs dither For an arbitary sample rate the math is more complex and I'm just curious to how/if it can be done, it migth not be easy to understand . Reading the SOX homepage , well it a lot of info it has settings in spades :-) Being what it is, it would sure be possible to find settings that do sound different . This peaked my curiosity to how transparent to the source material this is ? Also My Meridian preamp do upsampling to but to even rates, but my Meridian HDMI to 4*MHR box always outputs 96k . None of it sounds even half bad so i could ofcourse enjouy the music and be oblivius to the finer points of samplerate conversion, did I say i was a curius person and that do like to understand things -- Mnyb Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: SB3 + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) iPad 64gB wifi +3g with iPengHD SqueezePad Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Do you think they use a lowpass on upsampling just for fun and because they are to dump to do it without? Upsampling by simply adding inbetweens gives an aliased mirror image nobody wants. Here lvqcl, a Hydrogenaudio member that offers the sox foobar resampler plugin gives you the chance to do upsampling without a lowpass: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=showtopic=67376view=findpostp=675545 I don´t think you want that as your music signal... -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
I dont know how many have seen and studied this test... The gold standard seems to the Weiss Saracon 1.6. A bit pricey at $1500. SoX is free. Cant beat that! -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Daverz;622600 Wrote: Doesn't the SB already pad output to 24-bit? Or is that just for the internal DAC? Or am I just confused altogether? Yes - no matter what you do everything that comes out of an SB is 24-bit... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Belden Digital,Kimber 8TC Speaker Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Why on earth souls I want to UPSAMPLE??? I mean: why do I store material in a lossless format if I then add a lossy process to it (although minor, there will be arithmetic losses when up sampling 44.1kHz material to 96kHz). -- pippin --- see iPeng, the Squeezebox iPhone remote and *New: iPeng for iPad*, at penguinlovesmusic.com pippin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13777 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
The bad news for you then is that the SB DACs all up-sample internally.. -- DaveWr DaveWr's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9331 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
I use a custom convert.conf which uses SOX to upsample redbook, which i find preferrable in my system to un-upsampled. Placebo...expectation bias...who knows? ;) Sounds better to me, more fuller and better air around the instruments. I upsample to 88.2 rather than 96 as its a multiple of 44.1 as it better calms my audio OCD! :) Seriously though, upsampling to 88.2 does sound better (to me) than native redbook and 96khz. Just my £0.02 worth. -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
pippin;622630 Wrote: Why on earth souls I want to UPSAMPLE??? I mean: why do I store material in a lossless format if I then add a lossy process to it (although minor, there will be arithmetic losses when up sampling 44.1kHz material to 96kHz). While up sampling doesn't add any additional information to the audio datastream, it can greatly impact the D-to-A process, and as there are different ways to upsample that can result in a different experience As to whether one method of up sampling is better than another however I would suggest is extremely subjective -- snottmonster snottmonster's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=45063 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
I have an external D/A converter, am I still getting the SB3's upsampling in the stream ? Thx, b -- brjoon1021 brjoon1021's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12136 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Gazjam;622634 Wrote: I use a custom convert.conf which uses SOX to upsample redbook, which i find preferrable in my system to un-upsampled. Placebo...expectation bias...who knows? ;) Sounds better to me, more fuller and better air around the instruments. I upsample to 88.2 rather than 96 as its a multiple of 44.1 as it better calms my audio OCD! :) Seriously though, upsampling to 88.2 does sound better (to me) than native redbook and 96khz. Just my £0.02 worth. I decided to go with 24/96 because I figure the Transporter would upsample to 96khz anyway. I really dont know what happens in hardware in the DAC but it seems that many DACs upsample to 96 even though its an off multiple of 44.1. I would go to higher multiples but those are not supported. I didnt want to get crazy and try to hear a difference between 88.2 and 96! Interesting that someone has found a difference. I will take that into consideration when my OCD kicks in again! -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Gazjam;622634 Wrote: I upsample to 88.2 rather than 96 as its a multiple of 44.1 as it better calms my audio OCD! :) Seriously though, upsampling to 88.2 does sound better (to me) than native redbook and 96khz. You should realize that sox sees no advantage in upsampling 2x to 88.2 since with applying the lowpass all relation to a pattern of multiples in the data is gone. In theory upsampling to 96kHz is less lossy... -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
DaveWr;622631 Wrote: The bad news for you then is that the SB DACs all up-sample internally.. Seriously, they don't use different clocks? -- pippin --- see iPeng, the Squeezebox iPhone remote and *New: iPeng for iPad*, at penguinlovesmusic.com pippin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13777 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
This was over my head. But it brought up a few questions ? Knowing that my computer has anything to do with the sound coming out of the system really bothers me. Up until now I thought of the computer and especially the hard drive as merely a glorified CD (just a container of the file type). Am I to understand that some open source program called SOX with many, many tweakable parameters is doing A/D conversion ? Or any other conversion ? I play almost only FLAC files, but some MP3 files. I noticed the sample rates being in need of conversion in the OP comments. I think that FLAC and MP3 do not need conversion. Am I correct in that ? Is this a Linux only issue as I saw ubuntu in the original post ? thanks, b -- brjoon1021 brjoon1021's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12136 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
This was over my head. But it brought up a few questions ? Knowing that my computer has anything to do with the sound coming out of the system really bothers me. Up until now I thought of the computer and especially the hard drive as merely a glorified CD (just a container of the file type). Am I to understand that some open source program called SOX with many, many tweakable parameters is doing A/D conversion ? Or any other conversion ? I play almost only FLAC files, but some MP3 files. I noticed the sample rates being in need of conversion in the OP comments here: SB Server will fill in the %d with either 44100 (if sampling down from 88.2kHz) or 48000 (from 192 or 96). For the Touch, this will only kick in above 96 kHz. I think that FLAC and MP3 do not need conversion. Am I correct in that ? Is this a Linux only conversation or is Windows having anything to do with sampling rates, conversion, etc... as I saw ubuntu mentioned in the original post ? thanks, b -- brjoon1021 brjoon1021's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12136 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
It's an enable the hardware to support all input media thing SOX is only used when the source material is not directly supported by the player hardware, (eg playing 24/96 on a SB3 or 24/192 on the Touch, as stated by the OP) which means only Hi Res audio material is potentially affected. If you are playing FLAC rips of standard CDs, there will be no resampling -- snottmonster snottmonster's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=45063 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
brjoon1021;622485 Wrote: Am I to understand that some open source program called SOX with many, many tweakable parameters is doing A/D conversion ? Or any other conversion ? SoX is doing D/D conversion, and only if the sound file is incompatible with the Squeezebox. For instance, the SB Touch can play files up to 24 bit/96 kHz. If you try to play a 24/192 file on the Touch, SoX will automatically step in and downsample it to a Touch-playable format. The alternative would be silence (or just noise). If you try to play a 24/96 file on the Touch, SoX does nothing, and the file is sent to the Touch in its native form. -- Soulkeeper -that is not dead which can eternal lie. and with strange aeons even death may die.- touch + duet + boom + radio / wrt160n/dd-wrt / sbs 7.5.1 or higher/win7(32b)/avira free Soulkeeper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35297 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
I use SOX VHQ linear upsampler through foobar. I used to use dbpoweramp's upsampler. SOX seems to be better. I upsample all my redbooks to 24/96. The foobar interface is nice, you dont have to use command line. -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
earwaxer9;622508 Wrote: I use SOX VHQ linear upsampler through foobar. I used to use dbpoweramp's upsampler. SOX seems to be better. I upsample all my redbooks to 24/96. The foobar interface is nice, you dont have to use command line. Doesn't the SB already pad output to 24-bit? Or is that just for the internal DAC? Or am I just confused altogether? -- Daverz Daverz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32335 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
Personally I still prefer the polyphase upsampling from sox 14.2 -- tingtong5 tingtong5's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9671 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better resampling for SB Classic and Touch (probably all)
tingtong5;600829 Wrote: Personally I still prefer the polyphase upsampling from sox 14.2 Not the first time i read polyphase should sound better. I really don´t know why it should cause it adds much more noise as the recent, recommended rate resampling of sox. At least on my sinuid test samples there jumps noise around that is normaly absent in every modern resampler. Can someone give me a hint? -- Wombat Transporter - RG142 - Avantgarde based monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
