Don't get me wrong John, the dacs were good. It's probably the valve output stage that we preferred the sound of.
Printable View
Don't get me wrong John, the dacs were good. It's probably the valve output stage that we preferred the sound of.
Understand Ali The trouble with DAC's is just to much choice
Also John we didn't use JPlay, only Jriver.
This might have been a factor?
Normally for up to £500 I'd recommend the Rega dac, but despite sounding extremely good the USB only goes up to 16/48 - no hires.
If this isn't a problem I'd go Rega, particularly if you like an "analogue" sounding digital source.
The Mdac is good, but I wouldnt put it in a bright system. Like the Rega it has several filters you can select (like SOX!) and you might find a flavour you like better.
Those are the ones I've heard, some more Ive not heard but read good things about.
TEAC UD-H01 - £300
Matrix Mini-I - £260
StanB's Bushmaster? (Does it do hires?)
wee bit more expensive but possibly worth it?
Stello DA100 Signature - £750
An alternative is to use a USB/SPDIF converter like the MF Vlink 192 with the Rega. I use that setup and it sounds great with hires stuff.
Out of the box suggestion?
Meridian Explorer Dac.
http://www.tonepublications.com/macr...dios-explorer/
looks interesting, gets good reviews.
Always best to try and hear before you buy in your system, not always possible though. :scratch:
Cheers Gaz
The JK beats the Rega in Jplay using USB I already heard the difference. Also do not want to add another circuitry I heard the difference again and much prefer it as part of the DAC
Ok John. :)
I been playing around with Audacity trying to get the best out it with regards to up-sampling of music. It does a similar job to SOX but as I do not understand MS-DOS I find this has been just a simple case of trail and error with Audacity with results I can hear
With my set up makes a noticeable difference in detail and depth. Its has a bit more of a fuller sound compared to SOX. I played around with a few different genres starting of with Jeff Beck Nadia as that shows up faults very quickly
Audacity is another free download
Here are the settings I am using and how to get to them
Step 1 Click edit and then preferences at the bottom on left hand side go into Quality I used the following settings Default Sample Rate 88200 hz Default Sample Format 32 bit float (the DAC I am using goes up to 32bit) Sample rate converter best quality. Dither Shaped (for real time conversion and high quality conversion)
Step 2 Go to file and then click edit chain In left hand column click add I called my file name HD WAV then go to insert and click export WAV
Step 3 Insert audio track
Step 4 Export audio track
Beware it uses a lot more space on your hard drive and make sure you keep the original file when playing around with it
Its worth a play around and if you get serious you can change all your files in one go (I not reached this stage as still playing with what it can do)
Very interesting, John. Maybe there is something in 88.2 being the optimal upsample rate for 44.1 material? I will experiment with your settings back in SOX. Since Audacity uses the SOX engine, they should achieve similar results.Quote:
Originally Posted by John
It could also be the 32bit part I been mostly comparing the frequency rate so far
integer upsampling (I.e. 44.1kHz to 88.2) is preferable to my ears than 44.1 to 96 or 192 kHz. the conversion maths is much simpler and there is no spectral content in the source above 22 kHz anyway.
my dac up samples to 24/384 natively and I didn't notice any appreciable difference between up sampling with SOX or just letting the DSP manage it.
cheers
Alex
When John came round he played an example of the upsampling he's done with Audacity and I've been having a play myself since. At first I used the 24 bit setting and although interesting, it was the 32 bit/ 88.2 setting where the magic started. Yes John, the Oppo does handle it, it makes toast as well ;)
The presentation is certainly smoother and more open, seeming to have better seperation without pulling the cohesion between a group of performers apart. On recordings where female singers get a bit strident there's no longer a wince factor, there's no less treble energy but it's clean and clear. I thought it was just going to be an improvement in upper frequencies, clarity and the acoustic but there's more. Bass has a bit more drive, it's not just tighter. In music styles that show it, the subtleties of how a note is struck and the decay are more obvious.
The 'magic' is that the combination of all of these elements is making the musicians' techniques and expression effortless to follow and quite fascinating.
Nice one Martin, we like this a lot :cheers:
Gaz, I could see myself converting all my files after a bit more experimenting as I've yet to hear any negatives or compromise. Would you expand on what you heard when it didn't work for you, maybe I'm just not focussed on some aspect yet. Was it certain types of recording or types of music? Reduced excitement factor through the smoother presentation or something like that?
It could be that this is playing to my system's traits particularly well and I'm hearing an unusual and disproportionate improvement, but for example my system is not short of an open and spacious acoustic to start with, as John can attest.