|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
162.83.195.7
In Reply to: RE: Playing 24/96 and 24/192 FLAC files. What to use? posted by Freo-1 on May 09, 2020 at 10:04:22
I also recommend the Sony UPD X1100ES and simply use the analog outputs to your preamp. I have used mine via Ethernet to a NAS (network addressable storage) drive. It's simple enough to just go to the drive in the Sony's input list, then select the file on the drive (in your case FLAC) and it just plays. I use non-compressed WAV files, but it's the same principle. I use my NAS drive for all my storage backup for my various computers to store files. But it works equally well as a media server.Now I'm using a WD My Cloud Pro Series 32TB PR4100 4-Bay NAS Server, which is huge and expensive at about $1500. I use that because it has multiple uses (not just audio and movies) since I also do computer graphics and professional audio, so I need that level of storage across many different applications. However, you could get a NAS drive/server for much much less. Such as the WD My Cloud Home 3TB 1-Bay Personal Cloud NAS Server, which sell for about $150 USD. Of course, it all depends on how much storage you need for all your files. Nice thing about these is they exist as just another node on your home network, like a printer or laptop. Connect to your router and go.
As far as up-coverting CD's to higher sampling ... Not better. The source is still 16/44.1 and oversampling does not bring back what is lost when the CD was mastered down to 16/44.1 in the first place, that's a misconception. It's just 16/44 quality re-sampled after the fact. It's still the same quality. How can the upsampler know what was lost at mastering? It can't. Your better off listening to CD at their original sampling and eliminate the extra conversion processing.
Edits: 06/14/20 06/14/20 06/14/20 06/14/20Follow Ups:
I've listened with and without the DSEE-HX, and to me, there is a slight improvement with the up-scaling. According to the literature, the algorithm can increase the word length from 16 bit, depending on the source material.
"What this country needs is a good 5 watt amplifier!" (Paul Klipsch)
Upscaling bit depth is an exercise in futility. "Adding" word length to 16 bit recording is not a real thing. The S/N remains at about 96dB even if you bring it up to 24bit. The reason is that in mastering for CD, a 24bit recording is scaled down to 16bit and dither (low-level noise) is added. Once you truncate the additional 8 bits the result is graininess (quantization distortion) at low levels, so dither is added. So once you do this the dynamic range doesn't change going back to 24 bit, you only manage bringing the dither noise up. 24 bit upscaling has no effect on normal high signals, since you are only lowering the so-called noise floor with higher bit rates. However the added dither at mastering limits the quietest passages to whatever the dither was that was added at mastering. You cannot recover what was on the 24 bit master at mastering since it was truncated when saved at 16 bit. It's gone ... forever.Subjective listening is a fickle thing and doesn't always reflect the reality.
Edits: 06/15/20
The DSEE-HX feature employs filtering to support that function. In fact, the differences in filters is largely what separates the sound from DAC to another. The main reason Chord DAC's are so expensive is one is paying for the advanced filtering.
Cycle through the filter selections using a RME ADI-2 DAC FS, and it will be obvious.
"What this country needs is a good 5 watt amplifier!" (Paul Klipsch)
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: