 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: I'll keep it in layman's terms as well... posted by Thorsten on June 27, 2001 at 10:11:25:
Thorsten,Are you saying that you have compared dCS equipment upsampling red book CD against the analogue master tape used to produce that CD?
Best regards,
Robert Kelly
dCS Ltd
Cambridge, UK
Follow Ups:
Hi,No, I did not compare analogue Master against CD with dCS, rather some digital high resolutionrecordings done in a studio and that against downsampled CDR Copies played back via dCS. The Gear was also not Elgar/Purcell, but the rackmount pro gear from dCS.
Comparisons of my DAC against the dCS combo of the consumer units, not sure about software revisions BTW, in either case.
Yet I have also heard other upsamplers and upsampling DAC's and they share the same negative attributes to upsampling I heard with dCS. I agree that Upsampling changes the sound and in some aspects improves it. In other aspects however the disimprovements are quite large and it is those areas that I find most objectionable. I would go as far as saying that I preferred the plain Elgar over the upsampling combo, but that's just me.
Later T
BTW, what I hear from upsampling (and oversampling) is an overly bright and unpleasant tone, very busy sounding with plenty of fake detail, but a real term reduction in how deep I can hear into the recording. The "surface" so to speak becomes very glossy and nice, the core of the music is obscured. I also note a certain sameness to the sound, especially of cymbals and brass, also harpsichord. Instruments that should sound different don't.
nt
Well, MSB has a new upgrade (MSB Technology Link DAC III with 24/192 Input Option) that uses a synchronous upsampler: “The simpler math of synchronous upsampling (the new rate is an even multiple of the old) retains all data points of the original stream. It merely interpolates additional ones between them. Asynchronous upsampling involves total signal reconstruction, however. In other words, all original data points are discarded and replaced with new ones. That’s exactly what Jeffrey Kalt of Resolution Audio had pointed out in my earlier article as well. John Stronczer of Bel Canto Design, of course, had a retort. The computing power of modern chips, he argued, renders the entire subject of exactly what conversion frequency is chosen a mute point. I read up on the installation specs of Analog Devices’ AD1896 chip (supports all frequencies up to 192kHz). This confirmed that the manufacturers of the actual chip sets feel the same way as Stronczer. Our remote e-mail debate left me then and now with only my own two ears to decide what really gives. Just for the record, I do have an assumption. Superior results are a function of skillful implementation rather than subscription to any particular approach..” There’s a full explanation at: http://www.soundstage.com/earmarked/The Crystal CS 8420, which is an asynchronous upsampler, is commonly used by EVS, Bel-Canto, Perpetual Technologies and MSB "other" DAC's as well. Audio Note kit 1.1 interestingly uses a “1x over sampling technique” and has gotten some rave reviews as well: http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0200/anmeetsmsb.htm
Thorsten may have a good point in what he says; asynchronous upsampling can have its drawbacks… Plus that old “Barnum effect” can really drain your wallet. Music is a hobby to be enjoyed. MSB’s approach is very interesting though, and would be more immune to becoming an “antique” within 18 months…
Well if you feel that way get a Panasonic RP91 dvd player. They oversample redbook at 2x and have 3 filters to select from. They even have digital for the remastered output.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
