You are not logged in. Please login or register.
RME User Forum → ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series → Upsampling via software before input to adi-2 dac
I hear earlier in this thread that upsampling music via a computer software before it reaches the DAC makes the rme adi-2 dac sound as good as possible, is this true? What software?
Itchy?
Who told you that? Seems it wouldn't be anyone here. Merely Upsampling your files cannot restore/retrieve ANYTHING that did not already exist in the original source file. Let Go of that Myth promptly. Save your Sanity. 
Curt
Upsampling you use in situations where your connected device has only a fix sample frequency (i.e. DAT drives 48 kHz) which is unequal to the sample frequency that you use in i.e. your DAW project. Thats the purpose.
Otherwise I can only fully underpin what Curt said, upsampling does not polish your sound material in any way that it sounds better. It can not add any quality or magic that was not already before. All that you will get are bigger files and that your devices have more data to process, thus a little more CPU load.
Companies in the storage area will be happy if you increase your file sizes for no reasons.
Thanks Ramses.
My Son recently examined a Hi-Res 192/24 Recording vs it's Redbook 44/16 Copy. It's a fine recording, but there is absolutely NO difference. His test concluded that the "Hi-Res" file was nothing more than a SOX upsampled copy of the original 44/16 CD Master.
There's your Hi-Res for ya. Pure Upsampled BS.
Curt
Audirvana can upsample before sending to the DAC. I do this. I prefer the sound of the ADI-2 Pro fs running at 96 or 192 to 44.1, even though it's not 'adding' any information. It's hard to A/B blind test this - well, impossible in my circumstances - and so it's a subjective opinion.
There is some theory about not needing such hard anti-aliasing filters if you are playing back at higher sample rates, and this could influence anti-aliasing artifacts coming back down into the audible spectrum. The science is beyond me, but I have nothing to gain from finding things better one way or the other. As it happens, I prefer the sound of the RME at 192. It may even be that the D/A converters are better at 192, and the upsampling has nothing to do with it, it's simply running the converters at a place where they measure better.
Either way, it's subtle.
As you will see, we already have some 'hard' opinions on the matter, and they may be correct. But I'm not arguing that the upsampling adds anything, only that the circumstances of playing back at a different sample rate may influence the sound (for better or worse). In my case, I like running at 192 if I can.
Dominic
Audirvana can upsample before sending to the DAC. I do this. I prefer the sound of the ADI-2 Pro fs running at 96 or 192 to 44.1, even though it's not 'adding' any information. It's hard to A/B blind test this - well, impossible in my circumstances - and so it's a subjective opinion.
There is some theory about not needing such hard anti-aliasing filters if you are playing back at higher sample rates, and this could influence anti-aliasing artifacts coming back down into the audible spectrum. The science is beyond me, but I have nothing to gain from finding things better one way or the other. As it happens, I prefer the sound of the RME at 192. It may even be that the D/A converters are better at 192, and the upsampling has nothing to do with it, it's simply running the converters at a place where they measure better.
Either way, it's subtle.As you will see, we already have some 'hard' opinions on the matter, and they may be correct. But I'm not arguing that the upsampling adds anything, only that the circumstances of playing back at a different sample rate may influence the sound (for better or worse). In my case, I like running at 192 if I can.
Dominic
I read a thread similar to your example, I just wanna try one, most of my listening will be in 44
Audirvana can upsample before sending to the DAC. I do this. I prefer the sound of the ADI-2 Pro fs running at 96 or 192 to 44.1, even though it's not 'adding' any information. It's hard to A/B blind test this - well, impossible in my circumstances - and so it's a subjective opinion.
There is some theory about not needing such hard anti-aliasing filters if you are playing back at higher sample rates, and this could influence anti-aliasing artifacts coming back down into the audible spectrum. The science is beyond me, but I have nothing to gain from finding things better one way or the other. As it happens, I prefer the sound of the RME at 192. It may even be that the D/A converters are better at 192, and the upsampling has nothing to do with it, it's simply running the converters at a place where they measure better.
Either way, it's subtle.As you will see, we already have some 'hard' opinions on the matter, and they may be correct. But I'm not arguing that the upsampling adds anything, only that the circumstances of playing back at a different sample rate may influence the sound (for better or worse). In my case, I like running at 192 if I can.
Dominic
MC the designer of the ADI's said that upsampling is useless, cause upsampling needs the exact same antialiasing filter as straight playback. So you are only moving the problem. Maybe in the past with a bad antialiasing filter in a dac and a good upsampler some gain might be possible, but the filters in the ADI's are top notch and can not be improved upon. So indeed save your sanity!
Itchy,
I'm going to just quietly dismiss myself from this Thread. Speaking from 40yrs of experience, Falsehoods, and Mysticisms have led me quite often down the Path of Disappointment. "MASSIVE" improvements that only I could hear, etc.
Here, we do it differently. Support your "improvements" with Data, or else they simply don't exist.
Ohhh.."The Power of Suggestion" Your Magazines are quite expert on selling you $10K Turds. I know this, because it was THEY who corrupted MANY set-ups I was tasked to do...with their Fake Science.
Peace Out
Curt
RME User Forum → ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series → Upsampling via software before input to adi-2 dac
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.