Redbook vs up and Oversampling

[rollo]

   So far I seem to perfer the basic 44.1 over any upsampling or oversampling. DSD conversion so far is another disappointment.
   Has anyone else performed direct comparisons of the difference between redbook and upsampled CDs ?


charles

[richidoo]

We had a Cary CDP come to a g2g years ago, it had switchable DSP, upsampling up to 768kHz. "None" was the best sounding setting.  Shutting off the DSP always sounds better to me.

The ESS SAbreDAC has a different way of reducing quantizing noise, and it works well. You get the natural tizz-free treble, but no loss of life and edge. This explains it if you're curious. I can't understand it. http://www.esstech.com/PDF/sabrewp.pdf

Pure DSD is technically excellent, but few pure DSD commercial recordings available, not the type of music I listen to. Ripping SACDs with playstation isn't worth the effort to me, because most SACDs are reissued PCM or analog recordings anyway.

I have to choose a playback method focused on where the music is: redbook PCM. There are excellent PCM techniques like Sabre, Ayre, which make redbook sound plenty good enough for my needs.

[mfsoa]

Hi Charles,

Curious to know how the upsampling, oversampling and DSD conversions were done and what the player (or PC/player) was .

Thanks

-Mike

[rpf]

We had a Cary CDP come to a g2g years ago, it had switchable DSP, upsampling up to 768kHz. "None" was the best sounding setting.  Shutting off the DSP always sounds better to me.

The ESS SAbreDAC has a different way of reducing quantizing noise, and it works well. You get the natural tizz-free treble, but no loss of life and edge. This explains it if you're curious. I can't understand it. http://www.esstech.com/PDF/sabrewp.pdf

I have to choose a playback method focused on where the music is: redbook PCM. There are excellent PCM techniques like Sabre, Ayre, which make redbook sound plenty good enough for my needs.

Agreed.

[DaveC]

This is probably a case where implementation may be more important than format so it may really depend on what equipment you're using and it's particular strengths and weaknesses. I have read accounts of people preferring DSD conversion, but it might be their DAC just sounds better at DSD vs PCM.

I am in the same boat that most of the music I listen to is redbook and I would prioritize equipment that sounds good with it. But I would also require a DAC to be able to handle hi res PCM and DSD as well.

[mfsoa]

This is probably a case where implementation may be more important than format so it may really depend on what equipment you're using and it's particular strengths and weaknesses

Exactly why I asked for specifics.

There are so many ways that these processes can be done that it's overwhelming to try to understand the pros and cons of how each step contributes to the overall result.

And we thought vinyl was complicated... 

[rollo]

Hi Charles,

Curious to know how the upsampling, oversampling and DSD conversions were done and what the player (or PC/player) was .

Thanks

-Mike

  At first just a CDP that upsamples. Theta 5A then Lector CDP. Our club computer expert brought over his laptop which is basically a dedicated music server and we used a PDX DAC.
      An Esoteric K-01. The gear was top notch the computer set up properly.
     At first impressive then fatigue set in. Upsampling is based on math correct ? Manipulated. DSD the same if not recorded in that format. I'll say that the Esoteric CDP at $20,000 played SACD better than ever experienced. The PDX DC out of Aussie Land is a great DAC [ $5,000 ] again preferred over computer in general.
     Looking at new Woo Audio dedicated Redbook transport and DAC just for that reason. No filters, no up or over sampling nada but pure Redbook.


charles

[richidoo]

An output filter is part of the redbook audio specification. 44.1kHz sample rate causes aliasing distortion, so something is needed to fix that. DSP can be printed into the DAC chip, so it is the lowest cost solution, and works well for non-golden ears. Indeed, some audiophiles prefer the tizzy high frequency stimulation of bad quality oversampling.

Even if Woo uses a non-DSP chip, they must still have a filter just like every other digital player. If it's not upsampling or other DSP then it is passive filter, which has it's own drawbacks and MUCH more expensive than DSP, but that's OK for high end audio. Passive filtering can only paper over the already converted signal with more appealing distortion. DSP is the only way to reduce the aliasing distortions before conversion and avoid the euphony and masking of passive filters.

There are plenty of websites that explain what's going on with low sample-rate digital audio that you might enjoy.
http://jthz.com/mp3/CD-44100Hz.htm
http://www.mother-of-tone.com/cd.htm