XXHighEnd

YES. Here is my experience, try for yourself and share your impression.

Rip your favorite CD by using dbPoweramp to Wave and specify format target as 24/192. Play it with NOS1 USB and 32/768kHz / ARC prediction. I did it and almost got fiver because of it ! Now I am reripping my favorite CDs to 24/192 to hear them all again !

Peter, congratulation for your work ! Another happy owner of NOS1 is here !

Jarek

That is an exceptional idea and I will test it.

:rofl:

Hahaha, it was a matter of waiting until someone came up with combinations like this. Not that I *really* thought about it, but is IS an explicit application of the NOS1 of course (all this stuff outboard, nothing interfering with it).

Ok, everybody is going to try this. I will too. But first a question :

I don't know dBPowerAmp and I first wonder whether we are able to do it differently than you did Jarek. So, are there options anywhere ?
Is there a description to how this upsampling works ? (I think in filtering realms).

In any event, thanks for sharing !!
Regards,
Peter

The administrator of dbPoweramp, Spoon, specifically suggests not to upsample while ripping. He believes that for optimum sound quality, ripping should be done same as source.

As a matter of fact, in the early days of CA, I too had ripped Redbook CD to 24/192 & 24/96 & compared the same with native 16/44.1 files. My impression was that the upsampled files sounded bright & digital. In any case they didnt sound better than the native files. Mind you in those days I was using the Empirical Audio, Overdrive DAC.

Besides this I really dont see any reason why this would improve SQ, after all one is upsampling to higher levels (32/706) at XXHE while playback using Arc Prediction filtering, anyway.

Arvind

Arvind, you are totally right. But per today's knowledge and usage (of the NOS1) only half. Or maybe not at all.

Where Spoon also is right, today this is about the best means possible to create something out of Redbook which ALWAYS needs a filter. Upsampling is such a filter within itself. Now it just depends on how this filter is organized. And I can tell you : the most stupid ones may fulfill the task the best.

What happens here is that two filters are cascaded; the one from dBP and Arc Predition. When dBP contains a normally "good filtering means" it should fail for a better SQ result.

But this is why I asked about possible documentation and options ...


What's also important to me : When this is Jarek's finding, I believe him, until proved otherwise. I think at some stage I believed your specific findings as well, while others ordered me not to touch the software (for you alone) or otherwise "their" SQ would degrade. Remember it ?
All this little flashback should tell, is that we never should doubt one's findings. Let theories be in the last place.

(when we would be following theories or science, we would end up nowhere ... :no:)

... and all does not tell that you (Arvind) shouldn't be right on your theory as well; I just agree with that ...
But  know what may happen when Arc Prediction is cascaded with other filters; I have been playing around with that ... for a reason.

Regards,
Peter

Theoretical considerations are important, but... try and hear it for your own ears.

My ears tell me that I got MUCH better sound when ripping regular CD by dbPowerump to 24/192 wave and then playing it with XXHighEnd x16 than ripping to native format 16/44,1 and playing also with XXHighEnd x16.

I got nothing but bright sound. The sound is very detailed in a right way. The soundstage is huge, stable and sound is perfect, at least in my system of course.

J.

Hi Jarek - any chance that you could put details of your system in your signature?

P

Sure, just updated it below.

Jarek, is it really so that you don't use hyperthreading (looking at your "4 cores" in your sig) ?

Edit : Ahum :fool:, you do. But the base of the i5-660 is two core of course. :)

Hi Jarek, I don´t understand well why you say that you play it at 32/768kHz but in your settings you have 24/768kHz.

What should be the panel setting for Sample Rate, 352.000kHz or 384.000kHz?.

Regards, Juan

Hi Peter,

As I´m ripping now my cds with different settings and while I wait for Jarek answer, could you tell me please what Panel setting for Sample Rate should be used, 352.000kHz or 384.000kHz? and  if we are ripping at 24/192 which one must be the XX setting, 24/768kHz or 32/768kHz?

Thanks, Juan

Juan,

Maybe I don't understand the question;

You didn't ask before, so what is the reason you ask today ? Or is this only Jarek-related ?

Anyway, input to the NOS1 is always 32 bits (but XXHighEnd takes care of that once you told "Needs 32 bits" (which is the default for everyone).

Next you don't set the output rate directly, but tell how many times upsampling needs to take place (2x, 4x, 8, 16x). So, the input determines it.

But this has always been the case and has always been clear, I'm sure. So I most probably don't understand the question ...

Peter

Hi Peter,

I posted a question for Jarek in the forum and I can see it, maybe you can´t. It is:


Yes I have the 32 bits clicked in At>16bits the DAC needs, but what I ask is: what is the correct dac setting in XX (DAC Settings) 24bits 768.0KHz or 32bits 768.0KHz?.
I always used 24bits 768kHz and fx x 16 Arc Predict but if I understand well Jarek is using 32bits 768kHz (in XX DAC Settings).

Also what must be the Panel Sample Rate 352.000kHz or 384.000kHz?

Thanks, Juan

Hi Juan,

The "DAC Is" setting you talk about, merely defines the maximum, and it is there for self protection. So, if you define your Altmann DAC (16/192) as e.g. 24/384 *and* you choose for 8x upsampling, something may go wrong with your windows (but more probably an error will follow).

The NOS1 can process 24/768, so that is what it should be set to (DAC Is). What you use of that is up to you (that rate or lower).

What Jarek by accident allows is an input file of 32 bits, and while the DAC will process it (but will chop off 8 bits), XXHighEnd does not support it. So it can't harm anyway. But it would be correct to say that Jarek defined the NOS1 a little wrongish.

The Control Panel is not important, because it will be overruled by XXHighEnd anyway. Set it to what you want and start playback; you will see that it changes automatically.

Peter

Thank you Peter, now I´m testing what Jarek said but it´s hard mostly because I think that my Nos1 USB is still breaking in and the changes I feel could be just a matter of this process.

Juan

What I can say so far is that setting 32/768 in DAC Is doesn´t sound  worse than setting it at 24/768. Does it sound  better?, I don´t know...it couldn´t be possible but I´m not sure. Placebo?

Juan,

If you feel your NOS1 is still breaking in, it should be about the USB part. In that case bring up the Control Panel before you go to sleep. That should speed it up.

On the other hand, you may not mean this. I mean, I too feel that I still experience improvement and what I recall is that I changed a few boards in my own NOS1 last July; maybe August.

It is quite tough to experience these improvements, and it can only go by means of things you listened to many months back, which today suddenly for sure sound better again.
FYI : I only spend maybe 3 hours per day listening / the DAC being normally active.
I have had a period that I fired up the Control panel an hour before listening, and thought it helped. Or IOW, I often have the idea that the sound isn't at its best the first 30 minutes or so, never mind the DAC is always on ...

Peter

Hmm ... I just tried to explain to you that this is only self protection. It doesn't do a thing.

"DAC Needs" sure will make a physical difference, but I don't think it can operate like that (although I have in mind that it can with some setting). Don't try without preamp !!!

Yes, I do, I leave the Panel turned on overnight and I still feel improvements in sound from time to time. About if it sounds better after 30 minutes or not I really don´t know...


"DAC needs" is always in 32bits, I don´t use any preamp at all and I´m aware of it.

Juan

Hello Juan,

Your signature says you set SFS to 4300.

Is this a typo?

Thanks
Praphan

Sorry, it is 430.

Thanks, Juan

Hi Peter,

maybe I should start the next topic, but it is still related to my tests to get the best sound and NOS1.

I have i5 660 processor, and if I specify SFS of 200 I have sometimes breakes in music. If I specify 430 I have 1-3 seconds brakes between tracks. I specified 120 and now is OK. I see you and most of NOS1 guys have SFS 400 . Should I upgrade to better processor ?

Also, physically I have 2 core processor, but system sees 4 cores. How many cores does XXHighEnd see ? Is it a metter to switch hyperthreading on/off somewhere ? What should I set then ?

Thank you

Jarek

Hey Jarek,

The higher SFS implies two things :

Higher speed from the line to/from the disc(s) involved;
Higher processor speed.

Your processor is not the fastest, so that can cause it already.
I can't tell about the disc speed (but e.g. a 100Mbit ethernet to a NAS would be too slow for sure).

When you switch off hyperthreading the speed of the one core dealing with the processing of the file will be twice as high. So that helps *if* that causes it. But now other things will be not good (SQ, slow loading of FLACs).

Yes, XXhighEnd utilizes all cores (up to 24 are explicitly supported).

If you take a modern fast i7 (the 2600 maybe), all around it can be build to on par specs. This is nore than core speed alone (memory lines etc.).
If you want to spend more money on it, have a 6 core.
Always use Intel because of the hyperthreading and thus more cores.

Peter

Hi Jarek,

I´m testing your 24/192 way of ripping and although I don´t have yet any conclusion about sound I experienced the same breaks in music at SFS430, not in between tracks but in the tracks, not always but once in a while.
If I change to SFS120 then there is not breaks but the sound changes and it´s not so smooth as it is at SFS430.

Anyway, as I have an i7, 6 cores processor with hyperthreading activated and XX seeing 12 cores (6 + 6) and have the same promblem as you I don´t think that the problem is in your processor, that should be fast enough. Maybe it is in the dBpoweramp software when it is upsampling to 24/192.

Juan

Interesting ...

Notice please : You may tend to check with normal 24/192 Hires files, but this is broken in the version you have. Or at least the chance is fairly high that you run into Hires files which actually contain a problem in the header, and which I solved for the version I have here. Or these files don't play at all, or they and up in noise (mighty fast playback) after a minute or so. IIRC this only happens at 768 ( 705.6 ) output; with 384 ( 352.8 ) there's no problem.

Well, I talked a lot about this real problem, didn't I ?
The most logical thing to me would be that the disc I/O is the bottleneck; remember, these files are quite some larger.
The processing is quite the same (it takes somewhat more though), and so it won't be the cpu doing it to you ?

Peter

On my SYSTEM I hear no advantage with the dBPoweramp  "filtered" files.
The instruments are crystal clear to hear, but the reverberations of the room is missing. So it sounds dead and the emotions are gone. ON MY SYSTEM.

Well, at least that is what I would expect more to be the case ...

I would have tried it myself by now, weren't it that I am quite deaf on one ear. Never mind which one, one is enough. :aggressive:

Peter

I see most of you guys have Clock Resolution in XXHighEnd set to 15 ms, whilst I have 0,5 ms. Truly, in my system it sounds less digital and edgy when clock is 0,5ms than 15 ms.

I have bigger room ambiance and the soundstage with dbPoweramp target set to 24/192 than to 16/44,1. It sounds "richer" then regular rip, more like hi-resolution tracks. Maybe it is artificial, I do not know - I like it more at least with XXHighEnd and NOS1.

I can hear also a difference between Windows 2008 SP2 and Windows 7 SP1 (both 64-bit). I have them on dual boot. I think that sound from Win2008 is more pleasing. I cannot find a better words to describe it. Win2008 has better combination of resolution and emotionality.

As regards to SFS I like setting of 120. It is OK for me, I do not feel it sounds any worse than 430 in my system.

Jarek