XXHighEnd

Hi,

I made several  tests  in conjunction with 24bit/96KHz HD and 16bit/44,1KHz recordings.

My impression is that the SQ of 16bit/44,1KHz recordings is smoother with a finer note/less overall harshness  (of the cymbals)  and a bass/kick drum  with more resonances/reverberations. The soundstage has more width.

Peter, please listen to the CD, track 2 again and you hear now the clicks of the sticks on the cymbals very clear.

http://www.amazon.com/Jazz-Garden-Stanley-Clarke/dp/B001VFM0QU/ref=sr_1_8?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1391768160&sr=1-8&keywords=stanley+clarke

Joachim

Hey Joachim, nice !

If you are as far as that, you can also try to set Switch#5 Up, deactivate Is NOS1 in Settings, and choose Stereo Reduced in the NOS1 driver control panel.
Now you can not use 16x any more, but all is electrically different now. Should theoretically be more spatious which is NOT better (technicaly).

Best regards and thanks !
Peter

Interesting. I've spent the last 3-4 weeks listening with 8x upsampling but didn't want to post about it until i was "sure" about my impressions. What prompted me to experiment with the upsampling was a listening session where my Phasure NOS 1 was compared to a Meitner MA-1. I've had this opportunity twice now in two different rooms and the first time the NOS-1 sounded better by a mile. The second time was with runs of 25ft interconnects, and the sound of the NOS-1 compared to the Meitner was a bit too polite and soft sounding, Though the NOS-1 sounded excellent the Meitner had a bit more pzazz or energy, bass was a bit tighter and louder. The meitner used a pre-amp and we tried the NOS-1 with and without the pre-amp. Though the NOS-1 sounded better without the pre, in both cases the Meitner had a bit more energy or sparkle. When i got home, I played around with settings trying to replicate the sound of the Meitner and found that the 8x oversampling instead of 16x added that bit of sparkle (similar to the Meitner) that provides, as Jochim described, more resonances/reverberations with a kick drum. Unlike Joachim, though, I'd say that 16x sounds a bit too smooth compared to 8x, vocals and solo violin  have slightly less body and presence than 8x. In this regard when I first tried 4x oversampling I thought it sounded best but over time it sounds a bit fatiguing. 8x seems a good compromise. Anyway, the guy with the Meitner is coming back in mid-may and we are going to give them one more listen in my room where the NOS-1 was clearly better the first time we compared them. So, for now, it seems that 8x sounds more pleasing than 16x. Would be interested in others impressions.

Brian 

Ron Carter and his “Golden Striker Trio” was in Helsinki a couple of weeks ago. It was an impressive performance and what I was wondering about was, that his acoustic bass was “singing” (with the typical reverberations).

A test CD straight from the beginning is.

http://www.amazon.com/Wood-Brian-Bromberg/dp/B000FQJPBO/ref=sr_1_5?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1398493659&sr=1-5&keywords=brian+bromberg

The sound characteristic of the acoustic bass I heard live is not reproducible at my home, until I switch to 8xAP and the bass is “singing” now. (Brians remark “ ….. 16xAP  have slightly less body and presence than 8x” hits the nail ……….. .)

Joachim

Brian, I don't think Joachim said that ? Anyway it is clear what you think.

Regards,
Peter

So I too tried it, but actually for different reasons. And (warning) I used the Switch#5 Up (see previous post) because at this moment I can't do it otherwise.

Maybe it is too difficult to compare the real apples with the real apples (because I have more changes going on), but I think it was obvious that a way warm sound comes from this.
A.o. I tried The Friends or Mr Cario (Jon & Vangelis) which I know as waytoo super lean, but no single leannes came from it any more. Here too I must be careful because a few months back I reported similarly about this album but I don't think so extreme.

What I also recognize (I think) is the better kick drums. More umpf. But, this is not so difficult when things go towads the far more warm side. However ...

I also played Abdullah Ibrahim's Senzo and now I don't know ...
In my view this is one of the best natural piano (wing) reproductions, and I can't say I still think it is in this setup. Some piano keys zoom, and it is all a fuzzy warm bath now. Sparkle (overtones) is still there as earlier, but it's all so heavy that it now looks like the recording space could have needed a 100 bass traps.

Overall I sure liked it and maybe it is more pleasurable to listen to (palpable), but I don't think it is more real.
I wasn't bugged by less accurracy, but the warmth overrules the freshness and real sparkle.
Anyway I feel no need to switch back for the next session but that only tells I now listen subjectively (which I actually don't want to do).

Remember, Switch#5 Up and this can make a large difference.

Peter

Hi Peter,

Brians OS is W7 and mine W8.

At present the SQ wit 8xAP is quite pleasing and I'm comparing "apples".

When switching #5 at the DAC XXH setting remains at 16xAP or reduce it to 8xAP too? = Edit = Stupid question!!!

Joachim

Joachim,

I actually want to know to what degree my apples are apples. So I saw you asking that question (yes, just set to 8x) so let me know when you have some results on this.
Again, I just can't do it with Switch#5 down, and with Up it is electrically all different.

Thanks ...
Peter

I'll give switch 5 up (with other settings described in Peter's post above) a try this afternoon. Had yesterday afternoon off and spent the time so pleasantly lost in the sound of music!

Hi,

made a very short test run (due to item 2) with Swicht#5 up and changes within XXH/driver panel necessary.

My impressions:

1 - with the same volume setting the SPL is much louder.
2 - the acoustic bass (of the a.m. Brian Bromberg CD) is much bigger than his natural size.
3 - bass is fuzzy at very deep frequencies.
4 -  the soundstage got lost by a certain margin and the positions of the instruments are not accurate. (see item 2)

So, back to my previuos settings and everything fell into place again.

My wife is out of home and the "seagull" flew higher than before.  :) The cymbals and bells were hit in different depths of the room. Amazing to listen.

On my computer system with the settings noted in "profile" this seems my best choice of the AP.

Joachim

Ha ! Then at least I am happy about my own findings with Switch#5 Up !

Thank you Joachim !
Peter

Brian/Joachim,

Gentlemen, this is an interesting discovery!  :good:

By default, I always used the "max upsampling" feature in XX, meaning that the system works at sampling frequency 705,6 (or 768kHz if multiple of 48kHz).

But trying some test tracks today in x8 times "only", I hear a slightly more "fresh" sound. There is slightly more sparkle in the treble, which increases the "snap and drive" even for bass instruments.

This occurs also with 24/192 material:
Miles Davis/Kind Of Blue/Flamenco Sketches
Ray Brown Trio/Soular Energy/Sweet Georgia Brown
Marvin Gay/Whats Going On/Whats Going On

I am gonna run the system like this for a while and see if it stands the test of long term testing.

The big question: What is the cause of different SQ?
-Is it the presence of added HF sampling noise when running on lesser sampling frequency, or is the system more "comfortable" when not pushed to work with max sampling frequency?

Whatever the explanation, the difference is noticeable, and in the magnitude of, let's say, what we hear when fiddling with different Q1 values.

Hey Pedal glad you've given it a try too! It's been several weeks  since I changed to 8x and I've not felt like I wanted to go back to 16x. We will see. Regarding 24/192, are you saying that you generally upsample? For me HiRes always sounds best at its original sample rate of 96 or 192.

Yes, with "fx" activated in XX, I always get maximum upsampling for the different formats I have. I thought it to be the best, without further testing.

But now I will re-consider. :-)

I don't have a conclusion about these differences... Could this be caused by a "lesser" demand on USB ?

But there is an added value with 8x: no more "cuts" with very low SFS :)

Alain

Hey ...

A bit similar to the response I just made in Re: Q-settings for Dummies (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=2957.msg31176#msg31176) ...

At the moment I myself can't change to 8x (I'm frozen at 16x for now :old:) so at least that is the reason I don't try.

On this one - what is the reason that others don't try or don't report about it ? This a bit beyond me.

Are we done ? is all good enough now to really sit back and listen to music only ? :smack:

Regards,
Peter

Interestingly, I tried 8x only yesterday evening. I was actually just testing some 24/192 files I'd just made from my new turntable and wanted to hear the difference between native and 2xAP and 4xAP (so 192, 384 and 768). And...

... I prefer the 2x AP, i.e. 384! (This is with switch #5 on, i.e. "DAC is a NOS1".) I didn't have time to try 16/44.1 files with 8xAP, but I will try that this evening.

Somehow, I suspect the BB1704s might be optimal at 8fs rates. Maybe this is why some of the best oversampling filters (e.g. PMD100) were 8x also?

Will report back...

Mani.

So I've been using 8x only for about 2 weeks, with sporadic listening sessions but enough cumulative time to form some opinion compared to 16x.

I find it more resolving but very relaxed and easy to enjoy without trying to sit there and analytically figure out the difference.

When an artist is singing softly there is a delicacy and naturalness to their voice and as the sound decays to nothing I feel like I hear every last molecule of air leaving their mouth. And when they sing loudly, I never feel like they are shouting unless they really are. I'd say it is more dynamic and fast without a hint of breakup or struggle, really nice, really natural.

The same air movement thing applies to horns and with stringed instruments I hear more of the vibration of the strings and a more natural resonance of the instrument.

In my musical selections thus far, I have not heard any exaggeration of the scale of the performer, instruments or soundstage.

I have not felt the need to return to 16x and when I've tried it, I prefer 8x, but if I had never tried it, I would still be loving 16x and really couldn't find fault with it.

Glad someone tried this because I never would have thought to. Who knows what comes next, but for now I think stick with it.

Todd

Okay ...

Envision my "NOS1a" in lab setup I have been using for the past 7 weeks or something like that. That concerned a completely new NOS1 to begin with and further it's wires all over the place (I don't dare to put up pictures of it, but I should for your all fun).
Burning it in has been a nightmare ("keep on going Peter, just keep on going").
Now :

Since a week or so I have yet another brand new DAC and this one is set up in NOS1a fashion - almost complete production and so far only used for measurements. That one though -thus- can change sampling rates. So today was the day to finally listen to it, or better, listen to 8x instead of 16x. At the moment of this writing exactly one album ago I started playback. Might it be of importance : hooked up to the development PC which is Windows 7, Normal OS Mode and just Attendend ("just do it Peter, just do it").

In brief : This is the Silverstone USB3 card in quadrupule. I actually never heard anything like it, and I am sure what I hear resembles what you said, Joachim.
Yes, why not emphasize your name.
Oh notice, since I never mentioned it I think : The Silverstone has been rendered useless (no influence any more) and it is the first that occurred to me. It felt like a downside at the time. But now it's back (but not assmbled in this PC anyway) and I LOVE what I hear.
As usual I try to place things in a context, so you'll know how things can NOT compare with what you have at this moment :
(but also because I myself am dealing with quite some apples and oranges)

- W7 Attended etc. etc. (FWIW and if all is right nothing - or ehm everything);

- Not broken-in DAC (only played a lot of test signals :));

- New Arc Prediction Filter version (:oops:);

- NOS1a version.

- Does not float (haha). Just saying.

- Oh LOL, just noticed that this uses Mixed Memory. Yeah, well ...

- And of course that 8x.

Peter

Hi Peter,
good to hear that the we can trust our ears, and that your new AP produces identical/similar results.

Our main concern/question is now, is there a time schedule for the shipping of our NOS1’s to you.

Kind regards

Joachim