You are here

Log in or register to post comments
Tomdabomb09
Tomdabomb09's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 17 2010 - 3:38pm
To Resample or not to Resample

That is the question. More specifically, I would like to start downloading some hi res music, but I currently don't have a means to play it. I do plan on upgrading to a Music Fidelity V-DAC MKii soon, so I know I'm not just wasting my money buying these files, but I'd like to know if listening to them now is better or worse than listening to CDs. Does downsampling hi res files to 16/44 or 16/48 cause it to lose quality compared to bit-perfect  playback?

Kal Rubinson
Kal Rubinson's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 32 min ago
Joined: Sep 1 2005 - 9:34am
If you are getting the HD

If you are getting the HD files because you are committed to getting a suitable DAC, why sweat this?  There are many variables but any differences (in either direction) would be tiny and not easily predictable.  Would you consider buying twice rather than for the long run?

jazzfan
jazzfan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 8:55am
Resample but...

There is no harm in resampling however based on your needs I would suggest that you download the high resolution files and keep these original files and backup copies (ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS make and keep back up copies of all digital audio files). Then using any one of many very programs make resampled files and back up these files. Did I mention that you should ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS make and keep back up copies of all digital audio files?

Now you will have the original high resolution files for use once you get new DAC and the standard resolution files for use until then.

Some good programs for resampling NOTE: these are Windows based programs:

foobar2000 - you may need to add a resampling component. I suggest doing a google search on how to resample using foobar2000

dbPowerAmp - the gold standard program for managing digital audio files. Works great and I've used it many times to resample high resoltuion files and also to convert from one lossless format to another. Pick up a registered copy - it is well worth every penny.

John Atkinson
John Atkinson's picture
Offline
Last seen: 19 min ago
Joined: Nov 7 2010 - 3:31pm
Data Back-Up is Essential

jazzfan wrote:
ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS make and keep back up copies of all digital audio files.

I can't emphasize enough how important jazzfan's advice is. With digital data, if they don't exist in at least 2 places, they don't exist!

My iTunes libray resides on my Mac mini's hard drive. I back up both the library and the original downloaded files to a local 1TB USB drive every time I add new music, and to a portable 1TB drive once a month. I also back it up to a remote RAID-array NAS drive every 3 months.

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

24x48
24x48's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: Jul 2 2012 - 2:17am
Your sound card or DAC should do resampling automatically

I don't understand your problem. If you play hi-definition (HD) tracks on your computer media players such WMP, they should play your hi-definition tracks without problems. If your computer sound card does not support hi-definition, it will automatically downsample and play. If you use external DAC that supports HD, you will be able to enjoy superior HD sound. I always enjoy in 24bits/96khz by upsampling DVD tracks

Bill B
Bill B's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jul 28 2012 - 1:59pm
hold on thar

Wait a minute.  "I always enjoy in 24bits/96khz by upsampling DVD tracks"  Dude, you need to know you are NOT actually getting higher resolution by starting with a lower resolution and "upsampling" it.

24x48
24x48's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: Jul 2 2012 - 2:17am
You are the dude

If you don't know what upsampling does, don't call others as dude. It's very offensive. Literally speaking you are the dude here. Weighted upsampling can improve sound quality!  If weighted addition is close to original sound, sound will definitely improve. It can also create degenerative sound. There is subtle difference in sound tones.

Bill B
Bill B's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jul 28 2012 - 1:59pm
hi sport

First I've heard that "dude" is offensive.  Huh.  I do not know what you mean by "weighted addition".  You may find that you are getting improved sound, so good for you.  But if there is improvement, it is not due to getting higher actual resolution out of your original files via upsampling.

24x48
24x48's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: Jul 2 2012 - 2:17am
Upsampling does do high definition

Upsampling is more than stuffing more samples between samples. Good upsampling methods will attempt to guess original sound correctly and insert new samples based on the guessing. A simple method to upsample from 48khz to 96khz can use simple averages of two consecutive samples. In each two consecutive sameples, insert average values of the two consecutive sample values. More advanced methods may use complex regression functions to guess correct original sample values.

For low and mid frequency sound, upsampling will generally produce improved sound. However, high frenquency sound can result in distortion and dampening. If distortion in high frequency sound does not affect overall sound negatively, you get improved sound from upsampling.

Upsampling is a very interesting area that challenges intellectual imagination.
 

jazzfan
jazzfan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 8:55am
Kool Aid Anyone?
24x48 wrote:

Upsampling is more than stuffing more samples between samples. Good upsampling methods will attempt to guess original sound correctly and insert new samples based on the guessing. A simple method to upsample from 48khz to 96khz can use simple averages of two consecutive samples. In each two consecutive sameples, insert average values of the two consecutive sample values. More advanced methods may use complex regression functions to guess correct original sample values.

For low and mid frequency sound, upsampling will generally produce improved sound. However, high frenquency sound can result in distortion and dampening. If distortion in high frequency sound does not affect overall sound negatively, you get improved sound from upsampling.

Upsampling is a very interesting area that challenges intellectual imagination.
 

I just want to know: is the stuff that you are drinking legal? And if so, where can I can a hold of some because, quite frankly I am tired of living in the reality based world.

By the way, just how expensive is your USB cable because for high resolution audio one needs a USB cable costing a minimum of $500 per meter. Anything less and all the bits get confused and the sound is really, really bad.

jazzfan
jazzfan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 8:55am
Kool Aid Anyone?
24x48 wrote:

Upsampling is more than stuffing more samples between samples. Good upsampling methods will attempt to guess original sound correctly and insert new samples based on the guessing. A simple method to upsample from 48khz to 96khz can use simple averages of two consecutive samples. In each two consecutive sameples, insert average values of the two consecutive sample values. More advanced methods may use complex regression functions to guess correct original sample values.

For low and mid frequency sound, upsampling will generally produce improved sound. However, high frenquency sound can result in distortion and dampening. If distortion in high frequency sound does not affect overall sound negatively, you get improved sound from upsampling.

Upsampling is a very interesting area that challenges intellectual imagination.
 

I just want to know: is the stuff that you are drinking legal? And if so, where can I can a hold of some because, quite frankly I am tired of living in the reality based world.

By the way, just how expensive is your USB cable because for high resolution audio one needs a USB cable costing a minimum of $500 per meter. Anything less and all the bits get confused and the sound is really, really bad.

24x48
24x48's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: Jul 2 2012 - 2:17am
It's legal

Of course, it's legal. I use Windows Media Player with "ffdshow" plugin software. ffdshow is free open-source software. It resamples (=upsample/downsample) while playing DVD and MP4 tracks on the fly. It operates inside WMP. You can find ffdshow plugin downloads by googling "Media player codec pack". I also use Foobar2000. It also has resampling features. One is builtin. Another is a plugin.

It is noted that resampling happens on the fly while playing track and vanish. It does not create any new copies. So it's completely legal. However there are programs that allow you to make new resampled copies. Making resampled copies of copy protected tracks is not legal, because it is "copying". The initial poster should take note this as well. There is no need to make resampled copies. First it's not legal. Second, your media players will do resampling automatically when you play them.

You don't need to buy expensive USB cables. Look, this is digital. Don't get confused with analog cables. The cable that comes with your USB-DAC or sound-card is more than enough. Note that USB cables should not be too long. Less than 1 meter length is fine. Decent USB-DACs cost a few hundred dollars. External USB sound cards, which also provide high-definition input, can cost several hundred dollars. USB cables are always included.
 

jazzfan
jazzfan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 8:55am
Very good

@24X48

I must say that I am very impressed with your answer and that you are being much more reasonable than I was and you have my apology for being so rude in my previous post. While I don't believe that upsampling can really improve the sound what you are suggesting is a no cost way for someone to try upsampling for themselves and come to their own conclusions.

As for USB cables, despite my failed attempt at a joke, you and I completely agree regarding expensive USB cables in that they are entirely unnecessary and a complete waste of money. Plus other than the various reviewers opinions there is absolutely no scientific reason as to why or how a $500 audiophile USB cable will perform and sound any better than a standard $5 USB cable.

Happy Listening!

Tomdabomb09
Tomdabomb09's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 17 2010 - 3:38pm
Stop fighting dudes! I

Stop fighting dudes!

I finally got my Music Fidelity V-DAC ii, which supports 96khz USB playback! I'm playing music through JRiver [WASAPI], and currently have my DSP Output Format set to 96khz. I was surprised not to hear JRiver as a suggested media player earlier. Does it do a poor job of upsampling? Is this setting right? Please don't fight! 

jazzfan
jazzfan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 8:55am
Who's fighting?
Tomdabomb09 wrote:

Stop fighting dudes!

I finally got my Music Fidelity V-DAC ii, which supports 96khz USB playback! I'm playing music through JRiver [WASAPI], and currently have my DSP Output Format set to 96khz. I was surprised not to hear JRiver as a suggested media player earlier. Does it do a poor job of upsampling? Is this setting right? Please don't fight! 

I don't believe that we are fighting anymore. Glad to see that you got your new DAC, I hope that you're pleased with how it works and sounds.

I for one haven't mentioned JRiver because I don't use that program. Most of my listening is via one of the many Squeezebox devices I have throughout my house and Squeezebox has its own music management software called either Logitech Media Server or Squeezebox Server. When I need to listen directly on my computer I find that foobar2000 is more than adequate.

24x48
24x48's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: Jul 2 2012 - 2:17am
You are right
jazzfan wrote:

...Plus other than the various reviewers opinions there is absolutely no scientific reason as to why or how a $500 audiophile USB cable will perform and sound any better than a standard $5 USB cable.

A main reason for going digital technology is to eliminate the need for expensive cables. Digital technology provides better quality without using expensive cables. $500 USB cables belong to criminal fraud category. It's contradictory. "It has no effect on quality of sound/video at all". Only morons buy or sell such cables.
 

Reed
Reed's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: Sep 6 2005 - 5:37am
My preference

There are several software players that allow you to shut on/off upsampling and oversampling.  I have also had various combinations of DACs.  You can make your head spin trying to knit pick differences.  Over time, trying several options, I find that I favor a non oversampling/non upsampling DAC/software options.  At times I sway a little, but seem to keep ending up there.

BTW.  I totally echo the backup warning.  I had a lightning strike take out my 2TB drive.  Thankfully, I had been backing the drive up to an identical second drive.  I have a MAC system and use firewire drives.  The backup speed is way faster than a USB 2.0 drive.  I backup with the second drive, unplug it and store it in another location.  

Tomdabomb09
Tomdabomb09's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 17 2010 - 3:38pm
Speaking of expensive cables

I ordered the V-DAC ii on ebay and the guy included a Pangea P-100 power supply. I noticed on the instructions for the V-DACii it says "only use Musical Fidelity DC Power supply." I looked on the instructions for Pangea and it said it was compatible with V-DAC, though ti said nothing abotu V-DACii. Anyway, I tried using it and the audio kept cutting out. It seemed like the P-100 would just suddenly stop supplying power and start again. This scared me so I'm just using the power cable that came with V-DACii. Is my cable just broken or is it not compatible with the V-DACii? 

Also, I noticee when I go into the V-DAC properties in windows under the advanced tab it gives me the options to change the output in 'shared mode'. Right now it's set to 24/96. Is this also upsampling the audio signals? Might I be doing that twice? Can't imagine that being good for the sound.

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading