Why up-sample?

[Roulston]

I thought I understood this, but ????

When converting CD content for use in a source such as a server, but in my case a Colorfly, is there any point in upsampling form the 16bit 44.1khz CD baseline.

Either during the converstion or playback. The Colorfly, like my other main DAC can output 24 bit 192khz and upsample the supplied inout content.

But is there any point either objectively or subjectively to doing so? It can't add content that was not there in the first place.

I routinely purchase HD tracks when I can so this primarily to adding CD content.

I have tried a variety of searches as I know this is not a new question, but could not find an answer.

Thanks in antic-i-paatttion.

tony

[Roulston]

Noting the lack of responses I assume that:

1) My question is too stupid to be worthy;
2) Or I have not explained it well enough,
3) It is deemed a lazy question, or
3) No one knows

To simplify: if I load 44.1/16 track my play can play it back at many different rates using the SRC switch. Why would I play it back at 88/24 or 192/24 etc?

If interpolation rather than our resampling I can understand, but my sense is I would be listening to a new product.

I understand the issue when mastering new analog content, the more sample with greater word depth the better, and down sampling as a form of compression I get, but up sampling from low to HD I don't quite get. No quite about it really.

The manual states using SRC draws more current, I assume processor effort. A side from the file playlist management I really like the colorfly C4. SQ is very nice.

Dazed and Confused,

Tony

[SoNic_real_one]

The process of upsampling requires creating the NEW samples and can produce sound results from horrid to very nice. Some (A)SRC do a better job then others, some DAC realy on internal DAC's IC to do a simplistic upsample, some use a dedicated DSP for that matter. Sure, a PC can do a decent job at upsampling in real time too. So there is little use for storing the files in upsampled format if you have decent equipment on DAC side.

PS: I personally like the Denon Alpha processing for CD sources.

[janneman]

Originally Posted by Roulston

Noting the lack of responses I assume that:

1) My question is too stupid to be worthy;
2) Or I have not explained it well enough,
3) It is deemed a lazy question, or
3) No one knows

To simplify: if I load 44.1/16 track my play can play it back at many different rates using the SRC switch. Why would I play it back at 88/24 or 192/24 etc?

If interpolation rather than our resampling I can understand, but my sense is I would be listening to a new product.

I understand the issue when mastering new analog content, the more sample with greater word depth the better, and down sampling as a form of compression I get, but up sampling from low to HD I don't quite get. No quite about it really.

The manual states using SRC draws more current, I assume processor effort. A side from the file playlist management I really like the colorfly C4. SQ is very nice.

Dazed and Confused,

Tony

Up sampling makes sense when converting to analog, because it makes the task of analog filtering (which is required) easier/ cheaper. It also makes for filters that have less pronounced phase shifts at the highgher frequencies.
Other than that, as long as everything remains in the digital domain, I don't see any advantage.

jan didden

[SoNic_real_one]

As I said, it might make sense if you don't have a decent upsampler before the DAC conversion.

[Roulston]

Thanks guys, so from my simple perspective, playing back at a sample rate higher than the source itself adds no SQ value, but the upsampled out put might make the analog stage more efficient if it was all designed and implemented well.

Thank you, it think it is time to run some sample files and attach it to the cro.

Cheers, Tony