hi. simple question- should i resample with foobar before feeding it to my Lite DAC 60 which is an OS dac? i have an envy sound card that i set it for 96/24bit output after foobar does resampling with pphs internally and the difference is indeed better detail for less dynamics but im not sure which method is more beneficial, objectively. theories, opinions, i'd like to hear it all from you experts. thanks.
if there needs to be resampling done do it using the Foobar plugin. No resample is "bit perfect" apart from an intiger multiplication in sample rate, nor does it matter aslong as the resample algorithm is good. The foobar algorithm is very good there are slightly better (VERY slightly) but only in phase response and it's probobly better than any built into soundcards etc.
I agree mostly with kipman725. Resampling in software prior to sending to the DAC has the potential to better OR worse than having it done in the DAC. DAC oversampling implementations tend to err on the side of cheapness, so a software resampler has no real excuse for being worse. But, they certainly can be.
The idea of bit-perfectness has no meaning here though, as you're trying to change the signal! Not sure what people were getting at with that.
Ideally you'd be able to compare them objectively, but getting a look at the oversampled signal inside a DAC isn't easy/possible. I know there are some very good free software oversamplers around, but I don't know what the state of Foobar plugins is.
The idea of bit-perfectness has no meaning here though, as you're trying to change the signal! Not sure what people were getting at with that.
Ideally you'd be able to compare them objectively, but getting a look at the oversampled signal inside a DAC isn't easy/possible. I know there are some very good free software oversamplers around, but I don't know what the state of Foobar plugins is.
There is just so much information and no more in a sampled signal.
Resampling to an integer multiple/fraction of the original rate results in the least loss of data, but, in general, because an infinite precision maths environment is not available, any resampling results in a loss of information.
Many different forms of upsampling are available for visual images, but none are free of negative effects. You can't put detail (or any other feature) into an image that wasn't there in the original without inventing it. An invention may deceive the eye on some level, in some conditions, but it will not deceive across the board and it will not bear side-by-side comparison with the original. The same is true for audio.
You'll get the closest approximation to the original by playing back a sampled audio track at the original rate.
An oversampling DAC is a device whose design is driven by economics rather than quality. It may meet the quality levels expected of a non-oversampling device, but this will be despite, not because of the fact that it is an oversampling device.
w
Resampling to an integer multiple/fraction of the original rate results in the least loss of data, but, in general, because an infinite precision maths environment is not available, any resampling results in a loss of information.
Many different forms of upsampling are available for visual images, but none are free of negative effects. You can't put detail (or any other feature) into an image that wasn't there in the original without inventing it. An invention may deceive the eye on some level, in some conditions, but it will not deceive across the board and it will not bear side-by-side comparison with the original. The same is true for audio.
You'll get the closest approximation to the original by playing back a sampled audio track at the original rate.
An oversampling DAC is a device whose design is driven by economics rather than quality. It may meet the quality levels expected of a non-oversampling device, but this will be despite, not because of the fact that it is an oversampling device.
w
... provided the NOS DAC is followed by theoretically proper but technically unfeasible analog antimirroring filter. Which is not the case for every single NOS DAC.
The most damage I have experienced was altering the music with software. Detail and Dynamics were destroyed. The second best way, for me of course, was to ratchet up the up sampling on my dac. 24/96 - 24/192 etc. The only use I found was using one of the upsampling modes on my dac for poorly recorded music like most of Billie Holiday's stuff. The upsampling seems to smooth out harshness that may cause fatigue on bad recordings. I am happy with my gear but I would think upsampling through your dac could be a way to compensate for any weaknesses in your system. One of the most common problems with gear is having etched and compressed highs. I do recommend leaving any changes to the material with the hardware and not the software, the software just never seemed to produce anything but negatives.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.