transporter: upsample files with sox and drop external DAC?

[posnos]

I am on a system simplifaction kick at the moment and have been debating dropping my DAC (Bryston BDA-2)

The DAC does synchronous upsampling to 176.4k or 192k (i.e. has two paths for 44.1k and 48k based files) noting that all my stuff is 44.1 and I run LMS on LInux.

My simple question is, all things being equal, would I lose anything (with regard to SQ) by using sox asynchronously inline with LMS compared to using a synchronous external DAC.

Sadly the transporter doesnt support 88.2k (as far as I know***) so upsamping needs to be asynchronous so any opinions on target rate: 48k or 98K

Obviously on the plus side, dropping the DAC loses one point of potentital jitter but asynchronous sox upsampling quality is a complete unknown to me.

Thanks,

Peter

*** doing some surfing after posting this thread points to the fact that Sean did add 88.2k support some time in 2008... so I will test this out soon so the obvious target rate would be 88.2k and my concerns about asynchronous sox upsampling is diminished so what

[Apesbrain]

I'm sorry, after the "Windows Audiophile Edition" thread I guess we're all out of gas for this one.

[posnos]

I'm sorry, after the "Windows Audiophile Edition" thread I guess we're all out of gas for this one.

hmm... didnt think I was spouting foofoo here... just asking if I would lose any SQ doing upsampling with SOX inside LMS verses an external DAC.

Unless you think upsampling is foofoo...or even extermal DAC's

Thanks for the comment anyways.

Peter

[philippe_44]

hmm... didnt think I was spouting foofoo here... just asking if I would lose any SQ doing upsampling with SOX inside LMS verses an external DAC.

Unless you think upsampling is foofoo...or even extermal DAC's

Thanks for the comment anyways.

Peter

synchronous vs asynchronous upsampling does not mean anything. it's a transformation in the digital domain and only the precision of the arithmetic use could make a difference which is far below anything you will hear. Assuming the same precision, you can do it in the dac, in sox, in AWS in the cloud, it does not make any difference (1+1=2, wherever you calculate it). As far a upsampling is concerned, oh well ... any decent DAC+filtering, Transporter included put that problem an order of magnitude below the distorsions that are introduced by the rest of the analogue chain, your ears included.

don't know what I'm doing in the audiophile forum

[posnos]

synchronous vs asynchronous upsampling does not mean anything. it's a transformation in the digital domain and only the precision of the arithmetic use could make a difference which is far below anything you will hear. Assuming the same precision, you can do it in the dac, in sox, in AWS in the cloud, it does not make any difference (1+1=2, wherever you calculate it). As far a upsampling is concerned, oh well ... any decent DAC+filtering, Transporter included put that problem an order of magnitude below the distorsions that are introduced by the rest of the analogue chain, your ears included.

don't know what I'm doing in the audiophile forum

Thanks for this reply, especially coming from someone as esteemed as yourself.

I just retired early from a intensive job (sucked up many hours per day) and have lots of stuff I want to try now that I have the time.

Simplifying my system is a key part of my initial endeavours and yes I wlll obviously use my ears to benchmark an external DAC verses transporter + sox verses transporter alone, but its good to understand I wont be pissing away time on a dead end.

Peter

[Fizbin]

I think you'll have a hard time finding a DAC that sounds as good as the Transporter. Even finding one that's a minuscule better will cost a lot of money. And no, I don't infer that all pricey equipment necessarily sounds better or even good at all. I know people who have compared the Transporter to DAC's that are twice as much and those DAC's are either close or just a fraction better.

I've had one foot out the Squeezebox door for awhile, trying (sort of like you) to simplify my setup and find smaller gear. I was hoping to transition to a USB based setup but I don't think I'll find a DAC that sounds as good as my Transporter that I can afford. Just for fun I recently tried an inexpensive Topping D50 because it measured very well over at audio science review. (I also heard reports of it sounding better than the Oppo 105). I really wanted to keep this DAC, I liked how it worked, but unfortunately it didn't come close to the Transporter...which I seem to be stuck with. Of course it's not a bad piece of gear to be stuck with.

[darrenyeats]

For future reference, synchronous/asynchronous sounds more like a description for whether the SRC occurs in real-time or is done beforehand.

I believe you're referring to integer or non-integer "up/down-sampling factor" or "sampling rate conversion factor".

Cheers, Darren