Search results

Could you repost that same picture and the question another 20 or 30 times, please? I don't think it's enough to have repeated it in only 4 or 5 threads so far.

I've seen it and heard from others (and Peter) about it, but have never tested one. The claim was that it was more immune to noise generated by the PC by virtue of better isolation and low CPU usage when used with the XXX Hi-end player. Peter was trying to prove that even the act of moving a...

I've had many debates with Peter, the author of XXX Hi-End in the past. He even sent me one of his (complex!) USB cables to test at one point. He wasn't too happy when I found that it produced no measurable effect, except for some additional noise in some configurations. I did try his player...

It's actually a technical marvel of a product. Completely useless for the main claimed benefit of audible improvements, but then, internally it uses 256 bits precision for calculations, runs slow, costs a lot, and requires a major investment in time and equipment to operate. High cost, extreme...

I agree, there's a certain part of ASR membership that just jumps into action to defend the perceived red line whenever some newcomer comes and tries to challenge it. I see it more as an ASR self-defense mechanism than anything more sinister. There's too much groupthink on the outside of ASR...

You’ve asked plenty of ‘leading’ questions. Some may perceive it as an act of JAQing off (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_question). This happens a lot on ASR, unfortunately.

and that’s why I recommend that you read more of ASR before continuing. There’s plenty of objective results and evidence. Plenty of blind tests on audibility of hires, and measurements for oversampling and non-over sampling DACs. Even software that you can use to find your own answers.

Your mistake is trusting your listening experience. Is posted the links to videos as to what you need to learn before you can state that A is better than B among DACs. Any questions, conclusions and wild goose chases that result from this mistake are unnecessary and avoidable if you would just...

I already answered that question multiple times in this thread alone, and even in the post you quoted. What else do you want to know?

Sorry, don’t have the time or inclination to read the wiki page.

Oversampling allows simpler filters to be used. Same reconstruction quality can be achieved without oversampling by implementing more complex filters. It’s a tradeoff an engineer makes. If a DAC has poor reconstruction, one can try to fix it by resampling and filtering outside the DAC… or one...

I said it was cost and simpler implementation of reconstruction and digital filters.

For the same, high quality of reconstruction, it is.

No. Oversampling is used by engineers to help build cheaper/less complex circuits. It's not that it sounds better than properly reconstructed, non-oversampled audio, it's just that it's easier to do this on a budget. Oversampling is already done in 99.9% of the DACs out there, so what point are...

Dither can (and should) be applied any time quantization error is introduced, usually when fitting a result with more bits of precision into a smaller sample size.

Something to get you started:

And I'm suggesting that the problem is most likely in how you evaluate equipment, not in the equipment itself. Until you learn how to properly compare two devices for real audio differences, you'll be stuck in a loop, looking for solutions to imaginary problems.

Looking for a solution to an existing problem implies a problem exists and isn't solved satisfactorily. Nearly everything discussed in this thread is a solution looking for a problem, not the other way around.

What? Oversampling is a practice of increasing sampling rate 16x or whatever. A filter, NOS or otherwise, does not by itself increase sampling rate, so it’s a misnomer to call a filter NOS. A DAC can be NOS, but not a filter.

#1. No filtering is an improper way to reconstruct PCM signal. This was covered nearly 100 years ago by Shannon, Nyquist, and others.