Audiocontrol Hyperion Processor

[Kal Rubinson]

Storm's implementation, at least IMO, is better not for for number of filters but for ability to put PEQ before ART and ability to appply tone controls after ART.

Run ART on a PC (as a VST plug-in) and you can do that just as easily.

 

[Oddball]

Run ART on a PC (as a VST plug-in) and you can do that just as easily.

Last I had HTPC was in the elder ages. Actually remember it quite vividly as it broke some speed records while on the balcony of my NY flat back in 2001. Was -25C so it was a really good run.

Enjoying my ART on simple AV 10 - really no reason for PEQ or after the fact tone adjustments in my use case. Just perfect the way it is.

 

[welwynnick]

Run ART on a PC (as a VST plug-in) and you can do that just as easily.

Can you do that with 16 channels?
I had a sneaky feeling that it was limited to 8 channels on a PC.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Can you do that with 16 channels?

yes.

 

[PGAMiami]

Anyone know whether the APR 16 will internally resample everything to 48khz, as an AVR like a Denon 4800h would, or process sources at their native sample rate, like a Storm processor? With ARM DSP and x86 like processing power, it certainly should be able to. This would be largely irrelevant for video as it’s mostly at 48khz anyway, but not irrelevant for hi rez music.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Anyone know whether the APR 16 will internally resample everything to 48khz, as an AVR like a Denon 4800h would, or process sources at their native sample rate, like a Storm processor?

How do you know if the Storm processor will process at sample rates above 48kHz? According to my information, "Post-Processed Outputs: Up to 32 channels, 48kHz." When I queried them about this, their response was "Our chips are capable of 96kHz processing, so a bypass is possible and likely in the future."

 

[PGAMiami]

How do you know if the Storm processor will process at sample rates above 48kHz? According to my information, "Post-Processed Outputs: Up to 32 channels, 48kHz." When I queried them about this, their response was "Our chips are capable of 96kHz processing, so a bypass is possible and likely in the future."

Well, that’s what happens when one relies on ChatGPT. Yesterday its gave me a very detailed comparison of Storm vs. what it called less sophisticated consumer AVRs and confidently said the Storm was native rate. Today it’s apologizing for its error. Great catch Kal.

What about on a Mac mini? AI told me it also did SRC on Dirac.

I’m trying to decide whether to 1) do best I can with Dirac and call it a day, 2) continue with a system that uses Mitch’s filters for stereo and my Denon for video, or 3) build out a full immersive system using Mitch’s filters.

I only know enough about this to get in trouble, but as it seems to me, you need 60,000 taps and filters that have latency to do DSP properly in the bass region where you require accuracy down to a couple hz when you don’t have speakers supporting each other. This is how Mitch gets a stereo pair to sound great. The speakers are each individually corrected and they are not supporting each other. The latency allows them to know before you are supposed to hear something that some corrections are needed. Works great for music, but latency is an issue with video unless you have something like J River delaying the video. Mitch has sent me separate low latency filters for video. His work is spectacular.

Dirac has speakers supporting each other. This is also very appealing and a great way to manage nodes and resonance. But it’s not as resolving as an Audiolense 60,000 tap filter,

I have another design constraint you all may not have. I need a system that just works, with one remote so my wife and son with special needs can use it. No wired remotes for me.

 

[TheKoC]

Run ART on a PC (as a VST plug-in) and you can do that just as easily.

Do you have any news on when ART for PC will be released?

 

[Steakhouse]

How do you know if the Storm processor will process at sample rates above 48kHz? According to my information, "Post-Processed Outputs: Up to 32 channels, 48kHz." When I queried them about this, their response was "Our chips are capable of 96kHz processing, so a bypass is possible and likely in the future."

Of course their chips are able to process 96KHz. This answer however is basically a non answer since it does not indicate if Storm actually does it.
Once you activate Dirac everything is resampled to 48KHz anyway. The idea about the Storms maybe able to output 96KHz without Dirac is imo a an academic one. It will not happen and it is also not needed.

 

[welwynnick]

I don't have any evidence, but I'm pretty sure that Storm could process Atmos + Dirac at 96kHz if they chose to.
It's just that they can use more effective filters if they process at 48kHz, and the benefits of doing that outweighs the disadvantages.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Well, that’s what happens when one relies on ChatGPT. Yesterday its gave me a very detailed comparison of Storm vs. what it called less sophisticated consumer AVRs and confidently said the Storm was native rate. Today it’s apologizing for its error. Great catch Kal.

I learned from experience in sending the ISO-EVO hi-rez sources and got only 24/48 at the output.

What about on a Mac mini? AI told me it also did SRC on Dirac.

That may depend on how you are implementing it. I am a Mac newbie, so I cannot comment.

Do you have any news on when ART for PC will be released?

Dunno. Like you, I can only ask but, although they have had Beta versions on the website for a long time, the current ones are not so described

Of course their chips are able to process 96KHz. This answer however is basically a non answer since it does not indicate if Storm actually does it.
Once you activate Dirac everything is resampled to 48KHz anyway.

That, of course, is not an entirely clear conclusion. Dirac, itself, can run up to 24/192 as I use it every day. The issue is, as it was with Audyssey, with the hardware and whether the hardware manufacturer will provide sufficient DSP power for higher sampling rates. What is clear is that Storm chooses not to do so (yet).

I don't have any evidence, but I'm pretty sure that Storm could process Atmos + Dirac at 96kHz if they chose to.
It's just that they can use more effective filters if they process at 48kHz, and the benefits of doing that outweighs the disadvantages.

Perhaps. Their justification might be that all the widely available immersive content (which is what their products are bought for) is limited to 24/48, anyway.
.

 

[welwynnick]

Perhaps. Their justification might be that all the widely available immersive content (which is what their products are bought for) is limited to 24/48, anyway.

That's a reasonable rationale for moderately priced gear, which the Storm is not.

If there's 96 and 192kHz material out there, and there's lots of it, in stereo and multi-channel formats, then I think an audio replay system should process it as such.

I'm a very principled person, or stubborn and dogmatic, if you prefer. But I strongly believe that in a cost no object system in the 21st Century, the digital audio bottleneck should sit in recording, mastering, storage and especially distribution, and not in playback at 20th Century levels of technology, contemporary with carbon paper, VCRs and fax machines.

I have have high hopes for Hyperion.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

If there's 96 and 192kHz material out there, and there's lots of it, in stereo and multi-channel formats, then I think an audio replay system should process it as such.

I am in complete agreement with you.
This from Trinnov in response to my query about the AltitudeCI:

(sampling rate is "up to 192kHz") This is often misunderstood. We don't do a great job explaining it. What we are referring to here is something that I believe is unique in the home theater sector: we adjust our digital signal processing to match the incoming data rate up to 192k, preserving the bandwidth that you may have paid good money for at HD Tracks or similar sites. By contrast, every other surround processor I know of resamples everything to 48 kHz, regardless of the incoming rate, since that is the only rate at which their DSP chips operate.

I'd like to hear the same from the other players in this market.

 

[Highfidelity]

How do you know if the Storm processor will process at sample rates above 48kHz? According to my information, "Post-Processed Outputs: Up to 32 channels, 48kHz." When I queried them about this, their response was "Our chips are capable of 96kHz processing, so a bypass is possible and likely in the future."

What Storm means by that is with their new update it’s possible to upsample the post DSP 48kHz audio up to 96kHz so the Ravenna network could be set to native 96kHz. This way they can boast 96kHz output capabilities. However it won’t improve sound quality. And more likely degrade it due to an additional SRC stage.

 

[Highfidelity]

Regarding the Trinnov Altitude CI, it can process all incoming audio at its native sample rate up to 24/192. However the Dante output is downsampled to 48kHz because it needs to be for compatibility with all incoming sample rates as Dante must be fixed to a single rate. However if you use the AES/EBU outputs, it’s possible to get the full bitperfect SRC free in-out signal path up to 24/192. Don’t expect this from any other processor that isn’t Intel processor powered. As it take a significant amount of processing power to achieve this.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

What Storm means by that is with their new update it’s possible to upsample the post DSP 48kHz audio up to 96kHz so the Ravenna network could be set to native 96kHz. This way they can boast 96kHz output capabilities. However it won’t improve sound quality. And more likely degrade it due to an additional SRC stage.

If so, that's disappointing.

 

[Highfidelity]

If so, that's disappointing.

Then the Trinnov CI is for you. Also much cheaper if you don’t need all the channels.

 

[welwynnick]

What Storm means by that is with their new update it’s possible to upsample the post DSP 48kHz audio up to 96kHz so the Ravenna network could be set to native 96kHz.

I don't think that's what they mean at all. It would be pointless.

Then the Trinnov CI is for you.

I have a suspicion that Kal can figure that out for himself.

 

[Highfidelity]

I don't think that's what they mean at all. It would be pointless.

.

It’s what Storm says they did anyways. It’s not pointless, it’s so idiots can brag that their processor can output 96kHz. And it stops people on forums who don’t actually understand what they did from crying about 48kHz limitation.

 

[welwynnick]

It’s what Storm says they did anyways. It’s not pointless, it’s so idiots can brag that their processor can output 96kHz.
And it stops people on forums who don’t actually understand what they did from crying about 48kHz limitation.
View attachment 495681

For everyone's benefit, that's what Storm wrote in their blog here: The Journey To Full Digitalization. The context here is an AVP with digital audio output.
In addition , they also wrote the following in this blog: Mastering Digital Timing. The context here is minimising jitter.

Both at input and output, our processors operate asynchronously, meaning they are not forced to follow the clock of the connected source or device. Instead, we reclock the signal internally with ultra-stable timing references. This means whether you play music at 44.1 kHz, a Blu-ray at 48 kHz, or high-resolution content at 192 kHz, StormAudio ensures perfect playback timing across all inputs and outputs. On Output, before signals are sent to DACs, amplifiers, or AoIP endpoints, they are re-clocked again.

Both of those statements are explicitly clear that Storm use an output ASRC, post processing. That's regardless of whether it's an analogue or digital output.

How do you know if the Storm processor will process at sample rates above 48kHz? According to my information, "Post-Processed Outputs: Up to 32 channels, 48kHz." When I queried them about this, their response was "Our chips are capable of 96kHz processing, so a bypass is possible and likely in the future."

However, Kal's reported statement above does not explicitly state that Storm achieve 96kHz output from up-conversion. That's only an interpretation of that statement. My interpretation is that can perform DSP at 96kHz. If that's true, I'm sure that Storm will continue to use both input and output ARSC, regardless. I could be wrong, but I don't think so. Time will tell.

Anyone know whether the APR 16 will internally resample everything to 48khz, as an AVR like a Denon 4800h would, or process sources at their native sample rate, like a Storm processor? With ARM DSP and x86 like processing power, it certainly should be able to.

This is a thread about the AudioControl processor, and I think this is the key question now. And it might not be answered for some time.