AuraEngine Converter

[Erogen]

Why offline, why million-tap​

Every DAC upsamples. It has to — reconstructing an analog waveform from 44,100 samples per second requires an interpolation filter. But a DAC chip does it in real time with a filter of a few hundred to a few thousand taps. AuraEngine removes the real-time constraint entirely: it renders the track offline through FIR filters of 1 to 30 million taps, designed in 128-bit arithmetic, applied in end-to-end 64-bit float. The DAC then receives a 352.8/384/705.6/768 kHz waveform that is already reconstructed — its own filter has almost nothing left to do

AuraEngine — The Signal Path

How AuraEngine renders 44.1 kHz audio at up to 768 kHz: every DSP stage, its parameters, and why it exists.

toxadev.github.io

Does anyone have any experience?

 

[JSmith]

Yawn...

Does a 4 million taps FIR filter sound better than a 16K one? Let's find out.

Claim A claim is frequently made that DAC digital filters with a lot of taps can make a significant difference in sound quality. Some software packages and even hardware manufacturers are touting the benefits of large FIR filters, often with millions of taps, supposedly because these produce a...

www.audiosciencereview.com

@pkane


JSmith

 

[Sokel]

Lag?
I suspect seconds?

 

[Erogen]

30M Taps, all DSP options: Enabled
Encoding speed for the entire disc: 22m11s.
The disc takes 56m24s.
Intel Ultra 7 GPU: OFF

Intel Ultra 7 GPU: ON (GPU integrated with the processor, shared memory)
Encoding speed for the first two recordings: 2:45
Intel Ultra 7 GPU: OFF
Encoding speed for the first two recordings: 3m20s.

There is a software error or insufficient system memory. With a larger number of files in the queue, and with the GPU enabled, the program displays an error after 4 or 5 files and stops working.
I think a modern graphics card should significantly speed up the entire process. The AI estimates 8x-10x faster with an RTX 5060-class graphics card at 30M Taps.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

30M Taps, all DSP options: Enabled
Encoding speed for the entire disc: 22m11s.
The disc takes 56m24s.

By the time it finishes I will have changed my mind about what I want to listen to.

 

[Erogen]

By the time it finishes I will have changed my mind about what I want to listen to.

Conversion is slow when using only the CPU. Using the graphics card's GPU should speed up the process significantly.
I ordered an RTX 5600TI; I'll check the conversion speed.

 

[Mnyb]

All this trouble ? converting offline to yield enormous files to store somewhere ? before you listen to them ?

I say nope nothing in the test of even best of our chip based DAC's shown anything peaking up above the noise floor , the filters inside our DAC's may not be perfect down to -300dB ( Paul McGovan territory ) but their sufficient for the job at hand .

 

[Erogen]

All this trouble ? converting offline to yield enormous files to store somewhere ? before you listen to them ?

Of course not. Conversion with a good GPU should be quick. You convert before listening.
Of course, you can't improve a bad final mastering; to do so, you need the original source, before the bad mastering, and then re-mastering.
However, you can significantly improve certain aspects of a bad mastering. This converter is designed for that purpose.

 

[Mnyb]

If you use other effects and setting it may help , but straight sample rate conversion is a solved problem and don't need this .

So just making a 16/44.1 file to something like 24/384 kHz will in itself not yield anything at all . Your DAC's already doing this internally and also apply filters digitally of sufficient quality.

If this software can apply other interesting effects ? de clipping ? dynamic range expansion or something ? then it can be worthwhile ?

 

[Redacted]

Can't we have mono-block mixer taps? - they are infinitely variable compared with just two (hot and cold), and the golden-eared people can then set temperature to within 0.001C with a bit of effort.

 

[Mnyb]

Of course not. Conversion with a good GPU should be quick. You convert before listening.
Of course, you can't improve a bad final mastering; to do so, you need the original source, before the bad mastering, and then re-mastering.
However, you can significantly improve certain aspects of a bad mastering. This converter is designed for that purpose.View attachment 557045

wonder if this is an artefact ? if you apply some negative level gain before sample rate conversion , true peak may not see the clipping for what it really is ?

 

[Erogen]

wonder if this is an artefact ? if you apply some negative level gain before sample rate conversion , true peak may not see the clipping for what it really is ?

Please don't ask me technical questions. I'm not responsible for creating this program. I have no technical knowledge. What matters to me is that I can use this program to slightly improve poor mastering.
For over 20-25 years, CDs have been mastered very poorly. The 21st century is simply a disaster. Dynamic range has been drastically reduced, clipping is very common, and the volume is very loud. It's simply unpleasant to listen to.

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

Please don't ask me technical questions. I'm not responsible for creating this program. I have no technical knowledge. What matters to me is that I can use this program to slightly improve poor mastering.
For over 20-25 years, CDs have been mastered very poorly. The 21st century is simply a disaster. Dynamic range has been drastically reduced, clipping is very common, and the volume is very loud. It's simply unpleasant to listen to.

Hang on, now I'm confused. Are you saying you are using the program to remaster CDs?

 

[Erogen]

Hang on, now I'm confused. Are you saying you are using the program to remaster CDs?

Yes.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Of course not. Conversion with a good GPU should be quick. You convert before listening.
Of course, you can't improve a bad final mastering; to do so, you need the original source, before the bad mastering, and then re-mastering.
However, you can significantly improve certain aspects of a bad mastering. This converter is designed for that purpose.View attachment 557045

Wait, what? This picture clearly shows you have corrupted the files in some way. Proper up-sampling will have exactly the same DR value and same number of clipping samples!

 

[Erogen]

Wait, what? This picture clearly shows you have corrupted the files in some way. Proper up-sampling will have exactly the same DR value and same number of clipping samples!

Hello

I think you should read and understand:

AuraEngine — The Signal Path

How AuraEngine renders 44.1 kHz audio at up to 768 kHz: every DSP stage, its parameters, and why it exists.

toxadev.github.io

 

[829]

[...]

Does anyone have any experience?

AuraEngine: Perfectionist off-line mega-tap digital filtering - with hybrid-phase transient detection & blending.

Archimago does.

 

[Mnyb]

Well it does something besides normal upsampling then .

It’s not the 30 million taps that are the actual feature …. ( a red herring for ASR readers ) it’s the handling of ISO’s and clipping artifacts with the special filter approach.

IMO a wholesale conversion of everything all the time might be unnecessary ( if it ain’t broke.. ), but try on your most atrocious tracks ?

 

[Erogen]

Florence + the Machine (2010) Between Two Lungs CD1
30M Taps, All Options: ON (These are extreme settings.)
The GPU integrated into the Intel Ultra 7 processor is weak.
The speedup compared to using only the CPU is about 10%-15%.
Conversion time for a track lasting 3m:52s - 1m:30s
With a total memory of 16GB (shared with the GPU) and increasing the GPU memory limit to 11.3GB, the conversion process completed successfully, but we still receive a message saying "waiting for memory to be freed."

 

[Drengur]

One might need this for Death Magnetic...