• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Can one of you gurus rescue me from my brain

OP
B

BigMiIke

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Messages
53
Likes
6
That would depend input/mode in an avr, most convert for any kind of processing.
So what would be the best way to bring it from the DAC to the AVR? What input would I go into and what I use red white cables? Toslink ? Coax ?
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,938
Likes
6,097
Location
PNW
So what would be the best way to bring it from the DAC to the AVR? What input would I go into and what I use red white cables? Toslink ? Coax ?
Well if you want the external dac to then go into an avr, generally you would use the multi-ch analog inputs (bypassing internal processing on many units), or a regular analog input in direct mode. I wouldn't say that's the "best" way to process signal, tho. It's just not that important.
 
OP
B

BigMiIke

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Messages
53
Likes
6
thanks for the replies everyone - it’s a catastrophe- I’m not overly audio techy , I’ll just listen to AM in 48 or whatever and learn to like it and forget 192 exists - even tho it does goddammit!
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,938
Likes
6,097
Location
PNW
thanks for the replies everyone - it’s a catastrophe- I’m not overly audio techy , I’ll just listen to AM in 48 or whatever and learn to like it and forget 192 exists - even tho it does goddammit!
?? AM if the object needs nothing particularly. Just hate/rage generally.
 
OP
B

BigMiIke

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Messages
53
Likes
6
thanks for the replies everyone - it’s a catastrophe- I’m not overly audio techy , I’ll just listen to AM in 48 or whatever and learn to like it and forget 192 exists - even tho it does goddammit!
 

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,747
Likes
13,080
Location
UK/Cheshire
it’s a catastrophe
Only in your mind. This is the brain we need to save you from. :p

In reality from an audibility point of view 48 is as good as 768 (or even 6144 were that to exist)
 
Last edited:

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,191
Likes
12,481
Location
London
I have never used my ipad as a source as such, but with a Macbook, if you go into ‘Audio Midi’ ( applications,utilities.audio midi) you can select the sample rate and bit depth.
Keith
 
OP
B

BigMiIke

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Messages
53
Likes
6
So I’ve decided to give this a go .

I have a usbc to usb b cable which will go into a topping dx3 pro DAC -
Here’s where I hit the brain wall / do I run rca to the avr or coax or optical ? Which provides best sound ?
And where do I input them in back of onkyo
?

Thx
 

Liya

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2021
Messages
354
Likes
272
It seems pretty simple. I have an iPad that is capable of playing high resolution, audio 192.

I would like to get that audio into my Onkyo 9.2 avr.

I bought an Apple usb - c adapter with hdmi & usb out .
I use Apple Camera adapter


and I got hires from iPad (or iPhone) over usb
 

kemmler3D

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 25, 2022
Messages
3,352
Likes
6,867
Location
San Francisco
forget 192 exists - even tho it does goddammit!
Others have made this point already but, the main reason higher sampling rates exist is for use in the studio. Sometimes you need ultrasonic resolution to execute some special effect or another with good enough quality.

For home listening (for any listening) 44.1 or 48khz is enough. Intuitively, "more is more" and higher sampling rates should sound better in some way. After all, that's how it works for lots of things. On a practical level the only thing higher sampling rates gets you is a higher maximum frequency for playback. The good news is we already had the maximum frequency taken care of with lower sampling rates.

44.1 gets you 22,500hz. This is already higher than anyone old enough to rent a car can hear. 48khz gets you 24khz, beyond what any human can hear. 192khz lets you play back a frequency of 96khz - not even cats or dogs can hear pitches that high, and it's extremely unlikely your speakers can play it, nor is it 100% likely your amp will play it back properly either. Furthermore, microphones and most studio equipment are not designed to reproduce those frequencies properly either.

In most cases if you look at the content of a high-res file, it's nothing but noise above 22khz or so, if not lower.

Anyway, long way of saying rest easy when it comes to 48 or 96 or 192, despite what you might have heard, this was already thought through when they designed CDs.
 
OP
B

BigMiIke

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Messages
53
Likes
6
Others have made this point already but, the main reason higher sampling rates exist is for use in the studio. Sometimes you need ultrasonic resolution to execute some special effect or another with good enough quality.

For home listening (for any listening) 44.1 or 48khz is enough. Intuitively, "more is more" and higher sampling rates should sound better in some way. After all, that's how it works for lots of things. On a practical level the only thing higher sampling rates gets you is a higher maximum frequency for playback. The good news is we already had the maximum frequency taken care of with lower sampling rates.

44.1 gets you 22,500hz. This is already higher than anyone old enough to rent a car can hear. 48khz gets you 24khz, beyond what any human can hear. 192khz lets you play back a frequency of 96khz - not even cats or dogs can hear pitches that high, and it's extremely unlikely your speakers can play it, nor is it 100% likely your amp will play it back properly either. Furthermore, microphones and most studio equipment are not designed to reproduce those frequencies properly either.

In most cases if you look at the content of a high-res file, it's nothing but noise above 22khz or so, if not lower.

Anyway, long way of saying rest easy when it comes to 48 or 96 or 192, despite what you might have heard, this was already thought through when they designed CDs.
Fantastic explanation to an Audio ham and egger like myself .
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,115
Likes
14,779
If you bring an analog signal from the DAC, Onkyo has nothing to do in the digital domain.
The onkyo doesn't adc the analog input?
 

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,747
Likes
13,080
Location
UK/Cheshire
So I’ve decided to give this a go .

I have a usbc to usb b cable which will go into a topping dx3 pro DAC -
Here’s where I hit the brain wall / do I run rca to the avr or coax or optical ? Which provides best sound ?
And where do I input them in back of onkyo
?

Thx
The only job of a DAC is to convert digital to analogue. There is absolutely no point using it if you are going to send digital from the DAC to the AVR. In any case the DX3 doesn't have any digital outputs.

So you connect the analogue outputs of the DAC into an analogue input of the AVR - you can use any, but the CD input would be sensible.

Then you have to set that input to "pure direct" or whatever the equivalent is on the Onkyo. If you don't, then the AVR will convert the analgue back to digital, do whatever DSP it is doing, and then convert it back to analogue using the DAC in the AVR. Which then makes it pointless using the external DAC.

(It is pretty pointless anyway. I very much doubt you'll be able to hear any real difference from the external DAC)
 
Top Bottom