• 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!

Topping L30 Headphone Amplifier Review

w1000i

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
260
Likes
138
Location
Jubail SA
For God's sake. Why would you want to do that ? :facepalm:
You take a perfectly good 44.1 signal, you alter it by needlessly resampling it to 768, just to have a nice "768 KHz" display in your E30 ? :rolleyes:
That is not "Hi-Fi", sorry, that is something else.
You don't really believe that "just because it's 768 it will sound better", do you ? o_O

If you had actual 768 KHz music I wouldn't say anything (except that your ears are limited to 20 KHz in your younger years, which is the reason why 44.1 exists BTW : 44.1 / 2 = 22.05 and 22.05 > 20). But AFAIK such music doesn't exist yet at this point. Or maybe limited so some rare files.
100% of people here and elsewhere on Earth have mostly 44.1 music. In my case I have 1 to 2% of 48/88.2/96/176.2/192 KHz music, but no more.
For 44.1 music, 44.1 is the way to go : bit-perfect output and 44.1 on your DAC. That is "High Fidelity".
Upsampling to max always sound smoother. And if you do it to DSD that even much smoother.

We have ears to evaluate. :)
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,700

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,625
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
Upsampling to max always sound smoother. And if you do it to DSD that even much smoother.

We have ears to evaluate. :)

Uh huh.
 

Veri

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
9,596
Likes
12,036
Upsampling to max always sound smoother. And if you do it to DSD that even much smoother.
Funny how things only go one way, "smoother". While on a NOS DAC (a holo spring for example), setting it to oversampling or DSD mode of course makes it.. brighter. As opposed to the very smooth NOS mode! Almost like your very own bias is causing you to hear one way or another ...?
 
Last edited:

Mr:River

Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2019
Messages
76
Likes
35
Oh dear. Please stop. At least pretend to science it up a bit. This is how nonsense propagates and becomes received wisdom.
Hahahahaha. :D
1600711296412.png
 

bogi

Active Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2020
Messages
238
Likes
170
Location
Slovakia
Oh dear. Please stop. At least pretend to science it up a bit. This is how nonsense propagates and becomes received wisdom.
Sorry but then you are speaking about science but don't understand how delta sigma DAC works and what does it mean direct DSD. There are technical reasons why software upsampling and software delta sigma modulation can easily beat in quality the hardware oversampling and delta sigma modulation in DAC chip. Generally, with delta sigma DAC chips, for PCM source content it is possible to bypass first stages of hardware oversampling and for DSD source content it is possible to bypass complete oversampling and delta sigma modulation (direct DSD mode). For delta sigma DACs the PDM (Pulse Density Modulation) signal (not PCM signal) is their native type of signal which is finally converted into analog by low pass filter. DSD signal is one bit two level PDM signal so it is native type of signal for Delta sigma DAC, which (in contradiction with PCM signal) does not need to be complicatedly processed before it enters the D/A conversion stage itself (no oversampling, no modulation).

You and your colleagues are repeatedly attacking people who carry about sound quality. You have to educate yourself before you write a nonsense and call it "scientific". I am watching this "science" forum a week and I am seeing that it is rather a "science" kinder garden.
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,292
Location
China
Sorry but then you are speaking about science but don't understand how delta sigma DAC works and what does it mean direct DSD. There are technical reasons why software upsampling and software delta sigma modulation can easily beat in quality the hardware oversampling and delta sigma modulation in DAC chip. Generally, with delta sigma DAC chips, for PCM source content it is possible to bypass first stages of hardware oversampling and for DSD source content it is possible to bypass complete oversampling and delta sigma modulation (direct DSD mode). For delta sigma DACs the PDM (Pulse Density Modulation) signal (not PCM signal) is their native type of signal which is finally converted into analog by low pass filter. DSD signal is one bit two level PDM signal so it is native type of signal for Delta sigma DAC, which (in contradiction with PCM signal) does not need to be complicatedly processed before it enters the D/A conversion stage itself (no oversampling, no modulation).

You and your colleagues are repeatedly attacking people who carry about sound quality. You have to educate yourself before you write a nonsense and call it "scientific". I am watching this "science" forum a week and I am seeing that it is rather a "science" kinder garden.
You literally have no evidence suggesting that software oversampling improves performance. In real world testing, no matter what source sampling rate is performance stays roughly the same. Or in contrast, the best performance is at 44.1k and 48khz. Science is evidence based. We need evidence, not pseudoscience.
 

bogi

Active Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2020
Messages
238
Likes
170
Location
Slovakia
An usual personal computer has much higher computational power than resource constrained DAC chip. It can perform upsampling and delta sigma modulation calculations in considerably higher quality in 64bit floating point precision than it is done in few dollars costing consumer DAC chips. Thus feeding the delta sigma DAC with 44.1k / 48k PCM signal, when it disposes with DSD direct mode, is the worst thing you can do IF you have the possibility to perform high quality software upsampling and software delta sigma modulation. It is about the possibility to substitute the majority of DSP which is performed in typical delta sigma DAC chip with software based solution.

High quality software based upsampling, dithering and delta sigma modulation can be performed in HQPlayer Desktop or Embedded in real time during playback, or PCM to DSD conversion can be performed offline in HQPlayer Pro and other professional tools like Saracon. There are also some free or lower cost alternatives (foo_dsd_asio for Foobar2000 or for example the solution of Jriver MC), which don't reach the quality level of HQPlayer's algorithms, but still can provide good result.

So it is no nonsense to upsample or convert PCM to DSD. And there is no base for a rule that it would be best to feed a DAC with 44.1k / 48k PCM signal.
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,292
Location
China
An usual personal computer has much higher computational power than resource constrained DAC chip. It can perform upsampling and delta sigma modulation calculations in considerably higher quality in 64bit floating point precision than it is done in few dollars costing consumer DAC chips. Thus feeding the delta sigma DAC with 44.1k / 48k PCM signal, when it disposes with DSD direct mode, is the worst thing you can do IF you have the possibility to perform high quality software upsampling and software delta sigma modulation. It is about the possibility to substitute the majority of DSP which is performed in typical delta sigma DAC chip with software based solution.

High quality software based upsampling, dithering and delta sigma modulation can be performed in HQPlayer Desktop or Embedded in real time during playback, or PCM to DSD conversion can be performed offline in HQPlayer Pro and other professional tools like Saracon. There are also some free or lower cost alternatives (foo_dsd_asio for Foobar2000 or for example the solution of Jriver MC), which don't reach the quality level of HQPlayer's algorithms, but still can provide good result.

So it is no nonsense to upsample or convert PCM to DSD. And there is no base for a rule that it would be best to feed a DAC with 44.1k / 48k PCM signal.
Still no evidence. In measurements we've done, native DSD doesn't provide better performance. In contrast, the DSD bypass has constraints. For example, you can't have high output mode in ak4499 which potentially reduces DNR performance.
 

GeorgeWalk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
469
Likes
791
If your source is 16bit/44khz, upsampling can only, at best, end up with the same signal quality. You are adding no new information. Everytime a signal is converted there is entropy, information is lost. It is like making a copy of a copy.
 

Sukie

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 29, 2020
Messages
928
Likes
1,467
Location
UK
So it is no nonsense to upsample or convert PCM to DSD. And there is no base for a rule that it would be best to feed a DAC with 44.1k / 48k PCM signal.
Evidence? Measurements? Facts?

Without these it's just waffle (and not the tasty kind!).
 

MechEngVic

Active Member
Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
155
Upsampling to max always sound smoother. And if you do it to DSD that even much smoother.

We have ears to evaluate. :)
For God's sake. Why would you want to do that ? :facepalm:
You take a perfectly good 44.1 signal, you alter it by needlessly resampling it to 768, just to have a nice "768 KHz" display in your E30 ? :rolleyes:
That is not "Hi-Fi", sorry, that is something else.
You don't really believe that "just because it's 768 it will sound better", do you ? o_O

If you had actual 768 KHz music I wouldn't say anything (except that your ears are limited to 20 KHz in your younger years, which is the reason why 44.1 exists BTW : 44.1 / 2 = 22.05 and 22.05 > 20). But AFAIK such music doesn't exist yet at this point. Or maybe limited so some rare files.
100% of people here and elsewhere on Earth have mostly 44.1 music. In my case I have 1 to 2% of 48/88.2/96/176.2/192 KHz music, but no more.
For 44.1 music, 44.1 is the way to go : bit-perfect output and 44.1 on your DAC. That is "High Fidelity".

Analog to digital conversions made at higher than CD quality bit rates and depths show improvement in resolution, but the improvement has not been conclusively identified by ear in any of many listening tests. Maybe if loudspeaker technology improves someday, we'll be able to hear the difference.

A digital to digital conversion to a higher bit rate and depth can only be a lateral improvement at best. Would it be like increasing your "digital headroom"? Or is it like a digital gear reduction for greater smoothness and stability of torque? If there is evidence of it making an audible improvement, I'd like to read about it.

EDIT: Another thought: Do the "motors and gears" of digital reproduction gear run smoother at higher bit rates and depths? I'm trying to layman-out the possibilities.
 
Last edited:

MechEngVic

Active Member
Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
155
I finally tried the L30 in preamp mode hooked up to my main system. Chromecast audio>Soncoz la-qxd1>L30>Dynaco ST-70 Series II>Klipsch KLF-10's.

It sounded just like it sounds through headphones: Flat like a ruler and dead quiet.

But it just can't compete with my Nobsound NS-01P tube preamp with NOS Mullard 12ax7's and fancy-shmancy cap upgrades. The L30 has none of the glorious harmonic distortions and sparkles that, while wildly un-transparent, attract and addict!

The L30 will remain in headphone amp duty. I hated headphones... Until I got this amp.
 

badboygolf16v

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
285
Likes
356
I'm trying to layman-out the possibilities.

Unfortunately, whilst perhaps enjoyable for you, that will be a complete waste of time.

There are many helpful experts on this forum who could provide objective information on the subject.
 
Top Bottom