[mcgsxr]

An interesting discussion, and one where I can admit my noobishness!

I have some 24/96 FLAC.  What exactly does that equate?  Is it SACD or is that 24/192?  And is any of this FLAC hi rez, or does it have to be in a completely different format to qualify as hi rez?

Food for thought for me.  I checked, I have 1.8TB of music, less than 30GB is not 16/44.

So, perhaps for me and my collection, I really only need a DAC compatible with 24/96, though 24/192 could prove useful as the collection expands.

I am also reticent to invest a lot yet, given the structure of my collection, and how it is weighted to Red Book.

[ted_b]

SACD uses DSD as its format, not PCM (16 and 24 bit recordings are PCM).  Only in the last couple of years have we been able to rip SACDs to its native DSD layer (via hacked PS3 method) and now DSD download sites are appearing, as the format regains some popularity.  It's like finding an old abandoned mine shaft and discovering several veins of pure silver.  It may not be your favorite metal, but who cares, it's very valuable and now there's new sources to mine.  Same as DSD; it's hirez and thousands of recordings have been either archived or recorded in it, so have at it.  No reason to debate which is better; get it all.

FLAC is a container for carrying PCM content, so FLAC can be 16 bit or 24 bit.  It was created to mainly conserve disc space losslessly (i.e. no less of music content, unlike MP3's).

[mcgsxr]

Now it comes much more clear.

I have no hi rez at all.  I have different rez of PCM.  I will likely focus on a DAC capable of 24/192 with an eye on DSD but it is not critical to me.

Apologies for posting in the wrong spot, but I learned a lot through it!

Thanks guys,

Mark in Canada.

[ted_b]

I have no hi rez at all.  I have different rez of PCM. 
Mark in Canada.

Hirez is anything greater than redbook/cd (16/44.1k).  So if you have 24 bit PCM you have hirez.  Not to be pedantic. 

[mcgsxr]

Actually I appreciate the distinction, and thanks.

I will continue to keep an eye on this circle as my music collection grows.

thanks Ted!

[k6davis]

I'm a fan of DSD as well, but primarily for native DSD files.  I've tried Jriver's DSD upsampling into my Benchmark DAC2 with mixed results.  I wish I could do it selectively.  DSD upsampling does help smooth out some 16/44 titles that are a bit rough around the edges.  OTOH, DSD upsampling pretty much mangled a 24/176 Reference Recording title.  Could be that my 2 year old HP laptop isn't up to the task of upsampling big files like that.

Russ

I'd venture to say that your theory about the the laptop being insufficient to the task may be correct.

JRiver's DSD upsampling is meant to provide a transparent representation of the original file in DSD form so that it can be sent to a DAC that excels at DSD decoding. It's not meant to make the file itself sound different, for better or for worse. That's JRiver's stated intent anyway.

More interestingly, the potentially heavy processing involved in real-time upsampling could have interfered with your computer's ability to serve the music without jitter. That could be the cause of the sonic degradation you heard.

[k6davis]

Hirez is anything greater than redbook/cd (16/44.1k).  So if you have 24 bit PCM you have hirez.  Not to be pedantic. 

Furthermore, I've heard it said that of the two, bit rate is more important than sample rate.

Based on my own (very limited) experience with a good number of first rate 24 bit - 44.1 khz recordings, that may be true.

[scorpion]

JRiver's PCM2DSD on the fly resampling is CPU-demanding.
First thing to check with Laptops is in fact Energy Settings, go for max performance and see if that helps.
Audiogate's conversion is not demanding as much CPU-resources as Jriver's.

/Erling