[firedog]

Hi-

I'd like to try upsampling some files to 24/96 to see if I like the sound better. I'm using a PC, and the programs recommended to me for quality resampling are Adobe Audition and izotope. Both cost around $350. I tried Audition, and it doesn't seem to have an option for 24 bit (only 8, 16, and 32).

Can anyone recommend software that does a good job? Preferably not hundreds of bucks if there is such a thing?

Thanks

[ted_b]

Wave Editor uses the great Izotope upsampler and is only $79.  Great discussion about it here.  Not sure if it's MAC only.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=69069.0

[Wayne1]

Why would you expect any improvement by upsampling 16/44.1 files to 24/96?

I do not believe you will get any additional information. If you are starting out with analog information, there may improvements to rip it at 24/96. I think you would be better served trying to obtain higher resolution source files.

[ted_b]

Wayne,
I agree.  I asked the identical questions on the CA forum (about same topic) and most said that they heard very little if any improvements, just larger file sizes.  What Barry Diament (recording engineer) said is that sometimes, at higher resolutions, DACs perform better...i.e if you take a 24/96 file and move it to 24/192 the DAC has a sweetspot there and loves it.  Only argument that made sense to me.  Dunno..but taking redbook and upsampling to a non-integer duplicate (i.e 96k instead of 88.2k) is likely a mess.

[firedog]

Why try it? Because other users have reported audible improvements. There are some reasons to think it might sound slightly better.

[ted_b]

Why try it? Because other users have reported audible improvements. There are some reasons to think it might sound slightly better.

I/we didn't say "why try it?".  Hell, why not!  But why do you think it is worth it?  Why do you think it will work to take 16/44 and make it sound better. that's all.  Go for it.  I wait on the sidelines to be impressed and have my wallet pillaged again. 

[jb]

Resampling will be beneficial only if you are using a Kusunoki-style NOS DAC with no reconstruction filter. Oversampling was invented was to raise the Nyquist frequency and simplify the design of the reconstruction filter. So, unless you change or remove the filter, oversampling does nothing positive. Furthermore, if your DAC is a delta-sigma type, it is already doing resampling. Doing additional resampling just adds more DSP and further obscures the audio signal as it was originally recorded. But, if you want to try anyway, get SOX. It has a very good resampler and it's free. Or, if you had Foobar, also free, you could switch between the SOX, SSRC, SRC,and PPHS resamplers and different sample rates in real time.

[firedog]

Resampling thru good software, not "on the fly" may work better. This is the one of the reasons that discs accurately ripped to HD often sound better than the CD itself. Some software may do a better upsampling job than others.

Also, it may reduce jitter produced in the on the fly upsampling. There are clock issues involved in the on the fly processes that are eliminated if the upsampling is done previously. Clock issues are forgotten about by most people who talk about digital reproduction, but they are a source of jitter, and jitter=poorer reproduction.

[jb]

I suggested Foobar and its real-time resampling capabilities because that is the easiest way to compare software resamplers and their myriad configuration options. Foobar will also batch-convert any number of audio files. Since you fancy yourself an expert in the supposed ill-effects of real-time conversion, would you please explain, in detail, how real-time conversion causes jitter?

[bunnyma357]

I'm on a Mac using PureVinyl demo software to upsample semi-on-the-fly, so I can't suggest actual software, but I have had good results upsampling files in software. The differences are subtle, but I believe I hear a slightly more open less harsh top end, that just sounds a little more natural, especially in things like the decay on a cymbal.

I am also planning on getting more hi-rez files, but this improves the collection I already have, since right now my tastes and the available hi-rez music aren't overlapping a lot.

Here is my list of areas where I suspect software upsampling may improve performance, but this is just my conjecture:

1) Method of upsampling - in software you often have choices on how to upsample trading time for quality (Faster, Good, Best), I'm guessing my oversampling DAC is doing it quickly and the software is doing highest quality.

2) PV software loads the file into RAM, so there is much less signal flow between hard drives and over the network before getting the signal out of the Mac. Since my drives and DAC are all on firewire, there is less of a burden on sharing resources.

3) I have a Pro Audio DAC, so as you raise sample rates it drops software features like mixing and signal routing, which may improve sound quality.

4) If I have a system with higher jitter, and send a jittery signal to an oversampling DAC it seems like all the jitter errors would get compounded. By sending a hi-rez software upsampled signal, the DAC doesn't have to uprez, so it is only dealing with the actual jitter.

There are some drawbacks, the interface is clunky, there is a pause between songs as it upsamples and loads into RAM, you have to use iTunes for playlists, etc.  But it has allowed me to use hardware I bought for listening to hi-rez music and digitizing LP's to provide subtle improvement to my redbook CD's as well.


Jim C

[doctorcilantro]

I leave J. River 32bit DSP on at 24/96 as I have a fair amount of native 24/96 material, everything else gets upsampled.

DC

[kyrill]

hi

With the new logitech  Touch and Hiface who accept 24 bit 96+kHz and with my DEQX preamp who accepts 96/24 i am interested as well in especially Firedogs original question to up-sample existing flac files. I have a SB3 and too many files already in .flac format. so how to convert a 16/44.1 flac into a 24/96 format?

I will listen first. maybe the on the fly conversion which happens in hardware in the DEQX sounds the same as when fed a "native" 24/96. Then because of space conditions i better keep my "old" 16/44.1 in hdd

[DSD_Mastering]

All things being equal...   upsampling does nothing to the sound!

As Ted says... some converters have a "sweet-spot" or a "native rate" that has a synergy with the system.

[doctorcilantro]

All things being equal...   upsampling does nothing to the sound!

As Ted says... some converters have a "sweet-spot" or a "native rate" that has a synergy with the system.

Well of course, but as I said, I'm lazy. Now if you can report that ABX results report it is detrimental, then I'll cease and desist.

[Vincent Kars]

Can anyone recommend software that does a good job? Preferably not hundreds of bucks if there is such a thing?

SOX: http://sox.sourceforge.net/