In Reply to: RE: PCM to DSD conversion posted by fmak on December 18, 2015 at 02:01:04:
Indeed, I am replacing no processing in the PC followed by PCM processing built into the SABRE chip with HQPLayer processing in the PC followed by the DSD128 processing (and volume control) in the SABRE chip. The actual multibit analog to digital conversion in the SABRE chip and I/V, and analog output circuitry remains the same. Why the HQPlayer processing is better is not something that I understand, because the processing by HQPlayer and the SABRE chip are both proprietary. I just go on what I hear. Others have done measurements, albeit with different DACs that show the HQPlayer approach is better.
Lower bit rate PCM (up to 96KH) is also improved by upsampling to 176.4 or 192, and would probably sound better if upsampled more, e.g. 352.8, 384 or, better 705.6 or 768. But my DAC only goes up to 192 in PCM mode.
Another benefit of the HQPlayer over the Mytek is that it comes with a bunch of filters to play with, whereas the Mytek offers only a few.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: PCM to DSD conversion - Tony Lauck 12/18/1508:15:41 12/18/15 (8)
- HQPlayer processing is better is not something that I understand - fmak 12:20:34 12/18/15 (7)
- RE: HQPlayer processing is better is not something that I understand - Mercman 12:37:14 12/18/15 (6)
- Filters and Conversion Methods - fmak 23:38:45 12/18/15 (0)
- RE: HQPlayer processing is better is not something that I understand - Tony Lauck 12:59:21 12/18/15 (4)
- RE: HQPlayer processing is better is not something that I understand - Mercman 13:01:53 12/18/15 (3)
- RE: HQPlayer processing is better is not something that I understand - Tony Lauck 13:12:16 12/18/15 (2)
- RE: HQPlayer processing is better is not something that I understand - Mercman 13:18:20 12/18/15 (1)
- ASIOs - fmak 23:41:08 12/18/15 (0)