APL 3910 owners, has anyone tried APL upsampler?


I placed order today for APL 3910 and Alex offered me to install his new upsampler board too. I choose to go with it but I've asked him to have it installed as switchable option.

I wonder if anyone of you heard his upsampler?

Regards
kaaos

Showing 1 response by germanboxers

Sean, you're probably confusing him with me. My only points on upsampling is that the name "upsampling" is strictly a marketing term, not a technical one. From a technical standpoint it is simply "oversampling". Secondly, oversampling/upsampling by non-integer values to 96kHz or 192kHz results in a slight mathematical imprecision compared to oversampling/upsampling to 88.2kHz or 176.4kHz or other integer multiples of 44.1kHz.

BTW, Alex has chosen a 88.2kHz "upsampling"/oversampling filter for sonic reasons (2x44.1kHz). With this chip he is able to use 88.2/96/176.4/192/211kHz oversampling, but feels 88.2kHz sounds best. I'm not sure I'd be able to tell the difference...I'll trust Alex on this one though.

I guess my biggest gripe with the "upsampling" marketing that has overwhelmed the digital field for the last 4 years is that it was marketed as something new and implied (by virtue of 96/192kHz) that it in some way was related to, or equivalent to, the new DVD-A standard, but for redbook CD's. Maybe it was necessary to give people a reason to accept the superiority of a better designed digital filter? But dCS's "upsampling" chip is not the same as the cheap ones that followed. Unfortunately, way too many of us "buy in" without listening at times. Not all of us certainly, but quite a few. I couldn't even count how many threads I've read that contained sentiment like, "yeah, but it's not an upsampling player, so I'm going with brand x". For others, their ears, or the ears of trusted others, have convinced them that a particular player is to their liking, and if it's an "upsampling" player, this may give them a certain confidence that there are good technical reasons for its superiority. No problem with that, but it's not really accurate.

"Upsampling"/oversampling is not the source of the sonic superiority of some chips. This is simply digital multiplication and is about as basic as it gets. The real magic/technical superiority lies in what happens after the additional bogus sampling data is added. This is where the math and technical complexity is expressed in the chip/digital filter. The merits of any given digital filter are in how well it implements noise shifting, anti-aliasing, etc and ultimately how well it is able to facilitate the reconstruction of the original analog waveform. This is where high mathematics comes into play and IMHO what differentiates the various chips.

I'm not "against" oversampling/upsampling to 96kHz or 192kHz...just think those numbers are chosen for marketing reasons, even though there is a small loss of mathematical precision in doing so. Whether this is audible, I have no idea? I owned and loved the Audio Aero Capitole and it oversamples/upsamples to 192kHz. I think the Swiss Anagram chip that Audio Aero uses is a fantastic and technically sophisticated chip!! I also think their analog section is done well. Unfortunately, the user interface/remote was ridiculously bad, IMO...heck $50 DVD players did this much better. Damn French Company...did so many things so right and then dropped the ball on the easiest part! LOL

Does my "stance" make sense? Preaching to the Choir? Babbling like a Baffoon?

BTW, I just received my APL 3910 from Alex today. It does not have the "Upsampling" chip. First impressions right out of the box without even a warmup were positive, but certainly not earth-shattering. I still have some system setup issues to address and certainly some burn-in time should help. I'm optimistic though.