2. digital
  3. 974949609

Upsampling and Stereophile

Last summer there were several threads here on Audiogon about digital upsampling and over sampling (a couple long and heated), but the opinion(s) of the audio press were conspicuously absent. In the Dec. 2000 issue of Stereophile, page 3, John Atkinson, has an editorial explaining their position on this in his "As We See It" column, page 3. I encourage everyone interested in the subject to look up the article. I have excerpted the following quotes that I think sums up Stereophile's opinion, and that may pique your interst: (1) "....the audio industry has settled on an 8X-oversampling ratio, the 44.1 kHZ CD data being converted to a 352.8 kHZ datastream before D/A conversion." (2) "no matter how good these upsampling products can sound-- and the dCS, Bel Canto, and MSB products indeed sound excellent-- there is no conceptual difference between them and traditional CD playback systems. I am now convinced that the sonic differences we have heard and reported on are merely due to the different choices in digital filters made by the designers of these products." (3) "In the meantime don't buy a digital product because it has "24/96" emblazoned on its front panel. Buy it because it makes your CDs sound great". Cheers. Craig.
garfish

Showing 5 responses by joe_coherent

joe_coherent
130 posts
 
Garfish, I understand that 24/96 players from, for instance Ayre and Muse read and decode 24/96 code from audio DVDs from Chesky, Classic Records, etc.
joe_coherent
130 posts
 
Garfish, that a product has "24/96 emblazoned" does not mean it upsamples. I don't believe in upsampling yet I have a 24/96 product and I definitely, definitely recommend 24/96.
joe_coherent
130 posts
 
Thanks Rcprince. I think we're pretty much on the same page. I'd be interested in hearing more about the Audio Logic to the SCD-1.
joe_coherent
130 posts
 
My integrated CD/DVD payer (Muse 9) definitely passes a 24/96 signal through the decoder. The sound of 24/96 discs is better than all except the most astounding regular CDs. Upsampling on the other hand does not have theoretical advantages. I recommend the white paper in the Muse site or the recent Stereophile article. In any event, the quality of the analog stage is more important than the above considerations. I believe a good CD player with good parts where they count, will in most cases sound better even with regular CDs, than a cheap DVD player at 24/96. Likewise, the sound of an upsampling DAC or CD player is more likely to be affected by its analog stage than by the upsampling itself.
joe_coherent
130 posts
 
Rcprince, thank you, interesting thoughts. My own sense is that the analog domain (in a digital player), and the recording and production have a much bigger effect in sound quality than the word length and the sampling rate (once you are above redbook CD). From listening to 24/96 material in my Muse, I do get a sense that a more quiet background can be achieved (i.e. dynamic range) than in CDs, but the differences are smaller between a good regular CD and a 24/96 DAD than between a good CD and a badly recorded/produced CD. My opinion on vynil, by the way, is that unless you spend $30K or more you will be hearing the groove, the wow and the flutter, etc, and that it is definitiely not worth it.
More to discover