2. digital
  3. 1106699790

Upsampling. Truth vs Marketing

Has anyone done a blind AB test of the up sampling capabilities of a player? If so what was the result?

The reason why I ask because all the players and converters that do support up sampling are going to 192 from 44.1. And that is just plane wrong.

This would add huge amount of interpolation errors to the conversion. And should sound like crap, compared.
I understand why MFG don't go the logical 176.4khz, because once again they would have to write more software.

All and all I would like to hear from users who think their player sounds better playing Redbook (44.1) up sampled to 192. I have never come across a sample rate converter chip that does this well sonically and if one exist, then it is truly a silver bullet, then again....44.1 should only be up sample to 88.2 or 176.4 unless you can first go to many GHz and then down sample it 192, even then you will have interpolation errors.
izsakmixer

Showing 1 response by izsakmixer

izsakmixer OP
39 posts
 
If an when you got an upsamiling player do you know what the actual upsampled rate is? Is it 192khz or 176, none of you listed it. I know of one product that has upsampling and it goes to 192 and it does sound different, but not better. Just looking at the difference in the recorded waveforms (44.1 and 192) clearly shows interpolation errors. If anyone has means to record WAVE files of the output, I would be happy to analyze. All and all I would have to beleive that if your player sounds better upsampled they must be doing 172. Or could it be that their clock is crap and when you use higher sample rate, jitter is less of an issue?..hum..

A<.
More to discover