OneHandWaving Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 By the way, an Oddity, I don't know if this is the way it is supposed to be, or if my Computer did it or what, but it put Audirvana Plus 3, as Audirvana Plus 2 in my applications folder next to my copy of Audirvana Plus 2.6.6 [ATTACH=CONFIG]33806[/ATTACH] The 2 simply refers to it being the second Audirvana Plus program in the applications folder. Nothing to do with the version number. Link to comment
Speed Racer Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I've further optimised the audio playback engine Damien, Why, when I set the software to do no upsampling, does it show that A+ 3.0 is sending Red Book content at 24/44.1 instead of 16/44.1? I want my DAC to do all of that, not the software. A+ 2.6 did not do this. Link to comment
DancingSea Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I downloaded 3.0 and gave a listen. It does sound very good. There are positive changes to the overall SQ. But for me, the unappealing high end remains, too shrill for me. I like Amarra 4's more smooth approach. Which is disappointing because of Amarra 4's well documented bugs that A+ seems to overcome. Link to comment
fbczar Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Yep. See above where Damien talks about the audio playback engine, which does not reside in the iZotope upsampling capability. Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile Is it reasonable to assume that most users on this forum think upsampling in IZotope results in sound quality that is superior the audio playback engine? Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile Link to comment
pl_svn Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 ... and even when I set "Limit bitdepth to 24 bit" A+, in the upper left corner, shows 32 as what it is sending to the DAC Qnap HS-264 NAS (powered by an HD-Plex 100w LPS) > Cirrus7 Nimbini v2.5 Media Edition i7-8559U/32/512 running Roon ROCK (powered by a Keces P8 LPS) > Lumin U2 > Metrum Acoustics Adagio NOS digital preamplifier > First Watt SIT 3 power amplifier (or Don Garber Fi "Y" 6922 tube preamplifier + Don Garber Fi "X" 2A3 SET power amplifier, both powered from an Alpha-Core BP-30 Isolated Symmetrical Power Transformer) > Klipsch Cornwall III headphones system: Cirrus 7 > Lumin U2 > Metrum Acoustics Adagio > Pathos Aurium amplifier (powered by an UpTone Audio JS-2 LPS) > Focal Clear headphones Link to comment
Jud Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Is it reasonable to assume that most users on this forum think upsampling in IZotope results in sound quality that is superior the audio playback engine? Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile The audio playback engine is used whether or not you upsample. Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
Jud Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Damien, Why, when I set the software to do no upsampling, does it show that A+ 3.0 is sending Red Book content at 24/44.1 instead of 16/44.1? I want my DAC to do all of that, not the software. A+ 2.6 did not do this. This is not upsampling, it is "zero padding" (filling in the eight least significant bits with zero values), which doesn't change the sound any more than 1.00000000 has a different value than 1. Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
Dreaming Jester Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 By the way, an Oddity, I don't know if this is the way it is supposed to be, or if my Computer did it or what, but it put Audirvana Plus 3, as Audirvana Plus 2 in my applications folder next to my copy of Audirvana Plus 2.6.6 [ATTACH=CONFIG]33806[/ATTACH] It's perfectly normal. The icons are the same, your computer lists A+ 3 as 'A+ 2' in order to not overwrite the older version. '2' is not the version number, rather 'another copy' of the same app. Link to comment
Speed Racer Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 This is not upsampling, it is "zero padding" (filling in the eight least significant bits with zero values), which doesn't change the sound any more than 1.00000000 has a different value than 1. Whatever. Just send it to the DAC in native format if the no oversampling option is selected since that is the intent of the option. Link to comment
RunHomeSlow Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 By the way, an Oddity, I don't know if this is the way it is supposed to be, or if my Computer did it or what, but it put Audirvana Plus 3, as Audirvana Plus 2 in my applications folder next to my copy of Audirvana Plus 2.6.6 [ATTACH=CONFIG]33806[/ATTACH] You should have renamed the 2.6.6 before copying the second with the same name... You can still change them to Audirvana 2 and the already named 2 change it to Audirvana 3 after closing them... then you'll know the version for real :-) If You Got Ears, You Gotta Listen – Captain Beefheart MacMini 2018, 4xi3 3.6GHz, SSD, 20Gb, macOS Sonoma > Audirvana Origin > Wyred DAC2 DSD Special Edition > Proceed AMP2 > Focal Cobalt 826 Signature Series > Audirvana Remote > iPhone 13 Link to comment
fbczar Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 The audio playback engine is used whether or not you upsample. Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile Well then, do most users think the result is better using upsampling or not in terms of ultimate sound quality? I assume many are just not willing to go through the process upsampling entails so Damien's tweeting matters to them. Since I do upsample May I assume the only possible difference in sound in 3.0 will relate to Tidal Masters played through the MQA process? Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile Link to comment
RunHomeSlow Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Well then, do most users think the result is better using upsampling or not in terms of ultimate sound quality? I assume many are just not willing to go through the process upsampling entails so Damien's tweeting matters to them. Since I do upsample May I assume the only possible difference in sound in 3.0 will relate to Tidal Masters played through the MQA process?Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile Whatever you did before 3 or anybody else (upsampling or not) will be upgraded in sound quality says Damien. Tidal or Not, MQA or Not, Quobuz or Not :-) If You Got Ears, You Gotta Listen – Captain Beefheart MacMini 2018, 4xi3 3.6GHz, SSD, 20Gb, macOS Sonoma > Audirvana Origin > Wyred DAC2 DSD Special Edition > Proceed AMP2 > Focal Cobalt 826 Signature Series > Audirvana Remote > iPhone 13 Link to comment
fbczar Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Whatever you did before 3 or anybody else (upsampling or not) will be upgraded in sound quality says Damien. Tidal or Not, MQA or Not, Quobuz or Not :-) That would be great. Always looking for an improvement, but all the tweaking in Audirvana and Dirac can take its toll. Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile Link to comment
Rezseeker Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I downloaded 3.0 and gave a listen. It does sound very good. There are positive changes to the overall SQ. But for me, the unappealing high end remains, too shrill for me. I like Amarra 4's more smooth approach. Which is disappointing because of Amarra 4's well documented bugs that A+ seems to overcome. I'd look at tweaking Audirvana's izotope settings to your taste, rather than chucking it. Note, the settings affect one another. Also check if you have Direct Mode enabled and if you're in Mode 1 or 2. The following may not be the settings you need, but it might make you hear a difference and give you a starting point for further changes iZotope parameters: Steepness 120 Filter max length 1,500,000 Cutoff freq 1.00 Anti-alisaing 200 pre-ringing 0.40 Link to comment
fbczar Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I'd look at tweaking Audirvana's izotope settings to your taste, rather than chucking it. Note, the settings affect one another.Also check if you have Direct Mode enabled and if you're in Mode 1 or 2. The following may not be the settings you need, but it might make you hear a difference and give you a starting point for further changes iZotope parameters: Steepness 120 Filter max length 1,500,000 Cutoff freq 1.00 Anti-alisaing 200 pre-ringing 0.40 Thanks for taking the time to be helpful. I have been tweeking Audirvana for a while and have begun to understand the filter interactions. Although I am jealous of the pre-designed filters in HQPlayer. If Damien could decide a way to toggle between several custom settings it would really be helpful. Imagine if you could design a few different settings and switch between them with your iPad? Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile Link to comment
Jud Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Well then, do most users think the result is better using upsampling or not in terms of ultimate sound quality? I assume many are just not willing to go through the process upsampling entails so Damien's tweeting matters to them. Since I do upsample May I assume the only possible difference in sound in 3.0 will relate to Tidal Masters played through the MQA process? Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile *The improved audio engine is used if you upsample or if you don't.*. So that is a sonic difference for you, entirely aside from the Tidal capability. (And yes, it helps to improve Tidal playback too.) Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
AudioDoctor Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Freddie Mercury and Bowie are sounding damned good right now, thanks Damien! No electron left behind. Link to comment
AudioDoctor Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Well then, do most users think the result is better using upsampling or not in terms of ultimate sound quality? I assume many are just not willing to go through the process upsampling entails so Damien's tweeting matters to them. Since I do upsample May I assume the only possible difference in sound in 3.0 will relate to Tidal Masters played through the MQA process? Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile What huge process does up sampling entail? No electron left behind. Link to comment
Jud Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 What huge process does up sampling entail? Playing with settings other than the defaults can be fun for some, but a bother for others. Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
AudioDoctor Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Playing with settings other than the defaults can be fun for some, but a bother for others. Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile I suppose, I just selected the 2x upsampling and left it at that. No electron left behind. Link to comment
fbczar Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 If have followed Jud and others as they have worked their way through Audirvana's many possibilities. If there is frustration it relates to the fact that all the Filter settings in Audirvana's iZotope engine are interactive with each other and they are also very equipment dependent. The results are rewarding, but you have to love tinkering. Link to comment
DancingSea Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 I'd look at tweaking Audirvana's izotope settings to your taste, rather than chucking it. Note, the settings affect one another.Also check if you have Direct Mode enabled and if you're in Mode 1 or 2. The following may not be the settings you need, but it might make you hear a difference and give you a starting point for further changes iZotope parameters: Steepness 120 Filter max length 1,500,000 Cutoff freq 1.00 Anti-alisaing 200 pre-ringing 0.40 Thanks for this. I was listening to James Vincent McMorrow's "Get Low" via Tidal HiFi. In my system, the bass is quite distorted using A+ 3. I reverted back to the factory systems, same thing - unlistenable. The Tidal App, and Amarra for Tidal both have no distortion. Not crazy about either app, but there's no distortion/ clipping... A+ 3 may just not be right for my system. I don't want to have to fuss too much with the settings... Link to comment
Jud Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 If have followed Jud and others as they have worked their way through Audirvana's many possibilities. If there is frustration it relates to the fact that all the Filter settings in Audirvana's iZotope engine are interactive with each other and they are also very equipment dependent. The results are rewarding, but you have to love tinkering. The filter settings being interactive is the way filtering works and therefore unfortunately can't be avoided. Same for at least some of the dependence on equipment, though one of my considerations in choosing a DAC is that I can feed it a signal upsampled in A+ and not have the DAC impose its own digital filtering. Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
rickca Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 When I upgraded to A+ V2 I think it came with a 3 month free trial of Tidal Hifi which I never used because I prefer Qobuz. Damien, is that offer still good or has it expired? Now that A+ V3 has an MQA decoder, I would like to give Tidal another try. If it is still good, can you please remind me how to activate the A+ TIDAL Hifi coupon? Pareto Audio AMD 7700 Server --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs i7-6700K/Windows 10 --> EVGA Nu Audio Card --> Focal CMS50's Link to comment
Speed Racer Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 The filter settings being interactive is the way filtering works and therefore unfortunately can't be avoided. Same for at least some of the dependence on equipment, though one of my considerations in choosing a DAC is that I can feed it a signal upsampled in A+ and not have the DAC impose its own digital filtering. And I chose my DAC because of how it sounds with its own special digital filter. I want software to feed as original signal as it can to my DAC and let it do its thing in real time. You guys give iZotope too much credit anyway. I didn't like how it sounded when I used a DAC in NOS mode compared to what the DAC did natively. And that was a $250 DAC. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now