Topic: NEW: SoX Resampling (Read 110811 times)

Matt · « **on:** July 13, 2016, 10:56:44 am »

Hi everyone,

The SoX resampler is now optionally available for all your resampling needs using MC22.

You can turn it on here:
Options > Audio > Settings > Use SoX for resampling

It's using SoX in the highest precision and quality way possible.

We didn't switch the default to SoX yet because the SSRC-based solution we use instrument tests so well.

No configuration options are planned.

Enjoy!

What is SOX?

marko · « **Reply #1 on:** July 13, 2016, 11:25:22 am »

Until MC22 became a thing, I had never heard of SoX.

All of the posts regarding SoX that I have read so far, assume that everyone knows about it and its coolness.
It has the potential to put people off and make them feel excluded.

I feel that it's a reasonably safe bet that I'm not alone.
I've already seen one exchange between Andrew and Hendrik that made think that this was just another audiophile argument waiting to blow up and immediately stopped reading.

Why would I want to turn it on?
Is there any benefit if the only output is a pair of stereo speakers plugged into the audio jack at the the back of the htpc?

RD James · « **Reply #2 on:** July 13, 2016, 11:47:24 am »

What configuration does JRiver consider the "highest quality possible"?
Are you still using linear phase resampling, or are you now using minimum phase?
For the people that know SoX, it seems like they'd probably want this to be configurable. (I'd probably stick to linear phase)

Looking forward to seeing the results of people testing the new resampler though.
For me, the biggest benefit so far has been that SoX handles arbitrary sample rate conversions, while SSRC in JRiver did not.

May I also suggest that you implement this option as a "Resampler: SoX / SSRC" drop-down menu, similar to the "Dither: TPDF / RPDF / None" option, rather than an "Enable SoX" checkbox?
That seems more appropriate for this selection.

Hendrik · « **Reply #3 on:** July 13, 2016, 12:22:08 pm »

Linear Phase, VHQ, Steep Filter, which is the established best mode for general usage.

We do not currently plan to offer a configuration option.

RD James · « **Reply #4 on:** July 13, 2016, 12:31:27 pm »

Quote from: Hendrik on July 13, 2016, 12:22:08 pm

Linear Phase, VHQ, Steep Filter, which is the established best mode for general usage.

Sounds good.

rotho · « **Reply #5 on:** July 14, 2016, 05:52:53 pm »

Here is a question in relation to the problem of mixing different zones in the same playlist (http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=102620.0) :

Can the SoX Resampler handle DSD and be used to mix different audio settings, with and without Bitstreaming, in order to solve the problem described in the above topic ?

Hendrik · « **Reply #6 on:** July 14, 2016, 06:08:28 pm »

Quote from: rotho on July 14, 2016, 05:52:53 pm

Here is a question in relation to the problem of mixing different zones in the same playlist (http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=102620.0) :

Can the SoX Resampler handle DSD and be used to mix different audio settings, with and without Bitstreaming, in order to solve the problem described in the above topic ?

Its just a new audio resampling algorithm, it doesn't change anything how those things interact, sorry.

kr4 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 14, 2016, 07:34:37 pm »

Is there any efficiency in processing achieved by using SOX as opposed to SSRC sample rate conversions? I have had lots of interruptions and rebuffering when down-converting from multichannel DSD128 to 24/176.2 or 24/192 PCM.

JimH · « **Reply #8 on:** July 15, 2016, 12:48:08 am »

Quote from: kr4 on July 14, 2016, 07:34:37 pm

Is there any efficiency in processing achieved by using SOX as opposed to SSRC sample rate conversions? I have had lots of interruptions and rebuffering when down-converting from multichannel DSD128 to 24/176.2 or 24/192 PCM.

No. The problem you're having could be CPU or bandwidth related.

kr4 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 15, 2016, 06:39:56 am »

Quote from: JimH on July 15, 2016, 12:48:08 am

No. The problem you're having could be CPU or bandwidth related.

Bingo. After 2 weeks of frustration, I finally determined that it was network bandwidth issues.

michael123 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 16, 2016, 10:04:56 am »

No option for apodizing filter?
No option to specify the filter per sampling frequency? If we're talking about 'established best mode', linear phase is today preferred for high-resolution streams

SOX btw requires quite a lot of hardware processing, interesting how did you achieve responsiveness especially with the memory play

sorepinky · « **Reply #11 on:** July 16, 2016, 07:26:14 pm »

I do not know whether upsampling is what SoX is supposed to be used for. Downsampling is what I see discussed on the various forums. Nonetheless, while upsampling with SoX from standard CD (ripped to standard compressed FLAC) to 176.4, Windows 10 Task Manager shows MC22 using between 0.2% and 1.5% CPU on a 7 year-old first generation i5 HP desktop [JRMark (version 22.0.8 ): 2785] - and that's with Play from Memory selected (not for sonic reasons) and a couple of PEQ LF filters. With the SoX option unchecked, the numbers are similar. When playing a 192 FLAC (i.e. without any resampling) the numbers are also similar.

I can't tell if I hear a difference in sound quality. Too subjective, but it sounds fine. Some user-configurable options would be nice.

kr4 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 17, 2016, 05:22:09 pm »

Quote from: JimH on July 15, 2016, 12:48:08 am

No. The problem you're having could be CPU or bandwidth related.

Aha. I spoke too soon. I relocated the NAS to the same switch shared by the MC server and it worked immediately.

However:
1. It seems to depend on the DSP settings. With a DSD256 5 channel file converted to PCM and DiracLive, the success depends on the target resolution.
a. Converted to 192/32 or 96/32, there are interruptions and bufferings every 30 seconds or so. Dirac on/off makes no difference.
b. Converted to 176/32 or 88/32, everything plays. Dirac on/off makes no difference.

2. In all cases, the CPU/memory usage seems similar (5-22%, mostly in the teens, and memory usage at 2-4 GB). However, when I look at the individual cores, only 4 are running and 0 and 7 have most of the load. Cores 1,3,5,7 are “Parked.”

3. On the other hand, network behavior varies strangely. In case 1b (good playback), network usage averages 2% but peaks in the 85-100mb/s range. In case 1b (interrupted playback), the average is the same but the peaks are in the 50-60mb/s range. Changing from direct to play from memory changes the network activity pattern but not the peak values.

I do not know what all this means or what may be significant but all these observations are with the same NAS connection described above.

kr4 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 18, 2016, 07:19:28 pm »

OK. In response to my original post here, SoX does make a difference and all playback (tried so far) seems to be fixed.

pschelbert · « **Reply #14 on:** July 19, 2016, 03:46:02 am »

Hi

okay, so its about signal-processing, may be not everybodies topic.
The DAC industry is now offering it in chips and also as a feature several seletable filters in some DACS on the market (reconstruction filters). To design such a filter yourself via JRiver and activate it during playback, what I described would be needed.

clearly I tried a lot of things. Offline to use different filters is no problem. However if you want it fixed in a playback system, since I use JRiver, I would like to just integrate user designed filters (myself).

Otherwise than that, I do not see any need for a different resampler then the one which is built in in MC21.
Actually, if you just want to hear music as you say, there is no need at all for a resampler. The DAC does it all...

Peter

Hendrik · « **Reply #15 on:** July 19, 2016, 03:59:50 am »

We don't plan to add anything as complicated as you describe, sorry.

pschelbert · « **Reply #16 on:** July 19, 2016, 04:20:19 am »

Quote from: Hendrik on July 19, 2016, 03:59:50 am

We don't plan to add anything as complicated as you describe, sorry.

Hi

if you have SOX built in, it may be an option to eanble users to add command line options (like its in lame, the mp3-converter for example). Not so easy to use, but enough.

Peter

marko · « **Reply #17 on:** July 19, 2016, 04:22:38 am »

Peter,

Thank you for your patient and measured (no pun intended) response. I kind of understood that

I'll bow out of here now and leave yourself and Hendrik to figure it out.

-marko

Hendrik · « **Reply #18 on:** July 19, 2016, 04:24:27 am »

Quote from: pschelbert on July 19, 2016, 04:20:19 am

if you have SOX built in, it may be an option to eanble users to add command line options (like its in lame, the mp3-converter for example). Not so easy to use, but enough.

We don't use the SoX command line tool, just the resampling library.

pschelbert · « **Reply #19 on:** July 19, 2016, 04:39:50 am »

Quote from: Hendrik on July 19, 2016, 04:24:27 am

We don't use the SoX command line tool, just the resampling library.

Hi Hendrik

okay, no way to enter parameters then?

Peter

JimH · « **Reply #20 on:** July 19, 2016, 04:42:57 am »

Maybe in version 25.

pschelbert · « **Reply #21 on:** July 19, 2016, 04:59:19 am »

Hi Matt

okay, I will need some patience...

Peter

pschelbert · « **Reply #22 on:** July 19, 2016, 05:06:09 am »

Hi

a more simple solution:

In the menue, add an "expert upsampling" option by an integer: 2x, 4x, which means just inserting zeros.
The upsampling would then do: CD44.1kHz to 88.2kHz or 176.4kHz, 48kHz to 96kHz or 192kHz
This will do the job of getting rid of the DAC-internal filter (mostly)
This will give alising however, but thats no problem (for the experts).
To remove alising: would be easy to just add a filter by the JRiver convolution engine or an external convolver which I use (acourateconvolver). As this is already built in, there would be no change at all.

Then the change would be minimal in the upsampling. Filtering is then up to the user. Every user can then do its filtering as crazy as he wants and you have not to worry about it at JRiver....

Peter

Sanlitun · « **Reply #23 on:** July 19, 2016, 02:14:54 pm »

I found the SoX setting last night after doing the MC 22 install and and have been very pleased with the effects. The big thing for me is being able to at long last change the sound signature of MC, as I have always felt the sound from Audirvana or Foobar to be somewhat more beguiling and fluid.

I generally don't like the idea of upsampling at all, but I am running my 44.1 at higher rates to get a taste and it is a welcome change.

kr4 · « **Reply #24 on:** July 19, 2016, 04:24:55 pm »

I find SoX useful for downsampling multichannel DSD64, DSD28 and DSD256 files to 176.4/192KHz PCM so that I can use Diracive roomEQ. Apparently, SoX makes for more efficient processing than the regular DSP which was often inadequate with my i7 processor.

pschelbert · « **Reply #25 on:** July 21, 2016, 04:25:31 pm »

Hi

to test this, just convert a simple dirac to analog. Then you see what filter is in the path.
Convert the time domain to frequency domain to have the full picture.

You can do that for every sample rate and observe the change.

Peter

ConradT · « **Reply #26 on:** July 22, 2016, 10:50:48 am »

Don't know much about digital filter technology, but I know what sounds better to me. The SOX re-sampling is a significant advance in sound quality in my system. The music flows better without overemphasizing the edges of notes. The bass lines and percussion are much clearer and it sounds more like instruments are actually being played.

A big thank you for implementing this!

PrinterPrinter · « **Reply #27 on:** July 23, 2016, 03:00:06 am »

Quote from: kstuart on July 19, 2016, 11:23:48 am

The upsampling in the recent Schiit multibit DACs is better than anything you can do on PC, so you only want to bypass the DAC if it has poor resampling.

Thanks mate, I have the Yggy and love it - I wonder what effect the SOX thing will have on it - if at all. My instinct is not to mess with the Yggy/Mike's algorithms. Happy to hear from other people's experience.

soundr · « **Reply #28 on:** July 23, 2016, 12:23:14 pm »

the sox resampling is beyond amazing sound thank you jim and the all manegment woooooooow

kstuart · « **Reply #29 on:** July 23, 2016, 09:19:05 pm »

Quote from: PrinterPrinter on July 23, 2016, 03:00:06 am

Thanks mate, I have the Yggy and love it - I wonder what effect the SOX thing will have on it - if at all. My instinct is not to mess with the Yggy/Mike's algorithms. Happy to hear from other people's experience.

If you have the Yggy (lucky you!) then you should definitely have all the Output Format->Sample Rate settings in MC22 set to "No change".

jmschnur · « **Reply #30 on:** July 23, 2016, 09:33:32 pm »

Does upsampling 44 to 96 make sense in this rendition of sox on JR?

AndyU · « **Reply #31 on:** July 24, 2016, 05:26:10 am »

Any chance of also using Sox to support playing back CDs that were recorded with pre-emphasis? This is an issue that applies to a small, but not insignificant, number of early CDs. You'd probably need to have a PREEMPHASIS tag to indicate which tracks to apply this to, and detect it when ripping if possible. I have a few CDs which I am pretty sure were recorded with preemphasis, as they seem to have an unnatural treble boost, but at the time I ripped them I was unaware of the issue. I think sox has a setting that can correctly de-emphasise.

Hendrik · « **Reply #32 on:** July 24, 2016, 11:08:32 am »

Quote from: AndyU on July 24, 2016, 05:26:10 am

Any chance of also using Sox to support playing back CDs that were recorded with pre-emphasis? This is an issue that applies to a small, but not insignificant, number of early CDs. You'd probably need to have a PREEMPHASIS tag to indicate which tracks to apply this to, and detect it when ripping if possible. I have a few CDs which I am pretty sure were recorded with preemphasis, as they seem to have an unnatural treble boost, but at the time I ripped them I was unaware of the issue. I think sox has a setting that can correctly de-emphasise.

SoX Resampling does nothing but resample the audio, we do not use the full SoX tool, just their resampling algorithm. No other features are available to us at this time.

Batosai · « **Reply #33 on:** July 24, 2016, 03:33:26 pm »

Hello,

I'm not that knowledgeable about the internal operations of DAC's but i thought using an ASIO connection through a USB interface it sets the DAC to the correct timing without upsampling if it can support the various playback rates?

I'm using an Pioneer SC-LX87 amp which has ESS SABER32bit Ultra DAC's in it. I have not checked if it does any other funny stuff when receiving the signal from the source but will try to found out. Quite an interesting discussion though

.

Edit: Found a link to DAC http://www.esstech.com/index.php/en/products/sabre-digital-analog-converters/audiophile-dacs/classic-sabre-8-channel-dacs/es9016/

It appears to do:
32bit processing up to 192khz (have only need to upsample low quality files through JRiver when using ASIO)
Digital Filter: fast/slow roll-off frequency (this is an option within the amp, fast just speeds playback affecting speech intelligibility so i have it on slow),
DSP: De-emphasis for 32kHz, 44.1kHz, and 48kHz sampling,
DSP: Programmable Zero detect
DSP: Click-free soft mute and volume control.

Slightly curious 2 of the DSP options as to what they do and whether the amp allows me to set them, last one seems self explanatory though.

Thouston · « **Reply #34 on:** July 27, 2016, 01:11:37 pm »

The new Sox Resampler sounds great. Thanks for implementing it.

JimH · « **Reply #35 on:** July 28, 2016, 01:14:52 am »

Split Sox Sideshow

vr2ch · « **Reply #36 on:** July 28, 2016, 07:43:29 am »

I am using a McIntosh MA7900 integrated amp. Turing on the Sox makes the sound much better, fuller, more lively and feels like coming from a top end CD player.

DDD · « **Reply #37 on:** July 28, 2016, 09:59:42 pm »

I had heard of this a while back and looked into whether JRiver supported it or not, I was a little disappointed to read that at the time it didn't but I liked JRiver enough to just forget about it.

It's nice to see it's finally here, and seems to sound great. Not sure if it's a placebo or what, as I've got an entirely new computer at the same time MC22 was released but the DSD>192kHz PCM downsampling with sox sounds fantastic. DSD is all I resample but this seems like a nice upgrade! Thanks.

Shogun · « **Reply #38 on:** July 29, 2016, 08:43:34 am »

Upgraded to MC 22 (skipped 21) just for the resampling.
One word: Amazing! Thought i tweaked my sound system to the maximum...the effect is beyond placebo.

Keep up the good work!

sorepinky · « **Reply #39 on:** July 29, 2016, 09:24:46 pm »

Comparisons for downsampling from 96kHz to 44.1kHz here: http://src.infinitewave.ca/

... and assuming the graphs to be accurate ...

If you set one graph to "JRiver 18" and the other graph to SoX VHQ Linear Phase, it seems that there are no audible differences between them. Some visible differences between the graphs are either ultrasonic or below the absolute threshold of audibility - namely for the 1kHz tones SoX might appear to compare favourably, however it's all below -140dBFS.

klay · « **Reply #40 on:** July 30, 2016, 07:29:33 pm »

Quote from: Matt on July 13, 2016, 10:56:44 am

Hi everyone,

The SoX resampler is now optionally available for all your resampling needs using MC22.

You can turn it on here:
Options > Audio > Settings > Use SoX for resampling

It's using SoX in the highest precision and quality way possible.

Do we care if all we use V.22 for is watching shows and movies?

Magoo · « **Reply #41 on:** August 01, 2016, 12:35:47 pm »

Does the SOX Resampler work over DNLA?

I have FLAC files and I'm streaming to a PS4 and transcoding to MP3's.

Would love some better SQ

Thanks!

estranged · « **Reply #42 on:** August 02, 2016, 01:35:29 pm »

Hello,

After enabling Sox in audio settings should I go to dsp studio and set some upsampling? Like 44.100 to 176.000. Is this how this should work? Novice here sorry

Thanks.

kstuart · « **Reply #43 on:** August 03, 2016, 11:09:10 am »

Quote from: estranged on August 02, 2016, 01:35:29 pm

Hello,

After enabling Sox in audio settings should I go to dsp studio and set some upsampling? Like 44.100 to 176.000. Is this how this should work? Novice here sorry

Thanks.

No.

SOX is a tool to be used when you need it.

SOX is simply a slightly better sounding conversion for when you need a conversion.

So do not up or down sample unless you need to do so.

Magoo · « **Reply #44 on:** August 05, 2016, 10:31:35 am »

Anyone know? Decided to purchase a Mc22 license!

Quote from: Magoo on August 01, 2016, 12:35:47 pm

Does the SOX Resampler work over DNLA?

I have FLAC files and I'm streaming to a PS4 and transcoding to MP3's.

Would love some better SQ

Thanks!

blgentry · « **Reply #45 on:** August 05, 2016, 10:37:05 am »

I'm pretty sure SoX works anywhere resampling is done. That should include DLNA. MC is pretty centralized in how it processes audio.

Brian.

pschelbert · « **Reply #46 on:** August 05, 2016, 03:17:43 pm »

Hi

I tried it today with MC22.
Works good, however no difference to the old SRC (in sound).

I actually used sample-rate conversion to adjust variable source rates to a fixed DAC-rate. Now my DAC (RME Fireface UFX) can switch to the source samplerate including the audiovero acourateconvolver FIR-filter (I have for each samperate a filterset defined).

I have seen some people believe an upsampling will enhance the sound. I can't follow that claim. The only reason would be if a DAC will work better at a higher rate.

Peter

Matias · « **Reply #47 on:** August 05, 2016, 09:17:48 pm »

It would be so easy to set up parameters in a hidden menu somewhere. It is not nice that you decide not to give the users the option instead forcing us to use what you considered the best setting.

kstuart · « **Reply #48 on:** August 06, 2016, 04:45:50 pm »

Quote from: Matias on August 05, 2016, 09:17:48 pm

It would be so easy to set up parameters in a hidden menu somewhere. It is not nice that you decide not to give the users the option instead forcing us to use what you considered the best setting.

They cannot be expected to give the capability to adjust every parameter involved in audio.

A casual web search of some discussions of SOX indicated audiophiles who were using the same parameter settings that JRiver chose (Linear Phase, VHQ, Steep Filter), so it seems that the choices were not arbitrary.

Remember that those who really care about such tiny differences can obtain SOX and use it offline to convert their files in advance, using whatever settings they like.

Matias · « **Reply #49 on:** August 08, 2016, 07:38:55 am »

Sure we can use it in advance and duplicate our entire music collection in our HDDs... not an elegant solution.
And this DSP already has parameters ready, why not give the tweakers options to tweak for example hidden in that menu where the DSD low pass filter setting is. Really 1 hour of coding and testing. I bought V22 just for this, else I would have stayed behind.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: NEW: SoX Resampling (Read 110811 times)

sorepinky

sorepinky