Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[medman711]

I know I can change sample rates by going to the Output Format part of the DSP Studio, but it looks like I would have to change every song in one format, say 44,100 Hz to whatever sample rate I wanted to try, say 192,000Hz. I don't want to do that. Is there a way to just change one song's sample rate so I can see what it sounds like at different sample rates.

Also if I were to upsample all 44,100s to 192,000, does that permanently alter the songs or can I revert back to their original sample rates?

Thanks,

Richard

[jimmy neutron]

I don't know about applying upsampling to an individual song, but in using upsampling it in no way alters the files. Upsampling (or downsampling) is the method of decoding the files during playback in your case. So you can change the sampling rate as often as you want and be safe in knowing that your songs will remain at their original sampled format. You can, however, change their sample rate permanently, but that involves another method altogether.

Jimmy

[hulkss]

Is there a way to just change one song's sample rate so I can see what it sounds like at different sample rates.

Interesting, I usually want to hear what it sounds like

[glynor]

Also if I were to upsample all 44,100s to 192,000, does that permanently alter the songs or can I revert back to their original sample rates?

It just happens during playback.  The files are untouched.

I don't think there's much of a reason to upsample anything, except for hardware compatibility.  Doing that doesn't increase precision.  It doesn't hurt anything to do, but I'm also pretty sure there's no real benefit.

The main point of the resampling support in the DSP is using it in a "resample things that my sound device can't handle natively" way.  That's why there are the "resample things greater than X and less than Y" controls.

[Frobozz]

I don't think there's much of a reason to upsample anything, except for hardware compatibility.  Doing that doesn't increase precision.  It doesn't hurt anything to do, but I'm also pretty sure there's no real benefit.

I think there may be some reasons to upsample before sending the audio to some DSPs.  Like maybe an EQ or some other DSP may sound slightly better if you send it something upsampled rather than 44.1 kHz.  I've been meaning to read up on that sort of signal processing and also try some listening tests to see if there may be something to that theory.

On the other hand, upsampling everything to 192 kHz puts more of a strain on the computer and can lead to more audio glitches if the computer isn't able to keep up.

[JimH]

On the other hand, upsampling everything to 192 kHz puts more of a strain on the computer and can lead to more audio glitches if the computer isn't able to keep up.

I don't think that's a serious load on any modern PC.

[Frobozz]

I don't think that's a serious load on any modern PC.

Most modern PCs would likely handle it fine.  I have an older AMD Athlon X2 that is more likely to suffer audible glitches if playing 192 kHz than 44.1 or even 88.2 or 96.  Especially if I'm doing other things on the computer while audio is playing and I've got DSPs active.

[Vincent Kars]

Tools like dbPoweramp or SOX allows you to resample to 16/24 and the usual sample rates.
As long as you don't overwrite the original file, it is preserved.

[jimmy neutron]

Up sampling your music from 44 to 96 and more is considered by many to provide a smoother waveform reproduction of the file. This is done because the upper limit filters are pushed further out past the standard 44.1 to 96, etc, thereby reducing ripple effects of the decoded file at the upper limits. Although no information is added to the file when you upsample the added benefit of lowering those ripple effects have an audible difference. It's a small and subtle difference but can easily be perceived if you have revealing gear. I have all my music set to upsample and the difference is an improvement in the air around the instruments in the recordings, and a bit more focus. Just really more like looking out a window, then opening the window to look outside. Things were clear at first but on opening the window and taking the glass away things look a little clearer. Like a said, it's not a huge difference, and really only gets noticed by the more revealing your gear is, but it is there and it is an improvement. Many CD manufactures are including up sampling in their CD players now because of this. I've never noticed that any one of my computers have strained at playing back those higher rates, and neither should anyone else. I will add that it's always better to upsample in hardware than in software. If your DAC has a setting that will allow it to do the up sampling then let it do it. If not then try it in MC and see ow it fares. The quality of upsamping methods will vary from player to player, or hardware maker to hardware maker.

Jimmy

[Vincent Kars]

I will add that it's always better to upsample in hardware than in software.

Are you sure?
Up-sampling in hardware is done by a DSP chip.
Often they are down in precision and in power.
As far as I know, top of the line DSP is 48 bits with a 76 bit accumulator.
PCs can easily use 64 bit or if needed 128 bit float.

The timeslot is limited.
If you play Redbook you have 1/44100 =    0.00002267573696 s to do the calculation.
You need some substantial horsepower to do all the calculations.
I wouldn’t be surprise simple due to its power and precision the PC is far better equipped to do the up-sampling.

[DarkPenguin]

I will add that it's always better to upsample in hardware than in software.

Sooo...  You should upsample only don't?

Edit: I may have combined your post and someone else's into a single position that neither of you took.

[jimmy neutron]

You may be right about upsampling  would be better done in software than in hardware. I don't know as I'm not an engineer, I'm only paraphrasing what I've read on the 'net and in publications. In any event, the OP should try it and see if makes a difference in his system, it certainly would not hurt anything or cause permanent damage. The nice thing about MC is that you can do this by simply pressing a few buttons in the Audio Config menu. Try it. 

Jimmy

[DarkPenguin]

Yep.

[Matt]

Are you sure?
Up-sampling in hardware is done by a DSP chip.
Often they are down in precision and in power.

I agree.

I believe in doing everything you can in software using your computer.

In most cases the hardware just runs code too, but that code has a tiny fraction of the performance available to it.

Modern CPUs are awesome.

[Vincent Kars]

It might explain why in some cases sending up-sampled audio to a DAC sounds better.
One simply defeat the DSP of the DAC.
But as usual, this is completely implementation dependend.
YMMV

[CountryBumkin]

I know you guys are into serious music listening - but my question/interest on this subject is about the audio in movies. Maybe you can help me understand this.
I have a large collection of HD/Blu-ray movies. I did not pay much attention to sampling rates before, but after reading this thread I went into Standard View>Files to see what my stuff is listed at.
It looks like everything I have is showing a sample rate of 48,000 (some have no info displayed).

1) Is this to be expected? Shouldn't some of the high-def movies have a higher sample rate? Is the sample rate data shown in MC coming from the source material (the movie) or this a computer setting thing?

2) One of my client machines only lists a single 48,000Hz Sample Rate, 16 and 24 Bit, in the Computer's Sound Properties. Should I set the sample rate to 48,000 in DSP for all the other higher sample rates? Meaning if a movie has a 96,000 rate will it choke when it tries to play on a computer that only supports 48,000?

I don't really understand the relationship of the sample rate settings in MC to the audio format/rate that is on the movie.  ?

[Trumpetguy]

Almost all movies have 48kHz 24bit audio. Both bluray and dvd. Some movies have 48kHz and 16bit, but that is irrelevant for your question. I have to date never seen movies with other than 48.

Music, on the other hand, has a large range of sample rates, 44.1 (standard CD), 88.2 (2x44.1), 96 (2x48), 172.4 (4x44.1) and 192 (4x48) kHz. The confusing thing is that almost no music material is released in 48kHz, maybe except music dvd/blurays. A lot of music is still released in multiples of 48kHz. Confusing. But this is the reason why you would need all these sample rates. Stick to the native sample rate if possible.

[bebe]

... The quality of upsamping methods will vary from player to player, or hardware maker to hardware maker.

Or the ears and sensibility of the listener. Age and sex matters ...

[jimmy neutron]

Or the ears and sensibility of the listener. Age and sex matters ...

Absolutely! Whether it's "does upsampling make a difference", or "does lossless sound better than a 320k mp3", or "does [insert make/model here] cable sound better than stock/Radio Shack cables"? So many things can make a difference. But I think it's fair to say there are audible differences. But, as has been said here, it really is up to the individual to try it and see if it makes a difference ( for the better, worse, or not ) in his system, and to his ears. Most all these differences can be easily tried on JRiver without any additional purchases. For those that are a bit more adventurous, well....that's another story    . Give it a try is my advice.

Jimmy

[Trumpetguy]

2) One of my client machines only lists a single 48,000Hz Sample Rate, 16 and 24 Bit, in the Computer's Sound Properties. Should I set the sample rate to 48,000 in DSP for all the other higher sample rates? Meaning if a movie has a 96,000 rate will it choke when it tries to play on a computer that only supports 48,000?

If that is the only option you have, you should set your client machine to resample all incoming signals to 48kHz. Being prejudiced here, I would simply assume that the rest of your gear hooked up to that client machine is not super high-end (no offence, and please correct me if I'm wrong)? If it is a standard living room audio setup, I would not be worried at all.

[CountryBumkin]

If that is the only option you have, you should set your client machine to resample all incoming signals to 48kHz. Being prejudiced here, I would simply assume that the rest of your gear hooked up to that client machine is not super high-end (no offence, and please correct me if I'm wrong)? If it is a standard living room audio setup, I would not be worried at all.

This machine is just a small/cheap Acer Revo connected to a Vizo LCD TV via HDMI. I lets me stream movies/TVrecordings to spare bedroom. I was surprised that the computer didn't have more supported formats but so far it seems to be working okay. Since none of my movies show sample rate other than 48,000 I guess there is no need to do anything.

[JimH]

I moved the discussion of Cirlinca to the third party board.