INTERACT FORUM
More => Old Versions => JRiver Media Center 22 for Windows => Topic started by: 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? (http://sox.sourceforge.net/Docs/FAQ)
-
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?
-
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.
-
Linear Phase, VHQ, Steep Filter, which is the established best mode for general usage.
We do not currently plan to offer a configuration option.
-
Linear Phase, VHQ, Steep Filter, which is the established best mode for general usage.
Sounds good.
-
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 (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 ?
-
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 (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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
OK. In response to my original post here, SoX does make a difference and all playback (tried so far) seems to be fixed.
-
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
-
We don't plan to add anything as complicated as you describe, sorry.
-
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
-
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
-
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.
-
We don't use the SoX command line tool, just the resampling library.
Hi Hendrik
okay, no way to enter parameters then?
Peter
-
Maybe in version 25.
-
Hi Matt
okay, I will need some patience...
Peter
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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!
-
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.
-
the sox resampling is beyond amazing sound thank you jim and the all manegment woooooooow :o
-
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".
-
Does upsampling 44 to 96 make sense in this rendition of sox on JR?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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 :D.
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.
-
The new Sox Resampler sounds great. Thanks for implementing it. :)
-
Split Sox Sideshow (http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=106218.0)
-
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.
-
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.
-
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! :)
-
Comparisons for downsampling from 96kHz to 44.1kHz here: http://src.infinitewave.ca/ (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.
-
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?
-
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!
-
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.
-
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.
-
Anyone know? Decided to purchase a Mc22 license!
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!
-
I'm pretty sure SoX works anywhere resampling is done. That should include DLNA. MC is pretty centralized in how it processes audio.
Brian.
-
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
-
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. :(
-
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.
-
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.
-
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!
I'd also really like to know the answer to this. Resampling over DLNA did not work in MC21 (despite the user interface giving the impression it should). My renderer cannot play files over 96K.
-
I'd also really like to know the answer to this. Resampling over DLNA did not work in MC21 (despite the user interface giving the impression it should). My renderer cannot play files over 96K.
Looks like there are problems with DLNA and MC22, so will postpone upgrading until it is resolved.
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=106383.0 (http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=106383.0)
-
Try using SOX on MC22 to resample my flac files from 16/44.1 into 24/176.4 with very high quality sample. The result is smoother and more liquid top end.
-
I can see the point when it comes to downsampling, but I canīt see the point doing this in real time. Why not just use a stand-alone resampler and resample the audio files or convert them if needed?
When it comes to upsampling I donīt see the point at all. Could anyone explain whatīs the point with upsampling? (Upsampling in the DAC is another matter)
-
I can see the point when it comes to downsampling, but I canīt see the point doing this in real time. Why not just use a stand-alone resampler and resample the audio files or convert them if needed?
Because then I would have to store multiple copies of the same files to accommodate different needs at different times.
When it comes to upsampling I donīt see the point at all. Could anyone explain whatīs the point with upsampling? (Upsampling in the DAC is another matter)
I'll let someone else take a shot at this.
-
I have a question about re-sampling 44.1khz/16bit to something like 88.2khz or 176.4khz 24bit.
There are many arguments about whether there is a difference, and I can see that a lot of it depends on the what the DAC is doing after it receives the data stream, but that is under the assumption that there are no differences being made to the data besides the re-sampling.
The problem is, I use JRiver for volume leveling and also as a 6ch active xo (using the parametric eq), so the output is obviously not the same as the original data. When playing something like redbook 44.1khz/16bit, would it make sense to use the new sox feature to re-sample to something like 176.4khz first, before JRiver applies the xo filters and volume leveling? My mind seems to say yes, but I may not have a good understanding of the effects of the application of filters on extra bits (64bit in jriver internally) vs higher sample rates. Please enlighten me on this subject. Thank you!
-
Split some posts about upsampling. Please don't start off topic discussions here.
-
i dont know if somebody already reported this. :)
today i started to try the new sox upsampling. im upsampling from 44.1 to 48. and after a bunch of songs i noticed that the position bar at the top of standard view was already (or stil) halfway the song altough a new song was starting to play. so i tested a bit.
with sox on, after 20.12 minutes of music, the position bar was already 15 seconds in the next song still playing the previous song, before the next song started.
this does not happen when disabling sox for upsampling.
for when its important.
buffer is 6 seconds
not playing from memory
the files are played local from hd
latest build 22.0.18
playback to asio
did i forget something :)
:)
gab
-
I'm not sure this is the best place to post this, but Matt asked for folks with DSD256+ devices to try the new PCM2DSD settings last year and I never heard back when I reported problems with my Auralic Vega DAC. The iFi DSD DAC I have works fine with 4XDSD via ASIO but the Vega just times out. Who at JRiver can I ping about this problem?
Does anyone have an Auralic Vega? After offering units with DSD256 Auralic claims you can't use MC but need Foobar which is a very confusing statement to me.
-
I'm not sure this is the best place to post this, but Matt asked for folks with DSD256+ devices to try the new PCM2DSD settings last year and I never heard back when I reported problems with my Auralic Vega DAC. The iFi DSD DAC I have works fine with 4XDSD via ASIO but the Vega just times out. Who at JRiver can I ping about this problem?
Does anyone have an Auralic Vega? After offering units with DSD256 Auralic claims you can't use MC but need Foobar which is a very confusing statement to me.
Starting a new thread would be best.
-
Hi, i just tried sox and result is very good...btw, i prefer not to upsample or downsample, but convert flac into wave at same frequency with convolution filter inside (audiolense)
I guess Sox sholud work also in change format (when checked obviously)...or not?
In normal playing otherwise should not affect sound....right???
-
I find my DAC performs better at 352kHz (both on paper and subjectively) so I'm happy to report SoX is a pleasure here with my Vega DAC.
Need to get Audiiolense out of the box, glad to hear you are enjoying it Guido (for now major room treatments working great).
-
I use Audiolense also for active crossovering...it works great...just an advice if you want to use it try Truetime domain with 0 dB max correction boost
My DAC is NOS ethernet DANTE (Focusrite rednet2) not supporting greater than 192 Khz and DSD (i would now try dsd-pcm conversion)
-
Is SOX used for PCM to DSD on the fly conversions or are you still using your own engine?
-
Thanks for adding the sox resampler option.
Personally I prefer a gentler slope of the filter than the steep one used. In sox terms it would be 95% (of the bandwidth) or even 91%.
How about adding also an option to to allow aliasing? 91% with aliasing sounds nice.
-
Hi all,
would it be possible to add full-scale SoX resampling options just like in Foobar?
(http://jyxo.info/uploads/77/776a7e35d3f96f8cbef0b1c989d7d82cdb898041.png)
(http://jyxo.info/uploads/91/91ee003166a0b90416a5dec6e51bb16e26932c3d.png)
That is pretty much the only thing JRiver is missing over Foobar (and that's why I am 'forced' to use Foobar as of now for audiophile listening). I have been waiting for JRiver to implement something like this for quite some time... and therefore hope you can get it done sometime in the future!
Thank you very much in advance for your consideration! :)
-
I always try to stay out of topics like this... but audiophile listening with upsampling??
I speak for all the musicians, composers, mixing engineers (post and pre) etc, like I am.
We create music and deliver good quality mediums. 44.1 kHz 16 bit for normal CD's as the medium cannot go higher.
Why up/down sampling this I don't get. EQing I do get, as everybody's amp and speakers sound different. Pro Studio's tend to
over compress the music is past time (I hope so..), and deliver a flat sound of the mix. So if you want
to hear it at home, as we heard and created it for you, buy a good audio system that doesn't color the sound and play the music flat.
If you don't like that, use EQ to pump up that bass.. whatever you like.
But upsampling won't make anything better, you are just destroying our creations lol
Like mp3s, creating a music CD mp3 album of around 100 MB, that we barely could fit on a 740 MB medium. . .
Or was it created only to make a download easier from the internet or to put more on our Hard Disks.
The sad thing is that most people don't even hear the difference between the mp3 or Flac or Wav audio files.
Studios that create modern music, rarely go over 12000 Hz with the mix, as most of listeners don't hear higher frequencies.
This is a fact.
You can't even EQ those higher frequencies, by putting the dB slider up. What isn't there, can't be added. Simple.
Classical music is totally different, higher harmonies etc, just put the orchestra in a nice audiophile room
and record it straight to pure audio bluray, dsd whatever you want..easyyy.. but even that, some guys want to resample ??
Oh yes, I had to stay on topic... lol
I will try Sox, I feel so sad.
-
Ninouchka,
Brilliant post. Thank you.
Jim
-
But upsampling won't make anything better, you are just destroying our creations lol
I am not an advocate of upsampling but I do not believe it is destructive.
-
I speak for all the musicians, composers, mixing engineers (post and pre) etc, like I am.
Sorry mate you do not speak for me.
I have worked on the technical side in top end studios in London for the past 30 years.
But I do not live in a perfect world and there is no such thing as a perfect DAC.
In order to improve the accuracy of digital to analogue conversions designers have been up-sampling digital audio within their DACs for years.
I think SoX is just another way of trying to improve the digital conversion process and I would certainly not dismiss its results.
-
Sorry mate you do not speak for me.
I have worked on the technical side in top end studios in London for the past 30 years.
But I do not live in a perfect world and there is no such thing as a perfect DAC.
In order to improve the accuracy of digital to analogue conversions designers have been up-sampling digital audio within their DACs for years.
I think SoX is just another way of trying to improve the digital conversion process and I would certainly not dismiss its results.
Brilliant post. Thank you.
-
This is the interface of Resampler-V, a free foobar plug-in. It has parameters to tweak and graphics showing the changes. Just brilliant.
Why can't we have this in JRiver too??
(http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q39/mreccius/Capturar_zps28n5m6ra.png)
-
Interesting discussion. But maybe you should start with explaining what it is and the benefits with PCM and DSD I could achive and not least how, in case there is more to do than ticking the box.
I'm just a user and not an engineer...
-
Interesting discussion. But maybe you should start with explaining what it is and the benefits with PCM and DSD I could achive and not least how, in case there is more to do than ticking the box.
I'm just a user and not an engineer...
Are you referring to the entire feature? Or just the post before yours?
If you are referring to the feature as a whole, then it is definitely a case of "if you are not already interested, then you do not need it".
It is something requested by a few people, with some very specific needs.
-
Bummer, I finally bought JRiver because I read that it added SOX. And it did but...
...after installing it now, I find it is only the base SOX implementation. That ain't bad for many folks. However, the full range of SOX functions can be of real benefit to many others.
In an earlier post, IOVH and others present the range of settings that I also can tap into when using FB2k. It helps to make the system continuously enjoyable for 15, even 20 hours non-stop. I have never been able to achieve this with JRiver's typical PCM implementation no matter how much I wanted it and neither have friends of mine who I thought I'd surprise with the new SOX feature.
Still, kudos for going the extra mile in adding basic SOX, which will be really good for many. Please consider adding the other SOX options a "relative" priority and, when it happens, I will happily break the news to the rest of the gang.
For now, I'll hold on to Fb2k for PCM ...but use JRiver for easier DSD playback, on which it does have many charms now 8)
-
Hi
I would like to have it. Just to circumvent the internal DAC filter. SOX would replace it, where I could control it by the advanced parameters.
If it could be implemented I would be glad. However JRiver is a great tool as is.
Peter
-
Several user requests for +1, now JRiver please do your part and add the parameters. Tks!
-
Sorry newbie question and just upgraded to MC22 on Win10.
Have SoX enabled and formatted in DSP output to 2X DSD raw AISO. All PCM formats works good outputting to Mytek Stereo 192 DSD Mastering DAC with latest firmware version converting all PCM files properly to 2x DSD but all DSD64 files are not converting to DSD128.
I saw the same question on MC19 thread but didn't see the answer what I need to do tol convert all DSD files to 2x DSD in realtime.
Thanks.
-
Bump.
Anybody?
Thanks,
Ki
-
As far as I know, the SoX resampler isn't used for DSD conversions (e.g. PCM to DSD or DSD64 to DSD128). Only PCM conversions (e.g. PCM to PCM or DSD to PCM) use the SoX resampler.
-
Thanks for your response.
I'll start a new thread with the question.
Ki
-
I am using a Theta Gen VIII dac. SoX resampling isn't a "clean" sounding as not using it in my set-up. I tried it for SACD to PCM conversion. Any suggestions? Sounds seems to get kind of flat.
-
I am using a Theta Gen VIII dac. SoX resampling isn't a "clean" sounding as not using it in my set-up.
Any suggestions?
Disable the Sox resampling option. . . :)
Spike
-
Disable the Sox resampling option. . . :)
Spike
I have. I'll try again at later date if more options become available.
-
Matt,
Don't make SoX the default yet. I think the current MC SRCC method sounds better than the current implementation of SoX. It is hard to subjectively characterize the difference but the SRCC method sounds more natural, relaxed whereas SoX causes some slight irritation that seems to build up over extended listening that happens when there is distortion present. It is subtle but nevertheless noticeable when you switch back to SRCC from SoX. You guys have any test data on these two methods?
PS: I am not up sampling but just letting MC downsample DSD to 176kHz.
-
I've been using SoX resampling for some months now and there's absolutely nothing wrong with the sound when resampling any FLAC - be it 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96 or 192 - to 176.4. It sounds extremely crisp and clean to me. Then again, there is no way to listen to SoX in isolation from a complete sound system, its environment or my mood, so that perceived clarity probably has very little to do with the resampling algorithm - and I wouldn't claim to hear resampling differences buried deep below the noise floor of any sound system and beyond the threshold of human hearing anyway! ;D
-
I've been using SoX resampling for some months now and there's absolutely nothing wrong with the sound when resampling any FLAC - be it 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96 or 192 - to 176.4. It sounds extremely crisp and clean to me. Then again, there is no way to listen to SoX in isolation from a complete sound system, its environment or my mood, so that perceived clarity probably has very little to do with the resampling algorithm - and I wouldn't claim to hear resampling differences buried deep below the noise floor of any sound system and beyond the threshold of human hearing anyway! ;D
I didn't listen under double blind conditions so, yes, I am skeptical of my own perception. And you are right about the noise floor and our hearing threshold. Still, I thought a heard a difference when I turned SoX off after a day of listening to it but I can't be sure. I only installed MC22 a day ago and will continue trying SoX but I think it wise for JRiver not to be too hasty to make it the default just yet.
-
I'd like to see more high-quality upsampling options, e.g. minimum phase apodizing. I have an R2R non-oversampling DAC, and these options are very welcome, they replace the average oversampling that 90% of DACs have. Enjoying greatly the high-quality upsampling options that other software vendors have implemented, be nice to see JRiver do the same. High-quality upsampling audio for videos would be a dream come true.
-
Simple request.
Can you add a checkbox in SoX to either enable or disable de-emphasis?
Also,
Are the default setting using dither, and if so, can it be disabled/enabled as a checkbox?
thanks
-
Dither can be disabled under Tools-Options-Audio-Advanced.
-
We only use SoX for pure resampling, it does not perform de-emphasis, dithering, or any other sort of audio procesing.
Dithering is implemented in Media Center itself, and unrelated to SoX, but you should really never turn Dithering off either way.
-
Why the need to dither with 16 bit?
-
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!
I am thankful that they have integrated Sox(it performs well, , ). but I have always found statements such as the one above "sounds more like instruments" ...dubious.(we're talking about *minute* (http://src.infinitewave.ca)... differences between two high performing SRC algorithms) I know this isn't hydrogen audio, but it would be nice if claims came with proof *especially* when said claims run counter to current knowledge. /spiel
-
Correct me if I'm wrong. In my configuration -DNLA over powerline to my DSD dac- sound comes out exactly identical, to my ears, whether Sox is on or ticked off. I figured when going DNLA to the renderer no Sox can be applied huh?
-
I am completely taken by the upsampling in MC22. I have never like upsampling in previous versions but in a speaker setup. But the current MC22+ifi Nano iDSD is very addictive. Interestingly, I do not like the SoX option. I also do not like the upconversion to DSD or 2xDSD. With the native upsampling, I feel I am getting a more punchy and clear sound. Another parameter of fidelity in my books, is recreating the recoding venue ambience and with 44.1K upsample to 352KHz I feel the soundstage is pretty three - dimensional with good depth. This is very very good.
-
Does the change take place instantly or restart/next track has to be played?
-
Playback has to be stopped for the change to take affect.
-
I am completely taken by the upsampling in MC22. I have never like upsampling in previous versions but in a speaker setup. But the current MC22+ifi Nano iDSD is very addictive. Interestingly, I do not like the SoX option. I also do not like the upconversion to DSD or 2xDSD. With the native upsampling, I feel I am getting a more punchy and clear sound. Another parameter of fidelity in my books, is recreating the recoding venue ambience and with 44.1K upsample to 352KHz I feel the soundstage is pretty three - dimensional with good depth. This is very very good.
kbkaran I'd be interested to know more as to why you prefer the standard resampling vs SoX. I too have a similar setup and do not usually resample but I find it handy for background listening while working and using the iNano. Crossfading and Volume leveling work great no matter what file format is being used when shuffling tunes... This is not my main rig and haven't' done much A/B comparisons (Wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway on this system....Vintage Akai amp with Old Bose 601's so...It sounds nice but Imaging/Soundstage is very poor...Mostly due to the speakers...) I'll play some more with this though using headphones when time allows...Or on my main rig...