A post was merged into an existing topic: Digital Audio - Frequency and Time Domain Requirements for Audio Reproduction
That makes sense to me. I suspect that you have more experience than I, but I had that same concern when I was building my system.
I chose a unique DAC that does no upampling and in fact doesnāt even have a DAC chip (Lampizator DSD Only DAC). So it was mandatory for me to perform the upsampling and conversion of all PCM to DSD on the server.
To mitigate the concern about the effect of all the extra processing on the server, I use jPlay to create a dual server system. The first PC does all of the heavy lifting while the second, which is connected to the DAC, loafs in āhibernateā mode. Initially, I questioned how ādamageā done in PC 1 could be undone by adding another component to the chain, but I tried it anyway. Iām enjoying truly extraordinary sound. Itās the best Iāve ever heardā¦ whichā¦ doesnāt mean a lot objectively because who knows what Iāve heard 
, but I would love to be able to realistically compare my system to others. Anyway, I donāt have the āitchā to improve my sound anymore. As a fellow audiophile, you know thatās a major achievement!
I recognize that your arrangement offers the same benefits with greater flexibility, but Iām okay with having only one room with the ultimate in sound quality while the remotes offer excellent but more down-to-earth performance.
1 Like
A followup. First, thanks to all for a lively and informative post.
Having returned home from a trip, I had the chance to test-drive HQP last night. I ran with the default settings ā pretty much ā and fed it 16 44.1 files from my library.
I must say that I was impressed, and the SQ was right up there with PureMusic/iTunes, if not better.
If Roon and HQP play well together when the combination is released, as Iām sure they will, Iāll be a lifer.
Now if only there was a way to decipher the settings in HQP for best effect on my system. Not being familiar with all the terms, the option settings are rather overwhelming.
Hi Rob,
In addition to the manual found in the HQP folder there are a couple of CA threads that are very helpful with HQP:
Geoffrey Armstrongās Kickstart guide
3 Likes
I tried HQP once, more than a year before I actually started using it. Initially, I was completely confused by its interface and all the settings seemed very complex, so I went back to using JRiver. But I kept hearing raves about it, so I dove back in.
My experience has been that the 4 drop down lists in the main UI are by far the most important. To oversimplify things to an extreme:
- The first 2 allow you to choose between HQPās upsampling algorithms. There are no right or wrong choices here, itās a matter of what sounds best to you - and which of them your server is powerful enough to run. You can read about others preferences in the links @andybob provided above.
- The last 2 are simple. They select the output sampling rate and whether the output should be PCM or DSD.
Of course there is much more to know, but for me, the above comprises the ā80%ā in the 80/20 rule.
Thanks @andybob I look forward to checking out those pointers youāve provided.
@k6davis Keith, though I havenāt had the opportunity to check out the above links, Iād be interested in what settings youāve chosen. Andā¦ should I be outputting PCM or DSD?
Thanks. Still learninā.
Hi Rob,
Still learning here too !
As to PCM/DSD (which HQP sometimes calls SDM) itās all a matter of how it sounds with your DAC.
Some DACās only accept one or the other, which simplifies things. Some DACs donāt upsample, some upsample to hi res PCM before converting to DSD, some immediately convert etc. etc.
Iād suggest trying 198 and 352.8 kHz PCM and DSD 128.
I have one of those ānewfangledā FPGA DACs that converts everything to DSD (PS Audio Directstream.)
So, does outputting in DSD mean less work for the Directstream? Would outputting PCM cause extra conversions? Or (and I think I know the answer to this), should I just try it to find my own preferences? 
1 Like
One of the problems with services such as TIDAL is that you tend to get the latest version, suffering from the effects of The Loudness War.
With each new remaster, more destructive look-ahead compression will have been employedā¦
The OP was listening to Graveland. Which version?
Regrettably, Graceland remasters have compromised dynamic range; if you manage to get hold of the original US CD youāll hear what I mean.
IMHO we should be comparing like with like. So how do identical files sound via Roon compared to other software?
I have a number of different versions. Iāll have to ensure that weāre comparing the same version, as you say.
@Lars_Backlund I forgot to remind you on my last reply: The original post mentions how I played the exact same track, once through Roon and once through iTunes/PM, with astonishingly different results.
[quote=āRob_Hanson, post:7, topic:5590ā]
I like the idea of sending 192 to compare. Another test would be to simply disable up sampling to see if there is still a difference in SQ. I would imagine that PM/iTunes āuntouchedā might be similar to Roonās delivery. If not, then perhaps PM is adding something.
[/quote]Hi,
Have you had chance to try this yet? I suspect you will not get such āastonishingly different resultsā.
Same track.
Same mastering version?
Hi Rob. Just curious how you can check that ? I find it quite a puzzle.
Roon 44.1
PM upsampled howeverā¦
Tried PM without upsampling?
Iām asking because IME sound quality depends to great extent on what the mastering engineer has been up to, and perceived SQ of different mastering versions differs according the sort of upsampling that is performed during playback.
Hi, allā¦
Iāll certainly post results of testing when I can. Sad to say, life keeps getting in the way of my sitting down for some critical listening.
@Lars_Backlund What you say makes sense. It seems to suggest that each version, each pressing, each remasterā¦ will make a difference as to what sounds best. Upsampling? Straight 44.1? Iām looking forward to a time where I can just sit back and relax to what I perceive is the best sound.
How about truncating everything after āā¦to what I perceive is the best soundā?
