Thank you for the input Joe. I am still on the fence about HQ Player. It sounds like a good product and certain good if someone likes to tweak. I guess I am at the point in my life where I am getting sick of constantly tweaking :)…
One honest question though is if the main goal is to get the improvements of the DSD sound from my PCM downloads and CD rips and comparing to up-converting. I can almost always hear the difference, dynamics, clarity, etc., in DSD versus PCM, so why not simply up-convert?
If I understand correctly (which again I may not), HQP is for on the fly up-sampling, correct? I know it can also apply filtering, etc., but it really is more or less for on the fly. Please tell me if I am not understanding this at all at this point :)…
So that brings me back to why not simply up-convert the files and then simply play them back through the DAC as DSD files? JRivers seems to do a very good job of up-converting files. I do hear a difference in comparing the original versus an up-converted file. Of course I understand the storage considerations, The up-converted files take up a ton more storage space. But if this is not an issue, is there a down fall to this way of thinking.
Again, input and opinions are welcomed and very much appreciated.
All DACs up-sample to their native resolution. The W4S will up-sample all music internally to 352/384, when it up-samples it also applies basic FIR filters, the sound you get from the DAC is a matter of how those filters are applied to the up-sampling. DSD is sort of the same, the DAC won’t apply it’s own filter is you give it a DSD file.
Using HQplayer you can use different filters, some that would not be possible on your DAC as the processing power to use the filter is more than the tiny chip on the DAC can manage. So in theory you are able to apply better filters in HQplayer than in the DAC. When you give the DAC an already processed up-sampled file it doesn’t apply it’s own filters, so you can bypass that step.
You could up-sample everyone of your files and keep them permanently on your HD, but that would take time and space and if you decided you want to use a different up-sampling method you have to redo it all over again.
Highly recommend one try HQPlayer and hear the difference.
On my system, it’s night and day. I can’t recommend it enough. For me the improvement was as great as going from a Benchmark DAC2 to an Auralic Vega. From my experience, it’s the best bang for the buck in high end audio.
Main reasons to prefer dynamic up-sampling as against stored conversion are access to HQP’s various filters and modulators and ability to use it with Tidal content. I’m also happy to avoid the time and storage associated with conversion.
Hello, another first poster here. I’d like to get in touch with bibo01 (Gianluca) as well regarding the purchase of HQP - or maybe he can contact me…
Thanks, andrej
In my system I can only upsample to DSD 128 over DOP (love the xtr-2s filter) as I have a MAC mini and DAC which tops out at DSD 256. But the sound difference is hugely noticeable.
Best tweak I’ve purchased for my system - from what others say as well the developer continually improves the product. All in all, it’s a no brainer.
Direct connection is fine for a trial. If you decide you like HQPlayer, I would strongly recommend that you move to sending data over the network to a NAA receiver - something HQPlayer supports. One such NAA receiver is the Sonore microRendu and the other versions of this product. There is also the SoTM versions, same functionality.
In my experience when I moved from connecting to my mac mini directly (via a W4S reclocker), the sound improved quite a bit when using a microRendu, possibly due to the isolation it accomplishes.
The other issue you want to consider is whether you want a very robust solution (Roon’s own upsampling) or what can possibly be slightly better upsampling with HQPlayer but with the possible issues of crashes (rare but probability is higher than with Roon) and having to VNC into your core to fix this.
