And this is what?
… You and others are trying to make a case for the viability of up-sampling to DSD512 and DSD1024… I am questioning the veracity of the claim that there is tangibly perceptual and contextually relevant, sonic characteristics conveyed in such products, to the human-being auditory system, as compared to DSD256, when auditioned by a panel (subjective or objective) of audiophile subjects… I am waiting for that indisputable evidence from folks like you…
(In response to your ridiculous claims… apparently you did not read the link to my statements regarding DAVE in the other thread… )
Show us the subject or objective test comparison between off-line PGGB and any other off-line sample-rate converter made by a panel of audiophiles…
We are talking about ‘real-time’ modulation of PCMxxx to DSD256 or a DSD128 or DSD256 recording being modulated to DSD512 on a computer platform running a digital-audio player … Keep this in context… And stop with this ridiculous subjectively-biased, rhetorical opinion stuff…
The fundamental premise is surrounding the contextual auditory validity of DSD512 and DSD1024 for the generalized audiophile playback experience, as compared to DSD256 which is the practical limit of Audirvana and other devices like the Bricasti M21 with MDx DAC boards that support sample-rates to DSD256, and not beyond this sample-rate.
That means 44.1 and 48 content should not be upsampled by an software player since it gets upsampled to 352.8 or 384 by the Bricasti. They think their own upsampling algorith is superior which might be the case or not.
DSD content is not changed by any DSP according to the manual but sent unaltered to a first order LP filter which is located in the analog board.
@matt
I correct myself, here…
I do believe they are up-sampling to 352 or 384kHz and presenting it to the DSP filter function that further up-samples the signal to do it’s calculations and then decimates this filtered signal to a working sample-rate of the AD1955 D/A circuit which more-likely-than-not is 768kHz… and may be different for the ladder DAC…
So… yes… I trust the adroitness of the Bricasti DSP filtering algorithms… and would follow their lead here…
Stop this ridiculous reframing of context… I was the one who pointed out that PCM was handled independent of the DSD DAC… You are the one who is not reading…
My posts here are challenging your assertions… and you don’t like it… so you have to resort to contortions of my statements and innuendo to justify your ineptness…
I did not make any assertions on this thread.
The one who did was you!
I clearly said that upsampling does not improve the sound of the original file.
Upsampling has nothing to do with human hearing.
Upsampling is about feeding the DAC with the optimal rate for which it was designed.
And this rate varies according to the design of each DAC.
"Serial Data Format in External Digital Filter Mode In the External Digital Filter Mode, the AD1955 will accept up to 24-bit serial, twos complement, MSB-first data from an external digital filter, an HDCD decoder, or a general-purpose DSP. If the External Digital Filter Mode is selected by Control Register 0, Bits 12 and 13, Pin 2 to Pin 5 are assigned as the word clock input (EF_WCLK, Pin 2), bit clock input (EF_BCLK, Pin 3), left channel data input (EF_LDATA, Pin 4), and right channel data input (EF_RDATA, Pin 5), respectively, to accept 8f S (48 kHz), 4fS (96 kHz), or 2fS (196 kHz) oversampled data."
AFAIK, the AD1955 operates in this mode in the Bricasti.
It’s described in the image I posted above… This is describing how it handles signals in “external filter mode”… The DSP is external and it delivers it’s processed signal to the D/A circuit of the AD1955 under control of the external proprietary DDS clocking of the M21