Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
NOTE: This is a "Community" forum. Please be mindful that community members are here to help as part of a community effort. We therefore appreciate your effort in keeping this forum a happy place!

If you have a specific issue (e.g. hardware, failure) and want help from our support team, please use our tech support portal (Support menu - > Contact Us).
Thanks a lot of your help in making a better community.

TOPIC: why 96 kHz?

why 96 kHz? 1 year 3 weeks ago #44298

  • Rusev
  • Rusev's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 39
  • Thank you received: 4
  • Karma: 1
why resampling at first ... and then why 96 kHz :)
Resampling is not exactly a good thing. There are few theories, that say good resampling is so power hungry operation, that event modern PC CPU cannot do it in real time.

I personally couldn't hear a difference compared to another naim streamer, that don't resample ... bit still just curios :)
SHD studio → Chord Qutest
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Wanderer

why 96 kHz? 1 year 3 weeks ago #44316

  • Wanderer
  • Wanderer's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 49
  • Thank you received: 36
  • Karma: 5
Hello Rusev,
to my knowledge, the internal sample rate has to be fixed to ensure that a predictable amount of DSP resources is used. A rate of 96 kHz was probably chosen as the highest at which the DSP chip was able to run the required program. Reasons to prefer higher rate could be various, e.g. the ability to accept more formats without downsampling, better DAC performance at higher sample rates, better quality of some DSP algorithms when implemented at higher sample rates, or something else.

These are just assumptions, it would be nice to know the official answer indeed.
Last Edit: 1 year 3 weeks ago by Wanderer.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Rusev

why 96 kHz? 1 year 3 weeks ago #44319

  • Rusev
  • Rusev's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 39
  • Thank you received: 4
  • Karma: 1
Wanderer wrote:
Hello Rusev,
to my knowledge, the internal sample rate has to be fixed to ensure that a predictable amount of DSP resources is used.
If so, then why dont leave at least 44.1 unchanged. Its still the most common sample rate and the conversation in 96 its not exactly trivial to be done right.
SHD studio → Chord Qutest
The administrator has disabled public write access.

why 96 kHz? 1 year 3 weeks ago #44322

  • john.reekie
  • john.reekie's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 3775
  • Thank you received: 1587
  • Karma: 140
It would, I suspect, be a "non-trivial" change to their software architecture. Also, anyone using advanced biquads or FIR filters would have to generate coefficients for every sample rate. OTOH resampling allows them to support non-standard sample rates as well, and if as you say you can't hear a difference....
I am not miniDSP support.

"You must ask the right questions." - Dr. Alfred Lanning's hologram.
-> Have you read the User Manual??
-> Have you drawn and posted a diagram?
-> Have you posted a screenshot?
-> Have you posted your config file?
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: devteam

why 96 kHz? 1 year 3 weeks ago #44326

  • entripy
  • entripy's Avatar
  • Online
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 160
  • Thank you received: 46
  • Karma: 3
44.1kHz is the worst sample rate for sound quality and there are technical reasons why it's hard to do good filtering at that rate. Without getting into sampled data theory it's difficult to explain why.

A simple example of the problem is that if you have a low pass filter which falls to zero at infinite theory with continuous signals, with sampled data that 'zero' is warped to the Nyquist frequency, which is at 22.05kHz for a sample rate of 44.1kHz. Having that zero at 22.05kHz instead of infinite frequency makes a huge difference to the rolloff of the low pass filter below 20kHz and well down into the audible frequency range. There are ways of faking the correct finite attenuation at the Nyquist frequency but they are approximations to what you really want. It is far easier to just raise the sample frequency to move the frequency warping away from the audible range.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: HansVanEijsden

why 96 kHz? 1 year 3 weeks ago #44349

  • MillsSteve2
  • MillsSteve2's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 18
  • Thank you received: 2
  • Karma: 1
I understand the internal 96 kHz, but is the output limited to 48 kHz? I've changed the output to 32 but 2-channel, but the DAC continues to read 48 kHz. I'm streaming Roon to it from my Bryston BDP-1, which outputs at 192.

Is 48 kHz the output limit? :S
Steve
Last Edit: 1 year 3 weeks ago by MillsSteve2.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

why 96 kHz? 11 months 3 weeks ago #44628

  • devteam
  • devteam's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 8764
  • Thank you received: 1155
  • Karma: 165
To the answer why 96kHz or more simply, why a single sample rate, here are some comments:
- A single sample rate is always used for a DSP as all algorithms (FIR/IIR/delay... etc) are all dependent on that variables. If we had flexible sample rate, aka 44.1k in, 44.1k DSP, we'd need as many set of filters as we'd have potential sample rate. Forget Dirac live, forget REW, forget simplicity..
- SAmple rate conversion isn't as bad as seen/envisioned when it runs at Dynamic Range of 130dB as the one we use.. There are a lot worse issues to worries in an audio chain.. :-)

@ Steve, All processing (analog and digital) comes out at 96k. Our Audio Precision unit shows the correct rate as metadata so we're not sure what could be the reason for your DAC reading 48k. Maybe some odd metadata issue on your unit.. Maybe start a tech support ticket?

DevTeam
miniDSP, building a DSP community one board at a time.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: DownUnderGaza, Jukka

why 96 kHz? 11 months 3 weeks ago #44710

  • tomjordan
  • tomjordan's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 19
  • Thank you received: 3
  • Karma: 0
(withdrawn)
Last Edit: 11 months 3 weeks ago by tomjordan.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

why 96 kHz? 7 months 11 hours ago #47316

  • Rusev
  • Rusev's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 39
  • Thank you received: 4
  • Karma: 1
Something interesting i think ...
after the last update from volumio (jan'20) now the SHDstudio accept the resampling form roon. I still experimenting, but there is definitely a difference in the sound if it is resampled to 96khz from roon and then send to the SHDstudio. Sure, small difference but with the right equipment audible when switching back and froth. Can't say what is better or what is right or wrong, but obviously resampling is not the same.
SHD studio → Chord Qutest
Last Edit: 7 months 11 hours ago by Rusev.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Moderators: devteam