Skip to main content

Topic: Saracon DSD to PCM converter: to which sampling rate should I convert? (Read 5969 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • amiti
  • [*][*][*]
Saracon DSD to PCM converter: to which sampling rate should I convert?
Hello ,

I am using Saracon DSD to PCM converter.

I read in here that with saracon , converting DSDs to higher sample rates than 96khz is pointless. In other places I read that converting DSD data to sample rates of 176.4khz and 88.2khz is mathematically simpler and thus preferable .

I tried both sample rates but am not sure which is better. 96khz sounds more detailed with better imaging while 88.2khz sound more clean or precise. I know these descriptions are vague but I was wondering if anyone with deeper understanding of the mathematical processes used by Saracon can give a definitive answer to which sample rate is preferable.



  • Wombat
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Saracon DSD to PCM converter: to which sampling rate should I convert?
Reply #1
I read in here that with saracon , converting DSDs to higher sample rates than 96khz is pointless. In other places I read that converting DSD data to sample rates of 176.4khz and 88.2khz is mathematically simpler and thus preferable .

I tried both sample rates but am not sure which is better. 96khz sounds more detailed with better imaging while 88.2khz sound more clean or precise. I know these descriptions are vague but I was wondering if anyone with deeper understanding of the mathematical processes used by Saracon can give a definitive answer to which sample rate is preferable.

Saracon does good with cutting as low as they do and alone for that make anything with silly high sampling rates pointless. The listening you describe sounds more like a expection bias/mental problem to me. Please keep TOS#8 in mind when explaining your result more precise.
  • Last Edit: 02 June, 2012, 02:10:50 PM by Wombat
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

  • amiti
  • [*][*][*]
Saracon DSD to PCM converter: to which sampling rate should I convert?
Reply #2
I understand no high sample rates are needed but isn't there an educated choice between 96khz and 88.2khz? Does the filter used by Saracon for DSD data allows to benefit extra detail in 96khz or is 88.2 is really the objective of that filter?


  • Wombat
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Saracon DSD to PCM converter: to which sampling rate should I convert?
Reply #3
My "educated choice" would be to use 88.2kHz and lower for the fact alone to not waste space with useless content. I strongly believe Weiss Engineering uses the correct math that makes audible differences between 88.2kHz or 96kHz impossible to spot until some gear may do something wrong.
It is interesting to read at the link you gave that even Daniel Weiss himself joined this forum and is "Junior Memeber"
He tries to argue with the "Technical Experts" members about his product but i have the feeling he had to realize after 4 whopping posts already he better shouldn´t
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

  • amiti
  • [*][*][*]
Saracon DSD to PCM converter: to which sampling rate should I convert?
Reply #4
Bruce B , from my understanding , is a part of the pyramix studio development team which serves as a competition to Saracon converter. In that forum thread he says:

Quote
Yes, I feel if a company that is using Saracon to convert DSD->PCM, then anything over 24/88.2 is a waste of money, even if it IS just noise.


What I fear is that the difference I heard (if not completely resulted from bias) is just extra noise.

  • Wombat
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Saracon DSD to PCM converter: to which sampling rate should I convert?
Reply #5
Bruce B , from my understanding , is a part of the pyramix studio development team which serves as a competition to Saracon converter. In that forum thread he says:

Quote
Yes, I feel if a company that is using Saracon to convert DSD->PCM, then anything over 24/88.2 is a waste of money, even if it IS just noise.


What I fear is that the difference I heard (if not completely resulted from bias) is just extra noise.

Do you really believe you can hear the noise up there? Please do some abx and don´t post such strange things.
The poster claims he needs a custom filter or very gentle liner/non-linear filters and of course high sampling rates to archieve transparency when converting from DSD. You better ask him why you hear a difference





Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!