- 24-bit dithering;
Quote from: vladg on 25 August, 2012, 12:44:28 PM- 24-bit dithering;Just a question, why the dithering? In foobar the dithering (if so desired) is done in the output stage. Not to mention that 24bit doesn't seem to benefit from dither.
All this "selected by ear" and "sounds better" makes me ask: Are you a sound engineer? What is your equipment? Also, I prefer higher samplerates as my equipment supports them. Also also, quoting "Direct Sound" sounds kind of fishy, WASAPI should be the output of choice when playing SACD. Thanks.
Just a quick feedback that the modifications sound great! Any chance to put back in what you took out before? (Especially higher sample rates)
- 44.1 support. I don't think it's usable to listen SACD on 44.1
About 176.4. I have idea to add both 176.4 and 192 support (add to 88.1 and 96 that already supported). But I don't have any >96 kHz capable audio interface around me to check! As soon as I can find it I'll add it! Hmm. Maybe I should add them blindly and ask to check somebody else...
not having a main folder to store the .xml files would be "not good," but didn't specify why...
(As an aside, I can't for the life of me find a changelog for foo_input_sacd on the website; I'd love to know what changes between versions!)
I guess that is because there is no way for the SACD plug in to inquire foobar about the actual location of the file... If is in the play list, it plays; probably only foobar knows where it "comes" from.
check the readme.txt inside the plugin zip, the changelog is there.
Quote from: vladg on 29 August, 2012, 04:40:45 PM- 44.1 support. I don't think it's usable to listen SACD on 44.1Because?
Quote from: db1989 on 29 August, 2012, 04:44:03 PMQuote from: vladg on 29 August, 2012, 04:40:45 PM- 44.1 support. I don't think it's usable to listen SACD on 44.1Because?I’m still waiting…
I don’t really know where to start with applying TOS #8 to this thread, but I just binned one especially obvious case. If you’d all like to provide some evidence for all this ‘sounds better wow high resolutions’ stuff, or at least stop talking about it, that’d be great.
Probably 96k it will sound worse than 88.1k. At the best case scenario it will sound equal.
Hi guys!This plugin (foo_input_sacd_hq) is patched version of Super Audio CD Decoder plugin v0.5.11 with added high-quality DSD->PCM 88.2/96 kHz conversion.http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18475891/foo_input_sacd_hq.zipTechnical details of patched version:- single-pass double precision processing;- 24-bit dithering;- SSE2 required;- 88.2 kHz sample rate support (32x downsampling);- 96 kHz sample rate support (5/147 polyphase filter);- 2.8 mHz DSD stream support;- filters were selected by ear.
The quesion is about why this mod is better than original?1. Support of 96 kHz (original had not).2. Less CPU usage (about 1.5 times).3. Single-pass 64-bit internal processing with dithering the result to 32-bit.