[Maxvla]

Using computer as source, what software/hardware do I need to get this all to work?

Current setup is Foobar in ASIO outputting via USB to DACMagic. I know the DACMagic only supports up to 48khz on USB, but can do up to 96khz through spdif.

Currently I have no sound card (other than onboard) and on the horizon may be a JH3A capable of taking 24/192 files. I'd like to prepare for using that level of resolution.

Will I be able to continue using Foobar or do I need a special player/plugin? Which soundcard do you suggest for 24/192 output (PCI Express if possible)? I see some of the popular sound cards with high rez options don't play all resolutions. Is this a big deal or should I not worry too much about odd resolutions?

Thanks,

Chris

 

[KingStyles]

Just get a usb/spdif converter.  A m2tech hiface usb/spdif converter will allow you to output the 24/96 via the usb output on your computer and it changes it to a spdif output for spdif into your dac. This will probably be the easiest and cheapest way to get your high res into your dac.
Here is some info on it. Also there is a lot of info on this site about it if you do a search.
http://www.tweekgeek.com/_e/Portable_Computer_Audio/product/HiFace/HiFace.htm

 

[Maxvla]

That's the same price as most of the sound cards I'm looking at. Any advantage to using that instead of a card?

With this device you install it's driver, then in Foobar point the output to it and then connect it to the DAC of choice?

 

[KingStyles]

 
Quote:

With this device you install it's driver, then in Foobar point the output to it and then connect it to the DAC of choice?

Correct. i dont know much about soundcards so I cant comment on which approach is better. The hiface does come up for sale in the fs forums regularly. You might get one for half that.

 

[xnor]

So do you want to use the DACMagic now or use just a soundcard instead, or buy a cheap soundcard with s/pdif out to feed the DACMagic higher sample rates and bit-depths than it supports on the usb input?

 

[Maxvla]

Actually just found out my onboard Realtek 888B chipset will output 24/192 through it's coaxial Toslink. I expected to have to get a decent sound card to do this. I'll give this a try when I get home from work.

 

[Maxvla]

Working great. Listening to the free sample from HDTracks at 24/96 on my DACMagic. The sense of space is improved a good bit in addition to other improvements. Never realized it was this simple to listen to high resolution files. Now to find a 24/192 DAC...

 

[Uncle Erik]

Not to be a wet blanket, but I gave up on computer-as-source when I went to hi-rez. My rig has a SACD player, DVD-A player, and a turntable.

I will go back to computer-as-source one of these days to deal with the Red Book collection. I have a Pass D1 DAC clone that needs to be cased. But I'll keep the other hi-rez equipment, too.

 

[Roller]

Quote:

Not to be a wet blanket, but I gave up on computer-as-source when I went to hi-rez. My rig has a SACD player, DVD-A player, and a turntable.

I will go back to computer-as-source one of these days to deal with the Red Book collection. I have a Pass D1 DAC clone that needs to be cased. But I'll keep the other hi-rez equipment, too.

What issues do you have with computer as source? I ask because as things evolve, PC audio is getting less PC and more audio, so to speak. And it's definitely not just for the convenience.

 

[Maxvla]

Problem with physical formats (sacd/dvd-a) is the players are costly and so is the media. I already have a $1k-1.8k IEM purchase looming later this year so I'm not looking to add a source.

 

[xnor]

Quote:

Working great. Listening to the free sample from HDTracks at 24/96 on my DACMagic. The sense of space is improved a good bit in addition to other improvements. Never realized it was this simple to listen to high resolution files. Now to find a 24/192 DAC...

I don't doubt that its working great, but changes between the format 16/44.1 and 24/96 are smaller than you (or most guys here) would think. The big changes are in the music itself, the way the track was recorded, mixed and mastered. Even if you don't have a 24/96 or 192 kHz DAC you can resample and quantize such tracks on the fly. If this is done properly you probably don't even notice the difference, I'm serious.
 

 

[Maxvla]

Perhaps, but I also have albums of similar recording quality (chesky, etc) on cd format and they don't sound this good.

 

[xnor]

Quote:

Perhaps, but I also have albums of similar recording quality (chesky, etc) on cd format and they don't sound this good.

That's possible due to the reasons mentioned above. We've already seen in the 16-bit thread that some (?) companies master tracks differently for CD, SACD .. despite the fact that they could simply use the SACD 'version' for the CD as well. iirc, it was Linn who even gave away 16/44.1 and high-res downloads of the same track for free, but even a one-eyed half-blind guy could see that the waveforms of the (supposedly) same track looked very different. I guess different levels of dynamic compression caused this, but who knows what else they've done with the 16/44.1 file to make it look worse.
 
The big audible changes are not due to the different format per se - which is kinda sad if you think about it.