Question about how to best output FLAC and DSF via Linux and HDMI - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 4 Old 04-28-2020, 05:22 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Baccusboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,190
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Question about how to best output FLAC and DSF via Linux and HDMI

I have the choice of running from two different Linux laptops, via HDMI output, to my Marantz SR8002 receiver. I am not sure what setting is considered to be "the best choice." Please offer your suggestions.

On Laptop A, running MX Linux, I am running DeadBeef to play files, and I have figured out how to get it to output as either using Pulse Audio, or ALSA, and in various ways. I am mostly just interested in running 2-channel files. Which is the highest quality? If I run out of DeadBeef via ALSA, and choose to upscale my audio sources to 192k, for example, I can physically see a report from my Marantz that it's receiving data in 192k (or whatever I set it to). If I run using straight Pulse, I don't get this report, but the sound is still really good. I think I hear a slight difference between the two options, but am not sure if my ears are fooling themselves?

On Laptop B, which is running Ubuntu (no other choice on this machine, due to some kind of bios lock beyond my ability to fix) I can only run Pulse out of DeadBeef, and I get no report of receiving 192k, or anything else. But it works and sounds excellent. ALSA doesn't seem to work. Not sure why. I'd actually prefer to be able to use this laptop, because it's a much slower machine which fits into the system better. Unfortunately, I have found the CPU seems to choke on at least one file so far -- a Knights in White Satin .dsf , if I have it upscaled to 192k. The CPU cannot seem to keep up and play the file well. Sound degrades.

Can anyone explain if it is upscaling in both Pulse and DeadBeef, and/or which would be the better choice for best sound? I have noticed that Laptop A may have better low-midrange and bass, while Laptop B seems to have more detailed highs, yet could be slightly thin on low midrange/upper bass.

I am running the Marantz SR8002 using Source Direct input.

Or maybe my almost 50 year-old ears are fooling me?

Thanks.

"Any reviewer that didn't rail against this [Young Guns Blu-ray encode] should be sued, and Lionsgate should be ashamed of themselves. " - msgohan

Last edited by Baccusboy; 04-28-2020 at 06:08 PM.
Baccusboy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 4 Old 04-29-2020, 08:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mlknez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 2,833
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 641 Post(s)
Liked: 216
when you are trying to upscale DSD audio, you are first converting to 88.2khz PCM, then you are upscaling to 192khz. it is a multi-step process. It would make more sense to not upscale anything. Just keep all at native sampling rate if your DAC can handle the various rates. Upsampling just to upsample doesn't accomplish anything.

Media Room: LG oled65c7, Marantz AV8805, Sherbourn 7/2100, Emotiva A-300, Studer A80, Studer Revox b795, Nakamichi RX-202, HTPC, exaSound e38, Sweetvinyl Sugarcube SC-2, (2) Piega P10, Piega Coax Center, (6) Piega AP 1.2, Hsu VTF-15h mk2
Office: Emotiva mini-x A100, Geek Pulse, (2) KEF LS-50, Goldenear FF 4, PC, NAS 130TB
Bedroom: Panasonic TCP55vt35, Marantz NR1200, Dune 3 Prime, (2) Elac Uni-Fi UB5
mlknez is offline  
post #3 of 4 Old 04-30-2020, 10:11 AM
Moderator
Moderator
 
PooperScooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Leominster MA
Posts: 22,883
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 502 Post(s)
Liked: 16202
There are zero benefits to "upscaling" the sample rate of the source. Think about it for a bit.

If a cannibal eats a clown, will it taste funny?
PooperScooper is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 4 Old 04-30-2020, 10:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SeeMoreDigital's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Nott'm, UK
Posts: 3,697
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1182 Post(s)
Liked: 1028
FLAC should be output via HDMI at its original sampling rate and bit depth. And DSD64 sounds perfectly fine when transcoded to PCM at 88.2kHz 24-bits...

Given that the sample rate of an SACD's DSD audio stream is 64 times that of an CD's PCM audio stream (DSD = 2822.4kHz and PCM = 44.1kHz). It's deemed good practice to use increments of 44.1 kHz.

I SUPPORT 'FAIR USE'. MY MORALS PREVENT ME FROM HELPING ANYONE WHO OBTAINS COPYRIGHTED CONTENT ILLEGITIMATELY
TV: LG 65UH770V | DISC SPINNER: OPPO UDP-203 | STB: VU+ UNO 4K SE
AMPS: 1No Audiolab 6000A, 3No Audiolab M-PWR | SPEAKERS: 2No KEF 103.2, 6No Wharfedale Diamond 10
ISP: Virgin Media @ 100Mbps | NETWORK: 1000Mbps | NAS: Synology DS212+

Last edited by SeeMoreDigital; 04-30-2020 at 10:59 AM.
SeeMoreDigital is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Surround Music Formats

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off