|
transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176
|
|
02-11-2015, 21:49
(This post was last modified: 02-11-2015 23:13 by simoncn.)
Post: #6
|
|||
|
|||
RE: transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176
(02-11-2015 21:06)Mihaylov Wrote: And what there was media server? Melco or another NAS? The server was my Windows laptop. Transcoding DSF to WAV in real time requires quite a powerful CPU. 2) and 3) were fairly similar and 1) was considerably better. Murrays on the Linn forum has suggested that an offline conversion from DSF to WAV would be better than real-time transcoding. This sounds plausible but I haven't tried it myself. |
|||
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
| Messages In This Thread |
|
transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176 - Andre Gosselin - 31-10-2015, 17:27
RE: transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176 - simoncn - 31-10-2015, 20:31
RE: transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176 - simoncn - 01-11-2015, 00:25
RE: transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176 - Andre Gosselin - 01-11-2015, 16:37
RE: transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176 - Mihaylov - 02-11-2015, 21:06
RE: transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176 - simoncn - 02-11-2015 21:49
RE: transcoding using dsf:wav;176 vs dsf:wav24;176 - Mihaylov - 03-11-2015, 08:39
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Search
Member List
Calendar
Help



