I’m a newbie with the Paganini. What’s the relationship between upsampler and DAC filters? What are likely to be the best options for 44.1 to DSD?
Thx,
Jeff
Jeff, there’s no direct relationship between the two sets of filters as such.
The filters on the Upsampler effect the bit rate upsampling, while on the DAC they’re analog reconstruction filters. The User Manuals explains the functional differences between them.
The “best” is what you decide sounds best to you - you won’t break anything by trying any/every filter. 
1 Like
Thx for the response. Which manual(s)? I have the stack, LESS the transport. The 3 manuals I have address each component, but don’t talk much about synergies between them and how to optimize SQ across the stack — though they are very clear on each piece.
What I have found: for 44.1->DSD Filter 5 on the Upsampler seems better than 1. (Mainly I’m listening to classical at medium volume.)
Beyond that, this may mark me as “not a true enthusiast,” but trying all 24 (?) possible combos isn’t a thrill for me. I like a little guidance from the Mother Ship. 
Jeff
You’re right, the User Manual doesn’t mention synergies between the units (except for the physical connections) or how to “optimise SQ”, but that’s because what sounds “optimum” varies from person to person, there’s no one particular optimum setting as such.
For example, you seem to like upsampling Redbook to DSD, Many others don’t. Likewise your preference for filter 5 with its associated non-linear phase response. Many others prefer filter 1 with better alias rejection.
Etc etc, I think you get the point 
1 Like
Got it, thx.
So for redbook, aside from DSD, what’s the other “leading brand”?
Jeff, you are questioning as if there is a clear “best” filter setting. As @Anupc has been pointing out , the preferable settings are subject to an individual’s taste. That is why dCS provide the choice. That taste will depend upon the listener’s personal preferences, the associated audio system components, type of music, room etc.
It is also necessary to understand that a filter provided for a given sampllng rate may not be available for another rate even if there is a shared numerical description. So, for example, filter 5 for a sample rate of 44.1 is not he same type of filter for a sample rate of 88.2 even if it is also called filter 5. Further , for the Paganini, the precise selection of filter types and their numbering differs from early Paganinis compared to those having the final software upgrade.
The User Guide suggests that you try them and decide which you prefer. dCS have already chosen the right types of filter for each sample rate ( which is why not all are the same) so you are basically undertaking fine tuning.
In practice, after you have played with the filters for a short time, you will form an opinion of which filter you prefer for which incoming sample rate. Paganini will remember these settings and , once you have a little experience, this will turn out to be a set and forget exercise. I am mostly using the same settings that I decided upon 24 years ago! Once the decision is properly made there is no value to be gained from continuing to visit the options ( feel free to experiment though, if you wish).
BTW, the filter changes can be very subtle in effect and, during the early days, you may find that what sounds good during a brief exposure may only reveal its shortcomings given a longer period.
Just try a little patience over the next week or two.
Pete, I appreciate your advice. I don’t have the complete stack: I’m using my Puccini as “transport.” I was reassured by the sellers that I have the latest software versions but you make a good point: I should double check. Beyond that, I’ve been involved with high end audio for 10 years, so I’m aware ultimately it comes down to individual taste. I was looking for a general, qualitative sense of how the filters in the upsampler influence or interact with those in the DAC. Perhaps that’s a poorly formed or unanswerable question. Anyway, that’s fine.
As far as my application goes, for reasons I won’t go into, I only play shiny discs. Given that the Puccini is not a real transport, I am limited for now to 44.1. Although I have quite a collection of SACDs.
One problem I have, which I posted about elsewhere: the Upsampler doesn’t remember my filter choice (5). If I turn off the Puccini and then turn it on again, it defaults from 5 back to 1 even though it’s the same 44.1 input. I have to change it manually via the menus. Somewhat inconvenient, though certainly not tragic!
Cheers,
Jeff
It is very commonly on this form that if you ask for advice on a setting or setup you instead get an education or a question on you other gear or how you have set it up etc, when you asking about the best setting other members have found for their taste.
So pleas, if you do not know! Don’t answer, or answer the thread starters question as good you can without any “playing smart” answers or education if the question is correct and straight forward easy to answer👍
Then i got a question to the thread starter, on how much do you think the digital filters give in SQ vs without the up samplers filtering if you do not convert it to DSD, just toggle around between filters and leave filter 1 on the Paganini DAC ?
Is it minor or a great difference vs without?
I’m always interested in what other audio enthusiasts have to say.
On your question, you mean keep it in PCM, say 192 and just use the PCM filters on the upsampler — do I have that right?
Yes! If you are experience any positive, noticeable SQ difference with the Upsampler after you installed it when you toggle between the filters etc?
I am thinking of buying a paganini upsampler, but questioning its SQ gain on the sound.
Mainly keeping PCM within the PCM domain. In the case of the Paganini, that would mean upsampling to a maximum of 176.4/192kS/s, with filter setting that suits your personal taste preference.
Someone in the dCS universe whom I like and trust told me with the upsampler the difference would be meaningful. I think that’s probably the best word to use. Not huge, but meaningful. I found that to be the case.
1 Like
That makes sense, thx.
“It is also necessary to understand that a filter provided for a given sampllng rate may not be available for another rate even if there is a shared numerical description. So, for example, filter 5 for a sample rate of 44.1 is not he same type of filter for a sample rate of 88.2 even if it is also called filter 5. Further , for the Paganini, the precise selection of filter types and their numbering differs from early Paganinis compared to those having the final software upgrade.”
Yes, it is a howling horrible mess.
1 Like
With the newest 1.3 FW the Paganini DAC can handle 382khz with Dual AES 192khz 
1 Like
@Anupc In terms of 192 vs DSD (upsampled from 44.1), are there any generalizations that apply re sound? I of course agree w/ you ultimately it comes down to taste. But often one can say
A gives you less X, more Y
B gives you more X, less Y
That sort of thing.
Thx,
Jeff
Well Jeff, generally speaking, it’s not a great idea to transcode from one format to another (PCM-to-DSD, or vice-versa).
However, many people seem to like the sonic signature of redbook PCM converted to DSD, and dCS platforms do a better job of that than pretty much anyone else (not to mention dCS have been able to do that from well before DSD became “mainstream” ).
1 Like
I i convert from PCM - DSD with filter 1 in my perviously Puccini DAC i owned for a couple of years ago for example. I did get att fuller sound and slight more warmth and extra bass, but i did loose the timing and fastness that dCS is known for, and what i like sounds most natural.
I say like Anup, that you should play it without conversation is the best way and you will receive the most transparent sound.
Just play around with the filters.
The asymmetrical filter 5 in the Paganini DAC is nice i think or filter 1 that is the most correct.
Then play around with the digital filters in the Upsampler is the way to go👍
Thanks for your collective patience w/ these question of a newbie.
I don’t want to overthink it, but I’m curious why transcoding isn’t a good idea.
As for the filters/format, I like 44.1->DSD, but there is a slight brightness or haze. What seems to be most pleasant so far is filter 5 on the Upsampler and 1 on the DAC.
More generally, between Upsampler & DAC the total # of combinations is daunting, particularly b/c different recordings will likely sound better w/ different filter combos.
And the other day for reasons that don’t matter I had the Upsampler out of the chain. And I remember thinking, Wow, this sounds f*cking fantastic. So I’m not yet convinced the Upsampler is really needed for A+++ SQ.
Cheers,
Jeff
1 Like
Because it’s not a lossless process.