Can MB map sample rates?

[chickenlogic]

My music collection uses a variety of different sample rates, but right now my DAC only plays 44.1kHz and 48kHz files. I use WASApI in exclusive event mode. 

What I’d like:
Map all files to be automatically converted to the correct multiple of the native sampling frequency.  So, all 176.4 and 88.2 files are converted on playback to 44.1kHz.   Also, all 192 and 96 files are converted to 48kHz on playback.

Is there a plug-in or setting to do this?

[sveakul]

First of all, I don't have a DAC, just Realtek on-board chipset.  I use Wasapi exculsive also.  Current behavior on my machine is that when I am passing audio streams at a sample rate my audio device does not handle (like 22.05 or 88.2 kHz), MusicBee's bass.dll component automatically resamples it to 44.1 kHz so it plays.  Note that I do NOT have any default resampling in use via MusicBee's own playback preferences.  Does this NOT happen on your setup?  You could specify a rate other that 44.1 if you activated the MB resampling option in preferences, but then that's the only rate you'd get on any file.

[chickenlogic]

No, in my case MB will play a 44.1 or 48 track, but goes completely silent when faced with a 88.3 or 96 track.   It keeps playing though, and makes sound again when it gets to a lower bit rate track. 

I’d like it to map to more than one rate, for best sound quality.   96 to 48 should sound better than 96 to 44.1 as it’s a whole multiple. 

[frankz]

If you're worried about sound quality and think you can hear a difference between 96k and 48k then why are you downsampling at all? Why not get a DAC that will handle your files?  Theoretically, the decrease in quality would be much worse going from 96k to 48k no matter how evenly they divide. If I were someone who says they can hear a difference in sounds above what's audible to humans, I'd be more worried about that "quality" cut than whether my computer could properly do a math problem with something that's not evenly divisible.  (I'm pretty sure it can).

FWIW, this "evenly divisible sample rate" paranoia is mostly left over from a time when there were unsophisticated resamplers and low-powered computers running them. Most modern resamplers will apply the right processing when needed.

Also FWIW, neither 96k nor 48k are bit rates, they are sample rates.

[frankz]

For anyone interested, this 11 year old explanation is as concise and clear as any I've read.

[chickenlogic]

I can hear the difference.  96 files sound better at. 48 than 44.1 when using other software. 

A better sounding DAC that also does hisgber sample rates will cost me $4000-$5000 right now.  And yes I’ve tried many. 

It’s not paranoia, I just have a resolving system with a really good PCM63PK based DAC.   

Downsampling the tracks in advance is not feasible as several thousand albums are involved. 

[sveakul]

My stock Dell XPS 8930's Realtek chip (not exactly "audiophile") handles 96 and 192 kHz native, so it's puzzling to me why you would need to spend thousands on a DAC that would handle those rates too.  I admit I'm probably missing something re DAC concepts, so I bow out of the discussion accordingly.

[chickenlogic]

Yes you can buy cheap DACs that handle all frequencies. They don’t sound as good as more expensive DACs.   There’s no point in downgrading just for convenience sake.