From this page:http://www.lampizator.eu/szop/L-Szop/BEST_DAC.html it follows that actually it is not really Behringer:

"Putting all my reputation on the table, I do believe that there is no other DAC box sounding even close on the market today. It is already in another class compared even to lampized Sabre Buffalo, Behringer, Satch or Lampucera."

Ivo

Peter,

Some time ago in Phasure DAC section you mentioned that analog stage must be passive one and that op-amps color the sound. So, now you have changed opinion? Or am I mistaken?

Ivo

Well, he does not, but he offers at least 3 finalized DACs. What we do not know is what exactly is in those DACs ,e.g., what chips he utilizes. To my mind there are OS DAC chips surrounded by very delicate electronics inside and this is the answer I guess. I myself have a DAC with OS chip (PCM1798) and in company with XX it works fantastic. The question is how much more fantastic can I get with the *best* DAC???

Ivo

Peter,

What can you say about this one: http://www.lampizator.eu/szop/L-Szop/BEST_DAC.html ?

I do not know why, but so far I trust this person. It is based on what he has done. I think it is valuable work and can be taken serious in choosing the *best* DAC.

Ivo

z2 = nice piece of code. pretty stable here at my rig. Fabulous space and 3D stereo is coming out of my speakers. Thanks.

Ivo

Hey Peter,

First of all: Thanks very much for really great and amazing sound coming out of XX.
Last weeks I have been listening to 9zb and to 9z-1 and here are my findings (16/44 flacs in QAP via original HiFace):

HF: 9z-1 seems like a bit thinner and clearer and a bit less harsh, meaning harsh is at very minimum anyways.
MF: 9z-1 seems like closer to listener so making the overall soundstage more round and full. Sound is even further away from the speakers.
LF: 9z-1 seems like deeper and fuller. Finally in my setup I really feel the bass.

Summary: 9z-1 is better than 9zb in all categories. The main advantage is that stereo is wider and sound is closer to listener, so making the room fuller of sound. Like it.

...and do not brake it please

Hi,

Have not yet updated my sig, but here is how I do it:

Windows7 HP, C2D E6300, HiFace USB device, KS mode, Special mode, Dev buffer = 32, All Qs=0 (the upper 2 values show 0 and 32), QAP:
The sound is amazing, there is bigger bass than before, more details and more space. The room is fuller than ever. Even my wife noticed that quality has grown since before versions. Have not yet tried Adaptive mode. Will report for sure.

One question: if I load in XX the FLAC file which is not from HDCD, should I still use Peak extension feature?

Ivo

Well, well, well. I think I am going to brake some rules here...

I bought the WindBox DE500 (http://eu.msi.com/index.php?func=proddesc&maincat_no=729&prod_no=2050) and thought to try it with XX before making it as a work PC. I was expecting that XX will perform badly in QAP in KS mode, but I was surprised because:

I did manage to run XX latest version in QAP in KS mode via HiFace device with Device buffer set to the lowest value, e.g., 32 in Special mode. And you want to know the CPU usage - it was between 0 and 10%. And the main message is that sound is awesome, no cracks, no bad anything, just pure pleasure. This all under fresh install of Win7 HP.

So, Atom based PC (at least D510 CPU) qualifies for XX usage in QAP mode.

However, as I said, I left it for work purposes and migrated my XX listening stuff to C2D E6300, however, the latter is no better in terms of CPU usage if compared to the Atom CPU based box.

The bottom line: CPU alone is just one half, the other half is the system integration of all the components that makes a computer personal.

Ivo

Hi all,

Bug#1: no log directory under XX folder when 'log activities' is selected.
Bug#2: I cannot get hotkeys working under Win7. Env variable is there, shortcut is on desktop, it launches the Autohotkey.exe, but no reaction from XX. I cannot bring it on. Did the same as in Vista and there it was working.

The sound is THE SOUND, meaning it sounds AWESOME.

Thanks,
Ivo

Actually, I am not that worried about XX code rather than Win7 key.

Thanks.

Hi all,

Just want to understand will it be OK with Windows7 activation if I switch from regular drive to SSD and reinstall Windows?
Will I be able to re-activate my Windows7 with the same key?

Thanks,
Ivo

BTW, I have tested my HiFace in QAP in KS mode on E6300 and it works well. I can go down till the lowest value of Dev buffer (32) and CPU is utilized for about 15%. The sound is really better if Dev buffer = 32 rather than 1024. Of course the latter does not utilize the CPU at all.

Based on the above, I am starting to move towards i3-530 CPU. Seems like it should be good enough to handle QAP in KS mode under windows 7 and hopefully any other xAP in the future.

Ivo

Peter,

Is the above CPU enough to handle QAP in KS mode under Windows7?

Ivo

Hi all,

If there is anybody who is satisfied with running XX in QAP mode via KS on Atom CPU, please call in and share your setup details! I want to know how much the Atom gets utilized in this mode???
I would like really to have a proof that it is not possible to listen normally the music on such a hardware using XX.. Otherwise I am going to buy one.

Thanks,
Ivo

Hi there,

So, I am still working on choosing the right box for XX, but I am still curious about the Atom CPU compliance with XX. Can you guys help me out by posting your data, following these rules: HiFace users are especially welcome!!!

Your CPU (e.g. C2D E5300, AMD X2, Atom 330,....):
Your OS (e.g. XP, Vista, 7):
Your 'Device Buffer Size' in QAP in KS Special Mode:
Your CPU usage (%) when running XX in QAP in KS Special mode:

Here is my setup details (not a PC I listen music on, but another one):
My CPU: C2D E6300 1.8 GHz
My OS: Windows 7
My 'Device Buffer Size' in QAP in KS Special Mode: 512
My CPU usage (%) when running XX in QAP in KS Special mode: 2-3%

Another interesting thing on my C2D: XX in QAP in KS Special mode consumes much less CPU than my Firefox web browser when I read my local news site. So, if Atom CPU is meant for web browsing why could not it be enough powerful for XX in QAP in KS Special mode then? I hope your data guys will help me out in choosing the right box. I am kind of stuck on that Atom....

Thank you,
Ivo