No doubt about it 2.11 its the best.

I think the Taiko engineering wise is excellent that's mechanical, metals etc. You do have to pay lots for precision engineering, machining metals, linear power supplies etc to exacting extremes of tolerance. But in the end its the package versus the money to extract this. The Mach III's are also extremely good with 2.11. If we could put a Mach III in a Taiko case we are at the same price as the Taiko. I'm not in a position or probably never to hear a Taiko so its certainly worth putting your money into a Mach III. This is transforming sound wise. Robert

Yes Ramesh I agree the Mach III is something else going from 2D to 3D in sound. A fundamental improvement to behold. Probably the most important upgrade even over a DAC. So you could have a cheap DAC with Mach III but not a cheap PC over an expensive DAC. Bit like Expresso coffee the most important part is actually the grinder not the fancy Expresso machine. My Mach III is only new so some way to go yet.

Robert

I have the same no "a" in 2.11a but scrolling works. I tried this several times and got the same result. Pasted over 2.11 as per normal.

Robert

Peter

I've tried changing SFS from .69 to 10.19 and think I prefer it. .69 has a bassy feel about it including vocals. I find 10.69 image better and more balanced sound. Early days yet. I see you use 10.19.

I've also tried setting cores using 2.11 honestly can't tell if its any different to Nick's manual method probably the same or very close.

I only have 4 cores so set it to 3. But on checking Xx is running on 2 with this setting. Is this correct?

Robert

Gosh W7!!! Charlie might be worth going for W10 14393 it was a big sound improvement over any Win OS prior with subsequent Xx updates. I would do a clean install with W10 14393 and new 2.11 program. Better to spend time getting this to work, end sound will be way better. This is the last big effort from Peter its worth trying it.

I did have problems getting patch to download to start, but my Bitdefender anti virus(not on my audio Xx computer) was the first problem. Then I downloaded latest version WinRAR plus Xx patch and was able to decompress patch files all on another computer then transferred to Xx audio computer using USB stick and applied per Peters method to 2.10. I have no anti virus programs on Audio Xx.

I always pull the internet Lan out during program maintenance. I never download updates on my Audio Xx computer or anything for that matter.

I also take Audio Xxhighend out of Ram state to Base and untick Min OS.

Anyway its working very well except can't get use to scroll wheel not working, guess I will learn new tricks.

On first boot to ram it all worked perfectly. Mind you tweaking Bios(Nicks tweak) has negated all first boot up into Ram issues since applying.

Robert

Yes I agree with you Nick. It does look like cpu setting didn't make it.
But I'm still running what you did in Bios Nick and this alone was well worth doing.

Nick did you patch over existing Xx version or do a clean install over W10? I just did a patch to to check on everything. I will run with this for now. At some point I will do a whole new install.

Robert

Hi Peter,

Sad its the end of updates its been an exciting ride at times. Thanks for all the effort above the call of duty at times.

Robert

Hi Peter, Nick,
                   Well I tried it and it does work. Mind you I only have 4 cores and reduced to 3, rebooted XXhighend in base no min OS.

Just a query I did toggle time performance and time stability. Does this realign/reset cores in Xxhighend?

Anyway I reset cores back to 4 and tried a song in Base, no min OS and yes certainly has a very positive improvement to sound. I agree it has sped things up, no error message at playback start now. Processes work quicker in Xx now. More music.

Bios questions:

Do you sync all cores or set core ratio for individual cores? Mine is set at sync but did not do a comparison.

Also have you tried hyper-threading off? Mine is on.

Some also suggest turn all C states off.

Certainly looking forward to 2.11 keep going Peter.

Robert

Comparing Flac tracks to original wave the wave tracks do sound better, smoother, less bright. Not by much but noticeable. Takes longer for XXHE to process from wave to flac than flac to flac.

Robert

Tore I've never bothered with Tidal but I see they are 24/96 files. Are these wave?
I've found converting 24/96/192 from Wave to Flac using dbpoweramp they all play perfectly. I havn't compared wave with flac to see if I can hear a difference sound wise yet.

Perhaps they need to be changed to flac somehow. As I'm aware at the moment XXHE only changes all flac files to Wave on playback. I only run Flac and wave audio files downloads and CD rips.

Robert

I converted the HD wave file downloads to Flac using dbpoweramp and replayed it worked fine, playing all tracks on 3 albums in particular without stopping. Two were 24/96 and one 24/192.

I recognise that XXHE converts Flac files automatically to wave.

Can XXHE convert wave to flac?

Robert

Tried SFS .68 no difference. SFS at higher levels over a 100 works. Something in the audio file is causing the issue I believe. I've run one through Xrecode(audio format software) but still no good.

Harry Belafonte Live at Carnegie Hall 24/96 HD Wave download is one I'm playing with that fails. The same recording but in flac downloaded from Qobuz works fine. In particular they are 24/96 files downloaded from HD Tracks. I havn't had any problems with 24/96 downloads this year but most are new recordings like Melody Gardot. Perhaps they had a problem and have fixed it. From my dealings with HD tracks they say they are only a vehicle for digital files and pass on whats given to them by the record labels.

Is there software I could run these music files through that might fix the problem?

Robert

Some of my older hi res downloads (24/96/192) which sound amazing playing back at .69 SFS only play one track then stop dead, some play 4 tracks then stop dead. They will play more tracks at higher SFS but don't sound as good!!!!
Recent hires downloads seem ok playing whole albums no stopping. So not sure whats happening here. 
Perhaps these hi res albums have a glitch in the program. How would I check this? All I know its bloody annoying.
Its random. New 24/44/48 stuff works fine also 24/96 this years recordings.
Robert

Thats ok, all ready damaged from years of Audio issues!!!

Do you think it makes a difference soundwise changing Ram OS size to 25GB for 14393.0?

Robert