Robert,

Can you try to elaborate on the frequency of the ticking ?
I think you said it is always constant. But what is the time interval between two ticks ? And are they always as loud when there ?
It starts to be intrigueing.

Peter

Andre,


100%.


Not ours, because it is only more efficient than an SMPS. That is how I deliberately said "less than 30W for the whole PC" ... and that includes the supply it self (eh, obviously but it may go unnoticed ).


That takes the assumption that the noise from this would influence sound. Well, maybe, but it is difficult for me to reason how to. So I use the LPS for "backfire" mains reasons. Or think about what the switcher actually does when more power is needed; it is digital behavior (and *now* you are allowed to think noise again, but towards the mains itself).

Anyway, the moral is that all is a consistent whole and you can't leave out one piece of it (see my previous post). So for example : use a higher Wattage CPU and the LPS is not sufficiently powered any more. Make it larger and it will spread too much heat. Now active cooling is necessary. The active cooling consumes as well (1.2 IIRC) and it gets worse again. And ...

So we travelled the other way around, until it started to work. And the base is the software. Nice eh ?

Regards,
Peter

Hi Andre,

There is no reason XXHighEnd will not work with the AMD.


True, but against the price of a high TDP (what about 180W).


So assumed you know about our Stealth Mach II PC, I myself will never be able to approve that. I mean, this PC is all passively cooled, runs on a linear power supply again passively cooled and anticipates a 120W (Xeon) processor. These too come with quite some cores like (hyperthreaded) 28. This 28 core is not really comparable anymore because quite expensive, but the 20 core costs less than the Ryzen.

I myself know nothing about the real performance and then mainly how it can be UNDERclocked, which is what we do with that PC (up to 300MHz if you want). And this really is to the benefit of better sound. Anyway, a completely new motherboard (to me) and I really will not be able to tell.
But if someone has a gaming rig with it and a couple of 70dB fans, then he can try it out. .
Please notice that even the gaming is not about processor speed at all and only partly about the GPU (speed and setup). It is about Minimized OS and what that all further implies for way way more (gaming) speed.
But what I wanted to say : now the whole PC consumes less than 30W and I can't tell in advance how that will work out with the Ryzen. If it is too hot (and/or can't be reved down) then it is byebye to the passive cooling and everything. And *that* I regard crucial.

Now I hope this helps you a bit ...
Regards,
Peter

Thank you Robert.
Peter

Robert,

I must call back on my idea about the DAC. I mean, I suddenly recall "the first track only" and how could that be the DAC ...

Possibly it is the 32 bits which I *do* pass on to the DAC. So for me and most they are cut (to 24 bits), but not for your 32 bits DAC ...

Regards,
Peter

Robert,

I would ask the manufacturer (and learn a few new languages on the fly ).
(btw, I talked about the DAC and not PC or something)

Easiest would be to lend a DAC from someone (or a shop).

I am just thinking ... You will have a kind of strange problem, because you can not ask it to anyone (e.g. CA) because there will be nobody with 24/768 playback software. AFAIK only XXHighEnd and HQPlayer, but both do that explicitly for the NOS1 as there is no other DAC functioning like this. And your Oppo will have an AKM D/A chip (32 bit) I suppose.

But thinking further again ...

The Driver software you will be having for that, should be Chinese XMos stuff. Nothing about the Chinese, but it won't be much official.
Can I be right ?

Peter

Bert,

The Driver Sigining is not related to this.


I don't know about "again". Unless this is your implied answer to my question you quoted (read : I still don't have the answer, really).
But you must apply that procedure and when you did that one time, it is sufficient for "ever".
But, do notice that it would be an easy mistake to copy back from a backup "copy" of the OS, and forget about this. Also, you can take it for granted that this was not yet done in your RAM-OS Disk, because the functionality emerged later, in 2.07.


Which makes that impossible.

Also notice that this is about OS settings and not XXHighEnd settings or dynamically by XXHighEnd changed settings. You must really press those buttons ("Change") before something is applied to the OS and which comes through after a reboot.

Peter

Hi Bert,

In the 2.07 Release Notes search for "time stability" (no quotes) and in there you'll see the procedure to follow.
I am not sure you just told that you did exactly that, so let's have that out of the way first ... OK ?

Regards,
Peter

Hey Robert,


No, that seems impossible to me. The playback itself virtually does not use CPU (you can check in Taskmanager). And with Arc Prediction (no Custom Filter) it can't be a bug in the filter programming either.

If it is so that the ticking is constant for its frequency/occurrence, regardless any XXHighEnd setting (but that sampling rate of course) I'd consider "electrical error" and a capacitor doing this to you. This is a bit tough to explain but think like a capacitor loading too much energy (if that would be possible in the first place) and that needing to escape. The loading builds up slowly until it bursts.
I am completely making this up and maybe it can't exist at all, but the lower sampling rate might draw just that little lesser of energy the capacitors must provide.

A software bug in the DAC is much more likely of course, but I think this won't express with the time period you imply (and rather each sample and then you will perceive it just as poor sound).

HTH
Peter

Robert,

Have you considered that it could be your new DAC ?
Can you prove that by means of another DAC, perhaps ?

On a side note : it is quite well possible that with 2.08 you suddenly perceive this (which it has been there prior to 2.08). This is a bit how 2.08 unveils "detail".

Regards,
Peter

Right David !
Regards,
Peter

Hi Ramesh - check your morning's email.

Regards,
Peter

So basically the same problem.

You could try to switch on logging, let the message about the Connection appear, let that be and grab the newest XX- log file and post it.
I'm afraid though that the relevant logging is just not active in the production version.

I feel that you have some general odd problem in your HTTP traffic (for the part XXHighEnd uses) or it is the problem I mentioned first, after all. I never tried it, but I could try to use your TidalSession.dat file to see the problem is in there (you now don't need to send email + password but only the .dat file, by email).

Did you (ever back) use the activation procedure on this Windows 10 machine ? I ask, because that would imply the same HTTP kind of traffic (protocol).

Another idea could be that you use MinOS on this PC and this is not really the idea of it. I mean, this was never tested and requires services could be off. So are you ?
Is the UAC On or Off ? (see rightclick on Stop). It should be On.

Peter

Ah, OK Colin.
Thanks,
Peter