|
130
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Intona gone again
|
on: November 22, 2016, 09:38:54 am
|
Hi Juan, Thank you for the kind words. allow me to say that I'd like to see Anthony around here. Allowed.  But I hope Anthony understands what you mean, because I don't ! It feels like a language problem. Kind regards, Peter I think Anthony is smart enough to understand my words and yours. Thanks Peter. Kind regards, Juan |
|
|
|
|
131
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Intona gone again
|
on: November 22, 2016, 09:25:02 am
|
Hi all, don't want to upset anybody BUT,
I've just taken the Intona out of the circuit after putting it back in about 8 weeks ago. Well I now think its definitely better sounding out.
I know this is odd but a friend and I compared the CD playback against the upsampled XXhighend playback of the same track's. The CD sounded better and this was at 16/44.
With Intona in, the treble was somewhat flat, less detailed, less impact, bass was ok. I realise I'm running both through the Benchmark, not the NOSa. But I am concerned somewhat how some of you are referencing your sound. My CD playback is through a Cambridge 751 BR player running direct into the Benchmark from the HDMI output. Normally the XXhighend sound easily beats the Cambridge. By removing the Intona XXhighend was better again.
I still say even though the Intona does some good things it takes something away.
Robert
Hi Robert, about 4 or 5 years ago I compared the sound of my latest cd player, a combo of EMM Labs of $20k, with the NOS1 and the XXHE/NOS1 beat the EMM Labs without a doubt, consequently I sold the latter and never regretted it. And I have not regretted among other reasons because, XXHE/NOS1A is upgradeable, the synergy between the NOS1 and XXHE is perfect, it allows me to modify the sound by changing a few parameters (that is entertainment), the service and contact with the manufacturer is almost say as with a family member (with what it implies  ), it is much cheaper and finally and above all it sounds better. All of the above to say that I have not a way to compare the sound with other players, the only thing I can do is to compare the sound of the NOS1A with or without some other components in the system or modifying XXHE. When I received the Intona I compared the sound with and without it and it seemed to me that the sound was better with it in the system. I never tried again but as I see your careful comparison I'll do it again and will share it with all. Thanks Robert. PS. Talking about the contact with the manufacturer as if we were members of a family, with what it has of good and bad, allow me to say that I'd like to see Anthony around here. Maybe it is not my business, sorry then, maybe yes, could be all of us business. Best regards, Juan |
|
|
|
|
133
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Your first RAM-OS Disk Upgrade ! 14393.0
|
on: October 26, 2016, 10:44:25 pm
|
|
After some modifications I'm now enjoying the 14393.0 version. The most important change has been to reduce the treble in my speakers by 3db. In my case I can adjust the level of the highs in the speakers, this way I managed to eliminate the excessive treble. I can imagine that if Peter could handle the software so it can regulate the treble, I think the 14393.0 version could be used without problems with a satisfying sound. The other change I've made has been the ClockRes to 5ms, otherwise the settings are Peter's ones.
I isolated the USB cable that goes from the Intona directly to the motherboard with an electrical tape in the same way that was previously isolated in the USB card and also have disconnected the grounding in the Audio Pc power cord. I know I have not the same computer as Peter (Stealth) but I can confirm that I have noticed a substantial improvement in SQ with all these changes.
Regards,
Juan
|
|
|
|
|
134
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: ram-os drive, XXHE v2.06b, Windows 10 build 14393.0
|
on: August 24, 2016, 11:43:37 am
|
|
I was trying to rewind when it was the last time I was really impressed with the sound and it was when I changed my settings to the new ones: SFS 120.0 Max 120.0. XTweaks 43, 100,- 1, 1. Q1:14, Q3:0, Q4:1, Q5:0 AND ClockRes: 1ms in place of 0.5ms.The custom filter was High 705600/768000 / 4.14%. And all that happened with W10-10586.0. XXHE v2.06a. I tested it again today and again the sound impressed me the same way. I changed the ClockRes to 0.5ms and the voice presence and smoothness was lost and the piano was somewhat a bit strident. Thinking that maybe the clue was in the clock resolution I returned with the same settings to the W10-14393.0 version. The result is that still the highs are a bit strident. So I return, for now, to W10-10586.0 with the settings mentioned above. However let me mention that the W10-14393 seems to have a better definition compared with W10-10586.0
Juan
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
