Hmm... The right things for me, turned out to be the last things that I found. I think I found every version since z2 better than z2 at their release and in the end I always returned to z2. So my statistic with first impressions is not so good unfortunatly.

My sound changed very much because of that asio driver. I can not tell how z4 sounds now. z2 and z4.1 are not so far apart. I should not post so quick. I do it always and always I wish I could have waited. Especially now, where sound changed so much from that asio driver. At the moment I think, it will need some time to figure it out. Z2 ist still competing, especially when it comes to coherence and dynamics. I also discovered scheme 2

I love my first impressions. They are always wrong but it has a system So M is out. It seems to have realy problems with dynamics. It sounds flat, not pronounced. I should have listened more to MC. There are the dynamics but they can scare you off. Was not the first time.
New ranking:
1. MC
2. SC
3. M

4 permutations left

With z4.1 also special mode works again. -> All problems solved!

HA! Special Works! Didn't thought xx changed that much that I didn't tried it at all Very NICE!

4th who downloaded and 4th who posted
I just can use adaptive mode because of my new asio driver. But no problem. I tested mixed (M), mixed contiguous (MC) and straight contiguous (SC) with sfs of 10.
I would say I like SC and M at a first impression. M is clearer. SC is more relaxed tube like. I don't know what to think about MC. It seems the closest to z2. Which in this case, is not good. M realy improves over z2. It is clearer and has the same realness that I like on z2. SC could be too smooth.
I ranc them like:
1.M (Best)
2.SC
3.MC (Worst)

I can not compare to z4 because I have a new installation and don't like to mess around with this ram allocation issue again. So it is out of my sight.
And BTW: Z4.1 starts flawless.

Good job Peter!

I have tried all buffer sizes up to 4096kb but all with q1=1. I will try again with different q1. Thx

Thx peter. I found a "sollution". I installed the ploytec usb asio driver for windows7 64bit. This driver is used by a lot of producers of homerecording equipment (tascam,..). Now the slider doesn't affect the sound anymore. The sound has become a lot more dynamic and powerfull. Something that I realy missed. Never thought it could be this. The disadvantage is, I just can use adaptive mode. With special mode the playback seems to start and then there is a scratching/humming sound. Is this a fundamental incompatibility or could this been solved?

The volume slider of windows in "Properties of SPDIF-Interface" affects the volume. So this should not be if I use KS?
Any idea what is the problem?
Adrian

Here is a picture of my running sevices. This is a moderate configuration, that allows you, to use internet, firewall and keeps the appearance of windows. There are nearly no harddisk operations, which you can hear. This is most important. On my fresh installed W7 SP1 RC there is no big sound difference noticable between no services at all and the normal services.

I think this is most interesting. So if the binary to floating point conversion could be avoided, then we could translate the binary data to PCM without loss of information.

Do you know how this was created? The measured error seems more ore less the same. 0.000031, and 0.00003 (with different signs and addition of them). So, it is systematic but looks very strange. Why should the data being rounded? Just if the bandwidth is limited or not? and also that rounding is strange. 0.000024->0.000028?

I do, heard and measured

That is exactly what I think but I would conclude different-> At first you need a speaker of a good base quality. If you have a realy cr*py speaker, you can put the best source and amp before it and it will not sound good.

How do you like to prove the software source is right? We messing around with this all day and still are not sure what is right or wrong. It is far more easy to prove a speaker is right. And as we can not measure the software at the limit we are working on, we must first trust our speakers.

Nevertheless, it is like the question: What was first, the chicken or the egg?

I would say: The speaker is the most overrated part in the hifi chain and the digital source is the most underrated. Plus, that a good digital source is the most difficult to get.

I would admit to what you are saying but instead of FIRST, I would say SECOND. Because the FIRST thing you have to look for, when it comes to room acoustics is the speaker. If it is non linear on axis and/or has some peaks off axis and/or has resonanaces in the waterfall diagramm, it is the first place where coloration come from. But as it is a chain, with a bad source no good speaker can shine and with a "bad" speaker it doesn't help if you have a good source.

Yep I know. But after second test all theories seems to fail. The filter before the pc makes the sound dry. So I have build two filters and don't use any of them...Great!