1026
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: How to choose DAC for soundcard?
|
on: April 15, 2010, 02:26:44 pm
|
Well, to use double or quad arc prediction of XX your sound card has to be able to output a sample rate of 88.2 (double redbook of 44.1) or 176.4 (quad of redbook). Since your card has an S/PDIF coax output you need to find out if it can handle thoses output sample rates. If so, then I would think that's what you would want to try first and, of course, purchase a dac that accepts those sample rates as well.
|
|
|
1029
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: What can it be ?
|
on: March 17, 2010, 03:46:22 am
|
The first day I tried the Hiface I repeatedly got the "Device allocated but cannot Play" error with everything I tried to do. Initially, I had to restart the computer every time to get xx to work again. The next day I switched from scheme 3 to scheme 1 and everything worked. Scheme three works for Peter and Mani (See: http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=1161.0) so I would definitely try changing the core appointments to see if you can find one that works for you.
|
|
|
1030
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Hiface Impressions
|
on: March 15, 2010, 10:53:36 am
|
Apart from whether you may use a lower latency with Special Mode, I'd me (more) interested in knowing whether it sounds really different from Adaptive Mode (remember, I don't have a decent DAC to use the HiFace with, so I never could/can try).
In the "Thoughts On Sound Quality" thread I posted the following under 9y-8: Adaptive or Special Mode? Boy would I like to have more problems like this; they're both fantastic. I do think, for the moment, I'm tending more toward adaptive, where it seems one is several steps closer to the stage. Adaptive is a cleaner, less "warm" sound but I seem to hear more of the detail and richness of Eva's voice in Fields of Gold. And the cleaner sound is not harsh, just more "present". So far, I'm still preferring Adaptive but its a close call!
|
|
|
1031
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Hiface Impressions
|
on: March 14, 2010, 01:43:22 pm
|
Oops, you are, of course, correct; at 5 a.m., keeping the facts straight is sometimes like herding cats. So, theoretically, should one of the settings I posted above sound better than the others? Again, its still too early here to turn up the volume. Just wondering, though, I do understand that, in my case, knowing "just enough" sometimes proves to be dangerious.
|
|
|
1032
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Hiface Impressions
|
on: March 14, 2010, 12:02:51 pm
|
Am a little confused here.....nothing new really. Did more testing this morning and "achieved" the following regarding Device Buffer size, Core appointment schemes and Q1 value of 1,, which was the setting for each of the schemes below: Scheme Buffer Setting1. No Appmt 2048 2. Scheme 1 4096 3. Scheme 2 2048 4. Scheme 3 4096 5. Scheme 4 2048 In establishing these values I used the exact procedure described in the tool tip. Today is the first day I can get a Q1 value of 1 without "too many buffer errors" occurring. Now others, Peter and Mani, set Q1 to 1 with a buffer size of 1024. Tool tip and release notes make it clear that you must establish the correct device buffer for Adaptive Mode to work properly. How can the same device, the Hiface, have a different buffer size depending on the Scheme chosen or depending on the type of processor in the particular computer? It's early here so I can't really test for sound quality between these settings. Just wondering.
|
|
|
1034
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Hiface Impressions
|
on: March 14, 2010, 01:12:06 am
|
Thanks Mani. I've got a cable on order. Not being in a position to audition them, I am willing to defer to an Audiodidact . Regarding yours and Peter's settings, I can't duplicate them. 1024/1 induces too may buffer errors. Also, I can't use core appointment scheme #3; #1 works for me. Don't know why this is so. What rationale did you use in settling on 1024/1? Just wondering.
|
|
|
1035
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 09-y8
|
on: March 13, 2010, 03:54:26 pm
|
Adaptive or Special Mode? Boy would I like to have more problems like this; they're both fantastic. I do think, for the moment, I'm tending more toward adaptive, where it seems one is several steps closer to the stage. Adaptive is a cleaner, less "warm" sound but I seem to hear more of the detail and richness of Eva's voice in Fields of Gold. And the cleaner sound is not harsh, just more "present". Two days ago, using my M-Audio Audiophile usb for usb/spdif conversion, I know I would have found adaptive mode too harsh or too digital sounding. Not so today. I highly recommend the Hiface if you are on a budget.
|
|
|
|