Got the same error in X2. Just started the program and had a single wav in the playlist from before. Didn't get so far as to start playback, just started XX. Then the out of exception message cropped up with an OK. The player works normally afterwards.

Ok...just some thoughts on an sunday afternoon here. Read what Telstar wrote, and although not heard your DACs, I kinda symphatize with some remarks: Several releases of XX have had too much energy in the treble and upper mid. MB this is because Peter has tweaked it that way to suit his own PB chain and speakers, I don't know.

But these are characteristics which also has come forward in my system, which is very different fra Peters.

Also some releases are very 2D and you get the feeling of looking thorugh a window as Telstar mentioned. But then again, some versions are VERY 3D.

The problem is that one versions good SQ is often ruined in the next version due to implementing more formats, changes etc. that has nothing to do with SQ in themselves.

Looking forward to hearing some of these DACs before long.

Bugge Wesseltoft is written straight forward, without any funny chars... lol ...

Dear god...

Hey, that was what you said a year ago... 

The problem is most likely the norwegian special chars - like Æ, Ø, Å e.g. meaning AE, OE and AA.

XX most likely doesn't handle other chars than english in favourittes?

Tried W9b here now. Compared it with W8.

W9b has that special "something" compared with W8! Difficult to describe it, more of a pleasure to listen simply put.

Not that big diff. in bass between these two versions IMO. Maybe more grunt in the sub-region on W9b but not much more.

Leif said it best over, more "flow" and more musicality to W9b than W8 which was a little dull in comparison.

IMO.

Will listen some more later. Compared only a few songs here now. Tried some Q-settings but not much difference.

 

Is a little plagued with a hefty cold atm. Will get back to this thread in a couple of days.

Will try some more and get back to ya.
Volume is at 0db, yep.
Playing unattended for comparisons.

Yep. 

Will try W8 asap.

I pointed of much of the same characteristics comparing V6A and W7 the other day under the SQ section. Soft bass. Not much response from that thread.

V6A is much clearer and defined than W7. And if W8 is the same PB structure as W7 the "problem" has moved on to it.

Maybe its me, but I LIKE the sweetness you mention. Get that from the absolute best situations here, with exceptionally clean power during holidays etc. when much of the people living around me is away.

Sweetness=Nirvana.

But that's only me...

As Leif mentiones, he has very good results WITH OS. Don't think thats a dead cow.

Am at Q=14 yet, will try new settings. Tried Double and Upsample, but reverted back to vanilla 16/44 due to miniscule differences.

And yes, running the above tests in unattended (not updated my profile yet, will see).

EAC ripped WAVs used for the test. 16/44 standard.

Well, finally got the time to try them against each other. Have only compared SQ, nothing else.

V6a is sharper defined, e.g. portraits the sound "picture" clearer. It also has more sharpened transient shoulders than w7.

W7 sounds a little more dampened on top, with rounder transient shoulders, but maybe more "pleasant" than V6a.

Standing basses is more in the background on W7, f.ex. on Jamie Cullums, "What a difference a day make".

Bass generally sounds a little "rounder" on W7, on V6a it has more 3D and more obvious contours.

Piano sounds also "rounder" and more in the background on W7 than V6a.

Have hooked up my front monoblocks to my PPP to be sure power changes didn't disturb my comparisons, e.g. clean power.

Voices/singers comes through clearer on V6a than W7. Or with a little more treble.

On V6a the general volume sounds a pitch higher than through W7 which sounds (a little) lower in volume, not much.

All above somewhat exaggerated to make the point. Will listen more to W7 to make up my mind.

Are you using XP and not Vista?