This is what I posted in CA, only 3 days ago :

All is a 100% matter of what your reference is, hence what you are used to (by now). Easy example (well, for myself, and you need to believe me) :
When Windows 10 came about, the first version which was supported was the (almost Alpha) Build 10074. This is still supported and the RAM-OS Disk we provide allows for booting into it with two mouse clicks (maybe three) and within a minute or two you can compare with any of the other 5 OSes on that disk, each in 4 modes (so yes, that is 20 differently sounding OSes). So, once in a while I give this 10074 a listen again to see whether it surpasses the current Build 14393.0 "reference", especially when I changed SQ in the player software.
Day before yesterday was such a day I did this.
 
Am I off topic ?
No, not really; while 10074 has been my standard for 6 months or so and found it the best, though a kind of special because it had a recognizable flavor (never a good thing), if I listen to it today, it all over s*cks. All over.

This is what I posted later, on the same day (you can see my heart was full of it ) :

So I have my own Lush in use now for quite some months. I quickly got used to its "sound" and am amazed each day again how albums I have known forever, now suddenly sound for the so much better. But ... this always has been with one consistent set of settings in XXHighEnd I was used to, hence, I never tried anything else, which I already shouldn't because of changing two things at the time (like USB cable plus settings). But a week ago I started with that, actually encouraged by a new XXHighEnd version with inherently better SQ to begin with and so automatically from one came the other. And what I now notice is that this cable allows for "infinitely" tweaking SQ by means of changes at the source (which is the playback software). The SQ suddenly is outrageous and the Lush is doing something quite differently from before : it carries another dimension. But let me quit being a commercial by means of this :
 
I started thinking about posting this because elsewhere I just posted about W10 Build 10074 and how this sounds like total cr*p now, while it has been my standard for 6 months or so. The difference ? the Lush. There is no single way that this OS can ever be made to sound satisfactory, so bad it is. There is just no mid, to name something. Bass is devastating, highs are thin as thin can be.
Point sort of is : 10074 always had a flavor which never is a good thing. But, I could like it, until a new (supported) build came about and that became the reference/standard for a longer time (these are matters all XXHighEnd users agree over easily). So, 10074 is wrong somewhere and the Lush brings that forward wherever it can. At least that is my reasoning now.
 
Yesterday it was Haloween. For me this meant that I found a couple of "Haloween" albums on Tidal, of which many appear to be up to hard core metal. It sounded gorgeous.  Now *that* is something (a kind of big victory that this can happen, right ?).
The other day we talked about Beastie Boys and how they now sound so good in a "hi-fi" system. But metal ?

This last piece refers to the lacking mid. And when I say lacking, I mean : it is not there AT ALL.
14393.0 ? all the other way around, but better balanced than a quite profound mid as how it was. At least with the Lush. So bass is better and highs are better, but probably it will be so that the mid decreased somewhat (and for 10074 all over).

Interesting eh ?

Best regards,
Peter

Ahaaaaaaaa ...


That. And for 100% sure. I desribed in on CA in between some (offtopic) lines. No mid and the worst ever.
Maybe I can find back where this was, although usually this is a tough task with all the offtpic nonsense in there.

It is funny that I can recognize it by your description !
Or just very good described by you. Haha.

So of course you can stay with 2.07 and 10074, but 10074 is "obsolete" for a longer time by now - I mean SQ wise. I reulalry try it (like I did for 2.09) and it never improves. The contrary, it gets worse. And how it is now, it renders music (OK, from 2.09) completely unlistenable.

Joseph, great thanks for this (although I have the feeling that you don't thank me much).
If you want a link to e.g. 14393.0 (no further upgrades applied to it) let me know. Or 10586.0, but that really isn't the better one (did not tray that with 2.08 or 2.09 !).

Kind regards and sincere thanks for posting (I doubted a bit whether it was my ears of the day),
Peter

Hi Anthony,

Oh, as long as nobody is going to take advantage of this and starts his own RAM-OS Disk sales point, I gues I can not object.
... No, not a good idea. At some stage it may go wrong after all (one is enough) and then who is to blame ? Point is, I can't grant it Anthony/Robert for this one time and say No to a next. Of course this NOT related to trust (not at all - the contrary because how can I think differently when Anthony very politely asks) but mind you, it would be quite 100% the same as explaining to someone how he for this one time can avoid XXHE Activation by explaining what to do.

Hopefully it is clear that this is not about normal $ income missing, because 100% the same as with the Stealth PC - someone who already owns the RAM-OS Disk (hdd) pays 0.00 for the SSD version of it. That internally the SSD costs 55 or 60 is because it just costs that (empty). So for anyone counts that they could have an SSD for the normal SSD price - it is only too bad that the shipping $ is in order.

So the above (stroke through now) really was my genuine idea about it, but at thinking over the "baming" which could happen at some stage, it is by far better if no-one can be blamed ever, and the first would be Anthony and the next Robert (but both equally). Would I want that ? (and even if you yourself wouldn't care, I will all the more).

Sorry for the long story !
Best regards,
Peter

Hi Robert,

There is no such thing as the "current" SSD. The SSD is for 32GB of internal PC memory and the HDD is for 16GB. The SSD can not be tweaked into 16GB usage (or otherwise the description is too long to bear) and the HDD can be tweaked for 32GB usage, but now the boot time is virtually too long (think twice the time you are used to).

Both are as current, and/but the SSD alwas comes with the Stealth PC. Well, as long as it takes because of the memory price for it (started out as 70euro or something and now is already 500 !!!).

If there's a different in sound from the two I'll eat something, BUT the implied memory usage (thus different for the both) is something which sure can matter. On one hand, the less memory the better (less current draw and such) and on the other, the more memory space for the OS (and for you) the better.

So as you see, a good question after all.

Best regards,
Peter

PS: Maybe you don't realize it, but the fast volume was made for or on behalf etc. - you.

Hi Richard,


Yes, that is OK.


Keep LAN means : when going from Normal OS to MinOS, the LAN is kept. When this is not activated, the LAN is definitely set out of order when booting into MinOS. Persist does nothing in that case.
Keep LAN with Persist is No means : LAN is kept when going to MinOS but when Unattended Playback starts, it is not kept (and re-engaged when playbask stops or some functionality needs the LAN). With Persist is No, the LAN is always kept.

I know it is confusing ...

Are you OK again now ?

Regards,
Peter

What's strange though is that apparently the .rar can solve this, but not for all ?

Ram os 14393 - install issue.

Peter

I suddenly think I know where these blocked files come from ...

The development machine I use here, runs on W7. The other day I had to upgrade that to W7/SP1. 2.08 was the first upgrade from that SP1 and W.09 also comes from there.

The strange thing is that I don't see this blocking myself. Not here, not on another PC outside of my network.
So I suppose I need the help of one of you to mimick this and to next/later check whether it has been solved.

Thanks,
Peter

Hi Richard,

I think your problem now is a different one, and possibly the cause also. I think there is no need to go into it as the damage is (really) done. But no worries :

Backup / Restore

Although in there it is more about back than restore, you will get the gist for "restore". Thus, you are going to set back the whole of the OS (takes a few minutes only).
Yours probably is 14393.0 and you will see the two files for that too.

Delete the normal one and copy the "copy" to the exact name as the one you delete(d).

Regarding the obsolete TRIAL it is best to just boot into one of the others, like 10586.0. Now look in Drive D: for the files.

---

To me it looks like you copied the whole new 2.09 over your previous version (like 2.08 or 2.07). This can't work. But maybe I judge wrongly. Anyway for a next time : RAM-OS disk users must paste the Upgrade Patch file.
And Richard, after this excercise you want XXHighEnd to be upgraded again (I don't know which version is in the backup file).

And yes, the base problem are these blocked files. See next post.

Best regards and good luck !
Peter

Yes Anthony. And coincidentally I have an example of that :

Maybe you recall that somewhere in the Release Notes of 2.08 I mentioned the stutter at changing the volume with the relatively low(er) SFS like 0.9 I used. Well, that indeed was a situation that the Audio PC was running for "months" (I don't know, but quite many weeks). Then last weekend I rebooted it, and now I have no stutter on the volume and SFS of 0.9 ... Only a first time of the playback session (that is always more difficult for Mr Windows, in general).

Regards,
Peter

OK Robert, if it was that simple ...
Otherwise all is looking good to me.

If it happens again, without you being aware of changing anything, let me know. It should not change automatically, so if that happens, something is amiss.

Btw, "mangling" with the normal Windows Boot menu can cause these kind of things easily. And actually you have just proven that you used that. But possibly only because of seing problems. But still ... (and just a general hint and nothing iof "accusing" as such !) we should never interfere with the (redundant !) XXHighEnd boot menu (thus only use that, so all remains consistent). Thus also with problems, try to use the XXHighEnd boot menu or otherwise things may only get worse.

Best regards and thank you for the feedback,
Peter

Yes, this is important. Are you using the Coverart Wallpaper ?

And are you using Alt-U all the time, but this one time it did not work ?
or ?

Maybe I was confusing. Alt-K is the same as that Stop After Track button and I really did not put any value in the difference (but good to know now anyway). If we use a remote (and I think we do) we can't even use Alt-K.
Otoh, you could be using the XXOSK and imply Alt-K from there (I do that some times).

Peter

Hi Guys,

There is totally nothing strange with the audio PC helping itself by a reboot. This is all about the memory and how things get cluttered. This is unavoidable and will deteriorate over time. Notice that I am talking about Windows itself and how it will become more and more difficult to perform its tasks fast and how audio will (!) suffer from that.

Small problem : I know this, I thus also test this, and when I have explicit issues (undoubtedly the same as we all experience once in the x days) it does not help. This makes me think that it actually DOES help, but some other environmental thing prevents that it shows. Something which acts togther with something else, and both need the reset in order to help SQ.

Of course it will be so that once all is 100% OK and the PC is more in trouble after a day or two, this will be noticeable. So Anthony (and Robert) you can't be wrong there. But while my PC seems fine even after two months (I am serious), there's just something else too. And, this even can be in the PC. Example : you stress the available memory too much because of overloading the RAM with just too many highres files. The OS will do everything and all to free memory, which just is not there. Mind you, we're talking about "disk space" which of course is memory, but the OS does not know that. Processes may start to cure this and they may never stop running until a reboot.

Something else is that after thinking about it a 1000 times, two days ago I finally set my Max SFS from 120 to 4. I never touched that before not to influence other trials (really going on each other day). This frees a LOT of memory, but only internal memory and not "hard disk" memory. This is typically the memory which gets cluttered and now has a lot more space for it (which means it won't require cluttering (hard to explain in one sentence)).

Regards,
Peter

Arjan,

a. Do you have the Always Clear Proxy button active (in Settings) ?

b. If Yes, do you (some times) use the [C] button near the bottom of the main screen ?

c. Can you dig up the resolution/sampling rates and HDCD state (possibly MQA state if you are using that) of the last track played and this new one ?

d. Can you describe this more thoroughly for me :


because no track stops unless it is the last track (hence the same you restarted payback for) or you used Alt-K (stop after track), or something else I can't think of.

Thank you !
Peter