XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
January 21, 2019, 11:20:00 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: August 6, 2017 : Phasure Webshop open ! Go to the Shop
Search current board structure only !!  
  Home Help Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 1009
1  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Unattended - A single track in playlist stops playing seconds before end on: January 19, 2019, 05:57:53 am

Dear Zheng,

Quote
My old settings were Q1=30, xQ1=10 which I presume to be too high for my meager PC.

I think I said SFS, but it is about what you mention (the net Q1 value). This is not related to a too meager PC etc., but it relates to how a larger buffer is dealt with internally. With the smaller settings it will still "cut" at the change of format or end of the playlist, but you may not be able to detect it any more. Say that a Q1 of 1x 11 implies a cut off of 100ms then 10x 11 implies 1000ms (one second). And so on. The speed of the PC does not matter to this.

Kind regards,
Peter
2  Ultimate Audio Playback / Cables (Community induced) / Re: The greatest invention in/for Audio (Lush^2) on: January 17, 2019, 08:52:10 pm

Quote
trying to apply  A: B-W-R-Y, B: B-W-R in the dark and could not see the colours properly Happy

Hahahaha - That could be the best way !

Nick, I will try that (A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-Y) for sure.
Thanks a lot,
Peter
3  Ultimate Audio Playback / Cables (Community induced) / Re: The greatest invention in/for Audio (Lush^2) on: January 17, 2019, 06:50:37 pm
Quote
Yeah, I already determined this (edit: actually not exactly the same, but similar) back in September:

Mani, I don't think that you referred to your config which was "not exactly the same" and you merely refer to your judgment, right ?
I mean, your config was not the same in any of your listed trials ... (that I can see).

Kind regards,
Peter


4  Ultimate Audio Playback / Cables (Community induced) / Re: The greatest invention in/for Audio (Lush^2) on: January 17, 2019, 07:30:27 am

I now think that people can save the trouble of trying this
A:B-W-Y, B:B-W.

At the third day I got totally crazy of too much energy. Too much buzzing with it - at least how I perceive it.
Because this seems highly related to some burn-in process (or maybe groundloop build-up ?) I will try it tonight once again, but if it starts out the same as how it did yesterday, I will revert to
A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R
within20 seconds.

Yesterday it was literally killing. Super super tiring, although no harsh sound anywhere. Explosive energy. I don't know what really happens ...

Peter

5  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Spurious RAM OS on: January 16, 2019, 01:55:29 pm

Maxi,

Once in a while I make a new one from the ground up. Last time was a month or so ago (for a new W10 Build). But because it was some longer ago, I couldn't do it and found errors in my own notes. And then to think that *each* time I create a new one, those notes have to be adjusted, just because it is such a huge pile of things to do, and often you forget to wite down instructions. So that surfaces the next time ...
Eh, good luck ?
(but I still can hand you the expansion procedure)

Peter
6  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Spurious RAM OS on: January 16, 2019, 12:36:22 pm

Hi there Maxi,

The RAM-OS SSD as we sell it, is an SSD for one reason only : it boots faster with the larger OS which is pre-installed.

So the story is a bit different from your idea about it :
First people have 32GB of RAM, then it is convenient to have more space for the OS (on the HDD as how we ship it, this is IIRC 9GB), like 17GB or so (I forgot the number). Thus, the OS file which is loaded in RAM aned which ends up as Drive C:, has been made larger and together with that it was put on an SSD because this is read faster during the copying to memory. But on an HDD it would have worked just the same.

The other way around (your case) :
If you just put the OS, in its container of 9GB to an SSD, it remains 9GB. It will load again faster, but the HDD was fast enough. And so nothing really changed.

I guess what you want(ed to do) is make the space for the OS larger. Well, this can be done by means of expanding the OS file. If you need that, I can send the procedure to you by email. Or maybe not, because you made the whole thing yourself and already will know how to do that ? Anyway you can apply the exact same to the HDD and the SSD, as long as they contain sufficient space.

And now this has all been said : the SSD we ship is half smaller than the HDD (SSD is 240-250GB, HDD is 500-750GB).

Best regards,
Peter
7  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: January 16, 2019, 12:26:57 pm

People shouldn't miss this.

Happy
8  Ultimate Audio Playback / Cables (Community induced) / Re: The greatest invention in/for Audio (Lush^2) on: January 16, 2019, 12:25:26 pm

Hey hey ...

A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R

This has been the configuration for many months. Maybe from of today we can change it to this one :

A:B-W-Y, B:B-W

with thanks to kurb1980.

Unless it is me or my ears or electrical charge from outer space ... this is such a refreshing one ... hard to believe it is real. Many things in there I never experienced before.

First odd thing : I never noticed a real change on day one of listening to this. Maybe the wrong music for it, hard to tell. But this goes in combination with day two, where it was one large jaw dropping experience (this was yesterday).

Odd: Bass sounds like with too much energy, but at second thought and "seeing through" it is about a layer under what you here foremost, that layer implying extra-low frequency.

Odd: When walking through the middle of the sweet spot (crossing the room from left to right and back), in the middle there's a clear increase of volume. I did not check with the SPL meter, but I guess it will be easily detectable. Anyway, like all adds up on the sweet spot.
I know, this may be logical to happen, but I never noticed it, and the increase is really quite much (feels like 6dB).

Odd: The depth of the sound stage is as flat as can be.
Huh ?
Yes, but in combination with a sound stage which never has been wider.
Huh^2 ?
Before trying it out, try to envision that. To me it seems impossible from theories. Still it is so. There is no depth but there is infinite width. And the most troubling issue : I can not detect where this bothers me. I mean, the speakers are not detectable anyway (and that with this flat stage ??) and it just is a most pleasant presentation.

There is detail in an again lower area which brings forward all kinds of sounds and voices and mumbling and a 100 things I never heard before. This also does a lot to cymbals and percussion instruments. I am also confident that this attributes to the (music) reality level ... not-normal.

But supposed you know my way of thinking, something quite else is going on ...

I (or we) already know of what happens to the "accuracy" as such, when the stage is made wider by what I call unnatural means. The sugar cubes are an example of that. You end up in a church but in the end all is more vague. The idea ? the energy in the sound waves is spread (by whatever voodoo force Happy) and therefore all becomes less accurate (it is torn apart). Get the idea ?
All right. This Lush^2 configuration works a kind of other way around;

The sound stage is wider, true. But the reason now is : all is compressed in a flat space (if I say it is 1 meter deep then I will exaggerate). And notice me dealing with the "energy does not get lost" law of physics. What I plainly hear is this :

All the energy is in this tight space (you could do the math on it, and compare with a depth of e.g. 3-4 meters as how it was previously). There it fights for space. This is the buzzing of the bass but which only happens when not listening at the right position. This is also related to the 6dB (?) of higher level which is perceived when being right in the middle (of the speakers) - hence at the sweet spot again. All there beams as should, comes together where intended and "adds up".

If by now you think I really lost it, then be happy as it is and leave it be. swoon

All the again extra detail which is there now, comes from the far better accuracy because of the more compact sound (more compressed ?). Much more collides and much more literally energizes.

Warning : I have the clear idea that this now requires the Custom Filter Low setting, although I did not try plain Arc Prediction (each second of trialling things feels like a complete waste of time - haha).
The other and more important warning is about letting this config be for a first day and only judge at the second (it is too hard to imagine that I just missed this all on the first day).

I noticed that it was impossible for me to judge the quality of the "sound" because the music itself attracted too much (this is always a good thing, IMO). However, I was continuously and throughout pointed at the new sounds I heard everywhere. In amount, think twice as many (I am serious).
I coincidentally started out with some old hit (Turtles - Happy Together (1967)) and was open mouthed from the super clear sound and how undistortedly beautiful the lead singer brought this song to me. A-ma-zing. And with a channel separation of which I readily knew I never heard it before.

An other odd thing is that while on one side there's super speed exhibiting, there's an unsurpassed palpability at the same time. Listen to the snare drums and you'll understand what I mean. Full with body, never sharp and just how it sounds in reality.

Out of here
Peter
9  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: January 16, 2019, 10:49:01 am

Coen, you tempt me ...

But many years ago I worked on it for as long as was needed to find out that this is about a deep down Windows driver bug. This, with the notice that KS Special Mode is highly illegal to begin with, so there really won't be anyone feeling compelled to solve that bug. And when the driver is used in normal fashion, this bug doesn't surface ...

Peter
10  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: January 15, 2019, 07:48:10 pm
No imagination, I think. Btw, if possible for your DAC, try to use KS Special Mode. If it works without ticks or buffer errors, it is "the best" (sadly not possible for NOS1 users).

Anyway, you are completely correct in your stance that the upsampling changes the buffer sizes inherently, etc. This is exactly why I created the NOS1 such that electrically this all does not matter (and the software cooperates  Happy).

Also notice that most DAC's will let themselves "overrule" for the filtering, hence, an e.g. 88.2 will not engage filtering for 44.1 (read : will not roll off under 22.05). This means that "our filtering" will be effective in maximum fashion. But if the DAC does not understand this way of working, then the overruling merely becomes "messing with". And then you will have quite contradictionary filters on top of it all. This is why a DAC actually should be Non Oversampling; now we can guarantee that our filters will be applied for 100% (not messed with even the slightest).

And oh, notice that each Q1 setting below zero, is a special application for the WASAPI engine. Maybe set xQ1 to 1 and Device Buffer Size to 1024 (I recall that ever back I made it for these settings and I forgot whether this is all taken into account). Minimum of Q1 for WASAPI is -4.

Have fun !
Peter
11  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Unattended - A single track in playlist stops playing seconds before end on: January 15, 2019, 07:36:57 pm
Hello Zheng - Happy New Year indeed !

I solved this a few days ago. All you now have to do is wait for the new version. Wink

Btw, I think it is not commonly known by others which recognize the issue as "the last track in the playlist", that this happens at a "Format Change". So in the middle of the playlist it can happen just the same, if only a next track is of another Sampling Rate than the current one. The current one now will cut (and for how much depends on the SFS).

Kind regards,
Peter
12  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: January 14, 2019, 04:40:33 am
I changed my Custom filter settings to [low] which brings back body and character to the music. At high or Arc Prediction the sound is too "technical"... at least here on my system.

Bert, Yes, you can very well be right. I already forgot about your description but had in mind the advised Custom Filter-Low setting and yesterday from the first second it all came to me as more musical. Maybe this does not 100% cover what you are saying, although it could when thinking of the "too technical" you refer to. Along with it, I have the idea it is more pleasant to listen to, while I not readily noticed downsides. Maybe a tad less spoken bass ?

Thanks !
Peter
13  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: January 13, 2019, 06:44:40 pm
Happy
14  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: January 12, 2019, 04:15:26 pm
Quote
Q1 = 30
xQ1 = 5

Quote
Changing q1 to 10 and xq1 to 15

Hi Nick - I am sorry, but both end up at the result of 150, and I am not aware of any possible SQ influence by means of the individual settings of each.
This is for Kernel Streaming. For WASAPI the story is different ...

Best regards,
Peter
15  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: INVALID ARG with 705.6kHz WASAPI on: January 07, 2019, 06:43:16 am

Quote
Maybe this is some raw form of WASAPI support which XXHE uses for optimum SQ?

Although this would be true (like "Event Mode" or whatever other software calls it) is not in there at all. It is just (indeed) that mere raw mode which existed only at the very beginning of WASAPI. But that should not matter.
What does matter is the denotation of DIYinHK at the driver, which tells that using the highest speed is at your own "risk" etc. or whatever it tells or ever back told about it (maybe this changed). So this is (or was ?) some self-implementation of the IIRC XMOS driver and it is tweaked or tricked. So yeah ... maybe that is it.

On an other note, be aware that not all software implements WASAPI in Exclusive Mode (and IIRC JR does not or at least allows the situation of "not"). This means that resampling may take place if a sampling rate is not supported.
If Foobar did not change things, then that would be the better candidate for comparing because Foobar does not (did not) allow working outside of Exclusive Mode (same for XXHighEnd and that thus can incur for the culprit easily).

Please be aware that Q1 is quite crucial for WASAPI to work (and that the error in particular indeed can come from this). At getting it to work, always have xQ1 at 1 and best is to have the Device Buffer Size at its default of 4096. The default of Q1 is 14 (so start there) and vary it with 7 and 20 (not everything between it). If this does not help, set the Device Buffer Size to 1024 and try the 3 Q1 settings again.
If that again does not help, set back the Device Buffer Size to 4096 and never look at it again (it probably does nothing these days, except for being part of the calculation which Q1 x xQ1 also is part of (think like Q1 x x Q1 x DevBufSize).

For WASAPI this is all about timing and how the endpoint device (DAC) talks back about this. So if that does not happen for this particular rate ...

On a not unimportant side note : I can't see per the logging where it realy goes wrong or what part of the code is executed. Maybe this is because it has been 100 years by now that I used WASAPI - maybe this is because I removed redundant code. But the fault and abrubt ending in the log file I don't recognize.
Btw, it should be so that you get one or two more error messages, one of them showing a sequence of numbers. Am I right ? if so, can you give me a screencopy of that ?

Peter
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 1009
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.574 seconds with 12 queries.