XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
March 29, 2024, 07:38:59 am *
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 ... 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 [998] 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 ... 1046
14956  Ultimate Audio Playback / Download Area and Release Notes / XXHighEnd Model 0.9s-2 (solves bugs) on: November 25, 2007, 07:41:54 pm
This version solves - if all is right - all the bugs or not completed features - as introduced with/for for Unattended Playback.

  • Processor Core Appointment.

    Also see The Good and the Bad ...
    This time it should work for you too (and not only for me Cry)
    Since the outlay in above link, do not triple over the Affinity just showing all cores; the 4 schemes act differently. But Scheme-1 should indeed show the Affinity appointed to one core. So you can check for it to work.

  • Various errors could showe up (could not be copied at will) at clicking Play with Unattended Playback.

    Important : The means to solve this, implied that during the process of loading the tracks, nothing can be interrupted (stopped); For normal WAVs this won't bother you, but with FLAC/MP3 the time for loading can be lengthy, and it is just that which could make you feel sorry to have pressed the buttons ... which is just the situation which can't be stopped (ok, Taskmanager). In a future version maybe (IOW, it takes too much time to make something really decent from the way it was otherwise).

  • Contrary to the above, the loading of normal WAVs at Unattended Playback is much faster now.

  • Scheme-3 showed up twice at the combobox for Processor Core Appointment Schemes. The second one now shows 4 as intended.

  • The checkbox for Unattended Playback has been moved from the Settings Area to the Playlist Area.

    As it turnes out, it comes handy when switching between Attended and Unattended is near by. So now it is.

  • Clicking Play did not work the first time after changing from Attended to Unattended.

  • Albums/Tracks loaded from the Library Area also loaded the tracks currently in !CurrentlyPlaying.PLXX.

  • Track Titles in Cue data without quotes dropped the first and last character.

  • At Unattended Playback, just clicking Play now is allowed.

    When bringing up XXHighEnd in order to select another track for playback, first clicking Stop is not necessary anymore.

  • At Unattended Playback, select a Track and press Play is allowed.

    It already was, but before Release Notes told it was not.
    Here too, now just clicking Play (without Stop) is allowed.

  • Similarly clicking Next is allowed to let the next track play as if it were Attended Playback.

    Note that with this action, as with the above, the tracks in the Playlist Area above the selected track will be removed from the current Playlist. Obviously this is not visible at the time of doing it, and what it comes to is that they are not saved in !CurrentlyPlaying.PLXX.
    Btw, all is for your own convenience, which comes down to being able to bring up XXHighEnd again, and just press Next for the next track (you'll understand at doing it).


A last note :
Just as selecting more tracks in the Playlist Area currently does not work anymore (already for a longer time), similarly this does not work for Unattended Playback. However, when attempted there, XXHighEnd will hang for a few seconds. Just that you know it ...
14957  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Choosing a DAC on: November 25, 2007, 07:07:21 pm
Is it really ? or was it just a funny remark ?  Happy
14958  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Noise in 9s-1 on: November 25, 2007, 01:11:03 pm
Gerard, Leo,

Most probably your "sudden noise with 0.9s-1" is caused by what I just described here : The Good and the Bad ....
It would be back to the situation from before 0.9m ...
14959  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: The Good and the Bad ... on: November 25, 2007, 01:05:44 pm
Gerard, you mean at the first install of a 0.9s version ? (so, probably last Sunday)
14960  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Vista + Engine3 is IT!!! on: November 25, 2007, 12:45:35 pm
hmm I hope no appointment is close to scheme 3, but could you give it a try and tell us single core peps what we might be missing... or maybe no appointment might ??? trying to make you curious and, well I need a push to start thinking about building that new computer.... or finding a laptop that will do it well.

Uhohh, your answer came by itself : The Good and the Bad ...
People only have to confirm that they did not have "it". That's easy ...
innocent
14961  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / The Good and the Bad ... on: November 25, 2007, 12:42:35 pm
Oh my. I have made a kind of terrible mistake in the 0.9s-0/-1 versions ...

First the bad news about this :

99% sure in your versions, the Processor Appointment Schemes did not work.
The 1% is about the possibility that your settings weren't renewed at the first startup of 0.9s-0 (or -1 when you skipped -0), which is about that message you receive "Set your settings !" at startup. Of course nobody recalls whether he had that message or not, but when everything is normal, you should.
Anyway, today you can check things, by choosing Scheme-1 (not the others !), start Playback, and look for the Processor Affinity for a few random processes (Taskmanager, Processes tab, rightclick on a process, choose Set Affinity -> is only there when you have more cores !). When only one core is ticked (not by you), you have it working.

Then the good news :

When you don't have it, there's always the opportunity to improve sound again with the upcoming version (most probably today) by means of changing the schemes. yes


How did this happen ?

The "Set your settings" message, hence the resetting of it, occurs after a certain number of days (3 or so) *and* a new version. So for me, at a kind of continues change of (trial) verions, this never occurs. Now, in the 0.9r version there was a checkbox for Core Appointment, and in 0.9s this was changed into a combobox for the Schemes. But, the checkbox was still active under the hood, had a "ticked" situation stored in the "settings" (on hdd), and in the program the fact to change Affinity or not kept on working with this checkbox. So for me it just worked ... (as well as for everybody who did not receive the "Change your settings !" message who also had the checkbox ticked before running 0.9s for the first time).

As said, most probably you don't have it active, with the factual result of having chosen "No Appointment" in the combobox.
I think you *must* check it out, just to get to know what you have been listening to in the past week; is it ok then you don't have to start finding the best SQ for Schemes in the next version, and is it not ok, then you may have wasted your time on finding "no differences", and you'd have to do it again with the next version (for the good cause Happy).

I am *very* sorry for the inconvenience.
Peter


PS: If you don't have it running but found the SQ to be improved over 0.9r, then your observations can/will still be correct because of the priority schemes changed, Unattended Playback (when applicable to you), *OR* (so careful here) without Core Appointment it works out better for SQ.
On the last matter, please remember that I said that Scheme-1 was the same as the checkbox from before, and that to my findings Scheme-1 is not good and instead Scheme-3 does the job. So what actually happened in your systems is that you switched off the checkbox from 0.9r.
Add to this, that I said (elsewhere) that I expect Scheme-3 to be rather similar to "No Appointment".
wackowacko
14962  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Vista + Engine3 is IT!!! on: November 25, 2007, 04:52:14 am
Hi pedal,

When I finished writing the below, I wanted to scratch it again because it doesn't seem to make a difference to matters. But my curiosity stays on what you actually meant by the 10KHz phrase and all. You could mean that such a high frequency tone is hardly audible anyway, so how to hear a difference between a square and a sine. But since you also emphasized on the capacitor thing *and* your DDDac doesn't have them, all together I wonder what the message is. So I did not scratch it Happy :


(If you try to listen and compare square and sinus tones above 10kHz, they are in fact not much different).

Are you sure you tried that with your DDDac ? (I mean : with a nos DAC)
They sound very different !?!

Quote
BTW, “99%” of all DACs have a capacitor on its output, so they don’t pass on any DC components to the amplifiers. So true square waves cannot enter the amplifiers.

Again strange, because your DDDac has no caps in the output stage I think. Or ... or maybe you explicitly talk about the TRUE square waves ... they indeed cannot exist in electronics.
Anyway, my squares show square and fair on my scope (with some ringing of course). No matter where I measure (even in mid air ehh room, though very hard to capture there because of reflections). They do from 20-20000Hz (and more I'm sure, but I did not test that) ...
They do NOT with an oversampling DAC (at 10000 they're already nice sines, but depending on the amount of oversampling of course).

Peter

14963  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Choosing a DAC on: November 24, 2007, 11:47:46 pm
No, I did not try it on a quad myself. But I do know that what is under my control under a Dual, is not under a Quad.
Difficult to explain. But for example, Gerner who has a Quad says he does not hear a difference between settings. In the Quad case this could just be true, because things are not (enough) under my control ...

Oh well .. never mind (?) ...
14964  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Vista + Engine3 is IT!!! on: November 24, 2007, 07:29:29 pm
Maybe it is more easy to understand it like this :

In that particular version of XXHighEnd the frequency output (as for the net result in the room) shifted to the low side. In 0.9s-1 it is shifted in the other direction - to the highs.
This is, btw, a typical signature of jitter ... or the bass is good, or the treble is good. Not both. In tis case (0.9s-1) however something else happened;
where the highs contain a fair (too musch) amount of jitter playing with Appointment Scheme-1, Scheme-3 just makes that good, pertaining the other goodies (I did not try "No Appointment" but my feeling says it's rather the same as Scheme-3).

Well, IMO of course. Cool
14965  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Vista + Engine3 is IT!!! on: November 24, 2007, 07:15:25 pm
Gerner, it is all in the post I referred to. The XX version concerned can still be downloaded ... but how can you check since you don't have subwoofers. And of course you must have the appropriate album (Hatfield's End, Stonehenge 4 in this case).
This has few to do with room response, it has NOTHING to do with tweaking frequency output, it is just a stupid software player doing it (wrong in this case  Happy).

 Tongue

14966  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Vista + Engine3 is IT!!! on: November 24, 2007, 12:34:07 pm
Thank you very much pedal !
And ... you just confirmed something I did not want to do myself, but will now : increase the bass volume (at the filter side).

Please allow me - as usual  Wink - to backup your findings with IMO a related story of mine. For my own mind setting it's always good to write about things anyway :

First, please read this post : Re: 0.9d vs u/i 0.9j;
This, btw, also shows why it is important to archive things the way I do it, and why your feedback is so important.

Well, whether all is really true as how I described it in that post or not may be not the most important, but the sole fact that with 0.9s-1 the bass output got less -while at the same time being sure that it is for the better because of bass output being more clean (indeed)- this again will be about less standing waves in the room. Must be ...
Might you not have taken the time to read that long post I just referred to ... it is about a 26dB increase of the sub-low frequencies, only because of a software player working out ... well ... not the best ? And this 26dB is indeed in a frequeny range 99% of audio freaks won't even notice because they aren't ready for the subwoofer era.

Now, as a kind of side story, the way I tweaked my xovers already shows a more or less ridiculeous dip in the middle, or better, boosted bass and boosted highs. I won't again refer to the topic where I brainstormed about my reasons for uplevelling the highs (it must be worked out better / more decent), but for in here it might be important that the output as measured from the speakers already was uplifted crazily and now will go in the same direction for the bass.

Sidenote : Be aware that in my case the highs are to be interpreted as coming from horn speakers, measured at the mouth, meaning : the output is rather directional, the room far far less contributing to it by means of reflections. For the bass output this is unrelated (the room will do her work here anyway).

Since I am too deep into listening carefully how things should sound, and which nowadays is ONLY about nature, and near nothing about removing distortions (or IOW not about "how will my system sound the least disturbing" -> history) I myself am dead sure that there is nothing wrong with my uplevelled highs, as well as that nothing will be wrong with uplevelled lows. Now, assuming I am right, we get this :

When a loudspeaker (or in fact system) is measured, this doesn't go through XXHighEnd, right ? whatever it goes through, it is not what we listen through playing our albums. Now you tell me : if a stupid piece of software player can incur for 26dB lifted sub low frequencies (as it works out in the room !!), what is there to say from whatever measuring software ? And oh, I do not say that this software (or device) would be wrong, but I sure say it works out differently.
But ... when we all, by means of absolute judging/listening/hearing come to the conclusion that XXHighEnd her output is good, then that leaves us with the withgoing conclusion that the output of the measuring will be wrong(ish ?). And obviously there is no reason why our measuring software is not subjective to the same matters our software player is, knowing that the differences emerge at the DAC side ...

Of course, nothing tells us that it is necessary to adjust the frequency output of our speakers, but as far as I can tell many things are going on beyond our knowledge, and when a frequency curve as I imply does so much good to natural sound (which is explicitly not subjective to what I like or whatever), then something must be going on.

Peter
14967  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Want a good laugh ? on: November 24, 2007, 12:04:38 am
This is what I had in mind for yesterday, but I did not get to it. Right now the fun is a bit over ...

What about your self-tuning Vista Audio System ?

After a few days of using 0.9s (which actually is a few days before you all received it) I got my first message about Vista shutting down the spooler service (this is for printing). So I thought, so what ...
Then a few days later the indexing service stopped working ... which is good because I already stopped it, but it came back after a reboot (a known Vista problem).
Then again a few days later a next service shut down, some svhost service dealing with the graphics on the screen (look below how "white" the taskbar became from it).

So ... as long as audio keeps on playing, this must be for the better. innocent

As said, yesterday I wanted to report about this (but did not).

Then, this morning the first report from someone of you came in, about that spooler service. And a second ...
And then someone mentioned about the indexing service ...

Well, did we create a self learning audio system, or what ?
uhhmm ...

I guess it is a matter of waiting until Vista shuts down herself. We can only hope for the audio keep on playing. Must be the best !


Ok, actually I don't know what's happening, but my first thought is that according to the priority settings and all, Vista decides that it isn't able to run services accordingly anyway, so she shuts them down automatically (I've seen "time out" reports in the Windows error log). From theory that is just good. yes
Of course you can wait for nothing running anymore, if this continues this way. oops

Yesterday I thought I was alone on this, but wanted to warn you anyway. But strangely enough today (and not last sunday/monday when 0.9s was uploaded)  people start to report similarly, and now I'm thinking whether it really can be so Vista "learns" from her environment.
Currently, my spooler service is already shut down right after a reboot. Well, again, good. But how on earth is this possible ? It took 4 or 5 days before a first occasion of this happened to me. Unless people did not report it, it took "your system" 4 or 5 days to come up with it.

Now what ?
Old
14968  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Wav, Flac, Mp3 Problems ? on: November 23, 2007, 11:32:09 pm
Of course it is not the file ? ...  smirk
14969  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: CUE file bugs on: November 23, 2007, 08:45:33 pm
Quote
All of us thousands of users of CUE files would really like to

rofl

Good point Dave. I did not know it. Easy enough to solve.
14970  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: How to play Unattended with 0.9s-1 on: November 23, 2007, 08:12:18 pm
Quote
Ok, I get something like this too.  It's when I use the "Library" Tab and select albums by their cover picture.

All true and clear guys. Will be solved !

Thank you once again Johan !
Pages: 1 ... 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 [998] 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 ... 1046
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 0.439 seconds with 12 queries.