Hi Gerner,

Not to talk problems out of the way ... I seriously think your 4 core (!) system cannot be judged anyway ... that is including the, say, fact that you don't hear a difference between do / do not tick the Appoint Procssor Core checkbox. You will be having enough headroom to not let it make any difference. On the other hand :

If *you* tick this checkbox, you will be appointing all the processes to one core (the 1st) and the 3rd and 4th would be doing nothing. For your system this would theoretically be worse ...
So a 4 core system is to be tuned differently, and which would be more difficult (I should evenly divide tasks between 3 cores, except for Engine#3 to be run at the 4th on its own).
So, in your case IMO it would be better to not tick the checkbox ...

NOTE : ... which would IMO not be the explanation of *you* having problems now. So I say it again : something is going on ... but not on my system.
Mind you, during playback I let XXHighEnd search / arrange for albums, taking the full 100% of the 1st core for 90 seconds or so. Although it may influence sound because of the second core taking a few % of it (due to drivers which can't be appointed), I do not hear it, let alone crackling appears.
... which STILL does not mean nothing is the matter ...

Ah, ok, clear.
Yeah, well, it is obvious that you are not the only one, so for sure something is going on. But also, in the context of what you are saying / proved, there's this :

It was me who always told that Vista/Engine#3 could not be stressed in any way that it would matter. But but but :
Since 0.9m(-1) and the appointment of processor cores I would express the opposite : while Engine#3 is not allowed to divide its tasks between the cores *AND* when new processes are started after Engine#3 running ... they will be appointed by the OS to the 2nd core (because the 1st core is already much more busy, see pics), and it will influence Engine#3 directly.

Do note though that this is from off 0.9m(-1) and not from off a later version.
Just trying to find an explanation ...

This is how it should look like at doing "normal" :

Hi Gerard,

I'm not sure what you are trying to tell here, but it looks like : when I stress the system, the sounds degrades.
Yeah, well ... Is it our intention to be able to stress the system and maintain good SQ now ?

If I misunderstood your message, please say so ...
Btw, if you are starting a process during playback, this is out of control of "Appointing Processor Cores", and they will interfere with playback (being the right (2nd) core).

Sliding the cursor towards the end of the track (in the area of 10 seconds near the end of it) confuses the "mechanism", so let's say it's not fair to do that (I think that's somewhere in the Release Notes, if that matters at all ).

Alltogether it is difficult to talk in the context of what you are doing with the PC, while obviously (??) it is not the intention at all to do such things.
But again, maybe I misunderstood.

Peter

Ahh ...

Gerard, this makes perfectly sense;
When you leave the window open (the one which pops up after clicking the Library button), the program can't do anything else ... while it should provide the next track when playback is active.


Thanks. Something to solve ...
Peter

Thank you guys. Really appreciate it.
Remember, I can't do it all alone ...

From various angles it comes to me that the SQ on versions 0.9n (but possibly from off 0.9o only) u/i 0.9p is degraded;
Soft crackles may emerge, depending on the soundcard used (and possible buffer settings in there).
This may start immediately or start after a few tracks playing.

Please revert to 0.9m-1 to be sure to have the good SQ again.

Thanks for everybody reporting this, while I myself was busy judging MP3 sound (which for me is without crackles, but here too others report them).

Edit :
But please note this is not sure; e.g. I myself can't copy this behaviour.

Peter

Very nice effort vojin. Really appreciated.
Also, I think you described things in a way which really can be useful at judging systems. It would be "my way" at least.
You must have much experience ...

Thank you,
Peter

First of all let me tell everybody that he/she is perfectly allowed to respond to this, and all is just open and not appreciated as offending (me) or whatever.
I waited a bit ... but since nobody vents an opinion, here is mine :


Formally Andrey is right in his judgements. Added to that, for him 72 euro means something like 1100 - 1400 euro. Similarly for American people the 72 euro is well over 100 euro these days. With this I only want to say that this is not so much "nagging", but merely a serious issue when things happen as Andrey descibed.


This is not completely true;

The combination of the data I receive from the original activation with what "you" would be asking for when such a thing like a stolen PC happens, and where this "asking for" would be by means of PM obviously, will indicate that it is you indeed. In fact, this is no problem at all, and the only thing what might be an issue is your trust in that I will provide an Activation Code (for free) again. But I happen to know that Andrey's context is a little bit different ...

What it Andrey really is about, is that someone could just TELL his PC got stolen, that this someone in the mean time resides at his friend, he obtaining a free Activation Code for this friend by this means ...

With the latter possible situation in mind, it just needs that twisting upside down, and there is the problem Andrey expects (from my judgement) when his PC gets stolen etc. ...


Just for fun, the situation is a tad more complex, and Andrey knows that :

Allow me Andrey ... You told me that you activated "a" PC at your work, but wanted the license for your home. The context however, is this : http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=229.msg1364#msg1364, first post.
Now a few things are going on ...

a. Whether you tell me that you made a mistake in activating the wrong PC, or -worse- when you tell me transferring the Activation just does not work (which happened one time before without I could explain it !), it doesn't make much of a difference because in either case I cannot check whether your story is correct;
b. When so much money is involved, firstly you 'll get a sad mood, and secondly you'll try anything to get things right. Thirdly however, I *know* much money is involved, and I can expect anything to happen to gain 1100-1400 euro illegally.

With this I do not, by any means, try to expres that Andrey's case of not being able to get the Activation where he wants it, is based on illegal activities. Not !
It expresses though, how difficult things can be to judge, while coincidentally several issues are going on at the same time, and I am not able to judge all anymore ...

(btw, at this time I am still working on these things, offline with Andrey)

Anyway ... although Andrey expresses his (more or less) virtual/hypothetical problems the way he did, I myself think it is justified to worry a bit about either that, or the underlaying potential problems.
One thing : as long as everything is told honestly, and history can make that consistent, there won't be a problem and you will get a Activation Code when needed. All is about trust ...

I can add to this, that it happened twice that people got in trouble at Activation (both cases were about not following the procedure correctly), while those both people just paid again to get things right (they were in a hurry I suppose), and *then* asked to get their money back ... which of course happened so. Obviously such a thing can only happen when 72 euro has a value of 72 euro; when it would be about 1400, personally I would not go about like that ...

Thanks,
Peter

Maybe I got the year wrong afterall ?

I gave priority to other things ... lousy planning.

Oh yes ... the capability to program correctly.
So no problem afterall.

Gerard, is it correct that I did not receive anything ?

Btw, I myself still did not find any anomaly yet .

Yep ... I forgot to build in a check that with XP this (MP3) is not possible ...

Not much helpful, right ? 

Read your PM.
Sorry for the inconvenience.

Hmm ...
Since you copied the whole folder from the originally activated PC ... could you delete the .DAT file on the "new" PC and try again ?
If this helps, it is just something I did not think of ...