Hi Jon - Thank you for your patience.

With some rest now … I knew the answer was simple :

Just the Lush^2 configuration. I already forgot.
A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-R.

It may come across confusing, but while the Blaxius^2 "analog" is presented as just that, we ship them for analog interlink usage. But your application is just digital and the work out should be the same as with the digital (USB) Lush^2 cable. Also, in the beginning the Blaxius^2 was supposed to be digital as such (it of course inherently is because of its specs), until we found that it wouldn't work for the MScaler - Dave combo. This is how the explicit -D(igital) version emerged. And point is : that can NOT mimic the Lush^2 because of one shield being fixed in side. Not so with yours …

The (if all is right) shipped A: B-R, B: B-R may not make any sense for your digital application. So try the one I mentioned above and let me know what you think. But of course only tomorrow. Haha.

Kind regards,
Peter

Hi there Jon,

For 100% sure I will try to come back to that configuration for you. But it requires attention I don't have at this moment (visitors from abroad) plus it requires reasoning and creativity. I mean, you are in the unique position that you use it in an environment that is … unique (the analog application for digital).
I *am* super glad that it works out. Nothing is worse than having the opportunity of warning you, while I just omitted that. So this feels good.

In addition, please notice that it is always a best idea to first let things settle (break in). Only then changes become fruitful because the judging will be more genuine. This should be about a week from the start.

Kind regards from here,
Peter

Hi Roger …

Triggered by the other post, I only now find yours. Great apologies for that. I somehow missed it completely.

So if you are still there (most probably 100% sure not), that drawing implies 3 bends of 90 degrees. So adds 30 cm.

Yes, a real kink will break the cable. This is why the advised smallest radius should not be compromised.
If you have it in your hands all is pretty obvious because you will feel where you should stop making the bend sharper. But that doesn't help much if you don't have it yet, does it ?

Kind regards,
Peter

Hi there …

I was afraid of that … could have asked (I recall I had a whole weekend for asking), but thought to not interfere because the descriptions should be obvious. I guess I must overhaul the description after all. With apologies …

Point is : The cable you have now is the better one. But it should work. And I don't see you talking about it not working as such. It can work, but depending on what they did at Chord's. Or in other words : we could softly blame Chord for issues, but instead we created the "digital" version just for the MScaler/Dave combination. But mind you, this was over 6 months ago …

So before we proceed, does it work ? also at the highest speed (768) ?

Best regards,
Peter

PS: And if I can address you with a name, this talks more comfortably. 

Robert, yes I am on Native Arc Prediction. But some times I try Custom when I don't like something. Always to no avail.

Best regards,
Peter

Update : The reason appeared to be something else;
It was the Custom Filter (set at Low). So I guess that we are able to hear so much through now, that this becomes apparent. And I suppose if you once hear it, you can't get rid of it any more.

Regards,
Peter

Lately something annoyed me. And yesterday with a 2nd album in a row, both from the early 70's, I heard a flanging effect in the highs. Possibly with the second (Triumvirat) I heard it because I heard it in the first Occupants from Interplanetary Craft - performed by The Carpenters).
I looked at my settings because I found it too odd, and my eye fell on the 5x30 again, of which I earlier had said not to notice much difference between the two (which surely should technically result in the same "treatment" as long as it is about Kernel Streaming (not WASAPI !)).

And then the problem was gone.

Extra odd (for me and XXHighEnd) could be that for WASAPI the values of Q1 (so Q1 alone and not related to xQ1 as multiplier) indeed would incur for such an effect when set from 0 to -4. Not that I ever heard it, but theoretically, yes.

I also recall an other setting which implies a "randomizing" effect. But  I forgot which that was and I don't see myself using any of that. Possibly it does not exist any more … It should be the ClockRes but I'd need to dive in the code to unveil it again.

Peter

Really so ? And not *after* I told my little story ?

I could postpone 2.11 for a while longer by putting in my ToDo a means to automate this copying …
Or maybe I can't keep this promise because I would let this go while booted from RAM, and the Mach II/III owners may find their Mach's running (too) hot during the process. I just don't know that. So mind you, as we know, copying the file to RAM takes a minute or two, but copying from disk to disk (SSD to SSD) will take (way) longer. Not CPU intensive at all, but … well, I just don't know.

Kind regards,
Peter

Nick,

The vhd file is never mounted, unless you explicitly request for it (the Attach functionality).

No Save of Settings will take place at Shutdown, unless you confirm it upon asking of XXHighEnd (answer with No, and nothing happens (the vhd file never was mounted in such a situation).

Might you once in a while Save Settings to it, that is still harmless. It is not the OS. Nothing changes further but that small portion of the file (say 1000 bytes in the midst of 25 million). It could do something, very far sought.

Where it goes definitely wrong, is you using the files as the OS. I mean, you just told you do that by means of *not* booting from RAM. So now continuously things happen, and it happens fully automatically (like OSes are).
Whether you do that in MinOS or Normal OS is regardless, but doing it in Normal OS is more devastating because the OS is 10 time more "wild / active" in there.

So all cleared up.
Btw, on top of all I suggest that you even might leave it booted from the vhd for complete days - just because you did not care (springing from not understanding that this could happen).

The upside of it all is clear : very good that you posted about it because now you know. And others maybe too.
More upside for you as a person : I myself always suspected this (degradation) and when preparing a Mach III I always boot into normal OS quickly to wee whether it works (but the RAM OS Disk *has* to boot into that by default because of OS initial settings for people). Then boot into RAM OS, to see whether *that* works, quickly followed by booting into/from RAM where I finally am at ease because from there nothing can happen to the file. It is just impossible, as explained. And indeed, I won't even save settings so the disks (the full PCs) are as much equal to each other for everybody. So … you confirmed unintentionally that this matters indeed (and obviously this is nothing to explicitly test, so I never did that).

Last thing : Don't be hyped about this, please. It will be able to take a few boots from the vhd file (a 100 too). Nothing will noticeably degrade (says me). It starts to go wroing when you leave all unattended and let the OS do its thing when it notices all gets idle. This is how I referred to "a whole day". So that would really be bad in one go. This is still theory just the same, but it always has been and again, you seem to have proven just that.

Kind regards and happy listening !
Peter

Nick, next time, look at the date/time of your vdh file; if you leave out step g of my list, nothing in the world is going to change that file, while it sits in your drawer.

Btw, notice the theoretical language problem (on your side - haha) … with "drawer" I literally mean that. Like in the dashboard closet of your car. And explicitly NOT the removable drive bay. And oh, you can let it stay in there if you want (it is not advised at all re SQ) and it still won't change a single bit, but in that case it is not by guarantee (you, knowing yourself etc.). Have it in that drawer, and again tell me what changes it ?
Yeah, the sheer fact that you change it explicitly by means of the copying, does things. Trust me. Whether audible I can't tell, but the location *will* change and all what's required to let your case be a sort of true, is that the memory mapping changes because of that changes too (and my estimate is that it does). Always for the better ? doubtful.
And so … how many copies did you apply by now, this afternoon ?



Voodoo is nothing for me, you know. And for your sake, I still hope for a misunderstanding.
Peter

Robert,

*If* you buy one, buy it through me; In that case I can make it work first (this is by guarantee, unless they lie about the specs).

Notice that I see something fishy in there, because each upsampling step requires 1 additional bit. So, 16 bits is the base (for Redbook). Then we go 2x, 4x, 8, 16 (that would be 705.6) and 32. This is 5 additional steps, with thus 16 bits at the base. Where to we end at ? 21 bits.
But the DAC is 20 bits only …

Having said *that*, I now see it fail in advance. I mean, XXHighEnd will be able to do the upsampling, but it will output in 24 or 32 bits, 21 bits really utilized, while the DAC will accept 20 bits only and thus messes up with the upsampling. It will still do 1411.2 Khz (or 1536 Khz), however.

And additionally : thinking of that, a 24 bits file would also be subject to the same anomaly, for a 24 bit DAC. But, there's a difference for the level where this occurs. Thus, the 24 bit is 24 dB lower than the 20bit, which is a lot - and actually too much to be audible. For 20 bits I am not so sure, especially because a DAC could resolve to 21 bits (the NOS1 does just over 23 bits, which is an exception).
Thus, it is also related to the resolvement, and once in the noise, it should not matter any more (as in : when upsampling from 24 bits requires a 25 bit but resolvement is to 23 bits (or less) anyway, then it can't matter).

The THD+N of 0.004% is an other figure which makes my "upsampling" theory quite moot. This is a bit harder to reason out (with math) but since the 0.00059% I see pass by over here is at a noise level of ~-140dB and distortion at -120dB, that headroom of 20dB implies just over 3 bits. With the notice that this is different from "resolvement", implying error in that same area can't be the best (thus, NOS1 resolves to 23 bits, but THD+N implies less than 21 bits - I am sure you can't follow).
Now, 0.004% will come down to 3 bits worse again (compared to mentioned 0.00059), thus "less than 21" turns into "less than 18".
Conclusion (kind of) : The 20 bit DAC already shows distortion at less than 18 bits, and thus implying more distortion beyond bit 20, is harmless.

Go for it.
Not that you need by any means. I just had fun in this bit of reasoning; I hope I didn't make too many mistakes.

Peter

Not from RAM, I presume now ...

Nick,

I still consider that I don't understand. But since you are not explicitly debunking my procedure :

to-tal-ly impossible.

Nothing changes that file underway, unless you do it yourself.

Thus :
1. Put file/disk in drawer;
2. It magically changes.

That is what you are telling me, and quite explicitly because I gave you the sequence of how you should deal with it, and you didn't reject anything of that.

What this has to do with better or worse tuned PCs is also totally beyond me.


Please don't. It is not related.
One thing : If you are correct even the slightest, then it is related to how the file is organized on the SSD/HDD) and how that is mapped to RAM 1:1 if such a thing would exist (but it could). In that case my advice : start applying your procedure as soon as possible this afternoon, so you may gain a SQ increase in one afternoon instead of many weeks.

I am NOT kidding with this. But it should denote whether you understand what is - and what is not happening.
So try it, and if you report back tonight that indeed SQ increased by many factors more than previously, I may have a hunch of comprehension (but I may still come over to check out your ears ).

And oh, never, ever, confuse this by the necessity to reboot once in a while in the first place. So yes, if I reboot after one week, it most probably 100% sounds better again. What you are indirectly telling is that you are capable of remembering how SQ was that week ago at a reboot, and that "today" at this next reboot, SQ will be better again than last week. Well, you know … I don't believe in such memory in the first place. With respect, but I still don't. (at the lack of an appropriate smiley).

Don't hesitate to reject my "story" explicitly, but please come up with a mechanism that can be understood. Explicitly take into account my list (a-i) with it, or else you may testify that you did not read that, or did not understand it. Both is fine, but good to know on my side.

Best regards,
Peter

Robert, IMO this is definitely so. I always noticed with the car stereo; It really does not matter to what brand / new radio you switch, it always exhibits better "stereo" (as in channel separation) as such. Even if you in the end switch back to the first radio.

Peter