Ha !, nice !!

In parallel I was posting this : 2.10 sound quality - SFS 10.19. This with the notice that you are fully on-par (read the text in there).
I hope you will find some useful tips in that post.

And yes, not knowing where to begin is quite similar to not knowing where you are (this could be a bit of Dutch). Anyway, welcome in my universe ?



Peter

Hey All,

I think it is fair to say that I have chosen a new SFS setting(s combination) : 10.19. This, together with Q1 x xQ1 of 30 and 20, a ClockRes of 15 and Q3,4,5 at 1,1,1. For those with the NOS1 : The buffer size in there is 16ms.

The .19 fraction in the SFS of 10.19 is "as usual" (lately). The "new" about this should be the combination of the somewhat lower SFS with the otherwise higher settings.

Watch out : I am posting this in the general "Sound Quality" section because I have to post it somewhere. However, people should realize that a larger bunch of you is not coming along with all what is new as of late, and therefore what I have so say will be moot to you / that bunch. Of course, everybody must obtain what they deem fit and what the $ (AKA wife) allows for, but in any event the below text will be quite useless to those who did not come along. Still, because yet another group of people sure does come along (and stays on par), it still seems justified that I post about it anyway. OK ?

---

The specificity about my "hardware" setup what most of you don't possess comprises of :

- Stealth Mach III Audio PC (10/20 Core);
- Lush^2 USB cable (100cm);
- Blaxius^2 Interlink (325cm).

Each of these elements contribute vastly (and I mean vastly) to the sound, thought impossible only 6 months ago. The leap is more than a quantum leap. So much so that I start to feel alone in this universe. And I hear ya : No, it is impossible to improve over what I currently have.
Sure.

---

What the whole lot today is about is speed, speed and even more speed than you will ever be able to comprehend. This is so much so that "original" completely bland sounds (like from a synthesizer) now fold apart into their individual frequency oscillator on-off sounds. Think like a prior sine (sinus) sound becoming the not-sine at all because of it going on/off in high frequency. I have talked about this more often in a far past and for those who remember : think like the Silverstone USB card's expression and how that too could be dedicated to on/off sound, although in a relatively very low frequency. Think 20Hz or so. And mind you, the normal "sine" frequency can be anything, e.g. 2000Hz, but if 20 times per second that sound briefly goes completely dead, you have a kind of modulation which could be "interesting". Of what I recall, this worked very well on the cymbals, but, it was fake. It brought a flavor. And we only noticed when environmental things improved (I think it was W10-14393.0 which killed the usage of the Silverstone card ? - or maybe it was (the combination with) the Clairixa USB cable).
What I am talking about today is the inherently present on/off sound many instruments produce. Thus not only synthesizes (when set to do it) but also a violin, a trumpet, a saxophone, a snare drum, a cymbal with nails in it (sizzle cymbal) and in the end also a human voice. Etc. etc.

Today it is relatively easy to observe that an almost infinite on/off frequency is still normally audible (say up to 200Hz) or detectable otherwise (above 200Hz). It adds a dimension to even artists as a whole, out of this universe. I mean, look at Jean-Michel Jarre's latest - Equinoxe Infinity. I was encouraged to get and play it while I initially refused. I deem the music too simple and too much of "synthesizer". But oh wow. His "production(s ?)" are completely transferred into something which takes you away with open-mouth interest, just because of what "sound" can do, that ending up in sheer music. And all what actually happens is the bzzzzzzz sound. And yes, it is your turn to transfer this bzzzzzzz into an on/off sound. Try it (with your tongue/mouth) - you will manage, no matter you thought the zzz was completely concatenated. It isn't. It goes on and off at a very high frequency. And when it does not, it won't be your bzzzzzzz but merely a sine of some frequency.

When I now first start out telling about the previous setting of SFS=140.19 (all else the same) and noticing how the Blaxius^2 was (is) more and more breaking in, I found the clear sound to become too profound. Not tiring or the like, but just overly clear. But what I also noticed - and this will be the speed of the speakers - is that some sounds seemed impossible to cope. This is hard to explain without listening, and even with listening it would be tough to discover tracks with it unless I noted them somewhere which I did not, but you could observe a kind of oscillating sound some times which just occurred 1 time too many per day in order to believe it was a natural sound. IOW, after quite some weeks now with the same (hardware) setup, I started to believe that something just could not cope.
Btw, easy to think it is incomplete reconstruction filtering, but I tested that and it doesn't make a difference for these observations.

Making a side step (again, sorry), I am 100% sure it is the Blaxius^2 which in some abnormal way preserves all which otherwise "escaped". I think of "frequency escaping from the cable" which is almost literal. That is, if we think about how shielding could preserve higher frequency (and real on/off is infinitely high frequency - though bandlimited by the sampling rate) and less/no radiation with it, then you can sense how I think these days.

And so I have been working on this and eventually came to the logic" of the system being able to track the higher frequency on/off sounds better when it would respond faster. This now is about the computer only, which, again inherently already is blazingly fast itself (the Mach III with its fast PSU, explicitly made for this (speed) job). But there's also the software ...

Others have noted it too, but when all is so extraordinaire(ly) fast and with that the most critical to distortion, it becomes a must that the PC does not run for too long. Mine normally runs 24/7 for weeks and weeks until something coincidentally requires a reboot, but these days I'd say this is not allowed any more. In the third day you will hear it. Whether this implies a daily reboot I don't know yet, but it could be good behavior.

Now on to the change, may you want to try it yourself, regardless whether you are "on par" :

On a new day and prior to your listening session, reboot the Audio PC (or boot it when it was not on in the first place - haha).
From that point on, set the SFS to 10.19. Thus, do NOT do that after listening to a higher setting like the current (for many) of 140.19 on that same day. If you do that you won't be able to cope hence like it. I am serious and this is a brain thing. Also, the reboot is necessary to not let it fail because of distortion in the first place.

Know that 99% most probably you may need a whopping 40 minutes of playback (all active, hence playing without sound will not help) before you are even allowed to judge. Do notice that I myself will not solve this by means of starting playback and have a shower to avoid the sheer distortion of that period (all way too cold) because, well, I like to observe what happens. No matter it is day in day out like this, it is just my behavior and I have no problems with it. But merely : you may notice a few stages of clicking in and at some final stage your adrenaline boosts, your jaw drops and from there you won't know what is happening to you. Or, what the system now is capable of.

---

Ah, I was going to talk about the SFS of 10.19. All right ...

What I sense of this, is foremost the strange combination of again more detail but with an unsurpassed silkiness. The too clear sound I talked about in the beginning, now becomes more natural. It could even be less digital, if you want. Less clinical. But mind you, this is not the explicit observation; this is merely about a disturbance eliminated. The disturbance as such is not about bad sound, but a deep down annoyance of the thought "can this be right ?". At least that it how I myself listen. The SFS of 10.19 in my mind responds faster to required changes (or possibly to "frequency"  as such) and now I write this I see that I maybe must look into the Nervous Rate as well, because that would *really* be responding to required changes.

Side note : if you'd change the SFS of 140.19 to 10.19 in an A-B comparison, you will be missing the clarity and will switch back in no-time. This is why you must start your today's session with the 10.19. IMHO etc.

What I find interesting is that a perceived hardware-limit (like something can't cope - speakers or amplifiers) can be solved by more "response speed" in the software. I think we all have the experience with the lower SFS'es (well, maybe not the 10 range so much but way lower) and how that increased crispiness. Am I right ?
So how is it possible that today it goes the exact other way around. Today - and I am quite definite about it - the higher genuine frequency implied fills holes which otherwise are too square and imply false higher frequency. Oh, that is crisp all right, but is it happening in reality ? And, if response is more slow the holes close to a bland(er) sound and all merely become sines. In addition I think that the higher frequency real (mere) sines of, say, 2000Hz, become too much forward because in reality they were no sines but contained small (on/off) interruptions. This softens. Or better : all what is more real will be for the better to beging with. This (too) is how our brain operates.

Right. As you can see I am at inordinate levels of judging now, which only happens because it just can be observed. Key of course is how an observability can be turned into something for the better again. This post was about that. And it took me two weeks or so of trying (getting rid of the deep-down small annoyance). So it is not easy.
But man, is it rewarding.

Peter

And Michael, might it help - I am using (seen from the back) the right-most bottom one.
Not that I ever tried an other ... 

Peter

It would, but you will be refunded right away because, well, that is the policy.

It might require work but what that is can not predicted at this moment. The least what should happen is that it technically differentiates from the others. From there it can be tweaked. Small problem : not my me ...
So FYI : at this moment there is hardly interest in WS2019. This is because the desktop OS is "minimized" to less than (core) server to begin with. This has been so in the past for all server versions ...

Peter

Hi Michael,

"MoBo" USB3 ports are on the back of the motherboard just the same ...
In the most common language "we" refer to those. That there's also one upright in the middle of the motherboard is true but this is not common hence not common language that I know.

Regards,
Peter

This is (finally) solved for the next version.

Peter

Hi Georg,

See my sig for the XTweaks settings. Maybe look at the "General PC settings" because they don't address the necessary cooling for the Mach PC's. The main one will be Balanced Load (and above 42 for a normal processor like yours).

It is not guaranteed that it will work, but I have the idea that it can work for all, if it is only understood.
Set it in Normal OS. Boot to MinOS. Play Unattended a few seconds. And maybe after that reboot one time. If then it doesn't work well under 1200MHz right from booting, then, well, it doesn't work.

Over here it always works out of the box, BUT I always use the RAM-OS Disk as a base (I mean : for any new PC we build).

Best regards,
Peter

Oh Fred ... what a great posting once again.


Peter

Richard,

Only yesterday I was thinking the same. But there is a general malaise going on in our audioland and this could be about being overwhelmed. Personally I can just sense that and it would be similar to me not being able to change drastically each other month. I mean, why did you not get yourself a pair of Blaxius^2 interlinks yet ?

Well ?

Hahaha

But it is a good example about myself. And this is thus what I was thinking of yesterday : I should possibily be raving about the Mach III once in a while and in this Mach III topic, but more honest would be to rave about the Blaxius^2 in *that* thread. But would it ? Maybe not because the base sound, I'm sure, comes from the Mach III. Still without the Blaxius^2 the sound would be nowhere near what I have today.
Or is it the Lush^2 ?
Well, surely Yes again because if I change its config to "a lesser one" all collapses again.

Some people are still getting used to their NOS1a/G3 upgrade. They just *can't* and get a new PC and get a new USB cable and get a new interlink, and when they're done they find out that possibly the internet cable should be changed into an ET^2.

Btw, yesterday we finished a first production HDMI^2 cable. No need to really tell about it because this environment (XXHighEnd in general) seems not to be in that direction. Or are we ?

Goof example for myself again : Did I finally make (have made) a Lush for my HT endeavours ? or a Clairixa for that matter ?
No. But I should have years ago. Good that I skipped because now it can be a Lush^2. Saves money ? yes, so to speak. But I'm just not up to all these changes.
So now I use the Blaxius^2 myself and the HT movies are suddenly outrageously good. Do I exaggerate ? no. But I had them made because they had to be tested because people asked for them (this is mostly outside of this forum). Same with the Lush^2. I was asked. Btw same with ET^2 and same with HDMI^2. Blahblahblah. But now I see what the Blaxius^2 does to the HT experience, shouldn't I fi-nal-ly make that Lush^2 for the HT connection ? (this is another PC somewhere down the basement). And what about the ET^2 then ? at least that could involve audio itself (goes to the same PC as mentioned Lush^2 should go to).

Another answer is : Lush^2's go out each day (since it exists). But the public response to them soon stopped. In here (Phasure) it never has been anything much to begin with, still 50 or so of the known people (to you and me) own one. Ha, this includes you.

Summarized, IMHO people can't keep on changing and they also can't keep on raving. I try, but it is quite difficult to not repeat yourself or another.
Meanwhile people like you may think that nobody agrees with you or that nobody buys anything. But the truth couldn't be farther.
Look at my post in the Lush^2 topic and how I asked to better stop writing myself. Two or so people said "no, please continue !" ... and next they don't say anything themselves.
Must we blame someone ? no. This is how it goes these days.

Everybody (or most) is silently happy.

Apologies for my bit of Saturday morning rant, but I suppose I agree with your gist, Richard.

Kind regards and thank you !
Peter

Thank you Georg.
And really no problem to spend that time. I wish that would not have happened. Is it the Ryzen indeed you are using there ?

Regards,
Peter

Hi Georg,

Would it be fair to say that something is wrong ?

Did you unpack the whole .rar on a not "AV infected" PC and did the install all over (of XXHighEnd) ?

Could that AMD be a Ryzen ?


Yes, if you still feel the lust ...

Kind regards,
Peter

PS: Strange suggestion perhaps : why stay on 10586.0 ? I don't think many people stil use it and at least for me it certainly doesn't sound better. I am thinking of this because *if* that is a Ryzen, you wouldn't want to use a too old OS. 14393.0 may not even cut it, but we haven't really tried newer builds anyway ...

Georg, why did I think about asking you to switch on logging, quit and restart XXHighEnd and then apply the procedure with the log file, but did I not ask you for real ...
Now I lack data which could be useful.

It can very well be that I built in something for 10586.0 which was not tested and maybe does not work now.

Were you previously using 10586.0 with 2.10 ?

Peter

Haha, no ... ME (perhaps). This shut off UAC as how it works today, works like that since 2.10. So what I meant is : maybe I made a mistake and it is necessary to shut off the UAC. Mind you, via the Stop button again. Thus :

- Shut off UAC;
- Stop Windows Updates.

In that sequence.
No need to reinstall anything. Just stop UAC and retry the Windows Update thing.

Does not help ?
Then swith on logging, retry the Stop Updates and right after the last message about it (see your earlier post) grab the newest XX- (thus only XX-) log file and post it (or send it to me, what you like best).

Peter

Georg - Thanks.

I wonder whether this can be related to not having shut off the UAC yet. Maybe you already did, but ...
I have never seen this before (but obviously I anticipate it).

If you never connect this PC to the Internet, it won't be a problem anyway ? (let me know your thoughts)

Peter

OK Georg, good.


Not sure. But also not sure what the "half attempt" could be you are referring to. What do you notice of it ? Or maybe better : what does it mean, "half attempt" ?

Regards,
Peter