XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
May 25, 2017, 02:36:15 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Dec. 31, 2012 : XXHighEnd + Phasure NOS1 DAC receive 6moons Blue Moon Award !
** "Lonely at the very top" **
Search current board structure only !!
Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2
1  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: B'ASS Current Amplifier on: May 24, 2017, 05:14:24 am
Hi Peter, so I think I don't have G3 (yet) ... but what is the lead time to get upgrade? (Can it really get better ? Happy

Jonathan
2  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 21, 2017, 11:09:42 pm
... now onto HQP as NAA.

So help me out here. How would you be able to connect the NOS1a to an NAA without a Linux driver for the NOS1a? What am I missing?

I use the following chain in my office system:

Roon (on music server) -> direct ethernet connection -> HQPlayer (on W10 audio PC) -> NOS1a

Here, the audio PC can't be regarded as an NAA, because it's doing the heavy lifting for HQPlayer... right?

Mani.

The NAA can run either Windows or Linux.

In my case I run HQPlayer on an OS X machine which outputs to NAA.
XXHE runs fine on the machine I want to use as NAA. I have a lot of both PCM and DSD source material that I want to compare side by side.

My problem is that when I click the #5 switch up/off, and set the driver -> Stereo reduced, then I get 2 drivers in Windows' list of drivers, and when I select the first for the NAA connection, I get sound in my left ear, and when I select the second, I get sound in the right ear. If I either leave the switch up or down, and select Multichannel 4.0, then I get 1 driver, and all the sound is in the left ear unhappy

I also tried remoting the NOS1a across my fiberoptic network at the USB level (VirtualHere) but that just didn't work (no surprise Wink

What would be great would be if Roon could just stream to XXHE...

Alternatively PeterSt can compile XXHE for the Windows 10 armhf version ... (in my dreams) and then it can run on the ClearFog...
3  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / CPU Utilization on: May 21, 2017, 05:08:07 pm
I am running XXHE 2.07 on a J1900 Celeron board (low power!) ... and I've sent it to upsample from 44.1 -> 705600 and it sounds terrific but I am concerned that there is something wrong because the CPU utilization reported by both Task Manager and ResMon are at ~16-17% ... that is too low, right? (yes the ArcPredict button is clicked on Wink
4  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 21, 2017, 04:32:27 am
After multiple reboots, reinstalls and who knows what, it is working in XXHE Happy ... now onto HQP as NAA. Sound is terrific so far Happy
5  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 20, 2017, 05:49:55 pm
I'm getting all sorts of errors.

Switches #2,#3,#5 all down. NOS1a checked (red)
XXHE gives me "Engine #3" fails to start
"Unsupported format" errors with both FLAC and AIFF files...

The screenshots in the "Dummy" install guides don't match 2.07 so I feel that I'm flailing unhappy unhappy
6  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 16, 2017, 10:27:19 pm
Now (this is still a non-HQP issue), when I uninstall and then reinstall the NOS1a driver, I get *2* drivers names:
"Phasure NOS1a Out1 L/R"
"Phasure NOS1a Out2 L/R"

the first does only the left channel and the second only the right channel.

Somehow, even though I've uninstalled and then rebooted and then reinstalled, Windows remembers my settings.. (Stereo reduced) unhappy


Jonathan
7  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 16, 2017, 01:48:42 pm
Ok thanks! "Stereo reduced" ... didn't try that setting because ... err.. never thought I'd want my stereo reduced ...  Happy
8  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 16, 2017, 04:14:55 am
Ok progress ... I have sound playing through HQPlayer via NAA ... but now only the left channel ... when I test the driver both R/L go to left channel ... reinstalled driver and now all sound in right channel ...

Not sure what to do?
9  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 15, 2017, 11:28:22 pm
Still no luck ... is it possible I need to do something with ASIO mapping? ... I think NOS1a is up and running so this is likely an NAA issue at the moment. (I have no idea of what an ASIO mapping is, but NAA seems to be sending the output to "Dummy" channel even though it is picking up the NOS1a driver unhappy

I'm feeling close though ... got some system sounds through my headphones !!
10  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 15, 2017, 10:31:09 pm
Peter, no I hadn't applied that post ...

some weirdness, when I look at the NOS1a driver properties, there is no "Advanced" tab and I need to reinstall the driver ... not signed to I will reboot into the special mode for unsigned drivers and try again... (really loving Windows more and more now ...  Happy

this post seems helpful!

Jonathan
11  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1a and HQPlayer on Win 10 on: May 14, 2017, 10:58:41 pm
I hope I'm close to getting this working and suspect I'm missing something really basic but I need some assistance.

I've installed Windows 10 onto my "NAA", connected the NOS1a and installed the driver (after enabling unsigned). I running Signalyst networkaudiod (NAA). This is seen in HQPlayer. When I play a song all seems good but no sound comes from the NOS1a.
12  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Ethernet vs USB on: May 05, 2017, 11:11:03 pm
Now if optical cables get impedance mismatches we have bigger problems Wink

Hi Jonathan,

Yeah, you say it in a joking fashion, but I know someone in one of the states of your country who makes a living out of reflection testing of fiber cables (I have seen his gear).
I am not sure but I think fiber needs damping too (sunglasses ? haha).

Anyway, it is my kind of promise that only part of it is about the cable itself. The largest part is at the end point(s) where noise is re-generated. For fiber (glass) way more than for copper. And here you have a reason why toslink sounds like sh*t.
Summarized, I have never seen that isolation by glass sounded better. And many of us tried and spent a fortune (well, in the league of $1000). Adnaco stuff and such.

Peter
Well not all fiber is the same, and toslink is at least mostly plastic and the endpoints are nothing like those for Ethernet. Glass is clearly not "way more" than copper in terms of Ethernet noise. This has been extensively measured because, well, a little bit of noise and jitter can wreak havoc with a 10g or 40g or 100g Ethernet line... no problem over kms for singlemode Ethernet with really good lasers and transceivers. Eye pattern measurements show that.

I have no experience with Adnaco fiber USB units so can't say but yes they are expensive ... waaay more than fiber ethernet units that cost a fraction and have much better performance ...

Of course a high quality fiber cable is needed, but frankly let someone try and improve over Corning which is off the shelf.
13  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Ethernet vs USB on: May 04, 2017, 05:11:51 pm
My approach to cables is that when/if cables make a difference it is a symptom of an underlying problem that should be properly fixed. So fiberoptic Ethernet "fixes" a whole category of possible problems. Now if optical cables get impedance mismatches we have bigger problems Wink
14  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Ethernet vs USB on: May 04, 2017, 12:38:58 am
You may get the idea that I'm a fan of keeping my upsampling workstation away from the electronics using an Ethernet  Wink

Haha... I remember trying to convince Peter to go the NAA route some 4 years ago:

So where does this leave us? Hereís my ultimate dream setup:

- main PC with W7/W8 (shouldnít matter at all)
- although HQPlayer is cable of excellent SQ, and even though most of the controls in the Settings area should become obsolete, Iíd rather use XX
     - I prefer the library management
     - I really, really want to use phase alignment
- of course, the NOS1 DAC Ė itís simply the best Iíve heard

What would it take to achieve this dream setup? Obviously, Peter and Miska (Jussi) need to work together on it, and find a mutually beneficial way to do this. There would need to be appropriate drivers made for the NOS1 to work under Linux. And I think thatís it...

But a lot has changed since then. With the Mach II audio PC, I'm not sure an NAA is necessary now. And in any event, without a Linux driver, we can't use our NOS1s with an NAA.

But USB remains to total PITA, and if ethernet is the ultimate solution, we should pursue it. But audio PC -> ethernet -> NOS1 is surely the way to go (as indeed you seem to suggest).

Mani.

You are on to something. The "NAA" is a small program that implements an audio driver remoting protocol that accepts Ethernet packets, buffers them, and writes them to the audio driver. It also queries the driver to make it appear as if it were locally  attached to HQPlayer ... in the case of XXHE or any other audio program for that matter, a remoting layer could appear as an audio device driver and send the packets across the network as opposed to the USB cable. The difference is that fiberoptic Ethernet could travel kms without concern... and if 1 Gbe isn't fast enough there's 100Gbe and higher.
So Ravenna does all this but at significant cost. We could do the same with regular Ethernet & software.
The endpoint could run Windows but there are chips that combine ARM & FPGA (Zynq) and so everything can be done with one part and that reduces development cost dramatically (there is still the programming)

Now Miska ideally would cooperate on an open "NAA" protocol or maybe he would give Peter the specs, or else a similar protocol could be developed.

Jonathan
15  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Ethernet vs USB on: May 03, 2017, 05:28:49 pm
Welcome jabbr!

Yes, a warm welcome from me too.

So jabbr, you found this a 100 times faster than I imagined, although I was sure that at one day you'd find my post about the interface. Of course it was very coincidental that I could write about it and that in combination with Arvind's question and your NOS1a arriving at the very same day. However :

What I do not want is that you see this (interface) as some sort of obligation. I only said it out of appreciation in combination which your desire to create such a thing and indeed maybe (all of) our wishes to have something different than stupid USB. FYI : I think I have been the very first (and only one for a longer time) who ever back on CA expressed how lousy USB was (for all of the reasons people, now 8 years later start to find out and complain about).
Anyway, I know as a first how "we" can like to do/develop things, but that it is always the lack of time which prevents it.

Quote
I happen to have a very small stash [of PCM1704s] (8 or 16) sitting on the shelf for a very very rainy day

So ... Of course that was challenging me a little, as I already knew that jabbr had these around, and he already knew how many we have laying around over here. But about the former ... these things can take years, until it is finally done or you give up.
So jabbr, don't feel pressed but when will it be ready ?
Nah, kidding !!

Peter

Thank you. Happy

My prototype board is onsite and working on the driver which is the hardest part for me. The initial prototype will run an embedded ARMv7 based Linux which is most convenient for all the control logic ... so I'm knee deep learning how to write an ALSA kernel driver... that driver controls the FPGA and takes care of sending Ethernet frames from the network buffer to the FPGA using DMA.

The advantage is that my sims tell me the chip will use like 1.5W so battery or supercap supply shouldn't be an issue.

In the meantime I'm using a ClearFog base as a network audio adapter (NAA) which is also ARMV7 based. I'd like to be able to compare side by side, but I can also repurpose my old(er) Celeron NAA to run Windows using iSCSI boot.

You may get the idea that I'm a fan of keeping my upsampling workstation away from the electronics using an Ethernet  Wink
Pages: [1] 2
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 0.331 seconds with 17 queries.