XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
July 18, 2019, 07:39:22 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] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 50
1  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: June 22, 2019, 07:10:54 pm
Peter,

I tried Atmos track 3. It presents as quite bland here with a too heavy drum beat at 55hz. I definatly can see where the performers are going with it and get a sense of what it could be but the sparkle and shimmer in the mid / top end electronic voice sounds never quite happens to make the track pop.

Now if 2.11 can make this spell binding that would certainly be something very special...

Nick.
2  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: June 21, 2019, 08:58:50 pm
Hi Nick interesting. Some of us went back to custom settings preferred to Arc. I think this was at the time you made some changes back in March this year. I still prefer Custom settings low 705600. Peter's settings online are out of date. Probably best to wait for next version 2.11 which will have even different settings I'm guessing. But you are right the sound does go off somewhat after fresh bootup, although I find it ok for a day at least.

Robert

Hi Robert,

Im back to straight arc prediction again at the moment. I managed to get the highs very detailed but smooth here so unfiltered is working nicely at the moment.

I am certainly looking forwards to Peter releasing 2.11. That is a strong statement he made above about being like a new PC or Dac. Its going to be fun  Happy.

Kind regards,
Nick
3  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: June 21, 2019, 07:51:12 pm
I think I may have come across another music initialization condition that could be of use for sound quality...

Thanks for sharing Nick. But I hope you don't mind if I give this one a miss - I think it'd be the straw that breaks this particular camel's back  no

Mani.

Mani,

Its a nice sound, problem is when I have been listening today I keep thinking wouldn't this be great with the nice sound, then its Click click click click.... click click click ..... click click click ..... ahhhhhhh ! Definitely too much setting up so don't blame you.

I hope that it works at Peter's (dont even know if it will be repeatable in other systems) and that Peter feels its worth / can be incorporated into XX. Although it sounds like Peter has way way more in store for SQ in 2.11. Can't wait  Happy

Nick.
4  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: June 21, 2019, 02:49:28 pm
Peter hi,

You will discover a new SQ feature in 2.11 which looks mighty much similar to what you describe, with the difference that I know what it is doing internally in the program. I still would not be able to reason any culprit or explicit "feature" as such, but it is controllable and looks to have the same behavior as your finding as of now.
In my case the sound changes so drastically that it factually requires different settings elsewhere (like a new PC or new DAC - to name something - LOL).

I'm really looking forwards to 2.11, it sounds like there is going to be some real fun using it.

Transparency and live qualities have progressed so far in the last 2 years with your new cables, latest XX versions and 621 based PCs. I don't think it would have been so easy to be sure of the changes in sound quality in this post before but now it just stands out so clearly. Iv been trying it out some more this morning, once you know its there its hard to listen without the nice sound set. I hope its possibly for it to somehow be built into the way XX initiates playback. Its already becoming a bind playing the 192k file and changing settings backwards and forwards.

PS: You are mad as well; how else could you find out.  Happy

Haha, yes I think I might be. Its been an obsession lately wringing sound quality out of my system. Mainly PC and Orelo setup work but certainly worth the effort. This SQ thing showed up I was when repeatedly playing 192k sweep files to EQ my bass and listening for SQ changes  Happy

A slightly different topic but I think another factor that impacts the SQ 621 boards when they used from cold is the oscillator. Its located under the chipset heatsink and that whole area goes from ambient to circa 60-70 degrees as the board warms up. I am pretty sure this changes the oscillator speed as the temp goes up proberbly by something of the order of -100 to 400hz. In my case this reduces amplitude of highs and increase bass slightly. I prefer sound cold but in other systems the speed change could just as likley to improve sound depending on the clock speeds of other parts of the system. Im running with a fan on the chipset's heat sink just now but a more perminant fix is coming  Happy

I hope this 192k nice sound thing can be reproduced and proves useful.

Kind regards,

Nick.
5  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: June 20, 2019, 06:28:44 pm
Peter hi,

I think I may have come across another music initialization condition that could be of use for sound quality, similar to the q1 q1x setting further up in this thread.

Over the past couple of months I have noticed that my system always has a particually live sound (eg extra dymanic, strong presence and very nice highs) when I first boot everything up and play the first few tracks each day. I could not pinpoint when this nice initial sound stopped but later in a listening session, although the sound is still very very good, the super nice initial sound is gone.

Whilst doing some equlisation testing I stumbled on a way to swich this nice initial sound on and off. I wounder, if this also works for you and if might be able to pinpoint / exploit what is going on. It seems like playing a 192k with no upsampling / arc prediction could be resetting something important to sound quality that makes the sound quality of 44.1k 705.6k upsampled tracks beter when played straight afterwards.


First getting the not so nice sound.

Play any 44.1k sample track at 705.6k with arc prediction and whilst playing change volume down then up a 1.5 db click whilst listening. Now stop playback and play the next track at you normal volume.  This gives the not so nice sound for me.

With the sound now not so nice play any 44.1k track you know the sound of especially well to see how it sounds (this will be your track B in the next stage that you should compare how it sounds now with nice sound I hope you get from the next step).

(If the above process does not result in the not so nice sound for you, maybe just listen to you test track B after a long playback session of a few hours and then try the next step.)

To get the nice sound.

First play any 192k track (track A), importanly set arc prediction OFF and with NO upsampling ie 192k samples per sec going to the dac. Now stop track A playing and select track B in your playlist (the track you selected that you know very well). Play this track with arc prediction back ON and back at 705.6k samples per second, and listen to the changed sound. Here there is a quite a significant difference with track B now being much more present and musical, no decernable down sides. If there are more tracks following track B in your playlist these will also playback with the nice sound.

My XX settings are pretty much identical to your signature and are up to date in my signature

Could this be useful ?

Best regards,

Nick.
6  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: March 17, 2019, 11:21:52 pm
Hey Peter,

I had guessed that you might have been looking at the possible reasons for the SQ differences. 60k lines of C that is some program.  It's a facinating explanation of what could be happening, thank you.

So I think you are saying that buffer size is the simple product of q1 an xq1, but q1 is also used elsewhere in the engine by itself to influance timing. Now you have explained this it may make sense in terms of what I hear. The SQ difference I get when selecting a lower q1 value (of course whilst ensuring the q1, xq1 product remains the same) is similar in character to changing the timer resolution setting.

It's good to know my hearing is not changing slightly each time q1 and xq1 "pairs" are changed  Happy

Quote

One thing I have in mind for very sure : the best sound I have now emerged 3 days ago after a reboot, but this was a special reboot which applied something special ... new to 2.11 ...


I am really looking forwards to this, I cannot wait.....

Kr,

Nick.

7  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: March 12, 2019, 10:22:33 am
Ramesh hi,

Can you hear any difference between q1 30, q1x 10 and q1 15, q1x 20. The latter sounds really nice here.

Your system is very similar so it would be useful to understand if you hear a difference too.

Regards, Nick.
8  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: March 12, 2019, 10:16:05 am
Hi Nick, I will try what you suggest but is your signature up to date especially OS version and Xx version?

Robert

Robert hi,

You are right, all up to date now.

Interesting that you hear differences too and feel q1 15, q1x20 to be the better settings.

Either we both have a common problem with our systems or something is not working as expected. Either way for now q1 15 and q1x 20 is definitely favourite here  Happy

Regards Nick.
9  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 2.10 sound quality on: March 10, 2019, 04:13:02 pm
Hi,

I have been playing with Peters new settings:

Q1 = 30
xQ1 = 5
SFS = 0.69
Q3,4,5 = 1,1,1
Core Appointment = 3-5
Nervous Rate = 10
Wallpaper On, no OSD feautures

Sound is pretty superb, but felt voices were lacking just a little prominence and dynamic, as a result emotion was not quite as strong as it can be.

Changing q1 to 10 and xq1 to 15 has really bought back the emotion and presence. Everything else remains very enjoyable. Mybe bass pitch resolution is a shade more smeared but overall these setting are nice. Might be worth a try.

Nick.




Peter hi,

I am back to this point about  q1 and q1x again,  where sound changes for different values of
q1 and q1x values which produce the same mathematical product.

I'v been playing using q1 30 and q1x 10.
Changing to q1 15 and q1x 20, "definitely" changes sound. The presentation is much clearer and noticeably more dynamic, emotional and musical with the latter setting. Since I last posted above on this, the resolution of my PC has majorly improved, and its now very easy to hear the difference between the setting. The change in sound is repeatable when switching between the settings, q1 15 and q1x 20 just sound so much more musical.

It might be worth looking at how the parameter(s) are passed to the XX Engin and or how they are handled internally something perhaps not behaving as intended with the potential for better sound with certain settings.

Kind regards,

Nick.
10  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Audio PC doesn't see Phasure NOS1 on: February 17, 2019, 07:17:44 pm
Gents,

Your issue is proberbly nothing to do with this but I mention it as was unexpected and therefore a difficult intermittent problem to find.

Some time ago I had periods were it was difficult to connect my PC to the NOS1, also periodically the connection would drop or I would get a high number of usb transmission errors whilst playing music, usually when bass notes were struck. Finally SQ was just not consistent session to session.

It drove me mad. I was doing some very complex stuff in my PC at the time with countless iterations and listening sessions. I just could understand the variability in SQ I was encountering.

Won't bother you with how the issue was isolated, but it turned out to be the short USB cable on my NOS1. Once it was pinpointed I put a meter on the short USB d+ and d- pins. The resistance was all over the place anything from 100 ohms to a few K ohms ! The culprit was the moulded connector at the small end of the cable. Move the cable near the connector and the resistance went anywhere.

The attached pic shows the cheap replacement cable I made up. The new cable stopped all sorts of SQ and connection vairiability problems including some PC to NOS1 USB cables being better at connecting than others.

Stanley

A as mentioned above your problem most proberbly not the same but it might be worth replacing your short cable with a spare just to rule this out.

Kind Regards,
Nick.
11  Ultimate Audio Playback / Orelino / Orelo MKII Loudspeakers / Re: Orelo MKII Sub-low Specs on: February 08, 2019, 03:47:09 pm
Peter hi,

Thanks, for all the very useful information.

I assumed that you would not have used the NOS and XX as the calibration signal source for some of the reasons you gave but just needed to double check. But very good to get it confirmed so I can cast my attention back towards my room and pc setups and trust the DSP curve.

In another answer where I spoke about relativly large bass cone deflections you mentioned that these large excursions generate second harmonics. In the real time FFTs of low frequency sweeps Iv been looking at, and just as you said, when cone excursjons are large those second harmonics are present ! This is not too much of a concern whilst listening though as the bass sound quality is still superb.

On a happy note, its very difficult to overstate the transformation in bass sound quality that the dsp tweeks to compensate for rear wall and corner reinforcements have made. So as not to go off topic in this thread I will start a new thread on the tweeks, it just may help other owners.

Regards,
Nick.
12  Ultimate Audio Playback / Orelino / Orelo MKII Loudspeakers / Re: Orelo MKII Sub-low Specs on: February 07, 2019, 09:55:22 pm
Peter hi,

Im doing some work on room matching my Orelos IIs, I'm very pleased with results so far. I have always had significant bloom in bass due, I think, to rear wall / corner interactions. I have appiled some simple DSP adjustments that have vastly improved bass reproduction. I will post the method used in case it is of used to anyone else when I'm satisfied with the results.

Doing this has raised a question if you could help.

When you generated the bass response curve for the Orelo IIs, that you put up in the graph in the first post in this thread, were use using your NOS1 and audio PC to generate the sweep signal that was sent to the speakers or did you use another device such as your DScope to create the sweep input to the speakers ?

The reason I ask is that with my current setup I am getting some significant driver excursions at  20 to 30 hz when I am playing sweep files through my NOS and when playing a few tracks with very low bass effects dubbed into the track. Im trying to work out where to focus attention to deal with this and it would help to understand how the the origional calibration took place.

Thanks and regards,
Nick.
13  Ultimate Audio Playback / Cables (Community induced) / Re: The greatest invention in/for Audio (Lush^2) on: January 22, 2019, 08:25:35 pm
Ramesh hi,

I think I might be able to understand your impressions so far. Extrapolating from listening to Manis system last week (Stealth III, blaxius^2 B:B,W,R) I can understand how the B:B,W,Y could sound a bit etched and forward:

The blaxius^2 is VERY transparent and introduces a life and a joy de vivre to the sound (I will be ordering a set as I just can't listen to my system easily since hearing the cables at Manis  unhappy ).

The Stealth III is more prone to mid / upper mid resonances than my PC.

I suspect that B: B,W,Y "works" here at the moment because this setting in part overcomes the relative darkness of my Blaxius 1 and my PC dosent reinforce the more forward presentation.

I am really looking forwads to listening again when I have Blaxius^2s in my system. For sure I know that I cannot reliably do more work on my PC or Lush^2 settings until the the cables are in.

Thanks for feeding back your thoughts. Its going to be fun seeing if my Lush^2 settings need to change with the introduction on the new cables.

Regards,
Nick.
14  Ultimate Audio Playback / Cables (Community induced) / Re: The greatest invention in/for Audio (Lush^2) on: January 17, 2019, 10:43:47 pm
Thanks Mani,

Might be with a try with A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-Y. Gives a very nice sound here but quite livley compared : B-A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-R.

Nick.
15  Ultimate Audio Playback / Cables (Community induced) / Re: The greatest invention in/for Audio (Lush^2) on: January 17, 2019, 07:13:51 pm
Hi,

Just to add another combo into the mix (Im not sure if this has been visited by someone before).

I have been using A: B-W-R-Y, B: B-W-Y for ages now. I think I got to this setup  trying to apply  A: B-W-R-Y, B: B-W-R in the dark and could not see the colours properly  Happy

For me  A: B-W-R-Y, B: B-W-Y brings a very livley but natural sound. Getting great presence and stage with excellent base weight speed and pitch.

Regards,
Nick.

Edit - notation was not the standard format.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 50
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 0.203 seconds with 12 queries.