184
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: 0.9z-2 HDCD decoding issue
|
on: June 24, 2010, 09:10:47 pm
|
Jarek, That DSP module you are talking about in dbpoweramp is using the same HDCD.exe program as xx does. Why would you destroy a album by pre-converting it, if xx does the same hdcd encoding on-the-fly. (There is no difference) True HDCD are converted to 24bit flac files by this DSP module.
Yes, xx does this on the fly, thats even better So disable the DSP (HDCD) future in dbpoweramp because you dont need it. Also check out Cuetoolsit has a function to scan your whole hdd and search for hdcd's, so you dont have to convert your albums to find them. cuetools puts a log in every album folder. [Verification date: 1/04/2010 20:24:06] [Disc ID: 0010b302-00932b73-8b0b220b] HDCD: peak extend: none, transient filter: none, gain: none Track [ CRC ] Status 01 [18b377c5] (32/32) Accurately ripped 02 [887af8c1] (32/32) Accurately ripped 03 [bc07b0fd] (32/32) Accurately ripped 04 [c61e1123] (32/32) Accurately ripped 05 [bf8d0c3f] (32/32) Accurately ripped 06 [9fd4b435] (32/32) Accurately ripped 07 [7602dcb6] (32/32) Accurately ripped 08 [a9484c10] (32/32) Accurately ripped 09 [7aa19656] (32/32) Accurately ripped 10 [cda0b98d] (30/30) Accurately ripped 11 [ee2aa8c8] (29/29) Accurately ripped And this is the log i get when i scan my whole disc for e.g. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Baptiste Trotignon - 2003 - Solo (HDCD)\Baptiste Trotignon - Solo.cue: HDCD detected, AR: rip accurate (4/4), CTDB: disk not present in database. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Barb Jungr - 2000 - Chanson, The Space In Between (HDCD)\Barb Jungr - Chanson_ The Space In Between.cue: HDCD detected, AR: rip accurate (14/14), CTDB: disk not present in database. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Barb Jungr - 2002 - Every Grain Of Sand (HDCD)\01 - I'll Be Your Baby Tonight.flac: HDCD detected, AR: rip accurate (22/22), CTDB: disk not present in database. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Barb Jungr - 2003 - Waterloo Sunset (HDCD)\Barb Jungr - Waterloo Sunset.cue: HDCD detected, AR: rip not accurate (0/23), CTDB: disk not present in database. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Barb Jungr - 2008 - Just Like a Woman (HDCD)\Barb Jungr - Just Like a Woman.cue: HDCD detected, AR: rip accurate (15/15), CTDB: disk not present in database. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Beach Boys - 1966 - Pet Sounds [AF 24K Gold Remaster 2009](HDCD)\Beach Boys - Pet Sounds [AF 24K Gold Remaster 2009].cue: HDCD detected, AR: rip accurate (56/56), CTDB: verified OK, confidence 53. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Beck - 1998 - Mutations (HDCD)\Beck - Mutations.cue: HDCD detected, AR: rip accurate (182/182), CTDB: verified OK, confidence 178. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Beck - 1999 - Midnite Vultures (HDCD)\Beck - Midnite Vultures.cue: HDCD detected, AR: offset 71, rip not accurate (0/183), CTDB: disk not present in database. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Beck - 1999 - Noboby's Fault But My Own (HDCD)\Beck - Nobosy's fault but my own.cue: HDCD detected, AR: disk not present in database, CTDB: disk not present in database. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Beck - 2000 - Stray Blues - A Collection Of B-Sides (HDCD)\Beck - Stray Blues.cue: HDCD detected, AR: rip accurate (5/5), CTDB: disk not present in database. G:\AUDIO-CD\# HDCD\Beck - 2002 - Sea Change (HDCD)\Beck - Sea Change.cue: HDCD detected, AR: rip accurate (202/449), CTDB: differs in 22 samples, confidence 274. Hope this helps a bit Roy PS: tip: after scanning your whole disc for hdcd's, copy/paste the log you get from cuetools and put it in a txt file, then search for "HDCD detected", like you do with ctl-f.
|
|
|
185
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: SQ differences in priorities, buffer sizes and split sizes - discussion
|
on: June 24, 2010, 02:15:56 pm
|
Hi there,
I just set Q9550 in msconfig to 1 core, checked it with cpu-z and the flac converting behavior in xx itself. 1 core is being used.
But the sound is awfull, it sounds like a cd-player all over again, definitely not better at all, it sounds like 2x mono. I will try to make it sound "more" right with changing some settings/schemes, later on. I also try to use 2 cores instead of 1 or 4
Marcin your work is definitely appriciated, but obvious answers are hard to find, everything influences you know this by now. So keep it coming. But I definitely hear you: its not hard to get lost in all those settings and schemes.
Later..........
|
|
|
187
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Interesting Music / Testmaterial / Re: HD tracks
|
on: June 15, 2010, 03:19:37 pm
|
I feel that the hirez tracks need a new point of view. The first time I heard them I was a little bit disappointed and thougth that the sound is too "cool". But with every step lessening the electrical and acoustical interferences I got a better and more interesting soundstage. I think that this was only the start for a new experience. What do you think?
Georg
AGREED,and you can make 2 catagories: The old (60s,70s, 80s, 90s) remastered stuff, like Doors, Oldfield,Alice Cooper etc, can sometimes be dissapointing because of "bad" mastering. (wich ist just neccasry because its taken from analog masters) those albums just wont get any better And mostly the normal 16/44 albums with Arc Prediction sounds way better. BUT, the newer stuff from e.g. HDtracks like Chesky Records and offcourse all the stuff from Linn and 2L is doing a much greater job, because of the better recording techniques like DDD, DSD, DXD (HDCD). (and mostly these record labels also take care in their cabling and mics (placement) used for the recordings) I also think xx evolved in handling these (and overall 16/44) files better and just because of the plain new versions updates ofcourse. So do give the "better" sounding HDtracks albums a listen and buy some because it can be worthwhile. Also a new link: http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/display.aspx?infid=3550http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/display.aspx?infid=3550&terid=4961http://blog.bowers-wilkins.com/lab/sound-quality-lab/the-definitive-guide-to-24-bit-flac/The B&W Digtal Timeline thread should end with (read the above link) : 2007 - Introducing the PC playback software XXHighEnd by PeterSt 2010 - Introducing XXHighEnd 1.0 Version Still curious about peoples findings with ARC on these 96 (and 192) albums (I am restricted to 88.2 for now) Cheers, PS: 2-0 is a good start for the new FIFA world champions!!
|
|
|
188
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: SQ of 0.9z-1
|
on: June 12, 2010, 12:07:49 am
|
Mani, I did not gave the latest (0.9z-1) version a thorough listen. And I am restricted to DAP (88,2 is my dac max), so i was hoping (looking forward) to your listening experience. Especially on the hirez stuff I have one question: is your signature still up-to-date ? I see you use 32 samples with Adaptive mode Try 1024 samples instead.Did you missed the 1024 samples discussion ? Roy
|
|
|
190
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / 0.9z-1 HDCD problem
|
on: June 11, 2010, 12:42:19 pm
|
The albums play fine here too once I edit the analysis.dat file to say No Yes, but they are HDCD after all......so should play as HDCD Its not on the cover, I know db is good ripping program too, same as EAC
|
|
|
193
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / Chatter and forum related stuff / Re: Activation Data Location
|
on: June 10, 2010, 07:46:06 pm
|
Hello there SimpSimon, Did nobody gave you a warm If the activation of xx succeeded, there should be a "XXHighEnd1xx.DAT" file in your xx folder (see pic) You only need it with a new version, but you can also use your normal activation code (method) to make xx fully functional. If you double-click that file it shows your activation code in binary info, its the series of numbers on the right side. (its the same code as you already have) So to be clear, when xx launches a new version just copy that file into the new xx folder and you can run several versions of xx next to each other (to compare SQ for eg.) But if you have xx fully running, dont worry much about it, for now. (more info can be find here http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=87.0 ) Did you managed to setup xx correctly ? Also a good thing to do is putting your system specs and hardware info in your forum signature. http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=124.0Read here about tweaking windows, to get the best performance out of your PC and also achieve better SQ. http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=548.0If you still have questions, dont hesitate to put them on the forum......... Best, Roy
|
|
|
194
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: 0,9z-1 clock/resolution operations in future version
|
on: June 09, 2010, 09:49:11 pm
|
Ugh,
Election polls (Dutch Elections), upsampling polls....strange evening, haha
- If it is always better to upsample (are there exclusions ?) - source rate and actual output rate should be displayed (as it is in current version)
I dont understand why we should (would) use 2x,4x,8x (16x), if there is reason for this, then it would be known with this version, I guess, if not.
2 settings are needed:
Keep original or upsample to dac max.
Maybe Jarek (or someone else) could explain why you want to use for eg. 4x or 8x If we need to chooce an upsample rate with every album we play (like Boleary said for eg), this is not very convenient.
MHHHO
PS: Peter, a downsample option somewhere would be great, in my case that is.
|
|
|
195
|
Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: 09-z1 issues
|
on: June 09, 2010, 12:18:04 pm
|
Hi Brian, Here is a quote from the release notes, Please notice that some care was taken to not let you choose impossible combinations for your situation, but that this will not be foolproof. Also notice that what we "fix" is the upsample rate (like x4) and not the output rate. This may not be convenient in all situations. Also, while (in the latest versions) before a hires file was left alone despite upsampling was set to be active, now it can happen that during playback of 4x 44.1 we run into a 192 file, which obviously can't be upsampled 4x on your DAC. It should be left alone, but possibly it tries, followed by a message your DAC can't cope; Too many combinations, and a sheer too much to test, but in a next version this will be arranged for (possibly by defining an output rate instead of an upsample amount). Roy
|
|
|
|