XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
October 07, 2022, 03:38:58 pm *
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 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
121  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Help me find a new DAC on: October 12, 2009, 01:51:35 am
Altmann Attraction DAC?

16/192.
yes

This is one I'd looked at and thought about, but didn't get because I wanted to use XXHE volume - 16 bits isn't enough.  I like the basics of its design.  dunno if battery is ultimately trustworthy, but maybe...If all you run is 16/44.1 material double arc oversampled and no XXHE volume (you have a preamp)... well, I'd sure like to hear this thing with XXHE,  gut feeling says it sounds decent/better than what I've got, (except for the volume part). 1K isn't cheap either though
122  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your questions about the PC -> DAC route / Re: Help me find a new DAC on: October 11, 2009, 05:57:58 pm
http://www.pacificvalve.us/USBDACs.html
Pacific Valve Fathom DAC might be one to try and the MoodLab looks good... I haven't looked for anything for awhile and bought blindly with the Stello.  I wouldn't recommend that at the moment.  I'm wishing I could try a NOS dac of some sort... but make sure it really is with PeterSt I'd say, because I'm still not entirely sure what that is other than dac company claims.
I'm hoping to be able to sell the FF800, Stello, and a couple other things hanging around so I can afford the NOS1 myself... and now I'm having to put braces on my kid ack $4500. US ... I don't even want to know what 4K in euros is in dollars :/, heh so I maybe joining you in an inbetween dac sometime
That doesn't mean I want PeterSt to 'dumb' down the NOS1, (which I don't think he will), to make it fit a lower price.  It just may take me a bit of time to get there.
123  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 0.9y-4 - w00t on: October 11, 2009, 06:45:51 am
Hi all.  No extensive back and forth here.  I've liked double arc prediction (can't do quad) with 9y-4 so much it was hard to start doing the audiophilic back and forth dance... but I did it a little.  I used a Chesky recording The Coryells and rock, Pinback and Nada Surf (normal phase for his one).  With the very well recorded The Coryells, I could go either way and be happy plain vanilla or arc prediction... but I still preferred arc prediction quite a bit more in comparison.  For me, it just takes a big step toward sounding more live... maybe thickening up a bit too much but much better than the thinner tinnier sounding plain vanilla.  For rock it was no contest.  Double AP was slamming articulate bass, burried vocals come out better... ssssssssssibilance is much Much better ... and that's a big one.  The designer of the Stello DAC really wanted people to like his upsampling to 192... I never have, and have always selected 'bypass'... but maybe with Peter's AP and whatever Stello did to this OS DAC in the analog section to maybe make it work with his upsampling,,, maybe Peter's AP is doing well with it in bypass mode... still, I can hear now where I'm really chomping at the bit for Peter's DAC,,, if I can afford it :/ hehe.  With double AP things aren't perfect with this Stello dac.  Sometimes I can hear upper midrange vocals jump out a bit (who knows, could be other equipment, recording... ).  I also might try turning the bass down a bit,,, but, otoh, it's the best bass I've ever heard and sometimes live bass can be very ripe... keep in mind this bass is very articulate, but I might, might I say, turn it down a smidgen... dunno.  That's about all I can think to 'fault' at the moment.  I'll try going back and forth later, but tonight I just want to listen to some music and double arc prediction for me is just working well.  I surely can understand how some might like plain vanilla, it does sound good,,, remember, at this point we're all overstating things... XXHE has really taken my system to a new level that I have to learn to listen to for awhile to be able to describe better... all ways tried with 9y-4 are better than they've ever been in my system.  This is a good family to be in guys.
124  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 0.9y-4 - w00t on: October 10, 2009, 05:55:26 pm

Anyway, I said lower was better because when I've left it at 128 sample (after listening to 24/96 and forgetting to set it back) and listening to regular 44.1 in the past it did not sound as good as when set back to 48 samples ... so, just figured lower sample rate was better.  Anyway, running it at 64 samples seems to work well and FF settings says it's a 88.2 signal it's sending to dac... so, alls well so far, nothing falling apart.

I don't want to muddy up the forum, but I want to address a change I've made with the Fireface 800 in case others have it and are trying settings... Right now I'm going back and forth between FF800 settings of 64 samples and 128 samples and for some reason, with this upsampling arc prediction, I think 128 samples sounds better.  This is kinda baffling to me because I thought if it plays at a lower buffer sample rate that that would sound better, like it always has with 44.1 material in the past. oh well.
125  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 0.9y-4 - w00t on: October 08, 2009, 06:33:25 am
Quote
happy because from what I've heard, lower sample rate

Uhm ?

Furthermore, I don't know. The only thing I know is that IIRC 64 always worked for me at 24/96 but I always set it to 96 for safety. At this moment I don't know, because I don't have the FF connected to the music PC anymore.

Safety?! yikes  Anyway, I said lower was better because when I've left it at 128 sample (after listening to 24/96 and forgetting to set it back) and listening to regular 44.1 in the past it did not sound as good as when set back to 48 samples ... so, just figured lower sample rate was better.  Anyway, running it at 64 samples seems to work well and FF settings says it's a 88.2 signal it's sending to dac... so, alls well so far, nothing falling apart.

Quote
If I've understood peter right, the Qs interact with the dac you have ... so everyone may be on their own with Q settings?

...I think (think ! people preferring Q2/3/4/5 = 0 (not Q1 !) have the ability to sort out distortion better, opposed to people who like the non-zero settings...

Did you just accuse me of preferring to listen to music with distortion over cleaner SQ?  Thems fighting words. hehe Anyway I've stuck with 4 26 26 0 0 all day today and I hear no reason to switch; to me it's sounding very realistic, and I use the term realism because the changes I'm hearing with 9y-4 are just so vast and different from other versions.
126  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 0.9y-4 - w00t on: October 07, 2009, 09:56:20 pm

Since I'm using double/arc prediction on 44.1 material,,, why is it I can set the Fireface settings to 64 sample rate?  I thought I'd have to set it higher like I have to when listening to hires material.  With 24/96 material I have to set the FF settings to 128 sample rate to work.  I know double/arc prediction must be changing something because I can't play it at the normal FF settings of 48 sample like I do with no doubling 44.1 material.  Is it really doubling to 88.2 with arc prediction, but somehow I'm able to play it with only 64 sample rate?

Welp back to some listening ... I have Red Nichols on the machine right now... an old 1940s recording haha great great old man stuff.

Well, it's weird to me, but something has changed as regards to FF 800 settings sample rate... now I can choose 64 samples on the FF and I can play 24/96 material... I used to have to set it to 128 samples to play, so it's not just double/arc prediction.  Tried this with 9y-3a and it worked there too... so don't know how long ago this change occurred. oh well, happy because from what I've heard, lower sample rate is better than high.
127  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 0.9y-4 - w00t on: October 07, 2009, 08:34:50 pm
Sill using arc prediction... I don't think I ever have tried just straight 44.1 with 9y-4, maybe I should, but I'm still blown away by what I'm hearing and spending way more time listening than I should.  Holy smokes the system can play so loud now with no strain.

My Stello dac has a two way toggle switch on the front that is labeled Upsample 192 & bypass.  I have never ever liked the 192 setting, I've tried many times, but always go back to bypass.  The stello has a 2704 chip in it, and I guess this means it is not a NOS dac, but it sounds amazing right now with double arc prediction, (dac is limited to 24/96, so can't do quad).

Since I'm using double/arc prediction on 44.1 material,,, why is it I can set the Fireface settings to 64 sample rate?  I thought I'd have to set it higher like I have to when listening to hires material.  With 24/96 material I have to set the FF settings to 128 sample rate to work.  I know double/arc prediction must be changing something because I can't play it at the normal FF settings of 48 sample like I do with no doubling 44.1 material.  Is it really doubling to 88.2 with arc prediction, but somehow I'm able to play it with only 64 sample rate?

Welp back to some listening ... I have Red Nichols on the machine right now... an old 1940s recording haha great great old man stuff.
128  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Q Settings - Post your settings and general impressions on: October 07, 2009, 07:46:18 pm
If I've understood peter right, the Qs interact with the dac you have ... so everyone may be on their own with Q settings?  For me the realism/articulation/big difference in bass with the setting 4/26/26/0/0 invert phase is the best setting still, as opposed to (2-4) 0 0 0 0, but I'll go back there again with other recordings.  I'm not even going to suppose I've explored everything with the Qs.
I also think there are phase changes going on when playing with the Qs... so always try normal/invert when you've moved your Qs... what may be right phase with one speaker/room may not be good for another.
129  Ultimate Audio Playback / Music Storage and convenient playback / Re: Happy with this setup on: October 07, 2009, 07:33:47 pm
Hello SeVeRed,

with the new Y4 I will now build a serious PC to run it on. And only that. As you told us about your dedicated PC and you have been running it for while , still making happy noices over the SQ, i would like to know whether you would buil it the same way again or have you found areas where it might be improved even further ?

Thanks for your time (away from listening XX Happy

regards,

Leo

ps
others with more know how on this than me (almost everybody reading this I guess) are of course more than welcome to  add their experience and insights.

Hi Leo,

Remember, all of my front end (computer too) are in a large closet just off the music room (drilled holes in the wall between the rooms).  The case is big (but keeps things apart) and the 3 fans and my processor fan is noisy (I would not want them in the room with me,,,).  But it sure does the trick of keeping thing cool. If it was in my room I'd either go for a different case or would have tried different case fans that were quieter. 

I think I've made a lot of good choices as far as the building of the computer.  The motherboard has been a stable one and the bios is easy to work with and gives lots of choices to tweak/shut stuff off.

Peter
will have to address again whether it is better to go with a Dual-Core Processor like I did still, or whether it would now be better to go Quad core... I like that mine is somewhat low wattage... probably good if you want to use a quieter fan. 

Could have gone for a lower cost lower NRG using video card...?  but who knows,,, maybe the power it uses balances right for the power supply hehe ... and the album pictures are probably shinier .... j/k  My video/display is set to go off after only a minute of non use... for some reason, I think the music 'relaxes'/sounds better when it goes off... but it just could be me liking a dark room at night time listening.

Here's an expensive neat trick for holding the hard drive...
http://www.frozencpu.com/products/7851/noi-15/NoiseMagic_NoVibes_25_Silent_Hard_Drive_Mounting_System.html?tl=g7c113
... but I hope you're getting a solid state drive for your main HD.  hehe I laugh everytime I look into my huge case with lots of HD bins,,, and all there is is a tiny 2.5" SSD.  Anyway, like I've said, things are well spread apart in my case, don't know if that makes a difference.

I'd get a bluray drive now rather than just a dvd drive for ripping ... there have been claims made about this LG being good for ripping.  After setting up the music computer, I've taken the drive out though... no need for it there.  I rip on another machine.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827136162

gl and ask any questions you'd like here.
dave
130  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Q Settings - Post your settings and general impressions on: October 07, 2009, 04:05:22 am
With the new version, 9y-4, I know the top end sounded much different to me.  Better cymbals/metal for sure, but ...
well I'm not sure of the words, but maybe a lack of sparkle, high nrg kick ... or was that just a lack of distortion in the upper registers I was 'missing' that I'd grown used to.  I know I'd previously moved Q2 Q3 up to 30 (then down to 26) and inverted phase to bring some 'weight' to the notes and have kept it there for several versions,,,, so today I moved Q2 and Q3 down to 0 and went back to 'normal' phase,,, after a listen I moved Q1 up to 4 (and thought I might keep moving it up; but there it has stayed all afternoon).  Seems a little more open on top now...bass maybe not what it was last night, but I've been walking around this afternoon and need to sit for a listen

but btw,
this is not settled yet, I may go back to 3 26 26 0 0 after a period of listening to this, last night was too good, but then again,,, 4 0 0 0 0 is sounding really great; we will hear.  Definitely, having the phase switch is a big part of using the Qs.

Edit
Well I've been dancing all over the Qs tonight,,, but I seem to have fallen kinda back to 4 26 26 0 0  (Things I've tried: (2-4) (23-30) (23-30) 0 0; (2-4) 0 0 0 0 & invert vs normal on settings).  Right now, and that will change, I'm digging 4 26 26 0 0 on a recording that's very clear and lively in the top end (Submarines - Honeysuckle Weeks).  Also, sounds great on Beethoven quartets I'm playing now.
131  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: 0.9y-4 - w00t on: October 06, 2009, 10:19:48 pm
This is the biggest leap forward in SQ that I can remember.  Everything in my system has just taken a major step toward 'real'.  Articulation I've never heard before.  Distortions which I didn't know were there before, well, this version shows that they were there and they are now gone.  Bass is unbelievably real in a way I've never heard my system do ... real growling.  Gone are cymbals sounding like escaping steam (I mean this has always been getting better with XXHE versions),,, but now, 9y-4/arc prediction we have real metal being struck.  I am just floored and thank you for having this released during a vacation period... or I'd be hung over for work from no sleep last night.  Going to start listening again today... the music room is an addiction (if I believed in such things) and Peter/XXHE is my dealer.
Thank goodness my Stello dac allows for bypassing its upsampling (which always sounded like cr*p) and lets me input up to 24/96 with no dac manipulation ... someday I'd like to hear what quad/arc would do, but for now, jezlooeez, double/arc is simply amazing.
This is a huge deal.
132  Ultimate Audio Playback / Music Storage and convenient playback / Re: Conveniently Randomize, how ? (0.9y-4) on: October 06, 2009, 09:53:18 pm

Small issue for Cue Files

When you ask for Tracks ("T") in the Library Area, and during the search Cue File albums are discovered, they will show as that one large track they really consist of. However, when such an Item is selected for Randomizing, it will explode to its individual tracks first, and they will be part of the base to randomize. But now watch out : when this really is about a Track selection, and we let the system select the Items in the Library Area, and supposed within out 40 tracks (!) to select are two Cue File albums, they will be the majority of tracks. Thus, supposed those two Cue File albums contain 12 tracks each, than out of the total of 40 to output, there are 38 + 12 + 12 = 62 for input, and 24 of that are from those two albums !
Now, at looking at the Library Area, you can also see a "dishonesty" from another angle, which is that each normal album shows all its tracks in there, while the poor Cue File album only shows 1. So, it is tougher to get selected, but once it is, it is all over.
I don't think there is a good solution for this, until Cue File albums are exploded in the Library Area to begin with. Maybe later.

Have fun.
Peter

All of us in the Cue(l) File Club, each and everyone of us, hope that someday you will take time to explode these files into 'tracks' we can select in the library area, while keeping the inherently better sounding & better integrity of single WAV files intact for playback...All of us in the Cuel File Club urge you to now take action.  GL
133  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / copy FLAC to WAV conversion on: October 05, 2009, 09:13:02 pm
Hi Peter,
When I select 'copy FLAC to WAV' and give it a path to copy too, it doesn't copy the flac file to a wav file... instead, it just copies flac for flac.
http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=930.msg7435#msg7435
134  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: Is there a size limit to 24 / 88 FLAC playback? on: October 04, 2009, 09:14:55 pm
Though I don't know if it will work, one thing you might want to try is to convert the flac files to wave using a program like dbpoweramp, a free download. I did this with the Marianne Thorsen violin concertos of Mozart that I purchased from Linn Records (they sound incredible). Letting xx convert the flac to wave when playing the flac file just took too long. I did not notice any difference in sound quality by converting the file to wave with dbpoweramp and then playing the file with xx.

Maybe just try converting one of the shorter "long" files to see if this will work. My guess, a very uneducated one to be sure, is that the problem is the result of xx having to convert such a huge flac to wave before it plays.


Using XXHighEnd:
Right clicking on a flac file in the library also allows for a permanent conversion of a flac to a wav ... along with a couple other options.  I don't feel a need to do that anymore now that XXHE copies the flacs to wav onto my SSD before loading into memory.
I live life slowly.  No playing before all conversions are done for me.... just push play and slowly walk back to my seat so my martini doesn't spill.

edit
wait, I just tried to copy a flac album to wav, but all it did was copy to flac again?  Is Copy flac to wav not working anymore.
135  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: CD vs XXHE; is the SQ comparable? on: September 30, 2009, 05:40:58 pm
Have you optimized your computer.  (Did your laptop come loaded down with a bunch of programs running/spyware,,, they seem to always sell em with a bunch of cr*p running).  Does DPC latency checker show any spiking anomalies?  Trying to understand what you mean by periodic hiss at lower Q settings?  When I was running an acer laptop I did a clean install from xp to vista.  I'd really recommend doing a clean install to Windows 7 (just recently put that on the same laptop, my daughters now, and it runs great; laptop is like 3 years old now).  This same laptop, when I was running it, had a faint buzz when I played it plugged in, I ended up shorting the plug (danger will robinson; you're on your own here) and the buzz went away, (laptop sounded better plugged in than running off battery, but needed plug shorted).  I know others have said the same thing about noise coming through speakers when using laptops.
http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml
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 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
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 0.128 seconds with 12 queries.