XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
July 28, 2014, 08:17:23 am *
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  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 1 
 on: July 28, 2014, 12:31:48 am 
Started by PeterSt - Last post by modmix
Hi Peter,

I use a DEQX since quite a while (sources so far: various sw player, media player and sat-receiver; all connected via AES/EBU through 10 MHz sync-ed MC-3+ re-clocker - quite happy with that ,-)

I just discovered these page while looking around for some information related to perceived SQ differences.

Now please keep in mind that when you set XXHighEnd to "DAC needs" to 32 bits and you feed that DigIn to the DEQX, it will apply internal 32 bit processing.
Would you pls kindly explain this a bit more?
DEQX digitally receives SPDIF or AES/EBU, only. Both signals may carry up to 24 bit per sample, as far as I know.

Thank you in advance
Ulli

As a side remark: A/D conversion inside DEQX uses an internal oscillator with some limited spec - SQ has been improved by a friend by changing this device.

 2 
 on: July 27, 2014, 09:57:43 pm 
Started by charliemb - Last post by PeterSt
All right. By now I may think differently again and that even Hires should be filtered in the "non-AP way". So no worries.

Also : Because at this moment you can only use the 176.4 filter while using 352.8 this will ring unnecessarily.
Nothing wrong with your ears !

Peter

 3 
 on: July 27, 2014, 09:40:48 pm 
Started by charliemb - Last post by charliemb
Notice that a digital filter has two purposes :
1. Reconstruction (really only applicable to 44.1/48);
2. Bringing down high frequency "noise" (same signal but images beyond Nyquist (sampling rate / 2)).

What Arc prediction will do regarding Hires is #2 only. Oh, it will work on #1 as well, but this is quite moot because not needed unless we think that frequencies between 22.05 and 44.1 (for 88.2 sampling rate) are very audibe and need reconstruction too.
So what's left for the Custom Filter is bringing down the HF "noise" more but to a degree which is rather moot (because Arc Prediction at 705.6 (768) output already has it down sufficiently to be harmful (beyond 352.8 (384)).

So it's almost the other way around : When the Custom Filter is engaged by standard (for say 705.6 and anticipating 44.1/48 playback) it should not engage the filtering itself when Hires is in order and leave Arc Prediction as it is.

All again will be different when Arc Prediction is shut off in the first place (see grayed checkbox in the Filter Designer) and now *only* the Custom Filter is operative. But here too, you won't be able to make it yourself because it needs to show the results of it (though this I could graph) and now I also don't feel much like making such a filter for you guys because I just don't see the reason (for the better) for it.

Let me clarify what I understood because I think things are different at 352/384 than they are at 705/768 and I think that even hi res needs help.  I understood that you might make a custom filter that behaves like AP when the source is hi.res. and like Custom (how it is now) when sourced with 44/48. 

What I'm saying is that even with hiRes source material, at 352/384 my ear is much preferring Custom over AP.  Hard to argue with the ear.

As an aside, I now hear the buzzing / zooming / mosquito-ing of the typical upsamplers that you've talked about.  I also hear that AP never has it, nor do the interpolative filters in HQPlayer.  With Custom, I can *sometimes* hear a little hint of the buzzing.  I accept it as it comes with a bunch of other goodies.  But usually when I hear it with Custom, it is in the recording itself; and I presume this is from the EQ processors that audio engineers use for vocals.  No doubt they ring, some more than others.   And I can check with AP for those recordings and sure enough the ringing is there for those recordings.  It's not a clean ring when it is in the recording but the essence is surely there.

Anyway, I hear the trade off that you are making with these filters and can see that it is like walking a tight rope, picking the right balance between the two extremes.

I can say, it is amazing that Custom measures better than AP because AP sounds cleaner.  But sound is sound.

 4 
 on: July 27, 2014, 09:30:00 am 
Started by charliemb - Last post by PeterSt
Quote
for say 705.6

Charlie, the "say" was meant to be an example. But I also think that maybe you didn't get what I meant. So for 352.8 and the others it would count the same (don't engage that filtering). Tell me if it is not clear.
Peter

 5 
 on: July 26, 2014, 10:35:10 pm 
Started by charliemb - Last post by charliemb
So it's almost the other way around : When the Custom Filter is engaged by standard (for say 705.6 and anticipating 44.1/48 playback) it should not engage the filtering itself when Hires is in order and leave Arc Prediction as it is.

I think that this is true for 705K.  But don't forget us peons who can only go to 384K!  prankster

 6 
 on: July 26, 2014, 09:57:10 pm 
Started by vrao - Last post by vrao
Lol ..... If you look at it that way ... prankster

 7 
 on: July 26, 2014, 09:26:12 pm 
Started by charliemb - Last post by PeterSt
oops

You are right. But actually you'll know what I mean.
Should sound way better though ...

 8 
 on: July 26, 2014, 08:56:50 pm 
Started by charliemb - Last post by charliemb
Thanks,  and...

Last thing : CPU usage tells nothing; 1.186 should be used with Q3,4,5 at 1,1,1, and now look at the cpu usage.

Also, with regard to this, when I try 1,1,1 the task manager does not update.  Normally I look at the graphic showing all 12 virtual cores to see what is happening and where.  But the entire task manager pane just stays as it was before I started playback.  After I it stop it eventually becomes live again and I can see the alt-x activity a little bit.  So this 1,1,1 is a powerful tool for controlling resources but I can't see what's going on.

 9 
 on: July 26, 2014, 07:11:43 pm 
Started by vrao - Last post by PeterSt
Not that I understand what kind of advertisement this is from the distributor (as it seems). You could say it is inconsistent as hell, you can also say it is honest. But maybe that sells with the combination of both ?

Nice example VJ.
Peter

 10 
 on: July 26, 2014, 04:36:14 pm 
Started by vrao - Last post by vrao
Harbeths are thought to have the typical British sound. If one compares it's sound (ported) with anything such as Naim (ovator series, sealed?), it's easy to hear distortion. The woofer has a subtle muffled and ill defined signal, almost such that the bass is not controlled. Ofcourse it's easy to notice once you compare head to head.  These were/are used as reference recording monitors.

Btw when searching for ATCs distortion specs, found this:

http://www.transaudiogroup.com/atc/scm0-1-15asl-subwoofer.shtml
"Do not expect to be "knocked down" with huge quantities of bass. Much of what we think is massive bass is really just loads of distortion at 200Hz to 300Hz! Sometimes this distortion can approach 40 to 50% of the total sub output!"

Pretty much summarizes what's been said about the Oreleo MK-II 

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
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 0.259 seconds with 15 queries.