JPlay Part Deux: A new controversy?...

[Josef]

I was rather ill past couple days and had to stay in bed...
As I had nothing better to do I played with jplay and to my complete surprise found couple more things that apparently no other PC player is doing at the moment so I decided to try them out and see if they made a difference...

Attached is small Sunday gift to everyone: 'New & improved' jplay but this time in _both_]32 & 64-bit native versions.
Oh, yeah - some people claim that native 64 sounds better! (Ah - It was about time for another controversy!  )

But hey, talk is cheap, so if you have Win7 64 or Vista 64 (=recommended) now you can try both versions yourself - Just like with previous experiment they are completely identical! (in terms of source code, of course).

Those with 32-bit OS won't be able to run 64-bit version and test this - sorry. Nevertheless, please do give 32-bit version a try - you just might find it worth your while...

Just unzip proper package for your OS, copy your WAVs in same folder and type 'play' from command prompt OR, simply double-click play.bat

Again, please share your thoughts & have fun!

[Marcin_gps]

At this stage I'm sure that 64-bit sounds better than XXHE in any configuration. Sorry Peter, but if you implement Josef's memory management and force 1ms timer, things might be totally different. Can't wait to hear it. Great times are coming for pc audio

Cheers,
Marcin

[Gerard]

Hi Josef,

I do not get your player to play. I have done what you asked (d) but still i get message (s)

Any idears? 

Thanx

[goon-heaven]

Thank you Josef - I hear excellent dynamics, more emotion and still that super clean music on your 64bit JControversy!

I wish you a speedy recovery.

[PeterSt]

Gerard - Try this right after a reboot. Or did you already ?
Otherwise your memory is too fragmented to allow for the large chunks which are allocated (and do the trick).

Josef, great stuff. I hope I can keep up !
(spending more on the "DAC" emails I receive than I anticipated upon ).

[Gerard]

Gerard - Try this right after a reboot. Or did you already ?
Otherwise your memory is too fragmented to allow for the large chunks which are allocated (and do the trick).

Josef, great stuff. I hope I can keep up !
(spending more on the "DAC" emails I receive than I anticipated upon ).

I did reboot but it does not work 

Will try my music pc tomorrow.

 

[Gerard]

(spending more on the "DAC" emails I receive than I anticipated upon ).

If it goes on like this the dac will be sold out before you can blink your eyes!! 

 

[Josef]

Hi Josef,

I do not get your player to play. I have done what you asked (d) but still i get message (s)

Any idears? 

Thanx

Hi Gerard - Can you double-click 'Lock Pages in memory' (uh, what was that in Dutch again? ) and send THAT screenshot? (you should be listed there)


Also - do you have enough RAM i.e. did you maybe make a HUUGE Ramdisk? If so, try making it smaller!

[Josef]

Marcin wrote:

At this stage I'm sure that 64-bit sounds better than XXHE in any configuration.

Goon-heaven wrote:

Thank you Josef - I hear excellent dynamics, more emotion and still that super clean music on your 64bit JControversy!

Peter wrote:

Josef, great stuff. I hope I can keep up !

Wow - thanks guys!
I implemented these latest findings just yesterday and have not slept at all last night: it may sound crazy (well, it IS crazy) but I just couldn't get myself to stop listening!
I thought I had too much wine (again ) so your fantastic feedback is mucho appreciated! Enjoy the music!

[Nick]

Hi,

I have been trying Jplay 1,2 and Deux (32 bit) but not having much luck. When I first tried I was getting an error saying JPlay could not register my sound device (a HiFace) but after switching windows audio back on this went away. Now when I play (trying with JPaly1 so that memory config is not a factor) I get a message saying the JPlay is playing the WAV file but unfortunately no sound.

I guess the program is using the Vista default sound device, I was thinking a vanilla Vista install my help, has anyone got JPlay working with a HiFace so far.

I would really like to give this a go as the results sound very interesting, any thoughts ?
Nick.

[manisandher]

Wow - thanks guys!

Well, let me add my bit. It sounds really, really nice. The low-level detail is quite astonishing. Well done!

Mani

PS. Latest listening done with 64-bit version.
PPS. It still doesn't like being installed and being run from my RAMDisk...

[boleary]

It works here with the hiface, the 32 bit latest version. I haven't tried the earlier versions. Had to get the right username, which took a couple of tries cause I assumed that my administrator designated username would be the correct one, but it wasn't.....Anyway I was surprised when it worked that it set the buffer size with the hiface to 1024:

The sound is very good "WASAPI sound" but it lacks the fullness of the lower mids and upper base that I get with XX kernel streaming. Is it being offered as an experiment for memory usage in xx or as an alternative to xx or both? Just wondering........

[Josef]

I guess the program is using the Vista default sound device, I was thinking a vanilla Vista install my help, has anyone got JPlay working with a HiFace so far.

I would really like to give this a go as the results sound very interesting, any thoughts ?
Nick.

Nick - What do see when you right-click your 'loudspeaker' icon in taskbar and select 'Playback Devices'? Is Hi-Face labeled as 'Default'? If not, right-click and say 'Set as default'. See Capture1.
If it is, click 'Advanced' and make sure sampling freq is set to 44,100 (does not matter if it's 16 or 24 bits) See Capture2.

EDIT - Also see if 44.1 is checked as 'Supported Format' - Capture3

Let us know what you find!

[Josef]

.....Anyway I was surprised when it worked that it set the buffer size with the hiface to 1024:

Surprised in what way?
If you'd like to change buffer size simply type jplay (from command prompt) and then edit play.bat accordingly - seems it can go down to 128 on my Vista 64 setup....

[boleary]

Will give it a try, but I thought that the hiface was limited to a buffer size of 2048?.

Does anyone else find that japlay, though very crisp, clear, and beatiful sounding lacks the lower end "fullness" of XXkernel streaming. Its that fullness that makes xx kernel streaming sound so organic, especially with the lone female voice. My findings were confirmed with the wife test, the true litmus in my livingroom!

[Marcin_gps]

Wow - thanks guys!

Well, let me add my bit. It sounds really, really nice. The low-level detail is quite astonishing. Well done!

Mani

PS. Latest listening done with 64-bit version.
PPS. It still doesn't like being installed and being run from my RAMDisk...

I have the same problem on W2008, not on W2008 R2 though...
I kind of agree with boleary regarding 'the weight' or 'body', but I like it better than XXHE anyway at the moment and maybe it's supposed to be this way, I mean - I feel that this is more lifelike and instruments, vocals sound very natural

[manisandher]

Does anyone else find that japlay, though very crisp, clear, and beatiful sounding lacks the lower end "fullness" of XXkernel streaming.

These were my thoughts when I first heard it:

XX sounds fuller and more musical, but JPlay sounds cleaner.

Mani.

[Nick]

Josef, Boleary,

Thanks for the advice, I have work away for a few days so I won't get chance to try to get play going till later this week. Good to know the hiface can sort though. It's a very interesting experiment with memory I am very keen to hear for myself. Will post thoughts on sound when I get it playing.

Nick

[Josef]

Will give it a try, but I thought that the hiface was limited to a buffer size of 2048?.

Ah, well, you should be able to increase buffer to 2048 in same way - Don't believe there will be much difference though...

BTW: Do you have system priority set to Programs or Background? (Mani, same question for you?)

[boleary]

Josef: My system priority has programs selected, I see your pic has backround services selected. Which is preferable for jplay and/or xx?

Marcin: For me, on my system, the fuller sound of XX is more representative of what one hears live, especially with vocalists. For what it worth (not much I'm afraid) my daughters career has required a few hours of listening in clubs around the US east coast (where I'm often "helping" the sound guy in the room for "best" presentation of her voice or guitar, though I have no training in this area....just what sounds good to me  ). I am always surprised at how similar the sound of XXHighend is to the sound I get at her shows.

Just my 2 cents.

Can't wait to hear Z4 cause I'm sure "things" will be incorporated as a result of the collaboration that continues to amaze  .

I know I've done this before but what the heck: check her out here: carsieblanton.com.

[Calibrator]

Again, please share your thoughts & have fun!

hmmmmm .... well now isn't this interesting.

The aussies are getting pummelled by the poms in the cricket so I took a break from viewing that and had a play with JPlay64 on my music server ( running Vista 64 ).

I set the buffer size in Jplay64 to 64 and, playing from the RAMDRIVE, proceeded to flip back and force between it and XXHE playing my usual set of test tracks:

"Samba Pa Ti" from Ottmar Liebert & Luna Negra's album "Solo Para Ti"
"Canto de Oxum" from David Byrne's album "Girls on My Mind"
"Amanda" from Sheffield Lab's compilation album "Creme de la Creme"
"Spanish Harlem (Rebecca Pidgeon)" from Chesky Record's compilation album "The Ultimate Demonstration Disk"

My overall impressions were that XXHE still had an advantage in transient response and "cleanliness", and this was assessed by careful listening to the metallic percussion instruments within the tracks. I usually find that if I get a good sense of metal objects sounding metallic, then the rest of the audible spectrum generally follows along in it's "believability".

I then started to lower the buffer parameter in JPlay64 until I reached the lower limit of 5 buffers. 4 or less and it refused to play. At this setting, 0.1134ms, it was getting rather difficult to discern differences between it and XXHE. I think a lengthy period is needed before a firm preference could be made, but a conclusion could be reached that however Jplay is using memory allocation and resources, should be attempted to be incorporated into XXHE.

Regards,

Russ

PS. Get well Josef

[Marcin_gps]

Calibrator, but you're on Special Mode-  that's another tale and very much different from adaptive. And Q2,Q3 at 30, you are aware that it totally changes the presentation towards 'fullness' and makes sound more on 'your face'...

[PeterSt]

Marcin, what does that matter ? Are Russ's observations not valid for that ? Ok, it looks like he writes it a bit from down under , but his conclusion (also) is that Josef's means work out for the better (I read it the other way around at a first read).

By itself Russ's observations *are* interesting, because we can do something with it. Set out lines/paths. Well, I think I can.

Peter

[Marcin_gps]

I didn't write that they're not valid, but Q2 and Q3 at 30 changes sound completely Besides special mode is available for limited users (ESI drivers preferable). I haven't been able to play stable with neither RME, Cantatis, M-Audio or Ploytec drivers.

[PeterSt]

OK, I guess I don't get your point then ?

So, I hear what you say, and I understand what you say. What I don't see is the relevance ...
(and you maybe better make it clear before *I* mess up ! )

Maybe you are saying something like : someone who has Q2/3 dialed to 30 is not allowed to judge ?
I could go along with that to some point. But since Russ his observations are not contrary to other's I don't see a problem in it.

Anyway, it is important enough to understand eachother well.

Besides special mode is available for limited users (ESI drivers preferable).

I guess this is merely your point (and not "besides"). Well, I like to put this the other way around : I can use Special Mode (as many can) and I wish I would be able to keep on preferring it. So, it clearly has way more detail, but somehow isn't good. What if "this" (memory approach) would solve that ? It would mean a huge leap forward, with some downside of some people needing another soundcard. So what ? if it is for the (vastly) better ... Of course, if you use the soundcard not to passthrough (but use the analogue outs) it's another matter - and I think you do the latter. Well, *that* would be no sot "valid" I think ... (you will be one out of 100, roughly estimated).

Ok, let me put it all differently. I think I am here to judge all your findings ("all" is "all you"). I also think I can do that, or at least managed rather well so far. Whether I can make something from it for the better is always to awaiten of course. IOW, don't be too afraid I'll triple over one "wrong" judgement, be it a random person or be it you (and you know that !!). In other words : it is far far more useful to have the input from as many people as possible, than none because he now thinks "I am not allowed to speak because I have Q2 set to 30".

... As it is allowed to observe something like that, like you just did. But "observe" is different from turning it into some negative, no matter how well meant (of course). So, I only want to protect a bit against that. That's all.
Well, you know ...

Peter

[Marcin_gps]

Peter, but it's like comparing apples and oranges, you know - to many variables IMHO, but sure everyone can have his own opinion, I didn't mean to criticize or sth. I just wanted to rather point few, in my opinion, important differences:

- Kernel Streaming vs. WASAPI
- double arc prediction vs. native 16/44
- ultra low buffer vs. higher
- and finally Q2, Q3 at 30

I think that a 'fair' comparison would be with XXHE set to Engine#3, the same buffer size and playing native 16/44, but that's my opinion
If Calibrator prefers what he does then good for him! But I can reply to his post, can I?

And you know that I also have dCS Elgar Plus with RME-AES32 in dual AES configuration. The dCS can work in 24/192 in dual AES only, other inputs are limited to 24/96, so I don't think I'm gonna switch to JULI@, which lacks BNC for word clock BTW. I see that you're a bit frustrated that someone could prefer other player? I get it, but you don't have to search for weak points in my system to rationalize my statement, because that what this meant, right - 'of course, if you use the soundcard not to passthrough (but use the analogue outs) it's another matter - and I think you do the latter. Well, *that* would be no sot "valid" I think ... (you will be one out of 100, roughly estimated).'

Cheers,
Marcin

[CoenP]

Hi Marcin,

Peter, but it's like comparing apples and oranges, you know - to many variables IMHO, but sure everyone can have his own opinion, I didn't mean to criticize or sth. I just wanted to rather point few, in my opinion, important differences:

- Kernel Streaming vs. WASAPI
- double arc prediction vs. native 16/44
- ultra low buffer vs. higher
- and finally Q2, Q3 at 30

I think that a 'fair' comparison would be with XXHE set to Engine#3, the same buffer size and playing native 16/44, but that's my opinion

Personally I think there is more to comparing. Just like CPU benchmarks, there are more tests that might work out completely diffferent for completely different configurations. Just like with all audio testing one would like to gain insight how a product compares to its peers right out of the box ánd in a highly tweaked situation. Just like the occasional dac that apparently does not like to be fed from a powerconditioner or brings extasy only connected by cable brand X, can be a winner or looser just the same by 'all things equal' comparison. I would opt for comparing products it their most favourable configuration.
I realise this is not a sustainable principle since allmost everything is variable and makes a difference. Still you could experiment within your own context and still get a meaningfull result.

Since the Jplay is a demonstration app it cannot be so extensively tweaked as XX. I think is is therefore justified for everybody who has gone through the effort of optimising XX compare it with (naturally optimised as possible) Jplay and publish his or her findings.

Unfortunaltely no comparing for me since I have no WASAPI enabled OS  !

regards, Coen

just an afterthought: are you shure the OS and PC XX optimisations are also optimal for Jplay....?

[PeterSt]

I see that you're a bit frustrated that someone could prefer other player?

I really don't get where you got that from ! Unless you mean "settings". And then I still don't see it really.

I had a lot more, but scratched it. But I'll summarize : you have a hard time in knowing what apples and apples are. One example that hopefully opens your eyes (and it counts for everything I tell you) : what "you" are actually asking for is that I insert a preamp again, just because you use one. And Josef. And everybody trying his version of the memory approach. And then what ? Man, I won't even try.
You also want us to listen to native 44.1 while we know whatever Arc Prediction sounds better. Now I don't care who will tell it, but if that sounds better than what we already judged to be worse from another theory, it is completely fine with me, but I won't listen to it because THAT is apples and oranges.

So ... if you prefer to overlook that, or maybe think that you can "hear through" that all, good. But please don't dedicate others to be able to. I can't ! (and even won't attempt as said, which not only counts for the one (two) examples I gave, but for 20 other things you don't think about).

One more thing, and just for fun : maybe you want to hear my ever native WASAPI; you won't believe what you will be hearing; Maybe you were there when the "Less dynamics" checkboxes were there. They were there for a reason. Sadly, these things can not be sustained when things get bigger, can more, have more branches, anything. Already *this* is one reason I won't listen to Josef's attempts if it were for the absolute merits (the relative amongst them is another story). It will say few for the end result. Did you think about that ? no, you 100% sure did not. But then again, the relative difference between the two versions (now four) *will* say something to me. But only that.

Anyone's judgement is valid for that. And yes, I *can* look through that.

Shall we now stop please ?
(not with listening to Josef's attempts !)

Thanks,
Peter

[Windows X]

Im onside with native boat. Arc prediction is good for not really highly resolving system. When use in high resolution system, I feel little annoyed with artifacts (not as much as amarra, though). Though peter said there won't have anything like that but I don't feel it's natural sound to my ears.

My 0.02

[Josef]

Peter wrote:

Shall we now stop please ?
(not with listening to Josef's attempts !)

It is very, _very_ easy to misinterpret someone thoughts when there is no eye contact and only letters on the screen - I'm afraid that just happened between you two guys but please let's carry on as Peter suggests:
Please keep your impressions coming: No matter what settings or amps or whatever!

In the end: This is only about increasing our enjoyment of music!

I bet you all it's not only Peter who is following changes in jplayer and looking for new ideas The more there are - the better! Maybe somebody will get a completely new angle and make a player that blows both XX & JPlayer out of the water - Great!
I personally don't care 'which player is better' as long as I enjoy how it sounds!


And let's keep in mind that, after all, some people will always like transistors and some will never switch from tubes.
Some are 100% digital and yet others won't touch anything but Vinyl.
Some like BMW, others Audi, and yet others Mercedes (poor chaps )
Some like blondes, some brunettes, and others reds... (and some like them all   )

Is it then crazy to suggest that some may prefer WASAPI & others KS?

I honestly don't believe there is such a thing as 'absolute best' in anything, much less audio.

My hope with this little 'JPlayer controversy' is to push the limits to the point where it will be up to personal tastes!

And then we can make our own Arsenal vs Manchester United teams and really fight it out!  

Keep enjoying the music! (and also: guys, apart from Marcin who clearly prefers 64-bit (and I tend to agree) there still are no other opinions on 32 vs 64bits....)

[PeterSt]

Im onside with native boat. Arc prediction is good for not really highly resolving system. When use in high resolution system, I feel little annoyed with artifacts (not as much as amarra, though). Though peter said there won't have anything like that but I don't feel it's natural sound to my ears.

Hey,

Just for your information, and my aknowledgement you *should* be right ...

Arc Prediction was made for NOS/Filterless DACs, and for those only. Moreover, it was explicitly made for 24/384 NOS/Filterless (read : the Phasure NOS1). This doesn't say all (see below), but it *is* good to know it (plus that you won't own such a DAC).

Next is my own surprise that most people like Arc Prediction over native anyway. This is not because I told those people ... the contrary ... I told them not to use it because ... (see above). But it just happened.

Today I am as far as that it highly depends on the DAC and what it does internally with already "ready" low passed data (so to day). I mean, one DAC still oversamples as hell, and the other "sees" that it is not necessary anymore (this is partly implied by software logic).

All 'n all, everybody who says he likes Arc Prediction better at using a DAC which filters itself (again and theoretically for the worse), is to be investigated on "how come". This is not about people having strange (or low-res) systems (at all), them not being able to listen well (at all), but to what degree their DAC "listenes" to something which is already good;
On the other hand, everybody who says Arc Prediction is worse than native 44.1 is inherently right. As long as they don't use something like the Phasure NOS1.

And so you must be right.
Peter


PS: Please let's not continue this subject here, because I really think it is off topic in here. Not by means of your post, but merely because of my answer.

[Per]

Josef, I agree with you on the peace on earth / forum statement, Josef. Let us be slow to judge (each other) and fast to forgive   Peter has done a tremendous job with his new dac. I am sure it will take highend computer audio to new heigths. Lots of congratulations, Peter - when my hifi one day is up to snuff I would love to give it a listen. Marcin, in my book you are The master tweaker of Computer Audio - and like Peter probably focusing of pushing the envelope of computer audio 25 hours a day That leaves very little for sleep - and then one could easily be a little a tense, I suppose.

Well, back to the topic:

I too have downloaded jplay1 and jplay2 and would sure like to try them and give some feedback, but I cannot 'Lock pages in memory' as I run Vista Home Edition   In short: I do not have the secpol.msc or gpedit.msc utilities that Josef refers to. From googling I have learnt that all the parameters is in the Registry database of Windows, but how to change the needed settings manually I have not been able to find out. Praise to Josef for digging into the inners of OS and sharing it with us.

Best wishes and regards to all of you,

Per

[Josef]

I mean, one DAC still oversamples as hell, and the other "sees" that it is not necessary anymore

Excellent point Peter!

If DAC is oversampling, then JPlay's output (a 'pure' native 44.1kHz) will be utterly destroyed!
(for example, 44.1 might get converted to 96kHz in DAC which is a _very_ hard thing to do right and almost impossible to do both _right_ AND in _real time_!)

And if same track is played with XX using Arc Prediction then DAC might say, ah, a 96kHz stream here:Good, I don't have to oversample I'll just play it....

Which obviously means that comparison is not exactly OK but nevermind - As I said, keep the opinions coming: the only way to make reasonable conclusions is to have _more_ opinions!

(Or, turn off Arc Prediction in XX and try again  )


My DAC is only pure native 16/44.1 (Audio Note) so I can't test this but maybe somebody with 96kHz or 192kHz can try following:
set DAC to its maximum (e.g. 192kHz) and try JPlay: does it fail reporting format is not supported? Then look in Sound Panel and check which format is selected as default (is it 44.1 or 96kHz?) Try changing the format and then try again.
(also, check if your DAC maybe has a way to 'turn off' oversampling? )

[Josef]

Per,

I cannot 'Lock pages in memory' as I run Vista Home Edition

but how to change the needed settings manually I have not been able to find out

Huh -That just may not be possible

But try this:
http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/tools/13970.html

And some small info on how to use it:
http://ben.versionzero.org/wiki/Cmd:ntrights

Note you not only need Administrator rights but you may need to turn-off UAC.

I have never tried this so no guarantees....

[manisandher]

I think there's an issue with nomenclature here. Although there are no precise definitions, mine are as follows:

Upsampling is done before the filter in the DAC

Oversampling is done during the filtering in the DAC

So Josef, when you say turn the oversampling off, most people would not be able to do this. 99.9% of DACs are delta-sigma, and therefore by definition need oversampling to work. Some DACs have the capability to upsample 2x or 4x. This is sometimes switchable on/off.

Arc Prediction is a means of upsampling in the software. If you have upsampling in your DAC, try to switch it off if you can. If you have a true multi-bit DAC, try to switch the oversampling filter off, or bypass it. If you have a delta-sigma DAC (highly likely), see if you like the sound of AP - you may, or you may not, depending on your DAC.

Mani.

[Josef]

Thanks for clarifications Mani!

BTW - Still unable to access command prompt from RAMDisk? Does jplay work if you simply double-click play.bat from Explorer?

[Flecko]

Where is the instruction to set up the memory lock thing?

[Marcin_gps]

Adrian, there you go:

Start Menu > Run > enter "mmc" > OK button
File > Add/Remove Snap-in > Add button
Select "Group Policy Object Editor" > Add button
Finish button
Close button
OK button
Local Computer Policy > Computer Configuration > Windows Settings > Security Settings > Local Policies > select "User Rights Assignment"
Double-click "Lock pages in memory"
Add User or Group button
Object Types... button
check Groups > uncheck Built-in security principals & Users > OK button
Enter "Administrators" under "Enter the object names to select" > OK button
Apply button > OK button
File > Save
File > Exit
Reboot

[PeterSt]

Josef,

I see you so persistent on the settings in the advanced tab of the audio device (like setting it to 44.1 etc.).

If you do everything right on your side, this doesn't make one bit of a difference.
But if you use Shared Mode, it does ...

[Flecko]

thx marcin!

I tested aples with aples first:

xx-engine3@44.1/16bit <-> jplay64
result: same sort of sound but jplay sounds cleaner

then aples with pears

xx-engine4,special@44.1/16bit <-> jplay64
result: nearly same level of detail, a little bit more focus on lower midrange and bass with xx, jplay sounds brighter

and then aples with oranges

xx-engine4,special@88.2/24bit <-> jplay64
result: much more musical with xx, more 3d, simply better

btw: just tested sfs.ini settigns again: would say 01 is closer to jplay than 21...I like 01 more

[Josef]

Josef,

I see you so persistent on the settings in the advanced tab of the audio device (like setting it to 44.1 etc.).

If you do everything right on your side, this doesn't make one bit of a difference.
But if you use Shared Mode, it does ...

I am persistent because I like to have things double & triple-checked before making conclusions - call me paranoid    
I'm well aware of unfortunate sh*t Windows is doing to samples in Shared mode - that one does not require multiple DACs to check 

[Josef]

Flecko: Thank you for your observations!

Was it done before you found jumpers to disable oversampling or after?
And could I bug you for 32 vs 64 bit test?

[manisandher]

... could I bug you for 32 vs 64 bit test?

I'll try this also at some point and let you know what I think.

Mani.

[Josef]

Josef: My system priority has programs selected, I see your pic has backround services selected. Which is preferable for jplay and/or xx?

Which one is 'better' I don't know: I think e.g. Marcin definitely prefers Programs (right?)

In principle, this shouldn't have an effect - However, it IS messing around with _very_ important parts in a running system as opposed to Background setting which leaves things more 'at ease' so to say

Personally, as I also write & test code for JPlay I absolutely need a system that is as 'predictable' as possible - hence my preference for Background.   

To answer what's best for XX I also don't know - maybe Peter will answer.

I can only say that, in principle, because of a different design approach and especially when certain settings are used XX will be definitely affected more than jplay - this however does not imply anything as, for example, certain XX settings intentionally make things even more non-'predictable' yet there are people who prefer SQ precisely with such settings!

Long story short: This depends on too many variables so it's best to try for yourself and make your own decision

[Marcin_gps]

Josef,

I prerefer neither of those :D

Marcin

[Flecko]

Flecko: Thank you for your observations!

Was it done before you found jumpers to disable oversampling or after?
And could I bug you for 32 vs 64 bit test?

It was done before the oversampling changes (8xOs with filter).
Now I use 4xOs with filter. The sound is very different now. Much more highs. will do the 32/64 test later. I must buy some food now :starving:
greetings

[Josef]

Josef: My system priority has programs selected, I see your pic has backround services selected. Which is preferable for jplay and/or xx?

In principle, this shouldn't have an effect - However, it IS messing around with _very_ important parts in a running system as opposed to Background setting which leaves things more 'at ease' so to say

Uh, uh - I should have gone with my gut instinct about that 'more at ease' part.....

Believe it or not, I actually planned to change that setting to Background directly in latest jplay: I decided against it as setting & reverting back whatever user had before (there are a few more possibilities besides Foreground/Background) meant manipulating Registry which means I'd be messing with users machine and I don't like that..... Even worse, I would be manipulating a setting that affects ALL processes! No way in hell....

But, as chance would have it, I am now in the process of testing a new tweak specifically targeting Windows 7 & 2008R2 users and which (surprise, surprise) is going to be yet another first among _any_ PC audio players 

As I was perusing needed literature I also read some parts on these 'Priority' settings which is important to understand in order to 'predict' the impact of this new tweak. Long story short:

I think I can now see a rather plausible theoretical reason why JPlay should preferably be run with Background setting!

Uh, oh, ah -  Does that sound like yet another controversy? 
Betcha! 

In fact, in the new episode of "JPlayer Controversy" series I will also reveal how you can push Windows to the MAX (in terms of making it 'sweat' the most, LOL) so, once again, you can be the judge for yourself and decide what/if these mysterious 'Priority settings' can do for SQ! (and test it very easily too    )

[BrianG]

Chaps can state of mind effect how we perceive the sound of things:

The aussies are getting pummelled by the poms in the cricket so I took a break from viewing that and had a play with JPlay64 on my music server ( running Vista 64 ).

 

but if Calibrator had said:

The aussies are "pummelling" the poms in the cricket so I took a break from viewing that and had a play with JPlay64 on my music server ( running Vista 64 ).

 


perhaps we need to know what state of mind people are in to understand their comments too?

 

[Flecko]

I made a short test between the 32 and 64 bit version. If there is a difference in how they sound, it is very smal. Maby 64 is a tiny bit better but this is in the range of imagination/placebo.

[Calibrator]

perhaps we need to know what state of mind people are in to understand their comments too?

 

haha ... hi Brian,

the woeful performance of the aussies in the recent match merely allowed me to play with JPlay earlier than anticipated, but you do bring up a valid point about state of mind when listening to music. I'm sure we've all had those days when the music just seems to have lost it's sparkle, yet the previous day everything was great.

The human mind is a complex beast and I've learned to accept that our perception of some things can change from day to day. It also illustrates why it is prudent to judge differences in sound quality over a period of a few days rather than an individual snapshot. It's quite possible that the same comparison today may bring forth a difference result, but the purpose of my comparison a couple of days ago was to give some immediate feedback.

Cheers all,

Russ       

[BrianG]

Hi Russ,

Some very valid points and I was enjoying the test match results the opposite to you of course (any chance we get to beat the aussies is a bonus) 

 

The other day I found an old hard drive that I had marked with a sticker many years ago.  The sticker was meant to make the drive "friend and not foe", stay with me, as the theory was that the music would be better received from something that wasn't a possible threat.   At the time I did it I didn't see, feel, sense any difference and put it down to snake oil.  This must be 5 years ago and when I saw the sticker I immediately felt relaxed about the hard drive, a warm, this is my friend kind of thing.  Very odd and I know it's not scientific or rational but that's the way it was for me, something had been implanted and I triggered the response

Sorry chaps, back to the JPlay
Brian

[Chriss]

One fast question Josef,
I can play anly 3 tracks at a time ( I'm ok with it) but why everytime when I copy new 2 or 3 tracks I have to reboot?

[PeterSt]

In case Josef isn't around (allow me please) ...
This would be normal; It is about the "necessity" Josef talked about earlier that the player always keeps on running, so it can re-use its own memory. You now restart it, and in the mean time the memory is too scattered to allocate enough contigious memory.

I think I myself can work around this, but I'm not at that point yet (not much time either).

HTH,
Peter

[Josef]

One fast question Josef,
I can play anly 3 tracks at a time ( I'm ok with it) but why everytime when I copy new 2 or 3 tracks I have to reboot?

Hi Chriss,

Peter pretty much answered your question - I can only add that jplay experiment is meant to demonstrate  & get feedback on so far unused software techniques that apparently (as everyone so far is attesting) have a positive effect on SQ. I never expected it to sound as good as it does and as I spent only a week or so on it I think you'll understand why it may not work all the time.

Having said that, I am myself annoyed when this happens (e.g. on my 'dev setup') and maybe I will look into fixing this (which is interesting to me as, in a sense, the fix will benefit SQ) but I have some other priorities on my mind at the moment so there are no promises...

In the meantime, if you are interested in a 'quick fix', have a look at my 'audio-only vLited Vista' post - I played many tracks on that setup and never encountered this annoying Windows issue.... (similar steps can be taken with Win7 if you prefer that OS: just keep in mind that 'less running processes = less chance of memory fragmentation'...)
 

[Chriss]

Thanks for the awnsers Peter and Josef,
you're my new PC Audio GURU's (I'm not joking )
Regards, Criss.

[Per]

...and in the mean time the memory is too scattered to allocate enough contigious memory.

Would the Gamebooster utility be of any use - defragmenting RAM? Have at look at this thread

http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=1400.0

I am using version 1.6 as I do not feel comfortable with the new version 2.0 GUI  - says I that use XXHE 0.9y-8 for the same reason  I find that XXHE and other programs are running faster and smoother but I do not have a tweaked Vista, so the only benefit for those who do - will probably be the RAM defrag. Thanks to Calibrator for mentioning Gamebooster in the first place.

Happy Holliday

Per