XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
March 28, 2024, 07:42:37 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  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: Challenging hiend cd player/transport result  (Read 147598 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« on: December 09, 2010, 03:13:50 pm »

Ok. Now I heard how paid version of xxhighend sounds like. I even compared to my diy music server to meet the same audio interface specifications (Weiss INT202) and nowhere come close to mine in $100k system besides more forgiving sound to superior hiend cd transport like playback mps-5/emm labs sacd se/dcs puccani/esoteric k-01

Under $5k cd transport/player with digital out, it seems acceptable to setup computer transport as bearable replacement but more than thatis impossible job and there's no way in these 5-10 years for computer to be as good as $10k cd transport for sure at least not in the same price.
Logged
Marcin_gps
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 455


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2010, 04:41:36 pm »

Play around with Processor Schemes, SFS values, buffer sizes, Q parameters and Engines (3 or 4, Adaptive, Special) etc
Also make sure you place XXHE and tracks on RAMdisk. And make sure you play unattended.
And how on earth are you able to tell what will be in 5-10 years, are you a fortune teller? lol
Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2010, 04:49:36 pm »

If you hear it yourself, you'll understand why. In my system, I used to think for a year or two but I have my hope all lost.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2010, 05:27:37 pm »

Quote
If you hear it yourself, you'll understand why. In my system, I used to think for a year or two but I have my hope all lost.

Remember, I offered you this bet. Why not take it ?
Happy
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2010, 05:41:29 pm »

Then I bet ten times for you to come here to listen to it. If you win, I'll offer your ticket for roundtrip too Wink At least I'm pretty sure my speaker and system setup is good enough to tell the difference. If there is anyone who's willing to say music server with proper configuration is better (either xxhighend/mine/jplay/etc.), I still can conclude there's a chance but the gap in the utmost revealing system is clear enough to say impossible. But I understand you Peter. If I hadn't played into hiend field and witness this myself, I wouldn't had doubt about music server being inferior or not at all.

Also, you don't have to believe me. I'm just expressing what I found in this experiment. And I think XXHighend owner has good enough ears to tell why he turned off something like arc prediction.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2010, 06:00:47 pm »

Quote
And I think XXHighend owner has good enough ears to tell why he turned off something like arc prediction.

... while in the mean time that same owner may not know when it would be allowed to have it on.
Well, I explained it to you I think, so all what comes from that quote is nothing much.

And ... you know what the INT202 can achieve for latency, right ? again nothing much !
... assuming this is still THE subject.

And again -assuming that is the subject- you *will* know how easy it would be for fairly random people with fairly good systems (a kind of prerequisite indeed) to win that bet.

So, I guess you give up now ? naughty
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2010, 07:16:27 pm »

I use RME-AES32 in my main system and I believe it's better than your NOS DAC as your XXHighend is like immature framework against jplay using WASAPI. I tested with INT202 just to compare between "my system" and "properly optimized XXHighend like marcin said" as XXHighend owner firmly believe INT202 is his best approach.

Maybe you can make a vote if you're so curious about it but I don't care. I just want to say gap between computer based and hiend CD Player like $20k is too wide to fill in. And you know? $20k DCS Puccani is so cheap against Esoteric K-01 when properly configured.

And don't joke with me for building system. I made $50k system where everyone came to listen to and no one said a word about bad sounding at all. Some honest guys may explain how he prefers difference from me aside quality and some admitted how my system sounds better than his but that doesn't matter.

If you have your flag in mind then I don't intend to change it. This is what I found from today's listening with all possibly the best computer transport against best possible CD Players.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2010, 07:28:54 pm »

Sorry, I put a smiley wrong.

So, I guess you give up now ? yes
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2010, 07:33:20 pm »

lol. Give up in what? If it's about making PC transport better than hiend CD transport then yea I give up and gotta aim for affordable closest ones instead. I'm not using Weiss INT202 in my reference system you know? Well, to be precise, computer based can't be in real hiend reference system. If you have your chance to try comparing your system with NOS DAC against something like Esoteric K-01 or P3-D3 which is even better including Esoteric G0rb, you will give up for sure (regardless of having clock or not).

Maybe you should let us know your reference system. What do you think?
Logged
glynnw
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 79


View Profile Email
« Reply #9 on: December 09, 2010, 08:17:33 pm »

YAWN!!!

Enough. unhappy

I would love to see a controlled shootout  with multiple listeners between the various formats, but until then it is all just so much gas.  I have friends who can sit with me and listen to the same system and come to different conclusions. 

On to more positive things, please.
Logged

Latest Vers of XXHighEnd - settings vary daily/Windows Vista Home Premium SP1/ Wavelength Cosecant Version 3.0 (24/96)/Bent Audio Tap-X Passive pre/Bottlehead Paramount 300B amps/Homemade open baffles/ 2 Bag End Infra 18 subs w/DSpeaker 8033 DSP on each/PS Audio Power Plant
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #10 on: December 09, 2010, 08:26:14 pm »

On positive note, computer-based audio can replace most mid-end transport systems and some infamous overpriced hi-end ones.
Logged
manisandher
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2112

from-first-principles.com


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2010, 08:27:24 pm »

Windows X, your posts remind me so much of the 'conversation' I had with a certain hifi dealer in the UK. He was convinced that the $20K Spectral CD player that he sells is better than my computer playback system (without actually having any idea of what my system is).

To him and to you, I would ask this: HOW DO YOU THINK THE CDS THAT YOU THINK SOUND GREAT ON YOUR CD PLAYER ARE CREATED????

You can bet your life there was a computer involved. If a computer is good enough to create the CDs that sound so great on your CD player, then it should be good enough to play the files back. Period.

Mani.
Logged

Main System:
Phasure Mach III (Win 14393.0 on RAM-OS / controlled by RDC, / connected directly to music server / XXHighEnd 2.11 / Minimize OS / Engine#4 Adaptive / DB=4096 / Q1=10 / xQ1=15 / Q3,4,5=1 / SFS=4.00 / XTweaks = 34, 10, 0, 0, 0 / Straight Contiguous / Clock Resolution = 15ms / Scheme 3-5 (low/realtime) / 8x Arc Prediction / switch #5 'up/off' / Unattended) mobo USB3 port -> Lush^3 -> Phasure NOS1a B75 G3 -> 8m Blaxius^2 -> First Watt F5 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horn speakers
Office System:
Phasure Stealth II -> Lush^2 -> RME ADI-2 Pro FS R -> Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Marvel horn speakers
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #12 on: December 09, 2010, 08:31:55 pm »

I A/B tested it. Not just XXHighend but also Amarra and other possible dedicated platforms. I can't seem to find where computer can sound better at all cost against real giants. I'm not saying any hiend CD transport will sound surely better but certain ones are unbeatable in direct comparison using $100k system or higher with proper setup. The gap is too large to think computer-based may have potentials of challenging.

And lot of you guys reminded me of someone including my past self who deem to believe even best CD transport is going to lose to computer based ones.

Computer based has poorer mechanism and transport chain. Even CD player in computer sounds better from storage so how could CD transport lose against unless person who said it doesn't use real hiend system or doesn't know how to make hiend equipments sound right?

For easier to understand, how can you make ripped songs from CD sound better than playing directly from CD in your computer?

FYI: Vibration and resonance control of CD ripper drive can affect sound quality of ripped data.
Logged
Marcin_gps
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 455


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 09, 2010, 08:45:53 pm »

Mani, recording is very much different process, so can't be compared.

Windows X, it's a good thing (I guess) that we don't have $100k systems, so we don't think that PC audio is inferior Happy In fact, it's better at the given price range and there is a comfort factor in plus, which you're aware of.

Besides, I don't think you've tested enough platforms, audio interfaces etc to tell for sure and maybe you're looking for some other type of sound presentation that you prefer from e.g. Esoteric. Remember, everything is subjective. My friend has $200k system and gave up traditional CD transport for music server with XXHE onboard, and he said that he'll never go back to CDs...
Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #14 on: December 09, 2010, 08:47:11 pm »

Yes, It's really a good thing. I'm quite unlucky to realize this. Actually, I don't find that being very inferior in my system. Just about 90% of Esoteric P-05 or something in my room with my equipments. But in there.....may not last to 70%.....Let alone $500k or $1m system............who knows?
Logged
Marcin_gps
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 455


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2010, 08:53:47 pm »

OK, $1M system wouldn't necessary be better than $200k system, you are aware of that? You're talking about hi-end industry, where price has no transposition to quality - at least not linear as you may think.
Logged
Telstar
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 732


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2010, 09:05:10 pm »

You're talking about hi-end industry, where price has no transposition to quality - at least not linear as you may think.

 clapping clapping clapping
Logged

(2nd Apr 2018)
Software:
W10 14393 Pro x64 | XXHE 2.10 | MinOS | Q=14x1/0/0/0/0 | SFS 5,19 mixed contiguous | Nervous rate 1 | 4096k buffer |

Hardware:
OrigenAE H5 case | E5300 fanless |  8GB RAM | Winmate DC-DC fanless PSU | OS on SSD | Renesas USB3 pcie card | Belden highspeed usb cable | Audio-gd dac19 NOS with sigxer F1 | My_ref_FE mono amps | Albedo Apex speakers
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2010, 09:14:42 pm »

Quote
I use RME-AES32 in my main system and I believe it's better than your NOS DAC as your XXHighend is like immature framework against jplay using WASAPI. I tested with INT202 just to compare between "my system" and "properly optimized XXHighend like marcin said" as XXHighend owner firmly believe INT202 is his best approach.

I have a RME-9632 and I know how cr*py it sounds. Sorry but... LOL rofl
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2010, 09:17:00 pm »

Windows X ...

I had a nice reply for you, but didn't post it because all is just too childish. Remember, from my mouth just as well.
Instead I sent you my post per PM.

My suggestion : be more open to things, or maybe even more honest.
Act as if you know it all better and you will know nothing.

Over and out from my side. Happy
Peter
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
manisandher
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2112

from-first-principles.com


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2010, 09:40:09 pm »

Mani, recording is very much different process, so can't be compared.

Marcin, yes recording and playback are different processes. I said that the computer SHOULD be able to play the recording back to the same level of quality that it was recorded. Here's a thought experiment. You are in the studio with Keith Johnson who has just made a new RR recording using Pro Tools (or Pyramix, or Sonic Studio, or whatever) and which sounds stunning. He has the pristine digital file on his hard drive. So, you're going to tell him that he can't play it back on the equipment on which it was recorded because actually, althought this equipment is good enough to make some of the best recordings on the planet, it's not good enough to play these recordings back?

(Of course, Windows X would suggest that he creates a redbook CD of the recording and play it back on a $$$ Esoteric CD player in order to hear it in it's full glory.)

I think most of us here are all too familiar with the foibles of computer playback. But my point is that computer recording is no less easy. If you can get a computer to record well, then there SHOULD be no reason why you can't get the same computer to play back well also... IMHO of course.

Mani.
Logged

Main System:
Phasure Mach III (Win 14393.0 on RAM-OS / controlled by RDC, / connected directly to music server / XXHighEnd 2.11 / Minimize OS / Engine#4 Adaptive / DB=4096 / Q1=10 / xQ1=15 / Q3,4,5=1 / SFS=4.00 / XTweaks = 34, 10, 0, 0, 0 / Straight Contiguous / Clock Resolution = 15ms / Scheme 3-5 (low/realtime) / 8x Arc Prediction / switch #5 'up/off' / Unattended) mobo USB3 port -> Lush^3 -> Phasure NOS1a B75 G3 -> 8m Blaxius^2 -> First Watt F5 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horn speakers
Office System:
Phasure Stealth II -> Lush^2 -> RME ADI-2 Pro FS R -> Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Marvel horn speakers
Jack
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 111

Information is not Knowledge.....Music is the best


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2010, 10:24:25 pm »

Do people still use those cheap little plastic disks that were called CD's?
Far out!
I'm with Mani. Apples in - Apples out
Jack
Logged

Peter's latest version & settings - Win10/64 - Octo core PC  - 32gig RAM - NOS1 Mourinho Edition - BD Amps & filters - BD Inspired Horns - Comfy leather armchair with tablet remote control
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2010, 04:33:16 am »

OK, $1M system wouldn't necessary be better than $200k system, you are aware of that? You're talking about hi-end industry, where price has no transposition to quality - at least not linear as you may think.

Indeed. I firmly put this in mind before posting that's why I always stated about being properly setup. Most $100k system may not sound particularly better than my $50k system but highly optimized ones is a big difference.
Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2010, 04:34:18 am »

Quote
I use RME-AES32 in my main system and I believe it's better than your NOS DAC as your XXHighend is like immature framework against jplay using WASAPI. I tested with INT202 just to compare between "my system" and "properly optimized XXHighend like marcin said" as XXHighend owner firmly believe INT202 is his best approach.

I have a RME-9632 and I know how cr*py it sounds. Sorry but... LOL rofl

How can cr*ppy RME-9632 make AES32 being cr*p too? It's best digital transport for PCI/PCIe next to Mykerinos, you know?
Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2010, 04:41:38 am »

Windows X ...

I had a nice reply for you, but didn't post it because all is just too childish. Remember, from my mouth just as well.
Instead I sent you my post per PM.

My suggestion : be more open to things, or maybe even more honest.
Act as if you know it all better and you will know nothing.

Over and out from my side. Happy
Peter

As I'm not childish enough to judge things good or bad without actual listening experiences, I'm not also childish enough to approve something without knowing either how it sounds to my ears or how it's constructed to determine its potentials. If you stated that you compared this to most $10-20k CD Player/Transport-DAC in various $100-200k systems or so then I may give some consideration that it might be possible and ask for its construction inside like how well clock recovery is/quality of I/V convertor/its specifications like SNR THD and so on.

And you said this is world's first NOS DAC for computer and it should sound better than everything in this world? Sorry Peter but that can't buy me. At least show me your reference system to make me believe that you actually use this in hiend speakers with properly powered equipments.
Logged
Klinnilk
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2010, 08:11:14 am »

Hello WindowsX,
it is interesting to follow your argumentation, but some facts it seems you didn`t have understood. First of all reading DATA out from a CD Player is completely different from ripping DATA from a CD Computer Transport. CD PLayer does in time reading, this means it only gets the DATA when the Laser is on its position, it has no chance to get all the DATA off. Even the cheapest Computer drive can retrieve all the DATA from an Audio Disc, because it has all the time in the world to get the information because it is not time dependent.  So one of the biggest advantages of Hard Disk reproduced Music is, that you have all the Music on your Hard drive and you never have the chance listening to all the bits and bytes onto a CD Player whatever price range it is.
That you love the sound of your High End combination over your experimental set up is something i do respect but it is your individual judgement and has nothing to do with accurate reproduction of music, because you don´t have all the original DATA.
This seems to be a general problem when people judge systems; simple question, what is better sound?
Talk to a professional musicians and tell him about spacing, placing of the musicians on the soundstage, smooth bass and fine treble. He will laugh at your argumentation because all this parameters have nothing to do with music reproduction. So again, when you wanna listen to what the musician "wrote in his story" a CD Player is the wrong instrument. Reading a book where letters and words are missing and then judging it is somewhat difficult  Happy
Andreas
Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #25 on: December 10, 2010, 08:16:49 am »

You can also try comparing between mastering hires files to conventional cd disc. It seems plastic still works better than memory. I could set something wrong though.
Logged
Telstar
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 732


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: December 10, 2010, 01:21:44 pm »

You can also try comparing between mastering hires files to conventional cd disc. It seems plastic still works better than memory. I could set something wrong though.

Try a DXD file.

Edit: ah sorry you cant. Wink
Logged

(2nd Apr 2018)
Software:
W10 14393 Pro x64 | XXHE 2.10 | MinOS | Q=14x1/0/0/0/0 | SFS 5,19 mixed contiguous | Nervous rate 1 | 4096k buffer |

Hardware:
OrigenAE H5 case | E5300 fanless |  8GB RAM | Winmate DC-DC fanless PSU | OS on SSD | Renesas USB3 pcie card | Belden highspeed usb cable | Audio-gd dac19 NOS with sigxer F1 | My_ref_FE mono amps | Albedo Apex speakers
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: December 10, 2010, 01:56:46 pm »

Quote
As I'm not childish enough to judge things good or bad without actual listening experiences, I'm not also childish enough to approve something without knowing either how it sounds to my ears or how it's constructed to determine its potentials
Yes, you are. See...
Quote
I use RME-AES32 in my main system and I believe it's better than your NOS DAC as your XXHighend is like immature framework against jplay using WASAPI.
Quote
How can cr*ppy RME-9632 make AES32 being cr*p too? It's best digital transport for PCI/PCIe next to Mykerinos, you know?
Because it is the same technique involved. And how do you know it is the best digital transfer? I mean "Jitter: < 1 ns". That is cr*py in my opinion. You should go for a device that has "Jitter: <10 ps".

Quote
You can also try comparing between mastering hires files to conventional cd disc. It seems plastic still works better than memory. I could set something wrong though
The problem with hires is, that often the hires material was mastered different than the cd. This can cause different and foremost bad sound because of compression used and so on. Take yourself some time, get lost of your predjudice and start to think about it for a minute. What does your higend transport do different than your pc? It is digital data. If the pc could not read/handle it 100% correct we would not talk with each other over the internet. There are differents in CD reading software but that problem is realy solved. I can show you bit by bit, that I will get the exact same data reading the same cd by two complete different pc's. The main problem in pc playback is to get the data out of the pc, and that is where peter made his approach (xx and the NOS). If you have so much money, why don't you give the NOS a try? Losing 200$ could not hurt you.


Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Nick
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 763


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: December 10, 2010, 03:40:40 pm »

It's an interesting debate leading edge cd transport vs computer transport.

I have only an academic interest in which is "best" as this judgment is always only a subjective one. In the real world given the price tags of high end transports (not to mention relative convenience of use) I am not too worried as I cannot afford the sort of transport hi-fi needed to possibly out perform a computer transport.

For my part I got rid of a $15k transport 3 years ago to concentrate on computer transports. I did a lot of work on the transport before it left my system, but in the end a cd player is an electromechanical servo system trying to recover time critical data in real time from a disc with no ability to recover when data is missed (other than algorythmic error correction in real time).

For both types of transport system the aim is simple, just deliver the data stream unchanged to the DAC with each bit arriving exactly on "time". Much easier to say than do....

Both approaches to this have their merit. With the right amounts of R&D, I guess challenges of spinning a disc correcting any lost data, clocking the data and transmission of data to a DAC can be made to work extremely well. The same is true for computer audio where accurate data recovery is not such a problem but sequencing data flow into and out of memory, through output device software and hardware to a DAC is the challenge.

It's interesting to consider that after 25 years of CD transport development it has taken computer audio only 6 years or so to get so close to "the state of the art" that this conversation is already happening. With the extream speed and accuracy available from PC hardware its only a matter of time before the right combination of OS and replay software are coupled with the right data transmission hardware to deliver perfectly timed bit perfect data to the DAC. I think that this is the aim of all on this forum. 
 
IMHO Peter is raising the game of computer audio significantly by adopting an end to end system approach in the computer transport space that addresses; algorythimic data processing, OS, replay software, transmission hardware and the DAC together. I hope to hear the results quite soon.

Which is best today ? I don't know. Where would I place my bet in the short to medium term ? no question the computer, it is only a matter is time. If I were in the business of making or selling very high end transports I would be examining my business plans very carefully right now because the threat is pc audio and it has the the potential to deliver the same audio quality and better useability whilst taking a zero off the price !!


Windows X

I am genuinely very interested, can you say what your high end transport experience is ? You seem to have a lot of knowledge in this area. Are you a well informed private individual or do you work with music equipment ?

Best regards,

Nick.
Logged

Audio PC

C621 motherboard, Xeon 40 thread CPU.

 w10 14393 RAM OS => XX V2.10 / adaptive mode / XX buffer 4096 / NOS USB driver v 1.02 buffer 16ms / Q1,2,3,4,5 = 10,-,1,1,1 / xQ1 =15 / unattended / SFS 0.69Mb / memory straight continuous / system clock 15.0ms / Threadprio RealTime / Playerprio Low / CPU scheme 3-5 / 16x Arc Prediction / Peak Extend off / Phase alignment off / Phase off  / XTweaks : Balanced Load 35 / Nervous Rate 10 (or15) / Cool when Idle n/a / Provide Stable Power 0 / Utilize Cores always 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability  On =>  Lush USB cable => modified NOS1 USB DAC => no pre amp => Orelo active horn loudspeakers with modified bass channel DSPs.

Music server: X99, Xeon 28 thread PC.

System power two 3kva balanced tranformers with dedicated earth spur.
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #29 on: December 10, 2010, 04:34:07 pm »

Let me put in my 2 cents worth since I was at the one providing my computer/XXHighend for comparison. The test was done in a local dealer's showroom with quite an impressive system but unfamiliar to me.  I also have to add that in my system, I switched to Weiss INT202 a few weeks ago from Lynx AES16 so I am still experimenting a bit. The test was interesting but unfortunately for me,it was rather poorly handled. First of all, when we first listened to my computer with my Playback Design MPS-5, my PD was just turned on with warm up time of about 1 minute. I always find PD to be rather unbearable until I get a good few hours of warm up time and usually at home, I never turn off the unit unless I am going away for several days.

Then we switched to XWindow's system for a little while with Playback then switched to EMM/Esoteric for comparison to CD (I forgot to bring my PD remote so I could not switch to disc from AES/EBU input so we could not compare playing CD in PD vs computer into PD unfortunately). After that, we turned back to my computer and played 2 tracks with my computer/XXHighend after we listened to CDs for awhile connecting Esoteric DAC. The two tracks were Jazz Variant from Manger's Musik wie von einem anderen Stern and Kent Poon's 24/192 version of YOu've Got a Friend. The local Esoteric dealer was running the whole show so I had no control over selection of sequences of events.

First I have to admit that the CD version of Jazz Variants was certainly better but I don't think that it was all XXHighend/computer's false. I was experimentign with using 12V battery power for Weiss INT202 which gave much cleaner, smoother sound overall in comparison to Weiss's noisy switching power supply . Unfortunately, the bass impact and dynamic could not match the CD. Much false was to blame on the battery as when I burrowed XWindow's 12V linear power supply for his computer and plugged it into Weiss INT202, bass impact and dynamic improved significantly but at a cost of harsher midrange. Vocal became rather unbearable.

The Esoteric dealer kept saying that CD version of Kent Poon's track had more weight and better define bass than the 24/192 version. When I suggest that we ripped the CD to HD and actually compared the same track, there was no response. Actually, I can't even remembered if we even listened to the CD version at all besides hearing the dealer's comment.

However, beside bass impact and dynamic, I heard slightly wider soundstage and depth with CD. How much of that can be fixed via better power supply to Weiss, I don't know. XWindow brought 2 system, his smaller system that was a bit unstable but used the same Weiss's interface. His unit has bigger, weightier bottom end but not as liquid in the midrange. How much of that was the fault of higher latency/buffer, I cannot tell but my experience with Weiss and his linear power supply give me impression that a better linear power supply may improve things quite a bit more for his computer. His main system with RME was very nice. More clarity, very open sound, again much better dynamic and bass impact than my battery operated Weiss INT202. Unfortunately I wished we had more chance to compare other type of music beside the two tracks mentioned, more acoustic music, piano, classical with more variety and not just fixate tracks that only showed mainly bass and dynamic.

I did bring several CDs which I discuss elsewhere with Xwindow and other people who attended the session, some which I preferred CDs over HD and some which I prefered HD over CD unfortunately I never had the opportunity to play those tracks even though I showed them all the the guy running the show initially.

So what I really got from experiment was basically that I need to do more homework with my system and at least part of the weakness that can be improved quite a bit is not the computer nor the software itself (capacitor bank with bigger battery, car battery perhaps!). May be  after all said and done, I still cannot get the computer to perform as well as CD in that respect but I certainly am not as pessimistic about the quality of computer music server.

Also I have to add that Xwindow's may seemed a bit too single minded but I found him very knowledgable and is very sincere in his opinion eventhough sometimes it may rub the wrong way. He is very passionate about the topic but perhaps not the most diplomatic of person but I did really enjoy our meeting.

I hope that once I can sort out the problem with my power supply, we can have another friendly listening session but somewhere a bit more neutral.
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
manisandher
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2112

from-first-principles.com


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #30 on: December 10, 2010, 05:33:38 pm »

Well, I can't argue with people's direct experiences.

Earlier I wrote:

If you can get a computer to record well, then there SHOULD be no reason why you can't get the same computer to play back well also.

Can anyone explain to me why a computer would be able to record well but not playback well? I mean, what is more difficult about sending music data from a computer to a DAC vs. receiving it from an ADC and storing it? Surely whatever mechanisms might be messing it up during playback would also be evident during recording. And yet, CDs which have been originally recorded on computer seem to sound great on $$$ CD transports.

Mani.
Logged

Main System:
Phasure Mach III (Win 14393.0 on RAM-OS / controlled by RDC, / connected directly to music server / XXHighEnd 2.11 / Minimize OS / Engine#4 Adaptive / DB=4096 / Q1=10 / xQ1=15 / Q3,4,5=1 / SFS=4.00 / XTweaks = 34, 10, 0, 0, 0 / Straight Contiguous / Clock Resolution = 15ms / Scheme 3-5 (low/realtime) / 8x Arc Prediction / switch #5 'up/off' / Unattended) mobo USB3 port -> Lush^3 -> Phasure NOS1a B75 G3 -> 8m Blaxius^2 -> First Watt F5 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horn speakers
Office System:
Phasure Stealth II -> Lush^2 -> RME ADI-2 Pro FS R -> Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Marvel horn speakers
Nick
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 763


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: December 10, 2010, 05:44:47 pm »

Suteetat hi,

A very interesting account of the comparison, now we have much better idea about the event that triggered this debate, thanks.

Do you remember what DAC, amp and speakers were being used ? The question is more just out of interest.

BTW for your INT202 car batteries tend not to be so good in most audio applications they are great at delivery of massive current but not so good at delivery of quiet, fast, regulated power into digital circuits that run at Mhz frequencies. If you want to do a little DIY and depending on the current requirements of you INT202 you might want to look at using something like this. http://www.audiocominternational.com/product_info.php?products_id=28&osCsid=p67t8t2j3p94d4rlkddbapmsg1

I have used them a number of times in DACs, CD Transports, on USB cards and in SPDIF interfaces and they have usually been highly effective, much better than battery power. (Having said that I have not tried the battery type that JKenney is using in his HiFace mods which people say are excellent, you may not get your required voltage easily from these though).

Nick.

Logged

Audio PC

C621 motherboard, Xeon 40 thread CPU.

 w10 14393 RAM OS => XX V2.10 / adaptive mode / XX buffer 4096 / NOS USB driver v 1.02 buffer 16ms / Q1,2,3,4,5 = 10,-,1,1,1 / xQ1 =15 / unattended / SFS 0.69Mb / memory straight continuous / system clock 15.0ms / Threadprio RealTime / Playerprio Low / CPU scheme 3-5 / 16x Arc Prediction / Peak Extend off / Phase alignment off / Phase off  / XTweaks : Balanced Load 35 / Nervous Rate 10 (or15) / Cool when Idle n/a / Provide Stable Power 0 / Utilize Cores always 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability  On =>  Lush USB cable => modified NOS1 USB DAC => no pre amp => Orelo active horn loudspeakers with modified bass channel DSPs.

Music server: X99, Xeon 28 thread PC.

System power two 3kva balanced tranformers with dedicated earth spur.
manisandher
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2112

from-first-principles.com


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #32 on: December 10, 2010, 05:51:16 pm »

If you want to do a little DIY...

I'm upgrading the cheap SMPS in my Weiss AFI1 interface with a toroidal + Paul Hynes PS. All the parts are on order and I should have everything completed by the end of January. If all goes well and there is a definite improvement in SQ, you may want to do something similar with your INT202.

Mani.
Logged

Main System:
Phasure Mach III (Win 14393.0 on RAM-OS / controlled by RDC, / connected directly to music server / XXHighEnd 2.11 / Minimize OS / Engine#4 Adaptive / DB=4096 / Q1=10 / xQ1=15 / Q3,4,5=1 / SFS=4.00 / XTweaks = 34, 10, 0, 0, 0 / Straight Contiguous / Clock Resolution = 15ms / Scheme 3-5 (low/realtime) / 8x Arc Prediction / switch #5 'up/off' / Unattended) mobo USB3 port -> Lush^3 -> Phasure NOS1a B75 G3 -> 8m Blaxius^2 -> First Watt F5 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horn speakers
Office System:
Phasure Stealth II -> Lush^2 -> RME ADI-2 Pro FS R -> Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Marvel horn speakers
Nick
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 763


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: December 10, 2010, 06:25:17 pm »

Mani,

As a though experiment only (no real experience here on this topic) and ignoring factors like RF noise and interface protocols (USB / Firewire / I2S / SPDIF) which defiantly have an effect on playback.

To record, the analogue signal it will be fed into some type of interface (external or internal). The conversion quality should be a function of the interfaces ability to time the sampling and determine the amplitude of the samples. For ADC I assumed this would all be done at dedicated ADC chip level with a very good clock timing the process. If the recording interface uses a buffer to pass the data back to the computer, and the transfer is not handled by the ADC (eg a separate processor takes care of this) then passing the data back to the computer does not result in jitter and so has less (no ?) effect on the sound quality.

Going the other way round to play music you have all of the playback buffer and memory timing challenges that Peter works on. Ideally the computer should be able to move data around and to the DAC in a true real time stream at precisely data rate demanded by the music sample rate. But as Peter and Josef are finding there’s a lot influencing and impacting on this. The net result I guess is that the data arriving at the DAC is less accurately timed even if you can manage to achieve bit perfect delivery of the samples to the DAC.

Probably way off the mark here.....

Nick.



Logged

Audio PC

C621 motherboard, Xeon 40 thread CPU.

 w10 14393 RAM OS => XX V2.10 / adaptive mode / XX buffer 4096 / NOS USB driver v 1.02 buffer 16ms / Q1,2,3,4,5 = 10,-,1,1,1 / xQ1 =15 / unattended / SFS 0.69Mb / memory straight continuous / system clock 15.0ms / Threadprio RealTime / Playerprio Low / CPU scheme 3-5 / 16x Arc Prediction / Peak Extend off / Phase alignment off / Phase off  / XTweaks : Balanced Load 35 / Nervous Rate 10 (or15) / Cool when Idle n/a / Provide Stable Power 0 / Utilize Cores always 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability  On =>  Lush USB cable => modified NOS1 USB DAC => no pre amp => Orelo active horn loudspeakers with modified bass channel DSPs.

Music server: X99, Xeon 28 thread PC.

System power two 3kva balanced tranformers with dedicated earth spur.
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #34 on: December 10, 2010, 06:40:02 pm »

Let me add that I used to have hope about computer music server could be as good as $10k CD transport. I've tried more than 5 of audio interface at highest possible classes from various brands besides Mykerinos. One day when you realize how better system really make the difference, you'll know that music server couldn't get there.

In my own system, I could my own music server is almost as close as Esoteric P-05 like 95% or so when listening like you use flac against wav/mp3 against flac/etc. But I do know its true potentials in larger system like $100-500k ones. I could say $100k system we auditioned few days ago sound 5-10 times better than average $30-50k system. It has a lot more than equipments in there to make sound real good like world's best quality of custom-made stands and power distributor and $6-7k DIY preamp that beats some $20-40k ones easily for quality.

It's not like I'm being single-minded for any subject. If it's something I'm not really into it and know almost full well in every aspect, I wouldn't dare passing judgement on anything like that. But with my knowledge and experiences that I believe it's quite generic to discuss with tons of people who owns $100-300k system at ease, it can't be wrong to be judged in wrong way. I'm talking about quality here not preferences in sound.

To Mr. Suteetat, it would be nice if we can meet up in each other's places and test our projects to discuss for further improvements some days before X'Mas Wink.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #35 on: December 10, 2010, 07:03:19 pm »

Quote
But with my knowledge and experiences

Just for fun here ... wasn't your age 24 ?

If not, what is it ? (and better keep it honest)
To me this seems as important as your $$$. Both say not all, but say something.

?
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #36 on: December 10, 2010, 07:29:02 pm »

How can we understand such thing like harmonics, micro-details, transparency, transient of dynamics, impact, speed, in very subtle but highly critical in super hiend system with proper setup and controlled in the same way? Do you believe putting a coin on any equipment can make the sound difference?

Let's just say money and information skills play best here. Computer can get roughly at 1ms or 0.5 for hardware while CD transport like Emm labs and Esoteric have hundred times lower. What can you expect?

And since when having longer times mean having more knowledge and experiences? If XXHighEnd can out best my non-xxhighend system, I would seriously take your word in consideration. But that didn't happen.
Logged
manisandher
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2112

from-first-principles.com


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #37 on: December 10, 2010, 07:44:58 pm »

Probably way off the mark here.....

Hey Nick, you may actually be well on the mark. The only contention I have is that you associate buffer and memory timing challenges to playback only. I'm pretty certain they exist for recording also.

Also, most professional setups would have the computer slaved to the ADC/DAC clock, or to a dedicated external high-quality clock, for both recording and playback.

Actually, Suteetat & WindowsX, when you were using a computer/XX, were you slaving the computer interface to the DAC? I guess not with the INT202 (it doesn't have a w/c input) - how about the RME? In my experience, this is very important.

Mani.
Logged

Main System:
Phasure Mach III (Win 14393.0 on RAM-OS / controlled by RDC, / connected directly to music server / XXHighEnd 2.11 / Minimize OS / Engine#4 Adaptive / DB=4096 / Q1=10 / xQ1=15 / Q3,4,5=1 / SFS=4.00 / XTweaks = 34, 10, 0, 0, 0 / Straight Contiguous / Clock Resolution = 15ms / Scheme 3-5 (low/realtime) / 8x Arc Prediction / switch #5 'up/off' / Unattended) mobo USB3 port -> Lush^3 -> Phasure NOS1a B75 G3 -> 8m Blaxius^2 -> First Watt F5 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horn speakers
Office System:
Phasure Stealth II -> Lush^2 -> RME ADI-2 Pro FS R -> Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Marvel horn speakers
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #38 on: December 10, 2010, 07:58:58 pm »

I did slaving clock from dac to my main transport. Another machine in test was made for compring Suteetat's approach to mine with same audio interface and so on. I have 0.02ppm clock feeding dac and transport in my home.
Logged
manisandher
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2112

from-first-principles.com


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #39 on: December 10, 2010, 08:07:14 pm »

OK, I understand you do things (i.e. clocking) well in your home system.

But at the local dealer's showroom, when you were making a comparison between computer/XX and CD transport... were you slaving the computer interface to the DAC? If not, then I have way less confidence in your listening observations. And this would also explain why there was such a variation when the INT202 power supply was changed.

FWIW, I cannot bear to listen to my system unless the computer interface is slaved to my DAC's clock.

Mani.
Logged

Main System:
Phasure Mach III (Win 14393.0 on RAM-OS / controlled by RDC, / connected directly to music server / XXHighEnd 2.11 / Minimize OS / Engine#4 Adaptive / DB=4096 / Q1=10 / xQ1=15 / Q3,4,5=1 / SFS=4.00 / XTweaks = 34, 10, 0, 0, 0 / Straight Contiguous / Clock Resolution = 15ms / Scheme 3-5 (low/realtime) / 8x Arc Prediction / switch #5 'up/off' / Unattended) mobo USB3 port -> Lush^3 -> Phasure NOS1a B75 G3 -> 8m Blaxius^2 -> First Watt F5 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horn speakers
Office System:
Phasure Stealth II -> Lush^2 -> RME ADI-2 Pro FS R -> Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Marvel horn speakers
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #40 on: December 10, 2010, 08:21:53 pm »

My main system have it slaved from d-07 in comparison and got pwned once emm labs sacd se took my place for audition. Worst could expect from Eaoteric K-01. I couldn't imagine music server in any solution to sound as good as this (after weight balancing calibration when everyone leaves but me and dealer alone). And let's say p3d3g0rb combo sounds 50% better than k-01 as rubidium clock alone rougely improve K-01 significantly to 20%.

Without antelope clock, I wouldn't consider my music server sound bearable too as I'm enjoying 90% out of P-05 and 70% without it in my system.
Logged
GerardA
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: December 10, 2010, 09:04:45 pm »

Windows X,
I'm sure if you pay Peter a million euro's he'll make a special version of his DAC for you that will sound the best in the world!
Logged

asrock ->intel 6700/4GB/Samsung 850 SSD/Win 10() Pro /XXHE 2.09  Special (32) Clock: max ,SFS: 4  MC, Q1 = 14, Q2,3,4,5=0,0,0,2 Quad AP, No Invert / Playerprio = Belownormal / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = 3 / Mixed contigious / Unattended -> Minidsp 2x4HD (IIR and FIR)->  Mivoc AM80 / 300B / gainclone -> TDL TL/Seas Excell/ScanSpeak
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #42 on: December 10, 2010, 09:11:14 pm »

Making hiend dac to kill top model of Emm Labs isn't that easy, you know?

And I prefer to pay 1m euro elsewhere though. Or you guys prefer to see only posts about "omfg! Xxhighend with xxx puts my $$$ cd transport to shame!"' huh?
Logged
Chriss
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


View Profile Email
« Reply #43 on: December 10, 2010, 11:04:16 pm »

Windows X,
I like when people talk with some knowledge, skills and thoughts even if they are not so correct or complete. For a lot of thinks you are right but lets think together what is the most bigger benefit of the CD transport over PC?(I will be happy to writte them down)
-my guess is...the POWER SUPPLY ofc. If you open hiend CD and the hiend PC (is there hiend PC?) you will get my point. For hi-end PSU you need
Linear-tube,
Massive amorphouse transform,(Modular Power Supply / Signal Stage)
Kenotron Rectifier (Plasma Convertor)
Solid Core Silver Internal Wiring
Solid Core Silver Power Supply Cable ...and so on and so on
Most Pc's use chines 300000W ..nice, no! :D Yes we can continue with a lot of other stuff, someone like weight, plane down (rake), electricity!(proper power conditioner(most hi-end got one or even more) so you can see all the people in this forum found and search new and new thinks about PC music every day and yes there is still a lot of work but...don't give up the PC. It's a powerfull transport and storege!
Regards, and I(and the other I can say) respect your thoughts one or other way!
Criss.
Logged
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #44 on: December 11, 2010, 01:20:27 am »

The system we used in the test was Rockport Aquila, Karan mono, DIY preamplifier,
Esoteric D-07 DAC, for transport, it was EMM Lab, I can't remember which one but
not the XDS1 with Esoteric drive and not the older one with disastrous Philip drive.
I am not sure about wiring used. There were some monster cables and some Virtual Dynamic
cables from what I recalled. The system was incredibly dynamic, excellent soundstaging and depth.
Mid/high were a bit cool,a bit more on analytical side than I like. I left before I had to chance to hear
the system with their new Esoteric K-01 and dCS Puccini due to other commitment.
Cables used for my computer was Locus Design firewire to Weiss and Stealth Sextet from Weiss to DAC.

Thanks all for suggestion regarding power supply for Weiss. I don't have a clue about DIY but have many friends
who does. One suggestion that my audio friends who is also a car audio enthusiast suggested using capacitor banks
which helps battery to deliver much faster power than battery alone (I think!) at least that's what lots of people
use in their rather expensive car audio. I will also look into option of better linear power supply as well and will wait to see
how Mani's project turns out.

I picked Weiss INT202 over AFI1 mainly because my PD MPS5 does not offer clock input. It does have clock output  but not on BNC
but some proprietary connector for what purpose I have no idea but PD does not recommend using it as master clock to control other equipments
either.

Also PD is coming out with new USB module that will at least accept upto 24/384 sometimes next year. I will have to see how that go as well.

WindowX, definitely we can have another listening session soon but let me try a couple of things with battery first, it should not take too long krub.



Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #45 on: December 11, 2010, 04:56:51 am »

I use atom board to make least degrading from motherboard parts. I changed tons of capacitors to reduce noise/ripple/EMI/RFI. I spent $300 making hiend grade linear toroidal power supply with parts better than most $10k equipments use. I use good resonance control aluminium casing. I also treated hardware a lot more seriously in other fields. Do you think this is proper hardware configuration?
Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #46 on: December 11, 2010, 06:11:43 am »

Digging down to technical terms. It's impossible because:

1. Hardware buffer couldn't get lower than 1ms while Esoteric VRDS-Neo 5 and better works hundred times lower
2. Motherboard doesn't use high precision clock to ppm level (Esoteric generally have 5ppm for transport and 3ppm DAC/Player without mentioning its 0.00005ppm external rubidium clock)
3. Internal clock rate can get at best for 50-100ns even with 6 core high spec ones with standard grade clock that works like most common equipments.
4. kernel clock timer resolution can set down to 0.5ms at best which isn't even close to highend CD Transport that can go down that level we can't compete against

But that's for hardware/software architecture point of view. In most listening systems, difference will be degraded by imperfection of system configuration. The difference of 40-60% in design may get trimmed down to 5-10% for listening and some aspects may perceive differently. In higher resolving system may increase the gap of this difference.
Logged
arvind
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 529


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: December 11, 2010, 07:30:18 am »

Hi WindowX,

I have an EMM Labs CDSD SE & DAC 6e SE (using 2 channels only) & my CA is a Sony laptop connected (via USB) to Empirical Audio, Off Ramp 3 (sound card) & Empirical Audio, Overdrive NOS DAC. Like you, there was a time, I could not believe that CA could be as good as CD, Until I finally got the hang of fine tuning XXHE correctly for my system. Having achieved this, on numerous occasions, I have compared CDT vs XXHE & believe me XXHE sounds much more pleasing. I am also one of those who is fanatical about sound quality & will not listen to anything which is inferior, even if it is more convenient. In your case you probably need to fine tune XXHE. I am not a technical expert so I cant give you any opinion or explanation on why XXHE is better than CDT, but I do know when I hear better SQ.

Arvind
Logged

W10-14393.0 RAM OS / Mach III LPS 14/28/XXHE 2.11/Engine#4/Adaptive Mode/16x /Custom Filter/Q1= 14/0/0/0 xQ1=1/Device Buffer:4096/Invert Phase=On/Minimise OS/PE=off/Unattended/Stop All Services/SFS=20.69/20.69(max)/ClockRes= 15ms/Straight Contiguous/Music on HDD/Lush^3 USB cable A:W-Y-R-G; B:W-Y-R/Phasure NOS 1a/75b/G3 USB DAC. > Blaxius*^2.5 A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink. Orelo MK II active speakers. ET^3 between Mach III & music server. Driver version 1.04/Driver Buffer 16ms. OSD text = Off
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #48 on: December 11, 2010, 07:39:52 am »

To be honest, I could say my CA is almost as good as my Esoteric P-05. As I stated that difference between CA and CD transport depends on system configuration, it wouldn't be surprised if most of you guys here including me use CA instead of CD Transport. But in wider bandwidth, more resolving and revealing system will increase the difference to point where CD and SACD sounds like different system.

Also, please add this note in your consideration that "more pleasing sound in my system doesn't necessary mean it has better sound quality". It may sound easier to my ears with my configuration but doesn't mean I fully utilize both transports to over 95% overall performance. CA may attain 95% while CD get only 60% or so.

Unless we're dead serious on using ultra high fidelity system, CA may not sound that bad for pleasure listening if properly optimized but not everyone can accept that CA wins over in every way.
Logged
arvind
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 529


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: December 11, 2010, 09:50:30 am »



Also, please add this note in your consideration that "more pleasing sound in my system doesn't necessary mean it has better sound quality".

I DO mean better sound quality in comparison to my cdt/dac front end, with the amps/speakers being common factor in both.

Arvind
Logged

W10-14393.0 RAM OS / Mach III LPS 14/28/XXHE 2.11/Engine#4/Adaptive Mode/16x /Custom Filter/Q1= 14/0/0/0 xQ1=1/Device Buffer:4096/Invert Phase=On/Minimise OS/PE=off/Unattended/Stop All Services/SFS=20.69/20.69(max)/ClockRes= 15ms/Straight Contiguous/Music on HDD/Lush^3 USB cable A:W-Y-R-G; B:W-Y-R/Phasure NOS 1a/75b/G3 USB DAC. > Blaxius*^2.5 A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink. Orelo MK II active speakers. ET^3 between Mach III & music server. Driver version 1.04/Driver Buffer 16ms. OSD text = Off
phantomax
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 163


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: December 11, 2010, 11:04:51 am »

This is a very interesting question from a theoretical point of view. But it seems to me like a byzantine argument. Like Gods talking about their issues.
Let´s go dawn to earth and focus on the ugly main problem: MONEY.
My experience with hifi over the years is that you pay more and more money for less and less difference. And this at best ( so may times dissapointed ). Of course, even when my system sounded OK.,  I always knew that out there were better sounding systems (most of them). But I knew also that I did not have the possibility to get them.
And then came Peter with the XXHighend (sounds biblical). And this broke the rules (Commandments): with a ridiculous investment you got and unbelievable improvement.
Furthermore, if you have not a wealthy budget to get a super high end DAC, you have many options avalaible. This is my case and I had to build my own DAC and my system never sounded so good by far. Of course you always are looking for improvements but not at that prices please. That is why I am so grateful to Peter (and all of you guys for those ideas in the forum).
Probably I am off topic but I felt the need to say it.

Max
Logged

Audio PC -> AsRock Z79 intel i-3 4170  @~800MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, DIY Linear Power Supply. music on LAN /
Engine#4 Special Mode/Q1/-/3/4/5=*30*/-/*1*/*1*/*1*/ Q1Factor = *5* / Dev.Buffer = 1024 /ClockRes = *15ms* /Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect /
SFS = *0,69*  (max 0,69 / Phase Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 1-3 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback
Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / *OSD Off* / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = 35 / Nervous Rate = 10 / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Not the best / Time Stability = not stable / *Custom Filtering low for 176400* / Always Clear Proxy before Playbck = On -> Modified Audiotrak Prodigy HD2 internal soundcard with analog tube buffer (Broskie cathode follower) -> Passive biamplification: Canary Audio CA-301 MkII for highs- mids and Counterpoint SA-100 for lows -> Audiovector M-3 Super / modified Musical Fidelity X-3 (6h6p tubes) -> Grado 1000 headphones.
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #51 on: December 11, 2010, 11:10:02 am »

Quote
kernel clock timer resolution can set down to 0.5ms at best which isn't even close to highend CD Transport that can go down that level we can't compete against

People in here will know that we all don't like copying other's words and shout it is the truth. You are just doing that here. Stop it. Stop it, unless you really know what you are talking about, which I'm afraid will not happen ever. Not with this attitude.

If people say something, we trust that. Only then we can proceed. In other words, how can we proceed with near 100% rubbish coming from your hand. And it *is* rubbish because I know what I'm talking about, and it is 180 degrees different from what you heard elsewhere yesterday and try to use to your "benefit" (scratching). All your theories make no sense at all, and the only thing you may be right in is your better sounding CDP system against the PC transport. And if you continue like this, it will ever be so, virtually striving for the better in the mean time.

Like this all started (CA), you have in your mind that low latency is for the better. I agree. We all might agree. The foolish part on your side though, is that you are deaf or without memory, because now suddenly your newly heard 0.5ms does some anti-trick.
Also, you were told sufficiently enough (by me) not to use a Weiss product for your low latency objective, and *thus* you do just that. Deaf ? no memory ? ignorant somehow ? maybe you think I wouldn't notice ?

Over at CA I explained to you (with math) how low latency is or can be. You actually asked for that, but never responded and kept trolling anyway; You *know* that people can achieve 1 sample of latency, and might you have read it yesterday, I can do it myself now ( 32/352.8 ). You *know* it, but you found some argument (the 0.5ms) "prooving" we ly. In the mean time you have one - and only one argument against all only : you can't achieve it yourself most probably because you don't know where to start. Again, using that Weiss is the very first wrong base, and you knew it.

Let me add this, before things come over wrongly to others :

There is no way anyone, including me, including Suteetat, can ever jump into a random room with some (or all) of his gear, and make something out of it. You may have read about my own experience 2 weeks back. Same gear, total failure - and 4 hours of preparation. The only "advantage" I had, is that some of the attendees know the sound from my room, and/or know the sound of my partner there in his room. So, they knew things were completely wrong and completely unintended. This is not much different from Suteetat swinging with his albums of which he knew they could show something (which doesn't show everywhere), not getting the chance anyway. At that show similar happened; the system doesn't perform anyway, and next some guy with an USB stick wants to listen to "a track" which is a 10 minute stupid violin which wouldn't sound in that room anyway - and which we knew. 10 minutes !

So, to be clear about what I want to say with this : such a "failure" tells nothing. Just nothing at all. Similarly I'm not saying that the Weiss shouldn't have been used because remember, it is you hunting for low latency, and I can't tell how things turn out back at Suteetat's home. Also you know that I don't use the ultra low latency stuff myself.
In the very end I really like that you two took the challenge of comparing, but that Suteetat was the underdog, the guy in the showroom being prepared for a long time. FWIW, I also like the whole "project" itself, were this be about PC transports against the best CD transports. So, nothing wrong with that really, but keep in mind the stupidity of one person shouting outloud it can't be done, in the mean time suggesting that our systems are not $$ enough to know, or that we may be deaf otherwise (the latter you never said, but should be a conclusion, because the $$$ systems are all over the place (I know)).

So, please continue the subject and project, but please try to stay out of theories you don't know much about.
Lastly, you may be right on it all. But that isn't going to happen as long as you use OS DACs to compare (about SQ that is, against some pleasing sound).

Peter
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Eric
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 248


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: December 11, 2010, 12:15:37 pm »

Hello Peter,
yesterday you kindly shared your to-do list with us on the forum. Looks like all the items on the list do serve a purpose. And setting the right priorities seems to be the challenge. Now I am getting curious what your intention is spending so much of your precious time and attention on your response above.
P.S. No need to reply, just an observation.

Cheers,
Eric
Logged

3.2GHz CPU, 8GB RAM, XXHE 1.186a, W7x64 SP1 Ultimate on 2.5" 10Krpm SATAII spinning disk, 8GB RAM / KS:Phasure NOS1 Out 4.0 / #4 Engine / Adaptive / Buffer 4096 / ClockRes 1ms/ Stop All Services / Monitor Off / SFS = 0.4 / not Invert / No XTweaks / Playback Drive = External USB3 (USB powered) HDD / Unattended/ Minimize OS / Peak Ext / ArcPredict / PA- / Q1,-,3,4,5=14,-,0,0,0
Control Panel: Sample Rate: 352.800kHz/ USB Buffer Size: 8ms
Amps: BD-Design bridged Gainclones
Marcin_gps
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 455


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: December 11, 2010, 01:10:54 pm »

Peter, Windows X referred to system timer interval, when he wrote 0.5ms, it's not playback latency and it matters a lot. I hear the difference immediately in my system and I'm sure that OS is currently the biggest limitation when it comes to PC audio.

Regarding recording vs. playback, correct me if I'm wrong but there's no jitter involved when it comes to recording, while there's plenty during playback. What is it if not jitter that makes different pc-audio systems perform better or worse? Assuming that they're all bit-perfect. And I mean PC -> S/PDIF (AES) -> DAC route only (power supply stuff aside)
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #54 on: December 11, 2010, 01:21:38 pm »

Hi Marcin,

Quote
Peter, Windows X referred to system timer interval, when he wrote 0.5ms, it's not playback latency and it matters a lot.

You are correct on this. I mean the "it matters". But *I* am not relating this to latency, while Windows X does. And this is the whole point.

So, that the timer again influences is just another matter, and -as usual- a great finding (from you Happy).
But once this is out, it is ridiculous to immediately use that as an argument ("way too high") by someone who doesn't have a single clue about the (real) impact.

And FYI (and confusement otherwise), while this (better timer resolution) may help me with my 1 sample stuff as I can have it now, it really is not. It is something else I applied, in fact some weeks back already (about the "mutual exclusive" thing; you will remember). I only didn't try since then, did yesterday because I thought the ms thing might help, after which I realized it really was something else. Also FYI : with KS this *can't* help, because no timers are involved in the first place ... which is exactly why it is latency unrelated.

That is matters for SQ is quite another thing. Think about the driver ...
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #55 on: December 11, 2010, 03:30:14 pm »

If you can write app to count times with clock rate better than 2000hz (0.5ms), let me know. For me, action comes before theory. And if something goes wrong from action, I must be able to use theory with knowledge to reach acceptable conclusion, not delusion Wink
Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #56 on: December 11, 2010, 03:37:24 pm »



Also, please add this note in your consideration that "more pleasing sound in my system doesn't necessary mean it has better sound quality".

I DO mean better sound quality in comparison to my cdt/dac front end, with the amps/speakers being common factor in both.

Arvind

My music server may sound better than emm labs sacd se/dcs puccani and esoteric x-03 transport in other room doesn't mean its sound quality is better. Are you sure your system can fully utilize your cd transport with enough system bandwidth to tell the difference?
Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #57 on: December 11, 2010, 03:57:17 pm »

I also need to add that there're only handful of real reference system in this world. Less than 10 in my country and may not even 1000 worldwide. But for average consumer level, it can easily get in for most systems.

And peter, before you boast about 1 sample, make aure you know kernel resolution timer how can you archive 1 sample while Windows system can fetch only 2 instructions per ms at best?

Do I have to reveal everything I know to you to go try making better xxhighend and sell to us? Sorry bur I don't like to share it with this attitude.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #58 on: December 11, 2010, 04:11:42 pm »

Quote
Sorry bur I don't like to share it with this attitude.

Haha, I can understand that allright. But then :

Quote
And peter, before you boast about 1 sample, make aure you know kernel resolution timer how can you archive 1 sample while Windows system can fetch only 2 instructions per ms at best?

... as I said, you don't have a clue. And besides you imply I'm a lyar.

Now tell me, who starts the "attitude" ?
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #59 on: December 11, 2010, 04:35:59 pm »

Of course, you with all theory analogy talk and im sick of it. I wouldn't try to find acceptable explanation why cd is still superior if I actually heard ones being superior to CD.

Today I made another attempt between mine and Esoteric K-01 with its Rubidium clock. Rubidium clock made my music server sound pretty impressice to point that none could tell it's not from CD but doesn't sound close to decent ones. At least Emm labs sacd se still performs better in reference system as people who used to auditon it can clearly point why they're inferior. They even treated mine like car audio system for comparing to super high end reference level lol. But K-01 is like giants and wolf thingy.

I understand money plays significant role in investment but stating computer can out class all CD isn't what I can get right now. How do hiend audio store treat your project? Did they praise your machine or point out right where it went wrong?

If you care enough to check my statements, I never make fun of people's opinions and state out right to point I found as truly honest and ignorant ones.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #60 on: December 11, 2010, 05:35:00 pm »

I am sorry. I just think we are running in circles, and as soon you start to suggest that it is impossible to achieve the latency you're after -while others just have that- it all ends.

I mean well though, just as you. But there's no end. Maybe later. Happy

Peter
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #61 on: December 11, 2010, 06:04:39 pm »

That's all right as long as you understand. It's possible to archive 1 sample design from software algorithm but in hardware level will not work like we expected. You can find good reference from here.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163996.aspx

If software can run below 0.5ms, we would have seen 0.5 0.01 and so on by now but no. Software just can't be there. You mistook coding 1 samples to work in 0.5ms application latency (or higher) with 1ms hardware manner. It's not real below 1ms as long as hardware buffer couldn't go below that. It may has less delay, less induced jitter and less total harmonic distortions but it doesn't expand dynamics,harmonics and bandwidth of the sound which is still far from hiend CD transport.

Luckily, most system couldn't fully utilize what hiend CD transport can give and most systems couldn't handle the amount of information to the point where computer even sound better or more pleasant in some systems. Some can manage to trim down bandwidth from preamp, interconnects, room acoustics or speaker placements to make sound in control. My system is also ones among these lines that CD couldn't outshine music server completely.
Logged
juanpmar
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1236


View Profile Email
« Reply #62 on: December 11, 2010, 07:43:32 pm »

I´ve never felt comfortable talking about $$$ versus SQ, and I feel a little ashamed doing it but I think that I must add my humble part:
 
My system just have three components: The Cd player, a pair of monoblocks and the speakers. $$$ is around $135.000. The parts are:

-Cd Player: EMM Labs CDSD SE transport and DCC2 SE dac. ($25.000)
-Amplifier: A pair of Spectron monoblocks with V-Cap capacitors and Bybee Purifiers ($10.000)
-Speakers: Von Schweikert VR-9SE ($90.000)
 
The system is as optimized as possible and the room is also acoustically prepared. I have to say that the sound is fantastic.
 
On the PC side, I use a Sony laptop connected to the EMM Labs dac through a 4 mt. USB cable ($20) to a Musiland adapter ($60) and a Wireworld glass optical digital cable ($160).
 
XXHighEnd is in Ramdisk and you can see my configuration below.
 
Well, what I can say is that even with such a poor PC configuration the sound is "better" than using the EMM Labs transport. I wont talk about latency or jitter because besides I don´t understand enough about it I don´t care either.
 
Of course "better" or "worse" are always subjective but I can a see some pseudo objective parameters using my PC as transport that I´d like to point out:

- The sound is fuller, and not because of more accurate bass and upper bass but also because there is more body in the music.
- There are more details. At the beginning could appear that the sound is someway thicker but after a couple of minutes you can distinguish perfectly more details in the music envelope.
- The sound stage is bigger in all the dimensions, high, wide and deep.
- The musicians in the sound stage are much better placed and defined in a more three-dimensional way.
- The highs are more extended with a natural smoothness.
- The deeper bass is tight although in this case I have to say that so far the PC transport it´s not  better than the EMM Labs transport.

In resume: The music is more emotional  and get me much more involved with the PC and XXHighEnd as transport than with the EMM Labs. That´s at the end what I´m looking for as a music lover.

A final word: If I can get this kind of music with such a humble PC parts I can easily think that could be better with a more consistent PC configuration. This is why I´m on the Peter´s waiting list for the Phasure NOS1 dac.

Happy Christmas to all.
Logged

Audio Pc: Processor i7 970: 3200MHz (reduced to 1668MHz), 6+6 cores/ RAM Corsair DDR3, 24Gb, 1333MHz/ Mb Asus X58 Sabertooth/ OS and XXHE in Peter's RAM-Disk / The CPU fan is the only one in the Audio Pc: NF-S12A (600rpm/6.7db)/ No graphic card/ Power supply: Seasonic SS-400FL2, fanless.

Configuration and Updates in HOW I'VE BUILT MY NEW PC...http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=1673.0. This post is very old but maybe someone still find it useful

XXHighEnd: 2.11a. Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN/ KS:Phasure NOS1 Out 4.0/ #4 Engine/ Adaptive Mode/ Q1=10, Q3,4,5=1, xQ1=15/ Dev.Buffer: 4096/ ClockRes: 15ms/ Straight Contiguous/ SFS: 0.69 (max 0,69)/ Not Invert/ Phase Alignment Off/ Allow format change/ Decode HDCD/ Playerprio: Low/ ThreadPrio: Real Time/ Scheme: Core 3-5/ UnAttended/ Not Switch during Playback Off/ Playback Drive none/ UnAttended/ Include Garbage Collect/ Copy to XX Drive by standard/ Always clear Proxy before Playback/ Stop Desktop Services/ Stop Remaining Services/ Stop All Services: Off/ Keep LAN Services: On - Persist: Off/ Use Remote Desktop/ Minimize OS/ XTweaks : Balanced Load 35/ Nervous Rate 10/ Cool when Idle -/ Provide Stable Power 0/ Utilize Cores always 1/ Time Performance Index: Optimal / Time Stability: Stable / Arc Prediction/ Number of cores in use: 12 (máx. 6-12)

Music Server PC (W10) totally silent with OS (W10) in SSD and music inside in SSDs - RDC > Ethernet Gigabyte cable 3m > Audio Pc > 1m USB Lush cable directly from the USB3.0 in the motherboard > PHASURE NOS1a-75B-G3 (Driver v1.0.4) 16ms > Blaxius BNC interconnects > Genelec 1037B 3-Way Active speakers with BNC inputs
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #63 on: December 11, 2010, 08:16:52 pm »

I´ve never felt comfortable talking about $$$ versus SQ, and I feel a little ashamed doing it but I think that I must add my humble part:
 
My system just have three components: The Cd player, a pair of monoblocks and the speakers. $$$ is around $135.000. The parts are:

-Cd Player: EMM Labs CDSD SE transport and DCC2 SE dac. ($25.000)
-Amplifier: A pair of Spectron monoblocks with V-Cap capacitors and Bybee Purifiers ($10.000)
-Speakers: Von Schweikert VR-9SE ($90.000)
 
The system is as optimized as possible and the room is also acoustically prepared. I have to say that the sound is fantastic.
 
On the PC side, I use a Sony laptop connected to the EMM Labs dac through a 4 mt. USB cable ($20) to a Musiland adapter ($60) and a Wireworld glass optical digital cable ($160).
 
XXHighEnd is in Ramdisk and you can see my configuration below.
 
Well, what I can say is that even with such a poor PC configuration the sound is "better" than using the EMM Labs transport. I wont talk about latency or jitter because besides I don´t understand enough about it I don´t care either.
 
Of course "better" or "worse" are always subjective but I can a see some pseudo objective parameters using my PC as transport that I´d like to point out:

- The sound is fuller, and not because of more accurate bass and upper bass but also because there is more body in the music.
- There are more details. At the beginning could appear that the sound is someway thicker but after a couple of minutes you can distinguish perfectly more details in the music envelope.
- The sound stage is bigger in all the dimensions, high, wide and deep.
- The musicians in the sound stage are much better placed and defined in a more three-dimensional way.
- The highs are more extended with a natural smoothness.
- The deeper bass is tight although in this case I have to say that so far the PC transport it´s not  better than the EMM Labs transport.

In resume: The music is more emotional  and get me much more involved with the PC and XXHighEnd as transport than with the EMM Labs. That´s at the end what I´m looking for as a music lover.

A final word: If I can get this kind of music with such a humble PC parts I can easily think that could be better with a more consistent PC configuration. This is why I´m on the Peter´s waiting list for the Phasure NOS1 dac.

Happy Christmas to all.

I don't like throwing money as subject too but explanation is a waste without actual experiences like how I see my past self being on mid way from hiend audiophile delusion to hiend sound reproduction. I used to have debate with tons of dealer about computer audio being hiend and got shallow-minded responses. Up to some points, good parts comes at good price and setting things right comes with great effort so it all comes to money to make better sound and we must prove that amount of money we shall spend will worth it. If we can't use $$$ analogy then please bear with I'm going to say then. This will happen when $$$ gives what we can't expect and it's a scam like you got pwned right now.

For example, you failed at being reference system from using something like bybee in your equipments. It absorbed harmonics and dynamics to great degree for silky and smoothy sound that many people believe it was audiophile with something like quantum blablabla.....burrr. I even made better stuff than bybee and made better result than it but I ended up not using both because it's lame trick and reduce fidelity of sound quality. Plus, you use bybee to absorb harmonics and compress dynamics for leaner sound and use VCap to boost details and more midrange? I can completely understand why cr*ppy PC with something like musiland USB can sound better than CD transport like Emm Labs SACD SE. It's like a fight in lightweight match between people who's suited for lightweight and people who's suited for heavyweight.

 I'd like to note certain parts that caused delusional sound and very misleading from sound reproduction but that wouldn't be in the the topic but bashing equipments. Also. Emm Labs I reference to is good transport from SACD SE is quite great and signficantly better than some models about the same price. If I have configuration like you, I wouldn't be surprised to see mine being better than most CD transport because there're only handful people who can set hiend cd transport to work out right in the system. You need very wide bandwidth equipments and avoid all dynamic and harmonic compression accessories to hear the most out of harmonics and inner details that transport can give.

But seriously, if I never have heard about < 1ppm masterclock configuration with quite OK configuration that can make transport works as it should be, I wouldn't be able to hear harmonics and inner details to great degree why transport really matters. Sadly, Emm labs DAC forbid word clock input. Well, real better equipments are harder to play with though. If $300 computer transport is better in your system, maybe you should find media player and use its digital output. It may sound very close to your reference computer transport and can play movies too.

I'm not saying you should change your way of listening since it's your money so it's your own right to pay for what you're happy for. I've been trying to avoid complain people systems since they bought it and they should be happy with it without my concern but proper reason is flaws in system so I can't avoid it without $$$ analogy. If that's too offensive then you have my apology but that configuration shouldn't be qualified as reference system. I heard tons of $50-100k systems and none come close to my recent $100k reference system. Setting things right in this may even out shine some systems cost 2-3 times more in general.
Logged
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #64 on: December 12, 2010, 12:34:08 am »

Window X, please be a bit careful. Esoteric even with Rubidium master clock, while considered one of the best digital front end is by no mean, the only reference or absolute best (there is no such thing). Other people find dCS with inferior clock (according to Esoteric dealer), EMM XDS1 (with no master clock), MSB, and a handful of other digital front end superior. Much will depend on personal preference as well. Esoteric has its own house sound that some like a lot and that other prefer other. Same goes for Rockports, Karan, Spectral, etc etc. The gap that you hear as significant between computer and CD transport is there but is it neccessarily the deal breaker for everybody? Wilson Maxx3 does something better than Rockport that we heard the other day but I would not presume that just because I like Maxx3 better, it automatically means that Wilson is absolutely better than Rockport in every way.

I heard what you and Esoteric dealer tried to point out as deficit for computer music server. Unfortunately, I dont hear that as big a deal and I heard other quality in music server that I prefer over CD but you and Esoteric dealer does not seem to hear or care. Does that mean that I have no clue because I don't appreciate what you hear as much? I will not impose my exposure to live acoustic instrument and say that I hear the real thing everyday so I really know  what is best or accurate music reproduction kind of argument (even though it happens to be true) because I don't think it will serve anything much nor should I try to tell you how to listen to your own music system.

Your knowledge is very impressive but when you start imposing your own reference/standard/taste/perception as the absolute and try to forcibily shove it down everybody's throat, that is not going to create a friendly and productive discussion.

I think you have a lot to contribute but your way of delivering the message is rather counter productive. If you approach the discussion in a different way, I really think that we could get something going in a very useful way here.
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #65 on: December 12, 2010, 05:21:00 am »

Thank you for your kind suggestions. It appears I'm leaving wrong impressions again. As I said that preferences in sound and potentials of sound quality is difference story. Like Emm labs transport having wider bandwidth than all DCS models doesn't mean Emm labs sounds better than DCS. I'm talking about parts where computer audio can't be better than hiend CD transport which are height of dynamics and width of harmonics. I'm not talking about overall sound quality. It depends on people's skills how to utilize its potentials to reach good sound quality. I also know where are Esoteric/Rockport weak points but that doesn't mean being weak at something will make it sounds inferior. If you read carefully, I didn't frame any products being bad ones at all. I may frame the whole system but that's for the sake of pointing out why that system can play CD transport and music server to the same stage and I've been trying to avoid it till now.

There're also parts where music server sound better than CD transport like its cleanness and continuous midrange as well but with insufficient harmonics and depth, it could be careless like listening compressed sound. But some systems with compressed dynamics and bandwidth may find CD transport being inferior to music server. Also, I found something rather insufficient in that system too like weak impact and midrange of my preferences but I may like sound that doesn't reach level of real sound though. But there're also people with $300-500k system who doesn't really be bothered by compressed dynamics or harmonics at all too. So it comes down to preferences to pass judgement.

I don't know how music server will sound in system with Wilson MAXX3 but in that system, I heard no one saying music server is better. It's way beyond years to win CD in every aspects. Please keep in mind that sound quality I'm just trying to explain why it sounds better or worse in different systems in direct way. Some statements may sound harsh but that's the reality where most people including me couldn't bring out the best of equipments. Some people might give out honest opinions outside my ears like they don't like how my system sound or my system can't reference anything at all but why bother? I paid for it and I'm enjoying it.

I'm here to find facts not to make friends and I don't believe compromising difference beliefs can bring out anything productive though. If I were to leave some facts here, I need to say there's no one including various dealers Mr. Suteetat showed his music server to actually prefer sound of music server over CD. But compromising still keep us believing it could win some days sooner or later but sorry it won't come that soon or it may not come at all like digital winning analog. Digital may win for most cases but some points of reference system may not have any chance to win.

The important part is we must know why people like hiend dealers prefer CD as reference digital source not music server. Is it because of money or actually sound? If it's sound, we need to findout where music server lacks at and improve it to level it can compete against. But if you guys still keep on going with music server being superior to CD now, how can we improve it? Up to some points you may improve your system along with music server and findout that CD is actually better some days like me too. Like how I'm thinking music server is almost impossible task to win now but people who experienced something with greater effort than me said it maybe not long like I think so he could mean something very important from his experiences. That's also another possibility.
Logged
Klinnilk
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


View Profile
« Reply #66 on: December 12, 2010, 12:47:05 pm »

- what do you wanna achieve with this kind of discussion windowsX?

bringing it a little together:

- only reference systems are able to confirm your point of view (100k and above)
- made a test at a dealer where the CD Player won over the PC System, by dynamics and bass reproduction
- a lot of knowledge over Digital music reproduction mixed wild up
- taken only the arguments that increased your point of view, other argument simply ignored
i can go on with this list.

When you go to to experimental physics for example, and you create an experiment, the most important thing is:
does this experiment help me to ealuate the theory  or does it not.

This means i am only allowed changing one simple parameter whe i compare different test setups.
And when i see your test at the dealer and your whole argumentation, sorry , you are lightyears away from serious work.

How do you know that more dynamics (define dynamics), more spacing (more noise?), more bass or less (do you know at which level bass had been recorded, less bass can be more accurate than more bass) are parameters for judging accuracy of reproduction?

I just wanna gentle remind you that the SPDIF specifications that you have to rely on when you build a CD Player
are based on a Digital Standard that is at least 30 years old. And on the cornerpoints of  these specifications no Company can change something.

As i mentioned before, it is impossible getting all the DATA off from a CD with a CD Player, because of the limitations you have in in Time DATA reading.
And again, when you work seriously in science, how will you compare a system that has original DATA and the other has not?
You know that on a CD there are no Audio bits and bytes that contain the Audio Data, there are Digital words and in this words we have Audio DATA, the information of the music track (Time, Track) the information for error recovery and information for the speed of the motor for example. These words have to be read out and the information has to be distributed to the different sections of the CD Player and all this in real time.
Again I respect your listening experience and it is absolute O.K. that your prefer it and everybody here respects it but your argumentation like Peter said leads to nothing.
In Computer based reproduction systems is a potential that is far away from completely understood and it is young to the  30 years i mentioned above. So lets do it positive and constructive to bring it forward to come closer to a real music reproduction.
Best regards
Andreas

Logged
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #67 on: December 12, 2010, 01:43:20 pm »

does this experiment help me to ealuate the theory  or does it not.
: It does help with my theory "Can music server actually be better than old-fashioned CD transport?". I know now where the boundaries of music server is. I may not get into the best ones but I'm pretty sure I came pretty close to to by now.

This means i am only allowed changing one simple parameter whe i compare different test setups.
: If you enjoying testing in your room where your so called good CD transport may work at 50% + (-20% for bad harmonic distortion)  while 90% of music server can get better with far less disturbance from harmonic distortion then fine. Don't just stick what we can preceive or prefer to in limited system.

And when i see your test at the dealer and your whole argumentation, sorry , you are lightyears away from serious work.
: And what did you do to frame me this? Sorry, everyone can be good at talking without proving something and I know LOTS of people who only do good at talking like you and be laughed at behind your own back. It's not just testing in one system or two but lots.....LOTS to come down to conclusion that CD transport is still superior source comparing to trendy and DIY music server.

How do you know that more dynamics (define dynamics), more spacing (more noise?), more bass or less (do you know at which level bass had been recorded, less bass can be more accurate than more bass) are parameters for judging accuracy of reproduction?
: There're tons of materials to test. The same song from different medias like file/CD/vinyl version. I doubt if you actually have heard of real reference system to pose such question like this. We're playing in hiend field and yet you ask like we don't know how to deal or measure with something like this? There're tons of expert sound engineers, respected critical listeners and system experts who maintains everything to perform as close as possible to real performance though some of them may leave their own preferences in system.

I just wanna gentle remind you that the SPDIF specifications that you have to rely on when you build a CD Player are based on a Digital Standard that is at least 30 years old.
: I also want to remind you vinyl has been made for 60 years and now top level of studio mastering is going back to analog now. Why not 32/384 or DSD2 for mastering on Pyramix? Or yeah old tech 60 years as pure analog is acceptable to be better than CD but same digital is improving like computer? Go study data communications, computer architecture and operating system courses at least before prejudging something without complete knowledge of how they work at all ranging from entry to hiend level.



The rest I read are all misleading information where I feel too bothered to correct it so here I'm proclaiming again that

1. music server actually didn't sound better than CD in reference highend system. And I didn't test with old-tech SPDIF but AES/EBU digital system.
2. XXHighEnd isn't actually better generic WASAPI when properly optimized. I'm waiting for rematch with Mr. Suteetat if we can improve our system to get better and change the outcome. Though tons of people in here already switching to jplay over xxhighend with some wasapi tweak enhancements (and it's free too).

Also, data and not data? I already explained that CD read bits by scanning from plastic layer with laser for 0101 and storage read stream of wave audio for 0101. They just use different ways of recording. I've been on this projects for 3 years already and I'm honored student from Software and Knowledge Engineering knowing sound engineer and play hiend system well with all these information. So please don't act like I'm don't really know such common term like 30 years CD or old-tech SPDIF specifications. It's annoying.

To sum it short, I understand that it may pain some of you guys here seeing someone telling CD transport is actually better and there's no way to beat it now. Without enough knowledge and experiences, I would be frustrated too. But this is what I found from walking in various dealer shops with my music server and testing, hearing, perceiving and discussions with people in there. They started to open up with me over times as I improve my system to the point I and some shops trying this experiments with me to see if there's chance for CD to lose.

At least it should take about another decade for computer to be as good as CD if someone willing to design a new platform for hiend DAW system. It should be 5 years for fastest approach of new architecture for DAW to work as solid as hiend CD transport and another 5 years for possibility to adapt in audiophile industry. Let's say Mykerinos for example that even I wouldn't dare to buy ones anew with this cr*ppy motherboard without chance to win teflon plating with shortest circuit design and high quality parts ones.

For this argument to lead to something, I need to give out real information for open-minded people here to understand that we need lots of work to do and I'm telling now that music server sounds smaller than highend CD transport but the reason why some found it better because they narrowed down the scale of sound in their system to make it pleasing to ears with less THD breakdown. In highly resolving and revealing system, doing something like this is a taboo and we can't get real result from that method.

So what we should do next? Find a way to improve harmonics of sound reproduction from computer system and lengthen the depth of dynamics to make stage becoming more fuller with scale comparing to hiend CD transport. It may lose for inner-details due to inferior parts and hardware design but it can advance over time.
Logged
Telstar
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 732


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: December 12, 2010, 03:05:33 pm »

But seriously, if I never have heard about < 1ppm masterclock configuration with quite OK configuration that can make transport works as it should be, I wouldn't be able to hear harmonics and inner details to great degree why transport really matters.

I'll say once and for last, since you keep repeating this.
The PPM of an oscillator means only the capacity of keep the same timing over time, that is 1ppm it will take a year (IIRC) before it changes the timing.
It doesnt say A WORD about the jitter, which should be as low as possible, and it is measured in picoseconds (ps).


Logged

(2nd Apr 2018)
Software:
W10 14393 Pro x64 | XXHE 2.10 | MinOS | Q=14x1/0/0/0/0 | SFS 5,19 mixed contiguous | Nervous rate 1 | 4096k buffer |

Hardware:
OrigenAE H5 case | E5300 fanless |  8GB RAM | Winmate DC-DC fanless PSU | OS on SSD | Renesas USB3 pcie card | Belden highspeed usb cable | Audio-gd dac19 NOS with sigxer F1 | My_ref_FE mono amps | Albedo Apex speakers
Calibrator
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 556

Certified tweakaholic


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: December 12, 2010, 03:33:55 pm »


I'm here to find facts not to make friends ....


Well at least you've achieved one out of two of your objectives   1eye Smack !


Logged

(Sep 26th 2012) (0.9z-7-4 )
Parameters (0.9z-7-4) ->Coming soon...
Parameters (0.9z-6-1) ->Same as for 0.9z-6
Parameters (0.9z-6) ->http://members.iinet.net.au/~calibrator/XXHE/XXHE_parms_(0.9z-6).jpg
Hardware: Asus P5Q, H2O cooled 3.6GHz C2D, 8GB ram, W7 Ult X64 (NO SP1), O/S plus Galleries on 2x(OCZ 60GB Vertex2) -> ESI Juli@ (v0.978 drivers @ 48 samples) -> coax SPDIF -> Integra DHC-9.9 -> Hafler XL600 -> SGR Audio S-series Octagons -> aural organs -> nucleus accumbens sounds good !

====================
Turntables .. how quaint bored
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #70 on: December 12, 2010, 03:49:59 pm »

Telstar, that's quite something to say from believable theory but they don't work like your believing theory at all. I suggest you to try making comparison if clock under 1ppm actually make no difference in any proper system first and then we can discuss this in details. Anyway, do you know that changing BNC cable, putting resonance control items and power conditioning like outlet and powercord in masterclock affacts sound in system?

Calibrator, quit trolling aside, I'm not that lonely enough to resort having to make friends in online community. So it seems none of people like you is brave enough to show up and admit that my XX machine is actually far from claiming hiend transport like the name XXHighEnd. I hope some of you will reconsider and make proper measurements again.

I'm done here as no matter how optimistic I am, I always get sarcastic remarks if I say some facts like inferior to CD which hurt a lot of people here to stand still. But I'm using music server as primary source though. It sounds good enough in my system to take CD transport's place.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #71 on: December 12, 2010, 03:56:37 pm »

Quote
I'm done here

secret
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
manisandher
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2112

from-first-principles.com


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #72 on: December 12, 2010, 05:07:34 pm »

WindowsX,

I believe you. In your experience the best CD players outperform the best computer-based music servers that you've heard.

However, you are obviously open to the possibility that the Mykerinos card, that you have not yet heard, may prove to be CD's equal (or better even). Let me ask you to remain open to another contender.

There is an interface just to be released that some of us feel will be a game-changer for music servers. Yes, it's the interface that is included as part of the whole NOS1 package. Until it is released, I won't disclose any details, but it really seems a revolutionary way of interfacing the DAC to the PC. Unfortunately when mine arrives, I won't be able to use the NOS1 interface with my DAC. But I will be able to compare the NOS1 interface/DAC to my current interface/DAC (using either the RME AES-32 or modified Weiss AFI1 as interface, with DAC-as-master in both cases). If the NOS1 interface/DAC is better than my current interface/DAC, then based on my own experience and that of others who use a Mykerinos card with my DAC, I think that the NOS1 would be worthy of putting up against the best CD transports.

Mani.
Logged

Main System:
Phasure Mach III (Win 14393.0 on RAM-OS / controlled by RDC, / connected directly to music server / XXHighEnd 2.11 / Minimize OS / Engine#4 Adaptive / DB=4096 / Q1=10 / xQ1=15 / Q3,4,5=1 / SFS=4.00 / XTweaks = 34, 10, 0, 0, 0 / Straight Contiguous / Clock Resolution = 15ms / Scheme 3-5 (low/realtime) / 8x Arc Prediction / switch #5 'up/off' / Unattended) mobo USB3 port -> Lush^3 -> Phasure NOS1a B75 G3 -> 8m Blaxius^2 -> First Watt F5 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horn speakers
Office System:
Phasure Stealth II -> Lush^2 -> RME ADI-2 Pro FS R -> Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Marvel horn speakers
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #73 on: December 12, 2010, 05:43:50 pm »

Besides Mykerinos, I could hardly think of the rest I haven't tried to be on challenge. You're right that Mykerinos with best possible assemble with ultimate modification may have chance to compete against but thanks to cr*ppy motherboard and lack of generic player compatibilities comments, I'm afraid to give this a try. What if I invest $12k more and end up finding it doesn't work out smooth like I expect it to be anyway?

By giving notion best cd is still better than best computer audio, it doesn't mean computer audio can't be on stage like CD at least most people couldn't really tell if they're inferior in my system for first impressions. NOS1 interface directly from computer is interesting and I would like to give it a shot too but I'm not that hurry so I can wait till it's released and see how it works from screenshots if someone is kind enough to post what's inside.

If you run into people using Mykerinos card, please ask them if it's compatible with common audio player like foobar/j river/xxhighend/hqplayer.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #74 on: December 12, 2010, 05:45:38 pm »

Hey !

Quote
I'm done here

naughty
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #75 on: December 12, 2010, 06:11:36 pm »

Well, I'm done feeding part and I'm more interested to see you making audition between NOS1 and hiend transport+dac combo in reference system and give us impressions from your test. Wink
Logged
Telstar
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 732


View Profile
« Reply #76 on: December 12, 2010, 06:15:52 pm »

Telstar, that's quite something to say from believable theory but they don't work like your believing theory at all. I suggest you to try making comparison if clock under 1ppm actually make no difference in any proper system first and then we can discuss this in details.

It's because usually ultralow ppm clocks are also better regarding other specs, such as NOISE.

Quote
Anyway, do you know that changing BNC cable, putting resonance control items and power conditioning like outlet and powercord in masterclock affacts sound in system?

Yes, I do.


[/quote]
Logged

(2nd Apr 2018)
Software:
W10 14393 Pro x64 | XXHE 2.10 | MinOS | Q=14x1/0/0/0/0 | SFS 5,19 mixed contiguous | Nervous rate 1 | 4096k buffer |

Hardware:
OrigenAE H5 case | E5300 fanless |  8GB RAM | Winmate DC-DC fanless PSU | OS on SSD | Renesas USB3 pcie card | Belden highspeed usb cable | Audio-gd dac19 NOS with sigxer F1 | My_ref_FE mono amps | Albedo Apex speakers
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #77 on: December 12, 2010, 06:21:06 pm »

That's noise is part of improvements too but major part is stability of playback speed. You can read here for more information.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1276249490
Logged
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #78 on: December 13, 2010, 05:27:56 am »

This may be a naive question, (please don't kill me for it, this is a tough thread) but why do we need either computers i.e. pcs, macs or cd players at all for playing music these days?

Plenty of components come with elements that play files from flash drives, usb disks and even esata disks. These elements are still only secondary and after thoughts, but they are getting more attention.

I recently acquired the Oppo BD93. I haven't tried it yet, but it plays flac, wav, mp3 and possibly other formats from usb and esata disks. Which means it has to have a computer of sorts to decode the files and play them. It does so in a much less noisy (electrically and physically) environment than a pc's. It's interface software isn't much but then the section is not much more than an after thought. My question is why do we need a whole pc when so much can be done with so little? I say so little because the main functions of the Oppo are Blu-ray, Sacd, Dvda and internet video streaming and the disc play is at the bottom of the list. Couldn't someone much more easily and cheaply build a little "black box" audio only player for data files, instead of trying to tame a pc for that purpose.

Is there something that pcs have in particular that is needed for audio? They were certainly not built with audio in mind, speaking of after thoughts.

Chris
Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #79 on: December 13, 2010, 07:29:53 pm »

Quote
This may be a naive question, (please don't kill me for it, this is a tough thread) but why do we need either computers i.e. pcs, macs or cd players at all for playing music these days?

Plenty of components come with elements that play files from flash drives, usb disks and even esata disks. These elements are still only secondary and after thoughts, but they are getting more attention.
If there were a device that would be not as expensive and had very good sound quality, I would buy at once. But I think the big advantage of pc audio is, for a very low price you get very good quality.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Per
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 74

Music is forever...


View Profile
« Reply #80 on: December 13, 2010, 07:41:01 pm »

Quote from: Flecko
If there were a device that would be not as expensive and had very good sound quality, I would buy at once. But I think the big advantage of pc audio is, for a very low price you get very good quality.

Something like this

http://diyparadise.com/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemid=27

There is also a similar device with a built-in dac and headphone out

http://www.qlshifi.com/en/wzcapi/qa350.htm

(I have no personal experience with these devices whatsoever - so I do not know about real-life functionality / reliability) But they look interesting.

Per

EDIT 19:42 The qls-hifi site seems to be down / slow for the moment
Logged

Sep 2010
Acer Aspire M1201 | AMD Athlon Dual Core 4450e 2.30 ghz | 2GB RAM | Hitachi HDD (SATAII) 384GB | Vista Home Premium 32 bit SP2 | XXHighEnd 0.9y-8  Engine 4 | Q1/2/3/4/5= 14/14/7/0/0 | No Invert | KS Mode=Adaptive | Device Buffer Size=1024 | Split file=60 | DAC at 24 bit 44.1 khz | No Invert | No Upsampling | Playerprio=Low | Threadprio=Realtime | Scheme=3 @ Attended | -> PCI AudioTrak HD2 Advance DE | -> Sony EarPhones and Philips PC-speakers ;-)
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: December 13, 2010, 10:57:59 pm »

Quote
Looks very interesting. Not expensive at all. Not very comfortable. Seems to sound nice. I think I would try this but I will spend the money on the Legato (btw.: I am back to 44.1/16 Wink ). I will get a better sound from it, I am sure.
Thx for the link.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Marcin_gps
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 455


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: December 14, 2010, 10:35:07 am »

Quote
Looks very interesting. Not expensive at all. Not very comfortable. Seems to sound nice. I think I would try this but I will spend the money on the Legato (btw.: I am back to 44.1/16 Wink ). I will get a better sound from it, I am sure.
Thx for the link.

There's the digital interface from Audio-GD that some reported to be superior to jkeny's hiface.
Logged
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #83 on: December 14, 2010, 08:55:14 pm »

Quote
There's the digital interface from Audio-GD that some reported to be superior to jkeny's hiface.

You mean:
Quote
I stated earlier that he DI had a more natural sound. There is more cohesion to the music, the sounds and instruments fit in their right places. The DI still has some great instrument separation but the music still feels as whole  Contrary to the hiface jkeny mod the highs and perhaps upper mids are not overemphasized. Also, in terms of 2d soundstage, I find it perhaps a little wider with the DI but the hiface jkeny mod offers probably more depth but maybe that's because some frequencies are put more forward than others.

Also, I did notice with the DI that the very low frequencies (Bass) were considerably more present after more than a week of full use. I actually like a lot better the DI with the bass impact I get when I play my Wu-Tang tracks. However, perhaps the DI offers a darker sound than the hiface jkeny mod does. I'm wondering if that thick black background that we were talking about with the DI doesn't get in the way of the music that comes to your ears.

Sounds good but, ..., but I still think for 44.1/16 the legato would be better. Pat cares a lot about reflection, Kingwa not as much. He uses a second rca output beside the bnc output. That is a bad idea. The same thing as with the bnc input in my Ref7. Removing the rca input and going direct to the board with true 75Ohm coax made a "big" difference. Also the clock wouldn't be as well matched because it has to do different frequencies. And the legato is async. The legato seems to be figured out well. I am maybe a little to focused on the legato. But from my experience it seems best. The DI is also descirbed as more musical in an earlyer post. This is a statement that makes me suspicious. It can mean it sounds wrong because of false softnes. More cohesion in the music could be good but this can be an effect of less highs. If people are not sensitiv to this, they would call this a more coherent sound.

In an earlier post he wrote:
Quote
So far I can tell that the Hiface jkeny mod sounds better in terms of details, dynamics and soundstage (airiness and 3D spatial positioning of instruments or sounds) which is a big plus for me. However, I find that the DI doesn't have this over emphasize on highs that the Hiface has and I find the sound very musical.

The DI still needs a lot more burning in before I can make a definitive judgement on its sound signature.

If kingwa would design a more complete DI, in quality like the CD7 it would be easier to go for it.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #84 on: December 17, 2010, 05:32:07 am »

Quote
Plenty of components come with elements that play files from flash drives, usb disks and even esata disks. These elements are still only secondary and after thoughts, but they are getting more attention.

If there were a device that would be not as expensive and had very good sound quality, I would buy at once. But I think the big advantage of pc audio is, for a very low price you get very good quality.


That's just my point, why isn't someone producing this, it could/should be very inexpensive and much easier to deal with than a pc.

Let me paint a word picture. let's take the Oppo. As is it costs $499. It plays Bluray, Sacd, DvdA, Cd, Dvd, and various other disk formats. It streams Netflix and other internet video. Outputs 7.1 audio 24/192 dacs, 2 HDMI, and various digital, video, rs232, I/O, 10 - 100 internet, wi-fi dongle, 2 Usb 2.o and an Esata. It has 2 GB of memory. Plus other stuff I can't remember. It also sports a digital file player that plays mp3, wav, flac etc and sends video of your HD contents and what's playing to your TV or monitor. The content can be manipulated and played by remote control. This part is still fairly basic but apparently works fairly nicely. All that and more for $499.

Now suppose you strip away everything including the disk player and the good quality dacs, and leave only the digital file player, digital outs for your stand alone dac, video outs to your tv or monitor, Usb and Esata and possibly internet access I/O. Shrink the box. What have you got? Well it should be a very inexpensive, quiet, digital file player that can be accessed by remote via your tv or monitor. All you do is hookup your hard drives and you're ready to dance.

Obviously this is possible as demonstrated by those portable gadgets mentioned up a few posts and the Oppo.  But they all have too much other stuff. The gadgets have no video out and remote because they're mobile devices and the Oppo...

But I ask again, why bother with a pc when this so much simpler quieter device is begging to be manufactured. It seems the perfect project for someone like Peter, since it consists of software for playing files and an interface plus simple hardware. There'd be so much less to tweak, (of course audiophiles must tweak, so never mind).

Unfortunately I don't understand enough about the technicalities, if software in this non-pc environment would be too limited to reproduce really fine sound. Nevertheless, from what I've heard, it seems to have quite some potential and that with only limited funds and r&d thrown its way.

I'm just trying to inspire someone who can do this sort of thing to look into it. So look already.

Chris
Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #85 on: December 17, 2010, 05:50:06 am »


But I ask again, why bother with a pc when this so much simpler quieter device is begging to be manufactured. It seems the perfect project for someone like Peter, since it consists of software for playing files and an interface plus simple hardware. There'd be so much less to tweak, (of course audiophiles must tweak, so never mind).

Unfortunately I don't understand enough about the technicalities, if software in this non-pc environment would be too limited to reproduce really fine sound. Nevertheless, from what I've heard, it seems to have quite some potential and that with only limited funds and r&d thrown its way.

I'm just trying to inspire someone who can do this sort of thing to look into it. So look already.

Chris


There are already plenty of media players that can store music files on HD and either has built in DAC or have digital output for external DAC such as Sonos, Logitech Squeezebox and some that can output both music and video such as Dune, Dvico etc etc. There are all rather inexpensive and have good networking ability for multiroom purpose. However, I find sonic quality is still not comparable to computer music server (Personally I used Sonos, still own Dune and Dvico). There are good for what they are and much more convenient than XXHighend Happy but SQ needs to be improved. Personally, I also prefer
XXHighend/PC over Qsonix music server as far as SQ is concerned also.
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #86 on: December 17, 2010, 11:09:07 am »

Quote
But I ask again, why bother with a pc when this so much simpler quieter device is begging to be manufactured. It seems the perfect project for someone like Peter, since it consists of software for playing files and an interface plus simple hardware.

Brief for now : This is how I really started this all, back in 2005. I tried to improve on things -like conveniently loading files etc.- by tweaking JAVA (which is an interface language for devices as these), but it was too tedious, and still needed something like the TV to be on for control.
Now, many years later, it is what Suteetat says or implies :
It still needs the "super" environment and DAC, which will not be much more different than how the NOS1 is created (which in the very end is a 100% streamer, once you get the hang of what happens). But now there's one thing to start all over, and this is the control, user interface, *and* the (that) being dedicated, because no common Foobar etc. will be able to control it. So, it's just a design decision which at least I made with some full sense, but with the conveniency of the PC control, and the technicalities (and all pluses) of the streamer *and* the very best in th mean time.

Btw, the real "Oppo" times are from the age I mentioned (2005/2004), but back then I chose for a Momitsu. I'm not sure which of the two were first for network streaming; back then I could use the Momitsu for streaming from a friend's PC (over the internet).
I would dedicate Oppo as one of the most experienced, most ahead and stuff like that (also notice their kind of unique SACD digital output (older model I think).

Peter
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #87 on: December 23, 2010, 07:17:38 am »


There are already plenty of media players that can store music files on HD and either has built in DAC or have digital output for external DAC such as Sonos, Logitech Squeezebox and some that can output both music and video such as Dune, Dvico etc etc. There are all rather inexpensive and have good networking ability for multiroom purpose. However, I find sonic quality is still not comparable to computer music server (Personally I used Sonos, still own Dune and Dvico). There are good for what they are and much more convenient than XXHighend Happy but SQ needs to be improved. Personally, I also prefer
XXHighend/PC over Qsonix music server as far as SQ is concerned also.

Yes, all kinds of "players" exist. The problem is that 1.They all incorporate all kinds of parts that aren't part of what I'm proposing or looking for, i.e. dacs, streaming, lcd screens etc, 2.They are not meant to be audiophile gear for the most part.

I'm suggesting a very simple black box with a hard-drive interface (Esata, USB3) to connect to a drive with music files,  a digital out and/or an USB out to connect one's Dac, a video out to connect to one's external tv/monitor, and memory and software that is dedicated to decoding and playing back music files, and displaying a navigatible interface on one's tv/monitor.

All this is obviously possible and done on various systems from Ipods to high end portables to the devices you mentioned. But as I said, none of them keep it simple, nor do they put all their effort into creating a quality audiophile player.

I'll say one more time, It seems so much easier to go this route then to go the pc route and basically have to tweak the pc and Os forever to try you get to the state I'm suggesting, the simple audiophile dedicated black box. And the pc route gets ever more complicated as it now involves getting hold of a defunct Operating System (Vista), and then stripping it of everything that interferes with audio--basically everything, at which you're left with a relatively expensive box that was not meant for audio but that at this point is not good for much else. And it's too complex and frustrating a process for any but the most dedicated to endure for the sake of potentially high-end audio.

So, if anyone knows why my idea is not feasible, please let me know, so I don't go crazy trying to get someone to engineer this kind of black box.
And if y'all are gittin sick'a dis, no worries, I won't bring it up again (on my own anyway).

Chris
Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
Quest
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #88 on: January 01, 2011, 02:42:15 am »

crisnee, i totally agree with what you are suggesting, and that is where some small PCs have come in to fill the gap. i have been keeping tabs of PCs like auraliti, the bryston bdp-1 (based on it), sonore, modded mac mini, etc.. honestly think we are still quite abit away from a perfect PC, but we are moving.. Happy seems like many choose to exist on linux due to its low latency and simplicity. another way is to go for streaming but i'm not entirely convinced by streaming yet (in terms of SQ - e.g. ps audio pwd bridge) though technically it seems to move away from all the traditional PC related issues.

just to add my 2 cents on this topic in general, i have heard the difference between decent transports and PC fed into the same DAC many times, and unfortunately i feel transports still win as of now. it isn't a matter of detail level, soundstage, etc which seems obtainable. somehow it's the level of engagement or musicality and possibly this has to do with the timing and noise.

but as with all audio things, it is very subjective. the last time i did such a comparison at my home, even the visitors/listeners were split in opinion. out of 5 parties - 2 felt it was a preference and that there was no difference between PC and transport (tweakable difference), while 3 said 'PC is 90% of transport'. where it fell short are the areas i highlighted above. everyone's ear looks out for different things sometimes. Wink my setup is not high end but difference is already discernible. we plan to host a round 2 session once i sort out my interface (with int202 or rme aes32). for high end, i can imagine that cdp is just hard to beat simply cos there are no equivalently priced PC u can spend on (e.g. vs $30k cdp, even if u want to put $30k into audio PC, i am not sure where that money will go).

i think if u were to plot performance/value on a chart, PCs would start at a higher point at the beginning but with a slow rising curve, whereas cd transports would start at a lower point and have a faster rising curve. where it intersects in terms of $$ is anyone's guess.. this mark is constantly moving due to the fast pace of evolution in PC music.

2010 seemed to be the year of async usb (i know, doesn't seem to help you guys who already using rme aes32 and weiss af1). i am hoping that 2011 will be the age of new interfaces, streamers or 'audiophile PCs' to solve the core fundamental issues.. Happy
Logged
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #89 on: January 01, 2011, 06:37:26 am »

i have been keeping tabs of PCs like auraliti, the bryston bdp-1 (based on it), sonore, modded mac mini, etc..

Quest,

The problem with Bryston Bpd-1 for instance, it's over $2000. At the same time mid-fi companies are able to incorporate usb disk drive playback in Avr receivers and cd players that cost less then $500, and the usb playback is only an after thought. Have you listened to any of them? I haven't so I can't say anything about the sound quality. But it can't be awful. Some can even play flac and other better formats. So how are they producing it so inexpensively without using a pc?

Chris
Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #90 on: January 01, 2011, 03:18:24 pm »

A pc that is optimised for audio, can not be a pc anymore. It has to be a unit that like chrisnee said, is stripped of everything. Everything that induces rf noise to the circuits. And striped of software, that makes the performance inferrior like windows or every OS that is meant to do a lot of different stuff. It needs speciallized circiuts to do the audio processing at best. Non the less, the pc is still a very inexpensive approach to get good quality sound. Windows x said he could not outperform his CDP and I realy beleave him. Maybe his system can be made better but I know from listening sessions with CDT's that it is not easy to beat even a moderate priced CDT. For example my old usb interface(hoerwege usb-spdif) sounds better than a 12 year old Pioneer PDS06. And that is possible since the newest and best xx configuration. A better CDP, the modified (10 years old) Pioneer PDS707 can keep it up with my hiface and maybe sounds better in some aspects. It is a good drive but there are a lot drives that are much better. I would not bet money, if there was a head to head comparison between best CDP+DAC and best PC+DAC. The classical CDP has the big advantage, not beeing a computer. And I think it should be possible for a good CDP to read the CD accurate, when my CD-ROM can do that with 7Xspeed. Goining back to CDP is no real option because there are so much more possibilities (hires, downloads,...) you have with the "pure" digital playback. Peters NOS1 might be the first approach that has the techniques to outperform any CDP. A comparison would be really illuminating.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Quest
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #91 on: January 01, 2011, 04:12:54 pm »

i have been keeping tabs of PCs like auraliti, the bryston bdp-1 (based on it), sonore, modded mac mini, etc..

Quest,

The problem with Bryston Bpd-1 for instance, it's over $2000. At the same time mid-fi companies are able to incorporate usb disk drive playback in Avr receivers and cd players that cost less then $500, and the usb playback is only an after thought. Have you listened to any of them? I haven't so I can't say anything about the sound quality. But it can't be awful. Some can even play flac and other better formats. So how are they producing it so inexpensively without using a pc?

Chris
Hi Chris, auraliti costs $799, which i think its in the affordable range. a sonore starts from $999 to $1649 with lynx card. the sonore is higher priced (imo) just because it uses a passive cooling chassis and has more heat. i have not heard the auraliti but the sonore already sounds better than mac with puremusic imo. i have not compared directly to xxhighend or jrmc.

i have also not done a bdp-1 comparison (but i have heard the unit). i expect it to be of a good performance level too, given that it is basically a modified auraliti with better PSU, stripped video section, better chassis, etc. these 'upgrades' can be said to be in the audiophile range and as u know, do not come cheap. $2k is not alot honestly, if it manages to convince me it can better a $2-3k cd transport. don't forget an interface like a weiss int202 is already about $2k. however, i rather go the weiss way as i did not like the idea of a pure audio standalone pc, but as Flecko mentioned - this may be the only way to get further with performance.

what u mention about AVR and CDP costing $500 that give u plenty of features.. i may not be technical but i think things like chips can cost very low, enabling lots of good features, but good quality parts used for audio can cost alot. if u look at dacs, some high end dacs may be using the same chips as found in lower priced dacs, but yet the sound is so different.. if u look at AVRs in the past 5 years alone, the sound quality is honestly dropping every year for the same $. but now u have things like audyssey eq, hdmi, video in/out, upscaling, dsp, more channels, etc.

usb badly implemented can sound very bad actually. just like how it sounds like on some dacs.. i guess u have not heard how bad it can sound. this is why devices like m2tech hiface got popular in this price segment imo.
Logged
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #92 on: January 01, 2011, 07:31:42 pm »

i have been keeping tabs of PCs like auraliti, the bryston bdp-1 (based on it), sonore, modded mac mini, etc..

what u mention about AVR and CDP costing $500 that give u plenty of features.. i may not be technical but i think things like chips can cost very low, enabling lots of good features, but good quality parts used for audio can cost alot. if u look at dacs, some high end dacs may be using the same chips as found in lower priced dacs, but yet the sound is so different.. if u look at AVRs in the past 5 years alone, the sound quality is honestly dropping every year for the same $. but now u have things like audyssey eq, hdmi, video in/out, upscaling, dsp, more channels, etc.

usb badly implemented can sound very bad actually. just like how it sounds like on some dacs.. i guess u have not heard how bad it can sound. this is why devices like m2tech hiface got popular in this price segment imo.

I think you guys are missing my point and question. I'm not interested in the myriad features of an AVR or the cd playing of a CDP. What I am interested in is how the companies that make them can add on software/hardware at almost no expense (I would think that 95% or more of their money goes into the main features of an AVR or CDP) that decodes mp3, flac, wav, wma from an usb or esata attached hard drive and outputs it via spdif and optical.

And my further point is why is no one developing such an obviously inexpensive concept, as a stand alone device. I'm not looking for anything but a digital file player--no moving parts, no dac, only a spdif out and a video out to view the player/file management. Think Ipod with a video out instead of screen, an external esata disk instead of internal disk, no headphone out just the spdif, no controls except on/off and add a remote for the file management software (like the Ipod's controls for instance) and good psu and enlarge into black box. Viola. Very inexpensive (less than $300 and less than $150 with a wallwart psu) and should sound at least as good as say the Ipod through an Idecco (assuming a good stand alone dac).

Chris
Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #93 on: January 01, 2011, 07:51:12 pm »

Quote
no dac, only a spdif out

Maybe I overlook something, but it would be a strange kind of "explicit" excercition for such a developer / manufacturer;
Without "DAC" there would be no control over anything. Of course this is not really about the DAC as such, but what would logically be in there in order to control the stream. A clock ? yes, but acting as a reclocker because what goes in ? should be some audio stream, no matter it comes from an USB stick or anything. "Or anything" ? SPDIF again ? asynchronous ethernet ? (quite some more possibilities here). Well, that just all exists.

Let's put it differently ... what would that $500 (or less) DVDP lack regarding this ?
I think the latest DVDP I ever bought was a $100 thingy - including Ethernet connection. It nicely passes through SPDIF.

So, there *must* be more to it (to what you want, that is).
One could also say that SPDIF is not "it" of course ... and that I was only responding to your remark about *that*.

Generally let's not forget that the "cheap hardware" (if that would ever exist - with fine quality at the same time) will need drivers (for the device you see), or otherwise will need software (and a GUI etc.) to control it by means of some decent fashion. All adds up fast !
And oh, leave that all out and you'd have a CDP again. Or maybe a box which can play a preloaded pen only ... (btw, these exist too by now).

Peter
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #94 on: January 01, 2011, 08:16:16 pm »

Peter,

I don't get DVDP. Why this?

Just imagine in your head a stripped down Ipod--NO MOVING PARTS. Instead of the mini screen you have a video out to your tv or monitor. You can leave the little dac in it if you want but you use the Ipod's digital out. The point is to use it with a better dac as for instance the dac in the Idecco (which is supposedly very good) and to access an external Hard drive instead of its internal. All the software and hardware is already there, it's just accessing internal mini components instead of the external regular size hardware I'm suggesting. And it does all this without a formal pc or Mac and no internal moving parts.

No wonder no one is building this, no one understands what the hell I'm talking about.  dntknw  Grin

Chris
Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #95 on: January 01, 2011, 08:39:31 pm »

Quote
I don't get DVDP. Why this?

Possibly *I* don't understand Chris. But I thought that does everything you actually ask for, though in a large format. And my messages intended to be : you'd have nothing for good sound. It just takes more for getting that. And then the "infrastructure" doesn't match. Well, sort of.

But let's say I don't get it at this moment. very happy
Maybe look at all those devices actually doing what you want ... they won't even let through hires. That's "interface" stuff. And before you know it is will have a price similar to what I calculated yesterday (for something which would do what you want in a too large box).

??
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #96 on: January 01, 2011, 09:12:42 pm »

Quote
Just imagine in your head a stripped down Ipod--NO MOVING PARTS. Instead of the mini screen you have a video out to your tv or monitor. You can leave the little dac in it if you want but you use the Ipod's digital out. The point is to use it with a better dac as for instance the dac in the Idecco (which is supposedly very good) and to access an external Hard drive instead of its internal. All the software and hardware is already there, it's just accessing internal mini components instead of the external regular size hardware I'm suggesting. And it does all this without a formal pc or Mac and no internal moving parts.

I think the point is, it is not that simple. You need at first hardware that doesn't mess up the sound. Then you need an interface, software to control the unit and all that in an audiophile quality. No easy task, if you ask me. Linn majik might be close to what you are looking for but the price...and you get no good quality hardware. What you (we) want, can be done but it wont be cheap. You need people that know it all, from the software to hardware and with listening experience (if you want top quality).
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Quest
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #97 on: January 02, 2011, 01:57:54 am »

Chris, I do understand what you are talking about and tried to address it, but rather I think you have missed my point which Flecko has tried to elaborate. My point is - adding features is cheap. Getting audiophile quality is not. This was why I made the point on the auraliti ($799 for PC version, optimised but 'not audiophile enough', and $2k for bryston bdp-1).

My point about talking about AVR is due to you making an example of it. My point in this instance is that they are adding features in expense of sound quality - smaller or lower spec toroid transformers, lower power output (and fudging the numbers), higher SNR, going class d, etc). It's not just 'adding 5% to get more features' IMO.

The minimalistic digital player you are asking for exists at <$500. From a simple ipod + dock, streamers like squeezebox, and the myraid of media boxes out there (e.g. popcorn hour, ac ryan, etc) which can stream from NAS. All these have no moving parts (assuming your ipod is not harddisk based). They do the job but do they overcome the thread starter's concern - about challenging hi-end transports? IMO, no. I have tried all these and they don't even come close to a async usb interface used on a standard PC (where such interfaces like wavelink can cost $1k). Can a squeezebox beat a cd player worth $300? Possibly yes.

Just think why a wavelink can cost $1k when it's just a usb to bnc converter, when you can get a full PC (e.g. auraliti with bnc out) for that cost? What do you think we are really paying for? Or is the whole audiophile community full of suckers. Wink

Btw since you mention no moving parts, I think as long as it has a transformer in it, there are moving parts. So far all DACs and even some PC interface that I have tried benefit from isolation. My gf even found when listening to ipod placed on one of my isolation footers (she tried it for fun), it makes a difference.
Logged
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #98 on: January 04, 2011, 03:50:57 am »

Alright Everybody of late, one more time.

There truly is some kind of misunderstanding going on here. So let me be very specific and maybe we can come to an understanding.

1. To start with, I don't care if I'm right or wrong, I just want to be sure we've communicated and that what I'm envisioning is either possible or not possible. So far I feel we've spoken on different wave lengths, so that criterian has not been met.

2. My point here is not to create the best ever player that competes with $50,000 players. What I'm really asking is "Should we be starting with a pc or Mac, a product that certainly wasn't made for sound, and then strip it, rebuild it, try to understand it, try to clean up its inherent noise and myriad weaknesses, hope Microsoft comes up with a more Audio friendly OS etc. forever. It doesn't seem to make sense. Everyone's argument with me is --don't start with an AVR or an Ipod-- well at least they were made with audio in mind as their primary goal. By the way they were just examples to help readers to imagine what I'm getting at--that obviously didn't work. The point was that both of those include a little computer that is optimized for audio.

3. What do I envision? An inexpensive player (less $ than a computer with XX and usb -spdif converter) that can be connected to components that are already part of ones audio setup--like a dac. Think minimalist player, like Jplay, well maybe not quite that spartan.

(Can we agree that the new Oppo 93 is considered a pretty high quality player, especially where it comes to it's digital outs, definitely better than the Squeezebox). This is not a cheap stuff it with features kind of company. This player sells for $499. Less than a pc and already has a better functioning and sounding digital file playback system than any standard pc. And it was built with high quality audio in mind--that is key!

4. Now, take that Oppo and in your mind strip away all the non-computer parts, the disk playing apparatus and all the fancy video processors, the audio dac. Strip away streaming. Leave their excellent digital outs, the 2 GB of memory, their software which allows for wav, flac, mp3 etc. playback from external usb and esata drives, and rudimentary interface software who's images are ported to a tv. Redesign their remote, shrink the enclosure. 

5. Now what remains is a pretty good audio computer with a proprietary operating system of some sort. Why shouldn't someone start here instead of from a random Dell or Hp. Everything else is already better than a pc, after all it was built for sound. Just the software may need some tweaking.

6. Now the above was just for imagining. Why not build that imagining from the ground up? It seems so simple--not for me of course, but for any company that is already involved in audio players. Or maybe a couple of diyers could give it a go, or even Peter and Josef, both minimalists, both software guys, and Peter at least a some hardware guy too.

Chris

Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
Quest
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #99 on: January 04, 2011, 04:27:49 am »

Chris, thanks for elaborating. You are right, we were abit on a tangent as I didn't understand you were providing a development suggestion.

Taken your point, but I do think some people have tried from ground-up, e.g.:
1. PS Audio bridge - streamer card
2. Linn DS series - streamer
3. Squeezebox (including the dated transporter) - streamer
3. Bladelius Embla - server
4. Olive Opus - server

Now, I might be wrong, but I believe most of these guys have tried the approach you mention. Most of these have their own proprietary software and some level of hardware. Personally I like joint effort like what PS Audio and Linn have done, to build on a common platform so progress can be made on a community level, at least on software side.
Logged
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #100 on: January 04, 2011, 07:17:59 am »

Quest, I don't know the Linn or PS Audio bridge. I do own the Squeezebox 3 which is a fine little thing for what it is. But all this stuff is too complex. Even the Squeezebox. I almost never use it because it's a streamer and has to access a hard drive via a network. I prefer to avoid all unnecessary complications particularly when it comes to network stuff. I think all the equipment you mention is relatively complex and therefore unnecessarily expensive compared to what I'm thinking.

You could think of "my," idea as very similar to a cd player, the difference, it gets its files from an external hard drive instead of a disc. That's what I haven't seen, everything available is either a network/streamer type, or a whole system with built in drives, proprietary of course (the Olive and other more expensive pieces), or portable music player like the Ipod.

The Ipod is really the closest to what I'm suggesting because of its digital out, however it's obviously limited in other areas and too proprietary. I mentioned the IDecco previously. That company has taken advantage of the Ipod's digital out. For those who don't know what the Idecco is: It's a very nice "digital" Ipod ready integrated amp which includes the now hot Saber Dac. It sells for $1000 sans Ipod. It's gotten rave reviews from the audiophile community as has their normal integrated for high quality at a very reasonable price. Here's a quote from Peachtree Audio the Idecco producer: "Not so with the iDecco. We use the “Pure Digital” 1’s & 0’s from your iPod directly into our Super DAC with 11 regulated power supplies, so for the first time your iPod can really perform like a high-end CD player." So if a 32 GB Ipod can be sold for under $300 and can sound like a high-end Cd player, a much more complex player than what I'm suggesting then... Why start with a pc?

Open source development should be do-able, particularly where it concerns such a straight forward and simple concept. But either no one has thought of this, or it doesn't interest anyone. I don't get. I guess it's just too simple.

Chris


 

Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #101 on: January 04, 2011, 09:58:53 am »

Hi Chris,

It may be just that technical thing why you are (or may be) confused about the possibilities.

As repeated, what you want exists, but you think it is too large, complex and/or expensive (or maybe don't know partiular ones, but looking at the price may tell you enough);

As far as I can think about it, it is the "lacking" environment which will make it expensive, or uncontrollable (for the pilot) otherwise. For example, your idea about "just reading from disk" (without network, server, PC, etc. ?) ... how to do that ? Where is the software enabling that ? And ehm, maybe you didn't see it, but your TY is running on Linux, the washing machine is, the micro wave, your amplifier ... This has a reason.
Without this, there is nothing much to do, *or* write software that can read from e.g. a disk without further help. Doable. Next there's the selection (control). I know, it can be simple. But all what is provided by Squeezebox stuff already it too simple to my likings. Uhoh. So, doable ? maybe not.
I know you said that it could be very simple, so no MP3 etc. But maybe FLAC ? Hmm ... not all that much doable.

Anyway, that is why I said the environment isn't right. There are no tools, maybe chips, much programming to do in an environment without real memory, no OS so ALL has to be done, and while you'd dedicate something like this to me, I wouldn't know where to start really, if that indeed would be without an OS.

For further backround ... Things may not be as they seem. And, to let you know that people like me *are* thinking about this :
5 or 6 years back I got involved in the development of the first DAC which we now call asynchronous USB. Yes, the first, and you will not know it. It was based on the exact same principe you want, but the choice was made to let it use the OS to provide the disk data. Great choice, because it only needed a proprietary driver and all was done. It worked (and still works btw). It's even NOS.
Now who could have thought that even that matters, as do all today's asynchronous means. And what is the difference ? Or what MAKES the difference.
As you will also know, I started out with the "NOS1" to explicitly eliminate any difference. In fact it would eliminate XXHighEnd, right ? I did all I could, all was completely under my control, but up to today the differences remain, and I didn't even see them decrease.

Now tell me ... what makes you (or anyone) think that without something like an OS behind it (think asynchronous if you want) would suddenly eliminate those differences ? Wy actually sound CDPs different in the first place ? what actually does it take to get to that Walhalla which perveiveably can only be reached by means of that little box ? Personally I don't see that, although there indeed are some "means" which will contribute for the better. But further ? further I think it is the other way around. I think it is better to have some tweaks possible, which otherwise certainly would not be there at all.
In the end I know what it takes to get something like the NOS1 performing like it does, and I don't see any relation to its environment. Still though -and sadly- its environment influences. I also know how, but I would not know how to eliminate it. Yes, this all sounds way contradictionary, and I guess it is. But all this stuff -in the end- operates SO much at the micro level - while at the same time it is so hard to test and check and improve - that it may take a while before it's under our control. But also : it may well be that nobody recognizes what really is going on and what to look for. I mean, if you only look at the enormeous difference for the resulting wave for OS and NOS - while the WHOLE world develops around OS (what did you say ? Sabre ?) it must be clear that we are way way way (WAY) far from anything that is optimal. Or if you look at my plots in the other topic. I listened to that too for quite some years, but it is the most obvious how "wrong" it is. Still not all *that* audible. But so much is wrong, and so much the smallest micro details matter.

I think it needs time. But it also needs the industry to get another attitude. Today almost without exception everybody is "copying" asnync USB. Why ? because a few years back nobody could reason that it would be no good afterall. So, everybody is wrong AGAIN. It just doesn't help, and the approach is wrong.

But before this is all blahblah only ... I started with this all very explicitly (meaning like : XX was no accident and the first to "influence" this all ... the NOS1 was born to do something about it (but failed)), and I guess I am long from ready. There will be more ...

Peter

PS: Sorry for typos; didn't read back.
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
pedal
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 402

XXHighEnd is THE best buy in Hi-Fi. Thank U Peter!


View Profile
« Reply #102 on: January 04, 2011, 11:09:55 am »

Thanks for another great read, Peter. I love it when someone with (enough) knowledge puts things in perspective. It's quite funny/sad that the Hi-Fi industry majority is running down that USB alley, without knowing it's a dead end.

BTW: Why not licence your technology to Linn or some US company, enabling them to incorporate XX and your NOS DAC in a one-box music media server? I guess it all can fit on a pre-programed Sharc chip, providing State Of The Art SQ in an easy to use box. (Just a thought).
Logged

Hardware: Stealth Mach III > Lush^2 > 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3  > active preamp > 3-way active XO > amps > ribbon/dynamic true line source speakers.

Settings all settings as recommended by Peter by October 2019.
Quest
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #103 on: January 04, 2011, 03:36:28 pm »

Chris, I am really not sure why we aren't getting anywhere with this. Will try to quote you and answer directly as I really think I have covered all of this before! Hope this helps.

Quest, I don't know the Linn or PS Audio bridge. I do own the Squeezebox 3 which is a fine little thing for what it is. But all this stuff is too complex. Even the Squeezebox. I almost never use it because it's a streamer and has to access a hard drive via a network. I prefer to avoid all unnecessary complications particularly when it comes to network stuff. I think all the equipment you mention is relatively complex and therefore unnecessarily expensive compared to what I'm thinking.
The latest version of squeezebox (touch) allows you to hook up an external harddisk to it directly via usb. Is this simple enough? So does any of those media boxes like an ac ryan or popcorn hour.

So does an Auraliti or Bryston BDP-1.. but you will say this is linux and not built from ground up.

You could think of "my," idea as very similar to a cd player, the difference, it gets its files from an external hard drive instead of a disc. That's what I haven't seen, everything available is either a network/streamer type, or a whole system with built in drives, proprietary of course (the Olive and other more expensive pieces), or portable music player like the Ipod.
Just mentioned some examples above.
I do agree with you that in the past, typically they are either streamers or server types.
iPod is a server type imo, so I don't see what's wrong with stuff like the Bladelius Embla (which also allow hook-up of external harddisks).. it sounds good but of course comes at a high price tag.

Don't mind me saying but you don't seem to be getting the fact that performance comes at a cost. This is how a entry level Linn DS streamer can cost a few thousand but the Linn Klimax DS is $20k. How a squeezebox is like $200-300 but a transporter costs $2k? You certainly aren't paying that much more just for more features.

As PeterSt mentions, somehow there is no way we can escape the environment. Even with async usb, the OS matters, the usb cable matters, the power cord of your PC matters, etc.. if only we could.

The Ipod is really the closest to what I'm suggesting because of its digital out, however it's obviously limited in other areas and too proprietary. I mentioned the IDecco previously. That company has taken advantage of the Ipod's digital out. For those who don't know what the Idecco is: It's a very nice "digital" Ipod ready integrated amp which includes the now hot Saber Dac. It sells for $1000 sans Ipod. It's gotten rave reviews from the audiophile community as has their normal integrated for high quality at a very reasonable price. Here's a quote from Peachtree Audio the Idecco producer: "Not so with the iDecco. We use the “Pure Digital” 1’s & 0’s from your iPod directly into our Super DAC with 11 regulated power supplies, so for the first time your iPod can really perform like a high-end CD player." So if a 32 GB Ipod can be sold for under $300 and can sound like a high-end Cd player, a much more complex player than what I'm suggesting then... Why start with a pc?
ipod is at its current price because of economies of scale. It is also because of this economy of scale that enables them to work so much on the software. The only way I see this being possible for us is open source.

As for your comment on idecco, if you have heard one, maybe you won't be so influenced by all the hype.. the simplest interface like wadia ipod dock also doesn't sound better than a squeezebox to be honest. it's the implementation that counts.

Open source development should be do-able, particularly where it concerns such a straight forward and simple concept. But either no one has thought of this, or it doesn't interest anyone. I don't get. I guess it's just too simple.
Linn's software is open source. http://oss.linn.co.uk/trac
So are many of the linux iteriations.
Logged
crisnee
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile Email
« Reply #104 on: January 08, 2011, 04:53:18 am »

Peter, Quest, etc.

I do think we understand each other to a degree. However I think my original reason for posting either wasn't clear or has just been forgotten. I do see much of what you are saying, and don't think I ever disagreed with it (at least in my mind).

My original objective was either to find a simple digital file player (files from a hard-drive) with just a digital out (for sound) and video out (for visible file management), (no dac initially, just simple and inexpensive) or to suggest someone build one. It could the take place of the ubiquitous cd player and become the new ubiquitous player. It need not be perfect. It would probably be tweaked along it's way to higher ends as was the cd player.

Peter, I realize a player of this type would need an os of a sort, as does every mp3 player (When I mentioned the problem of dealing with os's, I was referring to Windows or Linux, basically jack of all trade os's (which is probably part of the problem). But wouldn't starting with a simple os such as found in high quality portable players with digital outs (Cowon, Hifiman, Ipod) be much easier to deal with, than with a pc, it's os and environment? I'm not saying that you would be able to (I don't know enough about this type of thing or you), but I mean in principle.

Quest, As to the Ipod/Idecco, I read several private user comments and they basically said the once sometime fatiguing nature of the Ipod's sound was now gone. As to the Squeezebox, I think the same still holds, although I'm not sure. I know that lot's of devices can play music from hard drives. The problem, it's not their only or most important function, not their raison d'etre.

Cd players were pretty much a one function component initially, and at least in part because they were simple, they evolved over time into better  devices. It's just curious to me that someone hasn't done the same by producing an Hd player or licensed their technology to do so. Someone like Apple, or Cowon or Hifiman (a couple of "highish end" portable players).  I understand why the specialty high-end producers like Bryston haven't, it would undermine their more esoteric products.

Peter, I'm sorry to say that I didn't understand quite a few parts of your post; I wish I had as they seemed to be telling interesting things about your start with your audio/XX projects. Most forum members seem to have no trouble understanding you. Perhaps non-native English speakers understand each other better than native/non-native combinations--or maybe I'm just too literal, but whatever the case I sure have a hell of a difficult time I'm very sorry to say. I mention this in case I'm asking something that you just answered or answered earlier that I didn't decipher properly.  Having said all that, please don't let it stop you answering my posts, because I do still get the gist of some of your explanations, etc.

Quest, There's no reason to go on with this topic other than to point out an Hd-player if you run across one, or to speculate on why one hasn't been produced, or why you believe one will not or cannot be produced. Other than that I think we understand each other well enough--although that may not be obvious at first glance.

Chris
Logged

Win7 Vanilla 64bit 4gb  Dual Core  E5200, 2.5ghz, offline audio only pc > 0.9z-6, Eng #4, Adaptive, MixedCon SFS 300, 10 ms, Buffer 2048, Scheme 3, Q1 1, 0s, > Audio-GD DI > Scott Nixon TD2 NOS Dac/MS V-Dac.
Quest
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #105 on: January 09, 2011, 03:55:43 am »

Quest, There's no reason to go on with this topic other than to point out an Hd-player if you run across one, or to speculate on why one hasn't been produced, or why you believe one will not or cannot be produced. Other than that I think we understand each other well enough--although that may not be obvious at first glance.
Well, I did give quite a few examples, but maybe you are not familiar with them or reject them because they perform more than 1 function (e.g. Bladelius which is a ripper as well), or just because you feel they are not built from ground up (e.g. Bryston which is on linux), or because a manufacturer has taken a different view (non hd player but streamer instead). That's fine. You are entitled to your view.

Honestly if you think stuff like Apple ipod is the best and simplest device, built from ground up for audio.. you can just mod it to have a larger harddisk, and mod it for a clean digital output into a DAC. Many portable rig owners have done this and I've heard quite a few. But please, give it a try yourself and let me know if you think it still sounds better than a CD transport of equivalent cost. Happy I personally don't find portable players to be built for audio really - they are mobile entertainment devices (with video) and built to a cost and size requirement.

Funnily enough, since we are talking about ipod, latest trend seems to be adding on usb devices to it which acts as the host to reduce jitter. Happy Like this:
http://www.aloaudio.com/algorhythm-solo/

To me, end of the day, we are pursuing this for the end goal of getting to better sound from computer files vs cd transport, and that was what I thought the whole purpose of this thread is about - especially in hi-end playback. I'm sure your suggestion is one way we can get there, but I'm also sure it isn't the only way we can get there.
Logged
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #106 on: January 09, 2011, 05:38:01 am »

Look like at CES Weiss is displaying its new music server MAN202.
However again, it might still do a bit more than a simple media player as it is also  a
ripper, ethernet, USB to external drive, firewire/XLR to external DAC, digital output via XLR/RCA
as well as analog XLR/RCA out.
Look like more highend companies are jumping into music server bandwagon now.
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #107 on: January 09, 2011, 04:20:55 pm »

MAN202? Reminds me another Sooloos-like product. I hope price wont exceed $10k.....$8k would be plausible.

Anyway, good ripping is dedicated PSU with something like Plextools + Plextor Premium(2) or Yamaha F1. Even powercord and resonance control of ripper drive affect ripped information.
Logged
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: January 09, 2011, 04:25:24 pm »

Quote
Anyway, good ripping is dedicated PSU with something like Plextools + Plextor Premium(2) or Yamaha F1. Even powercord and resonance control of ripper drive affect ripped information.
Have you tested this by comparing the bits of different rips of the same non scrachted cd? It should be the same, no matter what drive or what kind of PSU.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #109 on: January 09, 2011, 05:52:02 pm »

Yes, I did. Here's what I tested for powercord.

1. use Plextools to rip track 1 from Kent Poon Audiophile Jazz Prolouge III.
2. Turn off computer
3. Change powercord from $10 stock ones to ASR Magic cord (I like this ones because it has 6 big caps for power filtering as I use switching PSU) and turn computer on again.
4. Open Plextools and rerip the same track using the same configuration
5. Try listening to song individually. Older ones is duller and has less transparency.
6. Try comparing bit transparency...pass. They're all the same.
7. Try checking file comparison.....they're different.....hmmm As putting clamp on spinning disc affect SQ so I wouldn't surprise of something like this actually affect output information

I understand that most computer audiophile people have a lot of misconceptions and delusions about how stuff really works and what that can cause changes in good/bad ways. If all drive can sound the same they we don't need Esoteric P-01 to P-05 or Sony SACD should suffice.

FYI: I use Plextor Premium TLA:0000 putting inside Thermaltake Mozart IP (Decent Aluminium case for its price)
Logged
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #110 on: January 09, 2011, 09:47:25 pm »

Interesting. I have made experiments like this too. In the end, the most important thing was the set up of the software. Are you using c2 correction? Have you tried EAC too? With EAC I can get the same results from two completely different pc setups. Bit by bit, not the smalest different. If power supply or the drive makes a difference, there should have been some differences. Can you explain what the bit transperency check is? What program have you used for file comparison?
« Last Edit: January 10, 2011, 02:20:45 pm by Flecko » Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
AUDIODIDAKT
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 727

There's Nothing So Dated As Yesterdays Future


View Profile Email
« Reply #111 on: January 10, 2011, 07:19:21 am »

If you really like to test this:

Use the latest EAC version (there is a new version 1.0) and make sure your log looks (something) like this (1.0 version has log updates):
rip the whole album, F4 detect gaps, create cue sheet - non-compliant, use test&copy function to rip, then compare files, dont use plextools.
See how the crc calculations are matching, the albums "should" sound the same.
btw. This is not my log, just a log, i have a plextor drive too (PX-755), used plextools for a long time, also used a clamp ("de mat") before
used Taiyo-Yuden and gold discs in the past to burn my cd's, dont burn anymore, just rip.

maybe if you have results spread some filemail links around :-)

Roy


Code:
Exact Audio Copy V0.99 prebeta 5 from 4. May 2009

EAC extraction logfile from 26. October 2010, 8:59

Asura / 360

Used drive  : PIONEER DVD-RW  DVR-212D   Adapter: 1  ID: 0

Read mode               : Secure
Utilize accurate stream : Yes
Defeat audio cache      : Yes
Make use of C2 pointers : No

Read offset correction                      : 48
Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out          : No
Fill up missing offset samples with silence : Yes
Delete leading and trailing silent blocks   : No
Null samples used in CRC calculations       : Yes
Used interface                              : Native Win32 interface for Win NT & 2000
Gap handling                                : Appended to previous track

Used output format              : User Defined Encoder
Selected bitrate                : 128 kBit/s
Quality                         : High
Add ID3 tag                     : No
Command line compressor         : C:\Program Files\FLAC\flac.exe
Additional command line options : -8 -V -T "ARTIST=%a" -T "TITLE=%t" -T "ALBUM=%g" -T "DATE=%y" -T "TRACKNUMBER=%n" -T "TOTALTRACKS=%x" -T "GENRE=%m" -T "ALBUMARTIST=%v" -T "ALBUM ARTIST=%v" %s


TOC of the extracted CD

     Track |   Start  |  Length  | Start sector | End sector
    ---------------------------------------------------------
        1  |  0:00.00 |  5:52.32 |         0    |    26431   
        2  |  5:52.32 |  5:53.47 |     26432    |    52953   
        3  | 11:46.04 |  8:26.45 |     52954    |    90948   
        4  | 20:12.49 | 10:33.21 |     90949    |   138444   
        5  | 30:45.70 |  5:45.15 |    138445    |   164334   
        6  | 36:31.10 |  8:15.34 |    164335    |   201493   
        7  | 44:46.44 |  7:45.64 |    201494    |   236432   
        8  | 52:32.33 |  6:28.58 |    236433    |   265590   
        9  | 59:01.16 |  9:13.57 |    265591    |   307122   
       10  | 68:14.73 |  9:25.04 |    307123    |   349501   


Track  1

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\01 - El-Hai.wav

     Pre-gap length  0:00:02.00

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC CEBAB780
     Copy CRC CEBAB780
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  2

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\02 - Regenesis.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 99.9 %
     Test CRC 2493BA9B
     Copy CRC 2493BA9B
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  3

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\03 - Altered State (album edit).wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 04943A16
     Copy CRC 04943A16
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  4

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\04 - Atlantis Child.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 2B9A57BD
     Copy CRC 2B9A57BD
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  5

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\05 - Erase.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC BDCED9F0
     Copy CRC BDCED9F0
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  6

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\06 - Halley Road.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 99.9 %
     Test CRC 0E63EA5D
     Copy CRC 0E63EA5D
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  7

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\07 - Longing for Silence.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 198253C7
     Copy CRC 198253C7
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  8

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\08 - Getsemani.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 7F1390ED
     Copy CRC 7F1390ED
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  9

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\09 - Le dernier voyage.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC A1619745
     Copy CRC A1619745
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track 10

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\10 - Virgin Delight.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 3019430A
     Copy CRC 3019430A
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK


None of the tracks are present in the AccurateRip database

No errors occurred

End of status report

Logged

(Sept 30, 2010)                                                
W7 Ultimate x64 Tweaked/60 GB SSD OCZ Vertex (1.50)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME/Intel Q9550 2.83Ghz/OZC Reaper 2x2GB/
Esi Juli@ soundcard (KS)(x2v-v0_978)(Tweaked Coaxial)/Nvidea Geforce 9800 GTX+/750 Watt Zalman ZM-750-HP/100 MB Fiber-Optical Internet/
(XXHighEnd 0.9z-2)
#4Engine, Special Mode, 48 samples, SFS 12MB, DAP, Scheme=3, Q1=1, Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5=30,30,0,0, PlayerPrio=Low, ThreadPrio=Realtime
x-Allow Format Change, x-Stop Services, x-Copy to XX-drive by Standard, x-Start Engine3 During Conversion
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #112 on: January 10, 2011, 08:11:44 am »

While I am not denying that power cord may affect the way CD is ripped but I have to wonder. First I have to declare that I don't really know what's involved in ripping CD, all those error correction etc but this is what's bothering me.
First, Kent Poon CD has wav files on it so technically it is not really ripping. It is just a matter of copying files from CD to hard drive. 
While I believe that playing CD in real time like music CD has many potential problem unique to audio playback such as jitter, copying  wav file from CD or ripping CD to hard drive is no
difference from copying any file from CD to hard drive, unzipping files from CD or installing program from CD-ROM. If there is a significant difference in file data as Xwindow said when changing
power cord and making file comparison then I expect we would get a lot more CD errors, uninstallable programs, corrupted data files from CD ROM.
If we cannot get bit perfect reading from data CD to a hard drive, how would most computer be able to function? If error correction from CD ROM is good enough for
data CD, why should it not be good enough for music data (when ripping, copying, not playing).
I never tried to compare these myself and just assumed that properly set up EAC/dbPoweramp should take care of those problems.
I recognizes differences in sound quality of CD transport when playing music. There is no denying that but real time music playback is one thing, reading and copying and processing data on a CD in a computer is quite a different matter, I believe.
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #113 on: January 10, 2011, 02:35:24 pm »

Quote
First, Kent Poon CD has wav files on it so technically it is not really ripping. It is just a matter of copying files from CD to hard drive.
While I believe that playing CD in real time like music CD has many potential problem unique to audio playback such as jitter, copying  wav file from CD or ripping CD to hard drive is no
If it was a wav file and you would get two different files just by adding some powercord, I would assume the drive is defective. If it is a normal audio disc, there are ways to get different results. The error correction is not that perfect for audio cd like we know from normal files. But if you set things right, like shown by audiodidakt, and have a non scratched cd, the resluts must be the same, for different drives, powercords, pc's.... Otherwise , something is realy wrong.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #114 on: January 10, 2011, 03:22:23 pm »

1. I didn't copy aiff files from DVD disc of Kent Poon nor ever mention about DVD. Don't confuse this with CD ripping Wink
2. I used to use EAC as primary ripper till I findout Plextor Premium+Plextools pwn Plextor Premium+EAC 1.0 to level that EAC doesn't bring music and dbpoweramp is even worse.

I took deep length of research about how CD Transport works in level of hiend reference class combining with knowledge from data communication, OS and hardware architecture like computer/electronic. I can give you explanation why powercord or resonance and vibration control affect ripped information but you wouldn't understand in a way that you should be. It's like explanation nature phenomenon to someone who doesn't study physic.

Let's put it in simpler way, assuming c2/cache/SOHA/etc. can make perfect rip, we wouldn't need Esoteric P-01/DCS Scarlatti  transport in audiophile market Wink
Logged
AUDIODIDAKT
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 727

There's Nothing So Dated As Yesterdays Future


View Profile Email
« Reply #115 on: January 10, 2011, 03:35:18 pm »

PROOF IT !
 Happy

Rip one album with Plextools and EAC, then compare.
Plextools makes same rips as EAC.

Use cuetools to compare crc's

I'am openminded, but data should be data.

Not talking about playback-on-the-fly, where jitter can emerge.
Logged

(Sept 30, 2010)                                                
W7 Ultimate x64 Tweaked/60 GB SSD OCZ Vertex (1.50)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME/Intel Q9550 2.83Ghz/OZC Reaper 2x2GB/
Esi Juli@ soundcard (KS)(x2v-v0_978)(Tweaked Coaxial)/Nvidea Geforce 9800 GTX+/750 Watt Zalman ZM-750-HP/100 MB Fiber-Optical Internet/
(XXHighEnd 0.9z-2)
#4Engine, Special Mode, 48 samples, SFS 12MB, DAP, Scheme=3, Q1=1, Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5=30,30,0,0, PlayerPrio=Low, ThreadPrio=Realtime
x-Allow Format Change, x-Stop Services, x-Copy to XX-drive by Standard, x-Start Engine3 During Conversion
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #116 on: January 10, 2011, 03:47:47 pm »

Before this all runs off-track ...

Quote
6. Try comparing bit transparency...pass. They're all the same.
7. Try checking file comparison.....they're different.....hmmm As putting clamp on spinning disc affect SQ so I wouldn't surprise of something like this actually affect output information

It is this what confuses :

a. "Bit transparency" as such, implies "bit perfect", implies "all is bit per bit the same".

b. Different files ? impossible when combined with a.

So ...

Your means to check for bit transparency isn't correct (e.g. look at a HDCD light which says something but is no guarantee at all).
or
At checking the files the offset is different, and therefore the files are different. In this case bit transparancy can be maintained (theoretically).

In either case all says nothing. Of course, the different offsets may (or will) happen when using different drives to rip from.
Different offsets *will* sound different (throughout).

If this is not about offsets being different, but the files are anyway, as Flecko said : something is wrong to begin with, and no further observations or tests are necessary.
In the mean time (and in this case) your test for bit transparency fails as well (because it can't be).


To sum it all up :
If you state that a powercord will change the file outcome - or will state that any other varying means will change the file outcome - you are perfectly right things will be different / wrong etc.
It would be the first time though that I hear someone saying a thing like this, because it is 1000% obvious.

Claim 100% the same files, while they sound different - and then we'd have a rather normal case. Not that we understand much of it, but it is recognized and known to exist. Same problem if it were for you, but no advantage for a CDP which will only be (theoretically !) worse at this.
But come up with different files, and you are way behind facts. Still true (hence, I sure believe you), but something else is the matter, and it will be irrelevant to what it's all really about.

I hope I'm not confusing too much.
Peter
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #117 on: January 10, 2011, 03:51:00 pm »

From my experiences and knowledge, bit transparency doesn't necessary make identical information in output buffer. At least using different drive or application can pass bit transparency check but we know they don't sound exactly the same. Each to their own so I'll just share mine to level that it doesn't trouble me.
Logged
AUDIODIDAKT
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 727

There's Nothing So Dated As Yesterdays Future


View Profile Email
« Reply #118 on: January 10, 2011, 04:06:54 pm »

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue41/ca_kentpoon.htm

Quote
3. Let's move on to ripping. As with the above, there are proponents that claim only certain software, and optical drives for that matter, can "accurately" rip a CD. That they can clearly hear differences between rips via different means; even though the rips are bit for bit perfect. Any thoughts on what is going on here? Is there an advantage to using specific ripping software or drives over another? Say iTunes, WMP, Max or whatever when compared to say EAC?

We had this test in our article too. From our test, the iTunes rip is as good as EAC/Plextor rips on a disc in good condition. It is not a big deal in ripping with today's computer resources. However an EAC or Plextor rip is only superior because it re-reads the data on a scratched disc and will tell you what's going wrong during the whole process. If the rip is bit for bit perfect, then you will not able to tell any difference because there is none. iTunes has a shuffle function. You can create an album playlist with all bit perfect, but different ripping method files. Work with a friend and play them in shuffle mode to see if you really can detect which is which.

Quote
7. What do you see as being the most important factor in getting the best sound in computer-based audio? That is what should the consumer address with the greatest concern when setting up a computer-based audio system?

Don't try to use money as measure of sound quality. For example, saying that a Mac Book pro can never sound as good as the $10,000 CD transport because of all the audiophile terms regarding their differences. This is a gap between the traditional audiophile and the new generation of audiophiles. The biggest concern in computer-based audio is the DAC. A good DAC will guide you through.
Logged

(Sept 30, 2010)                                                
W7 Ultimate x64 Tweaked/60 GB SSD OCZ Vertex (1.50)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME/Intel Q9550 2.83Ghz/OZC Reaper 2x2GB/
Esi Juli@ soundcard (KS)(x2v-v0_978)(Tweaked Coaxial)/Nvidea Geforce 9800 GTX+/750 Watt Zalman ZM-750-HP/100 MB Fiber-Optical Internet/
(XXHighEnd 0.9z-2)
#4Engine, Special Mode, 48 samples, SFS 12MB, DAP, Scheme=3, Q1=1, Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5=30,30,0,0, PlayerPrio=Low, ThreadPrio=Realtime
x-Allow Format Change, x-Stop Services, x-Copy to XX-drive by Standard, x-Start Engine3 During Conversion
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #119 on: January 10, 2011, 04:10:56 pm »


I took deep length of research about how CD Transport works in level of hiend reference class combining with knowledge from data communication, OS and hardware architecture like computer/electronic. I can give you explanation why powercord or resonance and vibration control affect ripped information but you wouldn't understand in a way that you should be. It's like explanation nature phenomenon to someone who doesn't study physic.

Let's put it in simpler way, assuming c2/cache/SOHA/etc. can make perfect rip, we wouldn't need Esoteric P-01/DCS Scarlatti  transport in audiophile market Wink

May be you should try to explain otherwise stating that other people are too ignorant to understand your science is not a way to make constructive discussion.
Physics is not so exotic a subject, I am sure many people here have heard of it or even study it as well!
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
AUDIODIDAKT
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 727

There's Nothing So Dated As Yesterdays Future


View Profile Email
« Reply #120 on: January 10, 2011, 04:17:04 pm »

May be you should try to explain otherwise stating that other people are too ignorant to understand your science is not a way to make constructive discussion.

Try to be constructive WindowsX, following your statements for several weeks now, it never seems to end.

Discussions = good
Ignorant non-constuctive shouting = no good
Logged

(Sept 30, 2010)                                                
W7 Ultimate x64 Tweaked/60 GB SSD OCZ Vertex (1.50)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME/Intel Q9550 2.83Ghz/OZC Reaper 2x2GB/
Esi Juli@ soundcard (KS)(x2v-v0_978)(Tweaked Coaxial)/Nvidea Geforce 9800 GTX+/750 Watt Zalman ZM-750-HP/100 MB Fiber-Optical Internet/
(XXHighEnd 0.9z-2)
#4Engine, Special Mode, 48 samples, SFS 12MB, DAP, Scheme=3, Q1=1, Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5=30,30,0,0, PlayerPrio=Low, ThreadPrio=Realtime
x-Allow Format Change, x-Stop Services, x-Copy to XX-drive by Standard, x-Start Engine3 During Conversion
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #121 on: January 10, 2011, 04:49:09 pm »


I took deep length of research about how CD Transport works in level of hiend reference class combining with knowledge from data communication, OS and hardware architecture like computer/electronic. I can give you explanation why powercord or resonance and vibration control affect ripped information but you wouldn't understand in a way that you should be. It's like explanation nature phenomenon to someone who doesn't study physic.

Let's put it in simpler way, assuming c2/cache/SOHA/etc. can make perfect rip, we wouldn't need Esoteric P-01/DCS Scarlatti  transport in audiophile market Wink

May be you should try to explain otherwise stating that other people are too ignorant to understand your science is not a way to make constructive discussion.
Physics is not so exotic a subject, I am sure many people here have heard of it or even study it as well!

I'm not saying they're ignorant but not all knowledge can be archived without proper study and practice. If you have good fundamental knowledge about data communication, electronic, circuit design and hardware/software architecture, I think it will suffice for understanding.

Also, Kent Poon is talented and respected sound engineer but he isn't god of digital audio. Try your own experiments and see if it's true or not. It's not that hard for switching powercord from stock ones to premium ones and see if it really affect ripping or not. It's even easier than understanding why powercord affect ripped information. Make sure you use decent PSU like $100-200 ones at least. ultra low-noise toroidal linear PSU would be highly recommended if possible.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #122 on: January 10, 2011, 05:00:58 pm »

Quote
It's even easier than understanding why powercord affect ripped information.

Wrong.
I just said something about that. Instead of responding to it (very relevant for this) you repeat yourself again.

So ...
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #123 on: January 10, 2011, 05:23:19 pm »

WindowsX, we all here have achieved bit perfect read out of a cd. We want to help you, to get this too. Why aren't you listening to us? Just try EAC and configure it correct (offset!). Then change what ever you want, if there is still a difference in the files, we can see what is the problem. But still ,as peter said, there can be a difference in sound of the same files. But as long as they are equal, the problem is not the file itself.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #124 on: January 10, 2011, 05:44:52 pm »

I tried tons of EAC configurations with accuraterip too. I wouldn't say EAC is bad because I used to use it until recently that I found something else is wrong with EAC in resolving system. What I want isn't there with EAC. If you don't mind, you can post your EAC configuration and how you setup your ripper in here and I'll try in my place to see if that helps.

To be precise, PSU affect the outcome not just powercord so getting perfect rip is practically impossible or Plextor Premium 2 would be just overstatement.
Logged
AUDIODIDAKT
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 727

There's Nothing So Dated As Yesterdays Future


View Profile Email
« Reply #125 on: January 10, 2011, 06:02:46 pm »

Explain what is wrong, post the files !!!!

http://blowfish.be/eac/Rip/rip1.html

see my log in prevoius post,

tons of EAC configurations ???.............. there is only 1 proper setup, see guide

or, just rip anyway you like, send the recently found different sounding albums to me, i will sort out crc and offsets !

Please dont repeat yourself AGAIN.
Logged

(Sept 30, 2010)                                                
W7 Ultimate x64 Tweaked/60 GB SSD OCZ Vertex (1.50)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME/Intel Q9550 2.83Ghz/OZC Reaper 2x2GB/
Esi Juli@ soundcard (KS)(x2v-v0_978)(Tweaked Coaxial)/Nvidea Geforce 9800 GTX+/750 Watt Zalman ZM-750-HP/100 MB Fiber-Optical Internet/
(XXHighEnd 0.9z-2)
#4Engine, Special Mode, 48 samples, SFS 12MB, DAP, Scheme=3, Q1=1, Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5=30,30,0,0, PlayerPrio=Low, ThreadPrio=Realtime
x-Allow Format Change, x-Stop Services, x-Copy to XX-drive by Standard, x-Start Engine3 During Conversion
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #126 on: January 10, 2011, 06:03:19 pm »

You can use the settings Audiodidakt posted one page before. The read out offset must be chosen for your drive. You can test this with a cd or look into a table. The new EAC does this automatically I think.

Quote
To be precise, PSU affect the outcome not just powercord so getting perfect rip is practically impossible or Plextor Premium 2 would be just overstatement.
The advantage of the Plextor Premium 2 is its writing ability!
I have a 150€ Powersupply in my PC and a 1€ Plextor CD-writer Wink

Good luck!
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
AUDIODIDAKT
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 727

There's Nothing So Dated As Yesterdays Future


View Profile Email
« Reply #127 on: January 10, 2011, 06:07:43 pm »

You can use the settings Audiodidakt posted one page before. The read out offset must be chosen for your drive. You can test this with a cd or look into a table. The new EAC does this automatically I think.

I can compare crc's even if the offsets are wrong. (in most cases)
 Happy
Logged

(Sept 30, 2010)                                                
W7 Ultimate x64 Tweaked/60 GB SSD OCZ Vertex (1.50)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME/Intel Q9550 2.83Ghz/OZC Reaper 2x2GB/
Esi Juli@ soundcard (KS)(x2v-v0_978)(Tweaked Coaxial)/Nvidea Geforce 9800 GTX+/750 Watt Zalman ZM-750-HP/100 MB Fiber-Optical Internet/
(XXHighEnd 0.9z-2)
#4Engine, Special Mode, 48 samples, SFS 12MB, DAP, Scheme=3, Q1=1, Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5=30,30,0,0, PlayerPrio=Low, ThreadPrio=Realtime
x-Allow Format Change, x-Stop Services, x-Copy to XX-drive by Standard, x-Start Engine3 During Conversion
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #128 on: January 10, 2011, 06:10:40 pm »

Explain what is wrong, post the files !!!!

http://blowfish.be/eac/Rip/rip1.html

see my log in prevoius post,

tons of EAC configurations ???.............. there is only 1 proper setup, see guide

or, just rip anyway you like, send the recently found different sounding albums to me, i will sort out crc and offsets !

Please dont repeat yourself AGAIN.


That's what I was using and tried something else for drive configuration when I change my drive to rip. If perfect rip is real then $50 dvd drive should make identical performance to Plextor Premium or 2. But sadly, reality hurts. Even the same Plextor premium can't make the same sound if comes from different year.....or have different TLA number.

Believe what you want but what you did are all tried in mine.
Logged
AUDIODIDAKT
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 727

There's Nothing So Dated As Yesterdays Future


View Profile Email
« Reply #129 on: January 10, 2011, 06:13:31 pm »

And he repeats himself again.
swoon

I'am out........
Logged

(Sept 30, 2010)                                                
W7 Ultimate x64 Tweaked/60 GB SSD OCZ Vertex (1.50)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME/Intel Q9550 2.83Ghz/OZC Reaper 2x2GB/
Esi Juli@ soundcard (KS)(x2v-v0_978)(Tweaked Coaxial)/Nvidea Geforce 9800 GTX+/750 Watt Zalman ZM-750-HP/100 MB Fiber-Optical Internet/
(XXHighEnd 0.9z-2)
#4Engine, Special Mode, 48 samples, SFS 12MB, DAP, Scheme=3, Q1=1, Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5=30,30,0,0, PlayerPrio=Low, ThreadPrio=Realtime
x-Allow Format Change, x-Stop Services, x-Copy to XX-drive by Standard, x-Start Engine3 During Conversion
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #130 on: January 10, 2011, 06:18:47 pm »

I said I already tried what you posted but that's not that I can expect. Depth and inner details for harmonics are all gone comparing to others.

I'll send you ripped Kent Poon track 1 from EAC/Plextools/etc. when I get back for you to findout then.

Anyway, I have Perfect Sound 2010 ripped by Plextools which I believe it's better than EAC for overall sound. Do you have this?
Logged
AUDIODIDAKT
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 727

There's Nothing So Dated As Yesterdays Future


View Profile Email
« Reply #131 on: January 10, 2011, 06:38:46 pm »

Dont send tracks, rather send whole albums !

2 albums, one you think sounds right and one you think has lesser dynamics.
Only send albums with cue and log. (if possible)

I can setup this myself, if this is what it takes. (I have several drives and ripping software incl. plextools)

So......?
Logged

(Sept 30, 2010)                                                
W7 Ultimate x64 Tweaked/60 GB SSD OCZ Vertex (1.50)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME/Intel Q9550 2.83Ghz/OZC Reaper 2x2GB/
Esi Juli@ soundcard (KS)(x2v-v0_978)(Tweaked Coaxial)/Nvidea Geforce 9800 GTX+/750 Watt Zalman ZM-750-HP/100 MB Fiber-Optical Internet/
(XXHighEnd 0.9z-2)
#4Engine, Special Mode, 48 samples, SFS 12MB, DAP, Scheme=3, Q1=1, Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5=30,30,0,0, PlayerPrio=Low, ThreadPrio=Realtime
x-Allow Format Change, x-Stop Services, x-Copy to XX-drive by Standard, x-Start Engine3 During Conversion
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #132 on: January 10, 2011, 07:22:54 pm »

I'm on countryside right now and will be back in next week so can't do it right now.
Logged
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #133 on: January 10, 2011, 07:34:38 pm »

Quote
You can use the settings Audiodidakt posted one page before. The read out offset must be chosen for your drive. You can test this with a cd or look into a table. The new EAC does this automatically I think.

I can compare crc's even if the offsets are wrong. (in most cases)
It is much more convincing if you can compare every single bit by yourself by using hexcompare. Same crc is also not 100% proof they are identical, that is what I read at least.

Quote
That's what I was using and tried something else for drive configuration when I change my drive to rip. If perfect rip is real then $50 dvd drive should make identical performance to Plextor Premium or 2. But sadly, reality hurts. Even the same Plextor premium can't make the same sound if comes from different year.....or have different TLA number.
Maybe it hurts, that money can not buy everything. It is not us that have a problem buying a Plextor Premium. Be sure, I would buy if it had any advantage. As I said, Plextor Premium 2 is a HIGHEND BURNER. IT HAS SUPERIOR BURNING ABILITIES. But YOU seem to have a PROBLEM reading TEXT accurate Wink

Quote
Believe what you want but what you did are all tried in mine.
Look windowsx, the difference is, I KNOW IT.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Windows X
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


View Profile Email
« Reply #134 on: January 10, 2011, 08:13:37 pm »

Well, I didn't use Plextor Premium 2 as I don't think it'll worth for ripping alone as you think. I tried comparing between original master file and ripped ones for Kent Poon and Plextor Premium with Plextools is quite satisfying. Some people told me he tried putting drive on stuff like symposium or woodblock and archive different result too. It's not like I do or don't believe in his statement but that's what he found and try to share with me.

If you're curious, try it. Otherwise, leave it Wink
Logged
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #135 on: January 10, 2011, 11:32:40 pm »

Quote
Some people told me he tried putting drive on stuff like symposium or woodblock and archive different result too
I have my CD-Ripping drive mounted in an external enclosure with usb connection (btw. still the same results as build in the pc enclosure). Sometimes I put it on a book (=wood) or sometimes I put it on a pillow to silence it. It seems to sound more educated when the drive is standing on the book, while standing on the pillow, the musicians get a little lazy Happy
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Josef
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 157



View Profile
« Reply #136 on: January 11, 2011, 01:30:09 am »

Claim 100% the same files, while they sound different - and then we'd have a rather normal case. Not that we understand much of it, but it is recognized and known to exist.

Are you saying you have bit-identical tracks that 'sound' different?

An example would be most welcome....
Logged
Quest
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #137 on: January 11, 2011, 03:47:51 am »

Unfortunately I have to put in my 2 cents on WindowsX's side on this one.

1. Power cord/conditioning is proven to enhance benchmark speeds on my PC and friends' PC compared to stock cord (I urged everyone who own these products to do this test). Not huge but like maybe 10%. IMO I also take this as sign of better stability which can only be better.

2. Power cord does alter the sound of the PC during playback. Big difference. It's as sensitive as a power cord to cd transport. Details and dynamics can get choked otherwise. I also believe in importance of low ripple PSU.

3. For ripping, we did not test via different power cord, but the tweaks found to work are:
   - de-static and de-mag (biggest difference)
   - footers and weights does work as well, for external drives, but i prefer internal
   - usb cable for the external drive (i did not verify this - but based on friend's testimonial)
   - external power supply for external drive
   - add cd-mat

Someone even told me if ripping fresh (after reboot) it sounds better.

However, at the opposite end there are users who claim no difference, including Kent Poon. When asked about the Plextor Premium2 drive which he feels is very good, what he actually said was it makes a difference for direct playback. However, for ripping, he felt that it makes no difference as software should sort it out. He did however, note that some drives give poor ripping, but that is an exception. Of course, I feel if a drive is good for playback, it should be more stable for ripping which can only be good - so up to you if you want to part with the money! And put it this way, this is a small cost.

About the tweaks used, I had discussed this in another forum extensively. One interesting point was that sometimes these tweak result in measurably more errors that are within correctable margins, but the reviewer heard an "improvement" in the sound. So the forumer then said this "leads back to the age-old question of "what kind of errors sound good"." Happy

Maybe I don't have very high-end system, I feel the differences for ripping are there but rather small (other than power related or static). I can't tell what method result in better rip either.. if a power cord can influence sound of the rip, that is actually worrying cos I find each power cord has different character!

My last comment is on the comparison which makes this even tougher to note if there is really a difference or not. I personally find there are many variables on playback and therefore even if you playback 2 identical files (just copied), there is possibility you can hear a difference (e.g. in different drive, or even in different directory ). Give it a try. Of course, with ram buffering/drives I guess this issue is less now. Happy
Logged
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #138 on: January 11, 2011, 05:17:51 am »

Unfortunately I have to put in my 2 cents on WindowsX's side on this one.

1. Power cord/conditioning is proven to enhance benchmark speeds on my PC and friends' PC compared to stock cord (I urged everyone who own these products to do this test). Not huge but like maybe 10%. IMO I also take this as sign of better stability which can only be better.

2. Power cord does alter the sound of the PC during playback. Big difference. It's as sensitive as a power cord to cd transport. Details and dynamics can get choked otherwise. I also believe in importance of low ripple PSU.



No argument there. I am a big believer in power supply, power cord etc. Power cord I use for my computer costs more than the computer itself. The way power is supplied to Weiss INT202, switching power supply, battery, linear power supply, power cords themselves all have audible effect, at least when I tried them in my system.

Quote

3. For ripping, we did not test via different power cord, but the tweaks found to work are:
   - de-static and de-mag (biggest difference)
   - footers and weights does work as well, for external drives, but i prefer internal
   - usb cable for the external drive (i did not verify this - but based on friend's testimonial)
   - external power supply for external drive
   - add cd-mat

Someone even told me if ripping fresh (after reboot) it sounds better.



This is now the tricky bit. I have not experiments much with this myself but will in the future but there does not seem to be a good
locical explaination that I could tell why this should make a difference. Ripping CD should be no difference from reading data from a CD-ROM.
There is nothing mythical or magical about audio file there. If there is that much error when ripping CD, I would expect the same thing when
reading files from CD-ROM. May be I am missing something here.

I am all ears for things I can do to improve the sound quality. Something that may improve drive performance like this will be relatively cheap
in comparison to buying other stereo equipments but before reconsidering reripping my entire CD library, I would like to hear more about why
this should be the case.





Quote
About the tweaks used, I had discussed this in another forum extensively. One interesting point was that sometimes these tweak result in measurably more errors that are within correctable margins, but the reviewer heard an "improvement" in the sound. So the forumer then said this "leads back to the age-old question of "what kind of errors sound good"." Happy

Maybe I don't have very high-end system, I feel the differences for ripping are there but rather small (other than power related or static). I can't tell what method result in better rip either.. if a power cord can influence sound of the rip, that is actually worrying cos I find each power cord has different character!

My last comment is on the comparison which makes this even tougher to note if there is really a difference or not. I personally find there are many variables on playback and therefore even if you playback 2 identical files (just copied), there is possibility you can hear a difference (e.g. in different drive, or even in different directory ). Give it a try. Of course, with ram buffering/drives I guess this issue is less now. Happy


This is interesting. Personally, I listen to vinyl as well as digital. I have to say that I prefer the sound of turntable much more than CD. There seems to be something that analogue does
so well that digital cannot match. Personally I think that there is certain artifact there that happens to sound good that make LP superior to CD to my ears. Even digitally recorded master transcribed to LP still sounds better than CD and that certain quality that I find desirable in LP is still there in those digitally recorded album.

As far as external and internal drive. This is what I found in my system (I cannot explain why that should be the case but it is what I consistantly heard).
I prefer internal sata connection to hard drive where my music library reside. My window OS is on SSD and xxHighend on RAMdisk. To my ears, music library on NAS sounds the worse.
External USB2/3, esata are better but not as good as internal sata directly to mobo. Could it be the cable or shorter connection? May be? I don't really know. In an effort to have no moving parts in my computer (recently I managed to disable all my case fans),now my hard drive is outside the case but with sata cable connecting directly to mobo inside and powered from PSU that sits outside the computer case.
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
Quest
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


View Profile Email
« Reply #139 on: January 11, 2011, 10:35:45 am »

This is now the tricky bit. I have not experiments much with this myself but will in the future but there does not seem to be a good
locical explaination that I could tell why this should make a difference. Ripping CD should be no difference from reading data from a CD-ROM.
There is nothing mythical or magical about audio file there. If there is that much error when ripping CD, I would expect the same thing when
reading files from CD-ROM. May be I am missing something here.

I am all ears for things I can do to improve the sound quality. Something that may improve drive performance like this will be relatively cheap in comparison to buying other stereo equipments but before reconsidering reripping my entire CD library, I would like to hear more about why this should be the case.
Totally agree with you here. I can't understand it so personally I have avoided it. I tend to do this alot with tons of audio tweaks. Happy The whole 'confusion' starts because it is supposed to be digital and bits are bits..

Let's take a step back. Looking at CD playback, I think it is more accepted that different CDs can sound different and demag/destatic and other tweaks do make a difference. Now, think about it - what is really altering, given that the CDP is also reading digital bits? If the bits are read wrongly, then no sound or static should come out - but sound IS coming out, just altered in some way. If we are 'reading the bits in a different way', who is to say this is considered an error or more accurate?

To look more into detail - what exactly is the change? Is it information (e.g. missing notes/details), or is it something else like openness, liveliness, dynamics? Is this really additional bits being read, or the same bits being read differently/more clearly? Or something else?

The 'something else' to think about it is if the tweaks are actually affecting the CDP differently, rather than allowing it to read CD better. If destatic works, it does not only make the CD easier to read but maybe lowers static effects on the CDP which may give better sound. Onto ripping, this means what information is being read could be transferred better to the harddisk? Just a hypothesis.

Hope someone more experienced can chime in on this.

Quote
This is interesting. Personally, I listen to vinyl as well as digital. I have to say that I prefer the sound of turntable much more than CD. There seems to be something that analogue does
so well that digital cannot match. Personally I think that there is certain artifact there that happens to sound good that make LP superior to CD to my ears. Even digitally recorded master transcribed to LP still sounds better than CD and that certain quality that I find desirable in LP is still there in those digitally recorded album.
I think the answer is simple. There is no conversion involved and it is more direct. Even the best DACs are still trying to piece together what was originally analog. Happy I too prefer vinyl. Resolution is also higher than CD. Of course as usual this depends on the press.

Quote
As far as external and internal drive. This is what I found in my system (I cannot explain why that should be the case but it is what I consistantly heard).
I prefer internal sata connection to hard drive where my music library reside. My window OS is on SSD and xxHighend on RAMdisk. To my ears, music library on NAS sounds the worse.
External USB2/3, esata are better but not as good as internal sata directly to mobo. Could it be the cable or shorter connection? May be? I don't really know. In an effort to have no moving parts in my computer (recently I managed to disable all my case fans),now my hard drive is outside the case but with sata cable connecting directly to mobo inside and powered from PSU that sits outside the computer case.
Thanks for sharing. Is there any audible benefit from placing your harddisk externally this way?
I too prefer internal but have done it the other way - by just damping the casing which is already quite heavy.
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #140 on: January 11, 2011, 11:17:15 am »

OffTopic

Quote
I too prefer vinyl. Resolution is also higher than CD. Of course as usual this depends on the press.

That's an interesting one. Can you reason that out ?

If you like it ... I can. That is, I did somewhere, some time. So I'd have to dig it up.
But the result is the opposite. Happy

Waiting for yours first ... haha

Peter
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #141 on: January 11, 2011, 11:43:59 am »


Totally agree with you here. I can't understand it so personally I have avoided it. I tend to do this alot with tons of audio tweaks. Happy The whole 'confusion' starts because it is supposed to be digital and bits are bits..

Let's take a step back. Looking at CD playback, I think it is more accepted that different CDs can sound different and demag/destatic and other tweaks do make a difference. Now, think about it - what is really altering, given that the CDP is also reading digital bits? If the bits are read wrongly, then no sound or static should come out - but sound IS coming out, just altered in some way. If we are 'reading the bits in a different way', who is to say this is considered an error or more accurate?

To look more into detail - what exactly is the change? Is it information (e.g. missing notes/details), or is it something else like openness, liveliness, dynamics? Is this really additional bits being read, or the same bits being read differently/more clearly? Or something else?

The 'something else' to think about it is if the tweaks are actually affecting the CDP differently, rather than allowing it to read CD better. If destatic works, it does not only make the CD easier to read but maybe lowers static effects on the CDP which may give better sound. Onto ripping, this means what information is being read could be transferred better to the harddisk? Just a hypothesis.

Hope someone more experienced can chime in on this.


Difference between CDP and benefit of destatic and all the tweaks on CDP at least could be explained away by blaming jitter
since we are playing CD on the fly, something that is unique to CD playback as far as I know (at least in comparison to
the other usual computer usage).  However, ripping CD to hard drive should be more similar to computer CD-ROM usage
rather than playing CD on the fly like CDP. At least that is the way I understand it and may be someone can tell me if this is a
misconception.






Quote
Quote
As far as external and internal drive. This is what I found in my system (I cannot explain why that should be the case but it is what I consistantly heard).
I prefer internal sata connection to hard drive where my music library reside. My window OS is on SSD and xxHighend on RAMdisk. To my ears, music library on NAS sounds the worse.
External USB2/3, esata are better but not as good as internal sata directly to mobo. Could it be the cable or shorter connection? May be? I don't really know. In an effort to have no moving parts in my computer (recently I managed to disable all my case fans),now my hard drive is outside the case but with sata cable connecting directly to mobo inside and powered from PSU that sits outside the computer case.
Thanks for sharing. Is there any audible benefit from placing your harddisk externally this way?
I too prefer internal but have done it the other way - by just damping the casing which is already quite heavy.

I am still evaluating the hard drive bit but it may take awhile as my system is in a middle of some major changes so I have to wait for everything to settle down
a bit. At least I think it would not hurt anything Happy
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #142 on: January 11, 2011, 11:46:14 am »

I just can repeat myself. Use EAC and set it up like audiodidakt did, except the offset must be chosen for your drive. Then rip a non scrached cd. Change what EVER you like (if you change the drive, you have to set the offset for this again). Then rip the same cd again. Compare those files with hexcompare. It will show you every single bit and you will find, that every single bit is the same. If you still feel, that there is some difference, it is NOT the file!
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #143 on: January 11, 2011, 11:47:58 am »

OffTopic

Quote
I too prefer vinyl. Resolution is also higher than CD. Of course as usual this depends on the press.

That's an interesting one. Can you reason that out ?

If you like it ... I can. That is, I did somewhere, some time. So I'd have to dig it up.
But the result is the opposite. Happy

Waiting for yours first ... haha

Peter

I don't know about resolution as in measurement wise but vinyl always seemed to have more air and dimensionality than CD.
Dynamic range and bass at least on paper seems to favor CD but I have yet to find CDP/DAC that has better bass (quantity and quality)
and perceived dynamic range and transient response than LP. I have no idea why this should be though.
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
GerardA
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


View Profile
« Reply #144 on: January 11, 2011, 12:13:52 pm »

Quote
I too prefer vinyl. Resolution is also higher than CD. Of course as usual this depends on the press.

Well Peter, is it not the infinite samplingrate, that's making the difference?
Logged

asrock ->intel 6700/4GB/Samsung 850 SSD/Win 10() Pro /XXHE 2.09  Special (32) Clock: max ,SFS: 4  MC, Q1 = 14, Q2,3,4,5=0,0,0,2 Quad AP, No Invert / Playerprio = Belownormal / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = 3 / Mixed contigious / Unattended -> Minidsp 2x4HD (IIR and FIR)->  Mivoc AM80 / 300B / gainclone -> TDL TL/Seas Excell/ScanSpeak
Klinnilk
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


View Profile
« Reply #145 on: January 11, 2011, 01:02:40 pm »

"Even digitally recorded master transcribed to LP still sounds better than CD and that certain quality that I find desirable in LP is still there in those digitally recorded album"
This is often said by people who love the sound of a turntable.
Going back to the technical side: you add overtones and distortion to the signal when you play a record . On the playback process of a record, the stylus is resonating, the record is resonating(remember you can listen to a record without an amplifier and speakers because of the enormous mechanical energy you generate by playing records with a pick up system). These effects lead to this warm analog sound airiness and so on.
The information of a digital master tape must be converted to an analog signal, then you have the pressing of the mother record and from this mother you get the record you can buy for your turntable, all these processes lead to a loss of information not to more information.
Comparing the sound of a turntable to a classical live concert is very interesting, turntables generate their own sound, live music is very unspectacular no extra airiness or transparency. Music is just there.
So we are with this statement on a more interesting point: What is better music reproduction and how important is sound for good music reproduction?

Logged
GerardA
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


View Profile
« Reply #146 on: January 11, 2011, 01:20:10 pm »

@ Klinnilk,
I call this Stereotypes in Stereoland.
Distortion and resonances in speakers are a lot of times stronger than those in good vinyl recordplayers.
Nobody complaining about that?
Even on not to expensive speakers you can clearly hear the effect people here are talking about.
The funny thing is XXHE is so much better then digital replay some years ago and to a lot of people getting closer to the analogue sound.
Still I enjoy analogue better but with a mixed mood since digital has some strong points too.
At Peter's demonstration it was easy to hear that the higher sampling rates sounded closer to what I like from vinyl.
The naturalness and the true colours and timing of the sound.
In part it reminds me of the difference of analog and digital photography which is (or will be?) won by the latter..
Logged

asrock ->intel 6700/4GB/Samsung 850 SSD/Win 10() Pro /XXHE 2.09  Special (32) Clock: max ,SFS: 4  MC, Q1 = 14, Q2,3,4,5=0,0,0,2 Quad AP, No Invert / Playerprio = Belownormal / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = 3 / Mixed contigious / Unattended -> Minidsp 2x4HD (IIR and FIR)->  Mivoc AM80 / 300B / gainclone -> TDL TL/Seas Excell/ScanSpeak
Suteetat
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


View Profile Email
« Reply #147 on: January 11, 2011, 01:30:40 pm »

"Even digitally recorded master transcribed to LP still sounds better than CD and that certain quality that I find desirable in LP is still there in those digitally recorded album"
This is often said by people who love the sound of a turntable.
Going back to the technical side: you add overtones and distortion to the signal when you play a record . On the playback process of a record, the stylus is resonating, the record is resonating(remember you can listen to a record without an amplifier and speakers because of the enormous mechanical energy you generate by playing records with a pick up system). These effects lead to this warm analog sound airiness and so on.
The information of a digital master tape must be converted to an analog signal, then you have the pressing of the mother record and from this mother you get the record you can buy for your turntable, all these processes lead to a loss of information not to more information.
Comparing the sound of a turntable to a classical live concert is very interesting, turntables generate their own sound, live music is very unspectacular no extra airiness or transparency. Music is just there.
So we are with this statement on a more interesting point: What is better music reproduction and how important is sound for good music reproduction?



This is exactly why I said that there is this vinyl artifact. It is certainly not better in absolute term as far as accuracy, truth to source etc but heck, it sounds a lot nicer with it.
I agree that hearing live classical concert is a very different experience. It sounds a lot duller at first. In less than ideal hall, it could sound down right annoying.
I think I long ago stop thinking of getting my stero to sound like the real thing as far as classical concert is concerned. Perhaps small jazz band and such may be a bit easier to achieved as it is often performed amplified and we are listening through some kind of speakers anyhow. But hearing acoustic live band in small venue is still elusive. Now I pay attention to tonal balance and density, color, musicality and not neccessarily neutrality, whatever make me listen to music more and think about the equipment less and less, that's good music reproduction.
Logged

Intel i7 950 12GB DDR3 triple channel, Win7 64bit sp1 on SSD,
firewire -> Weiss INT202 -> Playback MPS-5-> ??

0.9z-4, KS-adaptive, buffer 256, Q1=1, no oversampling, SFS 100, straight contiguous,
minimum Clock Resolution, Scheme 2
Klinnilk
Audio Loudspeaker
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


View Profile
« Reply #148 on: January 11, 2011, 01:37:59 pm »

@GerardA
My statement is especially for the argument that digital recorded music sounds better on vinyl. It´s not a statement to the discussion Analog versus Digital. What i wanted to explain is simple that you loose  information on the way from Digital Master to Analog Record and therefore it is less accurate  Wink.
Logged
GerardA
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


View Profile
« Reply #149 on: January 11, 2011, 01:57:47 pm »

@Klinnilk,
Yeah, that's true, I miss some things from vinyl, but also from digital!
I made a digital rip of a 50's record some time ago, and playing it back on XXHE the thing I missed the most was the distortion!
With higher samplerate it was closer to the original, but that subject has been discussed before.
Logged

asrock ->intel 6700/4GB/Samsung 850 SSD/Win 10() Pro /XXHE 2.09  Special (32) Clock: max ,SFS: 4  MC, Q1 = 14, Q2,3,4,5=0,0,0,2 Quad AP, No Invert / Playerprio = Belownormal / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = 3 / Mixed contigious / Unattended -> Minidsp 2x4HD (IIR and FIR)->  Mivoc AM80 / 300B / gainclone -> TDL TL/Seas Excell/ScanSpeak
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #150 on: January 11, 2011, 02:02:12 pm »

Haha Gerard - maybe some small additions :

Quote
Distortion and resonances in speakers are a lot of times stronger than those in good vinyl recordplayers.

Theoretically true, but practially less useful. Try to think like this :
a. Any distortion in the source is multiplied by the gain (sort of);
b. Next any distortion (always square-like) can't be delt with by exactly that speaker you refer to.

So, 10 times wrongish, the other way around.

Ad b. :

Quote
The funny thing is XXHE is so much better then digital replay some years ago and to a lot of people getting closer to the analogue sound.

By stupid software alone ? come on ...
Ah, wait. See b. above. Happy
See ?

Quote
At Peter's demonstration it was easy to hear that the higher sampling rates sounded closer to what I like from vinyl.

Although you speak the truth for 100%, that higher sampling rate didn't show you anything even close to what it should be - and *can* be. Ehh, is ? I recall one person
a. knowing my sound reproduction;
b. who was at the demonstration;
c. owns an NOS1.
He may be more objective than I am (or can believed for) ...

Moral for now : don't bind any conclusions to what you heard so far, were that at random fine places or Amersfoort (ditch that experience Happy).

Quote
The naturalness and the true colours and timing of the sound.

Mine : the dullness, slowyness BUT ease (because of that) which makes you drill your ears with anything near by.
I can't help it. But with some "other" experience, it wants you to turn your head inside out, hoping for a more direct and more fresh sound. Something with attack. Something that doesn't show (grayish) cymbals without the attack preceeding it.

It is hard to explain, but the last example is killing; How can you listen to the sound of something, while knowing that that sound can only emerge after hitting it - hence the necessary attack. Oh, I listened to that long enough, but this was without the other experience. Now ? now my brains won't cope anymore. This is more serious that some stupid alinea wanting to make a point. It will make you ill, once you "know" how things should be.

Quote
In part it reminds me of the difference of analog and digital photography which is (or will be?) won by the latter..

Nice one. And, IMO is won for some 10 years by now, I think.
But ... not completely true. Digital photography can only win from analogue once you know what to NOT make pictures from, or under what conditions NOT to do that. So, it is more difficult, but once it's under your control you won't know about the differences anymore (read : I have been "struggeling" to make really nice pictures the first few years, and today I couldn't even think of what I did wrong at first ... making photos for over 30 years before that already).
Of course I am trying to find further analogy with audio, but I don't think I can. Or it should be about NOS stuff and its much better base, but its sheer infinitly more difficulties to finish it off properly (with the clear idea that I at last managed, after it being around for over 30 years).


One last hopefully nice thing to think about :
Audio - and its sound quality through loudspeakers is not subjective at all. NOT I said. First though, we need to be over that hurdle and leave the disturbing stuff behind us. I mean, choosing out of disturbances (distortions) and which sounds best, *is* subjective, because always when one thing gets better, the other goes the other way around. This changes when you can compare with reality; I don't need to tell you how a trumpet should sound to my or your speakers. Just blow on one, and you will know ...

Times are really changing ...
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
GerardA
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


View Profile
« Reply #151 on: January 11, 2011, 02:20:43 pm »

Well, I hope I can make this step into the new times soon too!

Talking about photography, I've been scanning my parents 40 years old holyday colour slides lately and am very surprised at how good they look with some good scanningsoftware. Much better than was possible 40 year's ago.
Now I have a lot of respect for the Agfa and Kodak engineers that were able to make so nice looking pictures, really artistic, although not as close to reality, but a littlebit like a painting. Some Kadachrome lovers around here maybe?
Logged

asrock ->intel 6700/4GB/Samsung 850 SSD/Win 10() Pro /XXHE 2.09  Special (32) Clock: max ,SFS: 4  MC, Q1 = 14, Q2,3,4,5=0,0,0,2 Quad AP, No Invert / Playerprio = Belownormal / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = 3 / Mixed contigious / Unattended -> Minidsp 2x4HD (IIR and FIR)->  Mivoc AM80 / 300B / gainclone -> TDL TL/Seas Excell/ScanSpeak
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #152 on: January 11, 2011, 02:29:17 pm »

Haha, not me. The only thing I can refer to is to the Kodak DCS-14 which was one of the early digital SLR cameras. lacking ...
a filter. A very similar filter we talk about in Audio, and it allowed to zoom in right to the 1:1 level, things not getting less sharp because of doing that (try that with any other camera). The NOS principle ...
One thing : you really had to know what to shoot, or otherwise you'd have aliasing in the picture ...
To a certain degree that counts for "plain NOS" the same. Know what to play and all sounds great. Leave out massive stuff though, or the distortion piles up and it will be quite messy.

That filter is just *needed*, but the implementation of it matters.
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
CoenP
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 818


View Profile
« Reply #153 on: January 11, 2011, 02:38:56 pm »

Imho this is all about the 'transparancy of the medium and not about sound quality per sé. I believe digital is more transparent than vinyl analog, though I now still have a preference for the latter. With digitalplayback is it with a great effort possible to get very close to the stuff that is stored in the medium. With stuff I mean the music including the processing distortions (mixingtables, bad psus or grounding, jitter in conversion to digital, clipping); this can be beautifull but also very disturbing. The question is: do we really want this transpareny on all our records?

What still puzzels me most is that XX still manages to get a very pleasant and revealing sound dispite the cr*p that me be stored in the bits.

On the topic of ripping: I believe bit identical rippings may very well sound different, regardless of powercords, clamps and weights. At this forum we make take as a fact that the dataretrieval is influencing sound quality. Though this may seem academic, noise may be recorded along on a magnetic bearer like a spinning disc and finds it way to the dac at playback. Also a second rip may be divided differently over the free memory chuncks of the storage medium and consequently induce a different jitter pattern at playback. If the playback chain is this sensitive, one can imagine other magnetic/electric phenomena having an effect on SQ (like data in a RAM buffer that is moved around or processes variably drawing currents from the psu, etc). I believe everyone that claims to hear a difference between rips.


regards, Coen

p.s. when confronted with the choice, I prefer beauty over accuracy. I have a (filterless) FOVEON SIGMA SD14 camera just for its dense colours and 3d-ness. Many generic CFA CANONs and NIKONs may be more accurate (sharper and more true to the real colours), but never get that special SD look and feel. One can also debate forever on this topic...
Logged

Settings: Qn: , SFS: , timeres: XT tweaks: , buf: 4096, driver: 8 ms,

Audio PC (jan 19): XXHE PC v1 with RAMdisk w.o. videocard and 1 of 2 cpu fans + BRIX/USB3 storage musicserver. ETN to Fibre converters (linear supplies), 500m SFP modules & 5m OM4 cable. Power cable PE not connected, together with nos1 and poweramp in separate "audio" powerstrip.

Clarixa set + Intona (or Lush 1m), Phasure NOS1a-75B G3 USB (buf 16 ms)-> Blaxius ->SE EL95 (0,8W triode) + cheap link to Abaqus 300W plateamps> Bastanis cable-> Bastanis Sagarmatha Duo ("DIY").

[other sources: TD124/3009SII-i/Grace F9/lounge LCR phono; Rega Planet 1997 vintage]
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16827



View Profile Email
« Reply #154 on: January 11, 2011, 03:18:25 pm »

Quote
I have a (filterless) FOVEON SIGMA SD14 camera just for its dense colours and 3d-ness.

Funny ... You don't want to know how much I have been looking between that DCS-14 and the Foveon back then. Both intrigued as much, but the Foveon couldn't cut it (ok, IMO) for the resolution. It took me a year to eventually get me a Canon, knowing that at least all was "right" in there (which was doubtful to me for both the others).

... as I used an oversampling Audio Note back then ...
(garage sale here within due time Happy)

In either case there's analogy with pictures (movies) and audio, and a lot I do is based on the possible visualization from pictures/movies. It's not the same, but elements are, and proof by the eye can be very helpful (by no means that can be subjective IMO).
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
CoenP
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 818


View Profile
« Reply #155 on: January 11, 2011, 03:29:42 pm »

Interesting!

The paralell with audio is that I beleive the foveon technology to be potentially superior to CFA (no AA filter, 3 layer tech). In its SD14/15 implementation the result can be very pleasing but is not allways accurate. Engeneers have perfected the three layer technology for the upcoming SD1. Sample pictures have been stunning, both accurate and beautifull. This is probably the equivalent of XX and NOS1 in digital playback!

regards, Coen

Logged

Settings: Qn: , SFS: , timeres: XT tweaks: , buf: 4096, driver: 8 ms,

Audio PC (jan 19): XXHE PC v1 with RAMdisk w.o. videocard and 1 of 2 cpu fans + BRIX/USB3 storage musicserver. ETN to Fibre converters (linear supplies), 500m SFP modules & 5m OM4 cable. Power cable PE not connected, together with nos1 and poweramp in separate "audio" powerstrip.

Clarixa set + Intona (or Lush 1m), Phasure NOS1a-75B G3 USB (buf 16 ms)-> Blaxius ->SE EL95 (0,8W triode) + cheap link to Abaqus 300W plateamps> Bastanis cable-> Bastanis Sagarmatha Duo ("DIY").

[other sources: TD124/3009SII-i/Grace F9/lounge LCR phono; Rega Planet 1997 vintage]
Flecko
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


View Profile
« Reply #156 on: January 11, 2011, 03:36:15 pm »

Quote
Also a second rip may be divided differently over the free memory chuncks of the storage medium and consequently induce a different jitter pattern at playback.
This would be a reasonable explaination for different sound qualities you get from the same data. There are for sure a lot of things inside the computer that can change the sound. Hardware and software can make a difference, as we all experience every day.
But It is important that we accept, that the data itself is not depending on things like powercords, cables, drives as long as everything stayes in the digital domain and is read out with propper set up software. Anything else would be nonsense.

Quote
I believe everyone that claims to hear a difference between rips.
I do beleave those poeple that claim to hear differences in different achieved data too. But we should never forget, that our ears and our brain is no gauged meassurement equipment. Perception can change by so many things like mood, expectations, things that somebody told us.... So everyone always should consider this, if he thinks he hears a difference and it is far better than before. It is a mental thing.
Logged

Software: Windows7 Ultimatex64SP1 | XXHighend 9z9b
Hardware: | Gigabyte X79-UD3 | i7-3820 | 16 GB DDR3 | OS on 128 GB Samsung SSD 830  | Music on 2TB WD Caviar Green | Seasonic X-660

XXHE Settings: | Engine 4 | Adaptive | Buffer=1024 | Q12345=[14,0,0,0,0] | xQ1=1 | Q5=3 | Scheme=3 | Mixed Contiguous with SFS=12 | 176.4kHz32bit | ArcPred + Peakextend | Clock=1ms |
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [All]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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 0.201 seconds with 19 queries.