XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
April 18, 2024, 02:43:38 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]
  Print  
Author Topic: 0.9u-11 & 0.9u-12 - just my thoughts  (Read 6126 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
manisandher
Crazy Audiophile
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2112

from-first-principles.com


View Profile WWW Email
« on: April 06, 2008, 01:03:18 am »

Hi Everyone,

As I’ve mentioned in another post, I had a protracted listening session last night (with 0.9u-11) and early this morning (with 0.9u-12). I was using system 1) in my signature (but with the RME FF800).

Here’s what I found:

Double Upsample:

Did not work with Mem box ‘unchecked’ and ‘DAC is 32 bits xxx KHz’.
Worked with Mem box ‘unchecked’ and ‘DAC is 20 bits xxx KHz’.

Very difficult to discern any consistent difference between Mem box ‘checked’ and ‘unchecked’. But if pushed to answer, I’d say I prefer ‘unchecked’ – it seems to sound slightly more ‘solid’ and precise.

My preference for upsampling or not really depended on the configuration:
a) with the soundcard in Master clock mode and DAC in PLL mode, I preferred upsampling - it seemed to smooth out the rough edges, give a blacker background and make things more 3D
b) with the soundcard in Master clock mode and DAC in RAM buffer mode, I preferred no upsampling – way too laid back with upsampling
c) with soundcard slaved to DAC, I definitely preferred no upsampling - upsampling took all the beautiful sparkle and ambience out of the music.

Quad Upsample:

Not tested. My DAC requires a dual AES/EBU input (may need to buy a single spdif to dual AES/EBU converter once RR release their 176.4 KHz material...).

Processor core:

Again, very difficult to discern any consistent differences. But if pushed to answer, I’d say I prefer ‘no appointment’  – it seems to sound slightly more lively (I may have to change my signature if I continue to find this...).

As I was using the RME, I couldn’t resist taking a few nice pics.

Mani.


* XXHE noise.jpg (29.3 KB, 593x182 - viewed 752 times.)

* XXHE Double Upsampled noise.jpg (29.51 KB, 593x183 - viewed 778 times.)

* Esoteric noise.jpg (30.21 KB, 594x183 - viewed 759 times.)

* Esoteric 2Fs noise.jpg (30.17 KB, 594x182 - viewed 787 times.)

* XXHE Double Upsample.jpg (138.43 KB, 1135x585 - viewed 801 times.)

* Esoteric 2Fs.jpg (141.14 KB, 1133x584 - viewed 787 times.)
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
Pages: [1]
  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 0.147 seconds with 19 queries.