Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Get a view of an entire thread on one page

Computer Audio Asylum

A new HighEnd Softwareplayer

194.229.73.62

A new and really excellent softplayer has become available. The limited group of fans that has had the opportunity to use the demo version reacts very enthousiastic. I am one of those happy few and as soon as I could buy the first non-demo release I did. If you take PC Audio seriously you should at least try the demo asap.

Leo

You can find it at : http://www.phasure.com/

Follow Ups:

XXHighend Demo window then.... nothing - SeVeReD 17:06:46 06/30/07 (1)
Well I installed XXHighend Demo on my test comp (winxp). It worked after installing Netframework 1.1 from MS update site. On the small speakers (definitely non-tweaked non audiophile computer) it sounded promising. I checked that my dedicated and tweaked for foobar Front End (Acer Aspire 9500 512 of ram winxp laptop bypassing kmixer by removing hardware in SoundAudioDevice and many processes shut off > Foobar/asio2k > Stello 100 usb Dac) had Netframework 1.1 already on it and installed by unzipping XXHighEnd-09b into it's own folder on the C: drive. I created a shortcut to XXHighEnd.exe on my desktop (just like my test computer) AND when I start it up
I see the XXHighend Demo window, click ok, it disappears
Then
Nothing. no player
I would really like to try it on my main audio system.
ALSO
Does this player only play WAV files? Or will it read my .cue files? I ripped my cds to a single wav file and let a cue file handle all the info... will this not work for your player? i know i know go to your forum... but AA is home for me.

Edits: 06/30/07 06/30/07
- RE: XXHighend Demo window then.... nothing - SeVeReD 20:16:12 06/30/07 (0)
  Did I read somewhere on the forums that someone said to try reinstalling directx? I googled install directx and it took me to MS site where I downloaded DirectX 9.0c End-User Runtime at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0A9B6820-BFBB-4799-9908-D418CDEAC197&displaylang=en
  It didn't change anything; still no player after clicking ok on the demo screen opening.
If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! - twystd 21:21:25 06/29/07 (10)
I too at first was a little put off by the terms, but I've checked it out. I went to the BD design forum, and found quite a few interested in the XX HighEnd player.

I registered to the Phasure.com site and saw that Bert was involved in the testing of the player, and left an introduction (Bert wouldn't be involved in anything shady). So far my computer hasn't developed any "social diseases".

I don't know how many of you folks know about Bert Doppenberg and BD Design, but he is very well respected in the European audio scene, as well as from a lot of us on this side of the pond as well. He's been doing it for quite a while, no newcomer that's for sure. He also runs a Forum on his site that is very informative, and has always been very forthcoming with both help and advice (one of the audio good guys).

He and the folks that use his forum have very high end systems, and if they are interested, thats more than enough to get my attention. I think it's definately worth a look. If and when I finally get my system finished I'll give it a try.

Reasons not to try it:

#1 He won't tell you how it works....I don't blame him if I spent all that time developing a player, I wouldn't tell anybody how it works either.

#2 If you download it your computer will turn green and fall off... See above post

#3 If He's not using ASIO it can't sound good... Who knows whether he is or not, whatever he's doing, it sounds good to a lot of people with excellent systems and ears.

#4 He wants money for it, unlike Foobar... Foobar is such a.... well the name said it, you really just about have to be a software engineer (like many here) to make it work right. If XX HighEnd works, I see it as a real bargain, saving my poor brain from all the anxiety I would go through with Foobar.

Currently I'm building a DAC, PC based music server, new amps, and new speakers, amongst other more mundane and pressing projects. A daunting list of tasks maybe, but I see that as nothing compared to the trepidation I have about being able to install and configure Foobar, before losing whats left of my mind. Sure would be sweet if it works!

twystd
- RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! - Dawnrazor 22:32:15 06/29/07 (9)
  #4 He wants money for it, unlike Foobar... Foobar is such a.... well the name said it, you really just about have to be a software engineer (like many here) to make it work right. If XX HighEnd works, I see it as a real bargain, saving my poor brain from all the anxiety I would go through with Foobar.
  
  This is a very valid point about Foobar. It is hard to configure to look good and do fluffy stuff like pictures, etc. However your point would be much much stronger if XX HighEnd would work!
  
  Foobar might be complicated, but at least it installed easily the 4-5 times I have done so. Winamp also loaded with no hiccups.
  
  Call me weird, but I would rather spend a weekend creating the look of a player and messing with output options a plugins, than paying for a player that wont install and I have to post on some forum just to get it to install.
  
  I am all for a simple player that non-pc people can use. In fact we as a PC audio community really need such a thing. So far, at least for me XX Highend is not it, since it doesnt even play.
  - RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! - twystd 10:26:43 06/30/07 (6)
    Dawnrazor, Ive read a lot of your posts, and consider you to be both reasonable and knowledgeable, but consider this.
    
    > > Call me weird, but I would rather spend a weekend creating the look of a player and messing with output options a plugins, than paying for a player that wont install and I have to post on some forum just to get it > > to install.> >
    
    If you are willing to spend a weekend fussing with Foobar, why not spend a little time with XXHighEnd, I doubt if it would take anywhere near a weekend. After all, it is still in the very first stages of release, and glitches should be expected.
    
    > > I am all for a simple player that non-pc people can use. In fact we as a PC audio community really need such a thing. So far, at least for me XX Highend is not it, since it doesnt even play.> >
    
    There are a lot of folks who have gotten it to run, some have a whole lot less technical savvy than yourself, so I don't think it's fair to say it "doesn't even play", obviously it does. It might be fair to say that your one attempt to get it to run was unsuccessful.
    
    Who knows, possibly you have deleted or disabled parts of your operating system, in order to make Foobar work, that it is interfering with the installation of XXHighEnd. I really don't know, but if you had a problem you might have given Peter a shot to straighten it out before giving up.
    
    I've done quite a bit of reading on Peters forum, and come to a couple of conclusions. One, it is not a finished product. Word had gotten out, and Peter was being urged by many to release it. Apparently it is good enough to allow folks to enjoy it, but there are still a few problems. The other is that when problems are pointed out Peter doesn't seem to get defensive, but sees it as an opportunity to improve it. At least that is my take, a little hard to understand because English is a 2nd language for him, however his English is MUCH better than my Dutch (or whatever).
    
    The gist is, I don't know what it sounds like because my system is not ready yet. I just want people on this forum, who do have a lot of knowledge, to give it a fair shot, and report back. I don't think half hearted attempts, and outright dismissals are constructive.
    
    twystd
    - RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! - Dawnrazor 18:16:45 06/30/07 (2)
      T,
      
      Much of what you write is true, and I appreciate what you are saying. I have made more than a few attempts to get this going. Others here are trying as well, but aren't having luck either.
      
      But after Peter's last post I doubt I'll try anymore. I am certain that it is not a languange thing.
      
      The other is that when problems are pointed out Peter doesn't seem to get defensive, but sees it as an opportunity to improve it.
      
      This has not been my experience at all unfortunately.
      
      I wish you the very best of luck on your system. If you need an easy to install, easy to setup (cover art, lyrics, crossovers, room correction, etc), powerful alternative to XXHighend e-mail me and I will be more than happy to get you going.
      - RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! - PeterSt 01:49:32 07/03/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! posted by Dawnrazor on June 30, 2007 at 18:16:45
        
        Hi,
        
        > I am certain that it is not a languange thing
        
        I won't use this as an excuse, but I excuse myself if I offended you. I really didn't try to, but just tried to put an (unlucky ?) example with some Ferrari to indicate that I just can't do this alone in cases.
        
        > But I'll get it going without your help. For you. Don't bother.
        
        This certainly might be dutch, prone to wrong interpretation. This will be about the "don't bother", which any dutch could interpret as "don't let it tire you if you don't want". The "for you" I meant just the same, and that I just *could* get it going without your help was because luckily someone else just jumped in at that time of writing. But it doesn't look good, I'll admit that. Sorry.
        That these really rough errors (demo -quit) shouldn't be there in the first place is very clear to me, but in cases (like this one) unavoidable. Maybe you want to checkout the origine of the OP, whom I asked to check right this out for himself first, but he was too anxious to post here first instead. Please don't blame him, as I don't either, and in the end there's only one to blame : me. Otoh, I tell you about this to show a little decency from my side, and it might explain things.
        
        Of course, all is in the context of you, having the problem, not helping me with it, so I'd be stuck if all of those having the problem wouldn't help. There's just nothing left to do for me then !
        
        Please, I tried to make that clear with the Ferrari example.
        
        Now, without -again- trying to offend you, I am much trying to get this player ready for you all, and it is not helping very much when you're only spreading the word that it just aint nothing much just because it isn't ready. For that matter, I was forced to provide something to get rid of the demo version (I know, I could give it for free), and I myself really was the last person wanting that. It grew like this over time.
        
        I am not trying to sell anything and merely like you all to have a good time with better quality playback. That I ask money for it is the result of further demands you out there have, will have, and ought to have. Please remember I started this all with writing the player for my own. It just grew into this ...
        
        I will help whenever I can, and so far I don't think you can prove otherwise. By this I'm not saying that I will have *all* of the answers, but at least I'll try my very best.
        I think (but who am I) that it is the most obvious that in order to get helped you (anyone) should put the problem or ask the question. Phasure.com is the place to be for that and passively waiting with the conclusion that the problem doesn't get away ... how can I deal with that.
        
        Lastly, this player is in beta, and it says so in the releasenotes, as well as that the releasenotes list the problems. The paying option is only, and really only there to get rid of the demo mode. I can show you dozens of emails and posts where I was urged for that.
        
        Now don't get mad at me because of anything in the above; if you feel you are anyway, it really can be my english only. Or it is just me, but then unintenional.
        
        Peter
      - RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! - twystd 22:21:46 07/02/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! posted by Dawnrazor on June 30, 2007 at 18:16:45
        
        Yeah, That last response from Peter WAS pretty defensive. I appreciate the offer for getting me started, hopefully I'll figure it out. Don't be surprised if you get a whining email from me some day!:> 0 Really do appreciate the offer. When I finally get my system up and running, I'd like to try both players, and report back.
        
        twystd
    - I'm wondering - SeVeReD 17:50:11 06/30/07 (2)
      "Who knows, possibly you have deleted or disabled parts of your operating system, in order to make Foobar work, that it is interfering with the installation of XXHighEnd. I really don't know, but if you had a problem you might have given Peter a shot to straighten it out before giving up."
      
      I'm running WinXP
      
      I'm wondering if this isn't my problem with getting XXHighend to run. If I've deleted/disabled something that I thought might not needed to run Foobar well. I had ok results in sound quality when I got rid of some processes and I ran msconfig and shut down as much as I dared which also helped Foobar sound better in some instances. I would think all players would benefit from this care... wonder what XXHighend would need that I shut down? I have a usb dac; so in Sounds and Audio Devices Properties to get around Kmixer I:
      
      "Bypassing Kmixer by Lynn
      
      "I think I have the answer for this issue.
      1. Open the Windows Control Panel
      2. Open Sounds And Audio Devices
      3. Select the Hardware Tab
      4. Select your sound card in the list
      5. Click Properties Button
      6. Select Properties Tab on the Sound Card Properties Panel
      7. Click on the Mixer + sign
      8. Select your sound card on the list
      9. Click Properties button
      10. Click option box 'Do Not Use Mixer Features On This Device'
      11. Click Apply, and then OK.
      12. Re-boot
      13. Windows Mixer will no longer use the device.
      There may be simpler series of steps to get a device out of Window's mixer, but I have tested the above and it works. The volume control for Windows will be disable (and assuming you have only 1 sound card, Windows will report 'no audio device). Foobar through ASIO will work fine and control the volume."
      
      I wonder if this could be a problem for the player... guess i'll go undo it. and see hehe
      
      btw I always like to mention bypassing Kmixer... this was a big big biggest improvement I heard when getting into computer audio. Presto does it a safer way by choosing another audio card.
      - RE: I'm wondering - Dawnrazor 18:23:02 06/30/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm wondering posted by SeVeReD on June 30, 2007 at 17:50:11
        
        Sev,
        
        i checked mine and I have been using my non audio pc, and it does map through the onboard audio, and I had the same demo window then nothing like you had....so I don't think that is it.
        
        thx well then it's not that n/t - SeVeReD 18:56:33 06/30/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I'm wondering posted by Dawnrazor on June 30, 2007 at 18:23:02
        
        ya didn't change anything for me when I switched it back to Use This Device
  - RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! - PeterSt 00:30:11 06/30/07 (1)
    Somehow you just don't WANT to get it;
    Of course you are right that you don't want to fuzz around with stuff which should work. But you really can compare it with this :
    
    You can buy this Ferrari for 100K (normal it's 400K), so it's a super bargain, and you have the money. It's brought to you house, and right away you want to try it.
    Sadly it won't start ...
    
    Now, what you actually do, is tell the man who brought it that you just don't wan't it anymore, and he doesn't need to bother to bring it to the garage. You just don't like cars which don't start. Period.
    
    Now read back. It all makes sense. But it's a stupid way to deal with your life.
    In the end there's one conclusion only : you actually don't want a Ferrari, or possibly don't even have a drivers license. :-)
    
    But I'll get it going without your help. For you. Don't bother.
    - RE: If Bert Doppenberg and crew are interested I am too! - Dawnrazor 17:44:14 06/30/07 (0)
      Somehow you just don't WANT to get it;
      
      Look around. I am not the only one having trouble. Art, Presto, Severed, Mercer also have reported problems. The fact is that I and others CAN'T seem to get it to work.
      
      Of course you are right that you don't want to fuzz around with stuff which should work.
      
      DUH. YOu admit that it should work, yet it doesn't. And then instead of taking responsibility and offering to help and find out what is wrong (thus improving your product) you launch into a false analogy (you forget to mention that I already have a Porsche in the garage that while requiring time to tweak, ALWAYS ran) concluding that I somehow deal with my life stupidly.
      
      But I'll get it going without your help. For you. Don't bother.
      
      HMM. Get it started? This does really seem to support the idea that this whole thing IS a coordinated attempt to "get it started" and not just happy people spreading the word.
      
      But I digress. With this kind of attitude, I doubt you will go that far. Particularly in high end audio. This is an industry where principals like Nelson Pass, Charles Hansen, Jim Winey, etc. routinely answer the phone, forums, and e-mail to help their customers with inane questions and bend over backwords to help.
      
      I for one won't bother.
      
      True colors Peter, true colors.
RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - unprotected sex - PeterSt 03:50:14 06/29/07 (23)
Hi all,

Excuse me for the title, but I had quite a good laugh reading all your posts and suspiciousness and all.

The actual reason I post here now, is because to my belief you are treating the OP (and Winnie too for that matter) quite unfairly. Mind you, so far you did not follow up on their advises to ask any question you want on the forum overthere (okay, you could catch a nasty desease, I know), and now you're blaming them on hoaxing the stuff because they don't answer your questions ?
Hmm ...

Ok. What's going wrong here (I think), is that indeed I created this player for people who just started to use computers to use email, and the group that formed overthere is expected to behave like that, hence it is them for whom I made the topics with outlays and all. If you try to communicate over in the end technical problems overhere, it just won't work and nobody is to blame. Well, nobody but yourselves because you just refuse to go there. ;-)

Otoh ... I am not here (first post, oops) to blame you of course, and I certainly won't. I, however, do ask to take the above into account, and that someone like the OP just is enthusiast about something he wanted to share with you. So would you please care to read his post about this to clear the air around that ? : http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=29.0

So, now this is of my chest, let's start again :-)

[reset]

Hi all,

Because I realized only yesterday that the community I address is from a less technical angle, while you out here most probably are the opposite, I tried to make a topic just for you. If you want, you can read it here : http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=112.0

I carefully tried to digest your needs, and hopefully put all the answers to the general stuff in that topic. If you want to know more, please ask away.

Btw, might you have put your question about "I receive a message Demo, that's it" overthere, you just would have got an answer right away : reinstall DirectX should do the job. But if not, we'll proceed on it.
And please note, it cannot be the intention to respond to such questions in forums all over the world. Okay ?

Then, you are right in your observations that the web pages (which actually is a forum only) may come to you as quite messy. I try my best though, and I'm constantly updating things according to remarks I perceive from here and there. Otoh, please keep in mind that I virtually may need 20 pages to make something clear for the community I originally addressed, whereas I myself would need one only. So it's just difficult, for me anyway.

Apart from the stuff on the page I created for you, I can do no more than tell you that this player was created for sound quality and sound quality only (and NOT for money btw !!). Since you're all here (I guess) to hunt for that, it doesn't make much sense to me to just not believe so, and stay away.

May we assume that we all know that all players sound different ?
Right, so I put my life in letting it sound the best of all. And not by coincidence, but intentional.

I read about your scepsis/needs about ASIO, KS, bit perfect and all, and actually I should blame it to my lousy english and "web pages" that you didn't discover it, while you're actually explicitly were looking for it, I suppose.
Never mind, as long as you now know that XXHighEnd afaik is the first Exclusive Mode Vista "KS" player.

Well, as I discover now, you (look at the latest posts) seem to be keen on expressing that a lean player is worthless again because everybody can do it. Right. If that were so, XX would sound the same as everybody's one line player. It just does not to *your* judgement. But since you're afraid of deseases ... well ...
:-)

Oh, somehow you are eager to think that you need to register in order to download the player. Where did you get that from ? did you even go there ? No such thing !

"How can I judge a player with a demo time of 6 minutes ?"
Yeah, right. You can't. But where did *this* now come from ?
Average playing time is 34 minutes, and then you restart. A zillion times if you can bear it, that keeping 72 euros in your pocket. :-)

This must be it for now.
Sorry I didn't reply to each of the posts individually ! next time I will.
Peter
- Hello...here's the problem... - Chris Garrett 20:36:21 06/29/07 (1)
  there's a perception that the original poster is/was a plant to advertise your product. This is against our rules. There is a manufacturer's Asylum, where for a small fee, you can make an official announcement for any product that falls under the Audio umbrella.
  
  The original poster has no history here and shows up touting a new product that nobody has heard about and so that peaked some eyebrows.
  
  As a manufacturer, you need to register your Moniker as an M: Manufacturer, so we all know which side of the fence you reside. Furthermore, as an Industry type, you may only answer direct questions regarding the products you sell, or you may post to clear up any misinformation regarding said products. Wholesale commentary on competitor's products, or just general comments regarding your products are verboten.
  
  I'm going to leave this thread up because I believe the OP bought the software and is just an enthusiast who wants to share his find.
  
  Thanks, Chris
  - RE: Hello...here's the problem... - LaMarmotte 00:28:13 06/30/07 (0)
    Thank you Chris !
- First Exclusive-Mode KS Player? Are you sure? - Scrith 15:34:56 06/29/07 (2)
  I question this because when I am using KS with Foobar2000 under Vista I am not able to play audio from any other application.
  - RE: First Exclusive-Mode KS Player? Are you sure? - PeterSt 16:05:13 06/29/07 (1)
    Well, I said "afaik", and I still think so. I mean, if in Foobar this would have been the case, we all would have known. But :
    
    I think from KS is known that it always behaves like that, just because it goes around KMixer ("Audio Engine" in Vista) and mangles with all officialities (that's why MS always told that it's unofficial, and that's why Foobar tells it's in trial phase -> don't know anymore whether they still tell this for 0.9x).
    
    The point would be that everything (except ASIO of course) traverses the audio stack and is emulated where necessary (like (IIRC) even Direct Sound officially doesn't exist anymore, but can just be run for backwards compatible reasons -> it's all emulated).
    
    The interesting part comes when you are not able to shut down the sound by means of the volume mixer (clicking the speakers in various combinations, or moving the sliders ditto).
    Even when you can't shutoff the sound (which would be a good sign), then you must still somehow monitor the output sampling rate. Thus, when you set the device to, say, 48K, it should output 44K1 really when you feed that. Outside of Exclusive mode I really can't get it to do that ...
    
    I never got Foobar/KS running on my Vista, but I didn't really try long. But MS has official statements that KS ceased to exist (which would be logic, because indeed it interfered with KMixer).
    I'm sure you can still use it, but latency would even be more than it already was.
    
    PS: If you's state that you can't shutoff the sound, I will get it running, and my soundcard will show the output sample rate.
    - RE: First Exclusive-Mode KS Player? Are you sure? - Scrith 12:07:06 06/30/07 (0)
      Interesting, but I'm fairly certain that KS still exists in Vista, and tht Microsoft knows about it, because with the Benchmark DAC1 USB I am using Microsoft's USB driver. :-)
      
      By the way, the lead engineer for the Benchmark DAC1 USB (which is probably the most well-known DAC in the world, and is often credited with getting a large number of audiophiles really interested in high-quality DACs in the first place) has a very, very long (38 pages?) thread about the latest version of the DAC (which supports USB input) of the DAC at Head-Fi.org in which he discusses many of the technical details about the DAC and the decision to go with the standard Microsoft drivers (which he claims are much better than most people realize and that the problems most people are seeing with them are usually the fault of the hardware in question, further explaining that their DAC1 USB is the first and only DAC, at this point at least, that is able to support 96K output using these drivers). Anyway, the thread is worth looking at and contains some solid information from a well-respected professional, rather than the seemingly endless speculation and theories from amateurs and laymen so common on internet audiophile websites.
- Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - Presto 12:52:03 06/29/07 (8)
  Peter:
  
  Sorry about the whole 6 minute thing. I was going by an incorrect interpretation of what someone else was saying.
  
  I have Windows XP SP2, with Microsoft NET Framework 2.0 installed. I read through the instructions (briefly) and I got the "Demo" window and no player like many others are getting. Are you getting feedback from your XP Beta testers? Are you testing on XP yourself? Or just Vista?
  
  Many people here are really reluctant to go to Vista not because of audio but simply because we've all learned that it's often better to wait when a new OS comes out until it's more stable and known issues are resolved.
  
  My "Free" advice?
  
  I think it's great you are marketing a "task-specific" product like this, but the thing is, whether a software product is $72 or $720 people have largely come to expect that installation should be done after reading a short instruction list or a "readme" and then using an installer.
  
  There is something counter-intuitive about running this program under XP and people don't want to sift through forums to get BASIC installation instruction. Forums are usually a last resort for people with atypical setups.
  
  I think if you wrote a small description of WHAT this product does and why it is special and how to install it (without the need to go to forums) people would be more receptive about trying it. You just said it best
  
  "XXHighEnd (afaik) is the first Exclusive Mode Vista "KS" player."
  
  Now we're talking! Exclusive mode Vista "KS" Player. That small sentence speaks volumes about your product.
  
  There is my constructive criticism.
  
  But we do (as a community) appreciate people who are writing audio software for the new Vista OS. Some companies are still not even supplying Vista drivers for their HARDWARE! So it's nice that people are investing their efforts into using Vista to it's full potential for audio.
  
  Pardon our skepticism, but once in a while we get a "new player" come around. Although we're really cynical at first, we do ULTIMATELY (collectively) try each player and give it a fair shake.
  
  Welcome to the computer audio asylum. :o)
  
  Cheers,
  Presto
  - RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - PeterSt 14:49:35 06/29/07 (1)
    Presto, thank you.
    So ... except for a handful of real beginners experiences I received only one post of the "Demo" message exactly like you describe it. This person (I don't even know why) reinstalled DirectX : http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=102.0
    However, in the beginning I heard this more often, and it's always out of my sight why this even *could* help. I can only imagine that the sequence as indicated in http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=11.0 wasn't applied, possibly because one thinks "I already have that".
    Since I never encountered this myself, and there doesn't seem to be any message (hence real error, trapped or not), there's no way for me to know where to look (for).
    But *if* you could just try to reinstall the latest DirectX version AGAIN, I'd be very happy to know what came of that.
    
    I opted for Vista because of the (IMO huge) opportunities. However, because obviously in my beginnings it wasn't there, as a kind of emergency "nothing to do else", I started with the XP version, being Engine #1 at that time. This is the one which actually can operate with a 112 sample buffer (might it mean anything to you), and it was made for unsigned bit perfect drivers (like my RME Firaface 800 MME drivers -> which is only an SPDIF passing through soundcard, and not my DAC).
    Although obviously I tried my best from the beginning with this version, to my own surprise it beat all (I knew). Of course this version still exists (in Engine #1 version), although chances are small that you can use it in bit perfect means.
    To continue this saga (just quit if you're bored), from off Vista RTM (december 2006) the struggle began to download the unknown for a week or so, 4 months later actually kind of giving up on things because people didn't want to wait anymore for XX. Mind you, Bert Doppenbert (mentioned by Klaus today) received XX, after we both very extensively testing all we could find for the Win environment. And he receives customers ...
    When I actually gave up Vista because of pressure I felt myself, I started to work on a version for XP which at least could run there (not bit perfectly) and to my own surprise even that sounded better than "anything else" (this is Engine #2). #2 is an unextendable kind of in between version, but with more possibilities than #1 *and* it turned out that both #1 and #2 performed very well under Vista.
    The latter I liked, until I found out that Vista is resampling all over the place (shared mode), which drew me back to #3, and after a break of a month or so, I suddenly got the hang of it.
    In the end that's how #3 got posted as well, and it really is without "soul" yet.
    Currently all versions (engines) are in lack of something. The help.htm explains this extensively (when to use which).
    For you with XP I'd just try it without bit perfect drivers (outside KS, outside ASIO) you may not find anyway. So far there's really nobody expressing negatives about it, or it must be AA and the post saying "I'm not sure I heard a difference, and if so, it might have been the placebo effect" (similar).
    There are many things which occur, but which maybe must be pointed out first (we all had to learn to listen). So far I did not do that, to keep things objective, mainly for myself because I never thought I could do it alone (or should).
    Besides that Vista is bit perfect for everyone, there's kind of outrages dynamics in there once your speakers don't really cope with the "sharp" accuracy it can unveil. Very hard to explain, and a puzzle for many weeks for all of us, but it can be provoced with "Doubling", and pronounced with Upsampling (#3). A gadged which makes you drop from your chair (I promise), but hust right once the speakers are adjusted to this crazyness (I know this sounds completely stupid, but is related to slightly out of phase xover filters (hence time alignment), which is unnoticable with any player, but "overdriven" with XX #3/Doubling.
    Now start to call me cracy. :-)
    Right.
    I -of course- agree with your good remarks about installing intuitively and all, but it really needs the experience first to be able to to just that. And mind you, one of the "mistakes" could be that there's just no installer, of which I thought it was the best thing (man, if you're not careful you get SQL/Server installed with screencopy software).
    So again, so far (after beginnings) the really only thing I encountered was just your error (and only once), and there's really no off line support (hence all what people bothered is on that forum).
    Well ... wait a minute, I see there's now Mercman with the same under Vista.
    So what do you guys do eh ?
    :-)
    Now I must be careful that not *this* is going to be off line support. ;-)
    Maybe you both browse briefly through this thread http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=48.0 and let me know what came from that. For Vista I'd say there's very little chance, but who knows.
    Thanks,
    Peter
    
    PS: or follow this one : http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=105.msg544#msg544
    Oops.
    
    Edits: 06/29/07
    - RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - artcheng@netvigator.com 09:27:47 06/30/07 (0)
      Dear Peter,
      
      I also had the same problem. Installed Directx again but no use...
  - RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - Mercman 13:53:27 06/29/07 (5)
    Peter,
    
    I'm running Vista Business and getting the "Demo Window" with no program like Presto.
    - RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - PeterSt 16:29:07 06/29/07 (3)
      As far as I can tell currently (for Vista) you'd be missing an assembly 1.0.2902.0 which would be from dotnet 1.0 ...
      No, I do not ask you to download dotnet 1.0 ...
      
      This is stupid ...
      I'll be back on it tomorrow.
      - RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - Mercman 16:43:04 06/29/07 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... posted by PeterSt on June 29, 2007 at 16:29:07
        
        Thanks Peter.
        
        Steve
        
        RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - PeterSt 04:26:45 06/30/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... posted by Mercman on June 29, 2007 at 16:43:04
        
        Somehow the guy I'm trying to solve this with is out of reach;
        Currently I can't do any better than trying to provide a message and proceed from there. http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=118.0 (0.9c).
        Thanks.
        
        Edits: 06/30/07
        
        RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - PeterSt 07:41:36 06/30/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... posted by PeterSt on June 30, 2007 at 04:26:45
        
        Never mind. I'm near to the solution now.
    - RE: Hey Peter. Thanks for popping in. Some comments... - PeterSt 15:19:26 06/29/07 (0)
      Working on this right now (but the person overthere may have gone to bed http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=105.msg550#msg550 ).
      
      I would work it out with you just the same, but not here then please !).
      But if you have the time, I'll work it out with JohanZ there.
      
      Thanks,
      Peter
- Main window needs a proper WM_SIZE handler - andy_c 09:36:32 06/29/07 (1)
  The first thing I noticed about this player was when I dragged the sizing handle of the main window, the entire main window and all its child windows would flash repeatedly.
  
  This is due to an incorrect implementation of the WM_SIZE handler for the main window. Apparently the entire window is being invalidated or updated when only the region that's uncovered by the resize operation should be invalidated.
  - RE: Main window needs a proper WM_SIZE handler - PeterSt 15:21:14 06/29/07 (0)
    Thanks for the advise !
    I know I must work this out, and to my belief the progress bar at the bottom is causing it.
- Thanks for posting and introducing yourself - Christine Tham 06:43:15 06/29/07 (6)
  Hope everything goes well for you and your player. And thanks for maintaining a sense of humour about this.
  
  As for Vista exclusive mode, you are probably right in that you may be the first kid on the block with a "player" (although Sonar also has exclusive mode support, plus WaveRT support, pretty soon after Vista launch, but then Sonar is not really a "player" as such).
  
  I played around with Vista exclusive mode and WaveRT earlier this year pretty soon after I received Vista via my MSDN subscription (which wasn't easy, because the only WaveRT driver that was easily available was the Microsoft HD Audio driver for RealTek). My conclusion was there's still a long way to go before we approach the sort of performance and quality we get today with good ASIO drivers. The RealTek WaveRT driver wasn't very good - high latency, and it seemed to be only 16 bits in resolution - someone on this forum has already confirmed that by demonstrating that if you try to send 24 bit data, what's coming out of SPDIF has only 16 bit effective resolution.
  
  Problem is, none of the "serious" pro audio manufacturers are writing WaveRT drivers. My guess is we are at least a year away before we get good WaveRT drivers that truly achieve low latency. Vista Exclusive mode by itself doesn't necessarily achieve low latency, all it does is prevent multiple applications from using the driver at the same time.
  
  I think that's why you find that some people here will continue to prefer ASIO, at least in the short term. I would encourage you to support ASIO as an interface if you can - it's quite easy to program in, just have a look at the SDK.
  
  By the way, if you are sucking the entire file into memory before playback (my guess based on klaus' post), I would suggest (based on my own experience) that this may not be the best approach. Yes, you could potentially reduce jitter and noise from hard disk access or optical drive spinning, but there are other ways of mitigating these issues (trust me - much better ways). The problem with very large buffers is that it won't be cached in L1 or L2, which means you are doing a lot of main memory transfers. This can cause impaired performance (ie. higher jitter) from non-uniform memory wait states, Windows virtual memory management, and even EMI from all those memory bus activity. There's research dating back from the 80s that highlight issues with large buffering. Maybe even earlier - mainframe guys keep reminding me nothing is new under the sun.
  
  Take a lesson from people who write DAWs and DSPs for a living, who have had a lot of experience dealing with these issues. You are probably better off maintaining a relatively small buffer, that fits entirely within L1 cache (if possible), so that memcpy transfers to the audio device become relatively deterministic (in fact, ideally, you want the core playback round trip to operate entirely out of L1 cache). This is hard to do given that Windows is inherently non real time, and this is why the very short signal path of ASIO becomes important. Vista exclusive mode on the other hand still has a very long signal chain - several pro audio experts warned Microsoft about this early on in the Vista development cycle, but Microsoft didn't listen, which is why pro audio manufacturers are not very enthusiastic about Vista.
  
  Lastly, rather than putting activation and time limits on your player, and trying to charge people for it, I would suggest you may be better off publishing it in open source, and request a donation if someone appreciates your work. That way, you won't piss people off from trying your player, you mitigate the "trust" issue about installing your code, and hopefully you get other people helping you improve the code as well (for free).
  
  Anyway, hope you don't think I'm trying to criticize you or anything. Just trying to offer some alternative ideas based on my experience. Feel free to ignore it.
  - RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself - PeterSt 07:22:44 06/29/07 (5)
    Not at all I think you critisize anything. No way.
    Now, I won't do it the other way around just the same, but I really think your presumptions are wrong. Think of this :
    
    There are standard means of producing sound via the Windows OS. One example is your one line of code (as per your other post), implying Direct Sound obviously. But there are many more ways, which under the realm of Vista are kind of endless (or to your creativity if you want).
    So, one of your presumptions is the poor latency the player perceives, and I really don't know where your get that from (did you read the post I referred to ?). But it's okay. However ...
    
    It is kind of sad (for me) that while you obviously have the best intentions in telling me what might be better for results, can't hold any truth anymore because your base is wrong. Also, if you (and if you like to :-) follow what I do, you see that I just NOT chose ASIO because it just doesn't sound good. And this is not because *I* think it doesn't sound good, it is because a whole group judges like that (compared to XX, not compared to anything else).
    
    Ok. I don't want to offend your knowledge (I really don't), but it would be good to have read that my virtual latency really is one SAMPLE, instead of explaining to me that I'd better use ASIO for good latency (whatever latency would be worth in the context of an audio player; I don't judge in THIS context).
    
    I hope to challenge you to read this page now, by implying a 1 sample latency. This needs context, and the context is overthere.
    
    Lastly, I'd really hope that we all could stay away from (charismatic) statements like Exclusive Mode is worth about nothing and still wandering the whole audio stack and all;
    If you out here keep on putting statements like this which everybody copies, it's okay with me and I stay alone with whatever it is my knowledge is. But again, please, do not connect to it -as implied- that any ASIO player is better.
    
    But maybe you didn't as I said "implied".
    
    Thank you,
    Peter
    - RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself - Christine Tham 17:32:19 06/29/07 (4)
      *** I really think your presumptions are wrong. ***
      
      Well, like I said, I am only speaking from my experience (over 20 years - I wrote a thesis on computer music playback in the 80s). Feel free to ignore it.
      
      *** one of your presumptions is the poor latency the player perceives ***
      
      No, that is NOT what I am saying at all. I realise English is probably not your first language, so my apologies for not making this clear. The reason I bring up the issue of latency is to do with the length of the signal path. There are of course other issues associated with latency, but they are less important from a pure music playback context.
      
      Vista in exclusive mode still has a long signal path compared to a good ASIO implementation. I didn't make up this statement - you can measure the difference yourself (it's about an order of magnitude - ie 50-100ms vs 5-10ms).
      
      Why is this bad? Refer to my previous post about issues with jitter and predictability in the signal path. Again, I am not making this up - these are issues that are well documented, and need to be addressed in high speed communications and networking, as well as in DAW and DSP implementations.
      
      *** I just NOT chose ASIO because it just doesn't sound good. ***
      
      This kind of statement is meaningless without substantiation. Surely it depends on the implementation. Are you really saying ALL ASIO implementations don't sound good? Have you tried them all?
      
      The truth is there are good and bad implementations. At the end of the day ASIO is just a specification. It has the *potential* to allow a good implementation, and today I would assert that it's much more likely to find a good ASIO implementation than a good WaveRT implementation (in fact, I'm struggling to think of one pro audio manufacturer with concrete plans for writing a WaveRT driver).
      
      *** I'd really hope that we all could stay away from (charismatic) statements like Exclusive Mode is worth about nothing and still wandering the whole audio stack and all ***
      
      Now, I never said that (and I wouldn't exactly call myself "charismatic" - but I think you are thinking of a different word!). What I said was exclusive mode does not really bypass the Windows audio stack. That doesn't mean it's worthless, but it doesn't necessarily reduce the length of the signal path. Again, I am not making this up. Go and read the documentation on MSDN or the WinHEC microsite. If you want to believe otherwise, fine, but I would urge you - speak to someone at Microsoft - maybe at the next Tech Ed if you don't have a Microsoft account rep.
      
      Why is the length of the signal path important? I've tried to give you a few hints in my previous post, but I suspect you didn't understand what I was trying to say. Never mind, as I've said before you don't have to believe me. But if you get a chance, talk to comms engineer or even someone who implements DSPs for a living. My knowledge is actually rusty, because this is not my speciality, but there are people who know this stuff really well. Believe me, people who do this for a living are obsessed about it - in high speed comms when you are dealing with signals in the GHz bandwidth you can actually measure differences in jitter caused by shaving clock cycles off the signal path and increasing predictability.
      
      *** But again, please, do not connect to it -as implied- that any ASIO player is better. ***
      
      Again, I have never said this. My advice was that you may want to consider supporting ASIO, since there are a number of really good ASIO implementations but there are virtually no WaveRT implementations, good or bad. ASIO is designed from the start to provide a short signal path, and a good ASIO implementation will follow the principles I mentioned in my previous post (ie. executing a very tight playback code entirely from L1 cache in kernel mode using a small, but tunable buffer within the driver itself). Of course not all ASIO implementations do this. And of course if you use something like ASIO4ALL or ASIO2KS you are actually LENGTHENING the signal path, not shortening it, so no surprises if it doesn't sound good (or different).
      
      But regardless of my comments, I wish you the best in your efforts and hope you end up with something good.
      - I've been trying to say this about ASIO emulators all along. - Presto 10:05:29 06/30/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself posted by Christine Tham on June 29, 2007 at 17:32:19
        
        CT: "And of course if you use something like ASIO4ALL or ASIO2KS you are actually LENGTHENING the signal path, not shortening it, so no surprises
        if it doesn't sound good (or different)."
        
        I just have failed to say it so eloquently.
        
        Cheers,
        Presto
      - RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself - PeterSt 02:25:42 06/30/07 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself posted by Christine Tham on June 29, 2007 at 17:32:19
        
        Christine,
        
        This is funny ... For me you hit every nail on the head. And, from now on maybe I shouldn't use the word "presumption" (negative) anymore. You clearly know what you are talking about (says he :-) but somehow you assume I don not, while *I* am the one who created this player. So, you work from (good !) theories, while I applied just those. Please read your own last post, and take it that I did.
        
        But what's going on here then.
        
        1. I don't think you listened and compared yet, and probably you'll give me the "but it doesn't work". Fine. You still didn't listen, and teach me how to go about. I like that, because I like to learn, but you're ignoring the, say, fact that I maybe should tach you. Mind you, maybe.
        
        2. You seem to know how I work. Trust me, you do not. This, I think, is the actual reason that there seems to be some disagreement, btw only showing in the discussion, and not so much in statements or presented "facts" (yeah, yours about my way of working).
        
        It is clear to me that you operate from theories only.
        It must be clear to you (by now) that I operate from the exact same theories, with the difference that I applied them in a physical workout (mind you, as per today).
        
        *** DO NOT take the below as a row of accusements ... please ***
        
        You "state" that the way I applied them can't be right, because ASIO is theoretically better.
        
        You say that I should listen to MS people, but again you talk from theories only, and again you didn't bother to follow the threads I gave you, which at least should give you the hunch I did.
        Besides following my posts in particualr threads, you could have noticed that there is no MS guy so far on this complete planet who could give answers to questions in "my" area.
        If you had read out the AVS thread I referred to, you had drawn the conclusion that the elements for this MS created are just elements and THEY don't know how to deal with the combination. Mind you I do.
        
        If you would have followed my writings (how could you), you would have read that WaveRT is near to a hoax. Otoh, if this is your interest or work, you should know that WaveRT exists for a loooong time. Do you ?
        Moral : all hype about WaveRT is ... a hype.
        
        *** DO NOT take the above as a row of accusements ... please ***
        
        ... since I like the way you talk to me, and it's really about helping out which I appreciate. But again, you don't know what I'm doing.
        And I know, my row above talks in secrets. I like that (by now, I must say), since there really was nobody to help out on this very planet to help me with it. Just because of that, I like to keep it with me. :-)
        
        What I do like, is showing off with a player which can do things, other players don't. That is, as long as you out there like the results.
        And remember, I'm far from finished. Also you could search phasure.com for Engine#4 ... (not much info, but anyway).
        
        A few superfluous comments maybe, since we already agree (trust me) :
        
        > I wrote a thesis on computer music playback in the 80s). Feel free to ignore it.
        
        I don't ignore anyone. But this is 2007, and e.g. what could not be done in XP can be done in Vista. :-)
        
        > The reason I bring up the issue of latency is to do with the length of the signal path
        
        Right.
        
        > Vista in exclusive mode still has a long signal path compared to a good ASIO implementation.
        
        Wrong. Not the way I apply it. And get a listen on a good playback system.
        
        > Why is this bad? Refer to my previous post about issues with jitter and predictability in the signal path. Again, I am not making this up - these are issues that are well documented, and need to be addressed in high speed communications and networking, as well as in DAW and DSP implementations.
        
        Right. And not because you say it, but because I say it. haha.
        
        > This kind of statement is meaningless without substantiation.
        
        Luckily here we're not at Hydrogen.
        It may be hard to follow all I say (in my poor english), but if I say this was excessively tested on the best systems we could find, it should just do for a normal human being who is just able to check it out. Do please do that. Start with Engine#2 on XP of which you know it's not even bit perfect. Grab a soundcard of which you can adjust the buffersize, and compare.
        You are allowed to reject everything, but you would be the very first really, and I would like you to express what and how and why and all. Not to prove your findings, but to prove I am wrong and how it is possible that you then say so. Hence ... I've got something to do again.
        When you are uncertain about #2, proceed to Vista with #3. Mind the Double options on both engines.
        
        > The truth is there are good and bad implementations. At the end of the day ASIO is just a specification. It has the *potential* to allow a good implementation,
        
        The only thing I could do obviously, is using what's provided with the players around, including usbaudio.de for direct USB ASIO implementation.
        What I could have done, is write my own ASIO implementation, which I just did not because, well, messy stuff in there. Call me crazy.
        More importantly, all ASIO implementations have the same characteristics fo sound quality (perceivement).
        Maybe it helps you if I say that I like the Wavelab(5) implementation the best (we could agree here, which just would be nice for the discussion).
        But it's "nothing" compared to what I achieve (I don't even like to talk in "I" this and that, and I'd rather connect it to the more distant player).
        
        > Now, I never said that (and I wouldn't exactly call myself "charismatic"
        
        I do. :-))
        
        > Go and read the documentation on MSDN or the WinHEC microsite.
        
        This makes me smile.
        Trust me, all what's really needed cannot be gotten from any documentation anywhere. You'd need the skill of all the bits and pieces throughout the net *and* the documentation, to draw the proper conclusions. If you don't believe me on this, you keep on being stuck in this documentation, but which should not imply I don't know it. I go around it though (hey, am I ignorant).
        
        > Why is the length of the signal path important? I've tried to give you a few hints in my previous post, but I suspect you didn't understand what I was trying to say. Never mind, as I've said before you don't have to believe me
        
        Remember for the next time : I believe you because it's just my thinking, and also I never said I didn't believe you.
        Besides all, the first time that *I* copy words or thinking from someone, yet has to come. Ignorant as hell. ;-)
        
        > My advice was that you may want to consider supporting ASIO, since there are a number of really good ASIO implementations but there are virtually no WaveRT implementations,
        
        Ok, this I don't get. I trust it you have a good purpose for saying this. The only thing I can connect to it, is that you say that WaveRT is to fail anyway.
        One time, for my own satisfaction, I will have created an ASIO driver. Just because it *will* sound different. For now there are other priorities, like supporting FLAC/WMA. And the "install" pbs of course.
        
        > And of course if you use something like ASIO4ALL or ASIO2KS you are actually LENGTHENING the signal path, not shortening it, so no surprises if it doesn't sound good (or different).
        
        Careful here. Assuming you just *will* have jitter. Would you state that least is best ?
        :-)
        
        Thank you,
        Peter
        
        RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself - Christine Tham 20:36:58 07/01/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself posted by PeterSt on June 30, 2007 at 02:25:42
        
        This will probably be my last post on this subject, because you seem to have difficulty in actually understanding what I am saying. Perhaps it's language barriers, perhaps not, but clearly it will be a struggle going forward. And in any case, I've said what I wanted to say - it's up to you what you do with it.
        
        *** somehow you assume I don not, while *I* am the one who created this player. ***
        
        Actually no, i haven't made any assumptions about what you do or don't know. I have not visited your forum, and have not downloaded your player, and I don't intend to, so my comments have nothing to do with what you have or haven't done.
        
        My post was simply in response to your comment that my presumptions are wrong. All I'm saying is that you can validate them yourself by actually measuring the latency of the signal chain, reading up on documentation and actually talking to people (not myself). Of course, if you don't want to, and if you believe no one else is smarter than you, then hey that's your call.
        
        *** It is clear to me that you operate from theories only. ***
        
        Well, if you recall I gave you sample latency data for Vista exclusive mode using the RealTek HD audio driver, vs a good ASIO implementation. How did you think I arrived at the data, from theory?
        
        My point really was go and measure it yourself, and compare. Otherwise you are the one talking theory, not practice.
        
        Ironic, isn't it - I quote actual measurements, you so far haven't shown any, and you're accusing me of operating from theory? :-)
        
        *** Wrong. Not the way I apply it. ***
        
        Well, I have no idea how you have implemented your player. All I'm suggesting is for you to measure the latency, and you will know.
        
        *** there is no MS guy so far on this complete planet who could give answers to questions in "my" area. ***
        
        Well, what can I say, you obviously are not short of self-confidence!
        
        *** The only thing I could do obviously, is using what's provided with the players around, including usbaudio.de for direct USB ASIO implementation. ***
        
        By "ASIO implementation" I meant *driver* implementation, not *player* implementation. I think you've misunderstood what I was trying to say, which really do not make any sense from the perspective of a user-mode application (ie., a "player").
        
        So if what you have been trying is various players using the usbaudio ASIO driver, then you have completely missed the point of what I was trying to say. In fact, I would *expect* all ASIO enabled players to more or less sound the same if using the same ASIO driver. That's the whole point of using ASIO, it abstracts out player implementation differences so the primary determinant of sound quality is the driver itself.
        
        I wouldn't necessarily consider the usbaudio ASIO driver to be a "good" ASIO driver, nor would I consider the chipsets it supports to be "high end" (in fact, very much the opposite). So I am not sure how that supports your belief that "all ASIO implementations have the same characteristics fo sound quality". If your point is "all ASIO enabled players kind of sound the same for a given ASIO driver" then good, that's intentional and by design.
        
        *** The only thing I can connect to it, is that you say that WaveRT is to fail anyway. ***
        
        This is another example of why I said you have a tendency to completely misunderstand what I was trying to say. In fact I said almost the opposite. My point was that there doesn't appear to be *any* good WaveRT drivers today - the only one I could get hold off was 16-bit only and had high latency (confirmed by actual measurements, not theory). And I don't know any pro audio manufacturers planning on writing WaveRT drivers. So my guess is good WaveRT implementations are at least a year away - I don't know how you can possibly imterpret that to me thinking "WaveRT is going to fail".
        
        Oh, I forgot, you think WaveRT is a "hoax." Well, if it is, then it doesn't really matter what I think, does it?
        
        RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself - PeterSt 01:04:15 07/02/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself posted by Christine Tham on July 01, 2007 at 20:36:58
        
        > This will probably be my last post on this subject, because you seem to have difficulty in actually understanding what I am saying.
        
        So true ...
        
        if you write things like this :
        
        > My advice was that you may want to consider supporting ASIO, since there are a number of really good ASIO implementations but there are virtually no WaveRT implementations,
        
        and I tell you that I don't understand what you're saying, which then you put out of any context like this :
        
        > *** The only thing I can connect to it, is that you say that WaveRT is to fail anyway. ***
        
        followed by the somaniest remark that I don't follow your points ...
        
        You're right. We should quit this.
        We just did.
how much?? - SeVeReD 19:05:45 06/28/07 (0)
Can you tell me how much $ they're asking for this player? I went to the site.. clicked around for a few minutes, and never found an outright easy to find price listing? I might try it after a while ... i guess im a little leery at this point,... and paying for a player ... hmmm, but what is the price???
RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - Mercman 04:29:05 06/28/07 (0)
Since every player sounds different, I guess I should just try it.

I have also been trying different players on the Mac. I have played with Bias Peak LE, Wave Editor, and Sound Studio. I really like Sound Studio-sounds better than iTunes on MY system.

I just sent my Wavelength Crimson back to Gordon for the Silver transformer upgrade. Back to vinyl for now.
I must be dumb ... - Christine Tham 19:45:36 06/27/07 (17)
I went to the site, but I couldn't find any information that described what this player does, how it does it, and why is it "high end" compared to other players.

Can someone post a link or provide a description? Just what is so great about this player?
- RE: I must be dumb ... - rick_m 20:23:56 06/27/07 (16)
  Don't feel bad, I think it's just goes with the territory. I know many SE's, and none of them seem to respond properly to marketing messages.
  
  Now us hardware guys, just show us a picture of a new scope and we drool...
  
  Rick
  - OP - Dawnrazor 01:09:02 06/28/07 (15)
    SPeaking of marketing, Am I the only one that finds it a bit odd that the OP is a marketing specialist, and has signed up recently on AA and the FIRST post (and only I think) is about this player. And the supporting posts although from a different poster try to get people to register and post on the site.
    
    It is almost like someone is getting paid to get people to that site.
    
    I guess I am a cynic, but it does seem odd. Like a marketing Troll drive by.
    
    Maybe just a coincidence, but I have to wonder.
    - You are right - this is getting very suspicious - Christine Tham 16:12:56 06/28/07 (8)
      As usual, you are very insightful. Now I am getting somewhat concerned and suspicious.
      
      I noticed that both LaMarmotte and Winnie (who I have never seen before on this forum) leaped to defend your "marketing troll" comment, but neither of them even bothered to answer my very simple question, which was to provide a brief overview of what the player does.
      
      I also noticed that when you mentioned you couldn't get the player working, neither of them offered to help, but instead suggested you visit the forum and post your question there. Where no doubt you have to register and provide personal details, including email address.
      
      In these days of viruses, trojan horses, spyware etc. I'm starting to wonder exactly what this software does. After all, it only takes a few lines of code to play back wav files on DirectSound (actually, only one line is sufficient if you are willing to be flexible), and more lines does not necessarily improve sound quality, so I'm starting to wonder.
      
      My advice at this stage is to uninstall the player, then system restore to a state prior to installation, then run a full suite of virus scanners, spyware busters, registry checkers and delete any stray cookies. Do not attempt to register on the forum, do not try and activate the player (since that may send information via the network) and under no circumstances pay any money via PayPal, since that will reveal personal details such as name and home address.
      
      Perhaps the author of the software can try and post here to clear the air, but until then I would advice extreme caution.
      - RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious - kls 02:11:00 06/29/07 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious posted by Christine Tham on June 28, 2007 at 16:12:56
        
        Hi Christine.
        
        I don't really think your comments are appropiate.
        
        The folks are just enthusiastic about the sound "quality"
        compared to other players.
        
        To shed some light on the background of all of this just let me tell you this:
        
        Bert Doppenberg delivers highest-end audio stuff. There is no question
        about it. Himself I'd call a real "early bird" using a PC as source.
        He is usually present on DIY fairs and IMO in general outperforming most other "commercial" DIY system (not talking about commercial systems in general) out there.
        Many of the people around here never had a chance to listen to such a system, which reveals the slightest quality problems in the data stream.
        
        Peter S and myself (monika: soundcheck at BD-design/DIY-Audio/phasure)started pretty much at the same time (last summer)to tweak the PC for best performance.
        
        It was obvious that every player does something different to the sound.
        I tried mainly all players under Windows before I switched to Linux.
        
        I do not intend to defend Peter nor I am doing marketing for him, because I believe my Linux setup/player (within my audio-chain) can "easily" compete with his player and beside offers quite some more very benefitial options (very fast fir-filter processing/crossover/convolution/64bit volume control/64bit processing,...).
        
        Now - Just to mention some examples about what he is doing to get you an idea that the whole thing shouldn't be put in the snake-oil or hokus-pokus corner:
        
        * No-Frills Design
        * Playing everything from RAM
        * Reducing processinterfaces and latencies
        * Using Vista Exclusive Mode (direct access to interfaces - that's why no
        KS or ASIO is needed)
        * .....asf,asf
        
        That's what makes the difference. All other players have to play under
        all weired conditions without hick-ups, this ususally goes hand in hand
        with loss of quality.
        
        Under Linux I am of course able to do much more! Vista won't let you digging into the source code. ;)
        
        Most of the players around are not that deeply integrated into the MS-OS as XX, that makes the difference. The other players come with hundreds of features at a cost of loosing sound quality. ( E.g. Foobar, Remove and Delete all plugins in the directory and listen -- It is known fact that it sounds better without them. Or take the old sse2 compiled versions (look at Steve/audioengr confirming this), they just sound better.)
        
        Even by listening to professinal mastering software you can hear clearly differences, because the way they are integrated into the OS.
        
        Unfortunately all the players are mainly tight to the obstacles comeing with an OS never meant to deliver a jitterfree realtime-data-stream - a prerequiste for "High-End Music".
        
        It is also a known fact that even the best reclocker circuits on the DACs
        are not able to recover the signal once it is messed up by the PC.
        Steve reported that tweaking the PC environment still made changes to the sound on his recklocker circuit.
        The intention behind all this effort is supplying the soundcard and/or DAC with the best possible signal.
        
        However. Just download that piece of software and make up your own mind.
        
        Cheers
        Klaus
        
        Thanks - you are the first person who have tried to actually answer my original question - Christine Tham 03:06:38 06/29/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious posted by kls on June 29, 2007 at 02:11:00
        
        However, like you I have also spent considerable time and effort optimizing my setup and playback chain, but I started much earlier - I first started playing around with digital music in the mid 1980s.
        
        As for the approach taken in this software player, all that you have mentioned can be achieved by writing a few lines of code, and a good ASIO driver on a good audio device will offer the shortest and most direct path between an application and the hardware. This is by design, and what the ASIO spec was intended for.
        
        By contrast, Vista Exclusive Mode is not a shortcut path, it still goes nearly the entire Vista audio stack. All it does is lock the audio driver from being accessed by another application. Go and read the Microsoft documentation on this.
        
        Better still, measure actual achievable latencies in Vista using exclusive mode, and compare it with a good ASIO implementation. I found that even using WaveRT (the "next generation" driver architecture that supposedly gives low latency) and opening in exclusive mode, the Microsoft HD Audio driver for Realtek was giving me 50-100ms of latency (which would be unusable for pro audio). A good ASIO driver can yield latency as low as 4-5ms.
        
        As for playing everything from RAM, the audio driver will rebuffer any data sent to it so I am not sure what the advantage of this would be. And since Windows is a non real time non deterministic OS, I am not sure what the value of a "no frills" design is.
        
        If you don't mind, I prefer not to download untrusted code. I think that's probably what made Dawnrazor and I suspicious in the first place. The two posters seem to be very coy about describing what the player actually did or offer real help to those who can't get it working, instead every post seems to be an exhortation to register at the forum and download the software - exactly what you would expect a social hacker to do. The original poster has made a grand total of 3 posts - all of them in this thread and appears to have registered a few days ago. The other poster has made a grand total of 12 posts in this forum - 10 of them relating to this thread. Note: I am not actually accusing them of being evil, but clearly there is room for doubt.
        
        RE: Thanks - you are the first person who have tried to actually answer my original question - Winnie 05:04:26 06/29/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Thanks - you are the first person who have tried to actually answer my original question posted by Christine Tham on June 29, 2007 at 03:06:38
        
        Now come on Christine, please get a grip.
        "The two posters seem to be very coy about describing what the player actually did or offer real help to those who can't get it working, instead every post seems to be an exhortation to register at the forum and download the software - exactly what you would expect a social hacker to do."
        If you had taken the trouble to read my postings, instead of launching into a monotribe, you would have read that I have no technical knowledge about how the XXHighEnd player operates - so go and ask the experts.
        "(Winnie) has made a grand total of 12 posts in this forum - 10 of them relating to this thread"
        Why don't you open your horizons a little and have a look in other areas of AA. In the past, I visited here occasionally to see if you guys had cracked the problem of getting exceptional sound from a PC without the need for a degree in computer programming. When I found it elsewhere, then I thought it only polite that I share it with you.
        It's a shame you didn't show the same politeness to a new guest in your bailiwick.
        
        "Note: I am not actually accusing them of being evil, but clearly there is room for doubt."
        My advice - When in a hole stop digging.
        
        Edits: 06/29/07
      - RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious - Winnie 00:42:15 06/29/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious posted by Christine Tham on June 28, 2007 at 16:12:56
        
        "Paranoia is a disturbed thought process characterized by excessive anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat."
        
        Can I respectfully suggest you visit your doctor. The condition you have is not healthy and requires treatment.
        
        Winnie (contributor to AA since 2003)
        
        RE: Perceived threat? - alan m. kafton 01:32:06 06/29/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious posted by Winnie on June 29, 2007 at 00:42:15
        
        Viruses and Trojan horses are very real threats.
      - RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious - Dawnrazor 22:21:11 06/28/07 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious posted by Christine Tham on June 28, 2007 at 16:12:56
        
        Hey Christine,
        
        Thanks for the safety advice, and I agree that it does seem suspicious. If I was advocating that people try a player I was happy with, I certainly would try to answer basic questions and be helpful.
        
        ANyhow, I hope that they do really mean well.
        
        You know, you really ought to write a player for the audiophiles out there. One that is easy for the non-computer people, but powerful for those who like to do advance functions.
        
        WHile you are at, add crossovers and room correction and any other thing you can think of. Kind of like ACXO but with playlist support and fast forward, etc. Should take a few days :)!
        
        Seriously, there is a market I think for such a player. Maybe you could call it Thamtastic! or something even more clever.
        
        RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious - andy_c 09:38:36 06/29/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious posted by Dawnrazor on June 28, 2007 at 22:21:11
        
        WHile you are at, add crossovers and room correction and any other thing you can think of. Kind of like ACXO but with playlist support and fast forward, etc. Should take a few days :)!
        
        LOL! You sound like my old boss :-).
        
        Thanks for your confidence in my skills - Christine Tham 22:43:30 06/28/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You are right - this is getting very suspicious posted by Dawnrazor on June 28, 2007 at 22:21:11
        
        But the reality is I haven't done any programming (for fun or otherwise) for over ten years, and serious coding for over 15 years, so I am really rusty.
        
        PS - I hope these guys mean well too, but these days installing software without knowing what it is is just asking for trouble, kind of like having unprotected sex. Plus given that it's relatively trivial to write a WAV player that uses ASIO (which is the most transparent way to communicate to the sound hardware, provided you have good ASIO drivers) I certainly would think twice about paying money for something that doesn't.
    - RE: OP - LaMarmotte 01:35:32 06/28/07 (2)
      Well I can't let a remark like that go unanswered of course. I have been a visitor to Audio Asylum PC audio for a couple of years and learned a lot from you guys. Thanks to what I learned here I went the PC way , with EAC and Foobar. Also tried other players that have been mentioned here before, I bought the germean Asio thing as well etc. etc. I tried all the tricks that I could pick up here. I visit this forum at least 2 or 3 times a week.
      Being also a long time client of Bert Doppenberg as a user of his great horn speakers I learned about XXHighEnd in it's conceptual state on his site. When finally a demoversion of XXHIghEnd became available I managed to be the first one to download and start the demoversion.You can read about it on the XX site (My moniker there is Leo) I asked Peter the developer of XXHighEnd almost immediately whether I could tell about it here. He asked me not to do that at that time because he wanted be sure that it was more or less bugfree and working in all kinds of PC environment. When he asked me to go and tell AA about it, that is what I did. I did this as a great fan of the product and a great believer in PC Audio. Not for any other reason. I do pay for the software like every client. And I am not being paid or rewarded in any way or method by XXHighEnd.
      
      Just give it try guys, it won't cost you anything and the only drawback is that you have to restart the software every 15 minutes or so in the demoversion.
      Of course trying is not necessary for some of the visitors here as they allready can tell so much by just reading about something instead of experiencing it. I really can only admire their great minds.
      
      Have fun with PC Audio !
      
      Leo
      - RE: OP - Dawnrazor 01:57:49 06/28/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: OP posted by LaMarmotte on June 28, 2007 at 01:35:32
        
        I did try it, but it didn't work. It just said "Demo version" or something like that. But didn't play any sound.
        
        THat was the version that was .8 or something like that.
        
        I can't try the newer version because he makes a huge deal about liscense and making sure you put it on your audio PC...
        
        I don't want to muck up that PC with uneeded software, and only put things on there if they work great on my other PC.
        
        SO unless I am missing something, I can't really try it, and there seems to be nothing compelling as to what this player does special.
        
        THe Burwen Bobcat software had a back story about some great studio engineer, the XMplayer had some explanation about a direct show dll that was part of it. I see nothing here.
        
        Maybe I was off base and can definately understand wanting to "spread the word" about a great product, and if what you say is true, then please accept my apologies.
        
        So what was the problem with Foobar and why did you have to buy ASIO?
        
        RE: OP - LaMarmotte 02:20:47 06/28/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: OP posted by Dawnrazor on June 28, 2007 at 01:57:49
        
        I was really very happy with Foobar, but I just more or less try everything that could be a further improvement. So I think Foobar is good and it is free, but the guys behind it are not really audio-nuts like us. So when somebody, who is impressed by and owns the same speakers that I will have one day (sigh), cooperates with that same speaker developer. And these guys , really very serious and succesfull audiodevelopers, say that they are working on a another great step forward (from PC audio and Foobar, that they use themselves, advocating the PC route for a couple of years now) I am intreagued. Just the nature of a researcher...
        It really for me brings a great step forward in audio quality, and many people on that site say the same.
        
        For your problem of not getting it started I refer you to the website. If you post a question I am sure Peter will help you solve it. It probably has to do with some auxiliary software (dot.Net and DirectX , I say from memory) which is explained on the site as well, with links and all. You can use the latest version in demoform as well.
        So DawnRazor I have read a lot from you and learned by applying and trying your advice. So now, as a pupil, I suggest to you the teacher to do the extra effort and really try it.
        
        regards,
        
        Leo
    - RE: OP - Winnie 01:19:23 06/28/07 (2)
      I guess I am a cynic?
      
      Yes mate you are. I have waited for about 5 years so that I can put all my music on hard drives without:
      
      a. It sounding crap
      
      b. Needing a degree in electronics and computing to assemble and master all the software requirements.
      
      XX Highend does this, so surely its worth letting the audio community know about it. Maybe I was wrong, for which I apologies.
      - RE: OP - Dawnrazor 01:33:16 06/28/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: OP posted by Winnie on June 28, 2007 at 01:19:23
        
        W,
        
        You are not wrong to let us know. If this player does this, then it is a great find. I just wish there was some better rationale supplied.
        
        A player that doesn't support ASIO or KS is not worth the time for me, and since the install didn't work, I find it hard to keep going.
        
        A is not an issue for me (foobar sounds great when you set it up right), but I do agree on your B arguement.
        
        Foobar has such a high learning curve. Which is why this player is a turn off. Foobar with all its foibles was EASY to install...never had any issues.
        
        Maybe some brave soul will get it working and do a comparison, but I seriously doubt it can sound as good as the ASIO supporting winamp or foobar.
        
        By the way, have you tried ASIO with these players?
        
        I am not dismissing this. THe Burwen Bobcat software uses WMP and some have said that it is a dramatic improvement. But it has the same issues as this phasure player (in fact it is even worse) you can't try it unless you buy it and it is a couple of hundred dollars.
        
        I didn't try that player either, and the phasure player I did try, and it didn't work.....
        
        RE: OP - Winnie 01:58:26 06/28/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: OP posted by Dawnrazor on June 28, 2007 at 01:33:16
        
        Hi Dawnrazor
        
        Many of the early users of XX Highend had teething problems with getting the software to run, including me!. PeterSt is extremely tolerant of questions to resolve the issues, and in most cases has incorporated improvements in the software.
        
        Because of rapidly increasing popularity PeterSt is obviously extremely busy and the Phasure site, may now lack a bit of clarity to new customers in setting up procedures. The information is all there, but in a number of places, and hidden sometimes in postings from other people who have had problems.
        
        Just post questions in the Forum. At present the response times are excellent.
RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - fmak 02:31:19 06/27/07 (3)
There is no explanation as to why it is high end or what is new about it, other than the author liking Non-OS dac and uses a described system. The non-OS system generated huge spurious images all over the place and will colour the sound of the system. Typical of much PC Audio software that people charge for..
- RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - Winnie 02:59:45 06/27/07 (2)
  Why dont you guys post your observations on the XXHighEnd forum. This will create a wider spectrum of opinion and give a balanced view of the product.
  - RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - fmak 03:35:44 06/27/07 (1)
    Because I have better use of my time. Using a Non-OS dac means that the user prefers IM distortion to uncoloured audio.
    - RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - Mercman 05:25:03 06/28/07 (0)
      Fred,
      
      I guess I also prefer IM distortion as well.
      
      Steve
Blind Test Results - Scrith 20:08:08 06/26/07 (18)
My wife volunteered to do some more blind testing with me. We used three different songs that were ripped error-free using AccurateRip and EAC.
The equipment in the test consisted of a Benchmark DAC1 USB and Sennheiser HD650 headphones with a Zu Cable. The PC is a dual-core AMD XP4800+ with 2GB of RAM. No other programs were running during the test. The power for the computer is filtered through a PS Audio Quintet and the power for the DAC is from a PS Audio Premier.
My wife could not tell the difference between XXHighEnd.exe (running under Vista) playing WAV files and Foobar2000 playing FLAC files (no DSPs enabled). We tested using Engine #2.
In my personal tests engine #2 seemed a bit better. I was testing using my speakers (Dynaudio Contour S 1.4 powered by a PS Audio GCC-250 using Cardas Golden Reference speaker cables and interconnects). To me XXHighEnd.exe seemed better sometimes, but other times it sounded identical (again comparing FLAC files using Foobar2000). I believe the difference I was hearing was imagined (I was thinking that it wasn't fair to run Foobar2000 with the peak meters and spectrum analyzer running, which were probably using up precious CPU cycles...I guess I have been taking a few of the posts here a bit too seriously).

Edits: 06/26/07 06/26/07 06/26/07 06/26/07
- RE: Blind Test Results - Scrith 20:38:36 06/26/07 (12)
  I must admit that I was disappointed by these results. I have always been a bit suspicious of Foobar2000, because I disagree with some of the views (about what matters in audio playback) of some of the people who have contributed plug-ins (and feedback) at HydrogenAudio.org (the general consensus there is that low-quality MP3 is just fine, and low-quality resampling DSPs are more than adequate...it amazes me how people who consider themselves educated and informed about a subject are often the most blind).
  Anyway, I intend to revisit this program once it has matured a bit, but for now I am pleasantly surprised at how well Foobar2000 held up in my comparisons (playing the dreaded FLAC format, no less).
  
  Edits: 06/26/07
  - RE: Blind Test Results - Presto 21:36:17 06/26/07 (11)
    Hey Scrith:
    
    If you like Foobar with Directsound, I would try kernel streaming, and maybe even ASIO.
    
    I was listening to Foobar2000 with ASIO last night (when I was turning on and off the convolver impulse Todd linked to) and I am still floored at just how resolving and enjoyable even the good old Foobar 0.8.3 sounds.
    
    Anyways, I would never bash the new player without trying it, but the fact it has no ASIO support, and the trial is good for 6 to 15 MINUTES?!? I can't give a player a fair appraisal (and compare it to other players) in 6 bloody minutes.
    
    I am also suspicious of some of the "Foobar haters" on that website. They don't mention HOW they are using Foobar. Even a program like Foobar can sound terrible in the wrong hands.
    
    For all we know they're using waveout with $20 computer speakers.
    
    Survey says? I'll read about it, but I won't waste time installing something with such a ridiculous trial period.
    
    Just my $.02
    
    Cheers,
    Presto
    - In Presto I trust - SeVeReD 18:33:01 06/27/07 (1)
      Every time I see a Presto post I am taken by the consideration, even-handedness, and amazed at the time he must have put in listening/abing to come to his conclusions (like there is such a word as "conclusion" in audiophooland). you're one of a handful of peps that i read every post from.
      
      Edits: 06/30/07
      - Aw gee thanks SeVeReD - Presto 13:04:18 06/29/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: In Presto I trust posted by SeVeReD on June 27, 2007 at 18:33:01
        
        Hey Severed:
        
        I think the reason I try to be "more fair" with people around here is not really a reflection of me as a person but more of a reflection of this forum. Although we see the odd disagreement, we're so small in number (PC source audiophiles) that we really can't AFFORD to be at each-others throats.
        
        This has become my favorite forum and I spend the most time here. I wait in anticipation for the next review, trial, problem, question, idea... you never know what's coming around the bend.
        
        I think we should pride ourselves in being *not* like some of the other forums (like Prop Heads where they often argue for the sake of arguing).
        Maybe it's our commonality of being "Computer" people that make us get along.
        
        Anyways, I am a PC Audio Nutcase, and this little community is very very important to me - so I try to keep that in mind when I post here. I guess I just don't want to act like an ass "in front" of the contributors here that I have come to like and respect.
        
        Maybe one day we'll have a PC audio convention... :D
        
        Thanks for the nice feedback though. Better than the other kind! :P
        
        Cheers,
        Presto
    - RE: Blind Test Results - Scrith 09:00:00 06/27/07 (2)
      I normally use Kernal Streaming (KS) in Foobar2000 with my Benchmark DAC1 USB. ASIO is not an option (the Vista USB driver does not support it, but I assume ASIO is just an interface, created by a driver like ASIO4All, that ends up sending the data to the KS layer).
      
      In the XXHighEnd player, I didn't see an option for using Kernal Streaming or ASIO.
      - RE: Blind Test Results - Presto 14:40:08 06/27/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Blind Test Results posted by Scrith on June 27, 2007 at 09:00:00
        
        "but I assume ASIO is just an interface, created by a driver like ASIO4All, that ends up sending the data to the KS layer"
        
        Nope. True ASIO is not created by ASIO4ALL. True ASIO is THE most direct path to the audio hardware (and thus the very low latencies). ASIO4ALL uses "kernel streaming and other methods" which for all we know may include MME, WDM, or directsound but NOT ASIO. The fact remains that you really can't HAVE a true "generic" ASIO driver (ASIO4ALL is a generic WDM driver that SIMULATES ASIO, giving the user latency control).
        
        If WDM/kernel streaming is AS GOOD as ASIO then it's a mute point, but some prefer "true ASIO" to WDM/KS, in which case ASIO4ALL would NOT be considered an equal to ASIO.
        
        Cheers,
        Presto
        
        RE: Blind Test Results - Scrith 23:52:16 06/27/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Blind Test Results posted by Presto on June 27, 2007 at 14:40:08
        
        OK, well I think it works a bit differently (due to the options you now have for interfacing with the hardware directly and giving an application the ability to lock out other applications from using the sound hardware in question).
        
        Anyway, I know that when I play using DS in Vista, some CPU time is being spent in an Audio-related process, whereas when I use KS system CPU time goes to about the zero (the same as when no music is playing). I am trusting the KS option in Vista at this point. Also, I could never discern any difference between ASIO and KS (when using an E-Mu 1212M and M-Transit Audiophile USB) back when I was using XP...I think what it comes down to is either you are using an interface that passes the data straight through to the hardware layer without any processing (KS and ASIO) or you are not (DirectSound, although it seems to be OK in some cases, like when there is no other audio source playing that requires mixing two sources together).
    - RE: Blind Test Results - Winnie 01:06:19 06/27/07 (4)
      For all we know they're using waveout with $20 computer speakers.
      
      I think you'll find that most of those that evaluated the software so far have systems that would be in the upper quartile.
      Try not to pre-judge
      - RE: Blind Test Results - Presto 17:53:27 06/27/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Blind Test Results posted by Winnie on June 27, 2007 at 01:06:19
        
        But I'm such a SKEPTIC by nature!
        
        Hey - I would have NEVER in 100 years thought that Winamp with ASIO would sound everybit as good as Foobar with ASIO about 18 months ago.
        
        For those who don't specify the exact details of their rig, what else can we do but say "For all we know"?
        
        If someone is comparing Foobar to a new player, then it only stands to reason that folks will want to know what VERSION of foobar is being used, what output TYPE, what specific output PLUGIN, which revision of that plugin, and which audio interface is the person using, and are they using onboard DACs or external, and if external, what transmission method is being used: optical? Coax? SPDIF? AES/EBU?
        
        For starters, if someone is saying they have a better player than Foobar, I would want to know:
        
        1) What OS they are running and which service pack
        2) What version of Foobar they are using
        3) What output plugin they are using, and which version of that
        4) What audio interface they are using
        5) Whether they are using external or internal DACs
        6) Whether they were doing any DSP (upsampling, DRC)
        7) Whether they were playing compressed or uncompressed music
        
        Without at LEAST this much information, one really can't start to appreciate exactly what these people are acutally comparing.
        
        That's all I'm saying.
        
        There are entrey level Ford Mustangs and there are Ford Mustang Cobra's and a dozen models in between. And they all perform differently. You can't just say "2004 mustang" - you gotta specify which one! ;)
        
        Cheers,
        Presto
      - RE: Blind Test Results - Dawnrazor 06:10:44 06/27/07 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Blind Test Results posted by Winnie on June 27, 2007 at 01:06:19
        
        W,
        
        DOes it support ASIO? What about Kernal Streaming?
        
        THis is the minimum IMHO for good sound.
        
        Can you do room correction on it?
        
        RE: Blind Test Results - Winnie 09:19:12 06/27/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Blind Test Results posted by Dawnrazor on June 27, 2007 at 06:10:44
        
        Hi Dawnrazor
        Questions are a bit too technical for me, why dont you ask them on the Phasure forum.
        I have little interest in how it works, just that it sounds very good :) and its free for you to evaluate.
        W
        
        If it's not bypassing the kmixer... - SeVeReD 18:35:56 06/27/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Blind Test Results posted by Winnie on June 27, 2007 at 09:19:12
        
        If your comparisons with other players are not done by bypassing the kmixer then you haven't heard your computer front end done right yet.
    - RE: Blind Test Results - Winnie 01:00:53 06/27/07 (0)
      The 6 mins (minimum) is for a session. When it times out you just restart it. Means you have to get up off your chair, but its worth it.
- RE: Blind Test Results - Dawnrazor 20:11:54 06/26/07 (4)
  Hey Scrith,
  
  What output are you using,KS or ASIO?
  - RE: Blind Test Results - Scrith 20:20:34 06/26/07 (3)
    I was using DS (DirectSound), because Foobar2000 running KS doesn't let other applications make sound sometimes (and this was a problem I encountered after a few comparisons on my own).
    - RE: Blind Test Results - Dawnrazor 21:12:02 06/26/07 (2)
      Hey,
      
      I don't think you can get really good sound with DS. At least on my system (and I have heard others say) DS just never sounded as good as ASIO.
      
      I'd be surprised if you could hear subtle differences with DS.
      - DS ( asio or kernal streaming - SeVeReD 18:21:18 06/27/07 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Blind Test Results posted by Dawnrazor on June 26, 2007 at 21:12:02
        
        direct sound has never sounded good to me after comparison with asio.
        
        Totally Agree Sev (nt) - Dawnrazor 01:02:31 06/28/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: DS ( asio or kernal streaming posted by SeVeReD on June 27, 2007 at 18:21:18
        
        f
RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - Dawnrazor 08:54:42 06/26/07 (3)
I tried this, and it didn't work. It just said "demo version" or something like that.

How did you install it?
- RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - Winnie 11:26:13 06/26/07 (2)
  What you get is a demo version for FREE, which allows playing of between 6 and about 15 mins of music. If you like what you hear, then you can sign up for the full (non demo) version, which makes it a normal player.
  
  PeterSt has been developing this software for almost a year and deserves massive amounts of credit for a job well done.
  - RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - Dawnrazor 11:36:04 06/26/07 (1)
    Thanks for the explanation. However, it never played any music!!
    - RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - Winnie 12:52:00 06/26/07 (0)
      There are a couple of bits of simple software that you made need to install to get your PC ready to run the XX Highend engines.
      
      Its all explained on the Site although in some instances it not easy to find a single clear description just yet.
      
      If in doubt just join up as a member (just like here) and ask whatever questions you have. Its a very friendly community and many of us are still learning how to apply PCs in this way.
      
      Have no doubt, its worth the effort :)
RE: A new HighEnd Softwareplayer - Winnie 08:40:55 06/26/07 (0)
Yep

I have replaced a £4000 CDP and DAC with a PC, an external soundcard and the new XX HighEnd player. Sound quality is not just good, its excellent.

Fill your boots

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.