|
Home
/ FAQ
/ News Classifieds / Events |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer |
Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
41.183.0.21
| '); } else { document.writeln(''); } } else { document.writeln(''); } } else { document.writeln(''); } } // End --> |
In Reply to: RE: cPlay - the open source high-end audio player using ASIO posted by cics on May 05, 2008 at 12:31:58
Refer to ReadMe.txt for important details & specifications.
Change Log (2.0b31 release):
- DSP refinements
- Threads optimisation for use with cMP's "Realtime" Optimise setting. Recommendation of "Critical" setting remains however significant efficiency gains makes "Realtime" a strong option.
This allows for complex decoding (i.e. FLAC) to occur without affecting playback in cMP. Depending on soundcard ASIO driver, "Realtime" setting could be better.- SRC efficiency improvements reducing CPU load and L2/L3 cache footprint
- Minor refinements
- Added support for "Tiny" DSP Buffer Size. Previous buffer options remains the same with "Auto" using either "Small", "Medium", or "Large", i.e. "Tiny" must be manually selected.
"Tiny" buffer option reduces L2/L3 cache footprint enabling lower specification CPUs to be used with resampling. The 2MB L2/L3 cache requirement remains to produce highest quality 192k output.
cPlay documentation can be found at the new cMP² website. cPlay 2.0b31 offers significant SRC processing improvements and remains the reference resampler. Those not using SRC should re-evaluate this. "Tiny" buffer setting is also highly recommended (especially in combination with SRC).
Please REMOVE previous versions before installing cPlay 2.0b31. Normal (SSE2), SSE3 B9, SSSE3 B9 and SSE4 B9 versions are available. Running cPlay on a CPU not supporting the required instruction set will cause cPlay to exit immediately. For best results, uncheck "Timer" setting and test different "Buffer" sizes.
Putting things into perspective
Changes are readily observed with each new release. What follows is a technical explanation of why this is so. Modeling (Periodic) Jitter Theory for a wide range of Jpp using a frequency sweep of the audible range and beyond yields the following:
Practical implications are profound as such Jitter Distortion damages sound quality:
- Sideband distortion rapidly increases with input frequency, i.e. high frequency sounds are most affected. This is seen in the rapid rate of distortion increase as frequency rises. Critical harmonic sound information in this HF band (delivered by tweeters) is distorted. This has detrimental effects such as veiling, poor transients and poor tonal decay.
- Most important insight is the extent to which Jpp must be reduced.
- We see that for high Jpp (150..350ps and beyond) an audio designer is not well rewarded for Jitter reduction efforts, i.e. despite large scale drop in Jpp, distortion levels remain stubbornly high. Modern DACs (including some soundcards) have an excellent noise floor of -118db or better. This implies that jitter distortion arising from HF input (above 5kHz) will be well above such noise floor. For example, an input tone of 10kHz and Jpp at 150ps would yield sideband distortion of -112.6dbFS. Ouch!
Interestingly this explains why some reviewers unexpectantly express disappointment with front-ends offering ~200ps Jpp performance. That is, the noise floor is polluted with excessive sideband distortion.
This may also explain why some vendors have become disillusioned with Jitter and have abandoned it's role as a major source of audible distortion. Sadly, others have yet to understand how to measure such distortion (which can only be done correctly at the analogue outputs).- Implications for poor setups with Jpp above 150ps suggest sound quality improvements will not be easily experienced. Perhaps this explains why some object to for example RAM size, quality & setup to have sound quality impact.
- Much to our relief, distortion drops rapidly below 150ps Jpp. As can be seen, for each 50ps drop, distortion reduces in ever increasing drops. That is, we see an exponential decay. Consider for example 50ps Jpp, any improvements here will have factors more benefit than with same improvement at higher Jpp. This suggests high quality setups like a fully specified cMP (whose measured jitter performance is 51ps Jpp RSS using foobar) would be significantly better at revealing improvements.
- For the ideal case, jitter performance results in sideband distortion for all input frequencies below the DAC's noise floor. A noise floor of -130dbFS, requires jitter performance below 10ps Jpp! Intel's new 32nm Nehalem platform is a good step forward.
Rarely does theory and practice meet so beautifully. The efforts of Julian Dunn who laid the foundations for understanding Jitter and its challenges is truly remarkable.
Can you add .APE (monkey Audio) files support, may be in new versions?
cPlay 2.0b31 Released ,plese!
I just got around to installing 31 today.
It is amazing how different versions can change the sound pretty radically.
mixed is a word I would use like a previous poster did.
SOme things like the resolution is dramatically improved and you can hear more into the recording. That comment about a light being turned on is so true.
The soundstage is a bit weird on my rig with 31. The center is so prominent now that it kind of excludes the other areas of the soundstage., but the center does sound really in the room.
Warmth is missing compared to 30. I miss that. And as I was listening to 30 and thinking how I missed some resolution, and now that I have it with 31, I miss the warmth.
I just put it on tiny and that is what I listened to. But maybe that isnt the best setting for my cpu?
Are there any settings that can get me "30.5"?
I am using a latency setting of 32 with tiny and src 145db set at 192k.
And do take this with a grain of salt. I just got my cmp2 up and running a month or so ago and now I have new amps and in the middle have changed speaker positions a bit. SO my memory could be off, but I did listen with 30 and then install 31 and listen.
If I had to pick it would be a tough choice. I think i lean toward 31 but on some recordings I miss 30.
Thanks
Sometimes lowest is not "best". On my system, latency setting of 48 sounds the most powerful and "precise", but falls short in terms of "warmth" and treble smoothness. I found that 128 sounds the most pleasant, natural, and the bass is better than any other source I've heard in my system.
Incidentally, latency setting of 128 is also what cics recommended for 192k. He said, "for 192k output, latencies to 128 samples (ASIO Hz of 1500) will be excellent. This assumes there's no "dead bands" in PLL, i.e. PLL is inoperable for certain jitter frequencies."
My other settings are: Tiny, SRC 145db, 192k, AWE, Timer Off
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
It just was more musical and 31 often left me uninvolved even though I was hearing more.
But I never tried 128. The cplay diagnostics reported that the Lynx liked 64 so I tried that and 32 and tiny, small, and medium. It just never sounded as good as 30. Perhaps I should give 128 a try.
I'm not sure if it's a glitch, but when I switch between different latency settings (i.e. 48 and 64), the cPlay diagnostics *always* report my current setting as "preferred". Hmm...
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
Hey, I was on 32 and it reported 64 was preferred so I tried 64. So I dont think I have that issue.
she needs to make up her mind!
Quick update, I now prefer the 48 sample setting after remaking my I2S cable with RG179 coax. Digital audio works in mysterious ways...
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
SOunds like!
I tried 128 with tiny, and that does seem to be much better. Not sure i will stay with 31 but right now it is pretty good.
Glad you like it!
In one of his posts, theo stated that "my system has many degrees of adjusting tonal balance ... [so] when I make changes I always prefer to go the way of better dynamics then adjust the tonal balance accordingly."
I happen to have very similar beliefs when it comes to choices of equipment/playback software. I believe that certain qualities, such as warmth, tonal balance, even better soundstaging, can be had through relatively simple tweaks. On the other hand, attributes like detail, dynamics, and low noise floor are more difficult to obtain. Oh, and I also happen to prefer to do things the easier way!
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
This combo at src/192 is nothing short of amazing, I just love it. Imaging, dynamics and a sense that a light is turned on at the back of the soundstage---so much more to hear but smooth, very smooth. Congratulations.But I have some questions regarding some anomalies. I get zero metallics but I do get an occasional what I call a 'static-ee' noise which goes away via going to another track or changing sample rate. Others get this as well. I got the same noise when I was running juli@ analogue outs. If metallics were a 10 as an issue the static-ee is a 3: far fewer and easier to fix but annoying just the same and does not require a reboot. So upon throwing this around in my head I believe it may have the same root cause as metallics but since the system is no longer using juli@ drivers it is just manifested as
different. But assuming this is correct here are some more observations: when I get the static’s my cpu usage is typically 50 % with spikes up and down. But since Sunday when you asked me to run 48/tiny I have gotten zero static’s so I thought it was the combination of 48 / tiny parameters that was doing it (and maybe it is) but I also checked cpu usage and I'm back down to 25%. This same phenomena occurred back in June when I was running spdif out to the Benchmark: for a wonderful week I was getting no metallics while getting 25% (when prior to this I was getting 50% cpu usage and lots of metallics). So I think there is still an issue with juli@ (albeit minor with I2S out) that is somehow associated with cpu usage jumping around from 50% to 25%. This am I had to reboot after being on for 3 days and upon reboot I got 25% cpu usage but with spikes up to 45-50%. After being on continuously for a while the spikes started to settle down in the 35-40% level but come back to a higher level after not running cplay for a while but with the pc still continously on.Edit: my mistake on the cpu usage bit, I found out my pc reset unbeknownst to me my bios hcc to auto and I got clock speed of 1600 when I reset back to 840 cpu usage goes back up to 45-50%. When I reboot I normally sense a reset of bios when It takes long to boot up, I missed it. I hate computers. I love cplay/cmp.
Not to throw cold water on my glowing review of cplay 31 @ tiny/48 (and it is nothing short of magnificent) what in your opinion could be happening here with the noise issues and cpu usage which seems to be correlated. Look if I had to live with this situation as it is now I would be happy for a long time. I'm just trying to understand if juli@ is fatally flawed and whether I should pursue another sound card. I was tempted by the Lynx but w/o anyway to run battery power or I2S out I fear the Lynx may be too limiting now that I have experienced LiFePo4 batteries and I2S out.
Edits: 10/20/09
Which type of cable(s) are you using for the I2S? I currently use Cat5e for my I2S -> DAC connection. While I can't complain about the sound quality, it certainly couldn't hurt to get "proper" cabling. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
Thank you in advance!
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
It is 75 ohm coax with teflon dielectric. I believe it is bg 179 (or something like that). It costs about $40 for 4 feet of it. Its very delicate but fairly easy to solder right onto juli@ pins.
Thank you! Sounds like the cable (or something similiar) in the link below. Can you please confirm?
Oh, and did you ground the braided shield or make twisted pairs with the cable?
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
yes it was rg not bg 179. I used the cable as a coax: soldered the center connector to juli@ pins & grounded the shield to a juli@ pin on the 10 pin connector. I twisted all the shields together and fastened a wire from the twisted bunch of 3 shields to a ground pin on juli@.
Thank you theo.I remade my I2S cable yesterday following your instructions, and it sounds good so far. Overall, it sounds cleaner, more detailed and resolving. However, the presentation also becomes a bit bright and forward, making vocals less enjoyable. I wonder if this is due to the lack of burn in. Does my experience with the RG179 coax sound familiar to you?
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
Edits: 10/28/09 10/28/09
Not sure...I was breaking in a new sound card as well as the I2S cables. Give it a few days then pass judgment. But yes it did mellow out eventually.
Edits: 10/29/09 10/29/09
Thanks, I think it already improved noticeably during the past 24 hours (I left the system on the entire time). By the way, the 30 AWG conductor of the RG179 seems *really* fragile. I used some hot melt glue on my Juli@ to ensure I don't tear the I2S cables off by accident. Ugly, but it works!
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
Edits: 10/29/09
why not solder?
Glue on top of solder. I'll post a pic when I have time.
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
Edits: 10/29/09
I was thinking of using a usb cable for I2S, just a thought :).
Brad
After intensive listening and adjusting (in a tri-amped system one has many tonal balance options) I have currently settled on medium buffer setting with juli@ panel @ 64 latency. I also needed to adjust subwoofer and midbass levels several iterations to get it right. With 31 I get great balance at low levels but at FFFF levels the highs seem to come forward and be prominent (not edgy) . Edit: ...Subsequent listening and I find this phenomena has diminished...I can understand why many have mixed emotions re 31 because w/o the adjustments I have, I may not have been able to dial in an acceptable tonal balance. I am now listening to cmp set to Realtime (rather than Critical) and will evaluate this based on your comments Cics. But what really does this do versus the Critical setting? My memory is that Critical was optimum, is that still correct for juli@?
Edit...Critical is better...
Edits: 10/17/09 10/17/09
Optimise set to "Critical" is the recommendation. "Realtime" can work with a minimal ASIO driver - one needs to test this. I prefer Critical with my Lynx.
It seems that you are changing too many things at once (and you have a new Juli@). Sound will change with more burn-in. Try this: in cPlay, set buffer to "Tiny" and set Juli@'s latency to 48 samples - gives this at least 48 hours.
You are right I believe my juli and my teflon coax (for I2s) are breaking in. I had been listening to 64 latency and tiny buffer for last several hours and its great(I mean absolutely MAGNIFICENT). Right now per your suggestion I switched to 48 latency and will evaluate this for awhile. When I loaded 31 I could not run 48 latency with tiny buffer (it stuttered) so I believe it was breakin all along.
But so far after several days the sound is simply the best I have ever heard in my system. The anomaly with the highs (dynamics shifts back & forth) was simply a breakin phenomena. The imaging is nothing short of superb. Later I will comment on the tiny/48 combination with cplay 31.
I have been down for 2 weeks. Events had overtaken me. In an attempt to implement I2s I hooked up my LiFePo4's backwards and fried juli@. Took me two weeks to get a new juli@. In the interim I lost my 96 year old mother...lots of stuff to take care of. I got my juli@ and just now loaded cplay 31 (still with spdif into Buffalo)...wow and I'm not even to 140 host clock control nor 3 3 3 5 on the memory. When I'm down for a while I have to creep back to optimum hcc and timings. But nevertheless 31 is great. Can't describe it yet but it sounds very very natural. Lesson learnt for me and hopefully for others KEEP POLARITY CORRECT ON BATTERY SUPPLY. More on 31 later, Initially very very natural
Hey Theob,
Sorry to hear about your mother. That is sad to hear, and kind of puts this hobby into perspective.
Thanks for keeping us updated and for the tips on the Juli@. One of the nice things about that card is that it is such a great performer for the money, so accidents are recoverable.
One of the reason i kind of have to run my lynx stock...cant afford to screw it up!
Thank you for your kind words. I appreciate it. I can't afford to screw up the Juli@ BUT I did, hopefully nobody else will.
For those of you who have followed my issues (& I had a lot) I could not get spdif to work on my juli@ after a dreaded metallic. So necessity becomes the mother of invention...I had my 75 ohm teflon coax to try I2s but 3 weeks of trial and error I could not get the mechanics to work. But with help from inmates (bertel and wackybytacky) I finally got it to work. Big shout out to Sonics without his i2s sketch I could not have corrected my incorrect hookup to Buf32. Alfred and Robert you are the man (er men)!!! Anyway I2s from cplay 31 is a significant step up in soundspace (wider and deeper) separation of instruments, fantastic (ie bigger) dynamics and lo and behold no metallics (omg what did it take me ---10 months from identification to solution). I'm running 192 with buffer set to auto and juli@ latency set to 64 (tried 48: too dry, tried 128: not enough air, 64 just right). Anyway 31 is unbelievably natural, open and dynamic. I'm not sure I am set on all the parameter setting but I am so glad to be back into 192 music! Thank you cics for 31: a masterpiece!
ps Robert: I think I am not going to try those 22 ohm resistors to damp the I2S signals...just a little gun shy now. I'll wait till you measure juli@ output impedance.
For those of you with Buf32s be carefull and learn from my mistakes if you decide to go I2s. Yes it was worth it but it took 3 weeks. The journey may not be for the faint of heart.
Sorry Theob. I was looking at things relative to the price of my Lynx.
If it is any consolation I think most of us have done some boneheaded things to destroy audio gear.
Why within the last year I toasted my Lynx card by wrapping it with tinfoil. Who would have thought it would have overheated? The damn pci slots end up making things upside down anyhow...
Fortunately Lynx replaced the op amps for a reasonable fee.
Forgive me, but I think I remember that we tracked down your metallics to your juli@. Do I have that right?
Yes the metallics are caused by juli@ drivers (required when using spdif out). However when going I2S no drivers are required and so no metallics.
I used to have a professional sound card (not Lynx, but the RME AES-32) in my cMP as well.However, ever since I found the I2S of the Juli@ outperformed my RME's AES, I sold the RME and never looked back. Then again, I didn't find the stock SPDIF out of the Juli@ impressive at all. The RME was significantly better than the Juli@ unmodded.
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
Edits: 10/14/09
Hey FP,
I am using the dacs on the Lynx as I will soon be triamping and need 6 dacs basically. The Lynx is fantastic for the money.
Actually I ran out to my external dac and while it was pretty good, I thought the Lynx was everybit as good, probably a bit better given the price difference.
Are you doing DSP crossover inside the PC? If so, what software are you using for that? Or does the Lynx software allow you to do that? Pardon my ignorance. I am running six channels active but do the crossover in a modified Rane RPM 26z. That is fed by a Mac/iTunes/Amarra/Offramp but am reading this thread to see if I want to try doing it with cPlay/Lynx instead.
Hey B,
The plan is to use the thuneau Allocator (www.thuneau.com) with cmp/cplay.
The hold up has been the funds for new identical amps. I get them tommorrow and I can then start in earnest.
Play-mate and Bibo01 are ahead of me in implementing the Allocator with the Lynx. Hopefully I'll catch up soon enough.
Nice Job! With a couple of mentions of mixed reviews and 2.0b30 being so good, I was not sure what to expect. I was initially pleased to see that 31 clearly had not taken a step back in any regard. It seemed at first that there was an increase in detail and clarity. CMP2 has likely gone well past the ability of my speakers to resolve all that it is putting out, but as I listened over a couple of sessions it is clear that while it is a subtle difference, I am hearing much deeper into the music. It is again time to re listen to my entire collection. For my system, SOX has been the clear winner, but with this release the gap has closed to the point that I can easily flip between SOX and SRC with no loss of air and detail and enjoy the subtle advantages of each on given track. Its now closer to flipping phase. I run on a laptop with a celeron with very small cache, and Tiny buffer really works well.
Again thank you for sharing this great audio achievement.
I have the new release for some hours running and I am amazed, that after the last, great version again some subtancial qualities are obvious. Again more details. As stated by someone already, lyrics are easy to follow. Voices in the background are clearly separated. I am used now, to let the system run in for several hours, before I give a statement. Thanks to sics for this version. Within a few days I will have my buffalo-dac running and can not wait for the outcome. Walter
Tarkowsky wrote:
As stated by someone already, lyrics are easy to follow.
You're absolutely right - but it may not always be a good thing.
My wife was amused to discover last night (over 40 years after first buying the record!) that the lyric for Chuck Berry's "Tulane" has one word in a line that is not what the usual sources say it is. They usually give it as "Get me out this funky jail". They're wrong.
Worse, this morning, I was playing "Purcell in The Ale House" (an album of 17th Century "catches" and "rounds", i.e. light songs for private performance, often by young men, in "noble" houses).
I knew HP wasn't among the angels whose praises he so eloquently rang in his music but I wasn't prepared to hear staid English choral group Pro Cantone Antiqua singing a hitherto-indecipherable line (no lyrics in the sleeve note) to a song called "Once, twice, thrice I Julia tried, the scornful puss as oft denied" was in fact "Kiss my arse" sung repeatedly in the most delicate harmony one could wish for.
Whatever next?
Cics, thank you for your clarification re latency. It did become clearer under closer study. b31 has reduced latency to 55 using tiny with the L22. My impression of b31 is somewhat mixed, with the greatest regard to that which I can comprehend but never achieve by myself. The instrumentation is very clearly balanced but does not have the room interaction of b30. Base music has lost some of the string decay, which is to say slightly smeared. For example Patricia Barbers Mythologies. I have switched back and forth several times and am still burning in b31. Thank you again, T.
No worries!
congratulations again, cics....!
there is a remarkable difference in this release :
its very obvious that the sound is drier and less resonant. especially on multiple brass arrangements there is clearly more precision. maybe a tad less glossy and shiny, but equally transparent.
beautiful !
I so adored b30. But after 3 weeks in-depth listening, I had two reservations (SOX, HQ, 48K, Small Buffer) :
-- there was a haze in the high frequency that could inject extra space in some recordings. The resulting 3D effect could be quite attractive but ultimately felt false. For vocals that were mixed way at the back of the sound stage, the images are fuzzy.
-- for some recordings (I am thinking of 'Astral Weeks' as an example, the Japanese remastered version) the emotional impact of the instrumentation was not quite there when compared to the LP version (again Japanese vinyl version). The attack of instruments such as congo, high hat, guitar etc. were soft and I couldn't feel the human behind the playing. Please note that the emotional content of the instruments is a big thing in 'Astral Weeks'
With b31, I now switch to SRC (tiny buffer, 48K, 121db) and the above too 'problems' are mostly gone! The high end haze is no longer there and the emotions are mostly back in 'Astral Weeks". And the bass is now more solid.
I find myself listening to the music rather than the hifi, finally, after all these years in the digital world.
Thanks Mr. cics.
In the past year (plus) with the many cPlay releases, the difference in SQ has ranged between subtle to a little more noticeable (and I'm a "Sharpener"), but (I may be exaggerating to say this) but wow, the difference between Tiny and Small is about the most dramatic difference I've heard. And I haven't even compared it to Medium and Large yet.Dawnrazor, you'll probably appreciate this: I started to listen to "Loveless" by "My Bloody Valentine" and was floored at how I could finally hear the lyrics in "When You Sleep" (without it being smeared by all the guitar distortion).
A usually "dark" (pardon the pun) sounding "Masquerade" by "Clan Of Xymox" now sounds more intelligible, and a usually "bright" sounding "Four Calendar Cafe" by "Cocteau Twins" now sounds less edgy.
Edits: 10/08/09
edward wrote:. . .the difference between Tiny and Small is about the most dramatic difference I've heard.
Judging by your list of favourite music, there's not much risk of our getting in each other's way in a music store but, having just experimented with these settings, you're certainly not far out - the difference is very marked.
(What I haven't done is compare v31 set at Tiny with earlier versions which, of course, lack the setting.)
Meanwhile, it's worth visiting the link below.
Dave
Edits: 10/11/09
Hey Edward,
I unfortunately havent had any time with 31 on the big rig yet. I was really digging 30 after my recent cmp2 build.
Hard to imagine it being better but cics always amazes.
I can tell you that over the years recordings that i thought were crap have actually turned out to be some of the better ones as my stereo has improved.
I can totally appreciate your comments and hope soon to share in them.
Thanks for posting this and I'll see if I have similar results.
There is a line by the Church in "Destination" on their starfish album that I have always been unable to hear. I hope this version reveals it, but I just think that might not be intelligible any how. We'll see.
D
Well, Dawnrazor, I know you and I share the same musical taste, and some of those 80s recordings that we are talking about are just dreadful. This past year has been rewarding though, as I have picked up "remastered" versions of Dead Can Dance, The Cure, Tears For Fears, Yaz, Joy Division and there are also remasters of Skinny Puppy and Cocteau Twins out there and Bauhaus is releasing a remastered version of Mask (and hopefully the rest of the catalog will follow). The Yaz box came with a DVD that included 24/48 versions which sound awesome. In fact all these remastered versions I mentioned sound awesome. I'm hoping that now that all these artists are doing remasters, that they digitally mastered at 24/192 and that these will some day be available. And I do thank NIN for paving the way, and offering "The Slip" as a free download (in 24/96 no less), but his music is so distorted anyway, that having the 24/96 version doesn't really offer you that much more.
But here's hoping that more of the 80s discs follow suit. (And I know my wife will pay good money if and when Duran Duran's entire catalog is remastered and/or available as hi-rez).
E,
That is awesome info. i had no idea all these remasters were around. i might have to buy some music for the first time in a LONG time. (OK I did buy that Sisters of Mercy "First And Last And Always" release that was supposed to be like the original vinyl release that was somehow different than the original cd release. But it wasn't remastered.)
Thanks a bunch for sharing.
FWIW your wife is better than mine in this case. When she saw me adding the cure cds to my shopping cart at amazon she said something like "you already have those cds, who cares if it is remastered. Its the same old song anyhow..."
I was nice enough to have added the new Michael Buble cd she has been dropping hints on, so I said, "Then why do you want that Michael Buble cd? Its mostly just covers of the same old songs..."
My wife is the perfect wife in almost every way. Audio is her one flaw...
Ironically I have enough pcs lying around that I was thinking of making a rip box to see if there were better ways to rip than I did years ago. Now I will have even more reason to go to the trouble!
Thanks again!
.
.
Hi Cics,
Thank you very much for the b31 update!
My feeling for this version is quite mixed: This version's accuracy and sound stage is the best thus far. Sound stage is so accurate that I can feel the singer standing in front of me. More micro details are revealed when playing back complex classical (orchestra) music. The other advantage to me is richer bass but not boom (well I only use JM Lab micro Utopia so other experts who have floor standing speaker will provide more relevant comments). However, the sound is "too accurate" that musicality is affected, especially when compared to b30. Therefore this version is good for classical but a bit coarse for female vocal. Therefore, I need to check "small buffer" in stead of "tiny" in order to smooth out the sound a bit. Other settings remain the same (upsample 192, VHQ, Linear 95, no alias). I still miss the female vocal in b30.
Thanks again for the good work!
Try adjusting juli@ panel latency. As I adjusted from 48-> 128-> 64 I found the impact on dry or etched to detailed and liquid very profound. I prefer 64 but you may like another setting.
You should try SRC, as cics recommended. Having experimented extensively with SoX settings in the past, I have a strong feeling that SoX tends to outperform SRC in certain areas, but the latter is simply more pleasing and musical overall.I will report back after I have the chance to properly evaluate the b31 release (new DAC still burning in).
"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.
Edits: 10/08/09
Post a Followup: