Computer Audio Asylum

Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies.

Return to Computer Audio Asylum


Asio Buffers and Sound Quality

87.228.210.244

Posted on November 6, 2009 at 03:24:56
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 4100
Joined: June 1, 2002
Why does the no of asio buffers affect the sound. Too little and SQ goes thin. Too much and SQ becomes mellower.

This is true for any player and sound card I have tried.

Software Jitter???????

Thats why I stay away from ASIO, it has more flavors than Baskin Robbins, posted on November 6, 2009 at 07:43:51
Dynaudio_Rules
Audiophile

Posts: 5594
Location: Georgia
Joined: April 1, 2005
I only like the flavor of tubes...



Scrutiny Strengthens The Truth and Breaks Down Lies 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋

And the favorite flavor in PC Audio is 'Fruity Loops'., posted on November 6, 2009 at 08:47:54
Squonk
Audiophile

Posts: 1682
Location: Indianapolis
Joined: August 17, 2005



.
Photobucket

That's different from what I hear., posted on November 6, 2009 at 07:33:56
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
The lowest possible buffer size sounds best to me.

cics attempted to explain technical reasons for it (don't remember whether in a post or one of his papers), and that didn't sit well with some inmates here - but that was from "it all sounds the same" position.

RE: That's different from what I hear., posted on November 9, 2009 at 03:13:43
Ryelands
Audiophile

Posts: 299
Location: Scotland
Joined: January 9, 2009
cics attempted to explain technical reasons for it (don't remember whether in a post or one of his papers).

The note in question (posted without comment) reads:

+++++

ASIO latency

ASIO drivers allow for latency setup in samples (or time or byte size). Recording demands ultra low latencies (as low as 32 samples). The same holds true for playback but its rationale is different. In recording, there's an explicit time delay between when an instrument is played vs when its recorded. Here, realtime processing is desired, i.e. sound is recorded as it happens.

Does size matter (during playback)?

Refined setups will readily reveal sound quality changes with changing latency. It’s best to use lowest stable latency. A good programmer would argue that latency is a non-issue for playback. "Just set it to highest level as we get less context switches which is more efficient . . .". This is not correct for best sound quality.

At a software, firmware and hardware level, PCI prefers small payloads.

"Latency jitter" as in variations in latency was thought to be the cause for why latency affects sound quality. This idea has been scrapped.

From a Jitter viewpoint, when a soundcard's buffer is populated (whilst the other buffer is converted to SPDIF or whatever), there's a burst of electrical activity. The idea is to keep this burst as short as possible thereby reducing interference to the soundcard's XO, i.e. reduce Jpp.

We achieve this by setting latency to the lowest possible level. Of course, using such a low latency would mean more frequent buffer loads. This is the ASIO frequency (or ASIO Hz). At 32 samples latency for 96k output, ASIO Hz is 3kHz. This is now periodic in nature and is digitally induced. We now have Periodic Jitter - the worst kind which exists for all digital playback systems. ASIO gives us control over this.

Higher ASIO Hz is preferred and you definitely want to avoid anything less than 1kHz. Why? A soundcard's PLL or PLLs down the chain will be able to further reduce this periodic jitter as the frequency is likely to be above the PLL's cut-off.

+++++

RE: That's different from what I hear., posted on November 6, 2009 at 07:40:39
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 4100
Joined: June 1, 2002
The lowest buffers sound best in some systems, but some sound cards need more.

RE: Asio Buffers and Sound Quality, posted on November 6, 2009 at 05:33:41
Squonk
Audiophile

Posts: 1682
Location: Indianapolis
Joined: August 17, 2005
I'm done playing the buffer game. I can't hear a difference (after several blind tests). Are you absolutely positive you hear a difference? Did you try a blind test? UGH! Sorry. lol It just doesn't make sense. If you say you hear a difference I'll give you that. Maybe my system isn't resolute enough.
Photobucket

RE: Asio Buffers and Sound Quality, posted on November 9, 2009 at 01:45:33
flipper
Audiophile

Posts: 13
Location: Qld
Joined: August 1, 2009


Its a well known fact that asio buffer size is for recording.
Sound quality does not change with buffer size,just set it around 1024 and you will never have any problems.

RE: Asio Buffers and Sound Quality, posted on November 9, 2009 at 02:10:31
Squonk
Audiophile

Posts: 1682
Location: Indianapolis
Joined: August 17, 2005
Thanks for the reassurance. lol
Photobucket

RE: Asio Buffers and Sound Quality, posted on November 9, 2009 at 22:21:06
flipper
Audiophile

Posts: 13
Location: Qld
Joined: August 1, 2009
Quote::Thanks for the reassurance. lol


No problems,there seem to be a lot here that need it,apart from just you.

I suggest that some who are hearing strange artifacts,give there ears a rest whilst seeking help for there affliction.
You have to wonder about the mental health of those that hear what others fail to hear.
Lets all start chanting "bit perfect is bit perfect" because I am afraid to say that if it is then it will all sound the same.
The only way for a player to sound apart from another is if [god forbid] it plays with the bits.

And please do not utter that word [jitter],there is nothing super about the human ear despite what many think,in fact compared with many other mammals it is sadly lacking.
The claims that many here attest to make them the laughing stock of the general audio community.

You have to wonder about the mental health of those that fail to hear what others hear., posted on November 10, 2009 at 15:58:06
ForgotPassword
Audiophile

Posts: 58
Joined: September 21, 2009
Hello, laughing stock of the audio community.


"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines." N.P.

Page processed in 0.037 seconds.