Computer Audio Asylum

Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies.

Return to Computer Audio Asylum

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Windows 10 Creators Update's UAC2 driver - Is it better than OEM driver?

180.183.107.11
Posted on April 30, 2017 at 14:40:58
Windows X
Manufacturer

Posts: 209
Location: Thailand
Joined: February 28, 2011
 Warning: This is purely subjective listening tests. Please keep in mind this is personal opinion and speculations.

I've been eagerly to test this for a long while but I have been so busy lately with lots of things to do now. Today I finished some works and have some free time to do some small tests. I'll use Hiface Two to test between new UAC2 driver in Windows 10 Creators Update and M2Tech USB Audio Driver.

Windows 10 Creators Update's UAC2 Driver: It works. It doesn't sound that bad. I find Windows 10 sounding a lot similar to Linux/OS X now. Maybe it's sound from mapping to UAC2 interface in firmware. Hires and DSD DoP formats worked too.

M2Tech USB Audio Driver: Are you kidding me? This makes Windows 10's UAC2 driver sounds duller. It brings better transparency and cleaner sound with this driver. I also enjoy music better with improved transient attack and slam of dynamics.

The sound improvement is no less from Windows 10 v1607 to v1703 to my ears. If you set to streaming buffer to Low Latency option, it'll sound much more closer to real instruments. It's a shame that OS X/Linux audiophiles won't be able to compare and experience this greatness.

Since the result is so obvious, I tried to find the reason why and this is probably why. Here's how Windows 10 Creators Update's UAC2 driver works.

UAC2 OS driver -> UAC2 interface driver -> kernel driver

Windows 10's UAC2 driver will route to UAC2 interface provided in firmware to interact with actual kernel driver. This UAC2 driver is more like a mapper to UAC2 interface driver in hardware device. And here's how M2Tech USB Audio driver works.

USB Audio driver -> kernel driver

Native UAC2 driver will interact with kernel driver directly. It can stream 24/192 format at 3ms latency. I tested "Minimum Latency" and I can stream 24/192 file at 256 samples as advertised. Impossible on UAC2 driver.

This generic UAC2 driver thing is good to have. It can make Windows based server solutions much easier for those who can't build a real turnkey Windows based server like Nimitra. However, I recommend to use OEM driver because it'll be better for most of the times.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Windows 10 Creators Update's UAC2 driver - Is it better than OEM driver?, posted on April 30, 2017 at 14:49:17
SBGK
Audiophile

Posts: 444
Joined: March 22, 2012
 guess your talking wasapi, the real benefit of native uac2 is it allows for wavert. How many client programs will make use of this though ?
http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

 

RE: Windows 10 Creators Update's UAC2 driver - Is it better than OEM driver?, posted on April 30, 2017 at 19:50:33
Windows X
Manufacturer

Posts: 209
Location: Thailand
Joined: February 28, 2011
 I'm talking about new uac2 driver that you can use USB Audio class 2 without installing driver.

 

RE: Windows 10 Creators Update's UAC2 driver - Is it better than OEM driver?, posted on April 30, 2017 at 23:27:37
Archimago
Audiophile

Posts: 821
Joined: January 18, 2002
 Works just fine for me. Objectively same as bitperfect ASIO driver and Raspberry Pi 3 Linux UAC2 driver.


-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.

 

Objectively same , posted on May 1, 2017 at 03:53:43
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 what does this mean? Sujectively not the same is what Windows X says.

With your low resolution FFT and thd + N measurements, 'objective' sameness is not that meaningful.

 

RE: Objectively same , posted on May 1, 2017 at 11:26:34
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 As compared to what, your measurements? Archimagos captures are cleaner than most who use similar technique. But since you brought it up, please state the required resolution required of results from such setups in order to meet the fmak threshold of "enough" resolution to be a data set which could be a case considered worthy of your analysis.

 

RE: Objectively same , posted on May 1, 2017 at 22:04:22
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 As compared to measurements using proper high resolution instruments and or sound cards, with proper analysis software.

If you understand measurement principles, you would not have asked this question. And if you must, compare these to Stereophile and HiFi News measurements and my 64 bit Pro FFT software and high quality ADCs.

 

RE: Objectively same , posted on May 2, 2017 at 07:17:04
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 "If you understand measurement principles, you would not have asked this question."

Either that or if you for once in your life posted some evidence with your claims that indicate you actually have some basis for making the claim....lol

Which FFT software and ADC's. Are you willing to share any screen captures which demonstrate this superiority?

I'm still very skeptical you can exceed the resolution of Archimagos posted results with your software and gear and will remain so until you demonstrate otherwise. This all based on your history of BS claims with no evidence or substance to back any of it. Until you post screen shots of your results I'm assuming they are just too embarrassing for you to reveal.

 

exceed the resolution of Archimagos posted results , posted on May 2, 2017 at 11:51:54
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 Anyone who understands measurements in electronics will know what I have been on about.

This is why Stereophile would not dream of using amateur software and hardware to make the case for no difference as claimed.

I don't have to and don't want to explain anything to you. If the originator of the comment wants to respond, that's fine.

 

lol. Is your last name Astaire?, posted on May 2, 2017 at 11:58:42
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 all the dancing you do to try and pretend that literally everything you post isn't complete BS might lead one to question that....

 

RE: Windows 10 Creators Update's UAC2 driver - Is it better than OEM driver?, posted on May 3, 2017 at 05:46:10
SBGK
Audiophile

Posts: 444
Joined: March 22, 2012
 so am I, the native driver allows wavecyclic for uac1 and wavert for uac2 resolutions for usb connected devices. This means the client just needs to copy the data to a point in memory and the device driver will read it from there, with potential benefits to sound quality. Do you think the client just magically sends the music to the usb device ?
http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

 

What is his idea of 'proper' ?, posted on May 4, 2017 at 20:01:06
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46306
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
He will never elaborate as he prefers to post within the confined boundaries of his knowledge.... which is evident in his often unintelligible vagueness.



 

RE: What is his idea of 'proper' ?, posted on May 4, 2017 at 22:17:29
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 Proper=Right or Wrong. In measurement, the instruments and techniques being used must be an order of magnitude or more better than the object being measured.

This is what you and some others are not able to fathom and regard as vague.

 

RE: What is his idea of 'proper' ?, posted on May 4, 2017 at 23:38:23
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46306
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
I commend you for being a bit more specific, this time.



 

Being Specific?, posted on May 5, 2017 at 02:26:30
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 No more specific than pointing out your inability to understand what other posters are saying.

 

RE: What is his idea of 'proper' ?, posted on May 5, 2017 at 14:11:16
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 Here is where you've once again almost certainly posted all the evidence necessary in order to reveal you are definitely full of it. Unless you have been to Windows X place and listened to the system in question, exactly how would you know how much capture resolution would be necessary in order to resolve an audibly resolvable difference in that particular case?

How many times have you heard the system in person, fmak, which Windows X made the determination about the new driver? how many times have you heard it before and after the driver update?

I'm going with zero, and you just made all this BS up here on the spot as usual.

 

RE: Being Specific?, posted on May 6, 2017 at 12:04:35
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46306
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
I have no problem understanding what other posters are saying because they usually make sense..... unlike most of your posts. But thanks for trying harder this time.





 

RE: Being Specific?Sense, posted on May 22, 2017 at 07:21:25
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 A post only makes sense to those who possess the background and knowledge to comprehend. In your case, your posts clearly demonstrate that you do not possess the capability of making sense of others' posts.

 

Page processed in 0.031 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]