|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.220.52.9
In Reply to: RE: Right - compared A+ with HQP and here's my impressions posted by andy evans on December 19, 2016 at 15:42:17
I upsample everything to DSD 128.
I use poly-sinc-shrt-mp, ASDM7, Bit Rate limit of 49152000,
Vol Max 0db, Vol Min -6 db ( Jussi's recommendation for up sampling to DSD128),
Pipeline DSD, SDM pack Dop.
It also upsamples DSD64 to any of the higher rates (2x, 4x)
without conversion to PCM.
No one else does that, all others convert to PCM first.
No problems at all operationally.
That being said, my Sony HAP Z1 bettered my Lampizator and Mytek Dacs, by no small margin, in direct comparison using same files playing at the same time.
The Sony is too big (deep) for my equipment rack in Den System,
I only use it in Living Room System.
I've been searching for a replacement open Back Rack ( Cabinet, actually).
I feel I wasted the $ on the Mytek and Lampizator Euforia.
I can't wait for Sony's replacement, Z2???
Follow Ups:
"Vol Max 0db, Vol Min -6 db ( Jussi's recommendation for up sampling to DSD128)"
Sorry, but as an official reseller of the HQPlayer I know for sure that this is not Jussi's recommendation.
He always recommends Vol Max -3 dB. This is to avoid digital clipping in many recordings and to allow for upsampling.
I would also recommend at the same time to enable +6 dB gain for DSD (in DFF/DSF setting menu).
OldmkVI as in Selmer I presume, so another musician?
I'm presently using an ES9023 DAC which doesn't do DSD. However, I have a Soekris I need to install, and that should do DSD. Maybe that will change things. Don't know anything about DSD yet.
Had another listen this morning. Once again struck by how smooth the vocals are in HQP. They're less euphonic in A+, but more defined. And that's it really - definition. A+ is more focussed. Listened again to some Janacek opera. Voices probably better in HQP but the orchestral instruments are less in focus - going towards a bit mushy. Much easier to pick out the timbres of flute versus oboe versus clarinet in Audirvana. They're a bit of a blend in HQP. It's disconcerting. So for all its sweetness, the harder but more defined focus of Audirvana is still the one I want to listen to. It just gets more details in the arrangement right, so the music makes more sense overall. Audirvana was always strong in instrumental timbre - that's why I originally preferred it to Pure Music and Amarra.
OK, 'using' is not exactly what I'm doing, but at least it's loaded on my headless Mac Mini with the hope of someday figuring out how to get it to play nice with my 'library' which is in iTunes and also how to get it to play nice with TIDAL and QOBUZ.
Hopefully soon.
the Direct Mode being disabled on AV+2.6.1/Mac Sierra.
I also use Decible, along w/MC21, HQ, and Korg Audiogate/DS Dac 100.
They all have their uses...
Well, I compared MC 21 , AV+, ( no Direct Mode) and HQ.
Still prefer HQ.
Such is Life.
Selmer?
I thought it was The Cartier Edition?
Selmer Mark VI. Started in 1954 or 5, ended in the 70's ( I think) when they came out with the MK VII.
So they are ALL old , at this point!
THEM, not me...
until the early 60's.
For your Entry-Level playing pleasure.
I used a Bundy Tenor a few times early in my early Classical Tenor career!
The ones I see on ebay are all plastic or have plastic bell and barrel and as I see on the internet the Selmer student instruments with the Bundy name sold in the mid to late 50's were mostly resinite but they did make the Bundy in wood as well.
My teacher was a stickler for tone and would never have allowed a plastic clarinet or a Rico reed to enter his studio!
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: