Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies.

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Computer Audio Asylum ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

RE: Thanks for posting and introducing yourself

Posted by Christine Tham (R) on July 1, 2007 at 20:36:58

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?

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

VH Audio

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---