Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › A (better sounding?) alternative to Foobar2000 -OR- A musing in the realm of bit-perfect streaming
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A (better sounding?) alternative to Foobar2000 -OR- A musing in the realm of bit-perfect streaming - Page 16

post #226 of 341
Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

 

Real men use XP. They keep bloating the whole OS since Vista...more background processes doing god knows what sneakily in the background and hogging your system, more bloat in the video department w/ that pesky Aero hogging the VSYNC, more bloat in the audio engine...like forcing you to set a fixed sample rate, now who came up w/ such a retarded idea?? m$ are just doing it wrong, they wanna market the MacOS ppl. Not to blame them, these are the ppl paying for software....they want a dumbed down GUI, m$ delivers.

 

Many ppl prefer KS in XP over WASAPI in W7, duh.

 

W8 should be out soon enough, maybe they won't screw up again...many ppl prefer Vista over W7 too hah. I'm the local admin of my box, I want to control each and every background process running on my system.


Real men DON'T use XP, seeing as it has no more security updates.  Also, you can turn off Aero, and control every process.  I should know, since at one time I had only six running on my netbook.  Also, you keep talking about having to set a single sampling rate in Win7.  But, WASAPI bypasses that.  Mine's set to 24/96, but I've tested it to output 16/44.1 when I had a file playing via WASAPI.

 

Many people?  o.O  Who are these people?  Were they blind tests from the exact same hardware?  Not through emulation layers?

 

Windows 8 should enter beta in July 2011.  Also, polls have shown that many people prefer Win7 over Vista/XP.  And you can control each and every background process.  It's called the services applet.

post #227 of 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by muad View Post

Im using the same as you, and I don't think I could pass an abx test between ulilith and foobar if the volumes were matched....


Isn't the volume automatically matched at 100% for both players (meaning both at 0db at 100% volume)? If not then isn't that already a sign that they don't sound the same?


Edited by donunus - 6/1/10 at 5:30pm
post #228 of 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draca View Post

Thanks for all the fascinating information regal!

 

@nick_charles: any developments in your testing?


No more yet, Lilith still refuses to output the reference sample correctly, it trims off the last 220th of a second, I am still messing about with the settings, this time in English thanks to LeePerry, will update if get better results...
 

post #229 of 341
Originally Posted by donunus View Post

Isn't the volume automatically matched at 100% for both players? If not then isn't that already a sign that they don't sound the same?

 

huh oh...looks like someone opened Pandora's box.
 

Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post

No more yet, Lilith still refuses to output the reference sample correctly, it trims off the last 220th of a second, I am still messing about with the settings

 

tried to change the mode from crosfeed to gapless? in ASIO/WASAPI/DS? in FLAC and WAV?

 

FWIW, I do get gapless audio...I can't hear any glitch in gapless albums using ASIO4ALL.

post #230 of 341

also could the crossfading volume in ulilith possibly be the reason for those tweaky samples? 

post #231 of 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

 

tried to change the mode from crosfeed to gapless? in ASIO/WASAPI/DS? in FLAC and WAV?

 

 



Using gapless and WASAPI and wav

post #232 of 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by muad View Post

lol you hack! That test was done with asio 0.9. and the version is at 1.2.7 now.... retest or go find somewhere else to troll

 

this is wrong!

 

 

 

 

this is what it actually says!

 

 

Nice find muad!

 

Love how leeperry has been shown to be intellectually dishonest about pretty much everything...

post #233 of 341

I was using gapless too but every time you cue a track it would still fade in the music. Its gapless between tracks though. 

post #234 of 341
Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post


Using gapless and WASAPI and wav

 

Might wanna try FLAC, I think WAV is decoded through DirectShow and there are some known issues w/ WavPack through DS for instance...FLAC/APE are 100% gapless for me in ASIO.

 

Originally Posted by donunus View Post

I was using gapless too but every time you cue a track it would still fade in the music. Its gapless between tracks though. 


Yes, seeking is also making use of fade in/fade out...you can disable this "mixer" in lilith but not in uLilith. Gapless still does work.

 

Can't tell on W7, but usually they have "(with Mixer)" in the renderers options.


Edited by leeperry - 6/1/10 at 6:24pm
post #235 of 341

again and again my ears tell me that foobar has more recessed mids than ulilith. I need to get a check up. Placebo levels are super high. I really do believe that it could be placebo but my ears are not allowing me to hear foobar as the one with more mids even if I do some mind control. Foobar consistently has an edginess in the higher part of the mids making it more aggressive even though less forward while ulilith has a more forward midrange right smack in the middle

 

EDIT: I can understand by what leeperry meant by ulilith being more laid back while some others said at first its more forward. Its the upper mids that are more forward with foobar while the lower mids I hear ulilith as being more forward. Its like foobar=digital, ulilith more analog. Very minute differences here compared to comparing an analog vs a digital rig but those are the the directions these player gravitate towards in character.


Edited by donunus - 6/1/10 at 6:34pm
post #236 of 341
Originally Posted by donunus View Post

even if I do some mind control.

 

maybe you just need some EXtreme Ear RESolution [:domus]

 

Originally Posted by donunus View Post

foobar=digital, ulilith more analog.

 

I really think I'm having a bad influence on you...but yes, I fully agree [:ginie]


Edited by leeperry - 6/1/10 at 6:34pm
post #237 of 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

 

sorry, I don't use foobar...It makes my ears bleed for some reason [:_jbm]

 

they have to prove that they are finally bit-perfect now(about time?), why should I prove that they aren't? you got it backward my little friend.



Wait, so you trash foobar this whole thread, but you don't even use it? Doesn't that make pretty much all of your comments worthless then? So, what exactly were you arguing? It couldn't possibly have been anything pertaining to foobar that these other people are discussing since you don't even use it. 

 

They have to prove it, but you don't have to disprove it when you're the one trashing it? What kind of logic is that?

 

Too bad you didn't say that earlier, it would have certainly saved a lot of other people's time in responding to you.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by muad View Post

lol you hack! That test was done with asio 0.9. and the version is at 1.2.7 now.... retest or go find somewhere else to troll

 

this is wrong!

 

 

 

 

this is what it actually says!

 


Yay, nothing like editing it to say what you want.

 

leeperry do you have something to gain by trashing foobar and building up these other programs? I'd hope so, otherwise, what's the point of doing stuff like this?

post #238 of 341
Originally Posted by darkswordsman17 View Post

 

what's the point


oh, I'm here for the fun  coz it's hard to deny that all the players sound different, have you read all the testimonials I've linked? Have you compared those players personally? The OP said he found a good player and usually those threads end up in 10 pages of "this is placebo, you're a nutcase that needs medical attention"....can you feel the winds of change? all the software I'm discussing is freeware btw.


Edited by leeperry - 6/1/10 at 6:45pm
post #239 of 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

 

maybe you just need some EXtreme Ear RESolution [:domus]

 

 

I really think I'm having a bad influence on you...but yes, I fully agree [:ginie]


Sometimes though with beat driven music I prefer foobar because the beats seem snappier. The bottom line for me is that they are different and sometimes just like the vst plugins you prefer one effect over the other. As far as proving it is different on my system to everyone that is reading this, I'm afraid I don't know how to prove it further than just my listening.

post #240 of 341

To me and my system, after several days of testing, the best player is MPC with Reclock and MadFlac, i try Foobar, Ulilith, KMPlayer, StealthPlayer, XXHighEnd all of them claim to be BitPerfect all of them sound different all of them pass the HDCD flag intact (i don't know if this is a good bitperfect test) so for the moment MPC is my favorite sounding player.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › A (better sounding?) alternative to Foobar2000 -OR- A musing in the realm of bit-perfect streaming