I'll be purchasing the program in the future for sure.
I tried this with JRiver...it did not change the sound quality one bit.
This is a $99 Euro program that doesnt really make any difference on my systems.
This Jplay code is highly suspect in the audio arena....many of the developers of products like
JRiver, DBPoweramp, Foobar have great mis-givings about what this code does not do.
If it works for you fine, its your $130 or so US....
But buyer beware...YMMV.
^^^^ Can you link to some sources other than JPlay's competitors that talk about their code being suspect? I think if one google's info regarding various reviews regarding JPlay's sound quality, you'll find quite a few very happy people....consumers and professional reviewers alike.
I have both JPlay and JRiver....and almost exclusively use Jplay as there is no question that it sounds better in my system. The fact that they just came out with v4.3, which now allows for DSD playback, gives me no reason to continue to use Jriver. While JPlay Mini's GUI is very bare-bones and rudimentary, I am all about the sound and couldn't care less about convenience.
I have been using JPlay on and off for few months and to be honest at the beginning I was convinced it sounded better than JRiver. But the more I compared the two I became pretty sure that the only difference was due to expectation bias. I came very closed to fork out those 99 euros but now only use JRiver.
Try reading this analysis with some real data with an open mind:
If you really want the links to where JPlay was asked to remove vendor logos that were used without asking
permission and the vendors asked Jplay to remove them I can provide them, but will not if this turns into a flame war.
The only reason I post this is there is data that indicates that this 256k program does nothing to make the bitperfect playback sound
any different than JRIver.
JPlay has replied in a thread on another site many times always in a defensive positon with little or not facts to prove their point.
If you think that its better than whats already out there and are willng to spend $99 Euros or $130 thats fine with me.
Have at it.
But I am telling you IMO that it isnt so...
And I am telling you also that its not any worse as well.....so if you dont have any player now and want good sound well its an option.
But many people want free OR complain about the cost of players etc like Jriver....so a minimilistic 256k DLL like this that turns off services etc....and touts
magical, mystical improvments of many already bit perfect capable players is well...go figure and read between the lines.
I have of course seen that test, as well as all the back and forth between Jim @ JRiver and the guys at JPlay. If a person with an open mind would read some the threads, it's pretty apparent Jim as an axe to grind with JPlay. Each and every time, on various forums around the web, someone comes on extolling the virtues of JPlay WITHOUT denigrating JRiver's mind you, Jim shows up on cue to crap all over JPlay.
As for your stance that JPlay seems oh so more expensive than JRiver, Jplay's stance is once you've paid for their software, upgrades and new versions are FREE FOR LIFE. Ask Jim if going from JRiver 16 to 17....or 17 to 18 is "free". I'll save you the trouble, it isn't.
All that BS aside, I don't listen to music with test equipment. If I did, then I'd hang out at Hydrogen Audio and call it a day.
JRiver has the far better GUI, JPlay allows my PC to reproduce music in my living room, more to my liking.
It's just that simple. My choice, my taste.
You came on here with remarks about a product that I doubt you've spent much personal time with. If that's the case, how can you come on here with a straight face and state that one player isn't any better than the other?
The reasoning for my response was simply to share my own view of two competing products which I both own...and use.
I respect your comments and opinions.
Just sharing my useage and experience.
I have both Jriver and have downloaded the JPlay trial and is does nothing magical to the sound I am listening to on my cans or speakers.
Zip, Zero, Nada....
If you hear differently great.
The claims of JPLAY is that it makes your sound so much "better, nicier etc.
You may not like HydrogenAudio, thats fine...
If you want to blow off the testing done by the computeraudiophile article thats fine too....but others will NOT.
(Note that the person that took the time to do the testing said in conclusion said: "In conclusion, using my ears and measurement software, on my system, I cannot hear or (significantly) measure any difference between JRiver and JPLAY mini (in hibernate mode)." This guy used his 'EARS as well in the data he took in his analysis".
This is tolerance and choice.
I did pay for a legal copy of Jriver 17 and just paid a reduced price for the next upgrade release 18. It was offered for $20 or so. a fair price for something that
fits my useage model and allows for bit-perfect playback. Whether you use all of whats in Jriver, it may not be cost effective for you. But the amount of code that is in Jriver is
considerable compared to what is in JPlay as best I can tell. I could write a program to turn off services etc...and ask you to pay me $130 or dollars for, to me that is even worse
than your perception of the cost of Jriver. And if your really cost conscience then there is always Foobar....
If I were the developer of a product that was the result of hard work and was my intellectual property and you come along and add something that would affect my product in an
adverse way...or use my trademark without asking...I too would take umbrage with that product. Especially if that product seems to imply that it will make your experience magical or much better than using my product without it.....especially without any real proof.
Just stating things like we are shutting down process's in WIN 7 that are not needed to relieve the stress on the CPU will make my already bit perfect playback better....geez louisez are we that..well 'gulliuble'? I for one am not.
A reason I am so doubtful about this product is my years in PC development and rollouts at a major pc company for XP, Vista, WIN 7 an d now Win 8. I have tuned, and been able (due to NDA's ) see inside of stuff that most of you are guessing about.
In the BIOS, Specialized firmware, hidden things....etc. if it were that easy it would have already been done.
So take the data with a grain of salt and if you really think that this product is really doing what they claim then my hats off to you...
Dont mean to rain on anyones parade...just think before you spend your money.....
This mirrors my first experience. Going from wassapi/foobar to jplay/foobar. Was running no tweaks, had a heavily laden OS, so I attribute that to the profound change.
So please tell us what this really does that makes such a world of difference???
I dont hear a thing different???
Free yes...buying a piece of code that turns off services and mucks with priorities for $99 euros or approx $130 us dollars....I dont think so.
You would be better of fiddling with fidelizer another well suspect service turner off...
PC's today running at close to 4 ghz etc dont have a real issue with being able to handle 16bit 44khz audio files.
The only thing stuff like this can possibly do is if you did have an very old, slow system that was doing many things while playing music....it might
help with playback ...but not from an audio quality perspective.
People have run audio files thru comparators and the difference has been 'ZERO' ...so whats really happening here?
The old subjective vs objective war?
If your interested in checking your system for issues with services and latency take a look at this:
Easy to use....let me know how it works...
That is super useful... thanks! Where did you find that tool?