Jie Extreme Player 2.5.0 released - Page 8

Sorry, but one of the points of a discussion about any particular audio player is how it compares to other players. If a forum member inquires about the best way of obtaining one of those other players, I'm going to provide that information if I can. If you don't want your JEP player compared to others, perhaps you've come to the wrong forum.

I took the time and got pkshan's ReClock mod working with his XA505 Foobar variant. High PITA factor, but worth doing. Tightens up the transients quite a bit, maybe a little more detail in big symphonic tutti crashes.

 

How about writing an extra little independant .exe application that would extract FLAC's and then load them into Jie by

 

a. running via a drop down option on right clicking a .flac file in Windows Explorer (like "Play in Foobar") and the run to

 

b. convert the FLAC to  .wav loaded into RAM

 

c. then  launch Jie to load and play the .wav out of RAM

 

Is that possible?

 

It would give the advantage of Jie being unmodified so it still sounds great with a big convenience bonus for most of us.

Edited by Nada - 1/4/13 at 4:48am

Just pick the file you want to play in JRiver, convert it (takes few seconds) and drop it into Jie. Don't have to convert the whole library.

I've just downloaded version 2.4.4 as I cant see a later version.

 

 Again I find my opinion is that this player gives me far greater listening pleasure than Foobar, I'm finding the sound to be very crisp and clear in the treble, Foobar in comparison sounds out of focus slightly. But the biggest improvement I'm finding is presence and how much more holographic this player sounds, it really does sound very good. But I'm still having problems with it playing the next track, I run it as administrator but still it will only play one track at a time, I don't know why, maybe it is because my PC doesn't meet the minimum requirements as I have 6GB of memory, no intel processor or SSD or is it because my music is on a server and not on my local machine? It's a shame as it really is a very nice sounding player.

Yes..yes.. a very good player..i hear a positive difference.

Highs are a little (but significant) more detailed, smooth, airy, have good separation. Bass is a little less strong in volume (which i like), so i do not need an eq anymore, with ST/hd600 opamp at max gain setting.
Don't get me wrong, i still like foobar a lot. Small anekdote: i reinstalled windows from scratch again, a few days ago. I remember how good foobar sounded just after a fresh install, without any windows updates &  antivirus installed yet.  100+ updates + antivirus later..i lost just that bit of extra separation & resolution in the highs.

So i guess something has affected the sound..
"Stock" foobar, i think, on a fresh installed windows has also very good separation/transients. And sounds a little more..(& i do not mean this in a bad way, although it might sound like it) powerfull/"metallic" in highs.  Again, i also like this "metallic", meant in the sense of "power" as opposed to "soft/smooth". Not meant as 2 iron bars colliding  =).
So..it is a question of taste also..
 

 

I think thinkspace is referring to the fact that you are comparing to Pkshan's Foobar 2000 Project which if I recall seemed to be crossing into a legal grey area so to speak in terms of foobar licensing. However, I could be wrong. On another note did you get reclock mod working on Win 7 or 8?

 

 

@thinkspace: Is 2.4.4 the latest free version? For anything later it is shareware?

Yes, I'm aware of the apparent grey area regarding pkshan's Foobar2000 variant, but I don't believe it amounts to thievery, as Thinkspace charges. The issue is whether the copyright claimed by the original Foobar2000's creators is violated by pkshan's usage; I feel there's ample reason to believe that there is in fact no such violation. One of the legal tests in such cases "...measures the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his or her original work. The court not only investigates whether the defendant's specific use of the work has significantly harmed the copyright owner's market, but also whether such uses in general, if widespread, would harm the potential market of the original. The burden of proof here rests not on the defendant for commercial uses, but on the copyright owner for noncommercial uses." Since the original Foobar2000 is distributed by its creators for free, as is pkshan's variant, it's hard to see any negative effect on the ability of the original Foobar2000's creators to commercially exploit their product. But as you say, this is a grey area until such time as it might actually be settled in court, and I can certainly understand if people chose not to use pkshan's Foobar2000 variant because of their interpretation of the issues involved. It's still not a matter of thievery, though.

Yes, I did, on Windows 8. It's a real PITA, but I feel it's worth doing. The audio quality tightens up a bit, with a little more detail, especially in the bass, at least IMO. Seems to have the same effect on both pkshan's Foobar2000 variant and on Daum PotPlayer. There's a possibility that it might improve JEP as well, but I haven't tested that yet.

Happy listening!

Thank you, I have just retried to run the BAT file as administrator but it still only plays one track at a time

 

 Could it because my music is on a network server and not on my local machine?

I ripped a CD to my local hard drive and tried that but still it would only play one track. Any other possible reason?

 

What DAC/soundcard are you using and what output mode?