Download 2.7.2 (Open Edition):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/f6hjnq75aoby6ez/JEP2.7.2.rar
Schema upgrade, using multi-core programmes.
Nanosecond buffer control accuracy.
Supports Windows 8.1
Super Mini core JEP_MBox, only 7.5kb, the world's first.

 
Download 2.6.1 (Open Edition):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/soo78cafbq1skcv/JEP2.6.1.rar
 
Download 2.6.0 (Open Edtion):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/kvwux93vdwwebv3/JEP2.6.0.rar
6th Playback Kernel, code name: Jacquier
 
Download 2.5.0 (Open Edition):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nuwcb9ogahet8sg/JEP2.5.rar
5th Playback Kernel, code name: Coconut
 
Note: Start from 2.5.0, Only Windows 8, Only 64bit, Only AVX (Intel Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge)
 
Download 2.4.8 (Open Edition):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4rmsu9bkr9rynev/JEP2.4.8.rar
4th Playback Kenel, code name: Pineapple
 
Gallery:

 
 
Install:
1. Extract JEPx.x.x.RAR
2. Run (use Administrator) JEPCFG.BAT (Only needs to be done once)
3. Trun off UAC
4. Reboot
5. Start JEPShell, OK
 
Note:
AVX version needs to support the AVX instruction set CPU (second generation Intel I3/I5/I7)

 
Start from 2.4.0

Ctrl+Alt+K, Kernel Lock On/Off

Start from 2.5.0

Ctrl+Art+L, Hibernate Mode On/Off

This player is fantastic, the best I have heard so far.

What is the difference ?

Might be the greatest player in the world, but you'd get more downloads if you made it available somewhere other than that funky 4shared.com site.

Apparently only plays WAV files; no FLAC or other format support.

Yep, only WAV for now, the SQ is good enough for me to consider converting my library though! I have tried just about every other player that is out, and this is the closest to what I consider accurate sound, very close to Amarra on my MBP, and its free.

I converted some of my FLAC files over to WAV and tried it out, and it does sound good. But sheesh, I've got nearly 3 terabytes of FLAC -- that'd be a lot of converting. I might just have to wait for FLAC support. Especially since the 1.6 version did have FLAC support -- I listened to that version as well and thought it sounded pretty good. Wonder why the reason for losing FLAC?

The next version will be using assembly language. It will be better sound.

Awesome This is already the best windows player i have ever heard.

Quote:

thinkspace said:

The next version will be using assembly language. It will be better sound.

Click to expand...

I dunno man assembly language has a nice clarity but I prefer the warmth of something written in C++.
 
Although we all know that you get the best of both worlds when you skip the assembly and write the machine code manually.

I wish someone were able to graph the data being sent tot the transport or dac drivers, I want a music player to have the most clear imaging and precise timing, then I can adjust for warmth with other equipment. I have heard other players that are trying to balance soundstage, decay etc. and IMO they are all colouring and degrading the sound, which is not what I want from a music player. Give me clarity, timing and dynamics any day

I thought I would download this player and give it a try. Firstly I found it a bit confusing, where it mentions system requirements it mentions minimum of 8GB of memory, well, I am running Windows 8 but with 6GB, I'm not sure if this is a problem or not, which I'll come back to later.
 
 After downloading I have a x86 and x64 players?
 
 Next big drawback is obviously WAV only files, I mean, come one, how many of us use WAV?
 
 So how did it sound?  I was testing it with Musica Ibuki usb 16 bit DAC, Musica Iris valve amplifier, both from Japan, Acoustic Revive USB USB cables, interconnects, and speaker cables. Speakers were JohnBlue inception 1.5 on Acoustic Revive stands. I was comparing it to Foobar. Firstly quite clearly to me this player offers a much more transparent sound, foobar in comparison sounds anemic and flat, on this Extreme player bass is for more present and powerful, richer, and digs deeper, on the other hand on foobar the same track bass sounds weak. Vocals too on the Extreme player offer for more clarity, it is much easier to decipher what is being said or sung, the is greater presence in the voice which I liked very much, it was more alive, more real and believable. The whole sound across the spectrum to me sound more three dimensional offering far greater presence and clarity, I am impressed with the sound of this player, but that is where the fun stops.
 
 
 Obviously it is work in progress, but it only plays one track at a time, I tried clicking "all" at the footer but it still just plays 1 track, not a whole album, any reason to why?
 
 The player is bear bones, there is now way of knowing any information such as how long the track is or how long it has been player for, there are no luxuries here. Of course the deal breaker is it only plays WAV for some odd reason.
 
 So, to conclude, it sounds really good, better than foobar, more clarity, greater presence, more powerful and deeper bass, but it really has a long way to go before anyone will want to use the player, at the moment it is just too inconvenient and too much work, too bare bones, but it is for sure worth keeping an eye on it as it has great potential, lets see.
 

Quote:

chewy4 said:

I dunno man assembly language has a nice clarity but I prefer the warmth of something written in C++.
 
Although we all know that you get the best of both worlds when you skip the assembly and write the machine code manually.

Click to expand...

 
Ha, that's lovely
 
About this player sounding better than others, seems there's processing happening on the background, which goes against bitperfect playback.

roller said:

Ha, that's lovely

About this player sounding better than others, seems there's processing happening on the background, which goes against bitperfect playback.

Click to expand...

Because processing going on int the background means it's not bitperfect? I have heard plenty of players set up without volume control and with native bitstreaming that sound different, which of them is not bitperfect? Should i check for background activity to decide which is bit perfect??? o.O

Quote:

drez said:

Because processing going on int the background means it's not bitperfect? I have heard plenty of players set up without volume control and with native bitstreaming that sound different, which of them is not bitperfect? Should i check for background activity to decide which is bit perfect??? o.O

Click to expand...

 
We could be stingy to the point where computers would be removed from the chain, yet we're not
 
EDIT: Also, what about int processing? Does this player bypass the native float step?