JulioCat2
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Posts
- 208
- Likes
- 10
Great work pkshan, i hear more details definitively an improvement!!!!! Thanks
foobar2000 HD - high sound quality player
- Thread starter pkshan
- Start date
xnor
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- May 28, 2009
- Posts
- 4,092
- Likes
- 227
[size=medium] Quote:
[/size]
What on earth are you talking about? And have you actually read this:
Quote:
[size=medium] ?[/size]
[size=medium] [/size]
[size=medium] How should sound quality improve if you take an ancient (7 years old) version of a player and redistribute the exact same main executable (I've checked it, it's exactly the same foobar2000.exe file from an old, official installer) with some recompiled components?[/size]
Is this some kind of joke?
[size=medium] [/size]
[size=medium] How should sound quality improve if you take an ancient (7 years old) version of a player and redistribute the exact same main executable (I've checked it, it's exactly the same foobar2000.exe file from an old, official installer) with some recompiled components?[/size]
Is this some kind of joke?
germanium
Headphoneus Supremus
I have had really severe reservations about any software that claims to be bi perfect sounding better than any other software that claims to be bit perfect. Many such programs claim to reduce jitter but if they understood anything about how computer audio works then they would know that it is practically an impossable tesk to improve jitter on a computer through software. Why is this you may ask?
1. Software operates at the proccessor level at a clock speed that is intirely seperate from the required final clock used by the sound card & hense can bear no effect on the final timing of the samples.
2. All data that has passed from the proccessor to the sound card is transfered in bursts, it is not actually streamed to the soundcard continuously as computers have many processes going that require servicing as well so it bursts enough data to the souncard to fill its buffers enough that the buffer can then stream the data to the DAC's while it waits for anouther burst of data to arive from the computer. Seeing as how this data has no timing relavent to the actual output timing to the stream going to the DAC it cannot effect jitter.
3. All soundcards have thier own buffers & timing circuits that are not related at all to the computers clock. These circuits are the only ones that can effect true jitter
4. Even the DAC's themselves nowdays are largely impervious to jitter on thier inputs as long as the clock fed to them is free of jitter. The reason for this is almost all current DAC's convert the signal that was in the past sent to a ladder type converter to a bitsteam type conversion at a far higher sample rate than the original making jitter at thier input a non issue. Any time there is any type of sample rate conversion there is a reduction of jitter as long as the clock fed to the converter is reasonably free of jitter.
5. The signal has to go through many hardware layers after the software does its processing before it is actually output to the speakers that software as long as it maintains bit perfect signal it cannot improve sound at all .
As you can see software cannot improve this facet no matter what they try to tell you. You cannot even feed an intetionally jittered signal though the computer & have the jitter remain as untill the data reaches the soundcard buffers there is no timing that remains of the original jittered signal, only sample positional data remans. It is up to the soundcard to retime the data releas to it's needs. As you can see only better hardware can improve computer sound, not software in a bit perfect setup.
1. Software operates at the proccessor level at a clock speed that is intirely seperate from the required final clock used by the sound card & hense can bear no effect on the final timing of the samples.
2. All data that has passed from the proccessor to the sound card is transfered in bursts, it is not actually streamed to the soundcard continuously as computers have many processes going that require servicing as well so it bursts enough data to the souncard to fill its buffers enough that the buffer can then stream the data to the DAC's while it waits for anouther burst of data to arive from the computer. Seeing as how this data has no timing relavent to the actual output timing to the stream going to the DAC it cannot effect jitter.
3. All soundcards have thier own buffers & timing circuits that are not related at all to the computers clock. These circuits are the only ones that can effect true jitter
4. Even the DAC's themselves nowdays are largely impervious to jitter on thier inputs as long as the clock fed to them is free of jitter. The reason for this is almost all current DAC's convert the signal that was in the past sent to a ladder type converter to a bitsteam type conversion at a far higher sample rate than the original making jitter at thier input a non issue. Any time there is any type of sample rate conversion there is a reduction of jitter as long as the clock fed to the converter is reasonably free of jitter.
5. The signal has to go through many hardware layers after the software does its processing before it is actually output to the speakers that software as long as it maintains bit perfect signal it cannot improve sound at all .
As you can see software cannot improve this facet no matter what they try to tell you. You cannot even feed an intetionally jittered signal though the computer & have the jitter remain as untill the data reaches the soundcard buffers there is no timing that remains of the original jittered signal, only sample positional data remans. It is up to the soundcard to retime the data releas to it's needs. As you can see only better hardware can improve computer sound, not software in a bit perfect setup.
pkshan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2004
- Posts
- 293
- Likes
- 50
Please give them a try before say these
xnor
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- May 28, 2009
- Posts
- 4,092
- Likes
- 227
pkshan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2004
- Posts
- 293
- Likes
- 50
Quote:
You can compare it to the original foobar2000 0.8.3, to see the difference.
http://www.oldversion.com/download_Foobar2000_0.8.3.html
nagual
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Posts
- 220
- Likes
- 12
"According to the laws of aerodinamics, beetles do not fly"
(Seen at the Boeing facilities)
Even if I could not understand all your arguments, Francis Bacon, who founded science as we know it, has stated that the only way to reach the thruth is doing blind tests.
(reply to germanium)
pkshan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2004
- Posts
- 293
- Likes
- 50
I am sure you can hear the sound difference in 2 or 3 seconds
xnor
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- May 28, 2009
- Posts
- 4,092
- Likes
- 227
Quote:
Because of the crashes that stop the sound, yeah.
I am sure you can hear the sound difference in 2 or 3 seconds
Because of the crashes that stop the sound, yeah.
germanium
Headphoneus Supremus
Quote:
"According to the laws of aerodinamics, beetles do not fly"
(Seen at the Boeing facilities)
Even if I could not understand all your arguments, Francis Bacon, who founded science as we know it, has stated that the only way to reach the thruth is doing blind tests.
(reply to germanium)
If you can hear any difference it is because something is happening besides passing bit perfect samples I.E. proccessing meaning it is no longer bit perfect. I have listened to many software programs & have not heard any real difference when dealing with bit perfect audio & that is how it should be. Yet I clearly hear changes I make at the analog harware level I.E Amps, Coupling & power filter caps meaning I am not deaf to real improvements. Improvements that I have made in hardware have been verified by others who have tried the sam mods & were found to sound exactly as I descibed them. therefore I say if there really is a difference I believe I would hear it. I heard none!!!!
pkshan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2004
- Posts
- 293
- Likes
- 50
do not use old foobar2000.cfg,
SQ will decrease
SQ will decrease
Puuzi
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Posts
- 15
- Likes
- 10
Just a heads up! I just downloaded this file and couldn't install it because my anti-virus (Avira) flagged it as a virus/trojan, specifically named 'TR/Crypt.XPACK.Gen' [trojan]. This is same when i scanned it online @virustotal.com. It may be one of those false positives as no other engine found anything, but i'd advise caution before running this files until it's fully checked out and certified as not malicious. It really bogged down my system. My browser hung and and I had to restart it several times. I'm still trying to get this removed from my PC.
Dradder
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2011
- Posts
- 129
- Likes
- 11
Interesting -- the download links don't seem to work. Did something happen such that pkshan had to pull the files?
Willakan
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2010
- Posts
- 1,039
- Likes
- 109
Pretty sure the law of aerodynamics thing was someone applying equation for fixed-wing flight to beetles, but anyway...
Also, someone finds malware in the file and it is quickly taken down? Or am I just paranoid?
Also, someone finds malware in the file and it is quickly taken down? Or am I just paranoid?
Users who are viewing this thread
