[bogi]

Another question regarding the matrix processor, do you recommend that I checkmark the Expand HR option?

I answered it above on this page ... Expand HF is useful only if convolution WAVs are used and if their sample rate is lower than sample rate of content played.

 

[bogi]

Just a small addition to @plumpudding2 's very good answer.

Buffer Time & Short Buff: See HQPlayer Desktop PDF manual (use search through the document ...). If you don't experience playback issues you don't need to change anything.

Modulator: You can use modulators marked as 512+ also at DSD256 output rate. It si not suitable at this rate only for source content >= 192k if it contains real instrument sounds with transients exceeding 48kHz (very rare).

 

[roderickvd]

Good info. Some add-ons:

Buffer time & short buffer: the duration of the audio that is buffered on the input & outputs. The shorter the buffer, the less delay, but the higher the chances of drop-outs if the processing cannot top up the buffer as fast as it drains. When I set buffers to minimal, 22 ms, I can view videos like on YouTube without noticeable delay, but I have to settle for less demanding filter/modulator/bitrate.

Bitrate: generally correct but if you want to be specific about it, look it up in the datasheets (of the DAC chip that's inside). For example, while an AK4499EQ supports DSD512, its sweet spot is DSD256.

Oversamplers: poly-sinc are usually lighter than non-poly-sinc ones. "-2s" variants are lighter again.

 

[plumpudding2]

I've had a small period of really enjoying listening to my Holo May in simple, un-upsampled NOS. Even though a NOS dac in Jussi's words "completely fails at reconstructing the original music signal" there's a certain allure to the sound.
However it irks me that 24 bit music files are introducing linearity errors in my music, and I miss being able to use digital volume control. I tried closed-form-M because it leaves the original samples intact and only interpolates, so I figured it could be some sort of NOS+. In the end decided that sinc-L sounds superior to my ears.

However I came across this Stereophile review of some ridiculous 50k dac:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/ch-precision-c12-da-processor-measurements
It uses an ultrashort polynomial interpolator for "perfect time domain performance". I then vaguely remember something about polynomials in the HQPlayer manual and indeed there's two polynomial filters there with either 0 or 1 cycle of pre and post ringing, appended with the comment "not recommended". Intrigued by the idea of recreating a 50k dac experience I gave them a try and.. I think i've finally found the NOS++ i've been looking for. Retains the character but adds clarity to my ears.

Anyone with a NOS dac with similar experiences? I'm really curious whether others also perceive these filters as enhanced NOS or whether i'm just placebo'ing myself

 

[Erick Muller]

I answered it above on this page ... Expand HF is useful only if convolution WAVs are used and if their sample rate is lower than sample rate of content played.

Well I'm not using convolution WAVs so I don't have to worry about this, thanks!

 

[Erick Muller]

Good info. Some add-ons:

Buffer time & short buffer: the duration of the audio that is buffered on the input & outputs. The shorter the buffer, the less delay, but the higher the chances of drop-outs if the processing cannot top up the buffer as fast as it drains. When I set buffers to minimal, 22 ms, I can view videos like on YouTube without noticeable delay, but I have to settle for less demanding filter/modulator/bitrate.

How do you feed youtube audio into HQPlayer btw?

 

[bogi]

How do you feed youtube audio into HQPlayer btw?

My way on Windows is:
I'm using PotPlayer with HQPlayer. I like it has WASAPI output and subjectively very good sound.
I just drag&drop youtube video URL from URL input box of Firefox into PotPlayer playlist.
Firefox has also PotPlayer extension - Ctrl-Click on youtube link inserts it into PotPlayer playlist.
Pot Payer and HQPlayer are connected by VAC.
In PotPlayer I can set video delay against audio so then video is in sync with audio despite delay caused by HQPlayer.
Other OS allow such a thing too, but I have experience on Windows only.

 

[Erick Muller]

My way on Windows is:
I'm using PotPlayer with HQPlayer. I like it has WASAPI output and subjectively very good sound.
I just drag&drop youtube video URL from URL input box of Firefox into PotPlayer playlist.
Firefox has also PotPlayer extension - Ctrl-Click on youtube link inserts it into PotPlayer playlist.
Pot Payer and HQPlayer are connected by VAC.
In PotPlayer I can set video delay against audio so then video is in sync with audio despite delay caused by HQPlayer.
Other OS allow such a thing too, but I have experience on Windows only.

Thx my dude

 

[PROblemdetected]

Good info. Some add-ons:

Buffer time & short buffer: the duration of the audio that is buffered on the input & outputs. The shorter the buffer, the less delay, but the higher the chances of drop-outs if the processing cannot top up the buffer as fast as it drains. When I set buffers to minimal, 22 ms, I can view videos like on YouTube without noticeable delay, but I have to settle for less demanding filter/modulator/bitrate.

Bitrate: generally correct but if you want to be specific about it, look it up in the datasheets (of the DAC chip that's inside). For example, while an AK4499EQ supports DSD512, its sweet spot is DSD256.

Oversamplers: poly-sinc are usually lighter than non-poly-sinc ones. "-2s" variants are lighter again.

Sweet spot?

Thanks of all your info

 

[Erick Muller]

I have a few additional questions, or rather, concerns regarding EQing with the matrix processor inside HQP, I share my current settings:

When y click on plot on both channels I get this on the phase response chart:

Is this normal?, the same thing happens on the phase response chart regardless of the EQ profile I'm loading in.

Thanks and I appreciate your help.

 

[genefruit]

I have a few additional questions, or rather, concerns regarding EQing with the matrix processor inside HQP, I share my current settings:



When y click on plot on both channels I get this on the phase response chart:



Is this normal?, the same thing happens on the phase response chart regardless of the EQ profile I'm loading in.

Thanks and I appreciate your help.

yes this is normal - https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/19715-hq-player/?do=findComment&comment=1261643

 

[Erick Muller]

yes this is normal - https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/19715-hq-player/?do=findComment&comment=1261643

Thx dude, I was getting worried.

 

[Ghoostknight]

Is this normal?, the same thing happens on the phase response chart regardless of the EQ profile I'm loading in.

this happens if you checked IIR to FIR... i guess it shows the timecorrection the FIR filter is doing, tho i also wondered since it looks like way too much

 

[Erick Muller]

this happens if you checked IIR to FIR... i guess it shows the timecorrection the FIR filter is doing, tho i also wondered since it looks like way too much

Maybe it's bugged?

 

[Ghoostknight]

Maybe it's bugged?

maybe the display, i cant tell for sure.. but this "pattern" looks right for FIR, im just not sure about the amount...
in can just tell for sure that audibly the FIR conversion seems to work fine, would the applied phaseshift be too much you would usually notice it quite easly, atleast on A/B comperasions if you have listening expierence with IIR vs FIR

it depends on your applied eq and the natural phaseshift of the speakers but for me (with some equalizer bands that tame high frequency gradually rolling off towards 25-30khz) with this eq i notice IIR vs FIR the most as in the highs seem to be tamed MORE than with FIR.. and FIR has better coherency if you imagine one bass transient and one high frequency transient played at the same time, the FIR version will sound more (or even perfectly) timecorrect, only issue is preringing with FIR... so its always a compromise

IIR because of the non existent preringing can have a more natural tone too it if you imagine a accoustic guitar recording, thats for me the most obvious hint to preringing... it can sound more "artificial" where transients seem smeared, imagine this:
instead of a instant high hat "TICK,kkk" (the first initial hit) you get something like : "ttt, TICK, kkk", tho it happens very quick (so saying "smeared transients" seem more correct)

tho having said IIR can sound more "natural" ... FIR with not too much preringing will actually sound more "real to life" imo (but yea its always a small compromise and depends on preference), thats also why inversed absolute phase is a no-go ... it will sound less correct since in nature tones are not produced with inverse polarity....

some stupid tests i did while figuring this out:
take a glass and spoon to you listening setup... try to find music that rougly plays stuff that is somewhat transient rich at the frequency of the glas when you tap it with the spoon....
now try to compare IIR vs FIR and keeping TRANSIENTREPONSE in mind and that it should sound closer to the glass transient, you will most likely notice that FIR sounds "more correct", and you might also notice how hard it actually is for speakers to produce clean, close to nature transients (it seems to go from 0 to 100 instantly where large amounts of preringing can make it seem less dynamic, more smeared etc)
things to keep in mind: dacs use reconstruction filters that ALSO either apply linear or minimum phase in various amount
if you use a two way speaker the tweeter is most probably wired out of phase... in this setup i advice to make sure that the bass driver is the right polarity and the tweeter is indeed inversed .... inverse phase is more noticable on bass drivers, it can really mess up the bass where highs merely sound a bit muted or a tad less real in comparison


also keep in mind, even with already phase shifted speakers like mine and 98% of speakers you can notice the time correct nature of FIR... just because its not perfect in the beginning doesnt mean messing it up further doesnt make it audibly worse