[Dalamar]

Christ, that thread is hopeless/. Only way to stop the disease in there from spreading is to nuke it.

 

[yukihiro]

I enjoyed reading this thread. 
 

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

 

hah, you're even more hardcore than me...I've met my master

 
there's a lot of starving trolls to feed if you feel up to the task: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/493678/a-better-sounding-alternative-to-foobar2000-or-a-musing-in-the-realm-of-bit-perfect-streaming/240
 
BTW, if I may respond to your post:
 
~Solid State drives sound better than spinning ..I don't believe it, it's prolly EMI/RFI related...and also having the HDD feeding groundloops but I use a USB Isolator to my S/PDIF transport.
~WASAPI and ASIO sound different, WASAPI sounds smoother fully dependent on your audio drivers.
~ASIO and Kernel streaming sounds different, ASIO sounds more harsh KS sounds more clean
what about ASIO4ALL(being a KS>ASIO wrapper)? I know either cMP or XXHighEnd coder(can't recall which one) said that he couldn't stand the ASIO color?!
~Every music software player sounds different for every operating system fully agreed
~Mac sounds different than PC or Linux never tried
~Most DAC's sound different of course they do
~Different IC's sound different ditto
~Power cords sound different never tried, I like to install ferrites on them, though.
~Linear regulated powersupplies sound better than switching X2, even a blind man can see it
~Mac's sound better with more RAM I'm dubious
~upsampling sounds different yep, it sounds brighter due to the increased THD(you can easily measure it in WaveSpectra)
~headless computers sound better than computers with attached monitors again a story of EMI/RFI, I'd have to hear it to believe it
 
I guess this PDF is your bible? http://photos.imageevent.com/cics/v03theartofbuildingcomputertrnsp/The%20art%20of%20building%20Computer%20Transports%20v0.3.pdf
 
I've applied most of his non-tinfoil tweaks...all my system processes run in low priority on single cores and my media players run in high priority on the 4 cores w/ their audio thread in realtime priority.

~ASIO and Kernel streaming sounds different, ASIO sounds more harsh KS sounds more clean
what about ASIO4ALL(being a KS>ASIO wrapper)? I know either cMP or XXHighEnd coder(can't recall which one) said that he couldn't stand the ASIO color?!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That would be Peter the XXHighEnd developer, I have spoken with him a lot about his music player and tried to convince him to stop tweaking it "thinking" he is improving the sound when all he is doing is making a whole lot of versions that sound different.  I told him his time would be better spent making a new GUI and an iTouch remote app.  I didn't agree, however some of his users chimed in and agreed that they would like an iTouch remote app so users of XX might get an app soon...maybe.
 
I also spoke with the people at JRiver a long time ago and tried to convince them to make a WASAPI and/or Kernel streaming plugin for their music player.  It took awhile but they finally did it.  Many people there kept saying it would make no different because they already have ASIO.  Of course ASIO sounds different than WASAPI.  I kept nagging them and they created a WASAPI plugin now everyone loves it. 
 
 
 

 

[leeperry]

So whaddayasay about ASIO4ALL? a bastardized mix surely, but does it sound like KS or ASIO to you?
 
yeah, the GUI in XXHighEnd is horrid...and I'm not paying $100 for a half-working player when there's Reclock and uLilith.
 
indeed, JRiver's software should be able to provide gapless audio through Reclock....but their bloated GUI really puts me off.

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

So whaddayasay about ASIO4ALL? a bastardized mix surely, but does it sound like KS or ASIO to you?
 
yeah, the GUI in XXHighEnd is horrid...and I'm not paying $100 for a half-working player when there's Reclock and uLilith.
 
indeed, JRiver's software should be able to provide gapless audio through Reclock....but their bloated GUI really puts me off.

 
Funny you should say that, here is the exact post of mine asking for a stream lined JRiver.
 
KingDoughnut
Guest

Re: Media Center 13 Feature Requests « Reply #298 on: December 10, 2008, 07:36:17 am »

[size=smaller]  [/size]

---

Ok here is an idea in the OTHER direction

How about a JRiver lite....no not jukebox, but something aimed more towards audiophiles who are obsessive compulsive [rightly or un-rightly so].  Something that has a very small memory footprint, runs in realtime, provideds users the ability to tweak buffer enough to load an entire CD into RAM, features geared only towards music [no photo manager, tv, etc.], and other Audiophile features I am sure I am missing. 

Other portions of the normal JRiver could be available as module add-ons for a small fee.  This way users will get the exact JRiver they want with a smaller price of entry. The other features of JRiver are good enough to sell themselves, and those that don't sell would give JRiver a clue as to what features are not value added.

Well, how about it???

Maybe call it JRiverX
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Needless to say, JRivers fan-boys stepped in and shot the idea down claiming that JRivers Jukebox does that blah blah blah.
 
Anyways A4A is KS wrapped in a ASIO cloak.  I don't like it.

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

Christ, that thread is hopeless/. Only way to stop the disease in there from spreading is to nuke it.

Why do you say "Hopeless"???  What is it that you hope for??
 
Can I ask what DAC's have you actually heard and what were the associated components?
 
I have heard your soundcard, it does sound great...clear sound with good clarity throughout the frequency range.
I have heard the following DAC's in my system: LavryDA10 owned it, Apogee MiniDAC on loan, RME Fireface on loan, Mdht Havana owned it, M-Audio ProFire owned it, TC Konnekt 8 own it, Valab own it, Matrix Mini-i own it, Audiogd Ref 5 DSP own it.  All these DAC's to me sound different.  In fact "You" are the only person I have come in contact with over the past 5 years that claims every DAC sounds the same, just by reading the specs.  I assume your claims are based on specs or some deductive reasoning you call logic and not practical experience.  Out of the maybe 20 other Audiophiles I know personally that have tried a variety of DAC's none of them would agree with you...  And out of the many, many Audiophiles I know met via the net I would say there are only a hand few that claim nothing ie, [powercords, wire, DAC's, Wav/Flac/etc., music software, etc.] makes music sound different  One thing these people have in common is a mid-fi sound system and probably the inability to distinguish tone so they rely on measurements and data to tell them what they hear.
 
If you don't mind could you please "Truthfully" list your system in detail and the variety of DAC's you have personally had experience with.
 
Thank You

 

[leeperry]

 

 
A4A is KS wrapped in a ASIO cloak.  I don't like it.

Well, there's a forum where audio drivers engineers chitchat, and they're always blown away by how well A4A works.
 
Did you try uLilith? I love this player so much, it sounds more analog that Reclock, which is really "in your face"...great for movies, unforgiving for poorly recorded music. uLilith SQ superiority is no black magic...everything works in 64fp(from the lossy audio decoders to the native VST plugins support/volume attenuation). Reclock runs a small WASAPI buffer in realtime priority, and you can set uLilith to do the same.

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

 

Well, there's a forum where audio drivers engineers chitchat, and they're always blown away by how well A4A works.
 
Did you try uLilith? I love this player so much, it sounds more analog that Reclock, which is really "in your face"...great for music, unforgiving for poorly recorded music. uLilith SQ superiority is no black magic...everything works in 64fp(from the lossy audio decoders to the native VST plugins support/volume attenuation). Reclock runs a small WASAPI buffer in realtime priority, and you can set uLilith to do the same.

Yes I have tried uLilith is does sound great.  Before that I was using KMPlayer with ReClock.  But since then I have moved to 100% Linux with Music Player Daemon.  This allows me a very small operating system with no bloat [the distro I use has only the basics], and a very small program that runs in the background to serve up the tunes MPD.  There are numerous VST plugings for Linux which can be used but I don't use them.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

Yes I have tried uLilith is does sound great.  Before that I was using KMPlayer with ReClock.  But since then I have moved to 100% Linux with Music Player Daemon.  This allows me a very small operating system with no bloat [the distro I use has only the basics], and a very small program that runs in the background to serve up the tunes MPD.  There are numerous VST plugings for Linux which can be used but I don't use them.

How do you find Linux in comparison to Windows for audio tasks?

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

How do you find Linux in comparison to Windows for audio tasks?

Well, I spent a long time going back and forth after trying to optimize both as best I can.  I used Windows 7 and Vista, Mac OS, and LinuxMint at the time to try to find what I thought was the best sound to synergizes with my gear/room and provides music software that I like.
 
As a starting point i used BlackVipersWindowsServices to reduce my processes down to a bare minimum.  I mean just to the point were Windows would not crash.  I went into bios and followed Cics's tweaks to optimize the CPU and RAM settings as well as used a latency tool to tweak my USB latency to optimal settings.  Even going so far as to kill WindowsExplorer [that would be the main GUI task bar/menu GUI for Windows] so ONLY my music software was running and even that was set to the highest priority.  I also disconnected the keyboard, mouse and monitor while playing.  So as you can see I went to extreme lengths to get the most out of Windows.  Over the course of a year +/- I tried every music software I could get my hands on, XXHighend, cMP, Foobar, JRiver [the usual suspects] plus KMPlayer, uLilith, XMPlay etc....literally everything I could find.
 
For Linux at the time I was using Linux Mint, again did every tweak I could find to optimize the computer and software.  Installed the Real-Time Kernel, upgraded ALSA, bios tweaks, full RAM, minimized processes and interrupts, go rid of any program that was not needed etc.  And like with Windows tried every music player available ALSAPlayer, Rhythmbox, Amarok, MPD, XMMS, Audacious, again the usual suspects plus some obscure command line players.  During that time I purchased a Mac Mini as well and followed the same scheme as Linux and Windows....optimized to the max. and tried every player available for the Mac as well....Cog, Play, XBMC, iTunes, PureMusic, etc.
 
This is what I found [copied from my website]
 
Linux and Mac sound similar, WIndows 7 and Vista are both way better than XP due to WASAPI output. But XP seems to be a smaller OS and can be made to have an even smaller footprint by disabling Services and produce better sound by using the cMP2 configuration.
 
With a Mac there are very little optimizations that you can do...its pretty much turn-key plug it in and play. The only way to improve the Mac sound is by going Firewire and/or buying Amarra or Pure Music at an additional cost.  However you can increase the process of your player via renice command.
 
With Linux you can get sound that will beat both Mac and Windows with some work. But you also have to be careful of the hardware you choose, although most sound cards now-a-days have working ALSA drivers. This would be the cheapest route with potentially the greatest gains.
 
With Windows you have the greatest number of both software and hardware as well as room to tweak the OS etc. to your liking. This IMO gives you the ability to create a synergy between the rest of your gear, the OS and software.
 
In summary:
Mac = least time to get up and running/least amount of music software/greatest cost
Linux = most time to get up and running/moderate amount of music software/least cost.
Windows = moderate time to get up and running/largest amount of music software/average cost.
 
Sound wise Mac and Linux are more analytical than Windows and ultimately more true to the music. All can be enjoyable to listen to with the right associated equipment and all can be controlled remotely. Making a hard stand for one being the best in everyones system is nearly impossible.  Sound is too subjective and there are just too many variables in any particular set-up to say clearly one is best in all situations.
 
 
P.S.  I know this is more than what you asked for but I just wanted to give you some background.

 

[digger945]

Can I have a link you your website. Most interesting some of the stuff you have just posted. Thanks a bunch for posting all that, I think it's very useful information. All of it.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

 
P.S.  I know this is more than what you asked for but I just wanted to give you some background.

No,  great posting thanks for the information.

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

Can I have a link you your website. Most interesting some of the stuff you have just posted. Thanks a bunch for posting all that, I think it's very useful information. All of it.

Here you go....I added some of the information from above to the site as I thought it might be useful
 
https://sites.google.com/site/computeraudioorg/home

 

[leeperry]

something tells me that you're coconut from the Reclock forum

 
the day linux will have Reclock/ffdshow and madVR, I'll think about it.

 

[Dynobot]

 
Quote:

something tells me that you're coconut from the Reclock forum

 
the day linux will have Reclock/ffdshow and madVR, I'll think about it.

....Yep
 
Linux "Might" have something like that, but if you are happy with what you are using there is no need to switch.