[leeperry]

the volume attenuation in Reclock is done in 53bit, and James doesn't care/believe in dithering apparently.

 

[K3cT]

Since uLilith is all the rage now in a local forum, I've decided to give it a thorough A/B with Foobar. I've set both players to output data via WASAPI, output data format is in 16-bit integer, buffer length is set to 50ms, and all DSP/resamplings are turned off in both Windows and the players.
 
The result? Both players sound exactly the same but frankly even if uLilith is slightly moar better than Foobar, I wouldn't use a player that won't even allow me to do a proper search in my playlist. 

 

[ExCelciuS]

Quote:

Since uLilith is all the rage now in a local forum, I've decided to give it a thorough A/B with Foobar. I've set both players to output data via WASAPI, output data format is in 16-bit integer, buffer length is set to 50ms, and all DSP/resamplings are turned off in both Windows and the players.
 
The result? Both players sound exactly the same but frankly even if uLilith is slightly moar better than Foobar, I wouldn't use a player that won't even allow me to do a proper search in my playlist. 

 
Hi K3cT, it's me

 
Well, I have tried uLilith + WASAPI and the result is better than foobar 2K + WASAPI, I don't know how, it's just the fact that my ears heard the improvement and out of happiness founding the best sound player I've ever heard, I tried to share it with the other members on the forum.
 
If I would rate, the sound quality of Foobar 2K + WASAPI is 7/10, and Lilith + WASAPI is 10/10, lilith is simply outstanding, the best sound player I've ever heard.
 
I'm talking and only focused on sound quality here, everything else is just second matters. 

 

 

[xnor]

And I just played a 24bit 96kHz flac file through a virtual sound card with both foobar and ulilith, recorded both (also in 24/96) and used diffMaker ... couldn't find the differences e.g. leeperry claims to hear.
 
Maybe he should stop calling others deaf... Anyway, anyone who says that foobar is "bass shy and blurry" deserves something like the golden raspberry or a special kind of jacket. 

 
... enough time wasted ...

 

[ExCelciuS]

 
[size=medium]

Hi leeperry,
 
I have downloaded the latest version of uLilith from here http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_Core2.7z
 
For me, uLilith is the best sound player I've ever heard, simply outstanding, 10/10 for sound quality 

 
But, I've read a post that said lilith 0.992 is better than uLilith, is that true?
 
And how to update uLilith?
 
I'm using Intel core 2 duo 2.2 GHz, do I need to use 2010-10-14_SSE2Diff.7z, which I can download at http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_SSE2Diff.7z ?
 
What is SSE2Diff.7z? Can it make the sound quality better?
 
 
 
Thank you.
​

[/size]

 

[leeperry]

 

 
If I would rate, the sound quality of Foobar 2K + WASAPI is 7/10, and Lilith + WASAPI is 10/10, lilith is simply outstanding, the best sound player I've ever heard.
 
I'm talking and only focused on sound quality here 

Well, yeah, all those players are bit-perfect...the rage lies in the software induced jitter these days, which depends on your OS, gear and ears.
 
some links, again:
http://www.cicsmemoryplayer.com/index.php?n=CMP.03Jitter
http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=692.0
 
And it's good to set uLilith's audio thread in realtime priority...like Reclock does for its WASAPI buffer.
 
Be happy if you can't hear a difference, it either means that:
-your DAC has an excellent reclocker built-in
-your phone or DAC isn't transparent enough
-your ears aren't too picky
-you run an early alpha of Windows 12, and they've fixed all those jitter issues

 

[leeperry]

 

I've read a post that said lilith 0.992 is better than uLilith, is that true?
 
And how to update uLilith?
 
I'm using Intel core 2 duo 2.2 GHz, do I need to use 2010-10-14_SSE2Diff.7z, which I can download at http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_SSE2Diff.7z ?
 
What is SSE2Diff.7z? Can it make the sound quality better?
​

1) dunno, it's not in english and they share the same audio engine
 
2) manually
 
3) you wanna use the core2 ICL11 build
 
4) it patches the X86 build to Core2

 

[ExCelciuS]

Quote:

 

1) dunno, it's not in english and they share the same audio engine
 
2) manually
 
3) you wanna use the core2 ICL11 build
 
4) it patches the X86 build to Core2

1) understood.
2) understood.
3) and 4) what is core2 ICL11 build? I have downloaded uLilith from http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_Core2.7z , it is core2 build, isn't it? If I have downloaded the core2 build, then I do not need to patch and use SSE2Diff, don't we?

 

[leeperry]

 

3) and 4) what is core2 ICL11 build? I have downloaded uLilith from http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_Core2.7z , it is core2 build, isn't it? If I have downloaded the core2 build, then I do not need to patch and use SSE2Diff, don't we?

Yes, it's Core2. The SSE2Diff package patches the X86 build to Core2, you don't need it.
 

time wasted

everyone but you hears a difference...Realtek aren't what they used to no more

 

[ExCelciuS]

Thanks leeperry 

, lilith has bring me a new blissful listening experience...

 

[xnor]

Quote:

Well, yeah, all those players are bit-perfect...the rage lies in the software induced jitter these days, which depends on your OS, gear and ears.
 
some links, again:
http://www.cicsmemoryplayer.com/index.php?n=CMP.03Jitter
http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=692.0
 
And it's good to set uLilith's audio thread in realtime priority...like Reclock does for its WASAPI buffer.

 
Yes, we know that you like to paste links...
 
"software induced jitter", that is a bold statement
 
Let's see. Running foobar and ulilith in parallel, same song. After a couple of seconds I can see that:
 
ulilith:
1) spends 54% more total time (kernel + user time)
2) needs 25% more cpu cycles
...
 
 
Shooting yourself in the foot, you're doing it right!
 


 
 
 
Quote:

everyone but you hears a difference...Realtek aren't what they used to no more

 
Thank you for that priceless moment.

 

[leeperry]

 

Thanks leeperry 

You're most welcome, enjoy the sound

 

 

[Mad Max]

Quote:

Since uLilith is all the rage now in a local forum, I've decided to give it a thorough A/B with Foobar. I've set both players to output data via WASAPI, output data format is in 16-bit integer, buffer length is set to 50ms, and all DSP/resamplings are turned off in both Windows and the players.
 
The result? Both players sound exactly the same but frankly even if uLilith is slightly moar better than Foobar, I wouldn't use a player that won't even allow me to do a proper search in my playlist. 

The biggest difference I hear between the two is the soundstage.  uLilith sounds more like my DVD player feeding my DAC and Foobar2k just sounds messed up, flatter, and unnatural by comparison.  It also sounds fuzzier to me, though I wouldn't say "bass-shy."  As nice as uLilith + WASAPI is, uLilith + ASIO4ALL sounds slightly better overall to me, and a touch richer.  Less treble harshness from the slight warmth, it seems to me.  Not as clean, neutral, and airy as Reclock, though.
 
I do agree uLilith's GUI isn't the best, and I wish it would support ALAC at least 'cuz I'm too lazy to go dig up my FLAC backup archives from which the ALAC collection is based on. (lol)

 

[googleborg]

anyone got some measurements?  

 

[K3cT]

 
Quote:

The biggest difference I hear between the two is the soundstage.  uLilith sounds more like my DVD player feeding my DAC and Foobar2k just sounds messed up, flatter, and unnatural by comparison.  It also sounds fuzzier to me, though I wouldn't say "bass-shy."  As nice as uLilith + WASAPI is, uLilith + ASIO4ALL sounds slightly better overall to me, and a touch richer.  Less treble harshness from the slight warmth, it seems to me.  Not as clean, neutral, and airy as Reclock, though.
 
I do agree uLilith's GUI isn't the best, and I wish it would support ALAC at least 'cuz I'm too lazy to go dig up my FLAC backup archives from which the ALAC collection is based on. (lol)

I thought the biggest drawback is the inability to do a proper search which is even more apparent if you have a humongous playlist like me. I'm aware you can search using the first string of the filename but it's near unusable for me.
 
If you have Foobar, try loading everything to RAM first as some people claimed that it reduces potential jitter. I couldn't tell a difference but it's nice not to have stutters when you experience heavy network or HDD activities.
 
And also hello, Excelcius. Nice to see you're posting here too.