[PenguinHeadphoner]

I suspect Android 7.1 isn't helping your cause.

Hi,

Well I would suspect that also... IF... Yes, there's always a "But" and an "if"

As I mentioned I am also using another App that serves more or less the same purpose as UAPP does.
But if I use that the same way I am using UAPP I can listen to my music for hours with no interruptions.
Even better : if I pause the playback of my files, I can even resume the playback which is more difficult to do with UAPP.

So why not using that app instead ?
Simple : it is so packed with features that you litterally have to spend dozens of hours to begin mastering it...
Total opposition to the sleek, simple and eye catching design from UAPP...

Regards.

 

[PenguinHeadphoner]

Mostly the pretty lights I suspect. All joking aside, I'd be willing to bet barely anyone, if anyone, would be able to tell in a blind A/B. But that doesn't just apply to bitrate, it applies to pretty much everything "audiophile". In fairness, it is preferable to have the best quality where possible just for the sake of it as long as it isn't a big hassle to get.

Hi,

Totally agreed.

When I download an album and I am given the choice between "16/44" and a "High Res" format, I tend to take the "High Res" version.
I am indeed not sure I would be able to tell them apart with a, say, 80% accuracy.
I think I was able to do that when I was younger : I could tell .mp3 apart from CD ; I could tell apart regular CD from 24/96. But that was it : I have never been able to distinguish 24/96 from 24/192.

To me, the best "ratio" is 24/48.
Why ?
Because you have better bit depth and slightly improved sampling rate.
At that does not come at the cost of too high storage...
24/96 begins to require really more storage and 24/192 will eat up your HDD in minutes

So I stick to 24/48 or 24/96 but do not go highr than that. Pointless for me and my 52 years old ears

 

[dgjl]

Hi,

Totally agreed.

When I download an album and I am given the choice between "16/44" and a "High Res" format, I tend to take the "High Res" version.
I am indeed not sure I would be able to telle the apart with a, say, 80% accuracy.
I think I was able to do that when I was younger : I could tell /mp3 apart from CD ; I could tell apart regular CD from 24/96. But that was it : I have never been able to distinguish 24/96 from 24/192.
To me, the best "ratio" is 24/48 : why ? Because you have better bit depth and slightly improved sampling rate. At that does not come at the cost of too high storage... 24/96 begins to require really more storage and 24/192 will eat up your HDD in minutes

So I stick to 24/48 or 24/96 but do not go highr than that. Pointless for me and my 52 years old ears

Ha! Agreed. Could have written that myself. Though not 52 for a couple of months...

 

[FilipeNgra]

There is nothing like "find Radio" in Qobuz? like we see in Tidal or Spotify? I miss this feature.

 

[PenguinHeadphoner]

Hi,

Are there ardios in Qobuz ?

If so, I wasn't aware of that

 

[FilipeNgra]

Hi,

Are there ardios in Qobuz ?

If so, I wasn't aware of that

Ther eare no Radios in Qobuz. I think the auto-play is similar but i cant find it on UAPP

 

[FlacFan]

There is no radio in Tidal nor in Qobuz in the traditional sense.
In Tidal the 'goto artist radio' will invoke a smart search function to collect and create a playlist of similar artist/genre. It works quite well. That functionality is available in UAPP as well, but differently implemented.
Qobuz has none of the above, just a 'your weekly playlist' typically refreshed on a Friday. I unsubbed Qobuz for that reason. That playlist included genres I am not even remotely interested in.

Cheers.

 

[Knobstler]

There is no radio in Tidal nor in Qobuz in the traditional sense.
In Tidal the 'goto artist radio' will invoke a smart search function to collect and create a playlist of similar artist/genre. It works quite well. That functionality is available in UAPP as well, but differently implemented.
Qobuz has none of the above, just a 'your weekly playlist' typically refreshed on a Friday. I unsubbed Qobuz for that reason. That playlist included genres I am not even remotely interested in.

Cheers.

Thank you but my question was if there are any settings that i cant access without the remote control.

 

[FlacFan]

Thank you but my question was if there are any settings that i cant access without the remote control.

This thread is about the USB Audio Pro player app. It does not need, nor requires a remote control for anything.
Maybe you need to look for a thread regarding your hardware. Phone, DAC/Amp or whatever you use UAPP on.

 

[Knobstler]

This thread is about the USB Audio Pro player app. It does not need, nor requires a remote control for anything.
Maybe you need to look for a thread regarding your hardware. Phone, DAC/Amp or whatever you use UAPP on.

Sorry i obviously posted in the wrong thread.

 

[sebek]

Pixel 6a phone, Apple dongle, I have a problem, playback is complete silent on UAPP, but if I first start a video on YouTube for a few seconds then go back to UAPP it starts to play regularly. Every time I close UAPP this thing happens.

 

[lukeyrada]

Hi,

Totally agreed.

When I download an album and I am given the choice between "16/44" and a "High Res" format, I tend to take the "High Res" version.
I am indeed not sure I would be able to tell them apart with a, say, 80% accuracy.
I think I was able to do that when I was younger : I could tell .mp3 apart from CD ; I could tell apart regular CD from 24/96. But that was it : I have never been able to distinguish 24/96 from 24/192.

To me, the best "ratio" is 24/48.
Why ?
Because you have better bit depth and slightly improved sampling rate.
At that does not come at the cost of too high storage...
24/96 begins to require really more storage and 24/192 will eat up your HDD in minutes

So I stick to 24/48 or 24/96 but do not go highr than that. Pointless for me and my 52 years old ears

Do you think you'd be able to consistently tell the difference in a blind A/B?

I don't think that I would. There's also multiple other factors. You can't just compare the same song or album at different sample rates, it has to be the exact same version (release) from the same master. Then the volume also has to be matched/equalised. Last night I was listening to some Stevie Wonder CD (AIFF) rips via UAPP and compared a couple of songs to the 24/192 versions on Qobuz. I thought 1 song sounded better on Qobuz and the other on my CD rip. The perception of improvement I would put down to a slight volume boost. If I can be bothered I might try and do a like for like (exact same release/version from the same master) comparison between a CD rip and high bitrate version on Qobuz. I don't anticipate much, if any, audible difference. I have 2 copies of The Ballad Of Darren for this reason, one CD and one 24 bit download. It should be the exact same version. Will test further.

 

[PenguinHeadphoner]

Do you think you'd be able to consistently tell the difference in a blind A/B?

Hi,

Did I say I would be able to tell the difference ?
If so, I think I did not express myself really well, or maybe you misunderstood my message.

I did say that, when I am given the choice, I take the "high res" version over the .mp3 or CD version even if I would probably not be able to tell the difference (anymore).
It is just for my own peace of mind...

Now, yes I did compare same versions of the exact same recond taken from the same source.
And that was from Beethoven 5th and 7th directed by Carlos KLEIBER, in the edition relesed by Deutsche Grammophon.
I happen to have the CD, the DVD-Audio (or Blu-Ray audio ?) and bought it on Qobuz when it was possible to select the foremat (I downloaded in .mp3, .flac 16/44, .flac 24/96 and I think there was even a .lfac 24/192 version).
I played them all on the same device.

As I said, I was then able to tell the difference between .mp3 (but that was 15 years ago) and CD ; between CD and 24/96... But that was it.
Today, as I already said, I am not sure I would even be able to tell a difference between .mp3 (at a reasonable bitrate, say 320kbps) and CD or even 24/96...

Of course, as usual, to all people asking if I am able to hear the difference and when I answer "Yes" just to make fun, I got the reply about "Double blind test with volume matching... Whci we all know if something almost impossible to achieve, so of course it can't be proven that I am indeed hearing the difference.

But again, I do not claim to be able to hear a difference... I just take "hi-res" when available and if possible 24/48 because I don't think I would hear the difference between that an 24/96 and so I can save storage space... But as I have enough space to store my music, that is not a real problem

 

[WDitters]

Do you think you'd be able to consistently tell the difference in a blind A/B?

I don't think that I would. There's also multiple other factors. You can't just compare the same song or album at different sample rates, it has to be the exact same version (release) from the same master. Then the volume also has to be matched/equalised. Last night I was listening to some Stevie Wonder CD (AIFF) rips via UAPP and compared a couple of songs to the 24/192 versions on Qobuz. I thought 1 song sounded better on Qobuz and the other on my CD rip. The perception of improvement I would put down to a slight volume boost. If I can be bothered I might try and do a like for like (exact same release/version from the same master) comparison between a CD rip and high bitrate version on Qobuz. I don't anticipate much, if any, audible difference. I have 2 copies of The Ballad Of Darren for this reason, one CD and one 24 bit download. It should be the exact same version. Will test further.

Spot on .. At the end of the day, just listen to the music and appreciate the improvement and musical engagement that one version might give you over another ... There often is more difference in SQ between two versions of the same track/album coming from different publishing firms than there is between different resolutions from the same publishing firm. It not only depends on resolution but more often the care and attention that has been put into a recording, the mixing, the mastering, the used equipment etc plays a big role in the quality of the end product

That fact alone often risks dragging one down into well known rabbit holes such as "whose masterings are better? MFSL or Analogue Productions?"... Whereas I generally prefer higher resolution versions over standard resolution versions, I often find myself preferring a standard resolution AP master over a high resolution MFSL master .. or vice versa ...

So in short, yes, high resolution versions often offer more detail and insight, but definitely are not always the holy grail ...

(Just to illustrate the above, have a look at all the discussions on the https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/ forum ... You wouldn't believe the number of disucssions that you can find there about whose mastering sounds better, or whether an SACD version improves over a CD version of the same album)

 

[HardstyleLoco96]

Hi guys. Been using UAPP for a while and just got curious of the crossfeed function. I been using my Hifiman Ananda Nano and heard crossfeed can help make it sound more like listening to speakers. What settings would you suggest on the sliders?