[5genez]

​

 

[castleofargh]

this is kind of on topic because of how people tend to give feedbacks without actual side by testing.
we recognize plenty of things and remember most elements we care about. the problem is the accuracy of those memories, not the lack of memories. and there are some things we recognize better than others. like voices from a lifetime of communicating, and the actual necessity of understanding voices well. so the brain pays extra attention to stuff like that. experience will help, we suck at memorizing a sound, but we can get a general idea by comparison to other memories, the bass of that device, the soundstage of that other device, the guitar of such song...
all and any information already memorized will help create a more complete memory of a given sound. musicians may memorize certain notes, the sound engineer may memorize an estimation of variation in DB at several frequencies, etc. we use what our brain is most comfortable with.  but as all memories are altered and based on other memories, expecting to have high accuracy as a result of using previous memories, it's just not very realistic.
for very accurate recall and analysis, it has been demonstrated that we're really good when the 2 things we want to judge are separated by less than 3 to 10s. after that our accuracy just takes a massive dive. it doesn't mean we lose it all, we just don't perform as well.
those who say they need a long time to really get a sound, are just replacing the accuracy from their senses, by experience. but all the tests I've seen so far suggest that rapid switching is the most accurate method to discriminate 2 sounds. experience is great for other things.
when you guys replace an OS by another, you're deprived of that very effective method. because you lose the first sound.
 
the second problem with memory is that the more we focus on something and recall that memory, and the more it will become exaggerated. it's the safest method our brain knows to keep something. if you see and egg, you don't care and may forget you saw it on the table. now if that egg has raptor legs and is the size of godzilla and you see it running, you will probably remember that one egg until the day you die.
we remember unusual things better, the brain knows it, so very often, when you tell it that something is very important and must be remembered, the brain will tend to make a caricature of it just to help memorizing. we trade accuracy for longer lasting memory. but of course once we have lost the original cues, we don't know that we don't have the proper memory. after all the last memory is the only thing we still have in our brain on the subject. so to us it's now reality as it always has been. only objective measurement, or the original sound available to see the difference, can help realize our mistake.
something I often think about, is how much I enjoyed listening to some old device when I was a kid. maybe 2 years ago I used an old k7 walkman with a good old "the wall" tape... let me tell you it didn't sound like I remembered it.

 
  the way to mitigate that problem is not to be too passionate about a certain matter(because passion is another way to have it all vastly exaggerated in our heads), and to have the different sounds available as often as possible to set a reference and kind of recalibrate our memory of the sound. so we're back to having the sounds we want to differentiate still available. it all comes back to having the 2 sounds side by side as the only proper way to listen and notice small differences. 
thinking that we're ok with an old memory(a few hours is old to me) of how something sounds, is only evidence that we overestimate ourselves.
IMO most times we do indeed get the main idea right. we're still amazing creatures. but the possibility of being wrong is real, and to me that leads to doubt, and when there is doubt, I stop making claims. so I want a proper side by side or some measurements to reassure myself ^_^. and I tend not to trust anything else(like feedbacks of burn-in, even if they're real and accurate, how could I trust such a feedback without measurements? it goes against everything I know about memory accuracy).

 

[Music Alchemist]

 
The interesting thing is, I wasn't expecting to hear a difference at all. I was very used to using Windows 7, for years...so when I heard such a dramatic difference, let me tell ya, there wasn't any doubt it was real! Just don't have a clue as to why it happened...
 
I do agree with most of what you said. It would be convenient to be able to rapidly switch between them side by side, but that just wasn't possible in this case.

 

[castleofargh]

sure, and I'm not saying you didn't get a change in sound with a clearly audible difference. only that it's really hard to be sure without the original sound. and as discussed before, even if the clearly audible difference was established, then it would still not demonstrate that the cause is winX sounding better than win7. so that's a lot of uncertainties, and we can't really hope to get anywhere conclusive with this alone.

 

[NCSUZoSo]

It may have nothing to do with Windows 10 itself, it instead may just be an improvement in a driver designed for W10 over the one previously used on W7.  In fact there are ton of explanations to why this could happen.
 
I too noticed a marked changed it the top end, the sound has more sparkle to it.  It's like with my Fender Blues Jr. that I modded and added presence and sparkle controls.  If you give it too much sparkle you start to get a little high frequency noise, so of course you only want it so high.  This is the change in the sound that I noticed when making the jump from Windows 7 Ultimate x64 to Windows 10 Pro x64.
 
Hardware is listed below in my sig in great detail with links.

 

[GreenBow]

I was thinking about this only recently. Since I bought JRiver and play bit perfect, it shows how much DirectSound alters audio. Maybe they just did some differences in Win 10 DirectSound. (I always used to think it was down to the hardware.)

 

[5genez]

Before the free trial was over I had downloaded the Windows 10 upgrade onto a thumb drive. It took a few days to get everything to where I knew what I was doing for the install...
 
 
I own a laptop that had been acting  bad. It was suffering with some corrupted files.  I do not use the laptop for my audio system. So, I started there.  Long story short?  The function as a laptop improved.  It had been Windows 7.
 
I made sure to also install a free software 'Spybot Anti- Beacon' which helps to eliminate the spyware capacities of Windows 10.  I also installed the Freeware "Classic Shell"  so it looks and functions more like Windows 7, and even looks nicer in certain ways than Windows 7.  Laptop?   Complete success. 
 
 I also own a fanless PC dedicated for audio.  It has a Solid State Drive which is audibly better than spinning hard drives that produce electrical noise because of the electronics needed to move the spinning hard drive. The spinning produces electronic ripple effect that gets interjected into the audio signal.  SSD don't move.That problem is not present.  Also, the PSU is of excellent quality and produces a low ripple as well.  Unlike my laptop had been doing with Windows 7 the PC functioned beautifully.
 
With good electronics and speakers the system sounded impressively good with Windows 7. With that in mind..  I then installed Windows 10.
 
Did not work.  Maybe it was an install problem?  The sound did not cut it.  I then was hoping my back-up image for the Windows 7 would be good.  It was.  I am now back to Windows 7 on my audiophile PC.  But?  It may have been due to some install glitch when updating to Windows 10.    As for now?  I am happy back with what I got. It really sounds good with Windows 7.  It sounded slightly odd with Windows 10.
 
Note!    I noticed that both 7, and 10,  offer the exact same set up for using a DAC.  Seems to be the exact same software configuration. 
 
On older systems with corrupted files the upgrade may improve things by default, simply because the corrupted files would be eliminated. Probably could have ended up equally as good if one made a clean install of Windows 7 over the older Windows 7 that had been running.
 
 
IMHO....   GeneZ

 

[bilboda]

Windows 10 sounded wrong to me when I installed it in a new pc with just an ssd drive.
I moved my regen, Aune x1s, Jriver21 using ASIO over to the Windows 10 pc and just did not like it very much.
All new hardware inside and the sound was harsher.
 
Then I installed the free version of Fidelizer using the purist setting. Game over. Stunning difference . It has never been this good. Controlled playback with Gizmo on my Tab4.
My windows 7 pc is still in use, movies, internet ,etc.
Just paid for the Fidelizer Pro. I could go into the differences, clarity, presence, spaciousness, etc but I wouldn't be explaining this well.
 
I highly recommend using the free version in purist mode. It won't break anything and resets to normal on reboot.
Listen to music for an hour or 2 stuff you know and like at least well enough not to delete.
Orchestral music was my eye opener. Extraordinary instrument separation.
 
Cannot recommend it enough. So right now Windows 10 does sound better than Windows 7 but it needed help.

 

[5genez]

Its different for everyone I guess...
 
 
I just ran Fidelizer in the Purist mode.  It did sound cleaner ... But, not better. 
 
I run using optical to my DAC. Maybe, Fidelizer is more effective when playing from USB?  With optical, I am avoiding a lot of internal noises running otherwise?  So maybe that's why?  
 
The best thing I did to improve the music was to change the op-amps in my Nuforce HAP 100 preamp to Muses 01's. That really changed everything for me.
 
Optical is always so clean sounding to me.

 

[Schonen]

Unless you do a double blind ABX test I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

[bilboda]

  Unless you do a double blind ABX test I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid.

There are koolaid flavors enough for everyone.  including the ABX variety. Unless you are only referring to the optical vs USB post above, how on God's green earth, could someone do an ABX of their own OS?
More importantly, why would they bother?
 
As far as Fidelizer , try it your self. It's free and painless.
 
Windows 10? MIcrosoft has already documented issues with bit streaming after Windows 10 AE update and provided fixes. Even without that published update I was fine with the idea that Windows 10 audio was a step back.
I just didn't like it very much. ABX? Who cares? I didn't like it. That's all I need to know.I took steps to improve it and I know it worked. How? Because now I like it. What would be the point in proving it?
 
For me, it's never about proving I hear what I hear. I'm perfectly comfortable in just discussing it. I realize I'm not ever going to understand everything before trying something new.
Even if I could have come up with a way to ABX and thus proved I heard a difference, it would not have increased my understanding one little bit.
 
I don't get this Prove IT! mentality. OP posted, I posted with a similar experience unaware of other's issues until my issue was first resolved. I didn't go around looking for proof of what I was hearing. I simply fixed it.

 

[5genez]

  Unless you do a double blind ABX test I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid.

 
Over the years I found double blind tests are needed when nothing to be heard can truly satisfy.  Its becomes a matter of which one has a detail that you may prefer when A-B'ing ... rather than hearing something and knowing it sounds great.  Its a frustrating cycle until one can finally find the right system that makes the listener feel at home.  After that?  Why bother to compare? That's the problem with so many being frustrated with their systems.

 

[castleofargh]

the purpose of ABX is to demonstrate we can hear a difference. so if that fact is the one being discussed/questioned, then abx is one good method to prove it.
for personal preferences, you don't actually need to hear a difference, TBH preferring the skin of one OS is more than enough to have a preference. and thinking there is a sound difference is fine too, shared as an opinion, it doesn't hurt anybody.
claimed as a fact that win10 sounds better on my system, is questionable, but possible(some old bad drivers, some new drivers coming in with the new OS, some settings getting reseted at the install ... to make a claim about it without evidence that's just an opinion stated with way too much confidence. it would make more sense if it stayed a personal feeling instead of being claimed as true without more than feelings.
 
what is clearly wrong is to claim that win10 sounds different than win8 or 7 all the times. the reason is simple, none of us have have verified it on enough computers to know it, so claiming it without knowing it... that's just being a jerk. this topic's title avoided it and stayed at the level of a personal experience which is the honest and caring thing to do.

 

[5genez]

With some folks, switching to Windows 10 may have simply corrected what had been corrupted files in the previous OS.
 
Its not a reliable thing to say upgrading made it sound better.  On my old laptop it made it run quicker.  I do not use my laptop for audio.  On my dedicated PC for audio, it did something to the sound I did not like.  So? Its maybe going to be better for you. Maybe not.    That's all. 
 
If you need to AB the two?  Then there is nothing much of any difference to begin with...   Its your choice.  Other than having to deal with the Microsoft sanctioned spyware potential of Windows 10, its quicker than 7. I simply installed the free Spybot Anti-Beacon to deal with the snoopers installed with Windows 10.  The Spybot can also be used with Windows 7, but is less needed with 7.
 
All's well...

 

[Quiruio]

I slightly bit prefer how Windows 10 sounds over 7, they are almost the same though, the soundstaging feels a bit more natural out of head mostly, a rather subtle difference though and not enough to make me 100% use Windows 10 because of that.

 
Agreed. Windows 10 is much better than windows 7.