Guide to PC Audio
- Thread starter Gerry_the_Merry
- Start date
Thad E Ginathom
Well-Known Member
You should try it. It's not snake oil and its free!
Oh, I have, I have indeed! :licklips:
Both for some of those "blind-test" which-wave-form-sounds-best mouse-click tests, and for appreciating the stereo image. It is, I suppose, the ultimate in disappearing speakers
I also do it for further "enjoyment" of sounds which are more the result of imperfect room arrangement or listening position than any stereo image --- like certain instruments suddenly being place outside the space between the two speaker. This is far from high-fidelity, but I have to confess to an enjoyment of the surreal, and sometimes the downright weird
I think that pro blind testing is done using an acoustically transparent curtain, but proper blind testing, let alone double-blind testing is way beyond any of the experiments we are likely to run in our homes. It takes more than one, for starters.
I'm not saying that there are no valid sighted tests. No one is going to suggest that a very low bit-rate MP3 is going to sound the same as a very high one (although variable bit rate can seriously muddy the waters on even this one) so a sighted experiment might be, "What differences can I hear?" Then might come a point where a blind test might be appropriate to confirm differences between two close rates, or, indeed, that there were differences.
When it comes to the controversial, or the situations where theory, or even common sense, tells us that there cannot be a difference, then I think we really must "go blind" before insisting that there is
As Gerry says, this stuff takes a lot of patience, and many of my experiments reach no conclusive result simply because I run out of it!
Last edited:
Gerry_the_Merry
Well-Known Member
Instructions for connecting USB DAC to Touch - Squeezebox : Community : Forums
This is the forum where USB DACs connecting to SBT is explained. It started in September 2009 and is going on even now.
The general forum is this
Squeezebox Touch - Squeezebox : Community : Forums
It is indeed a gold mine for ideas on how to squeeze the most out of squeezebox. Also note the standard of people. I feel very humble that I am experimenting with different listening combinations, but some of these folks are doing serious experiments on which a large number of users are dependent.
I use a Squeezebox touch. In one of the threads, i have seen a lan cable connection to Squeezebox work wonders, though how it can better a memory stick fixed to the SBT beats me.
This is the forum where USB DACs connecting to SBT is explained. It started in September 2009 and is going on even now.
The general forum is this
Squeezebox Touch - Squeezebox : Community : Forums
It is indeed a gold mine for ideas on how to squeeze the most out of squeezebox. Also note the standard of people. I feel very humble that I am experimenting with different listening combinations, but some of these folks are doing serious experiments on which a large number of users are dependent.
I use a Squeezebox touch. In one of the threads, i have seen a lan cable connection to Squeezebox work wonders, though how it can better a memory stick fixed to the SBT beats me.
Thad E Ginathom
Well-Known Member
Glad to know that you are into the SB forums.
Yes, there is stuff there like the fix to make the earphone socket on the Duet remote work, that is entirely the effort of individuals/community. Of course, it's another question as to why Logitech sell it without it working.
Yes, there is stuff there like the fix to make the earphone socket on the Duet remote work, that is entirely the effort of individuals/community. Of course, it's another question as to why Logitech sell it without it working.
cha_indian
Active Member
LOL ..... The fact that Snake oil merchants have fooled audiophiles in the past ... it is just that the story just continues into the digital age .. )
Thad E Ginathom
Well-Known Member
Gerry... when are you buying the Genelecs for your PC?
The demo thread left me feeling I-want-I-want-I-want
The demo thread left me feeling I-want-I-want-I-want
Gerry_the_Merry
Well-Known Member
I am giving up on digital altogether. I cant get resolution high enough, no matter that i do. I am depending on jls001 to rescue me, as i now understand that there is a simpler solution with external sound cards that can work without need to correct jitter.
I already have speakers, amp, TT and for the present that is enough for me.
Genelec was good, wish i had seen it earlier. But i am not of the school that believes in continually changing gear for small incremental changes (my current analogue is good through the chain). When i reach the limit with my system, then perhaps, i will look for gear change. There is so much music i have to listen to, and so little time, and even that time has been spent on manipulating gear rather than listening. All in all, am reaching the end of my patience.
I already have speakers, amp, TT and for the present that is enough for me.
Genelec was good, wish i had seen it earlier. But i am not of the school that believes in continually changing gear for small incremental changes (my current analogue is good through the chain). When i reach the limit with my system, then perhaps, i will look for gear change. There is so much music i have to listen to, and so little time, and even that time has been spent on manipulating gear rather than listening. All in all, am reaching the end of my patience.
Thad E Ginathom
Well-Known Member
That's a shame ... but, for whatever reasons you chose, the point is that we enjoy listening to our music, and you must do that in the way that you choose.
miroflex
Active Member
Hi Gerry,
I too tend to agree with you. Too much time and money is being spent on hardware and too little on software,whereas it is the latter that holds the content. I am glad that you are reversing the trend.
Regards.
In a PC setup lots is being spent on s/w too. Players like Amarra, Pure Music, JPlay, etc. Cannot even begin to understand how much they are better over Foobar to justify those prices.
For those on Mac platform, I have heard folks raving about the goodness of Amarra. Must be good. Also, I heard that iRiver is very good for PC.
I've been playing with JRiver and also JPlay. Marginal improvement over Foobar (better soundstage) to my non-audiophile ears.
I personally would not spend for such marginal improvement.
Thad E Ginathom
Well-Known Member
I would not even think about buying media-player software, and that's not only because I'm a linux user. I wouldn't have done it for Windows either. This is just the sort of area in which I'd expect the dedicated developers of stuff like Foobar, VLC, etc, to probably do a better job than the commercial world.
I no longer use Foobar (the Linux thing... and no, it won't work properly with my setup under Wine, although it should for many others) but still have a great respect for it, and therefore for its developers, who say,
We all know that the opening the wallet immediately sets the placebo effect in motion (honestly, who among us has not experienced that?) but whenever I come across arguments about one player sounding vastly different to another, I think of the foobar FAQs.
I had a simple rule, formed in the days when machines had considerably less processing power: avoid the fancy graphics and just play sound. It may not be necessary any longer, so perhaps now it is a prejudice rather than a rule. I also demand the ability to access my music according to the native directory/file structure of the OS (which is how I organised them in the first place) without having to convert them into some library/database.
As to giving up on digital (as in PC-based) sound ... fully ten years ago now, my new soundcard, to my astonishment, gave me much better sound quality than my 600 (that's about Rs45,000, and it was ten years ago!) Cyrus CD player. If PC-audio is not delivering, then something is wrong with the particular equipment or implementation, not the principle.
But, as I wrote before, we must be comfortable with the way we play and listen to our music. To take an extreme example, the vinyl lover, whose experience of the music begins with sliding that shiny black disk out of its work-of-art cover, may never be happy clicking on a file name, however much of a computer user they may be otherwise. In a similar way, much as I love computers, it will always be a printed book that I choose to get my literature from, and I will never take an e-book reader, notepad, or whatever, to bed with me! And I'll feel like that regardless of how much exactly-the-same the words are, because the experience is not the same.
.
I no longer use Foobar (the Linux thing... and no, it won't work properly with my setup under Wine, although it should for many others) but still have a great respect for it, and therefore for its developers, who say,
We all know that the opening the wallet immediately sets the placebo effect in motion (honestly, who among us has not experienced that?) but whenever I come across arguments about one player sounding vastly different to another, I think of the foobar FAQs.
I had a simple rule, formed in the days when machines had considerably less processing power: avoid the fancy graphics and just play sound. It may not be necessary any longer, so perhaps now it is a prejudice rather than a rule. I also demand the ability to access my music according to the native directory/file structure of the OS (which is how I organised them in the first place) without having to convert them into some library/database.
As to giving up on digital (as in PC-based) sound ... fully ten years ago now, my new soundcard, to my astonishment, gave me much better sound quality than my 600 (that's about Rs45,000, and it was ten years ago!) Cyrus CD player. If PC-audio is not delivering, then something is wrong with the particular equipment or implementation, not the principle.
But, as I wrote before, we must be comfortable with the way we play and listen to our music. To take an extreme example, the vinyl lover, whose experience of the music begins with sliding that shiny black disk out of its work-of-art cover, may never be happy clicking on a file name, however much of a computer user they may be otherwise. In a similar way, much as I love computers, it will always be a printed book that I choose to get my literature from, and I will never take an e-book reader, notepad, or whatever, to bed with me! And I'll feel like that regardless of how much exactly-the-same the words are, because the experience is not the same.
.
Last edited:
Thad, here are some interesting points about Jplay.
Playing via: [Kernel Streaming,WASAPI]. WASAPI may be compatible with greater number of devices, but Kernel Streaming offers much lower latency. KS is the lowest audio engine level in Windows, allowing more efficient, real-time streaming. For the ultimate playback experience, we recommend KS.
Buffer: [DirectLink=1-256]. This is the crucial parameter that impacts sound quality, so you should take a while to determine the lowest possible value in your system, which depends on overall performance of your PC and performance of the driver of your audio interface. For the first time CD material is guaranteed to work with lowest latency of 1 sample (DirectLink) on most PCI or USB audio interfaces! (note some DACs e.g. Antelope Zodiac work fine with DirectLink for CD format, but need bigger buffer of 192 samples for 192kHz files)
Memory: [250MB-12GB]. Minimum 250 Megabytes (32 Megabytes) up to 14GB (if you have 16GB RAM or more). Bigger cache allows for longer gapless playback. Note that the minimum must be at least equal to the size of a track you want to play. For 16/44 tracks it shouldnt be lower than 128 and for hi-rez 512. The default Memory setting is 1GB.
Bitstream: [native,24,32]. Some DACs support 32 bits, others 24 bits and some support both. It seems that at least some DACs have a preference for Bitstream size. This means that even if you play e.g. CD 16-bit material it may be better to expand it to 24 or 32-bits by adding zeroes. If your DAC supports multiple Bitstream sizes, JPLAY now makes it possible to specify exactly which Bitstream to use. Note that if desired bitstream is not supported by DAC, JPLAY will automatically revert to one which is.
Bitperfect Volume [-6dB,-12dB,-18dB,-24dB,-30dB]. Digital volume control for CD format is available only if DAC supports more than 16 bits. People with no pre-amp, i.e. no ability to control volume, have been asking for this for a long time. Note: only ~6dB steps are allowed in order to preserve bit-perfect output. Also note that if you apply volume to HiRez tracks, they wont be bit-perfect anymore (unless your DAC can process 32 bits) - in theory thats not ideal but in practice it may not matter due to huge dynamic range of 24-bit material - we thought it is best to leave it up to you, to listen and decide for yourself.
Polarity [normal,inverted]. Unfortunately some albums are recorded with inverted polarity i.e. plus and minus have been connected the wrong way. Most albums are OK and most people dont notice the difference anyway - just like most people dont notice if left & right channels are reversed - but those who do will immediately spot that music sounds dull or that bass is boomy or slow (to quote our reviewer Bill Gaw from EnjoyTheMusic.com) - reversing polarity will fix those albums - Mind you that listening to albums, where polarity is right with the option enabled (i.e. inverted polarity) will most likely compromise sound quality and is not recommended.
Engine: [River,Beach]. JPLAY offers two unique playback engines. Both offer bit-perfect playback; only different caching algorithms. Beach seems closer to live performance; more resolving, direct, providing better resolution and focus on micro details. River is calm, presenting more coherent and effortless image. You should try both and decide which one is closer to your preferences and which one works better in your system.
DedicatedCore: [OFF,ON]. All processes will be moved out from JPLAYs CPU core when this option is enabled. When activated, this feature has positive effect on sound quality.
Throttle [OFF,ON]. When Throttle mode is activated, JPLAY will reduce to absolute minimum both CPU and I/O priorities of all running processes and individual threads in the system it can get to, without risking the stability of Windows. Note that this will reduce systems responsiveness! (e.g. mouse may become jerky and machine may appear stuck at times when CPU intensive tasks are activated) If youre doing CPU intensive work, its best to turn off Throttle mode, but if you are just browsing, we advise to leave it ON.
Overdrive: [OFF,ON]. Overdrive mode applies only to Kernel Streaming in Hibernate mode. It pushes your CPU to the limits, providing the highest sound quality possible. Please note that this feature is extreme and using it with ultrathin laptops and small HTPC cases with poor cooling capabilities may lead to instability (blue screens, restarts).
Hibernate mode:[OFF,FullScale,TurboCore,ViaUSB]. Hibernate mode eliminates dozens of OS jitter-inducing processes & hundreds of threads, providing best possible sound quality. Please note Hibernate is extreme mode and may not work on all computers. For more details please read article below.
The FAQ is also interesting.
4. How can JPLAY sound better than other players?
Did you ever experience that one software package was much faster than the other, while both did the same thing and produced the same result? Maybe one was general-purpose and other was custom-built? Maybe one did many things OK and other did ONE thing great? JPLAY was built with only one goal in mind: optimal music reproduction. And that means no Music Management features, no User Interfaces, no nothing. Except a fanatical focus on producing the best possible sound quality.
5. Yes, I understand that. What I meant is how do you explain better sounding if all players are bit-perfect?
In music, timing is everything. And in digital music reproduction doubly so: while producing bit-perfect output is easy, producing it at exact time required by digital formats (e.g. 32 bits every 22 microseconds for CD) is not. Why? Because while your PC may be really fast, its also doing hundreds if not thousands other things at the same time it plays music. With so many things going on, do you trust it will always hit the beat at just the right time? Programming optimizations in JPLAY are designed to minimize both software & hardware interruptions in order to make it easier for PC to keep the rhythm.
6. My DAC is buffering data so Im really not concerned with PC keeping a perfect timing.
You should be. Simple truth is that the less processing the DAC needs to do, the better the results. Again, if you are doubtful, JPLAY is FREE to try! Trust only your own ears!
I am going to install JPlay and see how it sounds.
Cheers
Playing via: [Kernel Streaming,WASAPI]. WASAPI may be compatible with greater number of devices, but Kernel Streaming offers much lower latency. KS is the lowest audio engine level in Windows, allowing more efficient, real-time streaming. For the ultimate playback experience, we recommend KS.
Buffer: [DirectLink=1-256]. This is the crucial parameter that impacts sound quality, so you should take a while to determine the lowest possible value in your system, which depends on overall performance of your PC and performance of the driver of your audio interface. For the first time CD material is guaranteed to work with lowest latency of 1 sample (DirectLink) on most PCI or USB audio interfaces! (note some DACs e.g. Antelope Zodiac work fine with DirectLink for CD format, but need bigger buffer of 192 samples for 192kHz files)
Memory: [250MB-12GB]. Minimum 250 Megabytes (32 Megabytes) up to 14GB (if you have 16GB RAM or more). Bigger cache allows for longer gapless playback. Note that the minimum must be at least equal to the size of a track you want to play. For 16/44 tracks it shouldnt be lower than 128 and for hi-rez 512. The default Memory setting is 1GB.
Bitstream: [native,24,32]. Some DACs support 32 bits, others 24 bits and some support both. It seems that at least some DACs have a preference for Bitstream size. This means that even if you play e.g. CD 16-bit material it may be better to expand it to 24 or 32-bits by adding zeroes. If your DAC supports multiple Bitstream sizes, JPLAY now makes it possible to specify exactly which Bitstream to use. Note that if desired bitstream is not supported by DAC, JPLAY will automatically revert to one which is.
Bitperfect Volume [-6dB,-12dB,-18dB,-24dB,-30dB]. Digital volume control for CD format is available only if DAC supports more than 16 bits. People with no pre-amp, i.e. no ability to control volume, have been asking for this for a long time. Note: only ~6dB steps are allowed in order to preserve bit-perfect output. Also note that if you apply volume to HiRez tracks, they wont be bit-perfect anymore (unless your DAC can process 32 bits) - in theory thats not ideal but in practice it may not matter due to huge dynamic range of 24-bit material - we thought it is best to leave it up to you, to listen and decide for yourself.
Polarity [normal,inverted]. Unfortunately some albums are recorded with inverted polarity i.e. plus and minus have been connected the wrong way. Most albums are OK and most people dont notice the difference anyway - just like most people dont notice if left & right channels are reversed - but those who do will immediately spot that music sounds dull or that bass is boomy or slow (to quote our reviewer Bill Gaw from EnjoyTheMusic.com) - reversing polarity will fix those albums - Mind you that listening to albums, where polarity is right with the option enabled (i.e. inverted polarity) will most likely compromise sound quality and is not recommended.
Engine: [River,Beach]. JPLAY offers two unique playback engines. Both offer bit-perfect playback; only different caching algorithms. Beach seems closer to live performance; more resolving, direct, providing better resolution and focus on micro details. River is calm, presenting more coherent and effortless image. You should try both and decide which one is closer to your preferences and which one works better in your system.
DedicatedCore: [OFF,ON]. All processes will be moved out from JPLAYs CPU core when this option is enabled. When activated, this feature has positive effect on sound quality.
Throttle [OFF,ON]. When Throttle mode is activated, JPLAY will reduce to absolute minimum both CPU and I/O priorities of all running processes and individual threads in the system it can get to, without risking the stability of Windows. Note that this will reduce systems responsiveness! (e.g. mouse may become jerky and machine may appear stuck at times when CPU intensive tasks are activated) If youre doing CPU intensive work, its best to turn off Throttle mode, but if you are just browsing, we advise to leave it ON.
Overdrive: [OFF,ON]. Overdrive mode applies only to Kernel Streaming in Hibernate mode. It pushes your CPU to the limits, providing the highest sound quality possible. Please note that this feature is extreme and using it with ultrathin laptops and small HTPC cases with poor cooling capabilities may lead to instability (blue screens, restarts).
Hibernate mode:[OFF,FullScale,TurboCore,ViaUSB]. Hibernate mode eliminates dozens of OS jitter-inducing processes & hundreds of threads, providing best possible sound quality. Please note Hibernate is extreme mode and may not work on all computers. For more details please read article below.
The FAQ is also interesting.
4. How can JPLAY sound better than other players?
Did you ever experience that one software package was much faster than the other, while both did the same thing and produced the same result? Maybe one was general-purpose and other was custom-built? Maybe one did many things OK and other did ONE thing great? JPLAY was built with only one goal in mind: optimal music reproduction. And that means no Music Management features, no User Interfaces, no nothing. Except a fanatical focus on producing the best possible sound quality.
5. Yes, I understand that. What I meant is how do you explain better sounding if all players are bit-perfect?
In music, timing is everything. And in digital music reproduction doubly so: while producing bit-perfect output is easy, producing it at exact time required by digital formats (e.g. 32 bits every 22 microseconds for CD) is not. Why? Because while your PC may be really fast, its also doing hundreds if not thousands other things at the same time it plays music. With so many things going on, do you trust it will always hit the beat at just the right time? Programming optimizations in JPLAY are designed to minimize both software & hardware interruptions in order to make it easier for PC to keep the rhythm.
6. My DAC is buffering data so Im really not concerned with PC keeping a perfect timing.
You should be. Simple truth is that the less processing the DAC needs to do, the better the results. Again, if you are doubtful, JPLAY is FREE to try! Trust only your own ears!
I am going to install JPlay and see how it sounds.
Cheers
Last edited:
Thad E Ginathom
Well-Known Member
When I am discussing religion and spirituality on another forum, I am often reminded of discussions on this one! And vice versa. You and I can have heated arguments on some of the above items that can be just as "spirited" as I have with another friend on the other forum!
As you know, I no longer use Windows, so I am happily out of all the Windows drivers controversy, although I can certainly accept (long-held prejudice against microsoft ways of doing things!) that it is better to bypass the OS on this.
As far as bufferring is concerned, well, as you might expect, I can specify my buffering. Specifying too little means actual trouble as in dropouts: specifying too much just increases latency, which is of no consequence whatsoever for playback. It makes no odds if the sound is "delayed" by 1ms or 1 sec! That does not impact sound quality. I'm a little surprised, though, to hear you suggesting that reducing the buffer to one sample may be advantageous, when I have also seen you advocate "buffering" an entire song before playing it! There seems to be some confusion in the above between "buffering" and "memory" and the word "cache" is thrown in for good measure.
There are some other very odd things in the above, which I suspect originate from the marketing department's imagination, but hey...
On the other hand, one really bad, irrelevant and inappropriate argument or analogy is often enough to put me off, because it says something about the company making it. Here it is...
Might be a good product anyway. Many a good product has bad marketing! And surely, whether free or paid is irrelevant... as long as it is affordable then no harm in trying!
ps ... taking a look at their site. You might recall that I have have had huge trouble, in the past, with the way that PC interupts and priorities can work. I don't suppose they'll be giving their secrets away, though!
.
As you know, I no longer use Windows, so I am happily out of all the Windows drivers controversy, although I can certainly accept (long-held prejudice against microsoft ways of doing things!) that it is better to bypass the OS on this.
As far as bufferring is concerned, well, as you might expect, I can specify my buffering. Specifying too little means actual trouble as in dropouts: specifying too much just increases latency, which is of no consequence whatsoever for playback. It makes no odds if the sound is "delayed" by 1ms or 1 sec! That does not impact sound quality. I'm a little surprised, though, to hear you suggesting that reducing the buffer to one sample may be advantageous, when I have also seen you advocate "buffering" an entire song before playing it! There seems to be some confusion in the above between "buffering" and "memory" and the word "cache" is thrown in for good measure.
There are some other very odd things in the above, which I suspect originate from the marketing department's imagination, but hey...
On the other hand, one really bad, irrelevant and inappropriate argument or analogy is often enough to put me off, because it says something about the company making it. Here it is...
Might be a good product anyway. Many a good product has bad marketing! And surely, whether free or paid is irrelevant... as long as it is affordable then no harm in trying!
ps ... taking a look at their site. You might recall that I have have had huge trouble, in the past, with the way that PC interupts and priorities can work. I don't suppose they'll be giving their secrets away, though!
.
Last edited:
Gerry_the_Merry
Well-Known Member
Forgot to mention...I heard the Bryston BDP-1 in Singapore recently. There was little time to listen carefully, but the sound was indeed high class. But the simplicity was breathtaking.
You cant tweak it as much as you can with PC Audio and Turntables, though...
Has anyone heard it in detail? Seems too good to be true. In sonic terms, if there is little to complain about, the whole world should be converging on this product...
You cant tweak it as much as you can with PC Audio and Turntables, though...
Has anyone heard it in detail? Seems too good to be true. In sonic terms, if there is little to complain about, the whole world should be converging on this product...
^^ It seems the Bryston BDP-1 uses a modified ESI Juli@ inside it!
Source: Bryston BDP-1 digital audio player | Stereophile.com
Source: Bryston BDP-1 digital audio player | Stereophile.com
Gerry_the_Merry
Well-Known Member
Which I believe costs less than $200
Yes.
What I was implying was this: Bryston using an ESI Juli@ in their 2,100.00 (approx.) player is a pretty big acknowledgment of the capabilities of the Juli@.
About the price of the components, well, we all know that a lot of what we pay for the finished product goes for the brand value. I'm sure a 400 Music PC that's setup well will come pretty close to the Bryston BDP-01 as a transport.
What I was implying was this: Bryston using an ESI Juli@ in their 2,100.00 (approx.) player is a pretty big acknowledgment of the capabilities of the Juli@.
About the price of the components, well, we all know that a lot of what we pay for the finished product goes for the brand value. I'm sure a 400 Music PC that's setup well will come pretty close to the Bryston BDP-01 as a transport.
@venkatcr - I have been using JPlay and its good. Needs J River to run but kind of "betters" J River.
Honestly... even J River improves over Foobar... not by much but you can "hear" the difference in terms of better imaging and soundstage.
But coming to free players Foobar + WASAPI is still the best combo.
Honestly... even J River improves over Foobar... not by much but you can "hear" the difference in terms of better imaging and soundstage.
But coming to free players Foobar + WASAPI is still the best combo.
For excellent sound that won't break the bank, the 5 Star Award Winning Wharfedale Diamond 12.1 Bookshelf Speakers is the one to consider!
Similar threads
