XXHighEnd

I've just installed it. Frankly, to my ears Special mode plays the best. The sound is coherent - most detailed but without any harshness. Could it be any better than this, Peter? How deep would it go into a record? Right now I am able to hear so much background noises, that I'm actually scared. Is it still music that I am listening to or rather some kind of freaking analysis...

Haha, you may recall my topic from a few days back about re-enstating Anti Imaging upsampling (filtering) and how it again occurred to me how black the background was. And this is a virtue, I have learned. Until I after a few days went back to KS and (in my case) Adaptive Mode, and I really didn't know what I was hearing for background noises. So, or our "black" never has been the good idea, or back then this was about different noise which doesn't belong there.

There was a time that brushes were pereceived as strange noises, if you could hear them at all. Right now they blast through the room.
Have things changed, or have they ...

Day before yesterday I really was in a state of once again posting about that it couldn't be better because I'm perceiving plain reality.
I didn't post it because I have learned that there will always be some new idea to improve, and I guess it never stops. Well, I hope it doesn't or otherwise the fun will be gone.
In any case, I am not done with KS yet. There are more possibilities ...

Thanks,
Peter

I've been comparing Adaptive and Special mode. There is no doubt - Special Mode is superior! In adaptive it's impossible to hear details which are perfectly "visible" in Special mode. Especially when it comes to background details

Allright, so maybe it's time for me to switch back to that one again. Pfff
:)

I also prefer special mode over adaptive mode. In my system, adaptive mode is leaner and may be a touch cleaner but through special mode, I hear more bloom, string instrument has nicer decay and richer sound. However, in 09y-7 version, I can set Q1 as low as -4 and increase in increment of 1. IN 09y-8 version in special mode, the lowest Q1 setting available was 7 then it go up to 15, 45 etc. In adaptive mode, Q1 go down to 0 with iincrement interval of 1. Also at Q1 of 7 in 097-08, I get a bit of tick and pop but under 09y-7, I am at Q1 level of 0 with no problem so far.

I switched to 09-y7 and I have to admit that special mode on y7 is better for me, more analogue.

Although I am running y7 on xp, I think that the phrase "black background" can mean either of two things - one good, the other bad!

With a natural sounding recording, you can hear the spaces between the musicians - that is the acoustic of the space is part of the soundstage along with the musicians-- when you hear only the musicians with nothing between them, then a black background is actually missing ambient and low level information

when the black background means that there are no artifacts or distortion, then it is good!

best,

mark

Just installed .9y-08 Using special mode sound quality is best I have ever heard from my system. Clean and detailed almost beyond belief.

Thank you for a stunningly good product.

Thanks ... Very nice to hear !

:welcome01:
:)

I finally did some quiet listening of y-8. I found out that KS/adaptive mode with Q1=1 and buffers 1024 sounds the best that my system ever has.

1024 latency is the minimum for me to not hear distorion or "too many buffer errors". While with Q1=4 i could go as low as 256, the above combination sounds BETTER, more foot-tapping. I lowered Q1 after looking at Peter last signature ;) I generally agree with him about what sounds best.

I have to say that the new PSU could be somewhat related to this, but I surely am not putting back the old psu ;)

Will experiment comparing adaptive to special mode with the above settings.

Enjoying 09-y8! Took awhile to find the ideal settings but well worth it. I am hearing more information off recordings than I thought was possible. Arc Prediction more detailed than Anti-image but the Anti-Image is a bit warmer and fuller sounding which I prefer for the few tracks I heard. I think I'll be going back and forth between the two settings depending on the music material. The y-8 version is the most stable with my laptop so far and no error messages.

Here are the settings that work best for me without the slo-mo static.

Quad Sampling, Anti-Image, Special Mode, Buffer-1024, Q1-1143 and 15/15/0/0.

Double Sampling same settings as above except Q1-661.

Great work again Peter!

Adaptive or Special Mode? Boy would I like to have more problems like this; they're both fantastic. I do think, for the moment, I'm tending more toward adaptive, where it seems one is several steps closer to the stage. Adaptive is a cleaner, less "warm" sound but I seem to hear more of the detail and richness of Eva's voice in Fields of Gold. And the cleaner sound is not harsh, just more "present". Two days ago, using my M-Audio Audiophile usb for usb/spdif conversion, I know I would have found adaptive mode too harsh or too digital sounding. Not so today. I highly recommend the Hiface if you are on a budget.

Possibly I can take here THE first prize :)

Tonight spent time comparing Adaptive vs Special modes in double Anti-image mode (16/44 -->24/96). Cannot use ArcPred as my USB unit accepts only 48 and 96 kHz. (Still waiting for my HiFace and hope it will beat my current situation). So, let's get started!

adaptive:
q1=2, buffer=128, cpu~5% :)
sound :)

special:
q1=1(2 in samples), buffer=128, cpu~20-25% :( as it makes fans spin which create noise
sound :):):)

So, I choose special mode and try not to listen to the noise.


Other appropriate settings(common): Scheme-3/Low/Realtime.

So, Peter, can you give me more? :) Meaning, can we go below 2 samples???

BTW, it seems to me, not sure yet, but on my OS DAC Anti-image probably goes better than ArcPred...?

OK, yesterday when I wrote previous post I was judging about sound via wireless headphones - good ones, the regular way I listen to the music. This morning played several albums via speakers and can confirm that to me SPECIAL mode sounds better than ADAPTIVE. It is more warm, more detailed, very crisp and clear and the sound stage is very 3-D. So far it is best coming out from XX via my speakers, will see how it plays with ArcPred when my HiFace arrives.

Ivo, can you try Engine 3 and let us know how that compares to Special Mode?

Now I'm puzzled.  I thought Adaptive Mode was really just a way to help people who were having trouble getting the buffer size and Q1 setting dialed in on Special Mode... that if Special Mode and Adaptive Mode were run with the same buffer size and number of samples they would sound the same.  Am I missing something?

Hello everybody!
In my tube based system 09-y8 in adaptative mode is more detailed but no less warm than special.
In any case either of the two is a major improvement.
Due to particular conditions I have to use headphones more than I'd like to do. And there is a clear sympton to me: before the tube mods of my DAC ( this summer  www.lampizator ) and mainly the discover of XXHE ( this autumn ) I hardly could hear a CD without a heavy sense of fatigue at the end ( apparently it sounded OK. but after a half of hour or so ...)   :heat: very exhausting
Well, yesterday I could hear a entire opera ( 3 CD's in a row ) and even so I wanted to listen more  :xx:
Furthermore, the low level detail made unnecessary increase the volume to hear more and this is very healthy for my ears. :veryhappy:
To conclude, Peter, thank you very much for make me believe again in digital after many, many years of bitter decepcions. :thankyou:
Maxi

Hi Maxi - Very nice to hear. Thank you you wanted to share it !

No no no !

Adaptive Mode : Another version of Kernel Streaming BUT allowing for ultra low latency. Its way of working further is the same as Normal Mode.
Special Mode : Another version of Kernel Streaming BUT allowing for even more ultra low latency (some 100 times :yes:). Its way of working is completely different from Normal Mode.

So :


No, they will not.
Sorry ...
:swoon:

My bad, Peter.  I think I get it now.  I’m kind of preferring Special mode with my Lynx=>BAD Alpha setup where I can go pretty low without snaps, crackles, or pops. Brilliant clarity and still luscious tone.  I'm so happy with it that I sold my Spectral CD player! Now I’m anxiously awaiting delivery of a HiFace for use in my second system with a 1980’s-vintage Enlightened Audio Designs DSP-9000 DAC.  No high-rez, but have two setups will help shed more light on how the various settings influence sound.  This, of course, will come at a heavy price: I will be twice as neurotic as ever!   :wacko:

Hello,

I would like to share that I am not all that exited about the 09-08c version. I played a lot with the different modes and Q1 slider and did not manage to get 'special mode' to operate without dropouts/distortion. Somehow with any setting in the end I didn't care much about listening, a very bad sign.

So I decided to rerun y06, which I thought better suited my taste.

Wow, this was the sound I liked from XX, seemed even better than before albeit with a few hickups. 
Could this be the famed special mode?
And yes what I have not been able to achieve before smiled at me in the P3B file: Special Mode!! So I stopped XX and selected another track to enjoy some more music, however I got quite good, but not só special sound. Checked the new P3B: normal mode. Huh? Save for the volume slider on the driverpanel of the M-audio and selecting the new track I didn't change anything. In a row of ten attempts with the same track I once got special mode to operate again, with however a lot of distortion at the previous Q1 setting (1), upping it to 3 got some decent music out of the system.

So it seems that something unknown to me (yet) determines the feasability of getting special mode in y6 to work, while in y8 it doesn't work at all. Weird. A little context: this was observed on my antique XP-SP3 pentium III.

For now I settle pleasantly with Y6 with low driverbuffer (64) and high Q1 (30) in normal mode. No complaints!

regards, Coen

Hey Coen,

Well, what happened to you with the "sudden" Special Mode is exactly why I had to change it into a more explicit thing. It just can get into that, and when so it is detected and reported in the log file. Btw, today this still happens like that, but now we dictate it explicitly (as per the KS Mode setting).

Although it may look very strange to you - and even contradictionary, to me it looks quite normal. I mean, what you can't get done by explicit means, can happen to you automatically, if only things are let free, so to speak. And that 6 version did just that.

Now, the real cause of things be able to get done or not, is the state of your PC. To me too it can happen that my Special Mode (@ 22 samples) just won't work or keeps on clicking. This is "just" a matter of rebooting the PC, and all is well again. BUT, obviously you first have to have the experience that it can work, or IOW, whatever it is that suddenly lets it stop working ... who cares, but try a reboot.

If I have been copying a lot of files or did other "heavy stuff" to the memory (or what I expect of it) I always reboot the PC before using it for playback again.


Ok ... You do get Adaptive Mode to run (8c) ? If so, at what Buffer and Q1 settings ?

Peter,

Thanks for your reply. I allways use the XP sleepmode for fast booting, so that might very well impact te availability of special mode. I will try the reboot soon.

No problems with adaptive mode in 8c. This even works with very low buffersettings and low Q1 (2-3). I however do prefer normal mode on my system. I've also been playing with the sliders and buffer, but got no satifying sweet spot with 8c.

regards, Coen

If you dont upsample, try Q1:1, all other Q to 0 and adaptive mode. Choose the lowest latency that does not give you "too many buffers" error. For me this sounds best.

After much listening, I prefer the non-kernal streaming mode and engine 3 on my system.  The detail of engine 4 is nice, but when a cello comes in I just much prefer Engine 3.  A much more resonant mellow sound, which I find easier on my ears.

Hi Glynn, thank you for letting this know.

Was your experience with KS Special Mode ?
FWIW : It seems that I prefer Adaptive.

Peter

I was using adaptive mode.  I believe that one's preference for the different modes will be very system dependent.  My preference for Engine 3 was based on using my Bottlehead III preamp.  A week ago I purchased a 35 year old Sansui CA 3000 preamp. Hard to believe, but it sounds very good - in some ways worse than the Bottlehead, in some ways better. But it retrieves so much low level detail that with KS-Adaptive it is almost too much detail.  I wish I could figure out how to modify my Bottlehead to have the best of each.  But if I have to choose, I will take smoothness and tone over detail.

Yes, this is the great challenge or even "sport". In order to be able to do that, you'd have to recognize what's causing what. No, I am not saying you will be able to do that, but it is something I have learned over time. And it takes some years ... :swoon:

Anyway, I would be proud of owning such a Sansui. Otoh, I wouldn't be using it because I don't like preamps, haha.
... which brings me to this :

I don't know whether you have ever tried it, but you may try to use XXHighEnd without preamp at all. You may not get good sound because of impedance mismatch or not enough drive, but *if* something is coming from it, you will hear the character of the sound as how it really is (but "colored" by your main amp and speakers of course). From this you will learn which preamp actually does what to the sound, and from there you will learn what is "good" and what may not be good at all although you like it. From there again you may learn what not to like (because it's only color you hear, and not the real sound). It may turn your whole thinking upside down.

I don't think there is something like a preamp (or anything) creating too much detail to the sense of "you don't like". What *is* very well possible though is that you preceive fake detail. And, I know myself how bad fake detail actually is, despite you hear more detail ... Think like bringing noise into photos which sharpen. But it is still noise doing it and it just can't be right, no matter what you pereive from it.

If I were you, I'd replace all the capacitors I could find in the Sansui, let it burn in for a week, and listen again.
Much better though would be a setup without preamp. But remember, this doesn't go automatically (impedance and drive).

Peter

I used to listen @ special mode with Q1 at 2 and Q2/3 at 30. Today I switched to adaptive (Q1=1 other Qs to 0) and this is the best sound so far. Peter, could it be any better than this? I have buffer size set at 32 samples. Lowering Q1 even further results in lowering SQ  :wacko:

Today I installed fresh system - the same configuration, drivers etc and suddenly adaptive mode doesn't sound as good as special mode oO Would someone explain that *magic* to me? I thought I had it figured out, but nooooo, I have to keep on trying [;[;[;

Stupid reason : You got used to the other sound now, and better hear the difference with something you liked better in the first place ?

Also, very often a change (no matter which) sounds better. But later you hear the anomalies.

Lastly a more normal reason : the power saving settings of your new install changed, hence the performance of the PC. Those stupid settings do more than we want ...

?

Peter

Yeah, regardless of mode (special or adaptive), the sound is sharper, more edgy ;/ Before reinstallation I could sleep while listening to music, now my ears hurt - this is the best description of what I'm experiencing right now.
What power settings are you talking about? My power plan is set to high performance.

That doesn't say much, because in there you can tweak each setting to as low as you want (meaning : you could have done that with the before install). But keep in mind it is only a suggestion.

If the OS itself is not the same as before (what about a beta vs RTM eh ?), well, then you're quite lost.
What you also could do is perform the install again, but sit back and think what you could have done differently the very first time.

Tough one, and certainly not nice. Sounds similar to my moving from Vista to W7, but apart from some priority changes in the internals of the program the new KS solved all for me. Maybe it wasn't even W7, but just "the install" in my particular case. I mean, I was about the only one complaining at the time.

I hope you can find it ...
Peter

I've found the culprit, very odd though. It turns out that I had to go back to plain y08, play a song with my settings of choice (adaptive, Q1=1) and then upgrade to 8c. Going to 8c right away results in edgy sound, listening to it makes me sick (or fatigue, to be perfectly clear). Fortunatelly, my ears are happy again :)

I believe you because I believe in everything. :swoon:

But how can this be ??

On the other hand, if you would skip the 0.9y-8 base, what base would you have ? Nothing isn't possible, so that should have been some other version (?). And *that* is not allowed ...

I believe that there is no one clear recipe for good sound from PC. Everything affects everything - hardware, software, drivers etc It's best to have dedicated audio server just for playback, with absolutely no additional software and drivers (especially those for GPU and network adapter).

Peter, tell me, please, for adaprive mode, if I set buffer size to 64 samples and get sound without distortions, does it mean that my card supports latency at 64 samples? It wasn't possible when I used drivers from M-Audio, but now that I switched to Ploytec, it seems that I can get a clear sound even at 64 samples, but I get the feeling that it's somehow louder (probably due to increased detail).

Assuming Q1 = 1, yes. :)

Keep in mind : this is hard-detected by means of the buffer errors (see X3PB log file). So, you may have buffer errors at switching Coverart or other demanding stuff, but not throughout. If you have zero of them, go and try 48. :yes: