XXHighEnd

Yesterday I was playing some FLACed 24/96 material (Eva Cassidy) and I didn't like the sound one bit. In an attempt to make it more listenable I got a hunch to play the files as WAV, bypassing any conversion done by xx. 

I unFLACed the files with foobar, put them in a folder next to the original, played them and was amazed with the quite audible difference with the FLAC version. They sounded less bright and dynamic, with more emphasis on the lower mids. Still not a satisfacory sound, but obviously different. Maybe the source is cr*p or I need different xx settings to make this wav work.

I was under the impression that flac and wav sound alike in the latest versions of xx, but found otherwise.

Any ideas what is the case?

Regards, Coen

P.s. A allready experimented with AP and tried playing on and off converting to the XX disk (the 'ramdisk' feature)

Like I suggested before (but never received a response to that) - Set "Don't play at all", click Play on the first track of the album while Unattended is activated - let all rest and reboot now. Next get your AutoHotkey running (this might need some additional "setup" for that by now, because since 0.9z-6 it is expected to be loaded by XX automatically) and use Alt-P.

This way you will be using the same WAVs as implied by any other conversion (like from Foobar) and nothing can have happened to let it sound different (from that Foobar conversions), unless you put the Foobar output in a completely different place.

If then the difference is as clearly noticeable, let me know.

Also notice that as implied by the earlier posts about this, I can do something about it, if only the above procedure indeed prooves that this makes the difference. As long as this is not clearly proven I won't do a thing (and indeed, I don't test these things just because of a lack of time for it - I'm not good at A-B stuff either).

Thanks !
Peter

Ok,

I will try this tonight and report on the results.

Why do you say 'let it all rest and reboot now'? Am I supposed to start from a normal OS state?

Regards, Coen

Hi Coen,

Just a normal Reboot (from whatever state (is your reference)).

With "let it rest" I meant to be sure that all under the hood XXHighEnd activity has been performed. Should take a couple of seconds at most after all has vanished. Maybe use Taskmanager to be sure.

Regards,
Peter

Ok,

As I understand now:
I reboot with the PC on/off button in unattended when xx is settled. When Win7 has come up again, I start AutoHotKey an press alt-P to start xx and play the files in unattended mode.

I will make a short playlist with some flacs and wavs of the same music and report my findings on this thread.

Regards, Coen

Just did some intensive listening.

Well, the big difference between WAV and FLAC is gone after the recepy above. I stil have the impression that the wav sounds ever so slightly more relaxed, dynamical, natural and open. Not a big diffenrence that might as well stem from a learning effect (the more you listen to a peice, the more you hear). I am to tired now to investigate this further and am going to sit down and relax!

Oh, two things about unattended hotkey operation:
1) alt-T does not work xx keeps on playing. 
2) alt-S does bring the screen back, but without xx

And alt-X attempts to start a new instance of xx, this might be intentional. Previously I used alt-X to toggle to attend.

Regards, Coen

P.s. Do you have to do this recepy every time you start a new playlist?

Ehm Coen, it seems that you don't know the difference between Attended and Unattended ?

Alt-S just stops playback. Nice to have a PC you can use again then ...

Alt-X brings up XXHighEnd. Nothing Attended suddenly. It just gives you control with visuals.

Try to see the logic of it all. Eventhough it is mine. :swoon:

Alt-T ? I don't know what this is at this time (i'm somewhere else now). What should it do ?


Re the Recepy ... Well, formally yes. But this is no way of working of course. So, I must now think of some means which copies this behaviour but with some "luxury".

Peter

Well Peter,

Of course I was playing unattended pressing alt-P (play) after reboot. I never use Hotkey in Attended mode, so my comments about the keys are only for Unattended.

Alt-T: Toggle between Attended/unattended. Does nothing.

Alt-S: Stops play allright, but then the normal windows screen reappears w/o XX. (like XX has been quit)

Alt-X: A pop up asks if I want to kill the current XX session or start a second one.

This is all in unattended mode!! Not like you discribe below.

Maybe the hotkeys have been updated?

regards, Coen

Which thus (think about this) is about controlling the button for it ! Nothing like switching between Attended/Unattended as you think ...


Which implies that XX is already running.


Wasn't it ?

I say it again, please consider your idea about what Unattended is/means. But to get you started : This is playback without any controlling program (GUI) around. Don't get confused by "seeing" that you still can control when XX is brought up again, because all you would be doing is looking at what you just did (because the GUI is there). This is totally different from pressing play when the GUI is there in the first place (and remains because of Attended).

Maybe I gave the whole thing a kind of IT name, but you could also look in the dictionary what it means ...
haha

Well, hope this helps a bit.
Peter

Ok, I understand now that the Autohotkeys are about pressing XX buttons in Unattended mode.

I have trouble imaginating use for a hotkey that toggles the attended/unattended swith from a Unattended mode perspective. I think I got confused by the naming.

So nothing wrong with Alt-T and Alt-X. They are behaving exactly like pressing the toggle button and Alt-X in Attended mode. My misunderstanding.

So now how do I switch from Unattended to Attended mode???? Selecting 'Kill existing XX instance and start new one'?

If I understand correctly Alt-S should only stop the music and XX stays where it is, like pressing the stop button in Attended mode. Pressing Alt-p would restart the music.
Am I overlooking something here?
Unfortunately XX quits alltogether after pressing Alt-S in Unattended mode (have not tried this in Attended, should be the same, right?).

regards, Coen

Coen ... It looks like that by now I can't explain it anymore. Well, not to you as it seems. Not together with what's all in your mind by now ...


Alt-X just starts XXHighEnd. No matter it's already running.

Alt-T (upon your own indication from today) toggles Attended/Unattended button (the one under Play with the large cross in there). Further it does nothing.

Maybe this helps (Unattended Playback) :

- Make Unattended active (you know, that button under Play).
- Select a track and click Play (GUI disappears, music starts playing - maybe all disappears depending on further settings).
- Start up XX by means of Alt-X. GUI comes up again.
- Cross away XX (just for fun).
- Again use Alt-X.
- Click Stop.

This was an Unattended Playback session where you in between fired up XX to see where it is at playback. Notice the time cursor did not move. It is dead. Still you can use it to control (like you did with Stop at the end).

Might you -instead of using Alt-X in the above) have used Alt-S, that stops playback. It commands the audio engine to stop. That now the desktop and all reappears (in the case of you having direct it to go (see Settings)) is only because it is quite convenient to use your PC again, while no playback is going on anyway. But you could also use Alt-P now, and playback restarts (without GUI because you never applied Alt-X).

Or ... use Alt-E for Pause during Unattended Playack. Pick up the phone - grab a beer in between, and next use Alt-P. So sound commences where it left off (maybe here the deskstop stays away, just because it's more logic and I could have made it like that).

Peter  :wacko:

Aha,

So the appearence of the desktop when Alt-S is pressed can be set in the settings area.
That might explain the different behaviour from my XP setup!

I will experiment tonight if I all understand now.

Thanks for the clarification, this unattended/hotkey stuff it is somewhat counter intuitive, but it makes perfect sense.

regards, Coen

No ... the DISappearance can be set. And it has nothing to do with Alt-S.

This is a very nice comedy act.  :biglol: :cry:  Perhaps you two could play some nice audiophile night clubs?   :drinks: :friends: :party:

-Chris

Yeah mock us,

Maybe I should read the manual first on the next XX update :)!

All this sophisticated 'Unattended' and 'services off' is pearls for swines like me.

Hope this FLAC reboot thing gets fixed in the next release though.

Regards, Coen

Wasn't it suppossed to be fixed with the latest release?

Ok, what do you both mean by "fixed" ?
Was something broken ?

Welll as I recall it there was a need to reboot after changing the play-list for best sound quality. Somewhere you said this would not be necessary anymore for the next release.

Ah, did I say that ? Not that I know of ...

Maybe I said that I would try to get this done (indeed) ... ever ... :yes:

Regards,
Peter

The second post in this thread:


So i heard a clearly noticable difference (see following posts). That is that the  obvious and annoying difference between FLAC and wav was a good as gone after above procedure (rebooting and all). If you can hear a difference between xx versions you should be able to hear this one easily.

My question about the fix (first post on this page) was about your last remark. So what do you consider as proof?

Regards, Coen

It seems that a few in this thread smoked too much. All I ant to say is : try to read carefully and don't twist all upside down maybe. So, read back on what happened with your trials. You proved it sufficiently enough (or ?). Did I say anything further about it ? no.

But then another one comes along with the message that it should have been "fixed" in a previous version. All I said is that I didn't know anything about *that*. But of course contender #1 (you) reacts to that now. And this is eactly how this comes about :


Now, all is set, right ? No, it is not.


This reads like there's a question about a fix in the first page. But I don't see it. Nobody talked about a fix but GerardA.
And all *I* said is that I maybe could let it work without change in SQ - see procedure and if only that would help. Now, might anyone think that such a thing is as easy as a fix or should be called like that because it looks like to be an error ...

Oh boy.

Maybe for better clarity : here the "this" should have been emphasized or better layed out by me. So, the "this" is about what Coen prooved to be helping, and (only ?) theoretically something can be done about it. Practically ? I must first think of the how. So, this is about the "ever".

But no way this has been talked about before to the sense GerardA implies. Notice though that this looks the most similar to "your" RAMDisk exeriences, where people manually copying the files into there perceeived better SQ than letting XX do it. Still I don't recall that in a next release this would be "fixed", but I most probably will have said the same : maybe I can do something so that the SQ difference disappears.

Lastly about the FLAC subject again :
The ever release notes going along with the "Don't start playback at all" setting, told about to let it rest for a while after the initial "Play" had been pressed. Not the same as a reboot, but that may help too. As inconvenient and maybe even worse.

Finally, nobody suggests that you now all need reboots for a better SQ. I only asked Coen to try that out. Right ?
So now we know that it helps.

And now how to let this effect work by other (more convenient) means ...
I don't know (yet).

Regards,
Peter

Peter,
On the 12th of july you replied in the 5-02 thread:


The next version will sustain this ...
(if all is right).

So that made me think you would have the solution but maybe my english understanding is at trouble here.

Anyway it's allways nice things can still be improved ;)

Gerard, really ...

Of course our english isn't the best - mine ahead. But tell me, what has this to do with the FLAC thing ??
I see NO relation at all. Zilch.

However, the spatiousness I reported about in that other topic - you don't want to know how many times I wanted to report the last couple of months that this is now there all the time. I never did though, because too many things were happening at my side anyway (NOS1-USB).
So, whatever it was I pormised there became true. Not only for me, but also for you (with a few things hidden at this moment, so watch it when I (need to) refer to this later).

Please notice : I feel that somewhere this can be related to the FLAC thing, but I don't recall how or where. Just saying - just in case.

Anyway Gerard - All is to go step by step because it needs all the learning. If this weren't so, all was 4 years back as how it is today. And ...

Please notice : This topic goes a little strange, but this doesn't prevent all from the sole fact that I (no, we !) need guys like you to get hold of whatever it is *I* may not expect at all. Never forget this, no matter what my response might be in particular situations.

This little thing concluded (for your Gerard) : it should not be so that you need that reboot to reobtain good SQ (which sure could have been so before). But I don't see any relation to the FLAC thing here. Maybe you do, but I don't. That's why my response is how it is.
Lastly, the FLAC thing has been talked about before, but nobody took up the challenge back then to try it as suggested by me earlier in this topic. Coen now did, and AGAIN this is something to say "great thanks !" for. Also -might it be confusing- totally unrelated to the confusement in this topic.

Don't let this confusement undervalue the real value of it ...
Peter

Well I am happy I don't have to reboot!
But then I get/got confused about the reboot reported here when playing Flac. Since I play a lot of flac, no wav's actually I thought we still need the reboot. But I guess it is not the big thing it looked like.
So the main point is flacs sound different/worse then wav?

Hi,

on my system the SQ with wave files is superior.

Joachim

Hi All,
I don't hear a noticeable difference in SQ between FLAC and WAV in Pop and Rock, at least when I ripped them myself with EAC. The FLACS I downloaded from the net, at least the free torrents, were most of the time sounding stressy and they were not useable for me.
For jazz and classical music, thus music mostly recorded by microphones from acoustic instruments and vocals, I only use WAV-rips, to be absolutely sure, that no ambiance and roominfo is thrown away in the proces
greetz, HW

For people interested in this :

Watch for 0.9z-7 ...
:teasing:

In times when RAMDISK was popular here, what I did is I wrote a little batch script and made it accessible via right click. My way of listening usually is one album/CD per session, so before playback I select all tracks, right click and choose my script (called FlacToWav) and it converts all FLACs into WAVs and stores them in XX "premises". Then I hit PLAY and enjoy.
So, now I actually am planning to start using this script again. I see this as very easy workaround for the sound differences between flacs and wavs. If someone is interested into this script, give a shot.

Few days back I decided to switch back to the script and discovered that I had wiped it away together with my Vista install :(
Afterwards, started to recall how I did that and discovered again that that was not the script, but rather small process how I did that.
Now, I re-did it and this time the process includes small script as well.
But the main message is that in my setup WAVs outperform FLACs!!!
Will try tonight post here the process + script, how quickly turn FLACs into WAVs before playback via XX.
Have to run now...

Ivo

Ok. No matter how you do it Ivo, if it works for you it should work for me too. And, next I can see whether I indeed can eliminate the influence.

In the mean time, please describe where your FLACs sit (type of disks, how they are connected etc.), where the output of your script should go, and how exactly you start playing (don't forget to mention about Attended/Unattended).

Thanks a lot,
Peter

OK guys, finally I can describe my way of turning FLACs into WAVs before playback. This is relevant to those who store music in FLACs. In my case, doing this improves SQ. My music is located on external 2.5" usb powered usb drive and I listen unattended in MinimizedOS mode. Other details are in my sig. Below are steps that need to be followed to make this process convenient to use.

Setup

Step 1:
Download and install this: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/flac/flac-1.2.1b.exe. Do it in default location.
Step2:
Make new directory in C: drive. I call it PLAYBACK.
Step3:
Go to Programs and find FLAC Frontend application under FLAC. Run it. Uncheck "Delete input files" if it is checked and change output directory to "C:\PLAYBACK". Exit the application.
Step4:
Create new text file in C: drive. I call it "Play.txt". Rename it to "Play.cmd".
Step5:
Right click the created file and select "Edit". Paste the below lines into it. Change the last line according to where your XXHighEnd is located. Save the file.

c:
cd PLAYBACK
del *.wav

cd "c:\Program Files\Flac"
"FLAC frontend.exe"

C:\XXHighEnd-09-z6-1\XXHighEnd.exe

Step6:
Create shortcut of the "Play.cmd" file on the desktop.

Usage

This is maybe specific to my way of using XXHighend, but it may work out for you as well.
When I want to listen, I double-click the created shortcut (Step6) and first thing that happens is that "Play.cmd" deletes WAV files from PLAYBACK directory (it clears WAVs from previous session).
At the same time it launches "FLAC frontend.exe" which is graphical software and now you can click "Add files" and select your music in FLAC format you want to listen to.
When you have opened files, press "Decode" and what "FLAC frontend.exe" does is it decodes FLACs into WAVs and puts them into C:\PLAYBACK. Once it is done, close "FLAC frontend.exe".
At this moment XXHighEnd is launched. Close the black window (the one with output from Play.cmd). At XX, using "Explorer" button, load WAV files from C:\PLAYBACK into XXHighEnd. Play.

If something is unclear, write!

Ivo

Isn't this the same as "copy to XX disc first" when XX is in the C directory???

There is also a FLAC.exe in the XX directory, is this the same software?

regards, Coen

Not so sure. I think it is true when there are WAVs initially.


It is command line version. I use GUI version that makes the process convenient.

My theory is that XX sounds best if it only needs to read WAVs and start playing w/o any other activities.

Ivo

Of course it is. But this seems to be the whole point ... this worksout differently SQ wise. That is, when we have to believe Ivo and others. And I do of course.
So, the Copy to XX Drive was made especially for this, but *that* doesn't help (enough).

Peter

For what it is worth: Morten Lindberg, the owner/producer of record label 2L, said last year that they dislike to distribute their hi-rez music as FLAC, because it taxes the computers too much in the conversion phase.

Generally speaking, this is of course also pending on the size and speed of your computer/processor.

But keep in mind that 2L distribute 5.1 (six channels) in 24/192 hi-rez, which is turning into quite big number crunching.

IIRC, he said that they had observed some cases where FLAC-files caused audible distortion.

-----------

Personally, I often get "processor overload warning" from Norton security when I use my laptop computer to convert 24/96 FLAC into lossy AAC (for use in iTunes/iPod).

-So it sems there is something going on here. The difference in SQ between WAV and FLAC is (probably) linked to how FLAC converison taxes the PC during realtime playback.

Another weighty reference in this matter: Editor and technical engineer Paul Miller of Hi-News wrote a full page story about 2 years ago, describing why/how he heard SQ differences between FLAC and WAV.

Very strange indeed. May it have to do with the seperate directory or does Ivo use a different de-FLAC program?

regards, Coen