XXHighEnd

Yesterday I installed XX on my new MacBook. It has a dual-core Intel processor so you can make it Dual Boot to run Vista.
No probems with the installation, and XX saw my (DDDAC1543) usb-dac at once.  After listening a few hours last night I found out that:
The sound is beter than the configuration I played with untill now; a Linux OS with eca-sound, tweaked where possible. The difference is not that big though. The step from foobar to linux was far bigger. I hear a wider stage, not deeper, about the same 'non-digital' and slightly more detail in the music. You get more invoved, its pulling you more into it.
I also found out that the his/pink noise that starts from time to time is terrible, The programe loves to stop at once, or with a message from Vista it can not be run any longer, and very surprising: some tracks are husseled. You start listening JJ-cale and in the middle of a song you go on with Diana Krall. !!!
Because Vista also makes it possible to use EAC, I ripped 2 CD's that way and compared that to the 48K files that were ripped and upsampled in Linux. To my surprise the EAC 44.1 K sounds slighty better. By the way, what programe you can use in Vista to upsample ??
Since the sound is better, and I assume that the real version will run without trouble I think I will make the linux comuter a dedicated Vista operated computer for my music (if XX is not too expensive)
You did a nice job Peter

Werner

Hi there Werner,


First of all, good to know that "something" is working on your MAC. Thanks for the info.
Then, the his/noise you talk about is totally unknown to me. I wonder what that could be. It should be MAC related ... ?


This becomes the most important factor once you don't know what to check for else;
Differences between the versions (or means of connection) of the player sometimes are so small, that you must set yourself to explicitly look for involvement.


First of all, yes, this is kind of wacky, and for 50% this is an environmental thing, depending on the drivers. BUT, if you load a playlist, and then start from the beginning without touching anything, all should be okay. It is my hunch that with you this is not okay; please let me know whether all start to mix up by itself. If so, really something else is going on (the MAC again ?).


I never tried to look for one, but I created one myself (not available for distribution). BUT : don't do this under Vista, because Vista will just resample again.

Please take your time at comparing with Linux. It was and still is interesting and important to really know the difference.
Not to forget : this is still not the definite Vista Engine#3 version. That is to come yet, and sure is way better again.

Thanks,
Peter

Hi Werner.

Interesting statement:

Perhaps you can shed some light on your Linux setup. What do you call "tweaked where possible"?

Interesting that 44.1 sounds better then 48. If 48 sounds better on Linux. Why should it
sound worse on Vista- XX. Perhaps Peter has an explanation for that!?!
Is it because of the Vista automated resampling?
Somehow the behaviour doesn't make sense to me if the stream is not twisted somewhere in between.

Cheers
\Klaus

First of all, there are many many things that don't make sense in this audio world. We knew that, and I knew it too before I started this all. But, since I started with XX actually many more things now don't make sense. However, I know how to control/direct them. It's not science ... yet. :whistle:

The resampling in Vista is a very dangerous thing. The only general advise I have for it : examine the samplerate the DAC is running at (and hope your DAC (or soundcard preceeding it) can do that).
The current version of Vista can only run at 44K1, 48, 96K, and 192K.

Do note that in the properties of the Device, the only thing with effect is in the right most tab in there. If you tell in there that your device can do 44K1, it will. So then feeding it with 48K will imply resampling.

If you tell that it can do 48K (which you would do for movie playback), then feeding it with 44K1 will result in 48K playback.
Nice job they did. Not.

Peter

Hi Peter, Klaus

The linux set-up I used to play with:
Ubuntu 6,17.11 kernel
tracks upsampled to 48K with SSRC
timer set to 1000Hz
latency in Ecasound 64 (mS?)
playing the tracks from RAM
Alsa: nrpacks=1

I have to do some more listening to compare tracks 44.1 and 48K.
The 48K tracks I listened to were ripped under Linux (with Grip) and upsampled in SSRC also under linux
(and then put on my vista machine with an usb-stick)
The 44.1 EAC ripped tracks seem to have a deeper stage, and pulling me more in to the music.
I did not already do an A-B test with the same track 48K against 44,1K ripped by EAC.
But since I am curious to know I will do that test and let you know. I sure think it has something to do with the way the CD is ripped

Regards
Werner

Hi both of you,

Would you please respect the fact that all this in here is about XXHighEnd, and that it is not much useful to that respect if we are going to outlay very unrelated setups.

I know, it was me who is interested in other findings, which btw is perfectly allright. I mean, if I challenge JRiver, XMPlay, etc. by means of XX, there's no reason why a Linux based setup isn't challenged just the same. If someone would say "XX is serious BS", I wouldn't remove the post, but I would be interested in why instead. That is, say, the competition.

But please hold back a bit on getting very much offtopic.

If we from now on must start ripping our CDs on a Linux machine, this of course *is* very much related. So happily continue that in its own thread.

Please look at the topic title (and what is coming from it :))

Hi Peter.

My main interest was to get the 44.1 vs. 48khz question answered.

I did not intend to start a Linux discussion at your forum.

You did a great job with XX. period . Nothing more to say about it.

Cheers
\Klaus

Continued here : http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=34.0