XXHighEnd

:blush1:
From various angles it comes to me that the SQ on versions 0.9n (but possibly from off 0.9o only) u/i 0.9p is degraded;
Soft crackles may emerge, depending on the soundcard used (and possible buffer settings in there).
This may start immediately or start after a few tracks playing.

Please revert to 0.9m-1 to be sure to have the good SQ again.

Thanks for everybody reporting this, while I myself was busy judging MP3 sound (which for me is without crackles, but here too others report them).

Edit :
But please note this is not sure; e.g. I myself can't copy this behaviour.

Peter

Yep  :yes:

Gerner

Ok, thanks for your ears.  This time I've just been waiting.  I have to admit I've been using 0.9m-1... tried O, tried P... went back to M-1.  good call PeterSt.  I didn't do much back and forth.  Was going to go for the full on evaluation at some point.  But I did hear a difference and "felt" M-1 was better... so just been using that.  It must be frustrating for you to try to get everything (mp3 and the like) just right.  But, I think most of us here would chose music quality over convenience or format... there's other players we can go to for that.  How about having different XXHE players for different formats?... don't know what that would look like.

edit
oh, you haven't listened? just heard from others.  I don't get any crackle and can play -3 Q1 fine with M-1 or P... but I still think M-1 sounds "fuller"... but I will put some ear into it soon and tell you more if I can.  But I've mainly just been listening to M-1... it's on right now.

edit/caution
I've also been wondering if switching back and forth (starting up shutting down) M-1 and P, without rebooting between, could start to throw off sound?... I dunno, sometimes I feel that after rebooting both players do their best... heh now that would be a pain to evaluate.

-My CPU is single core,,, should I not have "Appoint processor core" checked... hasn't seemed to hurt with either M-1 or P.

Peter,

This is a problem i have had for a long time and right now i have it much more. For a long time i thought this was a problem with the XP driver i am using. I was planning to tell you in a few day's but right now i am a little busy.
Indeed it apears after a few songs and than the whole song the music sounds crackling.
But when i press stop and push play again the problem is over. But only for a few songs. But it also can take a whole cd before it comes up.

I also thought it apears when my harddisk was busy with something else. But i am not sure anymore.

Right now i am testing if it is less when the q1 slider is not anymore at -4

grtzzzz

Gerard..

Thank you guys. Really appreciate it.
Remember, I can't do it all alone ... :nea:

Peter  :whistle:

It's in a way fantastic that we either here or through private PM's collects info and beam it up to you.

Beforehead I have pointed out how difficult it must be to define where all those small problems appears from.

Settings?
HW?
SW?

To my big surprise yesterday I heard clicks even with Foobar. Never ever heard it before. And since I bought myself a stacker and threw out my labtop for the sake of storrage capacity, well, the clicking phenomenon appeared. It never happened before. (09m-1)

Now, when I upgraded to 09p yesterday, it started. But now also with both 09m-1 and Foobar. And it is 100% unrelated to Q1 settings. RME settings. One core settings etc. etc......

Must be a busy day today....in the bright CPU you carry on top of your neck...hahaha.  ;)


Gerner

What kind of a brain does it take to determine wether it's a HW or a SW buggy-woggy?

Hoi Peter,

This is excactly one of the reasens i did not tell you in the beginning. If i remember correct i have had this problem also with playing with Mediamonkey. ( Like Gerner has it with Foobar).. That's why i thought it was the Xp driver used in Vista. But i never or less played again with this program. There was also a time that i did not have this problem as much as today. For me it was not a big issue when it was happening once a day. One day i remember i was copying a bunch off music to my externe (usb) harddrive and then the chrackling appears again and again.

I have this crackling sound from the beginning of. But now i will spend more time in testing this problem...

And i think Gerner is right about the way we all are working....  :)  ( but in this case i had to do it a little bit sooner.)  :blush1:

succes today....

Grtzzzz

If you have ""Appoint processor core" checked, then shut down XXHE and then start Foobar without rebooting, wouldn't this be a problem?  It takes a reboot to clear "Appoint processor core".  This is a long shot guess, probably not related to what you guys are experiencing.

Nope...I think.

I don't have a core appointed to XX. And if I do it....it doesn't sound any different to me...!  :dntknw:

I had an hour with 9D today. No clicks here. 9m-1 far less. 9p quite some. Foobar stopped clicking after a reboot.

Sorry things run a little fast to make fast conclusions, I think.

Enjoy and cheers

gerner

Hi Peter, All,

I think i know now what is causing the problem for the errors during random play an even the crakling sound.... I was telling you before that i thought i might have to do with a busy harddrive/or Cpu for that matter.
Well tonight i began to do some serious moving (50 cd's )music (knippen/plakken) from one harddrive to another and did a virus check. Also i opend windows mediaplayer (not playing). and Gom player (playing a dvd). and did downloading a cd from the internet. ( The whole test i did the same!)
 
Gom player started to do update and while i was playing with xx The crackling sounds come's up for 10 seconds and automaticly disapear.

Very soon also at the end of a track the errors whe were talkin before came up. So i manualy pusht the slide bar to the end so that the testing speeded up a litlle. For 3 time's in a row the errors came up.  T

the crackling sound in the 10 min appeart 3 time's.

I made pic's also what was happening with Taakbeheer!! Look at the time right.. All of this in less than 10  min.



Pic 3 the first error (did not put in the same errors 2 and 3)
Pic's 4 and 5 crackling sound first time and second time.

EDIT: 21:00 uur Ok right now it happend 6 time's that the errors come up in 10 min time. ( Strangly no crackling right now)  :(

EDIT: 21.35 Crackling apears with .wav cd from Eva Cassidy all song long. Till the end and than with the next track played normal. (pic6)

EDIT:21.45 Again crackling Eva.
EDIT:21.47 Crackling.

Hi Gerard,

I'm not sure what you are trying to tell here, but it looks like : when I stress the system, the sounds degrades.
Yeah, well ... Is it our intention to be able to stress the system and maintain good SQ now ?

If I misunderstood your message, please say so ... :yes:
Btw, if you are starting a process during playback, this is out of control of "Appointing Processor Cores", and they will interfere with playback (being the right (2nd) core).

Sliding the cursor towards the end of the track (in the area of 10 seconds near the end of it) confuses the "mechanism", so let's say it's not fair to do that (I think that's somewhere in the Release Notes, if that matters at all :nea:).

Alltogether it is difficult to talk in the context of what you are doing with the PC, while obviously (??) it is not the intention at all to do such things.
But again, maybe I misunderstood.

Peter

This is how it should look like at doing "normal" :

Peter with this i mean exactly what you are saying. I began noticing that than the errors come up more. And i think i am not the only one who does some stressing (more or less)  with there pc. So everyone may know now that when they are doing a lot/less that this can happen.

( Even writing a post give's pike's in taakbeheer)

When i do not  slide the errors also come up. So sliding really does not bring up the errors more often.

Sometime's even when i do not stress the sysstem than sometime's the crackling and the errors come up. But not so much. So maybe the pc is doing something i/whe do not know of. And with this maybe whe could find out.??

The reason i began doing this is that than maybe whe find the real reason for those errors.... And maybe you or someone else has a good idear when reading this.? Just trying.

But i will stop now....  :)

Ah, ok, clear.
Yeah, well, it is obvious that you are not the only one, so for sure something is going on. But also, in the context of what you are saying / proved, there's this :

It was me who always told that Vista/Engine#3 could not be stressed in any way that it would matter. But but but :
Since 0.9m(-1) and the appointment of processor cores I would express the opposite : while Engine#3 is not allowed to divide its tasks between the cores *AND* when new processes are started after Engine#3 running ... they will be appointed by the OS to the 2nd core (because the 1st core is already much more busy, see pics), and it will influence Engine#3 directly.

Do note though that this is from off 0.9m(-1) and not from off a later version.
Just trying to find an explanation ...

This explains a lot to me...  :) :) So maybe when we like to do someting else and listening whe have to open the other thing before XX.

Diffucult job you have  :wacko: (But nice i think)

Grtzzz  :grin:

Hi Gerner,

Not to talk problems out of the way ... I seriously think your 4 core (!) system cannot be judged anyway ... that is including the, say, fact that you don't hear a difference between do / do not tick the Appoint Procssor Core checkbox. You will be having enough headroom to not let it make any difference. On the other hand :

If *you* tick this checkbox, you will be appointing all the processes to one core (the 1st) and the 3rd and 4th would be doing nothing. For your system this would theoretically be worse ...
So a 4 core system is to be tuned differently, and which would be more difficult (I should evenly divide tasks between 3 cores, except for Engine#3 to be run at the 4th on its own).
So, in your case IMO it would be better to not tick the checkbox ...

NOTE : ... which would IMO not be the explanation of *you* having problems now. So I say it again : something is going on ... but not on my system.
Mind you, during playback I let XXHighEnd search / arrange for albums, taking the full 100% of the 1st core for 90 seconds or so. Although it may influence sound because of the second core taking a few % of it (due to drivers which can't be appointed), I do not hear it, let alone crackling appears.
... which STILL does not mean nothing is the matter ... :dntknw:

Just for background info :

For those who recognize that their soundcards can respond to a 48 sample buffer, do you realize that this means a synchronized and consistent (meaning : throughout hours) refill of that buffer once per 1 milli second  (1/1000 second) ?
And that this factually means a latency of 3-12 times better than the better digital workstations ?
I only want to say : don't mess with your systems, or increase the latency (if you can), or crackles (skipping of samples) will be the result.

XX is quite stressing your system already for response times. Not for cpu useage (look at my graph a few posts back), but if another process gets to the cpu, even the small number of cycles XX needs won't get there (in time !!).

Okay, you knew that ...

Hi Gerner,

Not to talk problems out of the way ... I seriously think your 4 core (!) system cannot be judged anyway ... that is including the, say, fact that you don't hear a difference between do / do not tick the Appoint Procssor Core checkbox. You will be having enough headroom to not let it make any difference. On the other hand :

If *you* tick this checkbox, you will be appointing all the processes to one core (the 1st) and the 3rd and 4th would be doing nothing. For your system this would theoretically be worse ...
So a 4 core system is to be tuned differently, and which would be more difficult (I should evenly divide tasks between 3 cores, except for Engine#3 to be run at the 4th on its own).
So, in your case IMO it would be better to not tick the checkbox ...

NOTE : ... which would IMO not be the explanation of *you* having problems now. So I say it again : something is going on ... but not on my system.
Mind you, during playback I let XXHighEnd search / arrange for albums, taking the full 100% of the 1st core for 90 seconds or so. Although it may influence sound because of the second core taking a few % of it (due to drivers which can't be appointed), I do not hear it, let alone crackling appears.
... which STILL does not mean nothing is the matter ... :dntknw




Peter it is interesting. Here is some more info.

Say I have a window in my taskmanager showing 4 cores. OK. But they really show the pattern you have on your dual core. It is the same case. One active the other 0.
Further, it seems to make a difference when e.g. you have several XX versions open on your desktop at the same time, including Foobar.

(I do that to have fun comparing all those versions. I normally just throw the same 2 or 3 tracks in to their playlist and swap players.)

I do that a lot, however I do of course not play on more than one player version at a time.  :wacko:

But doing this swapping between players, even the other players are passified (but not shut down), it increases the clicks frequency.

Now if I leave Foobar alone on my desktop. No clicks.

If I leave only 9m-1. very few clicks.

If I leave 9D the only open player, no clicks.

Does that tell you anything?


PS! I never touch the FF scroller. And I never leave 48 samples, except for Foobar that likes 96.


Gerner  

Hi Gerard,

Indeed, before it showed 99 I guess ... ? (which it should !!).

A few remarks :

dwm.exe : your glass look in Vista. Better turn that off (into classic I think).

Explorer.exe : no idea why that is using cpu in your case.

General : 12 % useage is way too much (10 % follows from the list). If you sort the cpu column, at the top the cpu users will appear.

Peter,

CPU normally 5, 6, 7.

Normally in my case 95, 96, 97, 98.      But when it happend 87, 88, 90

I Changed bureaublad in clasical weergave.

I did sort the column... what do you like to know?

What is eating your cpu when you have the problems ...

I'm afraid though it's not so easy to find out; I expect it to be a one-time spike (like you showed before) but which possibly keeps on having the DAC de-synchronized until a stop-start is issued.

Let's not forget : no matter I don't have the problem myself, it should be the program that incurs for it now.

The best test might be : unchecking Processor Core Appointment, quit XX, reboot, and let it run so long that you're sure it won't happen anymore (or of course notice it still happens).

Be careful not to use other types of music data than before (WAV/FLAC/MP3).

I will do that...

just playing .Wav right now.....

Right now playing with processetab in front of me and watching if something strange come up when crackling apears...

 :)

Gerard,

Didn't you fall alseep by now ?
Must it be the conclusion, almost 24 hours later, you don't have problems when Processor Core Appointment is shut off ?

Hahaha....

No i did not fall asleep.... Did not had the lust yesterday anymore.... I will try that today....And I will find out what is causing the pike... We where planning to  buy a videocamera in a few weeks and when i have that i will put him for my screen and let Processentab open... I will be to late to see,  but i can rewind back....  :grin:

Let you know tonight!! (processor core appointment)

Grtzzz

( Ps yesterday ( APC checked) not doing any stressing in the evening it happend only once...)

Hey Peter,

I can go back to bed  ;) Just playing for 10 min Norah Jones (EAC .Wav) and the crackling apeart. ( It happends for 10 seconds and than went back to normal)

Offcourse APC is off... ( And restart after unchecking)
I will have to wait until i have a camera... Maybe i can borrow one sooner...

Will let you know....


Grtzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzznurk

Camera not necessary, I believe you.

Is this repeatable ? I mean, supposed you just rebooted and all, and it took, say, 20 minutes for it to occur; could you let it do exactly the same (same tracks !) again ?

If yes, please then try it WITHOUT reboot, but restart of XX only. Then exactly the same sequence again.

And ... you still think that this is since a certain XX version, do you ? maybe re-check that ?

The camera thing i would like to do to see what give's the pike or is that not important?
I really think (but will try) that its not everytime the same again. I have the idear that whatever is giving the pike when the pike is coming at the "wrong" time/place that than things go wrong. (End of a track) But less/sometimes it comes up during playing. Mostly the crackling goes all the way to the end of a track. but rearly it is for just 5-10 seconds.

I did not try compearing models. For me this thing is from the beginning of.... And as i told you before i did not tell because i thought it was the xp driver. You know that in the beginning i send you a PM ivm the EMU DSP thing. In that time the crackling was there....

I said that there was one time i thought the crackling was less.... But as i learnt they's day's all depends on the way i/whe are using the computer. So i think that that conclusion cannot be seen with a version that was current. ( In my case)

Gr G...  :)

EDIT: For a few day's now i thought that the crackling apears often/more in the beginning of playing. When i start the computer and starts XX today also after 10 min. But i could be wrong!!

Peter hoi,

I tried today some stress the pc some more.. and i kept on looking on processen during playing... When the crackling apears i did not see anything strange beside's the things under.... Look at what xx does.. Normally it's + 47.168 and 17.352


I said before that after a song "with" the new song is fresh/without. This is not correct.. A few time's even the next song does it. One time i moved the cursor just i bit and it was gone.... Also one time there was nothing going on i moved the cursor a litlle and than it began....

For now i give up.... And enjoy the new model.... Is great!!

Gerard...  :grin:

Gerard, two questions please :

a. Do you say that you actually had the crackles, say, always ?

b. Do you perhaps say that you don't have them in 0.9pd ?



Additionally : Can you verify that you have the crackles with EAC ripped WAVs from your own origine ?
This is not about bad rips, but about the treatment for non-EAC (better : not official red book format) rips as per 0.9o. This treatment is special, and your memory listing from your earlier post may indicate that it is happening ...

Thanks.
Peter

Peter hoi,

A: Yes i have had the crackles as long as i remember. (beginning of XX)

B: Since yesterday i have been playing witk pd and i have them with APC checked and unchecked.

I have crackles with my own EAC rippes and with EAC ripped cd's from someone "else"... And from i know of they are very good!!!

What do you mean with "This treatment is special"

I will do a test with a model before 0.9o and specially with rips from someone else... But i am 98% sure...

Grtzzz

I don't think that is necessary Gerard. I just wanted to be sure that I understood well.
Where your problem resorts from I don't know. But IMHO not from any late version of XX.
Not that this helps you, but it helps me a bit. :)

Heeeeey Peter, All,

Nou breekt mijn klomp (My wooden shoe just broke) ( Dutch Term)  :biglol:  :blob8:

There are two things going on!!!

Cracks are gone and the Errors (during random play) are gone....

What did i do??!!! rapappaaa rappapaaa rapapaaaa haha.....  :)

Ok

From the beginning of i had two harddrives....

HARDDRIVE 1:  is named C:\ and on that one is Windows and all the other programms including XX Highend installed. Also my favorit music was on this harddisk.

HARDDRIVE 2: is named X:\ and contained music wich i had to sort out....

I removed all my music from both disks and put my favorit music from my backup in X:\

Also i moved the map that contains XXHIGHEND and put that also in X:\

Right now i do some big stressing on C:\. Normally the errors and cracks come up very often...
But for the last 4 hours there is nothing... NO CRACKS - NO ERRORS :blob8:


4 Hours is maybe less to make conclusions but i could not wait to tell.... And fo me this is to much of a coincidence...

Let you know

Grrrrrtzzzz Gerard..    :yahoo:

Are both C: and X: connected by the same type ? I mean, both SATA, or might C: be ATA/SATA and X: be USB ?
(etc.)

Both are ATA.....

Could you retry with the XX folder on C: again (music stays at X:) ?

I already did  ;)

Hoi Peter,

I moved XX from X:\ to C:\ and when i play music that is stored on C:\ and X:\,  XX come's with cracks. Also, because of some copying on C:\,  XX shows difficultie's loading music.

I moved XX back to X:\ and now i am playing music that is stored on C:\ and than also XX come's with cracks and even errors. Still C:\ is a bit busy with some copying.

Now i only play music that is stored on X:\ and XX shows no loading diffucultie's and seems relaxter.
Errors and cracks still do not apear on X:\ when the music i play is on X:\

 :( :)

Gerard....

Can you verify that in the "bad" situation(s), the crackles start right in the middle of a track (say 10 secs from start and 20 seconds before the end at most ?

Also (and sorry I don't know anymore if you told it already), how would you describe the "crackling" you have ? (heavy distortion, small clicks, etc. ?)

Crackling = Heavy distortion/Real heavy

Crackles starts during playing. But sometimes when a new track apears the cracks go on. Sometimes after a few seconds. Sometimes in the middle of a song.  :(

EDIT: 20:00 uur Still no problems at all on X:\

Peter,

I have been playing for over 12 hours and i did not have any errors. Also in my case the cracks are gone. I can really say that XX seems to have it easyer.

So my conclusion is that if you have two harddrives it´s better to put XX in the harddrive where your music is stored and where you don´t have all your other programms. Or do you disagree Peter?


Gerard.  :grin:

EDIT: Playing for several day's and still no errors!!  :)

Gerad you positive laboratory...  ;)

How can I say it? I had the same phenomenon going here, but in a different version causing however the same side effects as you have been experiencing.

Mine had to do with that I want to have two different players of different origin open on the desktop to compare how the XX is developing along the way. This were not to find a winner, because that's not so difficult to decide...But merely just to keep an old player staying the same all the time, and having a better platform to follow the improvements of the XX.
Those two players could not co-exist and caused the same problems with distortion and clicks.

Now Peter gave me a recepy, or test method to find a solution and get rid of that problem on my location, and the method was found. But it is not the same "case" here as you have, even you experienced the same side effects. Funny isn't it.

The bloody thing for Peter is, that all of us are setting up things in right/wrong/different modes that may cause XX difficulties. But Peter doesn't have those settings and crazy things on his PC and it's hard to suggest on what would be causing problems and how they were created by us and not him. For Peter he must set his PC in the same default as we have to diagnose, and that is not always possible as different HW is also playing role. Peter cannot buy all our crazy HW solutions and test it off before a new release of the XX.

But as some of us is willing to spend time on helping this out, and Peter do it as well, a universial *no kill* player is soon to be born.

I think all this is better explained by the Master himself, and leave him the time for it, so I let you go free from my lausy way of explaining all this.


But let me put it this way: There is always a better solution. And those who doesn't beleive, will not be the ones who invent it.
I guess it's why we see so much going on re. the XX.

Gerner

Gerner, beautifully said. But allow me to address this to Gerard just the same. I mean, you both spent a hell of a time to find out what's going on, and although in both your cases this is not exacly clear, you are the winners of ... well, your systems.
Whether you may benefit from an improved version (the 0.9q I just put up) I don't know, but the fact is : those who persist will winn. I tried too (0.9q).

Either of your cases are IMHO rare, or better : as strange as could be;

Gerard, yes, you could say that you should not have so much "overhead" on your PC, but how that is related to one harddrive ... it beats me so far. I mean, XXHighEnd is not accessing that harddrive at all during playback (hence in the middle of a track) and still "you" (your PC) accessing that drive stresses XX. "Stresses" or de(s)organizes, in a mater I cannot comprehend.

Gerner, with you the same, but in an even more parculiar way;
You did not tell it out of politeness, but I will :

As soon as you start Foobar, NOT (and never) playing a single track at all, after a few minutes you have ... well, the same as Gerard; completely distorted sound which won't go away, until stop / restart playback.
Added to that : with *NO* Processor Core Appointment only. Well, if one thing beats me, it's this.
What even beats me more is that 0.9pd does not give you this distortion ... and ... you really received one program only (the 0.9pd) which is unrelated to the playback of sound ...

BUT :
As we know by now, 0.9pd not only solves these kind of problems (not for Gerard I think) but it even expresses a (far) better SQ. Those things must be related.


If not already ... :innocent:
But you can bet I do not only listen to all of you, but I also will explicitly take this experience into account in order to somewhere, sometime determine what is really going on in playback where it is SQ related. Ok, "we" started off nicely, but although I'd say we're near the top already, I'm sure it still is just the beginning of it.

I know this took 10ths of hours of each of you.
:friends:
Peter
:goodjob:

Hey Gerner, (skiz)  ;)

Thanx for your nice words.... Indeed strange that whe are both experience the same cracks. Even odd that it´s so diffucult to point out what is causing the problem. In my case it´s only a palliative and not the way it should in the future. But Ill keep on trying when i have some time left. First see how the new model does/reacts on this.

I have one question though..

1: :grin:  The problem you have is that only to Foobar related? Or does WMP/Other Players also infect the SQ?

Grtz Gerard 
 
 

Hi Gerad

Neither or both. Neither XX failed 'alone' nor Foobar did. Running in 'open' mode both failed, resulting in the symptoms we both found in the SQ. And I run the XX and Foobar in the Vista partition which has it's own seprate disc. Not hooked up in my loops of 2 x 3 TB music storrage discs.

What I could not think of was that that was due to how the core were set. Multicore or one core. I never had the thought it would have any influence and looked for all kind of other anomalities.
By coincidence I found out that the both can live happily together if the MOBO is set to 'one core' appointment.

Now if other players than Foobar has to marry under the same cicumstances I have not tried that out.

Gerner  :dntknw: