XXHighEnd

Hi all owners of the RAM-OS Disk,

Today 's the day of the first official upgrade to the RAM-OS Disk; I have been testing Windows 10 Build 14393.0 and oh boy is it worth while !

(http://www.stordiau.nl/xxhighend/W10-14393.png)

For my own situation it is more of everything. But if anything, I'd say the balance is more towards the bass now. Quite odd is, that I dedicate this a mixture of Windows 7 for the bass and W10-10074 for the highs, alhough this latter is more fresh. So those who are used to 10074 (or still remember it) it is a similar flavor of the highs, but more metal and therefore much more realistic. Also it is again more towards the Silverstone USB card (which I do not use any more). The power of the bass is what I recall myself from Windows 7 (SP1).
N.b.: I hope I can speak for all of you, because I have again something new in my chain (and indeed meant for you all as well, later) and very maybe it can be so that this new "device" normalizes the highs so something very pleasant and special and without it, possibly the highs may come across as "overdone".

Notice : From of W10-14383 (which is the first one I tested at the heading of the "redstone" release (which is 14393) a new version of XXHighEnd is required.

(http://www.stordiau.nl/xxhighend/W10-14393-02.png)
So in the Operating System (which you can download, see more below) there's 2.06b installed. The older versions (from of 2.01) work too, but not in Minimized OS and Unattended (things will stall after playback).

Another thing to note is that the latest Windows 10 versions (like 14393.0) have problems with "maintaining" the taskbar alive in Minimized OS. Now as we know from experience, we don't need much of it, but still it may require some experience to really not be bothered by it. But for example, it implies that all you might need for your audio operation needs to be on the Desktop (in icon fashion). Also, teach yourself not to minimize things to the taskbar, because after that it will be frozen "on there". Anyway, you will see an icon for Taskmanager on the desktop, because you might need Taskmanager at stages the Taskbar won't allow for rightclick (and start TaskManager from there).

To obtain the Windows 10 14393.0 Operating System (with everything installed in there, including an activated XXHighEnd as usual), drop me an email (sales phasure com). You will be returned an email without personal hello's and good bye's and if you have questions, please put them in here (and not by email).

Installation

Method 1 :
Easiest (for understanding) is to boot into your "service OS", which is the TRIAL denoted one. If this is still 10565 for you, then first set the system date to Sept. 2, 2015 (otherwise 10565 won't boot). If this is 14388 then all is fine (see RAM OS Disk - Upgrade 10565 TRIAL (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=3661.0) in case you want to upgrade the TRIAL to 14388). You will apply the file to drive C: in this case (see below as well).

Method 2 :
The even more easy way is staying where you are (BASE or RAM) but understanding what you are doing could be a bit more difficult.  You will apply the file to drive D: in this case (see below as well). Of course - if you are booted from RAM at this time - you must not forget to put your RAM OS Disk in your PC and perform Stop-RightClick - "Boot into" so the disk gets mounted.

The file you receive is zipped. Unzip it and put it in the root of your RAM-OS Disk (where the others are and notice above mentioned drive C: vs. D:).
Save the zip somewhere, as it can serve as backup file (similar to the "Copy" versions you received in the RAM-OS Disk). However, notice that you can also throw it away because later you will be able and allowed to download it again.

The below shows what you should achieve :

(http://www.stordiau.nl/xxhighend/W10-14393-03a.png)
So you see the two 14393.0 entries in there, and after you have put the OS file in the root of your RAM-OS Disk the "New" button allows for adding the OS to the Boot Menu. This is quite self explanatory, and otherwise there's ToolTip help in there.
Notice that after the new boot entries have been created (with the name you give them), one will be named like the name you gave, and the other will have received the addition "Memory" (you see that in the screenshot above as well). Best is to change the descriptions (after pressing Refresh so the new entries show) similar to the ones you already have (with the nice "BASE" and "RAM" in there). Do not forget to click Apply after you changed the descriptions.

Set back the date to "today" if you have changed it.

Space constraints

Most of you will have the RAM-OS Disk which is 500GB or 750GB. However, there's also teh Stealth PC and the RAM-OD "Disk" shipped with that, which is an SSD of 240GB. This will reach its limits after adding this OS (but it will fit).
Now, notice that you are perfectly allowed to delete an OS file from the disk/ssd, obviously one you never use anyway. Or even better : copy it to elsewhere. Doing this for one, will free close to 30GB of space, if you also delete (move) the "Copy" version of it.
Of course you can move the "Copy" versions of all of the OSes to elsewhere ...

While the above was about storage space, there's also a memory space little issue;
You will notice that this file is ~2.5GB larger than what you are used to. This is related to the more space the 14393.0 OS itself requires after installation. The effect is that for those with 16GB of internal memory, the free memory now runs a little on the low side with the notice that now 2.5GB less free memory is available after the OS has been loaded into RAM (and has been booted from there). This still should work fine, but it *is* less than what you are used to.
For the Stealth PC users this is no problem anyway, because that has 32GB of internal memory.

Last remark and now for the Stealth users again :
You may have noticed that the 10586.0 OS was shipped at 25GB of size (instead of 13GB). This was deliberate because it sounds better. I have not tested it myself with the larger file for 14393.0 (so I use the same 15.5GB you will receive), but notice that you can always make it larger *IF* you have the memory available (and with 16GB of memory this is out of the question). Directions for that  are available by email (nothing changed there). Also notice that once the OS File has been made larger, it will be impossible to shrink it to the original size you received it; it is possible to shrink it "somewhat" but the procedure is tedious and not really available (I did it once). Moral : Make a copy of the file before you start expanding it, so you can always go back to the original size when needed.

Happy listening !
Peter

All,

I was wondering ... Does the procedure work in the first place ?
I'm asking because I don't see any feedback so I just wondered. If it sounds like sh*t you can say it too, of course.

Peter

Peter,

 I should have mine installed in the next hour :)

I suppose I can copy The version 2.06b to the other versions too, including Windows 8 ?

Thanks,

Alain

Alain, no, don't attempt that.

Thanks,
Peter

Ok, but do you mean "no" only for Windows 8 and/or all the other Win 10 versions ?

Alain

No for anything and everything.
We never could do such a thing and nothing changed there ...

Peter

But didn't we port the v2.06 on all OSes with the ram-os drive ? (v.2.06 + 2.06a)

Alain

Peter,

The increasing in size went fine.

Then I accessed the audio PC locally with a keyboard, mouse and monitor.

The NEW file creation in the "Boot into" menu also went fine. Modified the titles with "BASE" on the BASE option and did a few "Refresh" (to get more familiar only) and even closed the menu to restart it.

Accessing now through RDC...

Allowed the share of the music drive that sits on the Server PC.

Creation of shortcuts on the desk (icons) for:
- "All Control Panel Items".
- "This PC".

As prescribed, I did not add them on the taskbar.

I cannot change the date and time (BASE, normal OS mode) since it requires NOT to have the administrator privilege.

Made all the adjustments on XXHighEnd.

Works fine :)

Going in Minimized OS mode now.
There is a picture in XXHE, maybe an album cover or something else ? I thought it has disappeared with Minimize OS but it is still there.

It seems to load longer when accessing (through RDC), but is OK. I did not check this through local connection (in Minimized OS).

Sound is very nice and "full". I will need to compare (this will take some time). But I like it :)

In RAM it plays fine too :) I will play with it for a while now :)

Regards,

Alain
 

The percussions... They seem more lively and present ? Am I imagining this ?

I have created a new topic here instead:
http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=3686.0

Alain

Alain, all posts about this are fine in here !
Will respond to a few things now ...

Alain, Do you mean some left over of my own situation over here ?

Thanks,
Peter

Alain,


Possibly you mean via the normal clicking on the date/time ?
I never even attempt that because it usually does not work anyway - certainly not in MinOS. So I always start a command prompt and apply
date [enter]
I just tried it ... works for 14393.0 just the same ...

Peter

It sould be (a leftover), but since I never play with images, it is probably easy to remove it if someone is used to it ? For the moment, it is not a concern for me (just an observation).

Yes, my attempt was through the date on the taskbar...

I don't know why I stopped doing this through the command prompt. I will follow that path from now on.

Alain

If possible, can you show it to me ?
Or otherwise, where does it show ?

Sorry for the delay...

Alain

Peter,

I know how to remove it, at least I think. For the moment I am in RAM mode so I am not sure if it will not be there even if I save the changes on drive, but it is just a leftover... 

Alain

Ah, that ...
No, that is on purpose.

Anyway (for those who don't know) : Skin settings ([ S ] button with the Playlist Area active) - CoverArt Background Image. Empty that field and all should be "clear".

Thank you Alain.
Peter

I should play more with some options... I have never attached any importance on covers... That may explain why my girlfriend finds some of my components... Of discutable taste aesthetically speaking ;) But I am sure this is not an unknown issue :whistle:

Alain

Installed, using method 2 went without any problems.
  :)

Peter,

I was wondering if the buffer (in Phasure Control Panel) is at 16ms on purpose ?

Thanks,

Alain

Alain,


Ahum. No, not really. :hips:
It is default like that from the Driver Install and I never thought of it ...
I guess I let it be like that, because it sounds quite great. :innocent: Or actually : never change a winning team.

Very well noticed Alain.
Thanks,
Peter

I return the compliment Peter :) True it sounds wonderful at 16ms. In this hobby, it is important to have the "experimental fiber" and never take all for granted...

Alain

Hi Peter,

How can I get the processor core temperature monitoring? (Missing on the 14939 upgrade.)

Peter,

Download and installation of new OS went well according to your instructions.

Had problems with adding Benchmark Dac software through File explorer, wouldn't work. Finally installed using Device manager from Control Panel.

Had issues with file permissions re music file server probably my fault here but sorted finally.

Xxhighend 6b Ram running and in min OS all great. Sound seems further refined.

I notice after loading the largest 24/192 album I only had 170MB left in the C drive. It did play all tracks with no issues.

Task bar no problem I've just shrunk Xxhighend so icons are visible on desktop.

I do have 32 g Ram and was wondering if I could make it larger than 17.58g or now 15.1g(14393)? I've had no problems playing tracks and albums so far.

I have requested to enlarge OS by email so whether this is part of it.

I notice you run clock res at .5ms now but sig shows 1ms.

Regards Robert

Hi Robert,

I did not adjust my Sig yet, but I will soon.

Sent an email with the expansion instructions.


If possible - and if you have the lust - you may elaborate a little. Would this be 14393.0 specific you think ?
Where would the difference be between installing via Explorer (??) and Device Manager ?

Thanks,
Regards,
Peter

Hey Kjell Narve,

If all is right you will find it on D: (the Drive Letter to the RAM-OS Disk (SSD) itself). \Installs\CoreTemp.
If it is not there it is in the 10586.0 OS, same place.
From there you can install it.

Do notice that that program itself implies a higher temperature, so i is actually not a wise thing to run it continuously. But for checking out things it is OK.
Also be careful that it doesn't still run while you think you have exited it; it has the (deliberate) habit of staying alive while you cross it away. Check the TaskBar Tray (and the colors per core).

Regards,
Peter

Peter,
       I have the Benchmark Dac driver in the D Drive installs folder.

I think it is because of 14393 OS.

First I opened this file and clicked on setup file. It clicked away but did not install. I tried this 3 or 4 times but did not work.

Not sure why but I opened the Device manager and the benchmark location was registered but had a warning sticker.

I opened the properties and proceeded to update driver which worked. I also had to do this in the sound, video game controllers for the Driver. After this it all worked.

Robert  

Robert - Interesting ...
I had a kind of similar issue with IMDisk install; Just nothing just happened at double clicking the Install .exe file (in Normal OS). As a last resort I downloaded the latest version of IMDisk, and that (luckily) worked.

Not really the same, but mentioning it so people may recognize general issues with installing things.

Thanks !
Peter

I have already expanded my Ram OS from the first time you put it up.

My question is should this not be expanded further to say 20g?

Robert, now I don't know what you are talking about ...

Assuming this is about 14393.0, this "obviously" was not expanded by you, earlier on. Maybe it looks like that because it is larger to begin with, but ...

If you have 32GB, make it 25GB. At least that is how I used my 10586.0.

If this is not what you mean, let me know.
Peter

I expanded my Ram file(Xxhighend) size back in April 30th this year according to your instructions to 18GB. This is what I have now. At the time you did not recommend to go bigger than 18GB.

Robert

Robert, I do not recall any recommendation as such. All I know is that the example (of the expansion) works with 18GB (5GB more) ...

You can do what you want, as long as you have read (i9n the OP) that "today's recommendation" is to let it stay as it is (with the notice that you can not go back unless you freshly copy if (from the download) again). Why ? ... because it sounds good as it is (and these things do make a difference).

Anyway, with 32GB of RAM, don't make it larger than 25GB.

Peter

Further to Benchmark driver software I went back to have another crack at installing software from File explorer and after opening Benchmark install file properties and ticking unblock box it all worked perfectly.

I do notice two things upon returning to min OS Ram XXhighend. The first time it loads into Ram, OS says there is an error and it all reboots. The second attempt is successful. This has happened twice now for me on first bootup into Ram. After this it works everytime.

Also once booted into Ram the screen flicks on and off 2 or 3 times then settles. Running XXhighend after this works everytime.

I've left the Ram at 18g hasn't been a problem so far.

For anyone running Ram OS its worth upgrading to 32g Ram especially if you play Hi Res files and upgrading to 14393. Windows OS's will only get bigger.

Robert

Hi,

in addition the build 14393 has an intense CPU load. Both PC's, office and Audio are more slowly than with 10586. XXH comes up after >60sec. :(

Joachim

Joachim, you are doing something wrong ...
Nothing is more slow with 14393.0 that I can see.

Peter,

Is there a 14393.0 version available for those of us without a RAM OS disk?

Paul

Paul,

No, not really. Well, the 14393.0 could be, but there's no official XXHighEnd version for it yet.

And a warning (please) : Do NOT play with any "I don't care" versions beyond 14393.0. Because remember, I used a 14383.0 and it sounded like total sh*t. Besides that, I had to adjust XXHighEnd for 14383.0 and I had to do it *again* for 14393.0. And this is all because W10 is "buggy" in MinOS.

In the far end I will be having 14393 myself (as a normal installable OS), but at this moment this is useless because no XXHighEnd for it.

Regards,
Peter

Maybe,
do you change something within the settings of W10, such as disabling services outside of MinOS?

Joachim

Maybe some additional remarks are required ...

I can see that the further W10 develops, the more backdoor solutions have been applied to things being wrong in the base and which apparantly can not be solved natively. Example :

Would you have followed the development of Windows 10, then you'd have seen that right from the start there always have been problems with "Explorer", which is the main controlling desktop program (the "dwm" program is even more, but this is not recognizable for you really). So maybe we recall the "memory error" from 10074 at shutting down ? well, it has been in there for ages, went away, and is now back again with 10393.0. So alreadu such a thing can not be solved apparently, BUT notice that this happens to us in MinOS (so blame me if you like). Still :

Someone mentioned the flashing 3-4 times right after booting. Yep, that is the OS repairing itself. So it restarts Explorer (which is that main manager). So it notices that something is wrong, and just restarts. This is in there from IIRC 10565 but it was required only once in a while. Now it is quite continuously, if only we first "mangle" (and we do).

What you don't know and see, is how I fight against something like Cortana. You can kill it, but it wants to be back (unless you take the time to sort out how to really disable it). But this is the whole stuff around backdoor solutions as MS applies them : we kill as much as we can, while MS restarts it as a standard procedure now, because things fail so often that restarting it is the solution.
Understand ?

Nothing is slow. But causing stalls is easy and you think it is slow. Watch the taskbar again; is it slow, or is it just stuck all the time, until the internal process restarts it finally ?
It is the latter.
But for what "we" notice, it is us ourselves doing it, because of some service not running.

Example of what is new in 14393.0 vs. 14383.0 :
If you don't set the taskbar to auto-hide in Normal OS, forget it. The settings to do it lack in MinOS. Why ? I don't know. But of course I (XXHighEnd) caused that. Sort out what it is, will take a week, and next something runs we like to get rid of.
In the end it doesn't matter much, because when the Taskbar is stuck it won't auto-hide either.
Not that we care when using Unattended in the first place.

So these were just a few notes. There's much more going on, and I do NOT see things are more slow. Really not.
But maybe I don't look right ! :)

Peter

Good question. But the answer is No.

One thing I seem to have noticed :
I think it was W8 (was it ?) where showing results from "search like" commands implied a delay (could be up to 0.5 seconds). So the result is there as fast (or slow) as ever, but there's also a delay in showing that. As if something first must communicate. This disappeared in W10 (or maybe W8.1 which I never really tried). BUT ... now this is back again. Or at least it feels like that. In the end this can make your work much nore slow (to finish). For example, search for a certain text in the Registry; the result is found fast (as ever), but it shows 0.5 seconds later. Now do this a 100 times (because the Registry is large and contains many entries with the term you look for) and this is 500 seconds of waste.
Without this delay the result shows instantly, and it only depends on how fast you can ask for the next result.

We can call this "slow" but in the end it is not.
But for net result it of course it. And it depends very much on what you do (whether you run into it or not).


I am withdrawing that now. Apologies.

Regards,
Peter

As I said in other post, everything is working well now. Only point that when I installed the 14393.0 (method 1) the only problem I found was that the Network was lost and did not appear the Servermusic disks. I guess that that happens when install a new version of Windows.

Other things I've noticed is that when change the volume, up or down, with the AutoHotkeys now the process is faster than before. Also if I want to do something with the taskbar in the Audio Pc sometimes it becomes a very slow process.

Otherwise the sound seems better than ever. The highs now seem full of detail and very natural and the bass are stronger and richer than ever. I could not imagine that my speakers were able to give such low bass with a vibration that really is impressive.

Regards,
Juan

Juan, thank you for your extensive feedback (also your earlier post).

Regards,
Peter

Procedure does not work for me.  The instructions are quite vague and can be read a few different ways so I am not sure if I have followed what you intended us to do precisely (well I probably have not it seems), but the boot procedure for my AudioPC is now dysfunctional and will only boot into W10565 by itself (which I have never used) regardless of what it is set to start into from XXHE boot menu.  W10-14393 is not available in the boot menu at computer startup at all. 

I need the monitor back so I can work so currently have no functioning AudioPC.  Not sure what to do.  Are you able to write out a set of steps 1,2,3 from a known starting point?  That would be less cryptic.

Anthony

To add to this, I have figured out that I can boot into the various RAM versions ok (so long as they are not an expired OS) but as soon as I try to boot into any of the BASE versions (by setting it so in XXHE) W10568 RAM tries to load and of course that is an expired OS.

I need to boot into a BASE version to set the network mapping for the music and streaming directories.

Uhm ... I wasn't talking about that "procedure" in particular. Merely about the internal working of the new OS. And that that did not work out indeed for the PCs with 16GB of memory, is known by know.

Btw I like to know these "vague instructions".

So FYI, there is not any procedure as such to create the OS in the boot manu, unless you call this a procedure :

1. Copy the OS file to the root of the PC;
2. Add the OS to the boot menu (the 5 seconds work thing).
but also :
3. Hook up the monitor to set up the RDC to that OS.


I am afraid that you did not apply the above 2 steps, with the 3rd as a quite obvious step, although not easy not to think of in advance (but logical as can be).


It is the other way around. Since there wasn't a procedure except 1,2 and you did not apply that at all (I am quite confident :)), you must now tell what you did.
Showing a screenshot of the Boot Menu of XXHighEnd is a good starting point (for me).

Peter

Notice the emphasized "a".

You need to boot into the BASE version of the one you want to use from RAM (and theoretically it could be all of them).

And Anthony ... if you respond, please be prepared for some quick back and forth communication so we can solve this quickly for you. Of coure I will need to find your first response so wait a bit for that, but after that we keep on going ...

Meanwhile and to apply some shortcut, give me your log file of this situation. Do this to let that happen :

0. Be sure to not have any USB sticks etc. in there which may occupy Drive D:. Notice that D: is (to be) reserved for the RAM OS Disk when booted from anything but the TRIAL. Check whether this indeed is so (C: is where you booted from (RAM or BASE) and D: is available and is the RAM-OS Disk).

1. Reboot into a for you working version (RAM is fine, but do not remove the Disk).

2. Go to the location of XXHighEnd (always drive C: (!!)) and remove the log files from the TemporaryData sub folder.

3. Start XXHighEnd (no need to switch on Logging).

4. Go to Stop-RightClick - Boot Into.

5. Grab the log files and post them as attachment.

From there, but please including your followed "procedure" (so I can try to prevent the issue for a next) I am sure we will be able to get you going again.

Regards,
Peter

Edit : I split the further posts about this issue to this topic : Adding 14393.0 to the menu failed (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=3695.msg39423#msg39423).

Hey Peter,

I sent an email for the Win 10 build 14393.0 download (the "smaller" revised version)... ?

Thanks,

Alain

:scratching::scratching:

Alain, I am quite positive that I sent the link to you right away. But it did not happen for real, I see now.
Apologies !

Coming up (again ;)) right now.

Regards,
Peter

Hi Peter, has it some other advantages besides that the new version takes up less space? In my case with 24GB of memory I have 4Gb free with the current 14393.0 version.

Regards,
Juan

Hi Juan,

Theoretically Yes but I did not really compare nor notice a difference (I use the small version too).

The "disk space" required will be 2.5GB less, implying that you will have ~6.5GB of free memory (same as I have at this moment). You won't use (need) that 6.5GB though ...

Anyway, you can ask for the "small link" if you want. No problem at all.
And if you as the first next increase the "disk space" again, it is still no problem; this is not a moot thing, because that disk space will be free disk space, and *that* can come handy at times (larger Hires albums).

Regards,
Peter

Thanks Peter, I send you an email for this new version. I guess that the installation process is the same one, correct?

Regards,
Juan

Juan, No. It now only requires this :

0. Boot into any of the other OSes.
1. Delete the 14393 file from where you put it (Root of RAM-OS Disk etc.).
2. Put the new one in there.

So the Boot Menu remains to be OK as it is.

Kind regards,
Peter

That's ok Peter

Thanks,
Juan

Don't worry Peter. I downloaded it at the office (after reading your post this morning), on a USB key... And I left without it... I am now downloading it again at home...

From a wandering colleague ;)

Alain

:swoon:

Anthony,

I split the latest posts about this to here : Adding 14393.0 to the menu failed. (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=3695.msg39423#msg39423)

Peter

I went back to 10586 without, then with Intona. It does seem easier on the ears. Is improved with Intona I do have to turn up the volume from no Intona.

I do think there is something about 14393 that is more revealing in the treble. In this mode without Intona I have to reduce volume to output the same loudness of music as the 10586 OS.

I will leave 10586 in place for now.

Robert

I must tell (and I am honest) that at several occasions it has slipped through my mind that additional noise enhances (emphasizes) (some of the ?) higher frequencies. Like noise can be added to a photograph and it may comes across as more sharp.

Peter

I need some help here.
I have tried to upgrade to 14393 but not successful.

First I upgraded the  service OS to 10565 and there is no problem with that.
I got the 14393 OS in my win 10 64 bit work computer and extracted the OS and put it on my USB drive in NTFS. I then follow the step 1 in the first post of this thread and copy the 14393 OS to drive C. Strangely afterwards there is only one entry of MyW10-14393-copy.vhd but no MyW10-14393.vhd in drive C.
When I add 14393 under new in the boot menu there is a check in the box repair along the line of the W10-14393 base . And the box repair with is empty. I have tried 3 to 4 times and the result is the same. Trial to boot from 14393 Ram memory also failed.

I am not sure what went wrong in my steps?
Can anyone give me some help? thanks.

Leung

Hi there Leung,


But this doesn't go by itself of course, you you must have made a mistake somewhere ?
Or did I put the file in the download with that name ? :scratching:
Anyway, most probably this is just the MyW10-14393.vhd and all you need to do is rename it to that name. Now the checkbox for repair will have disappeared and booting into the RAM version should also work.

Does this help you ?

Best regards,
Peter

Hi Peter,

Yes it works after removing copy from the name. After several attempts I can enter into the 14393 Ram.

But all the old settings in 10586 are lost in this new OS so I need to set all the library again. Not sure I can still remember that. Let me try first. I may need your help again if I can't fix that. Thanks.

Leung

Leung,

The 14393.0 is just a different operating system, so the settings are not shared with any other of the OSes in there.
But if all is right you can just boot into 10586.0 again and write down some crucial settings. I mean, the other OSes should still be there to boot from ...

Regards,
Peter

Well, I got caught out with the 'MyW10-14393-copy.vhd' name - I couldn't then add a new line to the boot menu. But as soon as I changed this to 'MyW10-14393.vhd', everything went fine.

But I have an issue now. I only have 16GB in 'Le Monster'. Occasionally I get a 'Free Memory' error after pressing Play in XX. This can happen in Attended as well as Unattended. Pressing 'Continue' seems to work and the music starts fine. However... there are very faint hiccups during playback. I tried increasing the SFS from 0.12 to 1.00, and I think this helps, but then I think the sound suffers a little. Would be nice to solve this without having to resort to adding more RAM memory to the PC.

Overall, 14393 seems way more lively and interesting than 10586. It's even listenable with the Intona removed, as I believe Robert reported a while ago. I'll have to do more listening before I decide whether I prefer the sound with/without the Intona.

Mani.

Hi Peter,

Finally got some time and fixed the settings in the 14393. And yes this OS is really great. The 10586 is very detailed but to my ears it lacked the last ounce of musical feeling and this 14393 just gives me that feeling and the sound is really very enjoyable now. Listen to that deep bass sounding nicely and naturally. The strings just seems to play right in front of you. This is really great. Can't imagine what improvement there could be with the Stealth Mach II PC ???!!! Thanks.

Leung

Thank you for the feedback Leung !

And so we continue for the again better ...
(just spent a whole weekend to get something going for the better and at "5 to 12" we just managed - :heat:)

Best regards,
Peter

Hi Mani,

I think I can recognise this, especially at track boundaries. It seems that this belongs to 14393.0 exclusively, but not 100% sure. It sounds like a tine scratch.
At this moment I don't know what to do about it.

The "Free memory" I do not recognise, but then I have 32GB. What exactly/literally is that message ?

Thanks,
Peter

I said that while I confused it with another situation, as I just heard the "skipping" passing by. Just a very brief moment of silence (1-2 tenth of a second); I think it is that what you mean.

Peter

Yep, that sounds exactly like what I'm experiencing. I haven't noticed it with the Mach II though, only with my own audio PC. (Mind you, I'm not at home right now, and haven't listened to either audio PC for a while. I'll check things when I get back at the end of next week.)

Mani.

Just installed 14393.0 last evening.  First, it was extremely easy!! I used Option 2, and installed the unzipped file in the D: directory.  Got network and RDC working and listened with Intona, without Intona, with "standard PC" setting and Stealth PC settings in Peter's signature for 10586. 

I need to do a lot more listening.  I must say that based on first impressions, I prefer 10586 with Intona.  14393 seems extremely sensitive to settings.  I also find it amazing that an OS version make make such a difference.  14393 sounds "rougher" to me: jagged without necessarily adding more detail, so I will continue to investigate settings.

The ability with RAM-OS to switch so easily is quite amazing.

More soon...

Ramesh

Hi Ramesh,

Yes, that fits my own initial description/judgement perfectly.

In case people find it interesting, these are my current settings with Intona :

Q1 = 14x10
Q3,4,5 = 0,1,0
SFS = 120
ClockRes = 15
Driver Buffer = 16ms.

In addition I switched the mains plug's polarity of the Stealth PC. Thus, only of that. It is also connected to mains earth, but the switch for that is Off and the (middle) switch in the NOS1a is also Off (Up).
Yes, I know, we with our mains plugs can just easily turn it 180 degrees, while most of the world can not do that.

The roughness is hardly detectable now, and I think that the main difference with what I used previously is that the bass is less firm and with that deeper (I hope this makes sense).
It could be the best balance so far.
I think that by now the/my conclusion could be that a more firm bass evenly expresses as a more firm "highs". Sadly the latter expresses as rough, but when paying attention the same counts for the bass. However, we tend to like more firm bass (just feels technically better). Still this is dangerous because very squared bass (think ZZ Top distortion guitars) now remains to be that right down to the bottom end, and there is no smoothness left. Say it is hammering and it could be a kind of tiring. With my new setup this smoothness is just sufficiently there while the roughness in the highs seems to be out of the way.
But this is after one night only with this configuration.

Inside info :
I already knew that this configuration measures the best on the analyzer, however, my own (made) isolator shows USB errors in that situation and thus the configuration could not be used (read : with the least 50Hz influence, USB errors appear - :scratching:). So I now decided to use the Intona again.

Peter

Hi Peter,

I am attempting to add 14393.0 to the RAM OS disk using method 2. The file has been unzipped to drive D. But I am only finding the Copy version in the drop down menu.

I have attached an image of the Boot into.

I think I should have the OS other than the Copy version.

Am I doing something wrong?

Best regards,

Arvind

Hi Arvind,

That name with the "Copy" in it, concerns the upload by me with the wrong name; it should be renamed to
MyW10-14393.vhd
I think the message to do this came along with the email containing the link, but anyway it is my bad.

If you still have problems with it, don't hesitate ...

Regards,
Peter

PS: You can keep the "Copy" version somewhere else as a backup, hence you don't need to keep that on the SSD (taking space). And of course you can download it again when needed.

Hi Peter,

But there is only one OS version after unzipping; Copy.vhd. Unlike other OS have .vhd version & Copy.vhd version.

Image attached.

Sorry for the large image size but no way to make the size smaller on the iPhone.

Best regards,

Arvind

Arvind,

Just rename the .vhd file without the -Copy.

You do not need to install two files, just one .vhd file in the root D: directory.

You will need to reconfigure network settings and RDC if you are using a LAN connected music server.

You will also have to reset the various Q and other parameters, as this is a brand new OS and does not copy over any settings from other OS versions you may have used.

Ramesh

Arvind,

I thought I'd make it very explicit, so here goes again:

- Extract the .rar file in some temporary location
- Rename the file by removing the -Copy
- Copy the file to the D: root directory
- Bring up the Boot Into.. option on XXHE
- Select the New button in the popup, and select the 14393 .vhd file to add as a new OS, and give it a name; select both BASE and RAM

You should be set to go.

Hi Ramesh,

Thank you.

That's exactly what I did but there are a few issues:
1) in the boot into menu against 14393 BASE the "repair file" does not show up. Even if I select the file from the drop down menu->apply->refresh, it becomes blank after refresh.
2) Currently my OS is 10586.0 RAM, if I now select any other OS-> apply-> reboot it only tries to boot into 14393.0 RAM. It shows error & then I have to manually select the OS to boot into. And it only boots into 10586.0 RAM, no other OS.

Best regards,

Arvind

I had a chance to listen to 14393.0 for a while this evening, using the settings that Peter mentions a few posts earlier.  By the way I do not know where to set the driver buffer to 16ms, so I'm not sure what that setting is.

I've been comparing with 10586 listening mostly to acoustic instruments: piano, guitars, acoustic bass, drums.  I find that I can make better comparisons listening critically at the "sweet spot" (very wide with my speakers), AND listening casually while doing other things--the second method seems to me just as important.

14393.0 is the best version yet! I cannot believe it.  Just when I'm convinced that we've reached the ultimate, Peter continues to evolve the sound towards perfection.  If there is any criticism I have at all, it is a slight lack of "air" relative to 10586.  But I also wonder if the "air" is an artifact, and not real.

Absolutely wonderful sound.

Ramesh

Arvind,

See below and name it literally as you see (the blue line).
(I am pretty sure you did not do it like that)

Regards,
Peter

Hi Peter,

I selected the file D:\MyW10-14393.vhd from the drop down menu (pls look at my first image). Named it & added it to the boot into menu.

Best regards,

Arvind

Assuming I hadn't done that, would I still get "repair with" W10-14393 against W10- 14393 RAM Memory OS option in boot into menu?

Arvind,

No, you did not. Your first image shows the file with "copy" in it.
Btw, your second image does too, and what you did after Ramesh' his help I can't tell.


Do you really care ? I don't. I only say that you must do what's being told. Whether this is from Tutorials, Emails or Forum posts.
OK, you "must" not do anything, but then don't complaing something does not work as intended. haha.

Best regards,
Peter

PS: Use my screenshot for the literal example and not Ramesh his text which coincidentally contains a space in the name; I say this because I see you write a space too.

PPS: Text from the email for your reference :
Should be sufficiently clear ! :)

After Ramesh's e mail I renamed it, & added it again to the boot menu but yes possibly there may be a space, which I will check later today.

Will revert back.

Ramesh, that's in the NOS1 Driver Control Panel (Buffers, and then top most field).

Peter

Peter have you tried, expanding Ram OS from 15g to 25g yet in 14393?

You mentioned 25g being better sounding in 10586.

Also Bios settings have you altered DRAM from Auto? Someone has suggested setting mine to 800 from Auto. This does slow down loading hard to tell if it makes a difference in sound.

Tried your new XX settings so far seems more listenable.  Havn't reversed power polarity. I've had more bass with 14393 anyway but treble has more clarity with 14393 over 10586. Have not removed Intona. I'm trying to listen over a longer period to get used to sound before making changes. Too many changes confused me and lost my way at 14393 introduction.

Robert

Robert,

I've spent some time listening now to 14393 with the new settings Peter suggested.  I'd say 14393 is a definite improvement over 10586.  I am still using Intona.

Unless I'm hallucinating, 14393 also sounds "louder" for the same volume setting.

The major improvements I can tell are:

- More realistic acoustic instruments (hard to tell exactly what causes this, but piano, guitar, bass, drums are rendered more "live")
- Bass definitely goes lower, is deep and not flabby, I'm not sure if some refinement is being lost, need to get used to it
- Voices, like acoustic instruments are also more "live"
- Classic rock albums that I found hard to listen to, are more manageable--the poor mastering does not seem quite as bothersome

I am definitely NOT going back to 10586.

Ramesh

For those who don’t use the RAM-OS disk (yet), but do want to install Windows 10 Build 14393.0: Where is this version to be found and what is the best procedure to install?

Regards,
Stanley

Hi Stanley - That version does not exist yet. But I am working on it.

Regards,
Peter

Robert, yes, I am using 25GB.


No I didn't; I have always found that parameter to be one dimension too much for me; I have too many other things to judge for, keep in my mind, and in a consistent environment, that I probably never get round to this one. If someone tells me (what to set for the better) I will go along of course.


See ? :)


Keep in mind that this advice was for the Stealth PC, which is very different from any other and which is related to the (linear) power supply in there. So we make it in a certain setup (which is always 100% the same apart from the processor used) and while I can measure that the changed mains plug polarity is for the better, that should or could count for everybody. For any random other PC it tells nothing (also not for the previous "XXHighEnd PC").

Regards,
Peter

Great!
Thanks Peter

Does anyone have suggestions for a simple way to test the reversed mains polarity with the Stealth PC in the US?  I'm hoping not to have to grind pins to fit, or rewire the power cord, but maybe there is no alternative.  Also is there any danger to this at all in the US?

Hi Ramesh,

I do not know an easy way to do this, because of the ground pin... My only suggestion may sound stupid, but if I really wanted to do this in an easy way, I would buy 2 good power strips (not too expensive) and I would invert the connectors from the cable that powers one of the strips. So every component that would be connected to that power strip would have the same reversed polarity.

The interesting aspect of it is that if someone has one strip in reversed polarity and another in "standard" polarity, he could test each component with one and the other to see how that affects SQ (if it does). Some components may behave better with the reverse polarity, some may yield better SQ with the standard polarity. It could be a good way to test different configurations. 

Regards,

Alain
PS: As for the danger of doing this, unless there is such a warning in the owner's manual, I don't think so. Where I am less sure is if a connector only has 2 prongs (no ground). A lamp may not be a risk, but for the wiring inside a component, there may be a reason for the "hot" wire to be as it is... In doubt, it is always better to contact a technician.

Reverse the plug if it has 2 pins(black plug photo), otherwise buy an international plug converter(cream plug photo) and reverse that. Don't forget to mark one pin for reference with felt tip pen.

This method is good for checking all component polarities. Amazing how many manufacturers don't bother. Listen one way will have fuller sound, the other leaner.

Robert

Hi Robert,

The problem with some 2 prong connectors is that the "hot" has a small blade and the neutral a bigger one (for some components), not allowing the switching...

As for the other (the "cream" one), not having a ground pin may affect the results, no?

It would have been so wonderful if the connector was made of two half mechanisms that would allow on to loosen a screw and just do a half turn and then tighten the screw, allowing to maintain the ground but reverse the polarity... But because the ground would be at the same place would not work...

Alain

To my knowledge US plugs have 2 blades the same size. Disconnecting earth will still give you a result. But should be reconnected when correct polarity is found.

We are right. Many have the same size 2 blades, but some do not, because they are told to be "polarized", for what meaning that carries. It may have to do with the topology inside the component...

Alain
PS: Anyway I hate these plugs. Having "audiophile" cables showed me how inadequate the principle is. The wall plugs do not hold the blades tight enough when a cable is heavy so the blades are partially pulled out of the wall...

Hi Guys,


It has been told before how hard it is for you out there to imagine how a manufacturer like from Holland and many more, just can not take that into account.
Look below;

You can see that all is completely symmetrical (with or without earth pin). This means that *because* of nothing depicting what the user (we) is going to put in how, the electrician already does not bother where the neutral is. It would be useless (for the user/consumer). This in itself means that I (manufacturer) can not take it into account and I would not even be able to test it. So where you have the hot wire on the left side, where's mine ? How is it oficially done ? had it been done that way ?
I seriously don't know and I don't think the rules exist for over here.

This means that all I can do is "everywhere the same". So all the Stealths are exactly the same. All the DAC's are also the same. And all I now tell is that it appears to me that the DAC is with reversed polarity plugged in compared to the Stealth PC. Or the other way around (which does not come down to the same, because now both are 180 degrees different all right, but both are now 180 degrees different from the amplifier I did not touch.

The meters (for audiophiles) we have for it (since maybe 50 years) measure current flowing. Uhm ... that is what I always took for granted. You moved the device over the gear and the louder the sound the worse it was.
Today I know better (I think) and what such device measured was just radiation (extremely low frequency, ELF, is how that is called and which is 50Hz or 60Hz).
So when things are connected "wrongly" all radiates as hell.

This field is very large and can't be layed out in one post. Also, even with measuring devices for this and the knowledge how all has been built up (I mean, internally like in-DAC) it takes many hours to find the best setup for one general situation only (like PC in Mains Earth, but DAC not). Really !

Peter

Gosh that's a nightmare Peter. In sunny New Zealand we have this plug. Only goes in one way, but even in NZ a certain amplifier manufacturer got it wrong polarity wise.

We do have 240volts at 10amps running so have to be careful!!!

No bad feelings intended.

Robert

Hi Peter,

In Canada and my guess is that it is the same in the U.S., when there is 3 prongs, the position of the "hot" wire is always the same compared to the ground (it is the small blade).

So when the ground pin is down (it depicts 2 "eyes" and the "mouth"), the "hot" is the smaller right eye and the neutral is the left eye.

Of course this is standard for domestic appliances because there are other NEMA plugs that have the 2 blades the same and I suppose it means that there is no dedicated way to plug the device.

This, provided that the electrician tied the right wire in the wall plug... There is a tool that one can buy here (not expensive) and if has a set of lights that indicates if all is connected correctly or not.

But then... How do one wires a IEC plug at the other end ? There must be a certain rule, depending if we are talking about 120V (hot and neutral) or 240V (hot + hot + ground)... Maybe it does not matter with a switching PSU, but does it for others ?

I agree: this is a nightmare...

Alain

This is still hot + neutral + ground (earth). How this is done varies wildly (per country and in some countries it varies in itself (like in the UK 5 means exist, IIRC)). If it were hot+hot I think the polarity would not matter over here; but it does just the same. :evil:

Peter

Hi Peter,

If you look at the typical electrical panel that we have here in Canada, you will see that each of the 2 tracks carries 120 volts. When 240V is required, the 240V breaker has twice the size o a regular 120V breaker, so it overlaps the 2 tracks, each of them going into a different wire.

Maybe it is just a matter of using the correct words to describe this, but a cable connected to a 240V breaker has 3 wires: 2 "hot" wires and the "ground". I know because I have tested some of them when installing a heating radiator (it requires 240V) here.

Alain

When we do such a thing, we have 400V. :) :)

It is not easy to find a good WikiPedia page about this. Yeah, Dutch ones like this : https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driefasenspanning
but the "English version of that" already comes up with this far more vague one : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-phase.
Anyway, for the English version concentrate on this phrase :

such as a 230/400 V system which provides 230 V between the neutral (centre hub) and any one of the phases

Side note : I am not sure whether really everybody has access to the two phase (or even three phase) system, but I'd say yes because often "higher current" apparatus require it (think electrical kitchen stove). And while we all might have acces to it, we mostly do not use it.
Below a plug for it.

Regards,
Peter

Expanding Ram drive from 15g to 25g works and definitely sounds better.

Those who havn't done this and have 32g Ram do it now.

I've reverted DRAM back to Auto as some 24/96 tracks skipped mid song. Mind you not sure if this was the issue.

New suggested Peter's 14393 settings do work for the better also on page 5 of this thread.

So few comments I wonder what some people are doing!!!!

Robert

Robert (and others)

I've read about this "expanding" the RAM-OS.  What is the process for doing this?  I have sufficient disk space and memory.

Ramesh

Email Peter and he will send you instructions.

Robert

After some modifications I'm now enjoying the 14393.0 version. The most important change has been to reduce the treble in my speakers by 3db. In my case I can adjust the level of the highs in the speakers, this way I managed to eliminate the excessive treble. I can imagine that if Peter could handle the software so it can regulate the treble, I think the 14393.0 version could be used without problems with a satisfying sound. The other change I've made has been the ClockRes to 5ms, otherwise the settings are Peter's ones.
I isolated the USB cable that goes from the Intona directly to the motherboard with an electrical tape in the same way that was previously isolated in the USB card and also have disconnected the grounding in the Audio Pc power cord. I know I have not the same computer as Peter (Stealth) but I can confirm that I have noticed a substantial improvement in SQ with all these changes.

Regards,
Juan

Juan great to see a new post. I had my earth disconnected on my computer but noticed clicks when connecting USB cables and was getting small tingles of static electricity from the case(especially when I touched the case with my cheek one day fiddling with cables). I've since reconnected the earth, all fixed.

Interesting you have reduced Clockres to 5ms. I'm about to try that, I have the odd HD 24/96 download that is skipping randomly throughout the album. I'm not convinced its not the download but havn't had skipping in the past on these tracks. This is since I expanded Ram from 15 to 25g but also tried Peter's new settings.

Robert

Tried changing Clockres from 15 to 10 then 5 then returned to 15ms. 15ms sounded the best with test files. Audible difference between the 3.

Robert

Hi Robert,

I've just built my new AudioPC and expanded the RAM-OS's to about 25GB and just started playing with 14393.  It sounds different to 10586 for sure, but I am not yet convinced it is entirely for the better.  Time will tell.

Anthony