XXHighEnd

Hi Peter,

Over the last few days I did an extensive comparison of SQ between the CD & the ripped ones, using XXHE 0.9y-3a. IMO the CD sound is significantly better in all respects. The Low Bass is tighter & deeper, mids are warm & deep & the high's are much more transparent. In fact if CD scores 10/10 ripped ones would score 6/10. The difference is too large.
Is there anyway to bridge this gap?

Arvind

how would man do that ??????????

simply play the CD with a CD Player rip the same CD & play it through XXHE. Then compare the SQ of both. I dont think there is anything so complicated about this.

Arvind

Well Arvind ... Let me start with telling you that I of course believe you. So, no problem there. What is a theoretical problem though, is that you seem to be out of line. Thus, I ditched my CD player ever costing 4K or so (a transport alone), and many more did with even much more costly players. None of us did this because playing music via a PC is more convenient, but because it sounds better. Way way better.

A part of the problem (I will call it my problem) is that I don't see how your system would not be "on par", which btw seems to be unrelated anyway (meaning : it doesn't matter much how good or pricey the chain is, PC playback -when done good- just is much better).

So ...

So let me try to tell you (call it teaching between quotes) what can be wrong with someone's perceivement of what's good and what's not.
Don't accept it without prejudice, but try to listen whether I can be right maybe ...

Generally (but this really is generally !) any more warmth means wrongness. No, don't disagree immediately, but try to follow what is going on; :)
Any not "tight" waves, or less directioned so to say (think of (additional !) reflections) will bring "warmth". I don't think this needs further explanation by itself. However, this means that "warrmth" as a discernable phenomenon is worth nothing. It is worth nothing because it may indicate just wrongness. Now :

The opposite of warmth is not "cold" or "sterile" or anything like that, no, it is tinnyness. Tinnyness is wrong, and it is recognizeable much better than warmth or a lack of that. Surprisingly, tinnyness is the most profound thing happening with computer playback. It can spring from many sources (starting with the external DAC opposed to the internal DAC we probably were used to with the CDP and which is MUCH more easy to let sound good). In the end this (tinnyness) was the very reason I started XXHighEnd.

I am not trying to tell that you won't hear this tinnyness or whatever - and while it actually is unrelated to this subject - I *do* try to tell you that warmth never is good ... why ? ... because tinnyness is NOT there (I hope you can follow). Tinnyness from the playback means (XX) is not there because, well, I say so. I know what it is and I spend some years on that. :yes: And thus :

What leaves is your perceived better warmth which cannot be. It can, but then because of other sources.
Now, in order to let you understand how I see warmth, I will try to tell you that this is about the micro detail adding up so much, that all the sterile (!) details become ... warrmth. Think of a nylon string. A nylon string is a sterile thing by itself, and without its normal warmth (of the guitar's cabinet and its harmonics) it may be an interesting sounding thingy (because of detail heard) but that doesn't mean it sounds natural. This needs *another* step of detail, and once that step is there the detail of all what you heard before is still there, but warmth is now added to it. For me this is totally clear, and btw not so difficult to prove by means of removing (and adding) a preamp;

The first thing a preamp does is adding warmth, and the second thing it does it removing detail. So, here warmth is traded for detail, and this is not good. However, without ever having removed the preamp, you never will know about the detail being in there. Try it !
Side note : I wrote similar to LydMekk two or so weeks back, because I expect him to have similar "problems" (or everybody else has them :)) but scratched that because of a too long post and me not finding it 100% appropriate in that case).

If the impedance relation is right, you really should try to remove the preamp in order to unerstand what I ever mean. Two things will happen :
1. Your jaw will drop at the detail you perceive, and you are sure you never heard something like that before;
2. Where has the bass gone.

Assumed (!!) that the impedance is correct, no brain cell in your head is going to tell you this is wrong. It can't be, because the preamp is just an additional thing, and the really ONLY thing it can do is destroy. Keep in mind : it has a "repair" function as well : impedance mismatch otherwise, but this was not assumed.
Btw, don't do this when you have to attenuate more than 30dB and only do it when you have a 24 bit DAC.

Where has the bas gone ? ha ! where has the bas gone the preamp added, and which you got used to.

Once you have this experience (and reference !) you will learn that detail comes forward because bass is removed. Or anyway this is one reason to let emerge detail. What I talked about earlier (the nylon string) works the other way around : warmth (not bassy sound) *adds* because of more detail. So, listen carefully to that "complete without bass" sound coming from your system without preamp, learns (or teaches you) that all the warmth you were used to before, was fake. It didn't allow for perceiving individual vibes from bass strings, or hearing the individual tones from a bass chord like Roger Waters may play it. Suddenly you hear instruments, and things in the room NOT moving before, now move (not spread bass waves have more power).


Quite a long story, and maybe highly pretentious while actually knowing nothing other than what you wrote, but ... I combine it with your earlier complaints, and think that is justified.
On a side not : I am not trying to tell you that I "listen better" than you or anything, what I do say though is :
1. I am working for quite some years on this, and I *know* how contradictionary things may work out;
2. I just recognize your problems, and recognize the possible causes.

I said it before : the foremost reason is impedance problems. You response to that was "but everything is from the same brand" (similar), so that can't be it. Well, I wouldn't be too sure of that, when you can't find a cause elsewhere;
If things sound harsh, no matter a version of XX does it, you will have an impedance problem *or* something which is even more clear (and too clear to even mention) : a jittery interface. Now, the problem with jitter is that you can't define in advance whether it works out for the good or for the better. Try Q2 and Q3 (keep in mind that it stays bit perfect) and you know what it does (somewhere). And don't tell me you don't hear a difference !

In between the lines, but very good to always have in mind, when things cannot be made consistent (for reasoning out the cause), something is very wrong. For example, very good bass with harsh highs don't go along (unless one doesn't know what very good bass actually is). However, "good bass" (which is different from very good) with not harsh highs do go along, like with the preamp example. One problem : the preamp is wrong, and it masks the real problem. The other way around can happen just the same : harsh highs with good bass, just caused by the preamp this time (impedance problem). Or what about sibilance ? just use a TVC and you know what I mean. Or use a class D to "achieve" that. Use a preamp with it, and you may never notice it.

All 'n all :

Since the preamp is a. an ever influencing piece of equipment that b. can be left out under conditions which c. I don't use at having the most good sound, there is -for now- no reason to believe that everything will be OK at your side. This means (IMHO) that one of the things to do is try what happens at removing the preamp. For sure you will learn something of it. For example, if you perceive less harsh highs in that case, there is (I think) no way to reason out the preamp made things better to that respect. In order to understand this, keep in mind that digital is still digital, and that a now "possibly too much digital" sound will pass right to your main amps, and if that sounds better for the highs, something *must* be wrong. The other way around, if "digital" now starts to be unbearable because of harshness, quite another thing will be completely wrong, most probably dedicated to the DAC (of course, normally the software could be blamed as well, but then better first come over and listen at my place :yes:).

Lastly for now : while removing the preamp might be a step you just don't want to make (for your own reasons), try to apply this simple test :
Get your current "soundcard" out of the way (was it the OffRamp ?) and use your motherboard's sound device instead (don't forget to set that to "Needs 32 bits"). What do you hear ? no difference ? in that case something must be wrong with your ears, which we both don't believe nor expect. So, you will hear a difference. What is it ?

The fun is, no matter what it is you hear for a difference, it is outside of XX and all is again bit perfect.
Now, supposed the mobo's device doesn't sound better, is it imagineable that the OffRamp can be exchanged by something which outbetters it ? or from an other angle : is it imagineable that USB might not be the best connection in the first place ?
I know your answers : Yes and Yes. And because this is so, you (for now) must trust me that you are bugged with something outside of XX.

Ok, you didn't say or even suggest it is XX, but for me it is obvious that you think so, and you are entitled to. Also, you might be just questioning whether "PC playback" can ever get close to what you are used to with the CDP. Please trust me : don't rest until you threw your CDP out of the window. I mean it !

I could have started with saying "but USB is not the best connection for SQ" and leave it to that. But please try to investigate it, and do this by the same means I suggested : the mobo's sound device. It may sound better !

Sorry for a way long post (and probably many typos) ... just tryting to help.
Peter

Hi Peter,

Thanks for the suggestions. I propose to go in this sequence.a. Try the laptop sound card, removing the OffRamp. b.Remove the preamp from the circuit.
BTW how do you connect your PC to the DAC? Do you use XX for volume control?

I am going to be out on vacation for a week so will try it on my return.

Arvind

Yes, XX for volume control. Start way low with it ! (like -80dB and still be careful). Keep in mind : when you need to attenuate beyond 48dB you will start to loose resolution. Give it 18 or 24 dB more and you will start to hear it for sure. So let's say that if you need -72dB it can't be good anymore. If the DAC is 16 bits only, you really shouldn't go under -24dB.

Furthermore, try to use as short interlinks as possible (DAC Out -> Main amps in). Thus, might you not have enough "drive" from the DAC, the shorther the interlink, the better.

Also keep in mind you must assume there won't be enough drive. So, this will be a first reason not have enough punch (or persisting bass for that matter). Try to look through that.
From here, try to interpret the difference between the OffRamp and the mobo's device. But also (and this might be the most important) they to hear -while not hearing it anymore - what the preamp does. Don't A/B, just listen for a longer while.
Assumed you will be hearing many many more details and stuff, next try to interpret this with regards to your general complaints (like harshness, assumed you still may be finding things to be too harsh). At this interpreting, keep in your mind that "not enough drive" will only make things (sound) more direct. It *is* more direct of course (no filtering from the preamp), but might harshness go less, you might proceed from there (at your interpretation of it all).

Lastly -enough drive or not- try to hear the way more detail in the bass, and next try to see through everything and start to wonder how in the world you may be able to get that detail *with* you preamp. I mean this not much in general, but merely how the chain would be able to pertain the detail while at the same time going warmer (the fun here is, *if* you don't have enough drive, you will be in lack of warmth). You will see (I hope) that adding the kind of warmth you now complain about, will remove the detail again. This, while you should have both !!

At this stage (I mean, after you tried this) it may get complicated to point to the cause, assumed you will have not enough drive (you could try to blame the DAC but this is not honest, because your DAC assumes a preamp). BUT, you will have learned what is in the music, and you will be hunting the combination of detail and warmth forever (with a good sense of knowing it can be done).
Maybe (and this is what I hope) you can determine an absolute best out of the mobo's device and the OffRamp, for detail and anything you can think of BUT warmth. Next it should be so that the best is the most warm, with recognizing it is caused by detail (and the harmonics will do this !!).

Something to look forward to for after your vacation ! ... as I look forward to your results.
Peter


PS: Try to imagine how indeed more detail brings more warmth (harmonics) while the nylon string so nicely "buzzes". The other way around, less detail will not show those harmonics, but it will also smear highs. Effect ? again more warm. But this time without details ... there will be no such thing as buzzing as how I mean to express it, except for buzzing around the room (bad placement, not fixed).

HI Peter,

I problem I foresee is the connection between my laptop & the DAC. DAC input is only AES/EBU. So how do I go about doing it? My Laptop is Sony Vaio.

I cant go shorter than 2 mtrs interconnect between DAC & amps.

Arvind

Yep, that would be a problem. It is not difficult to tweak with a little soldering BUT we better do not do that because results may become unreliable because of it (but if you really want to know I can unscrew a home made adapter I made once and tell you).

So, bad luck !
This leaves the OffRamp on its own, and it just means it will be harder for you to see through because of combining (now not possible).
But then it is only harder, not impossible. As said, you'll have good ears anyway and the only tough thing is the proper interpretation of the difference you will hear ("there is this difference, but what causes it ?").

Oh well, let's say a vacation is more important anyway. :swoon:

Hi Peter,

Back fresh from vacation to attack the SQ issue. Ok, now as suggested by you I removed the preamp from the circuit & connected the DAC directly to the amps. Ofcourse I had to keep the off ramp due to the connection issue discussed earlier. To my surprise there is a very faint sound from the speakers; which means the DAC cannot drive the amps even with XXHE on 0 dB. According to this I have to keep the preamp in the circuit.

Arvind

Well, bad luck again ! Of course a(n active) preamp not only attenuates, it also amplifies. So I guess this is not so much a matter of "not enough drive" but merely "not enough juice". I didn't think about that. :sorry:

I must honestly say though, it has a reason I didn't respond earlier. I mean I (still) think it is strange the sound doesn't blast from your speakers. I may not know enough about this, but I would say an active preamp doesn't amplify *that* much, that now you're almost without sound ! So, "no drive" is something else and it would disturb the frequency response balance; it doesn't make everything real faint (low volume).

Can't you use headphones ? Theoretically (ok, my) whether it is not enough juice or no drive, headphones just match that.
Btw, I myself would never use headphones to really judge everything (room modes/reflections being too important), but in this case I might try. Remember it is about relative aspects, and for sure harsness would come out.

Maybe for now don't bother too much, and maybe it is better to wait for the next version. I am not sure yet, but I think SQ may be different from that.

Peter

Hi Peter,

No possibility of headphones; there are no jacks & I dont possess one too. Guess I have to wait for the new version.

I too am surprised why the volume is so low; almost unaudible.

Arvind

hmm usually a preamp would attenuate, but I wouldn't think the preamp out of the system would be the factor here.  I mean, isn't the CDP going through the same preamp?  I'm betting something isn't right in the computer/soundcard setup, or going through all the digit jumps, hmm offramp.  Sounds like the CDP is more direct.  I recently hooked up my Sony SCD-1; it too also sounds pretty good/different (it used to be my reference and loved it against lots of more costly things friends brought over), but I like XXHE much better.  XXHE is clearly larger soundstage (especially front to back), much better bass, lyrics more intelligible, separation of instruments/voices natural, lower distortion/glare ... lately XXHE has just moved into the 'I haven't heard this much awesome evar' category.  If you're not getting that I'd say something is more wrong than a preamp.

OK people, here is what I did:
Given:
1) Took CD and ripped one track to hard drive using EAC in .flac format
2) Found and downloaded the same track from web in mp3 format (256 Kbit/s)
3) Prepared the same CD in CD-Player (a cheap one, just more than 100 USD)
Scenario:
Then I listened over headphones first 2 variants via XXHighend latest version unattended via USB connection to my Dr.DAC2 external DAC. And after that listened to 3rd variant via my cheap CD player via digital coax connection to the same DAC.
Conclusions:
1) Sound level the same with any variant.
2) Soundstage - XXHighend differs from CD player - both very close. No dislikes, no preferences.
3) .flac and CD track seem clearer than .mp3 - this is fine knowing what is mp3.
4) CD player actually gives the cleanest reproduction, but really speaking if I did a blind test, I would not differ what is playing CD player or XXhighend with flac or mp3.
Final word:
Well, either CD player is bad or XXHighend is great.
At last:
Several weeks have been listening to both CD player and XX also over my speakers - so both sources sound amazing to me. So, actually cannot say that XX is so much different from external CD player, it does pretty well in my setup. See details in signature.

Hi Ivo - Thanks for this report.

Since you have this track probably still on your mind, and especially thinking of the "cleanness" of either playback means, what changes on the XX side if you put your Q2-Q5 to 0 instead of 15 ? Just give it one run and try to judge what you hear for a difference ...

If you want of course !

Peter

Hi Guys,

In my set up I am still finding CD sounding much better than XXHE. Dont know if it is the Soundcard (Off Ramp) or some other factor influencing this. Other than the laptop & sound card the rest of the equipments are the same in both comparison. I have asked a friend to lend me his Empirical Audio Overdrive DAC to do a comparison, maybe it is the DAC which makes it sound different. The reason why I say this is that with the CD Transport it uses a different input ( EMM Proprietary Link) whereas with the Off Ramp it is AES/EBU. This may make some difference.

Just trying to eliminate the variables.

Arvind

Arvind, I have been thinking (sometimes I try :yes:) ... So, a few things :

First off, of course the OffRamp makes a difference. It will produce a totally different jitter signature. And by now I am sorry I never tried it for its musical merits when I had it here ...
Anyway, "good" or "bad" there will be a difference already because of that.

Next, although the OffRamp has been created just to eliminate jitter as good as possible, BUT, it is there in the first place to provide a USB connection ... USB is commonly known to have the worst jitter out of everything. Please read this carefully, because everything is relative, so to say, but this all starts with "you" wanting an USB connection. Thus, once you want that, a device like the OffRamp should be a good choice because it eliminates jitter from that jittery connection as good as possible. Note that I am not talking "jitter signatures" now, but just "amount of". Anyway, and theoretically, avoiding USB is always better to start with, which by itself of course doesn't tell anything about your other connection. It may be full of jitter also, but it doesn't "start off" with it, because it is not USB.
I hope you can follow ...

Then, you must try this :
Grab a piano piece of which you think it is a good recording. Use XXHE and set Q2 and Q3 (also Q4 and Q5) to 0. Your sig says you have that anyway. Now listen closely to the dryness of the piano (best have a wing btw). If you have the feeling it may sound too dry to your likings, you have a good test recording;
Now slide Q2 and Q3 up to 30 ... (not one by one and listen in between, just both in one go and then listen)
Do you hear a difference ?
If not, that might be your "problem", because it tells that XXHighEnd isn't able to perform its influence (remember, in the bit perfect domain always). By itself this may be stated as a good thing, because the software doesn't influence. However, *now* you are completely depended on the chain after the software, and when it's "bad" it stays like that, but when it's good it stays like that too. One small problem, nothing is "good" (read : not ready for improvement), and *thus* we must theoretically state it is bad.

But if you do hear a difference this is not the "problem". Let me know what you hear in this case.

Peter

Remember also, when it comes to usb, lots of things can influence sound quality.  When I was running usb straight into my Stello usb dac, which usb port out of the computer made a big difference, also, what usb cable I used made a big difference (I ended up liking a no name silver braided usb cable over many other tries, including an optical usb cable with battery power).  I ended up dropping usb because of these easily influenced differences.  Still, it never really sounded bad and beat out my CDP.

Have you tried other computer players (foobar, jrivers?) do they sound the same as xxhe? that may be telling about lack of influence.

I did compare XX vs Foobar vs XMPLay all in wasapi mode only running Vista laptop.
So, I like the players in this order:
XX
XMPlay
Foobar

XX sounds to me warmer and more detailed than XMPLay. However the latter is also very nice. Foobar is the worst and I do not like its wasapi sound. I have heard they have buggy wasapi code and this is probably why the sound is at the last place for me.
So, again in my setup XX and XMPLay are very close, would be interesting to hear what others feel on this?

Why a conversion to a compressed format (i know lossless but ..) and not simple to .wav? EAC setting ok?

Time to introduce new functionality in XX: real time cd play - and ripping functionality.

First your randomizing wish ... :)

Please try with Q settings= 4/0/0/0/0 and report back. Once I tried XMPlay and found it very similar to Foobar.

I use Foobar a lot for fast listening thru an album.

Foobar is really great, but NOT for SQ.
It sounds really flat, boring and without attitude.
Noticeable in seconds.

So without XX, I would still be using a CD-player. :yes:

to Telstar:

Do not get what you mean?
XX for me is number1 with any settings for Qs. I do not use 4/0/0/0/0 as I hear periodic hiss in my speakers/phones? If I use 14/0/0/0/0 or my sig. settings then no hiss.
XMPlay is better than Foobar.

Have you optimized your computer.  (Did your laptop come loaded down with a bunch of programs running/spyware,,, they seem to always sell em with a bunch of cr*p running).  Does DPC latency checker show any spiking anomalies?  Trying to understand what you mean by periodic hiss at lower Q settings?  When I was running an acer laptop I did a clean install from xp to vista.  I'd really recommend doing a clean install to Windows 7 (just recently put that on the same laptop, my daughters now, and it runs great; laptop is like 3 years old now).  This same laptop, when I was running it, had a faint buzz when I played it plugged in, I ended up shorting the plug (danger will robinson; you're on your own here) and the buzz went away, (laptop sounded better plugged in than running off battery, but needed plug shorted).  I know others have said the same thing about noise coming through speakers when using laptops.
http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml

Hi Peter,

Being a totally rock guy finding a piano piece is really tough. So the next best was to use Phil Collins- Against all odds, which has some piano piece. Anyway the result of setting Q2 & 3 to 30 is as follows:
The low bass has become more prominent. The mids are about the same but the highs have become sharper (not in a disturbing way)

I hope this helps.

Arvind

to SeVeReD:

Yes, my laptop is running the first year. I have not reinstalled it, but I have hardly stopped and removed anything unneeded. So, DPC latency checker shows < 100 mikros and there are no spikes. My profession is IT, so I know what I am doing, especially in performance tuning.
What I think would be even great is to take fresh Vista install and work on it using "vlite" approach. See http://www.vlite.net. My other home PC is running XP SP3 (nlited version: http://www.nliteos.com/) and it is damn fast and jumping, it is working much lighter than original install. I just do not listen to music on it since there is Vista with its Wasapi.

Your signature says 14/15/15/0/0.
I said to try 4/0/0/0/0 because the other Q can make the sound too smooth, less realistic. Q0=4 is my favourite, but 14 is also very good. If the comparison was this, no need to do another one.

Hi Arvind,

Well, this helps to the sense you DAC is not immune to XX's influences. So we know that now. But further ?

I wish I had some more constructive help om this. But please keep in mind, on my part this is not about the sound quality of XXHighEnd, hence I am not defending that. It *is* about your literal call for help, combined with the -what seems fact- it can't be so that in anyone's case XX doesn't sound better than the CD Player, *or* you would be the first case I know of.

At this moment this leaves us with the indeed different connections and my perception of USB in general; Maybe this brings us back to the SPDIF connection with the laptop's soundcard. But before we proceed on this : please keep in mind that generally this is no good at all. But remember, so far this is about recognizing differences hence reasoning out where the "culprit" (that assumed) is.

The maybe cheapest solution to go from coax SPDIF to AES/EBU is this : http://www.neutrik.com/fl/en/video/210_2044239418/NADITBNC-M_detail.aspx but note it also needs an RCA to BNC adapter. Or worse, a whatever jack the laptop requires - to BNC which may not exist, and thus that jack to RCA and next RCA to BNC.
To do real good there's something like this http://www.performanceaudio.com/cgi/product_view.cgi?products_id=2909 but by time you buy that, you had better bought a new PC.

I don't know ...



May it help, my own experiences on USB vs SPDIF, both to the same DAC (that accepting both) :
- SPDIF is more fresh (USB more muffled);
- USB expresses more bass, though I was never sure it is the *right* bass;
- USB sounds more "friendly" but in the end there is no joy in listening. I always expressed it as : the musicians don't want to perform for you. Instead they only play.

FWIW, this DAC internally converts USB to SPDIF, so any verdict is dangerous.

Also, and I don't want to confuse, there's a user around in here with laptop and OffRamp who is only raving about "XXHighEnd playback", and has an MSB Platinum behind it (only indicating you both should be in the same leage).
I guess some things are too difficult to solve from a distance, and this seems to be one of them.

Peter :cry:

Hi Peter,

I can understand the difficulty, especially from a distance, however I have faith in this technology, especially on XXHE & I will leave no stone unturned to make this successful. Let me go about eliminating some components/connectors & come to the root cause of this problem.

Arvind