0.9y-7

[GerardA]

Sorry, Milliseconds of course.
I'll type over the complete list tonight for your info/fun.
Adaptive mode works like you explained with lowering the buffersize (in my case to 256).
Special mode worked before, I'll try to find the old log!
And of course I'll try to make it work again and write down all the settings.
After that the Wife Acceptance test!

[PeterSt]

Ok. But make that milliseconds microseconds, and I will think of believing it. Haha.

[GerardA]

OK, I'll make it microseconds, but that's as far as I'll go!

[PeterSt]

Just for fun :

1 / 176400 = 0.00000566893. This times 88 = 0.00049886584.

I guess that is 498 microseconds.
But we'll see when you get home.

[GerardA]

Maybe: 1 / 48000 * 88 samples * 2 channels = 3,67 ms ? 

[GerardA]

OK, here are the results:

        3.6 ms  5.6 ms  9.6 ms 13.6 ms 17.6 ms  25.6 ms  37.6 ms
44      88       176     352      529       705       1058      1587
48      96       192     384      576       768       1152      1728
88     176       352     705    1058      1411       2116     3175
96     192       384     768    1152      1536       2304     3456
192    384      768    1536    2304      3072        313      2617

So these are the samples.
What is the buffersize with  these????

[PeterSt]

Ok Gerard - Try 48 and 96, and anything else that shows up in XXHE. Ok ?

[GerardA]

Hi Peter,

I checked the old log files and on 21/2/2010 all logs said special mode.
Does the data give any clue to what my settings were?


Name wanted  : PHASE 24 FW (0) MC Out >> #spdifpcmout01  Number of KS devices found : 1
o
Filter found : \\?\tt1394_enum#tt1394_avs_000aac0400#000aac0700cd6917#{6994ad04-93ef-11d0-a3cc-00a0c9223196}\spdifpcmout01
Name attempt : PHASE 24 FW (0) MC Out ** Found ** ** Succeeded ! **
No ambiguous devices found.
-13
-14
-15
-16
Data-1 : 0.34  Data-2 : 34.1  Data-3 : 8173  Data-4 : 1025  Data-5 : 1024
-17
-18
-19
-28
-29 (Start Playback)
Special Mode !

[PeterSt]

No, sorry. Only that you applied 1024 samples, but not with which buffer. And you seem to have a few there.
Of course it must have been one which allows the 1024 (which the lower buffer sizes won't I think). But even if you would have found the in XXHighEnd set buffer size, it still wouldn't say much about the driver's buffer size. Notice though that only a few match the XX suggestions, and maybe you recall to have chosen matching ones (which is what I would have done). This makes the list of possibilities smaller ...

[boleary]

Finally had an opportunity to hear Adaptive Mode yesterday. My experience is similar to GerardA's: Adaptive mode presents on my system with too much detail at the expense of the more "organic" sound that I get with 9y-5.06. ( BTW normal mode with 9y-5.06 sounds better here than normal mode on all updates since the "Peak Extension" checkbox was created.)

Obviously, as Peter continues to hone in on the best sound for his NOS dac, folks like myself, using old school stuff, my OS MSB dac was new in 2002, will not be able to experience all the refinements. This is not to say that my experience of XX isn't "worthwhile", cause the sound that I'm getting here with 9y-5.06, given my equipment, is really wonderful.

I have a hunch that one significant reason that Adaptive mode sounds too "detailed" and less "organic" is that my means of usb/spdif conversion just adds to much jitter which then becomes amplified with "more detail".  Will be able to test this theory when I finally receive that frickin' Hiface gizmo that, as it turns out, once was lost but now is found!

Question for GerardA and Peter :

I'm afraid you mess things up a bit (I didn't say you make a mess of it, haha);
If you have a setting of 88 samples in the Terratec, you can not use that for adaptive mode. Why ? well, because I did not take that into account, and there is no matching setting for it in XXHighEnd (I could add it though).

Now, 88 samples would be a very strange value (but it could be). Similarly, 3.6 or whatever seconds latency is a. way too high to exist in reality (I mean, what would the poor Pro guys doing with that) and b. never matches your 88 number. I am not sure which of the two to believe, but I tend to believe neither./quote]

What are you guys talking about here? Isn't the sampling frequency necessarily 88.2 when using 2x Arc Prediction or are you referring to something else? Not being quite the GEEK as others around here, I'm sorely challenged trying to follow these conversations.....

[PeterSt]

Well, you could be right, but remember, it is my own idea about it, and this is not proven right, yet .

Another thing : I wouldn't be so sure your MSB isn't oversampling, although it depends on the model if and how much (no, don't let me look it up, because if their website is as it ever was ... the worst).

IMHHHO you have one of the best DACs around ... I probably would have chosen that, weren't it that, well, today they oversample (a little only).

What are you guys talking about here? Isn't the sampling frequency necessarily 88.2 when using 2x Arc Prediction or are you referring to something else?

Uhm, what you say is quite correct, but this is about 88200 samples, while I (and Gerard's driver) talk about 88 ...

Peter

[boleary]

  Well, I spoke with the MSB folks a while ago and they confirmed that my DAC is a delta-sigma, so I have presumed that it must be oversampling. It does sound very good. The original op-amps were replaced with B.B. 627's.

[GerardA]

Hi Boleary,

One way I'm glad you confirm my problem...
I hoped to receive my Hiface yesterday, but somewhere a delay happened.
With the Hiface at least we're sure it's not the jitter that gives us the jitters.

The 88 means that for the terratec 88 samples are used in the buffer which is an equivalent of 3.6 milliseconds.
If one sample has 2 bytes of 8 bits and two channels then I guess the buffersize is 2*2*8*88 = 2816 but I'm not sure of that, let alone if this can be handled the right way, and what setting would be best.

I hoped to get some quidance, because I really want the special-mode sound back that I (we) had with 9y-5-6!
Maybe 9y-8 can do the trick, gonna try that now.

[GerardA]

Well 9y8 is really stable, no cpu-problems.
Soundwise it's the same like before.
Like a resonance somewhere between 2 and 8 kHz which especially vibrates in high female voices.
I think now it's not really in the transients but more in the vowels (klinkers) and long notes of violins and brass.
Maybe its a cone breakup of my metal cones...
Hope you can find something Peter!

[boleary]

Thanks GerardA, guess i know what to expect with 9y-8. Will be anxious to hear your experience with the Hiface. I think I'll have mine by the end of this week, hopefully. One thing I've noticed with Adaptive mode is that it sounds better with orchestral classical music, whereas it definitely has issues with the higher frequencies of vocal singer/songwriter stuff (my favorite).