XXHighEnd Model 0.9z-4-1

[Flecko]

Well, after a short spell with Mixed, I'm back to Straight Contiguous. Mixed is very easy on the ear but there is a loss of 'focus' (a bit like using RAMDisk). Straight Contiguous brings this focus back and the bass becomes more tuneful - but as before, I end up just wanting more of this beautiful bass (with Mixed, I have no desire for extra bass).

Did you tried scheme2 with mixed? scheme 3 sounds a little muddy compared to scheme2. In my system, mixed is still best sounding. I preceive the highs as more present with better resolution. Also all frequencies are more coherent.

[PeterSt]

Now I'm not entirely sure of everything Peter means by "Headroom" but I think volume must have something to do with it.

I meant the general headroom "before things go wrong". Like it doesn't matter much what you dial in, it always goes ok, or at least isn't suddenly worse by a great margin. That's why I referred to vinyl ... this always sounds good (not thinking about other aspects).

[manisandher]

Further to my latest post in the PurePower thread: http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=1445.msg16281;topicseen#msg16281, I've had a few thoughts about Special vs. Adaptive.

I have a question though: Is Special acting as some kind of 'filter', filtering out the 'edginess' from the sound? I ask this because my PP2000 unit in battery mode seems to be having a very similar affect on the sound. Could it therefore be possible that with Special, we are actually losing resolution? When in fact the root cause of the problem may be something else, e.g. mains supply?

Mani.

[BrianG]

Now I'm not entirely sure of everything Peter means by "Headroom" but I think volume must have something to do with it.

Interesting explanation of the term "headroom" when relating to analogue and digital recording:

In the analogue recording world, we are used to the idea that there is a nominal working level -- say 0VU or +4dBu -- but that it is permissible for signals to exceed this level by a certain amount called the headroom. On an analogue tape recorder, for example, the signal level can be increased well beyond the nominal line-up level and although it will become increasingly distorted as the tape begins to saturate, it will probably remain acceptable (even desirable in some cases).
Digital systems have no headroom as such -- the quantising levels are evenly spaced from the first to the last, and then they stop. Consequently, a suitable amount of headroom has to be created by defining and aligning the system such that the nominal operating level is some way below the maximum peak level. This allows the analogue metering on a sound desk, for example, to be related in some meaningful way to the recording level on the digital recorder.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun98/articles/digital2.html


So this is "mostly" an analogue term to describe how far you can "push" something beyond the specified limit before it breaks. With digital once you count further than 16bits the "bit" that takes you over sends the output from max to min (or something like that).

[PeterSt]

Most certainly NOT true. But it depends ...

When transients are very steep (and they are much steeper than you can imagine), any not so well designed DAC may overshoot up to its voltage rails. So, all was designed to let all fit (digital vs analogue domain), but the steep transient implies a higher analogue voltage than "flat" 1:1 conversion would tell. The result : clipping (on the PSU).

When we "upscale" in digital, this goes even further. Here a similar problem occurs when no digital headroom is there (the full maximum digital dynamic range is utilized), while the transient again urges for going up further in digital once some nice interpolation is used to inject more samples (upsampling). *Now* the problem will be that the digital headroom is exceeded, and something must be done about it.

Solution : lower the digital level before it can occur.
For XXHighEnd this means activating Peak Extenstion (together with Arc Prediction, which is this upscaling).

So this is "mostly" an analogue term to describe how far you can "push" something beyond the specified limit before it breaks

Beyond ?

(I'm in some mood ! haha)

[Flecko]

I have a question though: Is Special acting as some kind of 'filter', filtering out the 'edginess' from the sound? I ask this because my PP2000 unit in battery mode seems to be having a very similar affect on the sound. Could it therefore be possible that with Special, we are actually losing resolution?

my experience with adaptive and special mode is like that. Special sounds softer and with more 3D sound stage. Adaptive has a more powerfull sound with less resolution. Combining the sound of special and adaptive would be nice. The power and dynamic of adaptive combined with the resolution and 3D sound of special.

[SlickenSmooth]

Exactly! I miss the edginess you're talking about. It's too smooth at times! Although the clarity, detail, resolution and speed is really much superior to my previous CD player (Audio Research CD5), it lacks the body, foundation and presence of the CD player... When xxhighend can do this, then we have xx 1.0 imho..

[Scroobius]

OK I have been listening to 4-1 since it was posted (literally) and it is such a massive improvement in my system it is difficult to understand how it was possible. Anyway there is no going back but I have to say there is one area where there is a question mark for me and that is the base. 4-0 was very dry (in my system) if there was deep base on a recording then it would be heard but otherwise not much happening "down there". I have to say 4-1 sounds a bit over lively and under damped. Is this my imagination? in terms of dryness somewhere between 4-0 and 4-1 would be better.

Is this heresy?

Well it is a small point because the quality of 4-1 is just sublime.

All the best

Paul C

[BrianG]

Beyond ?

(I'm in some mood ! haha)

I think Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (1694–1773), had a nice way of putting it:

The sure characteristic of a sound and strong mind is, to find, in everything, those certain bounds, quos ultra citrave nequit consistere rectum (beyond which no right can exist). These boundaries are marked out by a very fine line, which only good sense and attention can discover; it is much too fine for vulgar eyes. In manners, this line is good breeding; beyond it, is troublesome ceremony; short of it, is unbecoming negligence and inattention. In morals, it divides ostentatious Puritanism from criminal relaxation; in religion, superstition from impiety; and, in short, every virtue from its kindred vice or weakness 

 

[PeterSt]

Does everybody agree that my enlgish is better ?
haha

Btw Brian, sorry about the earlier response. I'm really not like that I guess. But that mood I was in ...


PS:

Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (1694–1773)

Is that the one from the couches ?

[BrianG]

 

"Sweet, crazy conversations full of half sentences, daydreams and misunderstandings more thrilling than understanding could ever be."
— Toni Morrison 

I think this is close

[JohanZ]

Does everybody agree that my enlgish is better ?

Enlgish=English

[BrianG]

I installed more memory so my total is 8gigs and my SFS settings are:

SC = 320
MC = 320
M = 500

I was moving towards SC as the one I liked the most but with the big SFS for mixed the tide is shifting to mixed.  Just spent the afternoon listening to mixed and it was a close call between the two and it was becoming difficult to split SC from MC so more listening required.  I used the Beatles song "Oh Darling" as the reference between settings and the difference was very easy to hear especially as Paul growls his way through the song.

[wushuliu]

Just want to say that I reluctantly installed z41 today; I've found the last few versions to be more or less similar provided I played with all the settings enough and I got very tired of all the buttons and options and settings. Felt like a dog chasing his tail . But I thought I would give one more try with the new one anyway.

Well, well, well, what do you know. IT IS THE BEST XXHE VERSION I HAVE HEARD YET!

Analog is indeed the word. I have not changed any settings yet.  I have no intention. Great Job Peter!
  Maybe you should offer a streamlined version of z41 without
so many settings and options that would be more 'accessible' and user-friendly.

Also this was the first version for me to install without any problems. Another big plus!

Now please please please make this version 1.0 and call it a day! You've earned it!

[Telstar]

I'm having troubles finding the best sound from this version, or at least one that does better than z3 on my dedicated pc.

So far z3 with:
on ramdisk (copy to xxhe enabled)
scheme3
SFS 200mb
scheme3

sounds cleaner and more "right" than z4.1 with:
on SSC (copy to xxhe enabled)
scheme3
SFS 200mb (cant make it higher)
MC (mixed only sounded horrible, SC cant do 200mb unless i raise ram and/or remove the ramdisk but then i cant compare AB)
clock 1ms

I CANNOT disable services or it shuts down console.jp and i get no sound at all. So I think that for systems with much more memory and no layer something like 500mb SC and all services down, z4.1 CAN sound better.

Edit: the differences are subtle, both my and my SO cant say what's different but we both prefer the older version.