My first Windows 8 experience

[PeterSt]

First to the conclusion : I don't know.

On a side note : Not so easy to judge because I can't use the same PC as my Audio PC for it. Sound is different because of that anyway.

Degree of happyness : Low.

Hmm ...

Why did this turn out to be so different than my expectations were ?

My first idea : Windows 8 ain't right. But I can be more sure about that only after some explicit testing around this. Indications are :

DPC Latency Checker has to be rewritten for W8 (or has been by now - I didn't follow this, but read it a while back).

Same seems to count for Window Task Manager and everything which observes CPU usage; or it is not correct what we see, or it is not correct what happens. But an example is : The "Cool when Idle" parameter. When this is turned off as advised, we see a CPU usage as per the frequency of the processor; whether I can't see the right thing or whether it isn't right - it doesn't matter because I can't "see". Furthermore, *what* we see is very strange and no matter what it seems an indication that deep down things are not right in there. Hard to explain - look for yourself.

I see disk I/O on the OS disk I don't like. Must be relatively huge as well, because I don't see any disk I/O from the playback. That by itself is wrong too.

It is way way too easy to incur for "scratching" as I call it, which means something like moving the needle over the LP from start to finish. So, not DJ scratching, but a "scratching sound". Priorities must have changed or whatever it is, and all feels like a similar change (for the worse) which happened when going from Vista to W7.

The worst of it all seems to be that internally the "audio words" seem to be able to get out of sync. A crazy thing though : not on the byte level, but on the bit level.
We all know about those "ticks" by now, right ? Well, with W8 it will happen that sound stalls and when it proceeds suddenly ticks are there. This is new to me. Also new is that the ticks can vary in level vastly. Up to them having sheer SPL (so to speak).

The response of close to everything indicates an additional (new) layer to me. A bit tough to explain without seeing it happing, but think about some indication (mouse pointer) that a search has finished its work, but that it takes up to 3 seconds before the result shows. Not because something is slow, but because it has to be processed by some additional layer(s).

All indicates that the "normal" Windows Desktop *is* such a new layer. The scratching sound which can happen at playback, is exactly the same when e.g. a window is moved from position.

Similarly I think I have found that the "no nonsense" output to the bare monitor's screen, is not that anymore; it has become a window itself which again is that layer (or *again* a layer). Proof of this for myself is the impossibility of having a Wallpaper shown, but which is visible briefly after all when our normal Unattended Playback mode is quit; Something overlays it.
Or what about the three times flashing of everything (like "Wait for services to stop") when playback starts.
Press Alt-u and again see the OSD text flashing. This can-not-be- when this were the native monitor screen as intended - not without the text disappearing at all (which we will recognize from moving a window over that text and then it's gone until a refresh of it occurs).

Do notice that keeping any window alive is the most demanding and earlier test from me showed a 10,000 times more slow (like when writing the OSD Running Time).
Writing this I even recall the scratching sound now, doing this all in the wrong "modus" ...

The sound.

What to say. Bass seems as prominent as W7 RTM. Highs ... can't judge them really. But if anything they have a nature. This is less audible with normal, say Jazz music (but cymbals sound more metal), but ever the better with ambient. No silent synthesizers seem to exist and all carry the flavor of a synthesizer. Yea, well, how to explain *that*. A high pitched sort of veil over all. Not blooming.

Left/Right information or separation seems to have improved. But how can it have. As if some roughness rides on each normal wave with sharp peaks, and those peaks ar nicely seperately audible L/R.

There was no single moment of fun this first sesssion. Only strangenesses. Interpretation whether is could be correct what I heard. Seems more detailed but the detail is destroyed throughout by the veil. I forgot which male voice it was, but it sounded like an annoying bag pipe to me.

More L/R but also far away.

Could not shut off "Cool when Idle" because I didn't trust that.

Very important : whatever I set and did, it didn't change a thing. But if anything, highering the latency in the NOS1 Driver Control Panel from 4 to 16 seemed to improve somewhat. Until right there my perceived "bit shifting" occurred (several times) and I set it back to 12ms. Could be the NOS1 driver, from which I -btw- already heard that the underlaying kernel stuff could cause trouble at 16ms. But bit shifts ? looks dangerous to me.

Generally the sound is too "impressing". I don't know the proper word for it, but it's in the area of tyering. Not harsh, but a constant emphasis on things which should not be. Having enough - something like that.

So ?

Yea, so what. Wait for SP1 ? Just ditch it right away ?
My personal main problem is that I saw no settings which could change this nature of sound. So now I don't know where to start. Yea, disengage the whole metro desktop and via that eliminate those layers of which I think they are there.
But can I do that ? Of course not. Nobody can.

If someone else can tell me one thing for the better, please do and try to explain in detail. Tell your settings, because no way I could have found a good combination in one evening.

But I don't believe in this, no matter how much I wanted it and how high my expectations were.

Peter

[AlainGr]

As Peter knows, I am not that good when it comes to describing details about a XXHIGHEND version. My sensitivity to SQ is far from ideal when I read what many can sense from different adjustements with the software and their sound systems.

For sure I have sensed differences with the last 2 upgrades (9-7 and 9-8), but for example I never heard ticks (apart from the beginning) but I have to add that I don't use PA... Can't explain why. Sometimes I enable it, but I am apprehensive of a sudden burst in sound. I know, this was happening in the early implementations of it, but still... I allow myself to change my mind with time.

I have tried W8 as soon as it was available last October. I felt that the sound was a little "brigthter" (a leftover of my years of listening to systems with too much treble - possible), but appealing. From this report from you Peter, it just confirms that I do not have what it takes to differentiate good sound from excellent sound. Wether it is because of my sound system, the acoustics of my room (too much echo), me or a combination of all this - the results are that I realize each time my review of something will be quite limited.

The test Peter suggested about the ticks had me listening to one of my speakers with the ear at 3 inches of the speaker grid. This and only this allowed me to hear some ticks at .5 SPF. My environment is not really silent as I use a noisy PC to access my music PC through bluetooth. I would be unable to tell the difference in SQ from a connected/disconnected CD reader/writer. I do disable it in the device manager, with a few other things, but to tell that I hear a difference...

Maybe I am lucky not to hear all these fine tuning adjustements, but if the conclusion is that W8 is not that good for sound, I will revert happily to W7.

But for sure, from all I have heard before, although I felt that with W8, some instruments were not as prominent as I felt they were before, I hear a lot more details before. This may have no relation to the fact that I use W8 though.

Alain

[PeterSt]

Thank you for you time Alain.

Btw, those ticks were not related to PA. So also without PA they were there. Remember, were.

And oh, more bright would be a good description for W8, if you only see it as a negative. So if anything is NOT there, it's a black background.

Regards,
Peter

[AlainGr]

Thanks Peter. It would not have been you and all you did and are continually doing, I would not have tried W8 with the same interest.

I did not allow myself to listen to the latest version with W7. I will restore a backup tonight (Mmmm... Be ready to see an activation demand again...). Looks like I really have the full name for it: Alain Grégoire, Activation Guy... AG all the way.

An OT remark: I never got an SQ increase more than with XXHIGHEND. No matter the cables I changed, the tweaks I tried, the "this" and the "that" - XXHIGHEND is by far my "best component" and the incredible thing is that each time it feels like I have a new system... Of course there has to be a minimum synergy with all components, but XXHE remains the "peripheral" that amazes me the most.

Alain

[PeterSt]

Looks like I really have the full name for it: Alain Grégoire, Activation Guy... AG all the way.

I can confirm that you are record holder.
Anticipate that by now you (and me) will be under suveillance of some instance because the only reason they can think of you always paying and me alwats paying that back, should be fraude of some kind.


Peter

[PeterSt]

Envision me, yesterday, being behind the knobs and things for over TWO hours, just looking how I should be able to twist the sound from W8 for the better. Not playing, looking.

But it didn't help.
I think I could get rid of the "tyering" stuff hence the highs were a bit more normalised, but the bass suffers from it and the fun has even more gone (no crispy details).
Well, at least I was able to change the sound.

In a maybe strange way I solved the L/R being more profound, for myself. That is, how can that happen ? Well, sort of easy :
The sound won't detach from the speakers.

Hey, nice explanation eh ?

But it is so and really weird. If you (I) pay attention properly, you can see that it is not flat sound but far away only BUT with no mm of depth. Wat happens is a very strange thing because all what you hear does not fit. It doesn't fit the inherent "rather very good" sound. So, the detail and all and what not - it does not belong at all to sound not wanting to leave the speakers. Still it is *that* what's happening.
Beats me how.

The sound is mechanical. Like made by robots.
There is no way you can get in touch with it; Music/audio would never be your hobby when listening to this. It only makes sound.

Peter

[Jud]

The response of close to everything indicates an additional (new) layer to me.

All indicates that the "normal" Windows Desktop *is* such a new layer. The scratching sound which can happen at playback, is exactly the same when e.g. a window is moved from position.

Similarly I think I have found that the "no nonsense" output to the bare monitor's screen, is not that anymore; it has become a window itself which again is that layer (or *again* a layer).

But I don't believe in this, no matter how much I wanted it and how high my expectations were.

Peter

The above snippets show perfectly why I am reluctant to adopt new Windows versions.  (Though since many applications were withdrawing support for Win2000 by the time of the Win7 betas, I did try them and liked them enough to buy the release when it first came out.  In contrast, I also tried Vista in beta and knew I would never be comfortable with any version of that pig.  I think it was a big reason for the ascendancy of Apple, just as Win98 gave a boost to Linux.)  It takes many versions that all the little fiefdoms in Microsoft see as an opportunity to load up with their pet functionality before they get to a point where someone at the top cries "Enough!" and they put out a version that is aimed at cleaning out all the cr*p more than adding on a million great new things.

[PeterSt]

Yea, disengage the whole metro desktop and via that eliminate those layers of which I think they are there.
But can I do that ? Of course not. Nobody can.

Not true. One smart person did and it is not me.

So, Metro desktop totally gone, and now it's a 100% Windows7 desktop. Yes, including the most normal Start Button and everything and including the XXHighEnd behaviour at removing the Startbutton and bringing it back.

It takes more for Unattended and especially when all is brought back, but I just did that. So will it help for SQ ?
Maybe not;

Although I have Wallpaper behavior now the same for Attended like it is in W7, this is unchanged for Unattended. And notice that I managed to see the bare screen as a choosable task (alt-tab), so I *am* right on this; this is a window now (an application) - and the Wallpaper will not appear in that.
Ok, this can be solved by drawing the Wallpaper myself, but for now it is not about that, and it's merely about the SQ implications (I didn't listen yet, but expect no changes). *if* there is a change in SQ noq it can only be about the Metro desktop not being there (this is just naver started).

Will be continued ...
Peter

[Telstar]

I'm not getting W8 on any of my computers. It doesn't improve anything I like and uses an horrible UI.
If and when there will be usb audio class 2 native drivers, i'll think about it.

[PeterSt]

and uses an horrible UI

No sight of that here. 100% W7.
haha.

[AlainGr]

While I have been listening to music through W8 for quite some time, I never gave XXHIGHEND a chance with W7... After listening to 9-8e with W7, I understand now...

[PeterSt]

Yea, but wait ...

[AlainGr]

You bet I will (wait)

[PeterSt]

So ... I have been fussing around some more, hacked all I could hack and could also compare with the W7 install I had on that same machine (which btw is such a "XXHighEnd PC").

Ok ...

First of all I now understand somewhat better what is happening (to me).
And yes, I always like to reason out "merits" of what I'm hearing, and this could be another such occasion ...

If I compare W7 to W8 on the same machine and more or less not regarding further settings, the sound of W8 is completely totally square and sharp.
But wait ... in a good sense. But the difference is a sort of crazy.

In between the lines, briefly read this : Spotify vs XXhighend.
And notice that this is not unfamiliar to me. It was also already in my mind as the measure of why W8 should be better, no matter I did not like it much. Read back my first post(s) in this topic for what I am talking about.

When A-B-ing with W7 it is now totally clear to me that the left/right separation comes from the sheer fact that this super "sharpness" won't merge in air, when only it comes separately from left and right. Also notice the importance of my notice that no other DAC than the NOS1 has such an inherent good L/R separation, with only the Alpha being close to the same. This already means that "we NOS1 users" will perceive sound more hard-panned than others, or than even was intended by the recording (mixing) engineer. This is no joke, and while a bass can play 100% from the left through the NOS1, this same bass plays plain from the middle from *any* other DAC, apart from that Alpha.
I don't know about the Alpha, but do notice that the channel separation in the NOS1 is far from normal, and could be called an "invention" by me.
Ok, nice. Fine.

With the proper music played, which in my test-case actually always is ambient with synth stuff in there, the squares float through the room with special interaction. Notice that this is a kind of literal because it happens in-air. But, it must be allowed for, or IOW, those waves must be allowed to meet.
Remember my standing waves theory ? the fuzzier the wave, the more thick it can be seen, and the more easy two separate of those waves will meet and create standing waves (of mixed frequency). With Windows 8 this happens the other way around; the lot is so d*mn sharp that nothing meets, if it only comes from one channel. This is a bit hard to explain, but think very directional and the sharper the more directional as well. So, no side paths - no wall reflections. Or less of it anyway.
That is Windows 8.

Too good ?
NOS1 too good ?
Horn speakers too directional to begin with ?

Continued in next post.

[PeterSt]

"Play the proper music" he said. Yea, well ... hmm ...

After the A-B with W7 I was unable to judge W8 to be wrong. It just can't be while that sheer accuracy springs from it. W7 was saltless in comparison.

My tweaks and hacks had been applied, and perceiving the difference with W7 enabled me to think what to dial in which direction. Fuzz-up things somewhat, so to speak. Well, not really, but this was in my mind. The sound was already better than the day before and mind you, it is already tough to hear that good sound but think it is no good only because there's no depth in it. But here too, the comparison with W7 made me think different. Less depth maybe, but the depth from W7 is created by fuzzyness man ! Yea, oh. Ok. Hmm.
Let's turn up some volume then.

Hey, with some fine theories that even works. Haha. Well, what's actually wrong now eh ?
And this is where I start to play some normal music.

Ehm, 0.9z-8 is not *that* long around, but maybe we should save this new super-increase for somewhere in 2014 ?
Will we be able to cope ?

So ... what actually happened in my room was that I played way loud, but nothing went wrong because of that. Hard to explain again, but I think we can all envision a the louder the more messy things become. Same thing - those reflections. But hey, didn't I just explain that these had to be less now ? and that I actually tried to create a few ?
So yes, things fall together as it seems, and it just *is* better. It had to be.

Numerous, numerous times it occurred to me that I suddenly heard/understood words I never understood before. All is more clear *again*.
And I don't think I need to talk about more detail when the "so sharp" is already out.

Black background is back too.


Right. Don't try this with 0.9z-8e because it needs quite some new tricks and I am not even sure yet how to apply some of them through code (manually, yes). You will need to get rid of that Metro interface too, but I will tell you how to later.

Last thing, if not already clear :
It is not said at all that we perceive this as better. Or not for all music perhaps. But when not, we may need to change some mind setting, because it *is* better. Think about the MP3 experience - and I have asked the question more often : what actually determines that a wider sound stage is always better - especially when MP3 does just that.
I already know that THE means to test an amplifier is listening opposed to one speaker only (so, in straight line to one of the speakers - hi there Bert). The better amp will let sound your other speaker just the same. When I test with the "XXHighEnd PC I am about 1 meter from the right horn, the left one beting 6 meters away. With W8 I hear the left horn loud and clear - and this is where my "crazy L/R separation" came from. Nice eh ? yea, but farther away it won't merge. But maybe it should not. But how could it, when the sound concerned only springs from one side ?
Pump up the volume. Strange for solution, but my theory seems to be ok.

As with my very first line in this topic : I don't know;
Well, I think I do now, but I don't know about the prerequisites yet. Other feet to the NOS1 is what comes to mind. Fuzzy-up things.

Peter