0.9z-8-3a

[phantomax]

FRESHNESS! Is the first word to come to my poor english speaking mind after listening some well known tracks.

¿Placebo? Maybe. It would not be the first time.

BTW Peter, yes, I was shocked with the PA question but to be honest, I don't mind at all because my little gain issue.

Best regards,

Maxi

[phantomax]

Second impression EVEN better: orchestral tutti sounds much less (or not) congested and very easy flowing. Besides that, the "weigth" I was missing is there again, like in W8 but in a different and better fashion.

Maxi

[BertD]

I still can't get into minimized... it seems to go all through but at the end it comes up with a message that I should contact Phasure because it can't boot into minimized?

I see "wait", then a question about restore and then about continue and then the screen truns dark and then the message pops up that it can't!!!!

It looks similar to a situation where things were XX is not activated but it is (or isn't it activated properly afterall?).

Blehhh...updates!!! YAK

I am out for a while, not in the mood to stay behind a PC

[PeterSt]

Bert,

It looks similar to a situation where things were XX is not activated but it is (or isn't it activated properly afterall?).

You are not activated properly.

Peter

[Jud]

Bert,

It looks similar to a situation where things were XX is not activated but it is (or isn't it activated properly afterall?).

You are not activated properly.

Peter

I had the same error as Bert and Maxi last night.  Maxi apparently is properly activated, Bert apparently isn't.  I'd like to be as sure as I can that, given -3 *looked* to me as if it was properly activated (red font on the title bar, red border for cover art), -3a is also.

With that as prologue, the following questions:

- Should I just unzip -3a over -3 in the same folder?

- If I do unzip -3a over -3, should I go ahead and activate -3a, or would it already be activated?

[PeterSt]

Jud,

You can just unzip 8-3a over 8-3. As a matter of fact, only XXHighEnd.exe has been changed in 8-3a.

Peter

[BertD]

You are not activated properly.

I am now... 

Bert

[Arjan]

First reaction of my daughter of 12, wow dad this is much better! Yes, it is a fresh, open and clear sound. Really good.

regards, Arjan

[listening]

Hi Peter,

the music sounds silky, relaxed and there is additional room between the instruments and voices. I heard some middle age music played on original instruments with poor harmonics combined with a chorus of mostly chest voices -  the panorama, the staggering and details are really amazing 

Georg

[GerardA]

Sparkles? Fireworks!
Just comparing apples to oranges here again but the oranges sound so strange! Bigger then Live, thundering Bass from hell, sparkling highs from heaven! Unbelievable if this is real!
Hope tommorow still sounds this way because now it's really bedtime.

[phantomax]

I must go to bed too but I can't stop listening. This is truly addic....ti....ve....ZZZZZZZ

[Gerard]

Really agree with the above... 

And so stable and fast. Even with this low processor settings.

Fun!!!!!

[PeterSt]

FYI (and maybe it helps for the better for others as well) :

I have been A-B-ing for over 5 hours last night with volume up to the pain level - just to sort out better what best settings are, and this is what I changed (remember, this is through the NOS1) :

Q1 = 30, xQ1 = 10 (was 14/1), Time Performance Index = Optimal.
Further see sig.

What I tried to do was getting some "nastyness" out of the way, which (obviously) will exhibit more when playing really loud (which was 100dBSPL all the time yesterday).
Also notice that this has become more critical when not using Phase Alignment because all is more to the point (since 0.9z-8-3). I used Black Sabbath's Paranoid for it which tends to show this more nastyness when playing louder always, and I think I got it very well tamed by these changes; The higher buffer settings could not take out all of it, and the last thing I did was bringing back the Time Performance Index to Optimal. That really did the trick.

And FWIW :
Thinking about the reason that I and maybe a few others set the Time Performance Index to "Not the best" - which was about more depth ... I suddenly noticed that the lower SFS settings (I tried 1.5 and 2) take out some "phase-focused" sound. So, sounds which may emerge anywhere in the room do not so (much) with the lower SFS.


After I was satisfied with the settings as applied to "not the best sounding albums", I played one of which I knew it is OK, and next I envisioned myself at a house party (the XTC ones I mean) with the super slamming sound not hurting any ear at the 100dBSPL level. But the power coming from it ? wow.

Can people agree with trhis ? Disagree is also fine !
Peter

[Scroobius]

Right now I am listening with my old setting SFS=1.5 Q=10,0,0,0 Q1f=1 and

WOW !!!!!!!

does it sound good. The bass is fantastic and I thought it was good before.

Just now I cannot bring myself to play around with settings but I will later.

And - no stops ha ha - this is looking very promising indeed.

And also on top of that a computer with a built in heater to heat the room on these cold mornings.

Paul

[AlainGr]

While I can't do anything for the moment (girlfriend still sleeping), I was wondering about one thing...

I always liked HF. The more presence of them, the more satisfied I was. But with digital glare and "edgy" sounds, all depends on the music style more than anything else.

You mention Black Sabbath... I like the "fuzz" (guitar) a lot. With more HF, I feel I can hear that "sizzling" noise a lot more than when it is (maybe not the right word) "tamed" or should I say "controlled". And I like that sizzling noise that comes from the guitar. This raises the notion of "neutrality" against "personal taste"... A part of me like the fact that there are no more edgy sound, but another part misses that prominent sizzling sound...

And since my hearing is not what it was, sometimes I would like to have a little more HF energy - a hard to loose habit I developped a long time ago...

Alain