0.9z-8-3a

[Scroobius]

More with SFS settings - certainly my previous settings of SFS=1.5 & Q=10 Qf=1 are not now the best. Bigger settings seems slightly more relaxed with more "air" but the settings generally now seem to have much less effect. Previously the lower latency settings made the sound clearer, sharper but now that aspect does not seem to change with SFS & Q settings. I am running with SFS=50 Q1=20 just now but to be honest I cannot hear much difference if I increase latency further so I have not been bothered to "play" further.

I also agree with Boleary XX is much faster in fact now I hardly notice that the bigger latency settings are slowing response at all (that does not seem entirely logical because I would have thought the bigger buffer sizes would dictate the response).

And that bass response and quality - mmmmmmm.

Great stuff - XX is growing up fast.

Cheers

Paul

[stefanobilliani]

X tweak ultimate , minimized os:

 user did notice some "not liking" by software regarding a possible set of Processor Appointment ( probably going to ... unattended ) causing  reboots ;

Mobo set to " varying cpu speed in OS " is not liked by software , causing reboots going in unattended  . Software prefer Mobo to be
 " auto " in that regard .

Beside this 2 points , Cpuz says that when all is satisfied and software plays in unattended + ultimate , the cpu freq remains half of what is set .And of course the heat sink + fan say exactly the same .

In user case freq is 1600 Mhz ( set  to 3200 Mhz )


stefano

[stefanobilliani]

X tweak ultimate , minimized os:

 user did notice some "not liking" by software regarding a possible set of Processor Appointment ( probably going to ... unattended ) causing  reboots ;

Mobo set to " varying cpu speed in OS " is not liked by software , causing reboots going in unattended  . Software prefer Mobo to be
 " auto " in that regard .

Beside this 2 points , Cpuz says that when all is satisfied and software plays in unattended + ultimate , the cpu freq remains half of what is set .And of course the heat sink + fan say exactly the same .

In user case freq is 1600 Mhz ( set  to 3200 Mhz )


stefano

Also a reboot did occur automaticly after 30 minutes or so of listening in unattended .

EDIT:
OK cpuz is not to be considered . CPU temp says 3,8 Giga Hz( 6,7watts... :-) ) . The HeatSink is BIG (Core 0,1,2,3 : 25°,22°23°26° C )

Thanks

s

[manisandher]

I've just noticed that this thread sits under the 'Your Thoughts About Sound Quality' section, so here are a few preliminary thoughts:

Super, super smooth sound and subjectively deeper lows. I can understand why people can listen to this at high volumes for prolonged periods.

However here, Phase Alignment still sounds more 'real'. But I'd say without PA, the sound is almost more pleasant to listen to.

So, no concrete conclusions as yet...

Mani.

[stefanobilliani]

I like this version , because I can listen to it to low levels .

On the other hand , when something isn't right :

a) the tendency is to turn up the volume
b) after that a),  shut off .

. So I like 0.9z8-3a

[hf]

Wow, Peter, what an achievement. Once again! And at such a high pace (three-four big steps in only 3 months time). Where is this gonna end?  

In my system I have the following effects: much more definition, much more quitness, more depth and more 'musicality' (more caught by the emotions in the music) and it sounds more naturual/easy going. I love the romantic piano concertos and they sound so beautiful..

One point is a bit a step back (in my system): the highs tend to be a bit sharp again. Albums from Katie Melua and Stabat Mater from Jenkins you clearly hear the "ss's" at the start of the singing. This was gone for a long time but now it is back. Anybody any idea how to soften it?

Hein

[Stanray]

I perceive here also more definition, more quietness, more depth and a more relaxed and pleasant SQ.

On the other hand I noticed a bit more "ssss" (f.i. Neil Young's Greendale).

And I'm not sure, but I think I miss something that was there in 8-2 and that might be related to PA, some sort of subtle overtones perhaps that make the sound "real".

But I need to listen some more to be sure.

Stanley

[PeterSt]

For those who are in doubt about s'es, maybe try change the Time Performance Index ?

[soundgals]

On that subject Peter; in your sig you show "*Ultimate* / Time Performance Index : *Optimal*"

... But in your release notes you're recommending: "not the best"

What is your current thinking on this?

Thanks,

Geoff

[PeterSt]

Hi Geoff,

It is in this topic somewhere (post from me). I think from yesterday.

Regards,

Peter

[soundgals]

Ok, I've spotted it now. Thanks. I think it would be a good idea to add the Peak Extend setting to your sig as well. At various times, I've seen this recommended to be off and other times on. It's set to on out of the box, I know.

Geoff

[PeterSt]

Hey Geoff, thanks. I missed peak Extension - I guess because it's not meant to be a general SQ setting (but it is by some long time now).

Regards,
Peter

[juanpmar]

No problem in my case with temperature, the cpu is working at 99,7% of the normal frequency, if I remember well. The six cores are at 30ºC/33ºC with a very short maximum peak at 42ºC in some of the cores (tested with Real Temp. Room temperature 23ºC). I even took off the cpu fan and I´m using just two of the three big fans that are at the bottom of my case, they are running at minimum speed, +/-950 rpm. No fan filters either (that makes 3ºC/3,5ºC less). For the ones that have my same pc case I´d recommend to try this configuration. You can take a look to the link in my signature to see my pc case that have the advantage of a different orientation of the motherboard with the cpu cooler receiving directly the air that comes from the bottom fans.

Talking about settings I followed Peter recommendations, XTweaks : Ultimate, etc. and I´ve found interesting the setting of "Time performance Index" because the sound changes quite dramatically, at least in my system. What seems to be a bigger sound stage and a smoother sound with "Time Performance Index" set at "Not the best" is in IMHO just a misplacement of the sound and it produces a fake sense of smoothness. With "Optimal" the sound is more pinpointed, firmer and better placed than without it. The smoothness gotten, or the lack of it (however it should be named) is the one produced naturally by the instruments and the voices placed as they should be. In other words, nothing is perfect but with "Time Performance Index" set at "Optimal" the sound is less artificial, more real.

Great sound!, (as always).

Juan

[soundgals]

I also found the difference between, "not the best" and "optimal" to be dramatic. So I'm glad you posted that Juan.

I went backwards and forwards between the two over the last few days and finally agree that "optimal" is the preferred setting.

Compared to "not the best" resolution seems "hyper-real" with optimal.  More interesting, more involving.

In my main system with the NOS1 "not the best" could be a useful setting when listening at low to moderate levels. The sound appeared warmer and the bass seemed to be boosted, making listening at those levels more enjoyable.

If I started at higher than moderate levels with "not the best", I tended to want to turn it down. Conversely if I started at moderate or lower levels with the "optimal" setting I tended to go in the opposite direction and crank it up to realistic levels.

"Not the best" then for me is actually "the best" when I'm forced to listen at low levels.

I imagine it will also be useful for edgier recordings where, for example, sibilance appears exagerated on female vocals.

Geoff

PS: I need to change my sig. Settings are currently the same as Peter's

[juanpmar]

Hi Geoff,

I agree with you about the easier listening with "not the best" setting but, as I said, I find the sound not as well placed as it is with "Optimal". It is interesting also the changes in SQ that are related with volume level because there are changes again in the smoothness or the placement of voices and instruments, e.g. I find the perfect sound in my system at -30db while at -28db the voices are displaced a bit more in front and turn to be a little aggressive. It could be also related with the room acoustics that can deal well at certain volumes and not so well at higher levels.

All in all, what I can say is that this version is the best so far for my taste and in my system. The bass is big but firm and remains under control, the sound stage is deep and wide and the voices are clear and have a rare sense of humanity, I mean, they seem to come from a real human body. Very thrilling indeed.

Best regards,
Juan