how 0.9t sounds

[andy74]

Hi,

0.9t-0 sounds a little worse to me, than the previous one 0.9s-2.
Here are the settings I use in both of them:
- Vista ult;
- XX Demo;
- Engine 3;
- Q1-14 invert checked;
- priorities are set to nothing;

Sounds like it has gotten a bit muffled, a little less low volume details. Not good at audiophile terms .

What do you think?

Andrey

[andy74]

BTW

0.9sb-2 is my favourite and sounds the best so far.
The instrument sounds are somewhat acoustically finished (pardon my french), It seems like there is something more in low level detail.
It makes me think that I know it is there instead of I can hear it.
A new (or long forgotten) sensation for me.

[PeterSt]

I think I heard a difference, yes, and what I heard came to me as from good old 0.9pd. I have the priorities set though. BUT :

This is with attended playback.
With unattended playback there should be no difference with 0.9s. I must say though that unattended playback itself (i.e. since 0.9s), - though rather different - is hard for me to be satisfied with (thoughout all music that is). So I've been playing around with settings lately, and yesterday I ended up with Q1=-3, Invert, Double. That setting didn't change the remainder of the night, so it looks promising.
If I can keep that up tonight, it must be better.

But Andrey, what about your demo version ? why ?
Also : Better sound after activation, so be careful with that.

[andy74]

Why you ask:
I am away from home. So all my activated versions are left at home. ...

[PeterSt]

Oh ... I am sorry. But I thought you activated your laptop as well ...

[andy74]

No, it was waiting for me here (away from home ). So It was impossibe to LAN connect them and activate.

[SeVeReD]

We here at the annual CUE file users convention in Anchorage Alaska all agree it's great to get the added cue file support for 0.9T-5.  I like all the new features like wallpaper for the album cover and info. 
The SQ has been superb! -less distortion rich bodies delineated-... too, because I've spent each evening for a while listening to various Q1 settings.  Q1 18 is lining up well with my dac right now; If you'd asked me yesterday I would have said 17...  but really a big, better (i think at the moment hehe) change from the 14 I'd been leaving it at... I'm by no means done experimenting with Q1.  19 & 20 I've listened but I think phase something gong on/
If I understand what Peter wrote at one point was that Q1 settings would be different for everyone depending on their setup/dac... so I suggest experimenting a bit people, pick a number and give it a go for a day or two.  For me, I find myself listening for two things distortion changes and bass changes (phase stuff?) when picking Q1 settings.
I've been busy with holiday trips and leaving my wallet at relatives  over the last couple weeks heh, but the listening I've gotten in during the last few days has really sounded good with 9t5.  I have not felt the need to compare with older versions.... though I have several sitting on the machine heh.

[andy74]

After a day long listening I came to conclusion that with unattended playback all versions sounds almost the same.

But the strange thing.
I like sb-2 in attended mode more than sb-2 and t-5 in unattended mode.
Funny .

[andy74]

Now after a week listnening I have to admit that sb-2 with attended playback seems to color the sound a bit that's why I liked it better.
for the last week I listen to 0.9t-5 unattended (thread prio normal) and it sounds the best so far.
don't want any other version
I am glad that my version taste is the same as others for a change

[PeterSt]

I am glad that my version taste is the same as others for a change

No ... let *me* be glad that it was possible to create a sound that is now unrelated (UnAttended Playback) to the "environmental" work I do, which in the end scared me.
Of course this only works in Vista ...

In any case : thank you for your honest opinions.
Peter