Windows 10 - my Personal Verdict

[christoffe]

It is very well possible that 2.03 does not kill your laptop when going to MinOS.  

Hi Peter,

MinOs works quite well. No. of process are down from >50 to 29.

Joachim

[PeterSt]

Joachim, I meant with 10074 ...

[GerardA]

Very interesting but confusing. Is 586 ok or nok? Still need to install 10074?

Today I bought 25 in vinyl and that sounded like it should! I (we?) have to apologize to Adele, she really can sing and the recording quality is top of the bill!

After thanksgiving I'll see if I can make a digital copy with my new ADC-toy and compare with the other (downloaded) versions I've got. One version from vinyl on mp3 and one from cd on flac. With q5=2 they sound ok but my vinyl gives a bit more acoustical space. Let's see what will be the result...

[acg]

Meanwhile I can only encourage people to try 10586.0 (I have a download available - just send me an email). Not to waste your time, but to see whether 10586.0 *is* the better one. That too is a matter of statistics. The way to find out is a bit tough though.

Well Peter, I have tried 10586 via the download you have available and experimented for a while even trying Q5=2.  Once settled I have only compared two albums:  Daft Punk Homework and Dvoraks "A New World" Symphony #9 by Kubelik/Berlin Philharmonic and what can I say....


...I have no doubt that 10074 is where it is at.

[PeterSt]

OK Anthony, thank you for sharing.

Would you have more wording to describe what you think is wrong with 10586.0 ?

Btw notice that the Q5=2 is said to be used in Normal OS. This is outside of what Joachim is talking about. Instead this is 10586.0 specific.
It hasn't been told, but I assumed Q3 and Q4 to be at 1.

Regards,
Peter

[fmanheck]

Also makes me wonder if the artist is so removed from the process she does not know how poor it sounds on a system with good resolution.

Hey You

Despite what I said about Adele, it is IMO true that artists (far most of them) don't care a hoot about music quality. It has been said sort of, but why would a musical artist be interested in high quality music ?
It is just not the same thing. Or maybe it is even challenged for :

When I'm this musical artist, I'm in this larger hall with my own amplification all right, but which by guarantee can't be anything good. Say it just does not exist (at least not out of the box). So as the artist I give up on that ?
No, I just don't even start it;

I have my guitar and with some friends I start a nice band and when the click is there it exists a year after still and maybe I produce an album.
Cheap-ish of course because I have no money for it.

My hobby at home is not even cooking because I am never there to cook because of the performances each night. Anyway I dont have nice speakers at home as well. It is not my hobby.
Playing the guitar is.

In the end I can not help it really that I went along with a singer of superp level and that my friend next door is able to write such good songs that every listener starts to complain that the SQ of the recording is so unnecessary poor and it is a waste.

And I ? I play the guitar and it is my joy for life.


Something like that.

I definitely hear what you are saying and really can't disagree. I guess where I am coming from is that listening and enjoying music is my hobby and not my vocation. Is it safe to say in the case of an artist is their chosen medium actually their vocation? Maybe or maybe not, but for me being a chef is both my vocation and in many ways my performance. After 45 years of performances I would have to say that some of them have been more memorable than others. I guess I can consider myself lucky that my less than stellar performances are not documented for posterity as with a recording artist.

Without a doubt my greatest preference is to experience a live performance with that direct emotional connection with the performer. That of course is opposed to being in the comfort of my own personal space trying to recreate that same emotional connection. One big difference (unfortunately) is I have many more opportunities to listen in the at home than live. It is my reality and I accept it.

So to make up for that inability to always experience live performances, I try to assemble an electronic reproduction system that gets me as close to the live event as possible.

And I have to say that many more times than not it works for me. There are some Adele's within the range of music I listen to but I would have to say they are in the minority. There are many more Rickie lee Jones, or Leonard Cohens, or Ferrons or Marc Cohns...recordings that usually do give me that emotional connection.

Perhaps one reason for this is I have had the opportunity to hear them perform live. I certainly acknowledge that must help me make the connection I am looking for. I have not had the opportunity to hear Adele live. If I did maybe I could relate better. In that respect for sure it is my issue and not hers. I guess my problem is that I do really enjoy Adele as an artist and performer and with her Live at Royal Alpert Hall album I could make that connection and it was most enjoyable. I miss that on her studio recordings for whatever reason.

So back to the reproduction system. I have what I believe is a damn good system. I have the NOS1a, Phasure Computer and XXhighend(a few versions behind, but I always seem to lag a little behind there ). What I consider to be good amplification (845 monoblocks or excellent solid state) I have a number of good speaker systems at my disposal as well. What I love about this system is when I am able to make that connection it is absolutely magic. For whatever reason this particular system seems to make it easier for me to experience that magic more frequently than others I have had before. My guess is my system will continue to evolve and I believe it to be a separate hobby from experiencing music (live or at home). While I enjoy the system hobby, If I had to choose one it for sure would be experiencing the music. I am thankful I do not need to make that choice.

The funny thing is that even with great equipment or a live performance the responsibility for that emotional connection is ultimately my responsibility and mine alone. The performer whether live or at home can't do it for me. It could be the best performance of their career live or recorded but if I don't connect there is nothing; for me anyways.

So here in the United States today is Thanksgiving. It is my favorite holiday because for me it is about being grateful for all the blessing in my life.

So I am grateful for the opportunity to experience live music. I am grateful to have a home music system that usually helps me connect with the performer and performance.

But I am most grateful to be blessed with the ability to make that human connection. It stirs my heart and makes me smile. Happy Thanksgiving to all. 

 

[PeterSt]

Fred, that is a most beautiful post.

I just like to talk back to you so you see it was appreciated with a lot of sensitivity (I hope that is readable).

Maybe or maybe not, but for me being a chef is both my vocation and in many ways my performance. After 45 years of performances I would have to say that some of them have been more memorable than others. I guess I can consider myself lucky that my less than stellar performances are not documented for posterity as with a recording artist.

You just expressed more directly what I simply called "playing the guitar". And, (I hope) obviously this is not about playing the guitar as such, but a. play it before the audience and b. play it together with the rest of the band.
Often b. comes ahead of a. but it may depend on who you are.

So yes ...
With the notice for others that the small phrase of "being a chef" means the cook (but head of the kitchen), this too is in my view a cheer artistic performance. Here too it can be personal, but a good chef will express all the creativity which lives in him/her and does that for the audience. Not much different from my father playing in the orchestra, who did not practice over and over in hour house to earn some money, but to PERFORM.
He, coincidentally, was an audiophile at the same time, who not only was always working on his own amplifiers, TT mods and loudspeakers, but in the end was also working on the acoustics in the concert hall.

I think I kind of explicitly continued his work.
So if it is about Thanksgiving (what we don't know/celebrate over here) then maybe if I could play a 10000dB more loud, he could hear it ?

[pedal]

Finally I got my PC up and running again with OS W10Pro 10586.0 and XX 2.03a playing (for the time being) in NormalOS + Unattended.

I find the Sound Quality very good. The system is like a magnifying glass. Very resolved and open. Quick, dynamic and uncoloured. Treble is pure, bass is deep, tight and tuneful.

Ok, when I read some of the misgivings from others here, I agree that the midrange could have been slightly more organic, and the soundstage could have been even more "embracing". Being very critical, I might say my present setup is not that seducive. BUT what I hear is not much lacking. It is quite close to nirvana.

I can certainly live happily with W10Pro 10586.0 as it sounds today, knowing that I still have to complete the setting tweaks. Also I feel there is so much "right" in W10, that I'm confident Peter will manage to sort out the remaining artifacts.

-------


UPDATE: Q5 = 2 is a step in right direction. Midrange becomes more "liquid". Right now having a great listening session with The White Album (24bit USB stick version), hearing details I never heard before. Playing Blackbird is like being inside a birds cage. Remarkable bass playing by Paul on the other tracks.

[pedal]

Hi Peter & everyone trying 10586

In minOS mode I agree sound quality is not great with 2.03/10586. But a tip from another user may well change your opinion. Just go back to normal OS and change to Q5=2 (if you were previously Q5=1). Seems a silly idea I know but works wonders for me, the music is back!.

Colin

OK, for the moment it seems W10 users are split in 3 camps:

• Version 10074
• Version 10586.0
• Version 10586.x and others

10074 is the choice of Peter, but is troublesome, not easily available and I haven't heard it.
So I have to settle with the "next best" 10586.0, which I downloaded a couple of weeks ago.

Anyway, I find 10586.0 to be very, very fine sounding. I don't know what I am missing (10074), but it can't be much.

The purpose of this post is to discuss the best settings of 10586.0.
First, Colin deserves a medal for finding Q5=2. It opens up the midrange, without paying any cost, soundwise.

I also tried out his other settings, as described in his signature, but I didn't like them. Although they do "something" in the midrange, I find the bass suffering. In short - the one and only Q1 value for me is 14.

With Q1=14 I get exceptional tight, deep and tuneful bass. Here, the 10586.0 is the best I've heard. With Marvin Gaye Let's Get It On [24/192 DVDA] Suddenly the percussion is in the lead on all tracks. Same with Paul McCartney's bass on The White Album, and many others I have played during the weekend.

Now, If I just can identify the very last optimal settings somewhere, then 10586.0 will be a sonic heaven!

[PeterSt]

Hi Pedal,

A few remarks first :

• Version 10586.x and others

The only other will be 10565 and other users with 10.586.x I don't know of.

10074 is the choice of Peter

Although correct in itself, your list as a whole suggests that I am quite alone with my 10074. This is not correct;
Everybody favors 10074 except for two of which one I don't trust because he only tells it is fine, without judgment whether 10074 is better or not. Then there is a 3rd and this is you, but you don't know the difference (because did not try 10074).

This leaves exactly one person who btw is unknown to us and does not use a NOS1(a).  This is not important at all, however, you seem to bind conclusions on this which conclusions a. do not exist and b. what exists can not be much relevant to you.

Also see next post, which I planned for today anyway.

Regards,
Peter

[PeterSt]

So, next round ...

A few days ago this post of Paul emerged : Re: Are all MOBO's (of the same type) Equal? with this excerpt from it :

like plugging NOS into the Silverstone, setting up BIOS, then making the PC headless etc

and suddenly I saw the light ...
... The over-emphasized sound of all W10 versions except 10074 comes from the Silverstone USB3 card ...

I say it more often - it becomes too d*mn difficult. So, today one must be capable of recognizing that this Windows 10 crazy (negatively meant) sound originates in a USB3 interface.
Well, I did that and I appeared correct ...

So two days ago I gave 10586.0 another go.

What a difference !

So for those who forgot or don't know :
The Silverstone card implies a sound where the high frequencies (can) go on/off in fast fashion and where "holes" in the sound appear. Mind you, at a rate of say 5KHz. So highs receive sharp boundaries.

And this is exactly what suddenly sprung to my mind : Windows 10, 10586.0 ahead, exhibits this same sound but say with deeper holes. More rough. Far too rough. Blax sound.
It does bring forward all kind of detail otherwise not heard (especially in the somewat lower regions), but the balance is way off.
Ok.

So I stuck the (Clairixa) USB in the MoBo's USB3 and had a try ...
... with the result of no single "hole" being heard any more.
So actually the culprit is the Silverstone ?
It looks like it.

But ahead of noticing that the sound has normalized, was the again stuffed-ears sound from 10586.0. Really, it is hard to survive. And seriously, only because I had been working for two days on overcoming that not-fresh sound, it is that I lasted that long with it. Until yesterday when I thought to play something with deep bass and some rythm and when I also found that again it did not "work" at all. No bass really and no rythm. Really odd.

I can summarize the problem with 10586.0 like this :
- Not allowed to use the Silverstone;
- It brings a stuffed ears feeling anyway;
- It does not work anyway; nothing sucks you in. Balance is explicitly wrong.


As a last test I thought to do it some other way around;
I booted into 10074 and left the Clairixa USB cable where it was - in the MoBo socket.
Ha !
Dull sound.

Funny actually, because I use the Silverstone for ages and never tried any more without. So now I know and the difference is more huge than I recall from when I used it at first.
Without it, sound becomes rather flat. I don't mean "in space" but regarding the now lacking holes (see earlier in this text). Dull. Not fresh though not really stuffed ears. No sparkle.

So Clairixa hopped over to the Silverstone and all was correct right away.

Only candidates at this moment, and for me and my system, are Windows 8 and Windows 10 Build 10074. I think the 10074 will win this.

Peter

[pedal]

OK,

It seems I have jumped on the wrong train (W10 10586.0). However 10586.0 was the only one being available to me last week, and beeing the audiophile I am, instantly I started the tweaking process.

But let's not waste time on the second best: Where can I get hold on the W10 10074?

[PeterSt]

hehe ...
Are you sure you can take this ? haha

Getting Specific W10 Builds.

Please be smart and get yourself another disk for this. Then you can more easily compare (swap disks).
Dual boot is also possible, but I don't advise that in your (growing experience !) situation.

Regards,
Peter

[pedal]

hehe ...
Are you sure you can take this ? haha

I already erased one HD with music (all my Christmas and OST music) while fidling with the installation, so I paid the price of learning... 

But I am doing progress, and will make an attempt. I am curious to try 10074 and do some testing on my own.

In the longer run I plan buying the XX PC with everything pre-installed, together with NOS1 Upgrade, but it will have to wait till 2016 sometime.
(I promised the kids to purchase the home cinema in our basement before Christmas, so my cash flow will be low for some months after that).

[Robert]

In terms of Silverstone USB card which I have recently added for the first time to XXhighend v202 and 10074.

I can't believe the improvement this brings to the music. Definitely more muscial, listenable. This has held me up trying later OS versions and v203a.

In fact I will just add v203a to 10074 next as this should be simple enough.

Robert