As I understand In my case checking mem box shouldn't change SQ because I am listening 16/44 But it does somehow.
This is hard to tell or predict (in fact, I'm thinking of building in some log).
But that is why I told to check the memory; if it remains the same, it does nothing, and the executed code is really the same.
... I think / it should. But please tell the result of the Mem box and Memory useage.
And note that I will apply the changes according to your twisted brain. I like a twisted brain too, but then from a nice pint of beer.
Now, I asked LydMekk per PM to describe the differences as well, say, in order not to get plecabo'd. The key is in his observations.
LydMekk, allow me to quote you from your PM :
Have compared u8 and u10 again tonight some 20 times. Played 1 WAV 44/16 EAC-ripped, Fourplay->Journey-Fields of Gold.
The difference is minute, but it's there. 08 Sounds "rounder" and more gentle. U10 has more energy and level in transient edges in the upper regions, maybe from mid and up, like plucking the cords on a guitar sounds higher and clearer. U8 has almost not enough "crispiness" but in u10 theres tilting towards to much.
Maybe u10 has a slightly bigger scene, but that may be the slightly increased playback level upwards.
Seems I can set the volume up a notch on 08, on u10 I can't play as loud. I kind of relaxes more with u8 than u10 but u10 sounds more "clear".
I know, I also starts to confuse myself here...twisting and turning trying to explain what is more of a "feeling"...
Above text was never implied by me, but shows exactly what I expected (from the code) and what I experience myself. Ok, I *did* talk about it earlier but in other contexts, and some year ago it was excessivley discussed elsewhere, because it is so hard to comprehend.
Note that LydMekk is playing Double/Upsampled, where this shows more than what I like, hence what I find bearable.
I earlier referred to "energy" and stuff, but which is not measurable. In fact it is easy to recognize, once you have the experience; this is about higher dynamics. So, what theoretically is applied now is the "crazy dynamics" as how I called them one year ago, and which came from an early XXEngine3 version in Double and Double/Upsample. It kind of happened by accident, but I never forgot it and how the code was. Now, this has been applied to the normal (not Double) version as well, with the remark of it not being able to express that well there, because of (one of the) explicit "de-jitter" operations not working (like Double would do that). But it is there ...
How do you notice ? well, very easy, you can't play that loud. How do you *really* notice ? even more easy : because your wife tells you it's too loud. To give an indication of the difference : I played at -24dB since the Digital Volume, once we all got used to the level of -30dB (per night), and now I play at -36dB and
maybe I switch to -30dB. It just gets too loud otherwise. Not harsh, not disturbing, but just too loud. How can that be ?
Apart from quite some pages in order to (the attempt to) reason it out which I did one year ago, it can't. I mean, take out your dB meter and measure. There is just no difference. Mind you, this is about super transients, which possibly won't be caught by my slow meter. Still I set my volume 6dB lower, if not 12 ...
I can't be sure what it takes from the rest of the equipment to show this, but I know that my SS amps I had one year ago, including my Infinity R90s from back then, showed it easily. But, the band high-mid and tweeter in the R90's are capable of producing very high energy and are very fast ...
I am not sure what happens when the equipment is fed with these higher transients while it can't cope. You just won't notice ? plain distortion ? unwanted harmonics arise (is distortion of course) ? uncomfortable feeling ?
Stupid thing is, that I know that the highst level of "this" is better from theory. Better from the theory of the things I apply in the program, and assuming this can not overshoot, probably our systems can't cope with it ? I don't have the answer to this yet.
Might you have difficulties in recognizing it, try to pay attention to suddenly generally occurring similar things everywhere. In this case it would be about rattling the (wound) strings which every guitar player seems to be keen on (or can't avoid).
For those who think this is good (on their system), I can go one step further with this, although technically I don't know how to do it yet. So that's for later, when I have become more smart.
For those who think this is not good, I will create a checkbox "High Dynamics" for the next version. As how the code is setup now, this can easily be applied without changing the SQ in the base of either. Maybe I should call it "Low Dynamics" because I keep on thinking that the latest (0.9u-10) is theoretically better and should be default.
Peter
