Its very good

[Chris V]

All the XP engines so far are good, but my personal preference is #2 doubled.

I have it playing from an XP laptop through Fireface 400 into a TACT 2.2X DAC, then to an EAR 861 driving DX4s in Hornet Hedlunds and a Sugden A21 driving BD15s in 'Reference' cabinets

The sound is wonderful, open, clear and full of the body normally associated with high quality vinyl.
Notes such a a plucked guitar string are beautifully formed both in build, decay and timbre, but most importantly it gives music of such quality that I now consider my CDP and DAC redundant. This combo cost £4200 when new so this is no mean achievement.

I have listened to old favourite tracks which are given a new lease of life and to tracks such as Shania Twains "Your Still The One" which is so badly recorded that normally I enjoy it only at modest volumes. This evening I payed it loud and I wont kid you that it was perfect, but I didn't wince at the harsh parts .

Some further observations:

I compared XX directly with my CDP.
XX seems about 2-3db louder (more dynamic?). I needed to pursuade myself that this was not cheating on the comparison, as playing one bit of equipment a bit louder is often used by salesmen to impress and sell their gear. Not so, I turned the volume on XX down to subjectively be the same as the CDP and it still romped it.

Bass seems fuller, crisper and better defined.

One test of a good Hi Fi for me is the ability to be surprised and even startled by elements of the music. XX passed this test easily.

I don't yet hear any of this room correction stuff (though I listened for it and have an open mind), and the TACT, for me, pushes the performance to a higher level still, but XX is very, very good.

With luck my Vista laptop arrives tomorrow and we'll see how that does.

[PeterSt]

XX seems about 2-3db louder (more dynamic?).

When the DAC you used is the same (or better : when the whole chain after the PC is the same as that after the CDP), then, yes, I would dedicate that to more dynamics (and you probably read my descriptions about that). But *was* the chain the same ? I can imagine that with the CDP you at least didn't use the Fireface ...

Then, at using the Fireface, be careful dat the sliders are at the 0dB position. You can easily get them there by means of ctrl-click on them.
Higher is dead-wrong, and lower is not good also !

I don't yet hear any of this room correction stuff

Remember that there's nothing explicit in there, and all (my theories) is bound to "when it's good you don't need external corrections".
Since this, so far, works everywhere, and I don't expect you to reside in a concrete bunker (where it wasn't tested yet your conclusion should be : then there's other things in my system not optimally working.
And Chris, I don't say this to be right or for a whatever unreal reason, I say it because it works everywhere, and when it didn't it was always solved by searching for the culprit as long as it took to get rid of the room anomalies.
I *know* that your TacT will do it better in the case there's something going on, just like the TacT will get rid of the anomalies at using Foobar. So the real message is : don't use filtering cables to get rid of harsh highs and find the culprit instead, which would be in the same leage as saying : don't use your TacT and find the real culprit instead (no matter how unbelieveable it comes to you).

Of course you remember the nos-DAC thing (as a prerequisite to let it all work(out)), so here is reason #1.
But of course again, in your situation it would be a rather awkward solution, because the first thing you'd have to do is get rid of the TacT as well. That is, you'd be only allowed to let it pass through everything 100%.
Also, do note that squeezing out the peaks is different -and not as bad- as pulling up the dips, and that dips of 0dB SPL exist which just can't be amplified (1000 x 0 = ... ?).
Might you be able to get hold of an nos DAC loaner, don't hesitate to try whether I could be right ... 
If I am, it would be worth it. You know that ... 

[Chris V]

When the DAC you used is the same (or better : when the whole chain after the PC is the same as that after the CDP), then, yes, I would dedicate that to more dynamics (and you probably read my descriptions about that). But *was* the chain the same ? I can imagine that with the CDP you at least didn't use the Fireface ...

Then, at using the Fireface, be careful dat the sliders are at the 0dB position. You can easily get them there by means of ctrl-click on them.
Higher is dead-wrong, and lower is not good also !

You are right about the Fireface being an extra bit in the chain. Next time I listen I will make sure the sliders are at 0dB and report back.

I don't yet hear any of this room correction stuff

Since this, so far, works everywhere, [/i]

Interesting, as I was having this discussion with Gerner and please correct me if I am wrong, but all the systems you observed this on were front loaded horns. I would love to hear otherwise 

And Chris, I don't say this to be right or for a whatever unreal reason, I say it because it works everywhere, and when it didn't it was always solved by searching for the culprit as long as it took to get rid of the room anomalies.
I *know* that your TacT will do it better in the case there's something going on, just like the TacT will get rid of the anomalies at using Foobar. So the real message is : don't use filtering cables to get rid of harsh highs and find the culprit instead, which would be in the same leage as saying : don't use your TacT and find the real culprit instead (no matter how unbelieveable it comes to you).

All my cables etc have been chosen for maximum transparency, audionote silver etc and quality mains cables, so I dont think that the problem.

Of course you remember the nos-DAC thing (as a prerequisite to let it all work(out)), so here is reason #1.
But of course again, in your situation it would be a rather awkward solution, because the first thing you'd have to do is get rid of the TacT as well. That is, you'd be only allowed to let it pass through everything 100%.
Also, do note that squeezing out the peaks is different -and not as bad- as pulling up the dips, and that dips of 0dB SPL exist which just can't be amplified (1000 x 0 = ... ?).
Yes thanks, I know all about this
Might you be able to get hold of an nos DAC loaner, don't hesitate to try whether I could be right ... 
If I am, it would be worth it. You know that ... 
[/quote]

I do still have the Counterpoint DAC. Here are the specs, but it looks to have oversampling.

UltraAnalogue D20400 hybrid
Internal 8X oversampling digital interpolation filter
Dual 20-bit converters, a stable bipolar reference and two distortion supressing output deglitching amplifiers.
Proprietary architecture assures no transitions of Most Significant Bits at near-zero signal levels.
20 bit resolution provides 120db of dynamic range

OK while writing, I have formalised a plan. Because I like to mature properly on each improvement here is the order I will do things

1. Instal XX in the new Vista PC when it arrives (my current system is easily able to hear differences).
2. Work out how to store and archive my music using EAC
3. Evaluate all improvemments using the Tact so that my subs remain properly integrated.
4. When all is settled, borrow or steal a nos DAC and search out the additional benefits you and Gerner describe.

[PeterSt]

Interesting, as I was having this discussion with Gerner and please correct me if I am wrong, but all the systems you observed this on were front loaded horns. I would love to hear otherwise   

Haha, this was merely about rooms, not about systems.
The only "system" for that matter where I found it working just the same (and others weren't tested) were my own Infinity R90's.
No difference ...

All my cables etc have been chosen for maximum transparency

Oh, the cable thing was just an I think well known example, and I compared it with the other stuff ...
I think your (and anyone's) cables are unrelated to *this* matter.

I do still have the Counterpoint DAC. Here are the specs, but it looks to have oversampling.

You can always try it, with having in mind that (apparantly) before you didn't like it anymore and switched.
It's no matter of life and death, and long as you are "able" to decide for yourself what to use when.

Maybe you find it of interest that I use my two subwoofers all the time (upper cutoff is equalized with the bottom of the BD15s), and I too have a processor (for room correction) for the subs which I used before ... I just don't need it anymore. Not even with the 2 subwoofers.
Btw, you may have read that (out of all  ) Bert activated his subwoofer as well (which is a rather huge one), and the only thing he does is getting the xover right by means of a processor.

[Chris V]

I have now compared XP engine2 doubled with Vista engine 2 (non doubled)

Vista is equally impressive, but subtly different to XP. I found XP to be a bit livelier, but Vista wins out for me on its smoothness of performance. Its very relaxing to listen to, yet still very dynamic and XX remains far in advance of any CD player I have heard.

One example of the smoothness.
I mentioned before Shania's badly recorded CD which can be far too aggressive. On the track "your still the one" vista engine2 lifts her voice just far enough away from the backing chorus so that a nasty interaction is all but gone.

One down side to the vista engine2 is that it has lost some of the stability of XP, it doesn't crash out, but playback is populated by occasional drop outs of sound for a split second (maybe every 5 minutes or so).
I have the Fireface buffer set at high figures.

All together a very successful package.

[PeterSt]

All those combinations ... 

Well Chris, I don't think I even ever tried #2 on Vista. Possibly that is because (for me) theoretically it shouldn't differ for quality from #1 (but I know it does), while it has less functionality once Doubling is not applicable (like with Vista).
But another thing is : what did you set your sounddevice samplerate to in Vista ? Remember, properties of the device (after click on the loudspeaker icon in the taskbar tray), the rightmost tab and the combobox in there.
Set that to 96 and it really will be different again.

Note that you can check what it's really doing by means of the Fireface properties form (yellow icon).
In Vista you should get used to always doing that checking (with #1 & #2) because it's really the Vista setting determining it (mentioned above).


Now what comes to my mind for the first time ...
People like Klaus reported better quality with 48KHz (and offline resampling). This can be true for theories easily, once you know that the DAC's clock itself runs on a (MHz range) rate that suits the samplerate ... or not. For 44K1 it might be more not ...
Now, since I am used to 96K on Vista anyway, I might just as well resample to 48K ... uhmm ... *you* might just as well Chris.

I myself am always listening to #3 lately and I really need my time for that.

[Chris V]

But another thing is : what did you set your sounddevice sample rate to in Vista ? Remember, properties of the device (after click on the loudspeaker icon in the taskbar tray), the rightmost tab and the combobox in there.
Set that to 96 and it really will be different again.

Wow that opens up another big area for experiment (16/24 bit and change of sampling up to 192!)

There is a definite improvement for me as I increase the sampling rate I can see on my Tact that 192 is making it right through. Not sure if I should be running at 16 or 24 bit?

With both engine 1 and 2 there are a fair number of drop outs (more as I increase the sampling rate). I have got the buffer set at a maximum 1024 but this does not fully cure it. I guess engine 3 will sort it out

[PeterSt]

One down side to the vista engine2 is that it has lost some of the stability of XP, it doesn't crash out, but playback is populated by occasional drop outs of sound for a split second (maybe every 5 minutes or so).

Oh, forgot to reply to this one ...
Chris, I don't know what you have here, but this does NOT come from XX.

With both engine 1 and 2 there are a fair number of drop outs (more as I increase the sampling rate).

... just as that I wouldn't blame XX for this (but actually I can't tell ... about the first quote I can though, so I assume this is about the same problem).

If I must guess something : motherboard drivers, or very theoretically the Fireface drivers -> 1 %.
Since I don't like to experiment with Fireface drivers I don't use your version yet, but below you find the drivers which I use without problems.

If that doesn't help you should update all of your motherboard's drivers. And for those I can't help you ... (not experienced with that). So be careful.

[Chris V]

With both engine 1 and 2 there are a fair number of drop outs (more as I increase the sampling rate).

... just as that I wouldn't blame XX for this (but actually I can't tell ... about the first quote I can though, so I assume this is about the same problem).

If I must guess something : motherboard drivers, or very theoretically the Fireface drivers -> 1 %.
Since I don't like to experiment with Fireface drivers I don't use your version yet, but below you find the drivers which I use without problems.

If that doesn't help you should update all of your motherboard's drivers. And for those I can't help you ... (not experienced with that). So be careful.

Emmmmmmmm  was rather hoping it was XX. Now I have to find a cure myself

The laptop is a brand new Dell Inspiron, can it already have outdated motherboard drivers? The drop outs are sometimes when the PC is not being touched, but other times if I am doing something else on it, it happens.

I have turned the sound effects off on the PC, is there anything else I should stop running?

Will try changing the Fireface drivers to the ones you use and let you know what happens

[PeterSt]

I have turned the sound effects off on the PC, is there anything else I should stop running?

No Chris, this is really unrelated for this player.
Btw, Bert had the same (and in other areas I heard it as well as a solution -> ) Mobo drivers ...
Maybe Bert can tell you how to go about ? 

[Chris V]

I have turned the sound effects off on the PC, is there anything else I should stop running?

No Chris, this is really unrelated for this player.
Btw, Bert had the same (and in other areas I heard it as well as a solution -> ) Mobo drivers ...
Maybe Bert can tell you how to go about ? 

Comforting to know I am not alone (this pioneering stuff eh!)

I think Bert also has a Dell Inspiron so hopefully he will pop up with a solution.

Thanks again
Chris

[BertD]

I think Bert also has a Dell Inspiron so hopefully he will pop up with a solution.

Hi Chris,

Never had the problem with my 2 year old Dell (only using XP) but did have some hickup problems with my PC (solved that after updating to the latest drivers for the mobo).

Perhaps the data of the track is corrupt? That can cause severe hickups too...

Hard to tell from a disctance what you should change to prevent this from happening...

I am running XX on Vista (48kHz) with the fireface at 48 samples and no errors (except "demo expired" occasionally...)

Bert

[Chris V]

I think Bert also has a Dell Inspiron so hopefully he will pop up with a solution.

Hi Chris,

Never had the problem with my 2 year old Dell (only using XP) but did have some hickup problems with my PC (solved that after updating to the latest drivers for the mobo).

Perhaps the data of the track is corrupt? That can cause severe hickups too...

Hard to tell from a disctance what you should change to prevent this from happening...

I am running XX on Vista (48kHz) with the fireface at 48 samples and no errors (except "demo expired" occasionally...)

Bert

Oh dear, was hoping for a quick fix

Have recorded WAV files of many tracks on 2 PCs and all have these hiccups so convinced it's not the the raw data - also these ran perfectly on my XP laptop.

What drivers have you got in you Fireface 400?

Note to self  "dont panic and work through it all again slowly" 

[BertD]

Okay, then it is not the raw data but something else delaying the data "stream"

FireFace 400:

Driver date: 10.04.07
Driver version: 2.66
Hardware version: 1.63

Perhaps you can set XX' priorities higher?

[Chris V]

Okay, then it is not the raw data but something else delaying the data "stream"

FireFace 400:

Driver date: 10.04.07
Driver version: 2.66
Hardware version: 1.63

Perhaps you can set XX' priorities higher?

Thanks Bert

I'm using the same Fireface 400 drivers and firmware as you, so will leave well alone there.

It sounds like setting the XX priorities higher might help, but have used search and help pages, and cant see how to do this? Any guidance?

(I have not bothered registering all the new software on my PC as I wont be using it on the internet much, but I keep getting pop-ups urging me to do it, so perhaps the PC is putting some of its efforts into trying to do that in the background)

PS
Sold my Counterpoint CDP and DAC yesterday evening so the computer jukebox is in the front line.