V6a vs. W3 SQ

[SeVeReD]

I have to go to bed.  But, after a few sips of whiskey, I'm not sure now and need more time.  I moved the Q1 to 4 and changed the scheme to 3 and that seemed to help quite a bit.  I also turned down my volume a bit... I know that's supposed to not be a good sign, but I only turned down my the upper volumes on the xover to get a better balance.  Still preliminary, but W3 seems very lively in the upper mids, something that going to Q1 14 may help quite a bit and end up being better... dunno yet. Need more time which I don't have tonight.  Changing the scheme also helped... scheme 4 moves thing forward which I liked with v7, but was too much at Q1 0 for W3, so scheme 3 worked better...

I may still like V7 better, but I need more time now.  There was a liveliness, even more clear (dang is that possible... too clear? stripped?) to W3,...I need some more time with it Peter... and ya, with the new versions, the Q1 and scheme settings are very obvious in changing the character of the player.  Gotta go to bed, but hold them horses, unless you want to work on stuff ,,, dunno

Last thoughts were that W3 the upper mids were jumping out a bit, but sounded better when I turned down the high vol on the xover... may sound best after a bit more tweaking? dunno yet Peter.  I'll listen tomorrow and will have more time come tues evening too.

[PeterSt]

During the bad times I encountered the past weeks, I many times though of turning down my highs. But I know that would be a wrong thing to do, so I did not.
Same as that I wanted to turn down the bass. Didn't do that either.
I would be a wrong way of tweaking, knowing that these things have been good "always".

Right now the only thing which may come to mind is that the bass is not as tight as it can be. I'm sure this is caused by the high Q1 (it is just the nature of it).


I will do it. It gives me the better feeling, and once and for all I will have worked around stupid .NET memory management.

[PeterSt]

Btw., whats with the parental text filter the site has going?

Hahaha, I installed that right in the beginning (May 2007 I think) being afraid of people shouting at me all over.

I guess it can go with such a bunch of nice people ...

[pedal]

I am sorry I cannot participate in this AB evaluation due to newborn baby and busy at work. But all I can say is that my system never has sounded as good as it does now. (See my signature settings). Depending on the recording, the highs can be silky-smooth, extremely high resolution/lots of low level information accross all octaves, the soundstage can be extremely big, the bass so tight and deep that it shakes my whole house, micro- and macro dynamics can be frightly real, and I can play extremely loud without listening fatigue. Yesterday I had a critical listening session with a friend, a very critical listener, and he was in awe. Spellbounded, by the SQ.

I guess the key features here are: : UnAttended * V6a * Q1=-2
(Also I have all software on SS memory, and there are no USB interface in use).

So whatever you do, Peter, don't move away from this direction!

[Calibrator]

For those who want to judge the difference between 0.9v-6a (or 0.9v-7 for that matter) and 0.9-w3, please try this :

- Set split file at size (MB) at 700 (minimum);
- UNtick Start Engine3 during conversion;

and

- Set Q1 at 14. So, not specifically because of the above, but because it was my finding (too).

G'day Peter,

I finally found some time to devote to more A/B'ing using your suggestions from above.

I had reverted to 0.9v-7 and have been using it for a week now so I have a pretty good feel as to its SQ. I tried 0.9w-3 with your settings ( split size of 700MB and unticked Start Engine ) and started up some Diana Krall. It still lacks the sparkle of the earlier version to my mind. Particularly noticeable for the cymbals .. they don't sound as metallic. Now, this was using Q1 at -3. When I tried at again at +14 is was even more mellow and laid back, which isn't the way I enjoy my muusic. I like to hear every nuance and detail available.

I also noted that using a split size of 700MB resulted in a track stopping before the end and the next track starting up. When I used 0.9w-3 a week or so ago I used a size of 1024MB and didn't have that issue. I was also using the Start Engine3  during conversion option so perhaps that is the reason.

Hope that has given you a better feel for what we are hearing, and hopefully mimics your findings to a certain extent.

Cheers,

Russ

[PeterSt]

Thanks very much Russ. I hope to have it ready soon.

[SeVeReD]

Tonight I've spent time with W3 exclusively, and now that I've found some settings that I can work around I'm going to listen to it for awhile before going back to V7.  Very important for me was moving the Q1 up from -2 or 0 to 11 - 13 (for now).  I'm going back and forth between scheme 3 and scheme 4.  I think what also helped was moving from split file at 700 to split file at 425 (don't know how that would help the SQ, but I think it did for me) .... If I understand it right, that would keep the splitting of even a very large single album to just one split?  Anyway, after I get myself attached to this player, that's sounding very good tonight for me, I'll try going back to V7 in a few days.  Of course I leave unticked start eng 3 during conversion... are we not audiophools?  I never understood needing things to start that fast?  or is it just my fast computer...vroom vroom ... I already have to run back to the listening seat to get there before the music starts.  If you want slow start ups, I remember slow,,, that would be my SCD-1... XXHE starts quick enough.  What I'm trying to say is, I wouldn't even have the start eng 3 during conversion feature if it messes with the SQ.  Always play unattended too. ramblerambleramble

[PeterSt]

The size of the split shouldn't really matter, as long as it is not too small. So, 300 or 400 or 600MB it all doesn't matter (and most tracks fit within that anyway).

What does matter, is the clicks in between the splits (which are there at track boundaries just the same). So, I don't know what system I have, but I just hear them all the time. Just built in some "leds" in the software in order to show where I think they come from (which was confirmed by now), and tonight I *WILL* get it out of the way. Getting crazy of it, and I just don't know why it happens (at knowing *where* it happens).
The upside is that it is easily repeateable, and happens after 30 seconds or so of playing. This is different from when I worked on this before for such a long time (last April), when it was not repeatable (and the ticks were louder).

Note :
You may just as well forget about the "Start immediate" checkbox (hence you can have it ticked), because it was a theory I had that it could differ. But I don't think this was confirmed.
Kind of importantish : at UNticking this checkbox, tracks regulalry will play double, and after that playback stops. I noticed this before (and mentioned it somewhere) but it seems that this is caused by this checkbox being unticked (never noticed it otherwise). How this is possible anyway is another matter, and so far I can't find the cause.

[PeterSt]

and tonight I *WILL* get it out of the way.

Found it indeed. Solved it for myself, although not yet in the way it should for general purpose.

[SeVeReD]

Still kinda in a quandary about this.  I've stayed with W3 for a couple days now and went back and forth between V7 and W3 today.  Wasn't I just saying how unveiled V7 was, yet W3 seems more so.  But, have I reached the limits of my system? I feel like I hear more SSSSSSSSSibilance on things, distortion even? When I move back to V7 it sounds like I've turned down the volume, it sounds more relaxed, but veiled compared to W3. I relax more with V7... but on the other hand, W3 sounds exciting, maybe even more a window into the recording, but also a bit uneven, stuff jumping out in the upper mids? I've gone back and forth on dynamics; I don't think V7 is less dynamic, but maybe?  Lyric intelligibility is outstanding for both, but better? for W3 ... but I can play V7 louder, sometimes I think W3 hurts my ear and not of the right phase.... Q1 question?  I've stayed on 11 for W3, (0 for V7).... but there are a lot more numbers I guess I should explore...
I feel like I'm just throwing stuff out here... it's hard for me to evaluate right now for some reason. V7 more organic, greater depth of soundstage.  W3 even more see through, greater extension of upper mid highs (cymbals), but flatter soundstage... but get the feeling like my tweeters can't handle some things? or W3 not right for me. sigh... should take more time, but V7 is so comfortable and good to listen to with the music I listen to.  It has helped staying with W3 exclusively for the last few days, and I'll give it some more time, like I just need to find right Q1/scheme for it, like I feel I have for V7.
...
I really think I need to have Peter's DAC in order to evaluate this properly hehe

[PeterSt]

I really think I need to have Peter's DAC in order to evaluate this properly hehe

Hahaha, although you can very well be right on this, I have lost all my references.
Must learn again to listen to music too. I mean, typical lady jazz singers like Diana Krall or Barb Jungr didn't do all that much to me before. But now I just can't switch them off because of those basses used so profoundly. I said "used", and although Diana Krall rather heavily "used" it before, it now merely carries the music. But hey, isn't that always when such a bass is used ? well, maybe it wasn't through loudspeakers ...

The interest for (and of) the bass makes it a very tough job to listen to the other elements.

Anyway, the "ticks" as decribed earlier are completely solved now, and also I have a version of which I'm sure it sounds different. I must leave it to you guys though to interpret it.
Later today ...