Who's used the Audiophile Optimizer for Windows 2012 Server or Windows 8?

[k6davis]

Thank you so much for this patient explanation. So helpful.

 

Just to confirm: In a two PC setup, you use one PC, which runs Windows and all else, to "control" the other, which sends audio data to the DAC. Correct?

 

I'm really intrigued to try this. Are you able to listen to streaming audio with this arrangement? Does the "control" PC send streaming audio data to the "slave" PC, which then sends it to the DAC? Is this arrangement more economical than buying one of those dedicated music servers? Windows Server is almost $600, then there's the cost of the dedicated computer, the audio optimizer software.

 

Also, the networking issues implied in this "control"/"slave" dual PC setup sound daunting. Are they?

 

Many thanks, again...

 

You asked lots of questions in a small space, so there will be lots of reply, skipperdude!

 

You have the right idea. The ControlPC is the one you interact with. It runs your media player software. The Audio ("slave") PC is a passive device. Once it's configured, you don't interact with it directly. You basically use the ControlPC as though the AudioPC wasn't there.

 

I run WS2012 Core + JPlay + Audiophile Optimizer on both my ControlPC & my AudioPC. I've "told" JPlay & Audiophile Optimizer what the function of each computer is (ControlPC vs AudioPC) and both apps configure themselves accordingly. I use JRiver Media Center 19 on my ControlPC.

 

Except for the drivers to make everything work, I don't have any other software on either machine. That means that I don't listen to streaming audio through this setup. My objective was to minimize the activity on both machines in order to achieve the best possible sound quality.

 

I actually have a THIRD computer in my system that runs Windows 8 that I use for audio & video streaming, torrenting, internet, etc. My computers are all very small, quiet and relatively inexpensive. With three, I can get purist audio while at the same time having all the convenience and flexibility of general purpose computing.

 

There are definitely less restrictive options for setting up your ControlPC. It can have a GUI, internet access, streaming audio, etc. if you prefer.

 

You asked if a dual PC is more economical than most dedicated music servers. My setup is - even with three computers. No disrespect to anyone, but I've never been a fan of turnkey music servers. I find them to be very expensive & proprietary versions of a PC with media player software. Plus, none of them offer enough storage for my liking. IMO, it's not difficult to install a media player (of your choice) on a computer (of your choice) for far less money and with far more flexibility going forward.

 

You mention the costs. There's no getting around the fact that they certainly do pile up. I've always been willing to spend a moderate amount (maybe a little more) where there was an obvious benefit and I've found that to be true of the AO. To put it mildly.

 

Again, this is strictly my opinion, but with limited funds to spend, I'm far less enamored of special computer hardware than I am of optimizing the software. I have no interest in a $3k computer that runs Windows 8. I'd rather have a (quiet) $500 computer that runs WS2012 + AO. I do use the well-regarded Paul Pang Audiophile USB 3.0 card, but beyond that, my computer hardware is standard.

 

You also asked if the setting up the networking between the ControlPC & AudioPC is daunting. It's not. Setting up the entire system is not very difficult if you have a decent amount of computer literacy. It can even be done quickly once you are familiar with the process. AudioPhil's manual (which you can download for free) is fantastic and guides you every step of the way. Plus there is support available from him and on this board.

 

The only way to know if it's for you is to give it a try. WS2012's free trial lasts for 6 months. You could get a small SSD and temporarily replace your existing hard drive with it so there's no risk to your current configuration.

 

Whew.. I think that covers it!

[k6davis]

The more I look into this the more bewildered I become. There's a pissing match between JRiver and JPlay (for some reason, I though there were two types of software from the same company) with JRiver saying JPlay is a hoax. Which means one of them is a hoax--either JPlay, or JRiver, for its intemperate accusation. (And why are they both "J"? What's that about?)

 

Pissing match? Boy is there, and I don't see why. I think JRiver is fantastic and I don't see how JPlay negatively impacts their product, but that's their business. They are definitely not from the same company.

 

Then there's the philosophy of the dual-PC setup, which apparently does involve sending digital streams from the "control" PC to the "slave" PC, which then sends the stream on to the DAC. But if the digital signal from the "control" PC is already damaged from all that noise, the "slave" PC is hardly going to put humpty-dumpty back together again.

 

Terribly bewildered...

 

Believe me... I have had this exact same question. Your reasoning makes complete sense to me. I definitely do not have the technical expertise to answer your question properly, but there are others on the board that may chime in.

 

I can offer my .02, which is exactly what it's worth.

 

I suspect (or hope at least) that in a dual PC configuration, JPlay forces the memory buffering and timing of the output of the audio data to occur in the AudioPC and not in the ControlPC. That would serve to immunize the final output from whatever "damage" would have occurred in the ControlPC, if it had to do everything by itself.

 

Remember that the data that flows between the two machines is not a finished product that is ready to be output to a DAC. It stands to reason that in a dual PC setup, the ControlPC would be more focused on which bits to play while the AudioPC would be in charge of how those bits are played.

 

This is a gross oversimpifcation, I know, and it may not even be right, but it's a/my theory. If anyone else can shed light on the question, please do.

 

Keith

[skipperdude]

You asked lots of questions in a small space, so there will be lots of reply, skipperdude!

 

You have the right idea. The ControlPC is the one you interact with. It runs your media player software. The Audio ("slave") PC is a passive device. Once it's configured, you don't interact with it directly. You basically use the ControlPC as though the AudioPC wasn't there.

 

I run WS2012 Core + JPlay + Audiophile Optimizer on both my ControlPC & my AudioPC. I've "told" JPlay & Audiophile Optimizer what the function of each computer is (ControlPC vs AudioPC) and both apps configure themselves accordingly. I use JRiver Media Center 19 on my ControlPC.

 

Except for the drivers to make everything work, I don't have any other software on either machine. That means that I don't listen to streaming audio through this setup. My objective was to minimize the activity on both machines in order to achieve the best possible sound quality.

 

I actually have a THIRD computer in my system that runs Windows 8 that I use for audio & video streaming, torrenting, internet, etc. My computers are all very small, quiet and relatively inexpensive. With three, I can get purist audio while at the same time having all the convenience and flexibility of general purpose computing.

 

There are definitely less restrictive options for setting up your ControlPC. It can have a GUI, internet access, streaming audio, etc. if you prefer.

 

You asked if a dual PC is more economical than most dedicated music servers. My setup is - even with three computers. No disrespect to anyone, but I've never been a fan of turnkey music servers. I find them to be very expensive & proprietary versions of a PC with media player software. Plus, none of them offer enough storage for my liking. IMO, it's not difficult to install a media player (of your choice) on a computer (of your choice) for far less money and with far more flexibility going forward.

 

You mention the costs. There's no getting around the fact that they certainly do pile up. I've always been willing to spend a moderate amount (maybe a little more) where there was an obvious benefit and I've found that to be true of the AO. To put it mildly.

 

Again, this is strictly my opinion, but with limited funds to spend, I'm far less enamored of special computer hardware than I am of optimizing the software. I have no interest in a $3k computer that runs Windows 8. I'd rather have a (quiet) $500 computer that runs WS2012 + AO. I do use the well-regarded Paul Pang Audiophile USB 3.0 card, but beyond that, my computer hardware is standard.

 

You also asked if the setting up the networking between the ControlPC & AudioPC is daunting. It's not. Setting up the entire system is not very difficult if you have a decent amount of computer literacy. It can even be done quickly once you are familiar with the process. AudioPhil's manual (which you can download for free) is fantastic and guides you every step of the way. Plus there is support available from him and on this board.

 

The only way to know if it's for you is to give it a try. WS2012's free trial lasts for 6 months. You could get a small SSD and temporarily replace your existing hard drive with it so there's no risk to your current configuration.

 

Whew.. I think that covers it!

 

Awesome overview, man! Many, many thanks. It's starting to sink through my thick skull. Your choices definitely make sense. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to google "Paul Pang Adiophile USB 3.0 card"...

[skipperdude]

Pissing match? Boy is there, and I don't see why. I think JRiver is fantastic and I don't see how JPlay negatively impacts their product, but that's their business. They are definitely not from the same company.

 

 

 

Believe me... I have had this exact same question. Your reasoning makes complete sense to me. I definitely do not have the technical expertise to answer your question properly, but there are others on the board that may chime in.

 

I can offer my .02, which is exactly what it's worth.

 

I suspect (or hope at least) that in a dual PC configuration, JPlay forces the memory buffering and timing of the output of the audio data to occur in the AudioPC and not in the ControlPC. That would serve to immunize the final output from whatever "damage" would have occurred in the ControlPC, if it had to do everything by itself.

 

Remember that the data that flows between the two machines is not a finished product that is ready to be output to a DAC. It stands to reason that in a dual PC setup, the ControlPC would be more focused on which bits to play while the AudioPC would be in charge of how those bits are played.

 

This is a gross oversimpifcation, I know, and it may not even be right, but it's a/my theory. If anyone else can shed light on the question, please do.

 

Keith

Makes sense. Yes. Thanks again

[xiddox]

OK, I have a somewhat peripheral question.

 

Page 20 of Phil's guide refers to raising the priority of the IRQ of the USB controller that your DAC uses. Incidentally, the guide also states : "It’s best to switch view to “devices by connection” [Phil, this view mode is in the Device Manager, and not the System Information Utility, so I would suggest changing the text in your guide to something like: "It's best to use the Device Manager to view 'devices by connection'..."]

 

So anyway, my dilemma is that there are two USB interfaces listed with the exact same name, and the only way I can see to differentiate between them in the IRQ list screen is by the order in which they appear. So my question is: is the listing order the same in the two screens?

 

To be more specific, in the first screenshot below, you can see my USB DAC (actually, it's an EXAU2I USB to I2S interface board) connected to the "Standard Enhanced PCI to USB Host Controller" device. But there is a second device with the same name listed below!

 

 

Looking now at the IRQ list screen, you can see both devices listed with their respective IRQs. But there does not appear to be any way to gain more information about the devices listed other than their names and IRQs. So my guess (and hope!) is that the devices are listed in the same order in both screens, so that, in my case, my DAC USB controller is IRQ17.

 

Does anyone know if i am correct, or can otherwise offer any advice?

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]11000[/ATTACH]

 

- r.

[AudioPhil]

Hello Folks

 

Version 1.24 is online now and can be downloaded. All new features are described very well in the PDF guide. Especially the ServiceTool offers many new features. Have fun with the latest version...!

 

 

Version 1.24

===================================================

- Possibility to optimize USB via AudiophileOptimizer (relevant for SQ)

- USBPAL (RigiSystems) driver support (MYTEK, Audio Research, etc.)

- No Question about USBPAL if selected usage type is ControlPC

- AudiophileOptimizer offers possibility not to disable WMI (Acourate Convolver)

- No reset of Optimizer needed anymore to use additional features of ServiceTool

- Enable, configure and disable autologon via ServiceTool

- ServiceTool can show system and component informations

- Shell replacement via ServiceTool (JRiver 18, 19, Foobar2000 & Total Commander)

- Restore of default shell via ServiceTool (automatically detects core/minimal/GUI)

- ServiceTool no longer deletes Sound Signature and Digital-Filter settings

- ServiceTool now has only three switches to switch modes (core/minimal/gui)

- ServiceTool doesn't start anymore with a full reset of the Optimizer

- ServerManager won't be reenabled by the ServiceTool's reset function

- Update of the PDF guide

 

Best,

Phil

[joelha]

Hi Phil,

 

For those of us who have already installed the beta, is there a reason to install this version?

 

Thanks for continually bettering an already wonderful product.

 

Joel

[AudioPhil]

Hi Joel

 

yes absolutely. Especially in this case. But also generally speaking it's a must to download the latest package from the site once released. Beta versions should be deleted once the final version came out. Always use the latest PDF guide found inside the ZIP.

 

Best,

Phil

[joelha]

Thanks Phil.

 

What has changed between the beta and this release?

 

Joel

[AudioPhil]

Hi

 

The USB optimization is now optional. Autologon can also be disabled again.

Some small corrections etc. As said, please ALWAYS download the release version no matter what, this is very important.

 

Best,

Phil

[tboooe]

I may be totally hearing things but version 1.24 sounds better than the beta version???

[AudioPhil]

Hi

 

The usb optimization routine itself has changed a bit as well.

 

best,

Phil

[WuNgUn]

I thought the trial version was coming out when the latest version went gold...?

Or is it just a money back guarantee that is offered now...?

[damhooligan]

But I found that even stock WS2012 was an improvement over optimized Win 7 & 8.

 

May I ask how you found that ???

How did you compare?

 

I am just starting on my server2012 adventure.

And I can't hear the difference at all.

 

My current set up is non optimized win7 with jriver19.

I compared it to stock WS2012 also with jriver 19.

Both jriver settings are identical.

And both are using the same dac same cable.

And using the same audio track.

 

The only variable is the OS.

If you can hear a diff with optimized win7 , I should be able to hear a dif with a non optimized win7.

I want to hear it, but I just don't.

 

I am genuinely interested in audiophileoptimizer, but if I can't hear a difference now ,

I might fear I wont hear a difference either with AO.

[dminches]

Hi

 

The usb optimization routine itself has changed a bit as well.

 

best,

Phil

 

Phil, what's does that do and is this another option that we should try both ways?

[AudioPhil]

Once the money-back guarantee option is available, it will be only for new customers anyway. This cannot be offered for customers who already bought the Optimizer, sorry.

 

my father died yesterday so i have other things to care about than you waiting for the money-back guarantee, sorry again.

 

go ahaed and use it, enjoy it and let your soul get connected with your favorite music.

[dminches]

Phil, so sorry to hear that. My condolences.

[AudioPhil]

Thank you very much, much appreciated.

 

 

Rest in peace Dad.

[WuNgUn]

May I ask how you found that ???

How did you compare?

 

I am just starting on my server2012 adventure.

And I can't hear the difference at all.

 

My current set up is non optimized win7 with jriver19.

I compared it to stock WS2012 also with jriver 19.

Both jriver settings are identical.

And both are using the same dac same cable.

And using the same audio track.

 

The only variable is the OS.

If you can hear a diff with optimized win7 , I should be able to hear a dif with a non optimized win7.

I want to hear it, but I just don't.

 

I am genuinely interested in audiophileoptimizer, but if I can't hear a difference now ,

I might fear I wont hear a difference either with AO.

 

Im pretty much with you on this...

I ran an optimized Win 8 setup, imaged the drive, installed R2 (minor optimization) and ran JRiver (with my backed up settings from Win8). I couldnt make out any discernible difference.

So I loaded back my Win8 image...15 minutes from sampling R2, I was listening to it with fresh ears...no difference that I could explain. Both sounded equally good.

Ive also experimented with the Win 8 Optimization script on both OS's (found elsewhere in this forum) and I cant describe any differences.

But with the script being free, I have a little peace of mind that the sound quality should be better!

[WuNgUn]

Once the money-back guarantee option is available, it will be only for new customers anyway. This cannot be offered for customers who already bought the Optimizer, sorry.

 

my father died yesterday so i have other things to care about than you waiting for the money-back guarantee, sorry again.

 

go ahaed and use it, enjoy it and let your soul get connected with your favorite music.

 

Sorry to hear that Phil...

[dtb300]

Im pretty much with you on this...

I ran an optimized Win 8 setup, imaged the drive, installed R2 (minor optimization) and ran JRiver (with my backed up settings from Win8). I couldnt make out any discernible difference.

So I loaded back my Win8 image...15 minutes from sampling R2, I was listening to it with fresh ears...no difference that I could explain. Both sounded equally good.

Ive also experimented with the Win 8 Optimization script on both OS's (found elsewhere in this forum) and I cant describe any differences.

But with the script being free, I have a little peace of mind that the sound quality should be better!

This has to be the ONLY post I have seen where 2012R2 is not seen as an improvement over Win7 & Win8.

[AudioPhil]

Regarding other Optimization scripts. You all should know what it is about them. Most of them, are base on old code i wrote in the very early stages of the AudiophileOptimizer. CAD's script for example is based on an "update" script i once made for my old project known as John Doe's audiophile Windows 8. CAD put a lot of effort into it to extend it and make it better. there are also other scripts available for server 2012, they are mostly or partly based on my work as well. I am the first one who made kernel-streaming available in core mode working. Everybody who offers this today is only able to do so because of me and my work. So it's important you all know who you are dealing with if you deal with me, you deal with the source of all evil

 

The AudiophileOptimizer is used by over 400 audiophiles meanwhile. This means a great responsibility for me. Every new release needs to fit, the guide needs to fit, the software needs to fit. Before every new release, a lot of hearing testing has been done by many dozen persons all over the world. some with systems costing more than some other people's houses. i have other friends who help testing out in a professional way, including protocols etc. so even if i give out a beta version, also this has already been checked and tested technically and sonically for many many hours. so as AudiophileOptimizer customer you also get a quality-guarantee. you get a well used and well tested solution that has already proven to work and deliver as claimed. It contains tons of non documented tweaks to deliver the claimed results, don't expect i write down all and every details that makey my solution so much better than the others.

 

You get a solution which resolves dozens of problems for you, without you even noticing it, because they just don't happen. Setting your system up according to my guide, using my software, this is kind of a framework, a standardized platform that will bring reproducable results. The results achieved sound wise are fantastic, no body thought about the importance of the operating system and it's (right) treatment. i hopefully could change the general mindset. not your player is what really matters no, it's your OS and the tweaks applied to it.

 

As many of you do know, i never made the Optimizer to get rich or make money. no, i just made it because i was technically able to do so and had fun doing it. I made it because i wanted to find a way to make my system sound better than every other computer based system, but without having to spent thousands of dollars in hardware for rather small gains.

[dtb300]

Excellent post Phil....

 

This is why I am considering moving from Win8.1 to 2012R2. No new trails to blaze and a bunch of folks already running 2012 to assist. Win8 to 8.1 was a good upgrade (far less resources used), and with 2012 having a trial version available, it is just my time (effort involved) to get it setup to evaluate.

 

And the cost of AO is well worth it based on feedback here and at other forums - nothing but glowing reviews. The cost is right around what JPlay cost and that was also a great add-on.

[WuNgUn]

This has to be the ONLY post I have seen where 2012R2 is not seen as an improvement over Win7 & Win8.

 

You mean, in respects to sonic s with regards to minimal processes, services and logs and unneeded drivers comparing the two OS's...?

Other than that, they are pretty much the same kernel...

And if those differences make a huge improvement as most posters here attest, then there is something wrong with my ears.

Personally, I believe I'm an objective listener and appreciator of all music and I carefully and critically observe whenever I listen to a piece or audition other peoples systems.

 

Im not discounting Phil's hard work or anyone else's personal observations on their own systems while using AO...or different OS's for that matter.

 

My only wish is to test it on MY system before laying out hard earned cash for it...

 

Phil...would this even be worth while on my system? I use a single PC with tweaked R2, a modified STX (no external USB DAC) with discrete clock and PSU/regulation played thru kernel streaming with JRiver, a pair of vintage, modified Dynakit Mk III mono block tube amps with Poseidon drivers and Gold Lion KT88 tubes and modified Klipsch KG4 loud speakers...

 

And I have to say, even at 100 Euro's, its hard to imagine it sounding THAT much better with AO.

And besides that, I'm still a bit concerned that the "magic" that's happening behind the scene with regards to the various sound "settings" aren't messing with the audio data in some way, regardless of it being bit perfect and unmodified. When I purchase something to improve my setup, such as different opamps for example, I have a pretty good idea what is being changed and how it effects the output.

With regards to purchasing AO and not knowing what its doing (and you're totally within your rights to keep this proprietary process to yourself!), Im more than just a little leery...

 

Again, I don't wish to give offence to anyone here with my opinion...its just that...my opinion.

[k6davis]

You mean, in respects to sonic s with regards to minimal processes, services and logs and unneeded drivers comparing the two OS's...?

Other than that, they are pretty much the same kernel...

And if those differences make a huge improvement as most posters here attest, then there is something wrong with my ears.

Personally, I believe I'm an objective listener and appreciator of all music and I carefully and critically observe whenever I listen to a piece or audition other peoples systems.

 

Im not discounting Phil's hard work or anyone else's personal observations on their own systems while using AO...or different OS's for that matter.

 

My only wish is to test it on MY system before laying out hard earned cash for it...

 

Phil...would this even be worth while on my system? I use a single PC with tweaked R2, a modified STX (no external USB DAC) with discrete clock and PSU/regulation played thru kernel streaming with JRiver, a pair of vintage, modified Dynakit Mk III mono block tube amps with Poseidon drivers and Gold Lion KT88 tubes and modified Klipsch KG4 loud speakers...

 

And I have to say, even at 100 Euro's, its hard to imagine it sounding THAT much better with AO.

And besides that, I'm still a bit concerned that the "magic" that's happening behind the scene with regards to the various sound "settings" aren't messing with the audio data in some way, regardless of it being bit perfect and unmodified. When I purchase something to improve my setup, such as different opamps for example, I have a pretty good idea what is being changed and how it effects the output.

With regards to purchasing AO and not knowing what its doing (and you're totally within your rights to keep this proprietary process to yourself!), Im more than just a little leery...

 

Again, I don't wish to give offence to anyone here with my opinion...its just that...my opinion.

 

Smile. I was right were you are. I loved the sound of my system before AO. Now I can't stand to listen without it. You can't know how much your OS (even WS2012) is holding it back.. until you know.

 

WS2012 does not make the huge difference. WS2012 + AO (which you have not yet heard) makes the huge difference. Many others have said the same about AO.

 

I'm so happy with it that I've spent considerable time writing many words here encouraging other audiophiles to give it a try. I get no benefit from this, other than knowing that I've helped other people who are passionate about audio take their systems to a whole new level.

 

But all you can go on is words. I disagree with you that Phil does not explain what AO is doing. He goes into as much detail as I think makes sense on his webpage (Highend-AudioPC | AudiophileOptimizer) and in his manual. The theory he presents there combined with numerous testimonials from various sources was persuasive to me. There are reviews here, reviews on Phil's website, reviews on the JPlay forum and on AudioCircle, etc. Phil has claimed a 100% customer satisfaction rate. Based on what I've read (and of course my own experience), peoples reactions seem to range from strongly positive to amazement.

 

I hope you try it... mostly because I'm curious what your reaction would be. I suspect you might wind up singing its praises too.

 

If you want certainty, you could wait until Phil develops his trial version.