HQ Player

[Lbameule]

Dear all,

 

I'm new to this forum, maybe @Miska or anyone can help me out.

 

I've been a user of HQP for quite a while, I think my first version was 3.10. I have a Devialet amp/DAC, which only goes to DSD64. Up to one of the following 3.x versions I was able to use DirectSDM to send my DSD streams directly to the DAC. From then on (somewhere around 3.14 o 3.16, can't remember well when) I started getting stuttering, long pauses and then restarting for a few seconds, that kind of thing. No problems whatsover with PCM, Convolution on or off. I use Roon, so after some trials I found that a solution was to convert my DSD64 files to PCM176k in Roon, and then send those to HQP. No problems at all there. Exactly the same happened when HQP was upgraded to v4.

 

Now, I run both Roon and HQP in an old MacBook Pro mid-2012, with 16Gb RAM, a i7, two core CPU (3520M) running at 2.9Mhz. I use Mac OS High Sierra (10.13). This is then relayed via NAA to a microRendu. I know this older system can be an issue here. So, my questions:

 

a) DirectSDM means that nothing is touched from the original stream, and is sent as such to the DAC, doesn't it? Am I correct in that assumption? Then, why does CPU usage goes to the sky, and I get this stuttering and pauses? This happens whether I use convolution or not. Again, I'm only trying to play DSD64 files, no upsampling, no Convolution, nothing applied... PCM, as said, is not a problem. 44.1 up to 192, no issues. Devialets go up to 192k and DSD64, so I'm not looking to upsample anything beyond that. CPU usage when doing PCM rarely goes beyond 17%.

 

b) I've read somewhere in this thread that Mac OS High SIerra could also be (at least partially) a stumbling block, and that other versions work better, is that so? Would upgrading to Mojave bring any improvement in your experience?

 

Let me know if you need any other data. I'm at the office now, away from my system. In my setting, my max rate in PCM is 192, Integer upsampling (so any 44.1 file will be upmsampled to 176). I'm ticking DirectSDM, so nothing on the settings on DSD sources should matter, except for the fact that DSD64 is the max rate, maybe...

 

Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot, best regards to all!

 

L
 

 

 

 

[Lbameule]

26 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Yes, in case you are asking SDM output. If you are asking for PCM output, it only disables volume control on v4. So if you are using DSD to PCM conversion, it can get quite heavy.

 

Hi, Miska, thanks for your answer. No, my idea is not to change the source format. So anything DSD should come out DSD, PCM in PCM. So, to be more direct and to the point:

 

Do I need to start thinking about upgrading my computer? DirectSDM actually does something to whatever is being sent in SDM into HQP, and there is basically nothing I can do but upgrade the hardware, is that so? What would be the less computationally heavy setting I could use to listen do DSD64 when sourcing DSD64?

 

Also, any ideas on the macOS version comment (High Sierra being "worse" that Mojave) ?

 

Thanks a lot!

 

L

 

[Lbameule]

11 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

That is usually quite unusual case to do. Not many DACs actually have two separate DACs, and even fewer perform well enough in both modes to be worth switching over.

 

But depending on your settings, you can do the switch.

 

 

Only channel delays for DSD when speaker processing is enabled. But DirectSDM setting applies only to DSD->DSD case anyway.

 

Thanks again.

 

Well, Devialet amps are like that, you can send any of the two formats (PCM up to 192, DSD 64) and it will work fine with both. Now, which format "sounds better", that's a different question and completely up to personal taste. Both sound very, very good to me, and I may attribute more to the particularities of the format to any possible difference in SQ, than to the DAC being "better" in PCM or in DSD... The thing is that using DirectSDM my CPU usage is hugely more than when processing PCM. What actually happens is that CPU usage doesn't change whether I choose DirectSDM or try to actually use filters and convolution with a DSD file... Any dsd file I play (through Roon or using HQP directly to the DAC) squeezes the poor 2012 i7 chip to the bone, that's what sounds strange to me, because according to your answers DirectSDM shouldn't be such a hog on the system at all... I use no channel delays...

 

Maybe I should include an image of my settings so you can see what I'm doing and maybe detect something wrong. I'll post them from one in a while.

 

Once again, thanks for your answers and patience!

 

 

 

[Lbameule]

@Miska sorry for bothering with something as foolish as this: I'm using version 4.1.0.1 on a Mac with OS X Sierra, but when I tried to use version 4.2 and newer, I couldn't. The disk image I downloaded from the site shows the HQPlayer Desktop app crossed over, as with a No Parking sign in any street. Must I update my system to something newer?

 

Thanks, regards,

 

 

L

 

[Lbameule]

On 12/27/2019 at 6:26 PM, Miska said:

 

Possibly due to minimum OS level being updated from 10.12 to 10.13... These are driven largely by the development tool updates as they drop support for older ones. I test HQPlayer only on latest and latest - 1.

 

 

Yup, that was it. Upgraded to High Sierra and working fine. Thanks!

 

L

 

[Lbameule]

In my understanding, Lossless is any (digital) file format that maintains the "sound wave information" of at least 44.1/16bit, ie CD/RedBook, equal to at least CD quality. This can happen both compressing (like FLAC files and other formats) or not compressing (WAV, AIFF, please correct me if I'm wrong) the information in the file, the thing is that the "output" must be at least equal to 44/16.

 

Cheers,

 

 

L
 

[Lbameule]

Dear @Miska,

 

Considering the above posts, I just wanted to ask you more background info and your opinion on the following:

 

I'm using a Devialet 220pro. As such, it uses TI PCM 1792 chips. I can send to it either PCM192 or DSD64 (so actually I could just choose "Source" in HQP), but have decided to fix as output PCM 176/192 as most of my music is in PCM, and due to my actual HQP computer being old (2012 MBP i7, 16Gb RAM) and needing to apply HAF filters I cannot do DSD64 without stuttering. I'm using closed-form-M and NS9. I tried Sinc-L and found the following: Sinc-L has something in the way it sounds that's very appealing to me, but I cannot point my finger exactly on what it is. Comparing closed-form-M to Sinc-L I find closed-form-M  to have better transients, a better, wider soundstage, and it seems to sound very close to Sinc-L, but still, as I said before, find something in the way Sinc-L sounds that's more appealing than closed-form-M. This, of course, mith my system, my room, my ears, isn't, YMMV.

 

So, then, my questions would be: what, if any, is the difference between closed-form-M and Sinc-L? Considering my system (DAC) and the like, would there be a wiser choice to explore?

 

Thanks!!!

[Lbameule]

17 hours ago, Miska said:

 

As far as I know, due to the way Devialet operates, they convert all DSD inputs to PCM. So your best option is to always send 192k PCM there.

 

 

They operate in a very different way. I would say it is up to your ears to decide which one you consider better. From technical perspective it is not easy to recommend one over the other.

 

OK, thanks a lot! Rgds!

 

L

[Lbameule]

1 hour ago, Miska said:

 

Please send me email again, I may have missed something... (had a motorcycle accident and spent some time in hospital, etc)

 

Wow, hope you are OK now... Get well soon!

 

L

[Lbameule]

1 hour ago, Zauurx said:

After Crosfeed.. 432hz plugin ??

 

https://432evo.be/index.php/what-is-432hz-tuning/

 

I don't know what that sounds like to listen.
You must have an EVO server to test while it is a "pitch" plugin, is it perhaps interesting ?

What do you think about that, Miska ?

 

I don't think we would notice much of a difference... it's a bit lower (ie, lower in pitch) but I don't think I would realise unless I could compare it with a normal 440hz version side by side. That's my very humble view on it. It might sound better, nonetheless, but the difference is not that big.

[Lbameule]

@Miska Hi, Miska!

 

Just to understand better what's going on in HQP, what's the difference in approach between closed-form (or closed-form-M, the basics should be same, shouldn't they?) and poly-sinc-ext2? Does any of them work as á la Chord (R2R ladder)? I love them both, just want to understand better what's behind the logic of both...

 

Thanks!

[Lbameule]

37 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Difference between closed-form and closed-form-M is number of "filter taps", although this filter is operationally different so the concept of taps is very different from let's say sinc-M.

 

poly-sinc-ext2 is entirely different kind of filter, it is an apodizing polyphase construct and can convert practically from any rate to any other rate.

 

 

sinc-M is maybe closest to what Chord M-Scaler does.

 

These are all related to digital filters used to increase sampling rate. Not directly related to a conversion stage like R2R ladder. Chord is a delta-sigma DAC and is not using R2R ladder, but instead array of more or less equally weighted elements.

 

Thanks, Miska.

 

I'm underestanding more. As to being "better transients" or "better space", any pointers? Thanks, regards,

 

L

[Lbameule]

21 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

It is up to personal preferences and type of music being listened.

 

Linear phase filters are usually good for classical music and other material recorded with few microphones (not mixed) in real acoustics. This type of music doesn't typically have much transients either.

 

Minimum phase filters can be good for multi-mic mixed studio productions like rock, that don't really have any space information but have a lot of transients, like drum kits and such.

 

It is not black and white though, but could work as a rough guidance.

 

Good, Understood. Now, how would you consider these filters (meaning closed-form ones and poly-sinc-ext2) in relation to transients or space? Because they seem to be a good compromise or "middle solution"...

 

Thanks, sorry for the many questions...

[Lbameule]

11 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

These are linear-phase filters, although poly-sinc-ext2 in my opinion sounds very good on transients too.

 

Yup, that was my experience, too... Thanks!

 

[Lbameule]

11 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

Ok @Miska I wrote the image to the SD card using bmaptool, still nothing.

Just trying to help here, please forgive me if this seems too dumb, but have youchecked the SD card is not locked? Physically, I mean, some of them have a sliding thing that locks or unlocks the card.

 

Hope it helps!

 

L

 

[Lbameule]

4 minutes ago, tonym said:

Miska , as the Devialet Dac upsamples to 24/192 , but as you observed there is an issue with the Devialet Air Ethernet driver , should I set HQPlayer to 22bit. Or is there a better solution ? Its odd because I've never seen anyone raise the issue before

Tony, you shouldn't need to use the Air driver. Are you sure that if you connect directly it doesn't work? I have a Dev too, and I don't use it. I never had an issue...

[Lbameule]

Please, do try turning off the Air driver, and seeing what appears in your HQP settings. My setup is different, I use a MicroRendu between my server and the Dev, so what is seen is the mR, but please do try and see if the Dev is seen directly, without Air working.