HQ Player

[louisxiawei]

49 minutes ago, tboooe said:

Guys, I know this is purely subjective but I am interested to hear people's thoughts on if getting a GPU to run the more complicated HQP filters has been worth the extra cost versus just running the -2S filters?  

You can start with 2s and non-2s  of same filter on DSD256 ouput to see whether it's worth your effort. Non-2s is just more refined in every aspect.

 

Maybe this analogy might help, at least I find the experience is very similar. I'm a big fan of illy coffee and I purchase the exact same illy coffee bean used in the illy Café shop and make espresso at home with home-use espresso machine, but it can never compete the taste at Café. The heavy-duty huge espresso machine and barasti at Café make the difference. So does powerful PC for non-2s filter. 😉

 

 

[jimdukey]

"Non-2s is just more refined in every aspect."

 

I've not read Jussi posting that!

 

 

[gdpr]

Neither have I read Jussi posting that.

 

But, I do prefer non-2s as well. 

With my T+A Dac I even slightly prefer DSD256 - poly-sinc-xtr-lp compared with DSD512 - poly-sinc-xtr-lp-2s

I wish I understood what is different between 1 step and 2 steps in a particular filter, as the Dac itself is not aware what happens with the bits before receiving them.

 

Dirk

[jimdukey]

Thanks!

I'm just in DSD 128, with Lampi Euphoria and Mac D 150 Dacs.

I've done my own live recording with Sony PCM D100 recorder, in DSD 64.

Played back with HQ is SO Good!

I love the Upsampling to DSD 128, may get a DSD 256 Mac compatible Dac in the future.

 

I have been using Poly-Sinc and enjoying it more than some of the other options lately,

but haven't formed an opinion about the 2s/non 2s debate ( if there is one...).

 

Occasionally I've had to use 2s or they wouldn't upsample.

Maybe File dependent or user error.

 

 

[louisxiawei]

7 hours ago, jimdukey said:

"Non-2s is just more refined in every aspect."

 

I've not read Jussi posting that!

 

 

So whats your argument? Jussi rarely talks about subjective listening preference anyway. He is always being analytical.

 

But he did say non-2s is "technically" better.

[jimdukey]

OK, but I seem to recall he said it didn't matter, just a question of Computer resources.

Anyway, I'll just bow out here...

 

[tboooe]

 

22 minutes ago, jimdukey said:

OK, but I seem to recall he said it didn't matter, just a question of Computer resources.

Anyway, I'll just bow out here...

 

Hmmmmm..if it doesn't matter why go through with the expense of adding a GPU?

[asdf1000]

58 minutes ago, tboooe said:

 

Hmmmmm..if it doesn't matter why go through with the expense of adding a GPU?

 

Million dollar question.

 

There are those that do hear better SQ with non-2s like @louisxiawei and others mention.

 

And there are those that hear no difference are happy running -2s.

 

So if you have people on both sides, you'll probably just need to demo and decide with your own ears.

 

My NUCi7 can do poly-sinc-short-lp in non-2s at DSD512. That's the only poly-sinc filter I can test at DSD512 with non-2s.

 

It does sound subjectively better to me with non-2s. Small difference but it does make me want to build something powerful if I see some price drops this year, not for that filter because I can already do it with my NUC7i7DNHE - but other filters.

 

It's an expensive exercise though, as you hint.

 

If I'm going to spend any money on a GPU it will be the RTX 2080 because Jussi has one, so that's the lowest risk purchase, even though it's expensive. Anything cheaper might be less capable and might be an expensive risk if it doesn't help at all.

 

At the same time, I've just recently discovered poly-sinc-ext2 and this runs in -2s all the time and my NUCi7 can handle it and I love the SQ performance of it.

 

 

 

[tboooe]

1 hour ago, Em2016 said:

 

Million dollar question.

 

There are those that do hear better SQ with non-2s like @louisxiawei and others mention.

 

And there are those that hear no difference are happy running -2s.

 

So if you have people on both sides, you'll probably just need to demo and decide with your own ears.

 

My NUCi7 can do poly-sinc-short-lp in non-2s at DSD512. That's the only poly-sinc filter I can test at DSD512 with non-2s.

 

It does sound subjectively better to me with non-2s. Small difference but it does make me want to build something powerful if I see some price drops this year, not for that filter because I can already do it with my NUC7i7DNHE - but other filters.

 

It's an expensive exercise though, as you hint.

 

If I'm going to spend any money on a GPU it will be the RTX 2080 because Jussi has one, so that's the lowest risk purchase, even though it's expensive. Anything cheaper might be less capable and might be an expensive risk if it doesn't help at all.

 

At the same time, I've just recently discovered poly-sinc-ext2 and this runs in -2s all the time and my NUCi7 can handle it and I love the SQ performance of it.

 

 

 

Yeah it's definitely an expensive experiment.  The Asus Strix Rog Rtx2080 used by Jussi is about $850! Of course like any true audiophile I keep wondering if I can get better sound quality by using the filters that requie a GPU.  

 

I too use the ext2 filter and love it.  I have an i7-6700 used in a fanless case that has no problems with this filter.  My only complaint is that using that filter my 48 sample rate music isn't converted to DSD44x512 so my DAC can't handle it. I have to manually select another filter just for 48 sample rate.  

[asdf1000]

8 minutes ago, tboooe said:

My only complaint is that using that filter my 48 sample rate music isn't converted to DSD512

 

What's the reason this happens?

 

Can't you force both x44.1k and x48k rates to DSD512x44.1?

 

Or is the x48k -> DSD512x44.1k conversion too taxing for your i7-6700 CPU, with ext2?

 

[tboooe]

9 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

What's the reason this happens?

 

Can't you force both x44.1k and x48k rates to DSD512x44.1?

 

Or is the x48k -> DSD512x44.1k conversion too taxing for your i7-6700 CPU, with ext2?

 

It seems that in my system ext2 filter acts like auto rate family is enabled so HQP tries to convert 48k music to DSD512x48 which my DAC can't handle.  My CPU can handle DSD512x44.1k without issue using -2s and ext2 filters.

[asdf1000]

2 minutes ago, tboooe said:

It seems that in my system ext2 filter acts like auto rate family is enabled so it tries to convert 48k music to DSD512x48 which my DAC can't handle.  My CPU can handle DSD512x44.1k without issue using -2s and ext2 filters.

 

Interesting. Have you reported to Jussi?

 

You should be able to enjoy 48k to DSD512x44.1k with ext2, unless your i7-6700 can't handle it (as this is more CPU intensive than 44.1 to DSD512x44.1k).

[tboooe]

17 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

Interesting. Have you reported to Jussi?

 

You should be able to enjoy 48k to DSD512x44.1k with ext2, unless your i7-6700 can't handle it (as this is more CPU intensive than 44.1 to DSD512x44.1k).

Correction, HQP tries to play any 48k based song at DSD256x48k when using ext2 filter even though I set HQP to DSD512x44.1.  My DAC can only handle 44.1k multiples.  I just assumed this was how this filter worked.  So when you play 48k music HQP will output DSD512x44.1?

[asdf1000]

2 minutes ago, tboooe said:

I just assumed this was how this filter worked.  So when you play 48k music HQP will output DSD512x44.1?

 

My DAC handles both 44.1 and 48k rates.

 

But I'll test 48k to DSDx44.1k now and report back.

 

[asdf1000]

13 minutes ago, tboooe said:

 So when you play 48k music HQP will output DSD512x44.1?

 

Yes, no problem for me. CPU is higher than 44.1k to DSD512x44.1, as expected.

 

In HQP Embedded, I disabled auto rate family to force everything to DSD512x44.1

 

Which version/form of HQP are you running? You have the option to disable auto rate family?

 

 

[tboooe]

7 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

Yes, no problem for me. CPU is higher than 44.1k to DSD512x44.1, as expected.

 

In HQP Embedded, I disabled auto rate family to force everything to DSD512x44.1

 

Which version/form of HQP are you running? You have the option to disable auto rate family?

 

 

Thank you for testing.  I am using HQP on Windows Server 2016. Auto rate family option is off and in the main window I have DSD512x44.1k selecred.  @Miska any idea why HQP keeps trying to convert to DSD256x48k when I use ext2 filter?

[Miska]

2 hours ago, tboooe said:

Thank you for testing.  I am using HQP on Windows Server 2016. Auto rate family option is off and in the main window I have DSD512x44.1k selecred.  @Miska any idea why HQP keeps trying to convert to DSD256x48k when I use ext2 filter?

 

Are you on latest HQPlayer version? I think I fixed such issue some time in back...

 

[Miska]

6 hours ago, louisxiawei said:

But he did say non-2s is "technically" better.

 

I think I've only said they are slightly different, so technically single and two stage versions are not identical, that's why both are there. But from quality point of view they are practically same.

 

I'm personally using both. T+A DAC8 DSD is connected to the "big iron" with GPU and runs single stage filters while Holo Spring 2 is connected to the fanless 7600T and runs two stage filters.

 

[louisxiawei]

1 hour ago, Miska said:

 

I think I've only said they are slightly different, so technically single and two stage versions are not identical, that's why both are there. But from quality point of view they are practically same.

 

You did mention it before (I was an exasound user so I remember it clearly 😉). I also noted that the description for 2s on the manual changed since certain version of HQplayer last year saying "preserving almost the same conversion quality". For me, I still consider non-2s as a better sound quality filter option. But that's just me.

 

Anyway, thanks for the clarification.

 

[tboooe]

5 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Are you on latest HQPlayer version? I think I fixed such issue some time in back...

 

Oh ok.  I am on version 3.24.  I see the current version is  3.25.2 so I guess I better upgrade.

[tboooe]

5 hours ago, Miska said:

I'm personally using both. T+A DAC8 DSD is connected to the "big iron" with GPU and runs single stage filters

Curious..if you believe non -2s filters are practically identical to single stage, why even bother with it and spend the extra money, power, heat, etc needed for the GPU?  Is it just out of technical curiosity?

 

For now, I will upgrade my i7-6700 to an i7-7700K and see how far I can get with overclocking to 3.8ghz.  Right now, I cannot convert DSD128 to DSD512 using 2 channel convolution.  I may get a GPU in the near future as opportunity arises.

[Miska]

1 hour ago, tboooe said:

Curious..if you believe non -2s filters are practically identical to single stage, why even bother with it and spend the extra money, power, heat, etc needed for the GPU?  Is it just out of technical curiosity?

 

For now, I will upgrade my i7-6700 to an i7-7700K and see how far I can get with overclocking to 3.8ghz.  Right now, I cannot convert DSD128 to DSD512 using 2 channel convolution.  I may get a GPU in the near future as opportunity arises.

 

Primary use for the GPU is to run digital room correction filters. Reason why I have the 6950X monster machine is to play 5.1 channel material upsampled to DSD256 with digital room correction (and it still doesn't quite manage to do all I wanted). Convolution engine is one thing where GPU massively helps and that's why there's an option to run convolution on GPU and rest on CPU. Some filters also notably benefit from GPU, such as closed-form and sinc-M. poly-sinc is relatively heavy for GPU too.

 

The other 7700K + GPU machine is my development machine and running some use cases where CPU alone is starting run short, such as DSD1024 output when I want to test it.

 

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, tboooe said:

For now, I will upgrade my i7-6700 to an i7-7700K

 

If you are definitely upgrading, go to the i7-8700K instead.

[rickca]

1 minute ago, Em2016 said:

 

If you are definitely upgrading, go to the i7-8700K instead.

Why not go for i7-9700K?  It's available now.

[asdf1000]

11 minutes ago, rickca said:

Why not go for i7-9700K?  It's available now.

 

A few places have said the i7-8700K is the best value for the money out of i7-8700K to even i9-9900K.

 

Value, not outright performance of course.