JTS Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 Quote I have Never heard Any DSD Noise, on any Dac, ever. Thanks @jimdukey. I was surprised, too. It manifests as hashiness in cymbals and rain and stuff like that on the ARES. Once I heard it, I could not stop hearing it. Quote Jussi recommends upsampling everything to DSD 256 Yah. I was doing this with the ARES and also with the RME. I just don't really dig the RME sound. With the Neumanns it's just too sharp - almost strident. In DSD direct mode, I can't try and fix it with EQ. It's also how the RME images as well. It's a bit business-before-pleasure for my tastes. Quote I just have Mytek 192/DSD, Lampi Euforia, Mac D 150, all fine in DSD 128, with HQ. Thanks. I was looking at the Liberty, but think it might be a bit of the same in terms of "analytic" detail. I will look into your other DACs listed here. Link to comment
lucretius Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 50 minutes ago, Sigi said: Hi, I Wanstes to update from Version 3 to 4. When I submitted my xml key I didn’t got a code for buying the version 4, it just showed exception what will cost an update from 3 to 4 and how can I get the key? The upgrade cost: $USD 195.67 The full cost is: $USD 244.59 You'll need to communicate with Miska to fix your key. mQa is dead! Link to comment
Popular Post lucretius Posted May 11, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted May 11, 2019 2 hours ago, Jud said: Against this you have the arguments that this seems like too much money to you, and others may feel the same. But if you are arguing with the developer, you know whose decision counts in the end. So it is probably not a good use of time. The thing is I purchased HQPlayer3 2 years ago at approx. $USD 147.13. I thought that was a bit steep but I took the leap thinking when there are upgrades, they likely would cost somewhere around 50% - 60% of the full original purchase price. In the 2 years of ownership of HQPlayer3, I did not see any significant updates to the program -- mostly bug fixes. Now, HQPlayer4 comes along and the upgrade price is $USD 195.67, that's 133% of the original price paid. Wow! I could just stick with version 3 but its end-of-life is next year. And within this last year, how likely is it that there will be any development/maintenance work done on it? I realize that Jussi has calculated that he needs more revenues to compensate for his efforts but if I decline the upgrade, he gets no revenue from me. I haven't made the final decision yet, however, I haven't yet found anything to put me over to the purchase side yet. Perhaps Jussi can consider a lite version? DancingSea and motberg 2 mQa is dead! Link to comment
jimdukey Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 Thanks for your interesting comments! The RME is cheap, ( $1000+ -) but I was concerned about sound quality maybe being too analytic, but there were some good reviews too. Trial period from B&H Photo, but I haven't tried one . I'm not really recommending my Dacs, just that I have them! And there are so many out there now, I wouldn't know where to start to, except cost, of course. New Myteks only get DSD 128 on Macs, according to them. I like my Mac D 150 a lot, but again, DSD 128. I also have Sony HAP Z1 in a separate system, which I love. And DSD 128. Is there an echo in here? If a Z2 came out, I would absolutely buy it! Meanwhile, I use what I have and like it. Getting BETTER sound will likely cost too much, not that this stuff was cheap...! JTS 1 Link to comment
DancingSea Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 7 minutes ago, lucretius said: The thing is I purchased HQPlayer3 2 years ago at approx. $USD 147.13. I thought that was a bit steep but I took the leap thinking when there are upgrades, they likely would cost somewhere around 50% - 60% of the full original purchase price. In the 2 years of ownership of HQPlayer3, I did not see any significant updates to the program -- mostly bug fixes. Now, HQPlayer4 comes along and the upgrade price is $USD 195.67, that's 133% of the original price paid. Wow! I could just stick with version 3 but its end-of-life is next year. And within this last year, how likely is it that there will be any development/maintenance work done on it? I realize that Jussi has calculated that he needs more revenues to compensate for his efforts but if I decline the upgrade, he gets no revenue from me. I haven't made the final decision yet, however, I haven't yet found anything to put me over to the purchase side yet. Perhaps Jussi can consider a lite version? I whole heartily agree. I also respect everyone who disagrees! I paid $112 (about) for HQP3 18 months ago. That was through a HQP reseller here on CA that sold it at a discount - he no longer has a deal with Jussi. Now it’s $200 to upgrade to HQP4, nearly double what I paid for 3. I’ve never heard of a software upgrade, on any software, that had such a steep upgrade cost, percentage wise. It makes me leery of continuing in the HQP universe. And I just can’t imagine such a pricing strategy is going to prove more profitable for Jussi in the end than improving the GUI and a competitive pricing strategy. But who knows, maybe there are enough diehard HQP users willing to pay any price? If there are, then tip of the hat to Jussi. I like 4, it sounds good to me, but nothing significant over the sound of 3. And functionality of the interface has not improved at all. I think Damien is on the smart business path, and he really has no competition, which is a bit sad for all of us. With so much money and effort invested into our systems, why are the software player choices so few and troubled? PS Audio has recognized that reality and are developing their own software system, but it will be tied to their new, very expensive Octave music server. Link to comment
Nikko1960 Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 58 minutes ago, lucretius said: In the 2 years of ownership of HQPlayer3, I did not see any significant updates to the program Nonsense - Jussi has released many new filters in that time. Which is where the action is. I honestly don't get why people whine about the cost of HQP when, in my case at least, its about 1%-2% of the overall cost of my system, and yet such an enabling component. My advice: get a life! JTS 1 Link to comment
Nikko1960 Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 You've heard this elsewhere, Jussi, but 4.0.2 does not work. I've gone back to the previous release and all is fine. Link to comment
tedwoods Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 I think HQPlayer is more than just a piece of software. The SQ effect it has -on my system at least- is tremendous and as such quite fundamental too, as I'm building my system around it rather than the other way round. Its updates also usually mean even better SQ. I'm not affluent, but I find the cost of something that provides me with so much musical pleasure, justified and I feel I must support the person responsible for it... I also urge people to try HQPD Control (which is free). Its function is not unlike Roon remote or such. All my genres, artwork, etc show up fine in HQPD Control, so when I play music I concentrate on the music and not the program. JTS 1 Link to comment
Hammer Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 40 minutes ago, tedwoods said: I think HQPlayer is more than just a piece of software. The SQ effect it has -on my system at least- is tremendous and as such quite fundamental too, as I'm building my system around it rather than the other way round. Its updates also usually mean even better SQ. I'm not affluent, but I find the cost of something that provides me with so much musical pleasure, justified and I feel I must support the person responsible for it... I also urge people to try HQPD Control (which is free). Its function is not unlike Roon remote or such. All my genres, artwork, etc show up fine in HQPD Control, so when I play music I concentrate on the music and not the program. I agree. Inserting HQPlayer into my playback chain is like adding a new piece of equipment. Last time I had such a profound improvement in sound was a pre-amp upgrade at 50x the cost! Link to comment
One and a half Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 How is HQPLAYER configured when using a standalone network streamer such as a Lumin, Linn ? I installed HQPLAYER 3 the other day and the choices of interfaces was NAA or nothing. AS Profile Equipment List Say NO to MQA Link to comment
Popular Post chriss0212 Posted May 11, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted May 11, 2019 can someone ever tell me the reason why this is discussed again and again about the upgrade costs? If the cost seems too high for someone, or the jump from HQP3 to HQP4 does not seem big enough, who is forcing you to buy an upgrade? Why should a sotware for which there is an upgrade continue to be maintained? I do not understand this discussion ... who can judge how many hours in Miska has invested in the software? And what is the criticism that someone would like to be paid for his work? Thousands of dollars are invested in new hardware worth only a fraction of it ... but the work is not worth it? Do all the critics work here for free? It is really shameful, what fall here for arguments ... Miska: thank you for all of your great work and unbelievable support! Greetings Christian JTS and chips666 2 Link to comment
Le Concombre Masqué Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 8 hours ago, AnotherSpin said: It may sound strange, but... I was doing a massive rearrangement in listening room today. Speakers and listening position have their new place, etc. I also changed some isolation of components. Bottom line: the way I percept certain filters changed... THe HDD with my ripped SACD files wouldn't show via my network this afternoon so I only had PCM files at hand and went playing with filters... short-lp came out as probably the safest bet for whatever resolution and content. But I'm globally very puzzled : when I was listening to sacd sourced files only and without doing any back and forth comparison, 4 grew on me, ie GG singing above the 1981 Goldberg was consistently above the keyboard rather than being a drifting ghost and that was a first time ever and that's an impressive achievement and though not doing any back and forth comparison with 3, I started to think I should drink lesser wines, freeze longer in my ageing wetsuit, whatever, but consider buying 4. So, most often I have very much enjoyed listening to SACD sourced files with 4. when playing, ie, 44.1/16 Cure that was another story : I can't understand how some of us here don't hear any difference or claim 3 is almost as good etc : to my ears 3 and 4 sound mighty different with the same short-lp (or any other) filter. With 3, ie, the song Object is quite obscure with loads of Low End quite pleasant but not very delineated ; with 4 everything is much clearer, with snare drum impact etc rather than the kick drum + bass line indiscernible but pleasant of 3. So, most often I have NOT very much enjoyed listening to PCM files with 4. An explanation might be that 4 is much more revealing, kicking me out of a comfort zone with many low res files while with SACD sourced files which are (statistically) more audiophile's ear worthy it shines. With which filters and tracks have you built your appreciation of 4? Link to comment
lucretius Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 3 hours ago, Nikko1960 said: Nonsense - Jussi has released many new filters in that time. Which is where the action is. IIRC, during the last 2 years I believe Jussi added a couple of extra filters for the sake of "completeness" (not filters that you would use). mQa is dead! Link to comment
jimdukey Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 A couople of you guys are WAY OFF BASE. 4.02 works great. Your settings must be wrong. Polysinc Ext2 is a recent and fantastic Filter. Trolls go elsewhere, please. Link to comment
Popular Post JTS Posted May 12, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted May 12, 2019 2 hours ago, chriss0212 said: can someone ever tell me the reason why this is discussed again and again about the upgrade costs? If the cost seems too high for someone, or the jump from HQP3 to HQP4 does not seem big enough, who is forcing you to buy an upgrade? Why should a sotware for which there is an upgrade continue to be maintained? I do not understand this discussion ... who can judge how many hours in Miska has invested in the software? And what is the criticism that someone would like to be paid for his work? Thousands of dollars are invested in new hardware worth only a fraction of it ... but the work is not worth it? Do all the critics work here for free? It is really shameful, what fall here for arguments ... Miska: thank you for all of your great work and unbelievable support! Greetings Christian Here here. I purchased HQ Player a year ago and recently upgraded to 4. When I see @Miska here on the forum every day answering questions, when he answers my emails about configuration stuff, when I see updates and additions to filters and modulators, and when I am able to tweak things to suit the material and my mood, I understand that HQ Player is an incredible deal. Even looking at it from a colder cost/benefit perspective - the expense of new DACs/amps/transducers/cables while exploring methods of tailoring the sound to my interests and tastes is FAR greater and the effect often less than HQ Player. I would like to add my +1 to Christian's gratitude above. Miska, thanks for making, evolving, and supporting such a transformative and flexible piece of software. - Justin Superdad, LoryWiv and AnotherSpin 2 1 Link to comment
semeniub Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 I used very simplified reasoning when I recently considered the cost of the HQPlayer upgrade. This is the cost of the “technical” state-of-the-art in audio playback software, and it offers me numerous filtering options to help optimize my playback sound. I appreciate the level of support that Jussi offers within the forums, and I am satisfied in knowing that HQPlayer is treated not as another “it’s good enough” product by the developer. I then compare that to the cost of what I would consider to be technical state-of-the-art audio hardware products, and what it would cost me to stay up-to-date hardware wise (use Planar Magnetic headphones as a recent example). The decision to pay the HQPlayer upgrade cost was much easier then. My 2 cents. Link to comment
tobes Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 I've been using HQP3 for over 2 years just as a PCM upsampler. For some reason I've found it to sound better as a stand alone application than when used in conjunction with Roon - which is very frustrating. Computer is a 2012 i7 Mac Mini (Mojave 10.14.4) with Roon 1.6 and HQP 3.25.3 (closed form/NS9) upsampling x4 > iFi usb3 > Benchmark DAC3. Since I'm only doing PCM upsampling the CPU usage is very low ~2%. Why would it sound worse with Roon doing the control? Would moving Roon onto a separate computer allow HQP to sound the same as it does in stand alone mode - or is this something to do with how Roon fetches the music file and passes to HQP vs how HQP fetches/plays the file in stand alone? Mac M1 Mini RoonServer/HQPlayer> Holo May L2 > Benchmark HPA4 Headphones: Focal Utopia(2016), Sennheiser HD600, AKG K712 Pro Speakers: ATC SCM100ASLT (active) System details Link to comment
ckpiv Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 11 minutes ago, tobes said: Why would it sound worse with Roon doing the control? Make sure you do not have any of the Roon DSP features enabled. Link to comment
tobes Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 I've got all Roon DSP disabled - unless there is something I'm missing? Mac M1 Mini RoonServer/HQPlayer> Holo May L2 > Benchmark HPA4 Headphones: Focal Utopia(2016), Sennheiser HD600, AKG K712 Pro Speakers: ATC SCM100ASLT (active) System details Link to comment
Le Concombre Masqué Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 3 hours ago, jimdukey said: A couople of you guys are WAY OFF BASE. 4.02 works great. Your settings must be wrong. Polysinc Ext2 is a recent and fantastic Filter. Trolls go elsewhere, please. ext2 sounds way off to my ears in the context of 4.02 doing PCM to SDM 128 ; ASDM7 modulator, IIR/Wide (default) DSD settings. Convolution with save engine. ie compared to short lp, ext2 sounds globally pleasantly mellow but with short bursts of what I interpret as intermodulation distorsion + inconsistencies in instruments' placement and volume. Maybe will you care to share your settings and your findings when comparing filters? Please me thorough (convolution or not etc) for everything matters, doesn't it? Link to comment
Hammer Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 Hi, with the new "input" feature, would it be possible to play spotify through HQP 4? If so, how? Thanks! Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 8 hours ago, Le Concombre Masqué said: THe HDD with my ripped SACD files wouldn't show via my network this afternoon so I only had PCM files at hand and went playing with filters... short-lp came out as probably the safest bet for whatever resolution and content. But I'm globally very puzzled : when I was listening to sacd sourced files only and without doing any back and forth comparison, 4 grew on me, ie GG singing above the 1981 Goldberg was consistently above the keyboard rather than being a drifting ghost and that was a first time ever and that's an impressive achievement and though not doing any back and forth comparison with 3, I started to think I should drink lesser wines, freeze longer in my ageing wetsuit, whatever, but consider buying 4. So, most often I have very much enjoyed listening to SACD sourced files with 4. when playing, ie, 44.1/16 Cure that was another story : I can't understand how some of us here don't hear any difference or claim 3 is almost as good etc : to my ears 3 and 4 sound mighty different with the same short-lp (or any other) filter. With 3, ie, the song Object is quite obscure with loads of Low End quite pleasant but not very delineated ; with 4 everything is much clearer, with snare drum impact etc rather than the kick drum + bass line indiscernible but pleasant of 3. So, most often I have NOT very much enjoyed listening to PCM files with 4. An explanation might be that 4 is much more revealing, kicking me out of a comfort zone with many low res files while with SACD sourced files which are (statistically) more audiophile's ear worthy it shines. With which filters and tracks have you built your appreciation of 4? Interesting, various Goldbergs and Jarrett albums in heavy rotation here too...) I use Fred Hersch Trio - Live in Europe as a reference for couple of years, and should admit I never heard percussions with 3 as I hear it now with 4. Sounds like different mix overall, but the change is quite pleasant. I think I would agree with you ext2 doesn't shine in 4 as it was in 3. Mqa sounds good. With closed-form filters I think I hear more difference between closed-form and closed-form-M. What is more important, most of material sounds more musical and coherent to my ears in 4. Less digital, if I may say so. 4 is more forgiving for LP rips and old rock redbooks too. Le Concombre Masqué 1 Link to comment
warrior-kid Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 I have now reduced the volume to make the volume go gray. I start the Desktop and Client applications on MacOS Mojave and I am experiencing the following issues (in contrast to Audirvana 3.5.8 that is issue-free) playing Steve Howe Anthology in 16/44: The Library function does not work as far as I can see: the Library view shows the albums, pressing OK has no effect, what is supposed to happen? I revert to playing back using the Browse button to navigate to the album folder but the Client app remains empty and does not allow any playback. I then play using the Desktop by clicking on the chosen track--is this the expected way to play anything? Playback produces clicks (not unlike LP records)--this also happens in V3; Playback has small gaps--this is more pronounced in V3. Playback to DSD produces a popping sound and stops. The same works in HQP V3--with the exception of clicks and small gaps. Can anyone help please? Ayre QX-5 Twenty + Oppo 205, Mac mini + Audirvana, Ayre KX-R Twenty pre, Ayre MX-R monos, Monitor Audio PL300 floorstanders, Shunyata cables Link to comment
Le Concombre Masqué Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 @Miska I won’t apologize for criticizing 4 for I simply honestly stated my disappointment when it occurred with some settings and tracks. I now have had wonderful listening sessions with 4 and the one bad thing I could have done is discouraging you from offering a pro/monitoring grade player. The downside of it being that I have been set off a comfort zone and as much as walls disappear, presence is spooky etc with excellent recordings, bad recordings/masterings sound nastier. That’s fine. I (we, massively, I hope) just have to adapt. I insist that in my context (convolution etc) ext2 proves disappointing ; I encourage everybody to reassess his/her favorite settings (short-lp/ASDM7 as far as I’m concerned) As of pricing, let’s say it’s fair and you might even be right about the extra 0 for we certainly now benefit of your pro level outputs. However, I suggest you do a “Cheap guys” or boot day sometimes within the first 30 days after the launch of 4, ie next Sunday. That day you would make the upgrade discount coupon so that the upgrade is no more than 100€. I doubt anybody who has been prompt enough to have purchased yet would blame you, those having been supportive enthusiast buys. That would help guys like me with real budget constraints and shut down complainers and should globally raise more money and quicker. Of course I’ll purchase someday anyway and you would make more money from me ; but who knows when. I commit I would/will purchase on “Cheap guys” day even if it’s tomorrow. For your consideration. And I encourage all those who can to buy 4 and to do it any day but the day I have just suggested for you truly deserve a return on your great job and commitment. Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 45 minutes ago, warrior-kid said: Playback produces clicks (not unlike LP records)--this also happens in V3; Playback has small gaps--this is more pronounced in V3. Playback to DSD produces a popping sound and stops. The same works in HQP V3--with the exception of clicks and small gaps. Would you post a pic of your settings? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now