HQ Player

[LoryWiv]

4 hours ago, Miska said:

 

People wanted to have more focus on the artwork and that's why it is more central piece on the Client.

 

Having a large artwork display on client is a huge plus, harkens back to the days when one blissfully listened to their favorite music while holding the vinyl album cover in their hand...sight and sound combining to augment the experience.

[LoryWiv]

1 hour ago, MemoryPlayer said:

Is DSD128 with ASDM7EC modulator better sound than DSD256 with any modulator combination except ASDM5EC and ASDM7EC?

I have  reached the conclusion that yes it is, but of course that's in my system / my ears. I find the EC modulators to be the most natural and musical, without sacrificing "technicalities" for lack of a better word. I can run ASDM7EC with almost any filter at DSD128 and invariably prefer it to non-EC modulators at DSD256. 

[LoryWiv]

Jussi, I note in the manual closed-form-fast filter specifies use with 2x rates but I am using it for 16  bit / 44.1 khz redbook and 24 bit / 48 kHz HD flac files. Modulator is ASDM5EC, I am certainly not complaining, the combination sounds excellent and not too taxing on cpu or gpu, just curious if the manual is in error or if I am misunderstanding something. Thanks!

[LoryWiv]

1 minute ago, Miska said:

 

Manual is trying to say that the possible conversion ratio factors are power of two. So the filter can upsample by factor of 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024... But not for example factor of 7.5.

 

Noted, and thank you Jussi.

[LoryWiv]

1 hour ago, Miska said:

 

You can use 7 too, but 5 gives somewhat lower ultrasonic noise level on ESS, especially at rates below DSD512. But it also depends on a particular DAC (what kind of analog stage it has) and overall system. Otherwise 7 is technically better and if it works well for you, just keep using it.

 

ASDM5(EC) is the most generic approach for ESS DAC at <= DSD256.

Jussi, thank you for this explanation. I emperically have noted that ASDM5EC sounds better with most source material than ASDMEC7 at my usual setting of DSD128 or DSD356. I have the Matrix Audio X-Sabre Pro DAC (ESS 9038) and it is good to know that there is a basis for my impressions. As a "perk" ASDMEC is a little friendlier on cpu use as well.

Thanks!.

Quote

 

 

[LoryWiv]

3 hours ago, Jerry said:

 

Dear @Miska, would you consider creating a variation of sins-L that occupy slightly less than 8 GB of GPU RAM, so that all GTX1080 and RTX 2080 users get to experience this new sing-L filter?

I can easily run  DSD128 with Sinc-L on my humble i7 7700 at 4.2 / GTX 1060 (6 GB) and indeed it plays w/o stutter at DSD256 as well (Modulator ASDM5EC, CPU at 28%, GPU at 18-20%). Caveat: This is with source file = 24 Bit / 96 kHz FLAC

 

With 16 Bit / 44.1 kHz Redbook source files, I can only output DSD128. In both instances it sounds lovely, although not certain I prefer it to my recent "go to" of closed-form-fast.

[LoryWiv]

5 hours ago, pdg540 said:

 

I can run ASDM7EC/poly sinc xtr without cuda (HQP Desktop/Windows 10). From Jussi's post, it sounds like sinc-L with EC modulators will need cuda offload for sure and it rwill take more than 8GB video ram. The 1080Ti has 11GB ram. I'm assuming the 2080Ti, which can run sinc-L/EC modulator, has better cores and faster ram than the 1080. So I guess the question is whether the 1080Ti cores and ram are adequate. I don't really know much about video cards.

 

What CPU is in your desktop and can you run ASDM7EC/poly sinc xtr on your 9900ks? This combination sounds really, really good!

 

 

There must be more to it than just GPU RAM as my humble GTX 1060 w/6GB RAM on i7 cpu can run ASDM5EC with SINC-L at DSD128 or DSD256. Uses ~ 2.5 GB video RAM, It will run ASDM7EC - Sinc-L as well with similar RAM use although stutters occasionally.

[LoryWiv]

10 hours ago, blue2 said:

Seems to me this should be a separate tool which scans a music library and tags the files with recommended HQP filter? Better still would be a web DB so HQP could look up albums/tracks already scanned. Then all users could contribute and reduce the total scan time spent, and streamed tracks would also be included. Same idea as DR DB.

Interesting idea, but I think one of the defining elements of using playback software with so many modulator, filter and upsampling options is to promote the individual user's ability to experiment and identify their preferences. Speaking only for myself, of course, I may prefer a different modulator / filter / PCM vs. DSD selection with the same music on different days, just for a different flavor. Technical feasibility aside, if there were some sort of "recommended" settings for a particular track or album, it would be key to not automate it's use or preclude individual user custom selection. Just my 2 cents...this is an interesting discussion. Thanks.

[LoryWiv]

5 hours ago, MemoryPlayer said:

Better library view..., something like JRiver or Audirvana view! By the way, album view in client is confusing with so many info...

No other software player sounds so good as HQPlayer in Mac, Win or Linux, but it deserves a better GUI in my modest point of view.

Respectfully disagree. Since the change to client server architecture I find usability of HQ Player 4.XX intuitive and highly versatile / functional. Perhaps if there is a specific question about client interface you can pose it and Miska and others here cn try to help resolve.

[LoryWiv]

3 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Yes it is, under Pipeline Matrix feature which needs to be enabled for the feature to work (to be enabled separately). In channel routing it is always active for two first output (mix) channels.

 

Thank you, and with apologies for my newbieness, is the screen shot below indicative of active Bauer crossfeed using HQP defaults? My reading indicates Bauer is to achieve binaural ... is that how it is implemented here? Thank you.

[LoryWiv]

4 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Yes...

To my ears activating the Bauer crossfeed seems to constrict the sound, not what I expected, but pleasing in some respects and I could see it producing less fatugue for long listening sessions. I would like to learn more about other crossfeed variations. If anyone has a recommended custom setting please share.

 

The versatility of HQPlayer is really quite amazing. Thank you @Miska.

[LoryWiv]

20 hours ago, Miska said:

 

... try setting DAC Bits to 20 or so. It is better to play safe and set the number of bits a bit too low rather than the other way around. 

 

Thank you @Miska. More generally, I had impression that for most use cases one should set DAC bits as high as the DAC supports. Does that still hold true and if not, what determines optimal setting for a particular DAC?

[LoryWiv]

With my modest i7700 and 1060 GTX I am enjoying HQP 4.7, prior settings all run at same CPU / GPU utilization as with 4.6. No dropouts. Admittedly, I do not run fanless. I suspect it would be very challenging for @Miskato develop a truly "one size fits all" product development roadmap given the heterogeneity of end users' host systems. It is totally valid to provide feedback, of course, and to maximize applicability to multiple use cases as feasible is the right goal. That said, I think HQPlayer is a specialty product designed for people who seek a powerful set of tools for music playback, format conversion, upscaling etc...and accept that to utilize that requires some system "horsepower". 

 

Just my 2c, I recognize others may have different priorities. Thanks to @StreamFidelity, @bobflood and others for a worthwhile discussion.

[LoryWiv]

7 hours ago, MemoryPlayer said:

Oppo Sonica DAC with ES9038PRO SABRE, PCM up to 768 kHz 32-bit and DSD up to 48x DSD512!

Jussi previously suggested that with ESS sabre ASDM5EC may actually be better than ASDM7EC, if I recall correctly. I am using it quite happily with my Matrix Audio Abre DAC.

[LoryWiv]

To provide some balance I have noticed no change in usable filters / cpu limitation since 4.6 --> 4.7, runs as before at either 128 or 256 w/o dropouts. Admittedly I run ASDM5EC with my Sabre DAC, not ASDM7EC, however, as that sounds best. Clearly though there are others who have experienced changes. It may be worth knowing what distinguishes those who's usability has decreased post-upgrade from those who didn't at least to isolate any commonalities that can be addressed.

[LoryWiv]

On 10/20/2020 at 1:16 PM, Samuel T Cogley said:

Finally, finally got a PC that can sustain ASDM7EC stutter free.  Feeding a Topping D90 using networkaudiod, it's just sublime.  👍

Sweet! Please share what type of horsepower the conducive PC sports.

 

Thanks!

[LoryWiv]

7 hours ago, Gavin1977 said:

Still playing with my setup...

 

Steaming from Logitech Media Server to HQPlayer embedded via Linn Kazoo.  Tidal works fine, however most of my local files are in Apple Lossless .m4a and won't play.  What file formats does HQPlayer embedded work with?

 

I like embedded metadata, so wav is a no go for me.  Does AIFF work?  Or any any method of transcoding any file formal in LMS to send to HQPlayer in wav?

FLAC.

[LoryWiv]

On 11/14/2020 at 3:54 PM, pcmchild said:

Delete.

 

 

[LoryWiv]

22 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Depending on how much available CPU power you have, I would recommend for example ASDM5EC or if not enough CPU power for that, ASDM5.

 

If you have 48k DSD checked (assuming it works correctly with the DAC in question, for most DACs it doesn't), you can also make Adaptive output rate checked and set Bit rate to 48k x256. If it doesn't work correctly, leave it unchecked, and leave Bit rate and Adaptive output rate as they are now.

 

I have Matrix X-Sabre Pro as well and can confirm ASDM5EC is an excellent choice. I do have 48k DSD checked with no issues, but prefer to leave adaptive output rate off as it's quite easy to adjust for best setting at start of album playback. Just my 2 cents.

[LoryWiv]

4 hours ago, Bob Stern said:

 

It's the amplitude of the peak.  (Or dip if negative.)  Increasing the gain is like moving a single band's slider farther from zero in a graphical EQ.

Myself, and perhaps other devotees of HQPlayer, have minimal familiarity w/PEQ as contrasted to graphic EQ. Can you recommend a web resource or guide for the basics of PEQ that may help us correctly explore this new functionality in HQPlayer Desktop? Thanks!

[LoryWiv]

17 hours ago, abdodson said:

Seems like I must be missing something obvious, but my settings are not saving in HQplayer. I go to file>settings make adjustments and close (there is no "okay" button as in manual) and when I reopen the "settings" menu settings have reverted to default. Any ideas? I am using Audiophile Optimizer for Windows 10 and using HQplayer to process out of Roon. 

I had that issue when I changed screen resolution, placing OK button below visible screen. Try resizing / scrolling down or even just hitting enter on keyboard.

[LoryWiv]

On 12/28/2020 at 4:46 PM, Miska said:

 

Fast roll-off linear phase should be fine and not modify response when applied after HQPlayer filters. And in this case you certainly should stick to linear phase filters at DAC side.

 

Hi @MiskaI have same Matrix X-Sabre Pro DAC as @sledwardsbut rather than PCM upsampling I usually output to SDM / DSD. Would the fast roll-off linear phase DSC filter setting also be best choice to minimize DAC modifying the HQ Player output in DSD scenario as well?

[LoryWiv]

2 hours ago, sledwards said:

LoryWiv:

 

The 7 filters are specifically for PCM playback and do not effect DSD. For DSD you can change the cut-off frequency of the DSD digital filter. For DSD256 I use 60 kHz.

Thanks @sledwards. That is a very helpful clarification.

[LoryWiv]

11 hours ago, SwissBear said:

Thank you for your explanations.

 

It is the interface which does the translation of the 10 MHz clock signal and the clock signal to be used by the DAC. Singxer has a good expertise in this field.

 

The x-Sabre has a mode, called synchronous, which can be selected through the interface, where the DAC would follow the clock signal received together with the music flow;  the PLL can be disconnected as well. 

In the case of the D90, the technical support of Topping mentioned that the DAC would have the same behaviour if fed through the i2s interface.

 

My understanding is that i2s has brought a lower level of interface to the DACs which allows better use of external clocks. And I have to say that my listening experience matches this understanding.

Yes, @Swiissbear experience parallels my own with PC USB to Singxer SU-1 then I2S to X-Sabre DAC (using synchronous mode on the X-Sabre) producing the most musically satisfying results..

[LoryWiv]

22 hours ago, Confused said:

A question to those of you reporting that 4.9.0 has superior sound quality, (or indeed those who do not find this to be the case) what is your use case for HQPlayer?  That is, are you upsampling PCM or performing PCM to DSD conversion?  Similarly, do you have a PC + endpoint scenario or a "one box" system?

 

I guess I am just thinking aloud here, but I am just wondering if there is any correlation between those finding (or not finding) 4.9.0 to be superior and how HQPlayer is being implemented.

I am converting redbook FLAc or 24 bit FLAC to DSD128, ASDME5C, Snc-S and am clearly in the minority but found 4.90 a bit syrupy / warm, and am now enjoying 4.92 immensely. it may have just been my brain state the evening I ran 4.90 (nothing sounds it's best after a fatiguing day at work) but I am content  with 4.92 and not feeling any desire to roll back. I'm glad many others found something special with 4.90, though. Enjoy!