HQ Player

[mvilla]

44.1k, 48k >> 11.2M and 6.1M ... why not?

 

Hi Jussi,

I have a DAC that can manage PCM 384k and 256 DSD, both families, 44.1k and 48k. I flagged the “Auto-rate family” and my DAC is working accordingly: 11.2M and 12.2M respectively.

Unfortunately – while I have no problem for 44.1k,  there is a noise at 256 DSD for the 48k family (this occurs after a few seconds, and likely it is because the driver is not fully stable at that frequency).

So I thought I could by-pass the problem by limiting the DSD Bit Rate to 44,1k x 256, while still keeping the “Auto-rate family” flagged. My expectations were to have:

• 11.2M when in input we have 44.1k
• 6.1M when in input we have 48.1k 

But HQP does not play at all when a 48k file is in input. Why? 

 

Many thanks

Massimo

 

[DancingSea]

8 hours ago, Ernie said:

If I want to play directly from tidal or qobuz to hqplayer ( without roon), is that possible with version 3 (which I just purchased). Perhaps using loopback or something similar?

 

thanks

 

I’m fairly certain that it takes Roon.  Jussi himself listens to Tidal via the Tidal app, as far I understand.  Roon is expensive, but the versatility to combine local and Tidal/ Qobuz libraries into one is very nice.

[DancingSea]

Aloha Jussi (and everyone else),

 

If the same settings are used, the same filters, dither, sample rate, etc, in both HQP 3 & 4 Desktop, will the sound results be the same?  Or is there something about HQP 4 that makes a meaningful difference?

 

I understand HQP 4 combines various HQP iterations into one, and there are the new settings, but I’m wondering if there’s any reason to believe, in theory, that there ought to be a difference using the same settings?

 

Thanks.

[Yviena]

So what filters are people using nowadays, with all my dacs i have tried i consistently find that closed-form, poly-sinc-lp gives the most soundstage, while poly-short-lp, ext2 also sounds good but with less width/depth, closed-form-M also for some reason sounds a little more closed in compared to plain closed-form but i mostly only hear it in percussion stuff.

[Jerry]

57 minutes ago, Yviena said:

So what filters are people using nowadays, with all my dacs i have tried i consistently find that closed-form, poly-sinc-lp gives the most soundstage, while poly-short-lp, ext2 also sounds good but with less width/depth, closed-form-M also for some reason sounds a little more closed in compared to plain closed-form but i mostly only hear it in percussion stuff.

I can't tell if the added soundstage is actually due to pre-ring... so for me, Redbook are either poly-sinc-ext2 or Sinc-M and MQA is poly-sinc-mqa- mp. All three does apodizing...

[Yviena]

1 hour ago, Jerry said:

I can't tell if the added soundstage is actually due to pre-ring... so for me, Redbook are either poly-sinc-ext2 or Sinc-M and MQA is poly-sinc-mqa- mp. All three does apodizing...

Ext-2, and sinc-m actually actually have much more ringing than something like poly-sinc-lp but idk still find it to sound larger/deeper.

[Le Concombre Masqué]

8 hours ago, DancingSea said:

Aloha Jussi (and everyone else),

 

If the same settings are used, the same filters, dither, sample rate, etc, in both HQP 3 & 4 Desktop, will the sound results be the same?  Or is there something about HQP 4 that makes a meaningful difference?

 

I understand HQP 4 combines various HQP iterations into one, and there are the new settings, but I’m wondering if there’s any reason to believe, in theory, that there ought to be a difference using the same settings?

 

Thanks.

once again, why don't you try ? At the moment I'm amazed by the differences between the 4 iterations, 3 to 4 is a huge step, 

[DancingSea]

1 hour ago, Le Concombre Masqué said:

once again, why don't you try ? At the moment I'm amazed by the differences between the 4 iterations, 3 to 4 is a huge step, 

 

I have been trying.  Sometimes I think 4 is better, sometimes I think they sound the same.  I’m pretty sure I mostly like whatever was played second. It seems reasonable to ask the developer if he made specific changes between 3 & 4 that would make the same settings sound better.  This would help me clarify if it's a placebo expectation driven perception. 

 

Jussi’s anti marketing approach can make things challenging. Why not spell out the exact improvements he’s made between 3 & 4?  It’s seems so simple to me, “here’s HQP 4 and I’ve made xy&z better in this way”.  Instead, it’s more like “here’s HQPlayer 4, I won’t say what’s been improved, and it costs twice as much,”

 

There’s a certain “soup nazi” quality to it 😎

 

Now I’d like to preemptively disagree with my own opinion in an effort to undermine any forthcoming efforts to do the same 😉  

[Le Concombre Masqué]

1 hour ago, DancingSea said:

 

I have been trying.  Sometimes I think 4 is better, sometimes I think they sound the same.  I’m pretty sure I mostly like whatever was played second. It seems reasonable to ask the developer if he made specific changes between 3 & 4 that would make the same settings sound better.  This would help me clarify if it's a placebo expectation driven perception. 

 

Jussi’s anti marketing approach can make things challenging. Why not spell out the exact improvements he’s made between 3 & 4?  It’s seems so simple to me, “here’s HQP 4 and I’ve made xy&z better in this way”.  Instead, it’s more like “here’s HQPlayer 4, I won’t say what’s been improved, and it costs twice as much,”

 

There’s a certain “soup nazi” quality to it 😎

 

Now I’d like to preemptively disagree with my own opinion in an effort to undermine any forthcoming efforts to do the same 😉  

"soup nazi" ? is it a quote from surf nazis must die ?

[juanitox]

2 hours ago, DancingSea said:

 

I have been trying.  Sometimes I think 4 is better, sometimes I think they sound the same.  I’m pretty sure I mostly like whatever was played second. It seems reasonable to ask the developer if he made specific changes between 3 & 4 that would make the same settings sound better.  This would help me clarify if it's a placebo expectation driven perception. 

 

Jussi’s anti marketing approach can make things challenging. Why not spell out the exact improvements he’s made between 3 & 4?  It’s seems so simple to me, “here’s HQP 4 and I’ve made xy&z better in this way”.  Instead, it’s more like “here’s HQPlayer 4, I won’t say what’s been improved, and it costs twice as much,”

 

There’s a certain “soup nazi” quality to it 😎

 

Now I’d like to preemptively disagree with my own opinion in an effort to undermine any forthcoming efforts to do the same 😉  

 

 

Troll alert again 😶

[brother love]

1 hour ago, Le Concombre Masqué said:

"soup nazi" ? is it a quote from surf nazis must die ?

 

More likely it's from a Seinfeld episode with a Soup Nazi.  At this point, Jussi's reply to a chronic complainer should be:

 

 

 

[luisma]

17 hours ago, k6davis said:

 

The 3900x is new. I haven't seen anyone post about its performance with HQP, but for the CPUs that have been on the market for a while, Intel has outperformed AMD - for HQP.

 

As you can read in chip reviews all over the web, AMD's chips have certain strengths over Intel in general multi-threaded processing, but those haven't resulted in better HQP performance than Intel.

You are correct but multicore processing although doesn't improve directly the use of more complex filters it may improve the processing for the modulators I understand. 

[k6davis]

48 minutes ago, luisma said:

You are correct but multicore processing although doesn't improve directly the use of more complex filters it may improve the processing for the modulators I understand. 

 

I wrote a post about this a few days ago: 

 

My conclusion that Intel is better than AMD for HQP is based on the limited information and experience I have. I'm happy to be corrected if anyone knows otherwise.

 

[jimdukey]

Seinfeld. 

Where you been?

[AnotherSpin]

17 minutes ago, jimdukey said:

Seinfeld. 

Where you been?

Could you imagine there are countries or even continents where people have no idea about Seinfeld?..)

[sdmarquart]

@Miska

I'm using HQPlayer with the RME ADI-2 FS DAC in Direct DSD mode. I have the reference level at +7dBu on DAC menu. When I set the volume on the menu screen to 0.0 dB, it always changes to -3.5dB when I hit play. Even if I change the volume max settings in HQPlayer to 0.0, it always reverts to -3.5dB for line out volume. I normally have my vol max for HQPlayer at -3.0 dB. It just always plays the volume at -3.5dB.

 

Please let me know.

 

Thanks,

Spencer

[luisma]

1 hour ago, k6davis said:

 

I wrote a post about this a few days ago: 

 

My conclusion that Intel is better than AMD for HQP is based on the limited information and experience I have. I'm happy to be corrected if anyone knows otherwise.

 

I'm with you on that, even Jussi's been asking if anyone has experienced the new 3xxx AMD with HQP

[JTS]

45 minutes ago, sdmarquart said:

 

the volume on the menu screen to 0.0 dB, it always changes to -3.5dB

 

@sdmarquart Check out page 32 of the RME manual. It's all explained there.

[sdmarquart]

5 minutes ago, JTS said:

@sdmarquart Check out page 32 of the RME manual. It's all explained there.

 

Thanks. So, I think I get it. Reference level is +7 and maximum analog output level is 3.5dB lower than the chosen reference level which makes it -3.5dB. So, makes sense now. I think this is the best setting for me. 

[jimdukey]

Not really, if they into Computer Audio and have the Internet.

[JTS]

25 minutes ago, sdmarquart said:

I think this is the best setting for me.  

 

This is the configuration I use with my Freya, too. +13 requires me to turn the Freya down too much.

[sdmarquart]

@Miska Also noticed this in the Fixed Output level - Lock Volume entry:

 

 

"For example when the analog output should operate like a typical HiFi unit @ 2 V output level
(equals +8 dBu), set the hardware Ref Level to +7 dBu and 0 dB volume."

 

My Focal solo 6 be speakers are set to +4dBu at the back of the speaker. And I have the Ref Level set to +7dB and 0dB volume. Which shows -3.5db on the menu screen. 

 

I play HQPlayer into RME ADI-2 DSD Direct into Freya + preamp. At my current setting (Ref Level set to +7dB and 0dB volume), I can almost max out my volume - which of course is very loud and a bit distorted at max volume. Is that normal, or should I have a little more volume gain sent to the Freya +. The other option is the Focal solo 6be have an output the ability to output at -10dbV at the back of the speakers.

 

I see this in the manual regarding a "Fixed output level".

 

"0.315 V (-10 dBV, -7.8 dBu): Ref -5 dBu, Vol -3 dB"

 

Just curious if I should try this setting? I'm at work now but any input is appreciated.

 

Thanks,

Spencer

 

 

 

 

[sdmarquart]

Also, changing the setting on back of speaker to -10dBV would really pump up the volume of my vinyl. Currently, I can pretty much max out the vinyl volume too with not much distortion. I"m wondering if the volume should distort around the 3 o'clock setting on Freya +. Currently I'm not hearing much volume till I get to about 12 o'clock. Of course, I can test for myself but wondering what kind of benchmark setting there is. 

[rando]

1 hour ago, AnotherSpin said:

Could you imagine there are countries or even continents where people have no idea about Seinfeld?..)

 

I can imagine an internationally attended forum.  He's a real NYC soup chef who berated and threw out unappreciative customers. 

 

Not a radioactive monsters out of a Troma B horror film @Le Concombre Masqué 🌊

[AnotherSpin]

3 hours ago, rando said:

 

I can imagine an internationally attended forum.  He's a real NYC soup chef who berated and threw out unappreciative customers. 

 

 

I am not sure I ever saw Miska throwing away unappreciative customers. What I could see Miska is not willing to spend his time fabricating and flooding forum with marketing tales. The good news is, his products doesn't require any.