HQ Player

[Yviena]

@Miska is volume control supposed to be greyed out in directSDM mode even when sending PCM in the latest 4.0x version, and additionally it seems that there is no sound when converting PCM from DSD if directSDM is set. 

[Hammer]

10 hours 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.

 

 

That does seem to be the case.  On my AMD 1950X system, there is stuttering using ADSM5EC and DSD256, but my i7 6700k works fine.  Neither can do ADSM7EC.  

 

Will there be AMD optimizations down the road? 

[LoryWiv]

Hey, wanted to share this shout out to Signalyst from the NativeDSD release notes below:

 

Ballade Pour La Nuit (One Microphone Recording) (2019), Reinier Voet, Pigalle44:

In the fourth One Microphone Recording from Sound Liaison, Reinier Voet & Pigalle44 bring us the album Ballade pour la nuit (Ballad for the Night).  This is a live to Stereo DXD recording that features Jazz, Swing and elements of Django. Some listeners say it is the best of the One Microphone Recordings from Sound Liaison. The album is also available from NativeDSD Music in Stereo DSD 512, using the new modulators from Signalyst.

[Miska]

14 hours ago, Yviena said:

@Miska is volume control supposed to be greyed out in directSDM mode even when sending PCM in the latest 4.0x version, and additionally it seems that there is no sound when converting PCM from DSD if directSDM is set. 

 

Yes, volume control is supposed to be disabled always when Direct SDM is enabled, otherwise it is risky in various scenarios, like for example when output mode is "[source]" or if control application changes mode.

 

DSD to PCM conversion is supposed to work with fixed volume in that case. I'll check this once again.

[Miska]

On 7/26/2019 at 11:04 AM, DancingSea said:

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 are most notable changes listed in the release announcements on my front page and Twitter/Facebook. Listing all smaller changes and improvements would get really technical detail (I don't necessarily even want to discuss) and would be too much. And I'm not good at writing marketing text and I prefer to avoid trying. I think good sound speaks for itself enough.

 

[Miska]

22 hours ago, sdmarquart said:

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. 

 

Probably it is pretty good setting with +4 dBu sensitivity, should match pretty well.

 

The -3.5 dB is normal and correct for the DSD Direct mode for technical reasons.

[sdmarquart]

6 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Probably it is pretty good setting with +4 dBu sensitivity, should match pretty well.

 

The -3.5 dB is normal and correct for the DSD Direct mode for technical reasons.

Thanks @Miska. I appreciate all your input! I was at work yesterday playing out these scenarios. I finally came up with this setting. And it’s rocking my world.

 

Sensitivity setting on Focal speakers set to -10dBV.  Reference level on ADI +1 dBu, Volume -3.5dB.  All going through tubes on Freya +.

 

This is making my digital rig really bloom! Not too loud as maximum volume on Freya know goes to nearly 4 O’clock. For vinyl - which goes through the Freya + analog in - really shines too. Volume starts to distort at a little after 3 o’clock on Freya +.  Most importantly my ears tell me this kicks serious ass. And I don’t feel like I’m overloading anything 

 

Quite happy with it. Thanks to @Miska and @JTS for all your help. I know every rig is different but this works for me.

 

Thanks,

Spence

[jimdukey]

OK, here's The Deal:

If Miska says it's good, I'm on board.

It takes a while to get used to anything new,

so snap judgements can be misleading.

It's not much $ in the Audio World, and obviously Miska is knowledge able AND

an Enthusiast , and I have been a Customer for years now.

I love HQ and trust Miska without reservation.

I listened to the same File as I was on the Newest Hq, w/EC Modulators, 

on The Newest Audirvana, and "A" sounded pedestrian and kind of grey in comparison.

I use both, but I way prefer HQ.

And Upsampling PCM And DSD 64 and 128 to the highest Rate DSD 128 ( 12. whatever GH or MH)

which ONLY HQ can do is the Frosting on the Cake for me!!!!

Audirvana also had a paid Update.

It's Hobby,, I love it and am willing and excited to try the new stuff as it comes out.

Or stick with an older Version, they work too.

A lot of people seem to know just what Miska or Damien Should do or Should have done...

I've been a Professional Orchestral and Jazz Musician all my Life, and I recognize good sound when I hear it!

Or when I don't....!

I can hardly Imagine what MIska will come up with next!

In fact, I'm sure it takes both Knowledge And Imagination to do the work he is doing.

Oh, and P-A-T-I-E-N-C-E------

 

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, jimdukey said:

OK, here's The Deal:

If Miska says it's good, I'm on board.

It takes a while to get used to anything new,

so snap judgements can be misleading.

It's not much $ in the Audio World, and obviously Miska is knowledge able AND 

an Enthusiast , and I have been a Customer for years now.

I love HQ and trust Miska without reservation.

I listened to the same File as I was on the Newest Hq, w/EC Modulators, 

on The Newest Audirvana, and "A" sounded pedestrian and kind of grey in comparison.

I use both, but I way prefer HQ.

And Upsampling PCM And DSD 64 and 128 to the highest Rate DSD 128 ( 12. whatever GH or MH)

which ONLY HQ can do is the Frosting on the Cake for me!!!!

Audirvana also had a paid Update.

It's Hobby,, I love it and am willing and excited to try the new stuff as it comes out.

Or stick with an older Version, they work too.

A lot of people seem to know just what Miska or Damien Should do or Should have done...

I've been a Professional Orchestral and Jazz Musician all my Life, and I recognize good sound when I hear it!

Or when I don't....! 

I can hardly Imagine what MIska will come up with next!

In fact, I'm sure it takes both Knowledge And Imagination to do the work he is doing.

Oh, and P-A-T-I-E-N-C-E------ 

 

 

A blood loyal, crazy fan! 😊

[tboooe]

Is anyone having trouble applying the discount code when upgrading to version 4?  I got the code from the Signalyst website after uploading my license key but when I apply it at checkout I get an error.

 

@Miska I sent you an email to info at signalyst dot com.  

[521ztz]

On 7/26/2019 at 1:43 AM, 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.

Thanks for your input.

Any idea on 8700k vs 9700k for HQP? Which one is better?

[asdf1000]

On 4/8/2019 at 12:41 PM, ABQMD said:

FWIW, both the Topping D50

 

Hi @ABQMD

 

Does the Topping D50 support DSD256x48k rate? i.e. 12.288 MHz rate?

 

Or only DSD256x44.1k, i.e. only 11.2896 MHz rate?

 

[k6davis]

5 hours ago, 521ztz said:

Thanks for your input.

Any idea on 8700k vs 9700k for HQP? Which one is better?

 

You're welcome.

 

You're new to the forum, so I'm going to assume you're new to HQP too. The answer about what kind of server hardware is best for you really depends on how far you want to take things. HQP can produce excellent sound with modest hardware and on the other end of the scale, it can take advantage of all of the computing power you can throw at it to sound its best.

 

Do you intend to use HQP for DSD upsampling? If so, then to what rate?

[521ztz]

5 hours ago, k6davis said:

 

You're welcome.

 

You're new to the forum, so I'm going to assume you're new to HQP too. The answer about what kind of server hardware is best for you really depends on how far you want to take things. HQP can produce excellent sound with modest hardware and on the other end of the scale, it can take advantage of all of the computing power you can throw at it to sound its best.

 

Do you intend to use HQP for DSD upsampling? If so, then to what rate?

 

Thanks for you reply.

 

I bought HQP 3 around 2 years ago and I've being using 9900K @ 5GHZ to upsample music to DSD 512 without problem.

Recently I decided to build a hifi system in my sitting room therefore I need to build another Windows PC for it.

 

I'd like to figure out 9700k vs 8700k which one has better performance in HQP (8c8t vs 6c12t) when upsampling to DSD 512 or even higher.

 

Any input will be appreciated.

Thanks!

[PieterP]

On 7/26/2019 at 2:34 PM, k6davis said:

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.

 

 

The new ryzen CPUs are interesting for HQ-'players'. It seems the new Ryzen CPU's (3900x 3700x) do a better job in a number of benchmarks but especially not in certain games. In this test by techspot they come up with an explanation, that it is about dram latency and multi thread latency. My question is, how important is that for HQplayer ? 

https://www.techspot.com/article/1876-4ghz-ryzen-3rd-gen-vs-core-i9/

 

An issue with this benchmark is that they forced clockspeed at 4 Ghz, where the boost clock of the 9900k is higher.....than the Ryzen....

[rando]

As this broad subject has been posited multiple times, and Miska has given multiple program specific answers.  Searching will turn up an entire separate thread devoted to building a server for HQP as well as the wealth of information already brought forth in this one.

 

A small recap:

 

Gaming performance does not matter.

 

Gaming benchmarks do not matter.

 

Illogically handicapped "tests" aimed at gamers do not matter!

 

Obscuring regurgitation of manufacturer specs inside technobabble and colored charts especially does not matter.

 

 

What does matter is processor cache size and the speed all cores can simultaneously maintain.  

[AnotherSpin]

55 minutes ago, rando said:

As this broad subject has been posited multiple times, and Miska has given multiple program specific answers.  Searching will turn up an entire separate thread devoted to building a server for HQP as well as the wealth of information already brought forth in this one.

 

A small recap:

 

Gaming performance does not matter.

 

Gaming benchmarks do not matter.

 

Illogically handicapped "tests" aimed at gamers do not matter!

 

Obscuring regurgitation of manufacturer specs inside technobabble and colored charts especially does not matter.

 

 

What does matter is processor cache size and the speed all cores can simultaneously maintain.  

 

Was surprised to know you read, not write only...)

[Le Concombre Masqué]

Back to Desktop, as some have already said no sound and stuttering can't be best SQ.

 

I can't even do mqa mp/DS5EC with 24/96 while I can do it with xtr lp 2S with D4 under WS2012...

 

I run Park Control https://bitsum.com/parkcontrol/ under WS2012 don't know if it's enough to explain no stuttering vs stuttering

 

stuttering takes a while to come so I can say latest E has benefitted from the latest D4 advances. However, and it's puzzling, D4 seems to keep an edge in my system

 

As of SQ, under  WS the machine is wifi connected, nothing plugged. Running E there's a Ethernet cable via E to Thunderbolt adaptor, a HDD connected

 

 

[Hammer]

20 hours ago, PieterP said:

 

The new ryzen CPUs are interesting for HQ-'players'. It seems the new Ryzen CPU's (3900x 3700x) do a better job in a number of benchmarks but especially not in certain games. In this test by techspot they come up with an explanation, that it is about dram latency and multi thread latency. My question is, how important is that for HQplayer ? 

https://www.techspot.com/article/1876-4ghz-ryzen-3rd-gen-vs-core-i9/

 

An issue with this benchmark is that they forced clockspeed at 4 Ghz, where the boost clock of the 9900k is higher.....than the Ryzen....

 

Hi, I'm running Threadripper 1950X and trying to run the EC modulators to no avail...however, I notice that even when stuttering, my core speeds are around 2200 Mhz, well below the 3400 Mhz speed of the processor and its boost speed of 4000 Mhz.  Is this a Windows issue?  Has anyone tried to run the EC modulators on a Threadripper system on Linux?  Or perhaps HQPlayers internal optimizations are tied to Intel processors?

[LowOrbit]

Hi

 

I've been following this discussion around CPUs for EC modulators. I'm a longtime user of HQP, now on v4 Desktop, running into a Beaglebone Black/botic NAA and Twisted Pear 9038Pro Buffalo dac. I don't post much on fora these days but I just built a Ryzen 3700X pc for audio purposes. Using a MSI X570 mobo, 16gb 3200 DDR4 ram and a beefy 700w ATX PSU, no CUDA support, basic gpu.

 

My experience over the last two weeks is this: I can run upto ASDM7EC with any filter (poly-Sinc-XTR or Sinc-M are preferred) upto 48k x 128 without issue and it sounds fantastic. The EC variant modulators are a real step forward for SDM playback. Going up to 44.1k x 256 rates I get varying degrees of stutter introduced even though resource monitoring in Windows 10 shows some headroom on all 8 cores. I have the multi-core CPU box greyed out in HQP, Auto Rate Family enabled settings, and multithreading disabled in bios.

 

I have played around the overclocking profiles but nothing will get me to the point where x 256 rates will play glitch-free. Sometimes I get maybe 10 bars into a track before the hiccups begin, and they are sometimes very brief but enough to kill the music of course. 

 

It seems that HQP is heavily loading 4 cores with modulator activity (changing to low intensity modulator variants shows big reductions in core loading) and that's the bottleneck. I am not sure if adding a GPU (RTX2070 Super are looking like a good bet pricewise and for general performance) will help as Jussi has said that only the filters (and convolution processes, iirc, which I don't use) are suitable for the high level of parallel processing the GPU adds. It could be that offloading the filter processing will reduce the thermal load on the CPU enough to deliver a few more CPU cycles, and kill the stutter, but I am sceptical right now.

 

Maybe going to a 12 core 3900X will be the way to go. Maybe it just needs a 5ghz 8-core Intel Coffee Lake Refresh cpu. Just thought someone might find my recent experiences useful.

[Le Concombre Masqué]

Has anyone else tried Park Control's High Profile ? As a reminder I can use DSD5EC and some filters with D4 while I can't listen to anything any longer with EC modulators when running E4 since latest iteration. Since HQPOS is much lighter than WS2012 it should be the other way round. Might be thanks to Park Control https://bitsum.com/parkcontrol/. it's free try it...

[rickca]

1 hour ago, LowOrbit said:

My experience over the last two weeks is this: I can run upto ASDM7EC with any filter (poly-Sinc-XTR or Sinc-M are preferred) upto 48k x 128 without issue and it sounds fantastic. The EC variant modulators are a real step forward for SDM playback. Going up to 44.1k x 256 rates I get varying degrees of stutter introduced even though resource monitoring in Windows 10 shows some headroom on all 8 cores. I have the multi-core CPU box greyed out in HQP, Auto Rate Family enabled settings, and multithreading disabled in bios.

Has anyone with an i9-9900K been able to run the ASDM7EC modulators at DSD256 without stuttering?   

[JTS]

10 minutes ago, rickca said:

Has anyone with an i9-9900K been able to run the ASDM7EC modulators at DSD256 without stuttering?   

 

I'm running ASDM7EC modulators at DSD256 with any of the various filters on an i9-9900K. 64 GB RAM, two core clock of 5.1 GHz and 6 other cores clocked at 4.8Ghz, GTX1080. Nothing else fancy going on in the BIOS, my power profile allows for dynamic clocking/voltage. HQ Player stream is rock solid.

 

I get occasional dropouts when working. I'm I'm doing anything heavy, I listen to Spotify :-).

 

Have you checked what processes are running at the same time as HQPlayer?

 

- J

 

[rickca]

6 minutes ago, JTS said:

I'm running ASDM7EC modulators at DSD256 with any of the various filters on an i9-9900K. 64 GB RAM, two core clock of 5.1 GHz and 6 other cores clocked at 4.8Ghz. Nothing else fancy going on in the BIOS, my power profile allows for dynamic clocking/voltage. HQ Player stream is rock solid.

What OS are you running?  The max turbo on i9-9900K is 5.0 GHz according to specs, so how do you get 5.1 GHz?  What do you mean your power profile allows for dynamic clocking/voltage ... do you just mean you have turbo boost enabled and that you are not running the Windows high performance power profile?

[JTS]

5 minutes ago, rickca said:

What OS are you running?  The max turbo on i9-9900K is 5.0 GHz according to specs, so how do you get 5.1 GHz?  What do you mean your power profile allows for dynamic clocking/voltage ... do you just mean you have turbo boost enabled and that you are not running the Windows high performance power profile?

W10.  I have overclocked two cores of the chip in the bios (all the adobe stuff threads poorly so single core speed is king), turbo is enabled.

 

I have created a power profile that functions well with my work tools and keeps things cool. My power profile allows a minimum processor state of 5%.

 

Also, I have a gentle overclock on the cache and ram too. I don't have these speeds available without going into the bios. It's fast and very stable.

 

I don't know if the overclock helps with HQP, but I imagine that it does not hurt.