HQ Player

[LoryWiv]

36 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

This is all software stack through "localhost", except graphics and audio output. Audio output is not active there, graphics is, but the load should then be more on the Client rather than on the server side.

 

Is it the same if you connect through real network instead of "localhost"? You have two choices on the drop-list.

 

You could email me HQPlayer4Desktop.log from %LOCALAPPDATA%\HQPlayer folder, if you have it enabled already. If not, first enable it from settings and then restart HQPlayer so that it is gathered right from the beginning.

I'll do as you instruct this evening when home, and thanks for sticking with me to try to solve this problem, Jussi. 

[MASA]

Hi@Miska,Can I start HQPlayer automatically when I open a windows pc? I don't want to connect the monitor and double-click the HQPL icon.   Thanks

[Miska]

2 hours ago, MASA said:

Hi@Miska,Can I start HQPlayer automatically when I open a windows pc? I don't want to connect the monitor and double-click the HQPL icon.   Thanks

 

Yes, you can place the application shortcut in Startup folder. This works for any normal application on Windows.

 

[MASA]

1 hour ago, Miska said:

 

是的，您可以將應用程序快捷方式放在“啟動”文件夾中。這適用於Windows上的任何普通應用程序。

 

Thank you very much for your reply

[LoryWiv]

On 3/5/2020 at 1:27 PM, Miska said:

 

This is all software stack through "localhost", except graphics and audio output. Audio output is not active there, graphics is, but the load should then be more on the Client rather than on the server side.

 

Is it the same if you connect through real network instead of "localhost"? You have two choices on the drop-list.

 

You could email me HQPlayer4Desktop.log from %LOCALAPPDATA%\HQPlayer folder, if you have it enabled already. If not, first enable it from settings and then restart HQPlayer so that it is gathered right from the beginning.

Just a quick shout out to appreciate Jussi for helping me troubleshoot my issue with HQP Desktop using cpu cycles even when idle. This level of support and engagement with customers is a part of why HQ Player's substantial purchase price is still a good value, in addition to it being great software.

 

In case anyone else encounters this behaviour, for me solution was to assure the "Allow control from network" option was selected. 

[LowOrbit]

I've been leaning on the convolution feature of HQPlayer Desktop lately, and was wondering if there is an optimum impulse format?

 

I have mostly redbook derived files, but increasingly downloads are in "higher res" formats. I have been creating impulses at 44.1khz and 24bit depth, and am happy with the results.

 

I use rePhase to generate impulses and have the option to vary number of taps and other aspects of the generation process. Is there an advantage to going all Rob Watts on the tap length?

 

 

[Miska]

2 hours ago, LowOrbit said:

I've been leaning on the convolution feature of HQPlayer Desktop lately, and was wondering if there is an optimum impulse format?

 

I have mostly redbook derived files, but increasingly downloads are in "higher res" formats. I have been creating impulses at 44.1khz and 24bit depth, and am happy with the results.

 

Use 352.8 or 384 kHz sample rate and 64-bit floating point if possible.

 

2 hours ago, LowOrbit said:

I use rePhase to generate impulses and have the option to vary number of taps and other aspects of the generation process. Is there an advantage to going all Rob Watts on the tap length?

 

The actual filter defines number of taps needed. Since usually corrections should be mostly in bass range, filters tend to be somewhere from 16000 to 256000 taps long at 44.1 kHz rate. Every time you double the rate also number of taps gets doubled.

 

[LowOrbit]

2 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Use 352.8 or 384 kHz sample rate and 64-bit floating point if possible.

 

 

The actual filter defines number of taps needed. Since usually corrections should be mostly in bass range, filters tend to be somewhere from 16000 to 256000 taps long at 44.1 kHz rate. Every time you double the rate also number of taps gets doubled.

 

Thanks Jussi - I shall draft some new Impulses and have a play.

[nicoff]

Question on Upsampling:

I am upsampling all my files as follows: PCM tracks to 352.8; DSD tracks to 512 DSD.In both cases, that represents a multiple of 8 for PCM 44.1 and DSD64 tracks.

 

However, since I also have PCM tracks that are PCM 96, I would think that it would be better to upsample those tracks to 384.

 

Is there a way to tell HQP to upsample to 352.8 or to 384 depending on the sampling rate of the original PCM track?

 

Thanks!

[ericuco]

8 minutes ago, nicoff said:

Question on Upsampling:

I am upsampling all my files as follows: PCM tracks to 352.8; DSD tracks to 512 DSD.In both cases, that represents a multiple of 8 for PCM 44.1 and DSD64 tracks.

 

However, since I also have PCM tracks that are PCM 96, I would think that it would be better to upsample those tracks to 384.

 

Is there a way to tell HQP to upsample to 352.8 or to 384 depending on the sampling rate of the original PCM track?

 

Thanks!

HQP can do that.  Go to Settings panel:

 

1) set Sample rate (/Limit) to 384k

2) set Adaptive output rate to either check or grey box

 

If you want to do the same with DSD you have to check the 48k DSD DAC box as well as set the limit box appropriately.

[nicoff]

13 minutes ago, ericuco said:

HQP can do that.  Go to Settings panel:

 

1) set Sample rate (/Limit) to 384k

2) set Adaptive output rate to either check or grey box

 

If you want to do the same with DSD you have to check the 48k DSD DAC box as well as set the limit box appropriately.

 

Thanks for the reply. I found the Sample rate / limit under Settings. But I could not see the ‘Adaptive output rate’ option under Settings. Could it be named differently o under another category/tab?

[Yviena]

Yeah I too have constant stuttering with the newest HQplayer version with my 3700x at 4.3ghz with EC DSD 256 CPU usage is lower to 21% though, so back to 4.3.1 where it worked fine.

[ericuco]

6 minutes ago, nicoff said:

 

Thanks for the reply. I found the Sample rate / limit under Settings. But I could not see the ‘Adaptive output rate’ option under Settings. Could it be named differently o under another category/tab?

It is at the very bottom of the settings panel, might have to scroll down to see it.

[Miska]

37 minutes ago, nicoff said:

I am upsampling all my files as follows: PCM tracks to 352.8; DSD tracks to 512 DSD.In both cases, that represents a multiple of 8 for PCM 44.1 and DSD64 tracks.

 

Unless your DAC has a separate conversion section for PCM and DSD (rare thing). It is usually best to stick to DSD output at highest possible rate. Which DAC do you have?

 

[Miska]

7 minutes ago, Yviena said:

Yeah I too have constant stuttering with the newest HQplayer version with my 3700x at 4.3ghz with EC DSD 256 CPU usage is lower to 21% though, so back to 4.3.1 where it worked fine.

 

Curious thing because there are no changes that should affect this unless you have "multicore DSP" checked instead of grayed.

 

[Yviena]

17 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Curious thing because there are no changes that should affect this unless you have "multicore DSP" checked instead of grayed.

 

Yeah I need to have multicore DSP checked, in all builds I tried even Linux  leaving it at auto/grayed caps it at 2 cores/12.5% for some reason.

[Miska]

51 minutes ago, Yviena said:

Yeah I need to have multicore DSP checked, in all builds I tried even Linux  leaving it at auto/grayed caps it at 2 cores/12.5% for some reason.

 

Yeah, modulators then run channel per core, by design. That is only way it works on Intel. With those possible clock boosts it should really work on AMD too.

 

With multicore checked it is multiple cores per channel, but he load distribution changed. The overall thing is just freaking complex... Really the only difference here is that different cores are talking to each other.

 

I'm really curious how Zen 3 will look like. Hopefully it makes the drastic behavioral difference between current AMD and Intel disappear at leas to some extent.

 

[Yviena]

6 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Yeah, modulators then run channel per core, by design. That is only way it works on Intel. With those possible clock boosts it should really work on AMD too.

 

With multicore checked it is multiple cores per channel, but he load distribution changed. The overall thing is just freaking complex... Really the only difference here is that different cores are talking to each other.

 

I'm really curious how Zen 3 will look like. Hopefully it makes the drastic behavioral difference between current AMD and Intel disappear at leas to some extent.

 

Yeah I too believe the behaviour difference is due to the CCX/chiplet architecture.

[Miska]

21 minutes ago, Yviena said:

Yeah I too believe the behaviour difference is due to the CCX/chiplet architecture.

 

This is one of the areas where you really see difference in hardware architectures, when hardware is pushed to the edge for a realtime application. With most regular applications you don't really notice how much difference a little change can make!

 

[nicoff]

2 hours ago, ericuco said:

It is at the very bottom of the settings panel, might have to scroll down to see it.

 

Under Settings there is a box named “Auto rate family” I just checked it and it looks like it is doing what I wanted. Thank you!

[nicoff]

3 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Unless your DAC has a separate conversion section for PCM and DSD (rare thing). It is usually best to stick to DSD output at highest possible rate. Which DAC do you have?

 

 

Thank you Miska. I have the T+A DAC 8 DSD.

What Settings would you recommend for this DAC?

Thank you!

[Miska]

2 hours ago, nicoff said:

Thank you Miska. I have the T+A DAC 8 DSD.

What Settings would you recommend for this DAC?

 

Just send it always DSD data. If you can, DSD256 with the EC modulators. Otherwise ADSM7 at DSD512.

 

[MemoryPlayer]

5 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Just send it always DSD data. If you can, DSD256 with the EC modulators. Otherwise ADSM7 at DSD512.

 

ASDM7EC at DSD256 sounds better than AMSDM7 512+fs at DSD512?

BTW AMSDM7 512+fs is not a typo? Is not the correct ASDM7 512+fs?

[juanitox]

27 minutes ago, MemoryPlayer said:

ASDM7EC at DSD256 sounds better than AMSDM7 512+fs at DSD512?

BTW AMSDM7 512+fs is not a typo? Is not the correct ASDM7 512+fs?

don‘t forget to try ASDM5EC  don‘t know why but on the T+A it sounds more natural to me :)

[Miska]

1 hour ago, MemoryPlayer said:

ASDM7EC at DSD256 sounds better than AMSDM7 512+fs at DSD512?

 

Yes, ASDM5EC or ASDM7EC at DSD256 can perform better than something else at higher rate. You can try and compare how it is for you.

 

1 hour ago, MemoryPlayer said:

BTW AMSDM7 512+fs is not a typo? Is not the correct ASDM7 512+fs?

 

Not a typo, it is different kind of modulator than ASDM7. Due to the way it works, it can be used only at highest DSD rates.

 

That can be also used with T+A at DSD512, but especially for that case I recommend setting analog filter to "clean" (not "wide").