HQ Player

[Miska]

26 minutes ago, fgribas said:

Is there a reason not to use priority 31 on the audio thread? System stability maybe?

 

Yes, to large extent. The exact values are ones from Microsoft for the particular kind of tasks. Reason is mostly to avoid priority inversion problems, because some OS services run also at certain priorities. Similar thing applies to Linux too, because kernel threads also have priorities and you you'd want to be a bit careful not to starve kernel thread you rely on. In worst case one could end up with locked up system.

 

30 minutes ago, fgribas said:

So it makes sense to set the affinity to 1 physical core? Or to 1 physical core + its HT core? Or none of it?

 

If something, to both threads of one physical core. This allows the two threads to run on their or virtual CPU although they share the same execution unit. If you are not short of cores, you could allocate two physical cores instead.

 

34 minutes ago, fgribas said:

But out of curiosity: how is the support to users running different scenarios with optimization softwares like Audiophile Optimizer, Fidelizer

 

I always recommend not to use such. I'm running stock Win 10 Pro and Win 10 for Workstations with power management set to High Performance or Ultimate Performance power profile. This is how the software is tested.

 

It is just lost time to figure out after a while that some system tweak is reason for the problem. Lost time means less time to work on the code itself.

 

 

P.S. The introduction of EC modulators brought a lot more internal fine tuning to HQPlayer, because it really pushes current hardware to it's limits. It took a lot of effort. So everything had to be tuned very carefully to make it work as it does today.

 

[Zauurx]

11 hours ago, Miska said:

I would keep it "no foreground boost" if you cannot keep HQPlayer window in focus (topmost active) all the time. Otherwise if the active window switches over time it changes priority boosts accordingly.

After reading, I set the priority via ProcessLasso to "none".
And I use HQP desktop on my nuc win10 as a server with roon as remote.

For ProcessLasso "Tweak Screduler", i choosed : short, variable (22hex).

 

So HQP is launched via a batch script in a minimized window.
There is no possibility of launching it in "no gui" mode, quite simply ?
Like "fidelizer /S" or Roon in the notification aerea ?

 

[EDIT] i changed taskbar parameters.. >> HQP minimized as an icon in taskbar.

[perpetualapprentice]

2 hours ago, Markus87 said:

Hi @Miska,

 

I am planning my new HQP server right now. I will take the i9-10900K but was wondering whether it makes sense to choose the KF version over the K? 

As I figured the only difference is that the KF does not have an iGPU, correct? As I will pick an RTX 2080 Ti anyways, that should not be a problem and might even be an advantage in terms of noise... What do you think? 

 

Cheers, 

Markus

 

An observation from a Linux newbie - I had black screen issues when trying to set up an RTX 2080 Ti in Ubuntu 18.04. The problems were completely due to my unfamiliarity with the software but trouble-shooting in the early stages would have been infinitely more difficult if I had not been able to fall back on the built-in Intel video.

[rikirk]

On 6/6/2020 at 8:50 AM, rikirk said:

Appreciate taking the time.

 

The issue is with this specific DAC only since HQP v4. As mentioned I tried them all before reaching out including cables, port is dedicated gigabyte AMP-UP, same rate available from DAC: JRiver works, HQP get out of sync in a matter of few minutes.

 

Since there's nothing you can do, will manage myself in an other way.

 

@Miska A quick follow up: not having a single issue in the last week using a MS Surface (albeit with no up-sampling), I am now inclined to think the occurrence is hardware dependent on the PC side. Will update the mini-ITX mobo and in the process upgrade the CPU and possibly be able to enjoy HQP back again in V.4. 

[Miska]

33 minutes ago, rikirk said:

 

@Miska A quick follow up: not having a single issue in the last week using a MS Surface (albeit with no up-sampling), I am now inclined to think the occurrence is hardware dependent on the PC side. Will update the mini-ITX mobo and in the process upgrade the CPU and possibly be able to enjoy HQP back again in V.4. 

 

If portable device (floating potential) works fine, but a desktop PC with earthed IEC power socket doesn't, I would look into possible ground current issues between PC and audio equipment. This can happen over the USB cable's ground and mess up things in the DAC (in worst case).

 

[rikirk]

22 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

If portable device (floating potential) works fine, but a desktop PC with earthed IEC power socket doesn't, I would look into possible ground current issues between PC and audio equipment. This can happen over the USB cable's ground and mess up things in the DAC (in worst case).

 

 

Still wondering though HQPv3 was ok for years. Had 4 cables tested Venom, Tellurium, AQ and standard 2.0 USB High-Speed, all with same result. Case is fanless Streacom 8 on 165W PICO PSU. Anyway, will migrate JCat USB PCI into this build as well, so I would like to assume it will be enough isolated at that point.

[Miska]

7 minutes ago, rikirk said:

Still wondering though HQPv3 was ok for years. Had 4 cables tested Venom, Tellurium, AQ and standard 2.0 USB High-Speed, all with same result. Case is fanless Streacom 8 on 165W PICO PSU. Anyway, will migrate JCat USB PCI into this build as well, so I would like to assume it will be enough isolated at that point.

 

Has anything else changed in the overall system since v3?

 

What CPU is it? 165W is not so much, if v4 loads the CPU more, it could cause voltage drops on USB for example if the PSU is near it's limits.

 

I have one server with Streacom 10 case and their 240W ZeroFlex PSU.

 

[MemoryPlayer]

On 6/15/2020 at 7:09 PM, DancingSea said:

Is “MP” inherently more relaxed than “LP”?

For my taste yes always and classical music sound better!

Left hand on piano music is unbelievable and real.

[cat6man]

On 6/14/2020 at 2:18 PM, Miska said:

 

I would rather make it do the work during playback, rather than doing it during content scan. Because analyzing the content during scan would make the scan take much much longer. Not sure how much of an issue it is, but still. If you would analyze terabyte of music from NAS, HQPlayer would need to fetch terabyte amount of data which already by itself takes quite a while. During playback it is not as painful, but you'd only know once you play.

 

 

Steven Wilson? I don't know how RedBook versions of his remixes look like (depends how it was converted from hires), but his hires ones I've seen are certainly good and don't need apodizing filter.

 

 

i'm curious.  how would you (theoretically) identify a track that needed apodizing?

[blue2]

On ‎6‎/‎14‎/‎2020 at 7:18 PM, Miska said:

How feasible would it be to create something that analyzes the track and notifies us if it needs apodizing or not?

I would rather make it do the work during playback, rather than doing it during content scan. Because analyzing the content during scan would make the scan take much much longer. Not sure how much of an issue it is, but still. If you would analyze terabyte of music from NAS, HQPlayer would need to fetch terabyte amount of data which already by itself takes quite a while. During playback it is not as painful, but you'd only know once you play.

 

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.

[craighartley]

1 hour 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.

That sounds very cumbersome to me. I much prefer it being integrated. 

[Zauurx]

On 6/15/2020 at 7:33 PM, MemoryPlayer said:

Sorry for my previous question Miska...

Checking back I saw now we get all three platforms (Mac, Linux and Windows) with only one license!

This is not what I understood: a license for a version and one OS.
So HQP Desktop 4 on win10 and HQP 4 Embedded on Linux = 2 licenses.

 

Quote

Purchased license covers same major version (4.x) of the same product on the same operating system.

https://www.signalyst.com/webshop.html

[Miska]

5 hours ago, Zauurx said:

This is not what I understood: a license for a version and one OS.
So HQP Desktop 4 on win10 and HQP 4 Embedded on Linux = 2 licenses.

 

https://www.signalyst.com/webshop.html

 

I need to reword that from the times 3.x was still there. It still applies for Embedded, although Embedded so far is only for Linux.

 

HQPlayer 4 Desktop license applies to all three platforms, so you can choose/switch the OS you use it on.

 

[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.

[MemoryPlayer]

9 hours ago, Zauurx said:

This is not what I understood: a license for a version and one OS.
So HQP Desktop 4 on win10 and HQP 4 Embedded on Linux = 2 licenses.

 

https://www.signalyst.com/webshop.html

HQP Desktop 4 and HQP 4 Embedded are two products, so two licenses, however when we buy HQP Desktop 4 it will play for Mac, Windows or Linux, in my case I'm testing with Unbutu Studio recommended by Miska as the best platform for sound quality and I'm agreeing!

[rikirk]

23 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Has anything else changed in the overall system since v3?

 

What CPU is it? 165W is not so much, if v4 loads the CPU more, it could cause voltage drops on USB for example if the PSU is near it's limits.

 

I have one server with Streacom 10 case and their 240W ZeroFlex PSU.

 

 

Hi Jussi, thanks for the new follow-up.

 

Last night I did more testing on different machines and I am positive now the issue is not related to any of the HQP version, but rather in the poor protocol between the last releases of Win10 and the obsolete LHLabs USB driver.

 

What I did not realized is that the sample rate does not update on the DAC anymore and I have to manually do so in the Windows driver every time to match the one in the music file. Having changed my habit from keeping the original format rather than converting everything into DSD, put me in wrong spot and made the wrong assumption it was software related (although works fine in JR with the wrong rate).
 

I have no hope for a new driver from LHLabs, practically a defunct entity, so I will have this is mind for the future.

 

All the best.

[Miska]

1 minute ago, rikirk said:

Last night I did more testing on different machines and I am positive now the issue is not related to any of the HQP version, but rather in the poor protocol between the last releases of Win10 and the obsolete LHLabs USB driver.

 

Good that the reason was found though. Is the LHLabs DAC USB Audio Class -compliant? If it is, it could work through WASAPI using the UAC2 driver now built into Windows. Or alternatively for example on Linux (through NAA or similar method).

 

[rikirk]

It should, but I am running with the same issue even under WASAPI. And yes, when this DAC was in the main system with the Ultrarendu (Linux) worked great.

[Miska]

29 minutes ago, rikirk said:

It should, but I am running with the same issue even under WASAPI. And yes, when this DAC was in the main system with the Ultrarendu (Linux) worked great.

 

With the LHLabs driver removed?

[CheapSplurge]

Hello, new here but not new to audio 

 

I got a tt2. And love the thing. im not the best with pc 

But I got a win10 and would like to give this hqplayer a go. 

Well I downloaded and installed. As far as I got

 

The interface is complex to me and I don't know how to set it up to simulate or better an mscaler. 

Please help guide me to a tutorial on how to set the thing up. 

I use Tidal to discover music, I have my own wav files of high rez songs. But I mainly want it to improve Tidal as I listen to that most

 

Cheers

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, CheapSplurge said:

Hello, new here but not new to audio 

 

I got a tt2. And love the thing. im not the best with pc 

But I got a win10 and would like to give this hqplayer a go. 

Well I downloaded and installed. As far as I got

 

The interface is complex to me and I don't know how to set it up to simulate or better an mscaler. 

Please help guide me to a tutorial on how to set the thing up. 

I use Tidal to discover music, I have my own wav files of high rez songs. But I mainly want it to improve Tidal as I listen to that most

 

Cheers

The best way to use it is to use Roon to send audio to HQP. Then you get a great interface with the best DSP in HQP.

[CheapSplurge]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The best way to use it is to use Roon to send audio to HQP. Then you get a great interface with the best DSP in HQP.

I appreciate your response, truly

Its great news as I do have Roon allready. 

But how does one make hq player connect to roon is out of my real of understanding? I'm sorry I'm such a goober. But I do Want to learn and I'm currently browsing the thread, but the more I read the more discouraged I get

..i wish there was a step by step tutorial for airheads like me 

[The Computer Audiophile]

17 minutes ago, CheapSplurge said:

I appreciate your response, truly

Its great news as I do have Roon allready. 

But how does one make hq player connect to roon is out of my real of understanding? I'm sorry I'm such a goober. But I do Want to learn and I'm currently browsing the thread, but the more I read the more discouraged I get

..i wish there was a step by step tutorial for airheads like me 

A step by step will probably be needed because it isn't that intuitive. 

 

Here are some screenshots for now.

 

Make sure this is clicked in HQP. It enables Roon to talk to it. 

 

 

 

If HQP is installed on your Roon machine, then select ASIO or WASAPI in the HQP settings and select your DAC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Roon go to this screen and select Add HQPlayer

 

 

 

 

 

Then leave localhost if Roon and HQP are on the same machine. Otherwise enter the IP address of the HQP machine. 

 

[CheapSplurge]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

A step by step will probably be needed because it isn't that intuitive. 

 

Here are some screenshots for now.

 

Make sure this is clicked in HQP. It enables Roon to talk to it. 

 

 

 

If HQP is installed on your Roon machine, then select ASIO or WASAPI in the HQP settings and select your DAC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Roon go to this screen and select Add HQPlayer

 

 

 

 

 

Then leave localhost if Roon and HQP are on the same machine. Otherwise enter the IP address of the HQP machine. 

 

Omg thank you so so much, I really appreciate you! You are amazing 

[luisma]

This could be a simple question for someone to answer, HQP volume should be limited at -3 to avoid possible clipping, what about if you would like to get some more volume because your preamp is not enough? can this be done avoiding clipping and possibly noise? convolution maybe? let's say  I would like to increase max volume (without clipping +8db)?