HQ Player

[Miska]

15 hours ago, kwatch said:

Can I play an audio CD from a CD drive where the HQplayer Desktop is running?

 

Yes, should work now on all three platforms.

[Miska]

On 12/22/2021 at 8:28 AM, Kalpesh said:

say I want to listen to DG 1989/Pires/Schubert D784,

Let's start by the choice of PCM or SDM route for my Holo May, both through ps gauss xla, they sound much different and the PCM route much better

 

Did you remember to set PCM gain compensation to -6 dB so that you have matching volume between PCM and SDM routes?

 

On 12/22/2021 at 8:28 AM, Kalpesh said:

Maybe clean vivid live like fast attacks and decays in a more 3D presentation I enjoy thanks to PGGB (and that works with very few CDs for me so far, mostly 80's solo piano) are due to constant ringing ; but then it doesn't make sense to me that statistically round 1985 DDD Cds will benefit while post 1990 do not.

 

Maybe those older ones don't need apodizing filter? Are there big difference in Apod counter values for the entire album? Note that Apod analysis for pre-processed tracks like PGGB processed ones are meaningless. For correct analysis you must play the original content. PGGB will be much worse for anything that needs an apodizing filter.

 

On 12/22/2021 at 8:28 AM, Kalpesh said:

So, no doubt that HQP is my top priority player but I think a few CDs can be bettered by a PGGB treatment even when one does not have to compensate for the idiosyncrasies of one's DAC

 

I just disagree on that, because of the distortion problems it creates.

 

[Miska]

18 hours ago, Kalpesh said:

there seems to be a consensus against mqa on AS and I'm sold OK against MQA. However, the claim that working with artists producers etc to correct any defect ADC or whatever in the digital chain might have introduced faults sounds good to me ; the claim not the actual mqa thing.

 

Apodizing filters help fixing most of the ADC problems. You don't need a new lossy delivery format for that, you can perform it in the player/DAC.

 

18 hours ago, Kalpesh said:

Any road map on those routes is welcome ! At least an explanation in terms of how this or that type of signal processing better suits reconstructing what is supposed to be a bunch of 0/1...

 

It has been discussed a lot over past 10+ years. But basics of oversampling and dealing with converter linearity problems helps. Those bits represent the original smooth analog waveform, you don't listen to bits. DSP helps reconstructing that original analog waveform from the coarse digital representation.

 

[Miska]

23 hours ago, Kalpesh said:

BTW, though @Zaphod Beeblebrox and his testers preferred apodizing for 44.1, and though he explained that Rob Watts criticisms were based on a misunderstanding of apodizing in PGGB sense, I do all my PGGBng with apodizing Unchecked, especially since none of the CDs I apply PGGB to triggers HQp counter

 

Can you please move the PGGB stuff to the PGGB thread. This thread is about HQPlayer.

 

If you play PGGB'd file through HQPlayer, certainly Apod counter in HQPlayer shouldn't change because HQPlayer is not seeing the original content. The counter is only valid for the original content.

 

[Jud]

8 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

That's a really overly expensive NAA with no benefit at all.

If it’s one you already own and have spare for the purpose….

[kelvinwsy]

I ran conparisions of 705.6 PGGB fikes(44.1 khz orig) with zero filters and dither.. The PGGB tracks sounded vague and stereo location of instruments not dead center was off .. sort of vague location.. PCM upsampling to ..705.6 gave far suoerior cleaning up of the sound of the original 44.1 khz source track.. 

This was done with Hqpkayer 4.15.1!!

DSD512/EC7v2 wiped the floor vs the PGGB tracks.. 

I had done same comparisions with Hwplayer  4.13.1 doing 705.6 khz PCM upsampling.. Results were not so conclusive to my ears! 

Hqplayer 4.15 has made great SQ improvemts even for PCM upsampling..

 

Jussi Thx for all the Xmas presents!!

Looking fwd to DSD1024/PCM1536 with maybe 13900/14900 intel CPU's??

[Bertel]

@Miska quick question please: When sending 705.6kHz or 768kHz PCM in 32 bit to the Topping D90SE and its ES9038PRO, using poly-sinc-ext2 - is TPDF dither or LNS15 noise shaper recommended? Or a different dither or noise shaper? I understand that the noise shapers have an advantage when using <24 bit, but not sure what works best at 32 bit in terms of dynamic range and distortion?

[jimdukey]

Is there any downside to using AMSDM7 512+fs instead of DSD7 256+fs

for DSD 256 with ADI-2 fs/DSD Direct/Mac ?

They both work!

 

Sorry about the whole Piano/Transients subject.

I only meant that Piano can sound AMAZINGLY loud

in the right ( or as I like to call it, WRONG ) circumstance.

[Kalpesh]

5 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Can you please move the PGGB stuff to the PGGB thread. This thread is about HQPlayer.

 

If you play PGGB'd file through HQPlayer, certainly Apod counter in HQPlayer shouldn't change because HQPlayer is not seeing the original content. The counter is only valid for the original content.

 

ok. seems I've awoken the PGGB thread but it seemed dead PLUS I'm more deeply interested in reconstruction theories rather than software offers. I simply have no clue why some (a tiny tiny minority ) benefit from PGGB/PCM route in Holo. Not sure it would belong to PGGB thread either since it seems to rather attract people that hear the idiosyncrasies of their DAC addressed. Don't dare yet to create a thread titled something like "Is Digital profoundly Analog" in the sense that it requires mirroring conditions for creation and reproduction...

 

Factually, I have checked that every track I PGGBed process was not, in its native state, triggering HQP's apod counter

[Kalpesh]

5 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Did you remember to set PCM gain compensation to -6 dB so that you have matching volume between PCM and SDM routes?

 

 

Maybe those older ones don't need apodizing filter? Are there big difference in Apod counter values for the entire album? Note that Apod analysis for pre-processed tracks like PGGB processed ones are meaningless. For correct analysis you must play the original content. PGGB will be much worse for anything that needs an apodizing filter.

 

 

I just disagree on that, because of the distortion problems it creates.

 

yes I used gain compensation in HQP. However PGGB introduces tiny level compensations left unmatched.

 

True none of those old CDs, especially classical, needs apodizing

 

distorsions? I have compared apples to oranges, which sometimes makes sense : that is PGGB/PCM to non PGGB/SDM all to the max capabilities of HQP with the same xla filter and +i have trashed another bunch of PGGBed files for I preferred what HQP did with the untreated files.

 

Still, though I can't make sense of it or the whys (and once again my purpose is not to hack a software's thread with another software but rather to tap from your vision on deeper considerations about reconstructing the analog waveform) there ara a few records that sound better PGGB/PCM via Holo :

Shirley Horn's You won't forget me

Arrau/Chopin/Nocturnes (through unknown ADC)

Arrau/Debussy/Final sessions 3

 

As far as software picking is concerned, HQP wins hands down by a huge margin ; still I'm just trying to understand why some CD are better rendered by a PGGB pre stage and the PCM route

 

not always, but often, a common factor seems to be very audible noise floor for those digital recordings , in the order of tape hiss with analog, ie with Savall's Cant de la Sybilla : maybe there's a rational such as : less than 16 bits digital/ huge number of taps helping better recreate the event.... 

[AudioDoctor]

6 hours ago, Jud said:

If it’s one you already own and have spare for the purpose….

 

You make a good point Jud, but I would still recommend, it it's not an M1 mini, and 2014 or older, to install Linux on it.

[AudioDoctor]

15 hours ago, Bob Stern said:

 

Not true.  Jussi offers NAA programs for Mac and Windows:

https://www.signalyst.eu/bins/naa/

 

On a Mac, the conventional approach would be to put the program file in:

/usr/local/bin/

 

To run it, drag the program file to the Terminal and press return.  You can leave NAA running perpetually, without having to relaunch it when your turn the DAC off and on or quit and relaunch HQP Desktop.

 

It may not be ideal, but I'm running NAA on a Mac Mini.  (My signature is obsolete in that respect.)

 

I was not aware, thanks for enlightening me.

[Miska]

6 hours ago, Bertel said:

@Miska quick question please: When sending 705.6kHz or 768kHz PCM in 32 bit to the Topping D90SE and its ES9038PRO, using poly-sinc-ext2 - is TPDF dither or LNS15 noise shaper recommended? Or a different dither or noise shaper? I understand that the noise shapers have an advantage when using <24 bit, but not sure what works best at 32 bit in terms of dynamic range and distortion?

 

TPDF dither is fine for 32-bit. But you can use noise-shaper too if you wish. It will extend digital dynamic range in audio band to cover over 32-bit worth. But since the effect is below -192 dBFS, one could argue it doesn't have audible effect.

 

[Miska]

3 hours ago, Kalpesh said:

distorsions?

 

Yes, because of truncated transients as I explained before.

 

3 hours ago, Kalpesh said:

As far as software picking is concerned, HQP wins hands down by a huge margin ; still I'm just trying to understand why some CD are better rendered by a PGGB pre stage and the PCM route

 

You tried those with all the HQPlayer filter options for comparison?

 

 

[pavi]

9 hours ago, Miska said:

 

256 * 1048576 / 2 / 768000

 

If we talk about mega-taps in terms of computer meaning of mega.

 

of course! 

[Miska]

3 hours ago, Kalpesh said:

Factually, I have checked that every track I PGGBed process was not, in its native state, triggering HQP's apod counter

 

It means that they are either from an old ADC, or don't actually any real transients. Or both...

 

[Miska]

4 hours ago, jimdukey said:

Is there any downside to using AMSDM7 512+fs instead of DSD7 256+fs

for DSD 256 with ADI-2 fs/DSD Direct/Mac ?

They both work!

 

Higher amount of left-over ultrasonic noise. But no downsides in the audio band.

 

[jimdukey]

Thank You!

I'm liking my RME!

[Mops911]

17 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

That's a really overly expensive NAA with no benefit at all.

says who?

[AudioDoctor]

1 hour ago, Mops911 said:

says who?

 

me.

[Kalpesh]

7 hours ago, Miska said:

 

It means that they are either from an old ADC, or don't actually any real transients. Or both...

 

yes the sweet spot for CDs that would benefit, and thus that I consider, is circa 1985. And except Arrau/Chopin /Nocturnes, they are all digital recordings. when I mentioned unknown ADC for the Arrau/Chopin /Nocturnes I meant it was from analog source ; but of course all digital recordings require ADC somewhere after the microphones.

 

Almost never, maybe never never,  do my classical digital files trigger the apod counter whatever their age, the most recent being hires

[Kalpesh]

7 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Yes, because of truncated transients as I explained before.

 

 

You tried those with all the HQPlayer filter options for comparison?

 

 

from your explanation there might be no real transients in the PGGB benefiting files and thus no distorsion I can hear. Thank you for providing an explanation why sometimes the balance might be favorable despite the flaws you denounce. 

 

No, I'm not that obsessive that I tried and compared with ALL filter options. But I grasp what you mean : my base comparaisons are made with xla for SDM and PCM (could change to xl since there's no need for apodization with those circa 1985 files) but I also played with filters and yes in some instances I concluded that I'd be better off saving 20 Gb of HD and change the filter with the file left native.

 

Out of classical classical, an exemple would be Kraftwerk's 1986 Electric Café : with xla for both, PGGBed/PCM route and native/SDM route sound very very different with some appealing and appaling things with the PGGBed, maybe the distorsions you mention : it sounds a bit dirty on processed voices while sense of space and electronic percussions are richer : I haven't trashed the PGGB files but it's the kind of situation where if I was to play and enjoy a whole album it's worth taking the time to look for the best suiting HQP filter and route with the native files. Compared with the same filter, the Holo PCM route is quite the obvious choice over the SDM, then Sinc L is  sweet (I can not with SDM, best I could with SDM is ext2).

I think that PGGB reveals some grunge in the original (the first electronic album recorded digitally ?) rather than add distorsion.

But probably native file/SincL/LNS15 in HQP is the safest choice

[Kalpesh]

34 minutes ago, Kalpesh said:

Kraftwerk's 1986 Electric Café 

 

probably native file/SincL/LNS15 in HQP is the safest choice

technically you could claim that even with that 1986 exemple the SDM route is the cleanest with more percussive percussions and better defined echoes ; but then it yields much digital fatigue. Thank you for providing  all the options in HQP from which to tailor depending on mood, system, source recording,

[Miska]

1 hour ago, Kalpesh said:

the SDM, then Sinc L is  sweet (I can not with SDM, best I could with SDM is ext2).

I think that PGGB reveals some grunge in the original (the first electronic album recorded digitally ?) rather than add distorsion.

But probably native file/SincL/LNS15 in HQP is the safest choice

 

You make that sound like sinc-L would be better than ext2. It is not better by any technical means.

 

Have you tried something like poly-sinc-short-mp(-2s) with your piano recordings etc? Or poly-sinc-gauss-short or poly-sinc-gauss?

 

[pavi]

HQPlayer needs an FAQ.

 

If I understood it better than I do atm I would gladly volunteer.