USB audio cracked... finally!

[fas42]

Regarding, say Peter having the "best" products is not the point - rather, it's that he, and I, are sensitive to systems not working correctly - that is, not reproducing the sound quality inherent in the recording. So, you don't have to buy his products - sorry, Peter! - to get the "good stuff"; but it may be a quick shortcut.

 

My stance is that all reasonable systems can produce exceptional sound - the reason they normally don't is that not enough effort has gone into 'debugging' issues that are too audibly damaging - get everything on a level playing field, and even then some rigs will be better than others, for all the obvious reasons.

[Johnseye]

49 minutes ago, jabbr said:

What DAC? What driver? need more specifics...

 

39 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

Audio Alchemy DDP-1 DAC

drivers paired with the DAC are:

tusbaudioapi.dll

AudioAlchemy_LLCasio.dll

AudioAlchemy_LLCasio_x64.dll

Thanks

 

The driver that's active when I use another USB cable is "AudioALchemy_LLCx64.sys" version 1.61.0.0.  DLL API version 4.

Other USB cables work direct between PC and AA DAC without issue.

[acg]

59 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

Audio Alchemy DDP-1 DAC

drivers paired with the DAC are:

tusbaudioapi.dll

AudioAlchemy_LLCasio.dll

AudioAlchemy_LLCasio_x64.dll

Thanks

 

I don't mean to be a smart ar$e but have you rebooted the computer with the Lush cable in place?  That would be the first thing I do.  Standard IT reply, I know, but rebooting often is all that is required to fix pc problems. 

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

I am however having an issue.  My PC can not see my DAC with the Lush cable in line directly between the two.  Other USB cables have no issue.  When I use the sMS-200 between it and the DAC I have no issue.  Any ideas what the problem is and how I can resolve it?

 

John, I am here now. Sorry for being late, but it was sleeping time over here. 

 

I don't think there are any tweaks I can think of, if the Lush is to be working directly between PC and DAC. I suppose in your (so far first) situation the spec of the cable is, well, out of spec. 

I don't know anything about that driver you are using (and need to use) but possibly it is transferring a too high "packet rate" in idle mode (connection but not playing) which is unexpected. But just guessing because I need to say something, right ?

 

Options I see from here :

1. You keep the cable because you like it for the better anyway with that other device in the chain;

2. I give you a full refund right away because the product does not work as advertised;

 

Ad 2.

With that I could ask you to send it to a next address close to you and Phasure pays for the shipping cost of that.

Also notice that each cable is tested for 5 minutes on errors - yours too.

 

Oh, I now see you also sent an email. We'll proceed from there. With apologies.

Peter

 

 

[Johnseye]

8 hours ago, acg said:

 

I don't mean to be a smart ar$e but have you rebooted the computer with the Lush cable in place?  That would be the first thing I do.  Standard IT reply, I know, but rebooting often is all that is required to fix pc problems. 

 

I'm in IT and the most common first troubleshooting step is to reboot.  Standard IT reply.  Yes.  I rebooted for multiple reasons while troubleshooting.

 

7 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

John, I am here now. Sorry for being late, but it was sleeping time over here. 

 

I don't think there are any tweaks I can think of, if the Lush is to be working directly between PC and DAC. I suppose in your (so far first) situation the spec of the cable is, well, out of spec. 

I don't know anything about that driver you are using (and need to use) but possibly it is transferring a too high "packet rate" in idle mode (connection but not playing) which is unexpected. But just guessing because I need to say something, right ?

 

Options I see from here :

1. You keep the cable because you like it for the better anyway with that other device in the chain;

2. I give you a full refund right away because the product does not work as advertised;

 

Ad 2.

With that I could ask you to send it to a next address close to you and Phasure pays for the shipping cost of that.

Also notice that each cable is tested for 5 minutes on errors - yours too.

 

Oh, I now see you also sent an email. We'll proceed from there. With apologies.

Peter

 

 

 

I appreciate the response and the guess.   The behavior I see is when the driver is initiated, the "usb audio class driver control panel" will flap and a cascade of error windows appear until the driver and control panel crash.  So there appears to be some sort of recognition taking place but then is lost and repeated.  Positioning of the cable makes no difference so I don't think there's a loose connection point anywhere.

 

I posted here in hopes someone from the community would be able to offer suggestions.  Peter, I'll email you directly regarding next steps.

 

Thanks

[rando]

Did you do reinstall the driver in question or check for an updated version of it?  Try another USB port or investigate that driver?  Recently install an update to your player software that might be causing some non-driver related error representing as driver error?  Try the old USB cord to verify it is related to the introduction of "Lush"?

[Johnseye]

1 minute ago, rando said:

Did you do reinstall the driver in question or check for an updated version of it?  Try another USB port or investigate that driver?  Recently install an update to your player software that might be causing some non-driver related error representing as driver error?  Try the old USB cord to verify it is related to the introduction of "Lush"?

 

I reinstalled the driver.  Audio Alchemy has no updated version of what I'm using.  I've tried other ports.  The old USB cable works fine.  All good ideas.

[rando]

After reading "I work in IT" this was more to eliminate others asking than wondering if you knew well enough to dig in.

 

There is always the chance some deeply buried setting is causing the issue.  More likely it is down to not being a true USB 2.0 cable (which is a known issue with some DAC's).  Sorry to hear you were unable to offer another opinion to the pool.

[Johnseye]

11 minutes ago, rando said:

After reading "I work in IT" this was more to eliminate others asking than wondering if you knew well enough to dig in.

 

There is always the chance some deeply buried setting is causing the issue.  More likely it is down to not being a true USB 2.0 cable (which is a known issue with some DAC's).  Sorry to hear you were unable to offer another opinion to the pool.

 

I'm guessing it's a spec issue with the driver as well.  That the cable works with the sMS-200 endpoint in line shows the Lush works with the DAC itself.  So it's likely the driver.  Not sure if anyone is savvy enough here to analyze, modify and recompile the driver but thought I'd throw it out there.

 

EDIT: I use Roon on my server and the Roon endpoint on the sMS-200.  The USB driver on the server is bipassed in this situation.

 

In the offhand chance it's a cable issue, Peter is going to send a new cable my way.

[Paul R]

10 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Yes, you're right that the ear/brain shuts down - it very specifically reduces the sensitivity of one's hearing, to handle the SPLs - in exactly the same way as listening to loud, natural sounds. When the speaker output is significantly distorted this happens to a greater degree - your mind says, "This sounds terrible - I don't want to hear it!!". But the 'magic' that happens when the distortion levels are low enough is that the AGC in your head merely adjusts to match how it would deal with those natural high level sounds - it then still sounds "real", even though it will be very loud.

 

Remember, this is only done as a checking exercise - no-one sane would stand right next to a set of bagpipes going full blast for hours on end! ...

 

I am not sure any sane person would put their ear that close to a speaker playing at "full volume" even for a few seconds.  Not worth the risk of hearing damage IMNSHO.  

 

-Paul

 

[rando]

Or not turn the other cheek and do a double blind deaf test to verify their results.

[fas42]

7 hours ago, Paul R said:

 

I am not sure any sane person would put their ear that close to a speaker playing at "full volume" even for a few seconds.  Not worth the risk of hearing damage IMNSHO.  

 

-Paul

 

 

You're still not getting the point that it is no louder, in number terms, than what every musician experiences when playing his instrument in the company of others - drop a hard object on a stone or concrete floor, and you'll experience a transient burst of in the region of 130dB sound level. Your ears don't explode as a result of this, the human system can handle bursts of extreme sound with no problems - it's only if one is dumb enough to hang around in such an environment for 10's of minutes or hours that things start going downhill.

 

One can do the maths on what the sound level really is with the ears this close - it goes up 6dB per halving of distance from the direct source; let's say the peak is 95dB 2 metres away; 1m, 101dB; 50cm 107dB; 25cm, 113dB; 12cm, 119dB; 6cm, 125dB. Check the ruler - 6cm is mighty, mighty close! And, we have still not hit 130dB - also, I've taken an extreme example; typically one is doing this with far more moderate volumes, say 85dB peak at 2m - which then translates to a 115dB peak with the ear a little over 2" away. Players in an orchestra experience this for hours on end, so ...

 

Of course, if the sound is significantly distorted then it will be quite traumatic to listen to, even for a very short bursts ... which, is the whole point of doing this exercise ...

[Doak]

30 hours on the LUSH and first "serious" listen. 

Word that comes to mind is DENSE,, and I mean that in the best possible way. 

Which brings us back to LUSH. 

More later on after comparisons -- a few days at least. 

In no hurry to remove this cable from the system

[fas42]

1 minute ago, Doak said:

30 hours on the LUSH and first "serious" listen. 

Word that comes to mind is DENSE,, and I mean that in the best possible way. 

Which brings us back to LUSH. 

More later on after comparisons -- a few days at least. 

In no hurry to remove this cable from the system

 

I use the term "intense" - the impact of the music is such that it grabs you by the throat and doesn't let you go - in the nicest possible way ...

[Doak]

17 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

I use the term "intense" - the impact of the music is such that it grabs you by the throat and doesn't let you go - in the nicest possible way ...

Glad I got the work part of the day behind me before I parked it in the Sweet Spot - have barely moved for the past few hours.

[George Hincapie]

18 minutes ago, Doak said:

Glad I got the work part of the day behind me before I parked it in the Sweet Spot - have barely moved for the past few hours.

 

I don't think much of your decor, but that cushion is all kinds of awesome

[Doak]

That cushion - my own design

The sound panels - not beige

The furnishings - before I added the large orange floral decorated pillows 

[George Hincapie]

8 minutes ago, Doak said:

The cushion - my own design

The sound panels - not beige

The furnishings - before I added the large orange floral decorated pillows 

 

Ha! Your happiness in your home is all that matters! Have a wonderful weekend.

[Paul R]

5 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

You're still not getting the point that it is no louder, in number terms, than what every musician experiences when playing his instrument in the company of others - drop a hard object on a stone or concrete floor, and you'll experience a transient burst of in the region of 130dB sound level. Your ears don't explode as a result of this, the human system can handle bursts of extreme sound with no problems - it's only if one is dumb enough to hang around in such an environment for 10's of minutes or hours that things start going downhill.

 

One can do the maths on what the sound level really is with the ears this close - it goes up 6dB per halving of distance from the direct source; let's say the peak is 95dB 2 metres away; 1m, 101dB; 50cm 107dB; 25cm, 113dB; 12cm, 119dB; 6cm, 125dB. Check the ruler - 6cm is mighty, mighty close! And, we have still not hit 130dB - also, I've taken an extreme example; typically one is doing this with far more moderate volumes, say 85dB peak at 2m - which then translates to a 115dB peak with the ear a little over 2" away. Players in an orchestra experience this for hours on end, so ...

 

Of course, if the sound is significantly distorted then it will be quite traumatic to listen to, even for a very short bursts ... which, is the whole point of doing this exercise ...

 

Like I said, I think we will have to disagree.  There is a *significant* difference between what "every musician" experiences when playing their instrument and what you are talking about.  I do not know any musicians who would do what you suggest. 

 

YMMV. 

 

[PeterSt]

4 hours ago, Doak said:

Word that comes to mind is DENSE

 

Hi Doak - Yes, "dense" would be a most good description. I myself used different words for the same (and I forgot the words). Maybe I wrote it in the context of coherence (but at the micro level) and otherwise it would be the same as the individual transients which "connect" better. Anyway, it creates these firm / straight / taut string sounds, for example.

But please express it and all as you like. For now I only try to recognize whether it works out the same everywhere.

 

Thanks,

Peter

 

[PeterSt]

5 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

I use the term "intense" - the impact of the music is such that it grabs you by the throat and doesn't let you go

 

Of course that does exist too. But I am pretty sure Doak is not talking about that. He is now using "technical" terms which are not related to perception.

I almost always talk in technical terms as well, as all is about elements which builds up fine sound. So I work on thos elements. I can't work on "intensity", so to speak. But I also can't work on foot tapping. This is, as it seems, where all comes together and starts to play music. It is the opposite of all technical elements working perfectly, and robots play (it is about the easiest to accomplish and the hardest to avoid ).

[fas42]

1 hour ago, Paul R said:

 

Like I said, I think we will have to disagree.  There is a *significant* difference between what "every musician" experiences when playing their instrument and what you are talking about.  I do not know any musicians who would do what you suggest. 

 

YMMV. 

 

 

Fair enough. I'm just talking about the sound levels experienced by musicians who are alongside other musicians playing their instruments, and someone, not necessarily a musician, listening that close to speaker drivers being of the same order. And for me, the impact matches, if the SQ is good enough ...

[fas42]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

 

Of course that does exist too. But I am pretty sure Doak is not talking about that. He is now using "technical" terms which are not related to perception.

I almost always talk in technical terms as well, as all is about elements which builds up fine sound. So I work on thos elements. I can't work on "intensity", so to speak. But I also can't work on foot tapping. This is, as it seems, where all comes together and starts to play music. It is the opposite of all technical elements working perfectly, and robots play (it is about the easiest to accomplish and the hardest to avoid ).

 

Except, I assert that "all technical elements working perfectly" and "all comes together and starts to play music" mean the same thing - they are just different ways of expressing the same status, of the playback system. If I don't get "toe tapping" then the sound is audibly flawed; some technical aspect is not good enough, and needs to be improved upon. If you mean a setup is good enough in the conventional measurements sense, but fails to deliver the music - then, yes, that happens all the time. But the only reason for that is that the wrong things are being measured - as they say, .

[PeterSt]

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

Except, I assert that "all technical elements working perfectly" and "all comes together and starts to play music"

 

Hmm ... in my book that does not need to be true at all, unless you know the technical element which could be called some kind of glue, that makes the lot play music. So let's keep in mind, I can control most of the aspects we perceive from "sound through loudspeakers" as such, most of them by software alone. But there is no way that I have a dial for musicality.

 

Windows 8 could be the best example of this because it took me close to a full year to let that sound acceptable. In the end I managed, and what remained of it was most of the time too many robots playing your music. But, acceptable and at the time "we" didn't know better anyway and the sound was better than from Windows 7.

 

Then Windows 10 came along and coincidentally I had that working right even before people knew it existed; I brought out a version of XXHighEnd for build 10074, which at the time was a more official beta (or even alpha) version. Right from there Windows 8 would not play music any more because a new standard was set for musicality. In comparison Windows 8 now sounded like robots all over.

All is relative and we get used to all very soon.

 

Also try to interpret the new universe, because all you guys (seem to) know about is some W2012 server because some AO made some install for that, while nobody ever talks about the sound of different OSes in the base, while they all sound to-tal-ly different. Browse through the Phasure forum and see how much is about that alone.

So today all is about the different Windows 10 builds and 14393.0 is now the best music playing OS. And for your fun : 10074 which some of us still use, is a very high degree of "Lush exhibit" BUT with a high flavor. So, today when we can use the OS without that flavor (it just disappeared in later versions), 10074 is now unbearable because of that flavor. And so we got used to something again, very fast (this is a matter of hours, often, before you already can't go back because of plain distortions you perceive then from the previous situation).

 

Where were we ? Music. ... And so now it suddenly appears that a stupid USB cable is that glue but still I could not make it explicitly for musicality. I know what I did of course and it was pure technical elements again (electrical ones this time) but that it would produce music, I could not tell in advance; not the slightest.

Possibly a new era began because with this in our hands we can go further. But actually it is all back to base because the so many years of work (mind you, of countless people) now should be re-done but with this cable. Of course it does not work like that (I too never changed an XXHighEnd setting since the Lush) but actually it should.

[PeterSt]

One more for better explanation what I mean to say :

 

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

If I don't get "toe tapping" then the sound is audibly flawed

 

So an LP can't do that ? Music cassette can't ?

Of course they can, despite the noise, way fewer dynamics and actually lousy sound in comparison to what could be. And now watch out :

 

What I work on (but this is largely with the customers) is these individual technical elements. Thus, increase the dynamics, but, and this is almost by guarantee, see the foot tapping frequency drop. The former is something I can work on, the latter not because it is the consequence. However, once the consequence becomes a kind of law, I could start working on all those elements of which I know the consequence, to slightly decrease them (or increase them) and see whether the FTF (haha) rises. But this is almost impossible as it so much depends upon light, mood, what you play etc. etc.. This is also how this can't be done with one person. It needs confirmation (or debunking).

 

Anyway, we thus can end up with elements which are NOT the best individually. Add some noise and we could show a higher FTF. Make things smear somewhat and see the FTF rise again.

And to know whether a USB cable "smears" as such, one must first have one which does not at all (Clairixa).

To know that "smear" as such helps for the FTF, once must first very coincidentally run into W10 10074 and observe what's actually happening (in your head).

And so on and so further ...