A toast to PGGB, a heady brew of math and magic

[Fourlegs]

10 hours ago, Progisus said:

I revisited mconnect. The quality is right there with Rigelian. Pulling the ethernet quits at the end of the track while Rigelian quits at the end of the album. Terminating mconnect completely by a second up swipe terminates playback immediately. Rigelian continues to play. Interesting little things which make one wonder on the path of the file.

 

I am getting such a dramatic noticeable improvement with PGGB through roon/hgpe that it still wins out for me. Time to listen.

Pulling the Ethernet cable effectively proves that mconnect is not in the signal path. I guess that terminating mconnect by doing the double swipe must send a stop signal to MPD.

 

As ever the user is the only person who can decide on what sound quality is acceptable. For me MPD is so far ahead of Roon + HQP + NAA on the Antipodes that i am willing to ditch Roon.

 

As an aside for Innuos users thinking of trying PGGB i can tell them that the impending Innuos 2.0 app can play PGGB 705 / 768 32bit files and has a user interface which is a very good replacement for Roon. I am running the beta version of 2.0 and the sound quality of PGGB files on the Innuos is superb and well waiting for when it comes out. 

[Fourlegs]

31 minutes ago, Progisus said:

Further to my experiments with the signal path of mconnect for mpd (upnp) playback.

 

If I use mconnect on my ipad playing from mininserver on Antipodes to MPD player on Antipodes:

1) turning off wifi on the ipad eventually stops playback

2) turning wifi back on restarts playback

 

This makes me think that signal path is through the ipad and once buffered signal is used up the playback will stop. This is indicative of upnp/dlna play and not true MPD.

 

With true MPD the tie to the library is made through the mpd configuration. Once the controller (app) makes the connection, the file plays directly from the configured library to the player. If an album has been cued, the control app is no longer required.

 

Antipodes implementation of MPD is the direct link. One just needs to find a controller app that will communicate and read tags correctly. One that was working for me was Rigelian but it is having issues with the wave tags.

 

The sound from true mpd implementation is a step up from upnp/dlna but the hassle with tags has me back with roon/hqpe.

 

If anyone can confirm or correct me please do.

 

PGGB… It is the way.

 

Thanks for experimenting. Perhaps we Antipodes owners need to jointly put pressure on Antipodes (in a nice way) to put other players on their streamers that will support 705/768kHz files.

 

Innuos use Squeezelite on their streamers and they have found a way to get their 2.0 app with Squeezelite to be able to play 705/768kHz files. I will be asking Antipodes if they can do the same but please can others ask the same question! The squeaky wheel is the one they gets oiled!

[Fourlegs]

4 hours ago, Progisus said:

I just setup lms and squeezlite player on Antipodes and it plays up to 768. Only issue I had is bits needs to be set to auto and not 24 in my case. Tidal and Qobuz also play through the lms app. I can also use ipeng for control. There is no need to run the minimserver or dlna server as the lms server handles the library linking. Sound quality is very good. I am still impressed with roon/hqplayer using the embedded in the Antipodes.

 

I have used almost every player even Pure Music and Amarra and I am a huge fan of roon. 

Can you tell me which versions of LMS and Squeezelite you are using? The K50 has 7.9.3 LMS and  1.8.7 Squeezelite player and refuses to play any 16fs files whatever their configuration. I have even tried Roon + squeezelite on the k50 and that refuses to play. 

[Fourlegs]

1 hour ago, WilliamWykeham said:

It seems that the most of the contributors on this thread are using Chord dacs.  I wanted to share some impressions from a Holo May owner.

 

Curiously, I’m getting much better results at 16FS, 20 bits than I am at 32FS.  The sound at 16FS is more full bodied.  I also have sense of feeling more relaxed listening at 16FS than at 32FS.  

 

I’m wondering if any other May owners share the same opinion, or if you’re more partial to 32FS.  

 

 

 

 

 

I'm looking forward to seeing contributions regarding the Holo May with PGGB.

 

I wonder though, why are you using 20bit with 16FS? Is this a Holo May input requirement?

 

With the Dave I either use 32bit, 16FS on USB or now (and preferred) I use 24bit, 16FS for dual BNC input to the Dave using the SRC-SX usb to dual bnc convertor.

[Fourlegs]

19 minutes ago, happybob said:

I've been testing with v1.2.07 several "challenging" albums (i.e. 44K/16 classical albums with long tracks) with my M1 MacBook Pro (16GB RAM, 2TB SSD with 1TB free) and I can reliably do 256MTap (1 worker) conversions (16FS, 24 bit) - I'm using a Chord Dave Dac (with SJ DC4 LPS), currently through a Chord MScaler (since I also use the same setup for streaming audio and PGGB can't process streaming tracks, an opticalRendu feeds the MScaler which then feeds the Dave via 2 Blackcat Tron BNCs).

 

So even though the MScaler also upsamples everything to 7xxK, I find the PGGB tracks to sound quite a bit better than what the MScaler does and of course both sound a lot better than the original 44K/16 tracks.

 

Side question in case anyone has a thought: Given that I am still using the MScaler in the chain (eventually plan to not use the MScaler in this chain) - should I use PGGB Adaptive Noise shaping or not? Zaphod thought it's likely best to use it and also use 24 bits (given the MScaler is in the chain and that I'm not Dave direct via USB), but neither of us are sure whether the MScaler does its own Adaptive Noise shaping if it receives a track already at the 7xxK sample rate in which case the MScaler basically does nothing, or maybe it does do something? I of course can do testing to see which I like better - as I also will with the HF noise filter (currently I'm using the default Moderate and also Transparency Natural and Presentation Transparent). 

 

Another question I'm pondering: Does the MScaler essentially do what a SRC•DX usb to dual bnc convertor does in terms of benefitting the sound for Dave? Yes, the MScaler eliminates the need for Dave to use its USB input like the SRC•DX does, but has anyone compared an MScaler to an SRC•DX sonically assuming the MScaler isn't doing anything (i.e. its fed PGGB 16FS tracks)?

 

I'm so impressed with the SQ of PGGB tracks, even at "only" 256MTaps! Before PGGB I was at a point in my listening where I really didn't enjoy much classical music because it just didn't sound right (even with the MScaler) but now with PGGB it does!

I also retain the mscaler (with a dedicated DC4) in my system for streaming but i much prefer 32bit PGGB files to go direct to DC4 Dave by usb rather than to take them through the mscaler. I do not find ‘pass through’ on the mscaler to be transparent.
 

It is only when using the SRC-DX that i then prefer 24bit PGGB files going to the DC4 Dave via dual bnc.

 

 

[Fourlegs]

1 hour ago, happybob said:

Thanks for the perspective! I'm wondering, do you then do 2 sets of PGGB upsamples, one with 16FS/32bits and another 16FS/24bits? Also wondering what BNC cables you use? I can have an entirely different feed to Dave directly for PGGB tracks, but since I've found the opticalRendu to make a big improvement in SQ (I'm not yet at the point of having a Taiko although I'd like to get there, am currently using Roon via a SonicTransporter i9 as source), that means I'd need yet another opticalRendu/LPS to feed Dave or an SRC-DX directly and then another 2 BNC cables. This makes for a lot more $ and also more space taken up (I've got limited space in my current setup and unfortunately not unlimited funds). 

 

Stated differently and trying to put things in perspective: is the improvement achieved with PGGB upsampling greater than the improvement achieved by not having an MScaler in the chain (and so going from source directly to Dave or via SRC-DX)? Or is this comparing apples to oranges?

I used to do two sets of pggb files 32bit and 24bit when i was deciding how to feed the Dave but now all my pggb processing is in 24bit to go though the SRC-DX. 
 

I am the guy who makes WAVE Storm bnc cables so obviously i use those because i think they are best 🤣. (The bnc cables used with the SRC-DX do make a difference so it is worth trying a few different ones).

 

One big sound quality improvement for me was stopping using Roon. For the PGGB files I use MPD with my Antipodes or the Innuos 2.0 beta app with my Innuos. Both sound great. 
 

Answering your final question in a different way, i find the sound quality of the SRC-DX into a Dc4 Dave for normal redbook or streamed files to be sufficiently good that  I am not too bothered about using the MScaler for that. I decided long ago that i would rather have the DC4 than have the mscaler because the dc4 makes a bigger difference to my ears. So for much of the time i just stream direct (no mscaker) to dave through the src-dx then it is all set up anyway to play pggb files. 
 

That is my 2p worth or 2c worth depending on which side of the pond one comes from. 

[Fourlegs]

@Zaphod Beeblebrox Thanks. 

[Fourlegs]

1 hour ago, kennyb123 said:

I can try this on a MacBook Pro with Intel running Big Sur and maybe also Catalina.  I’ll hit you up later for trial licenses.

@Zaphod Beeblebrox my wifes 2014 intel iMac has 64GB of RAM and runs Big Sur (she gets my ‘cast off hand me down’ computers!). Happy to see if that maxes out on the number of taps it will process if it will help. If so let me know.

[Fourlegs]

3 hours ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

Since Mscaler will noise shape 32bits to 24 bits, for a true  (apples to apples) comparison 16FS 24bits need to be used used as input to Mscaler or better still (my preferred apples to apples comparison) to use 16FS 24bit signal via SRC-DX straight to DAVE's DBNC.

 

Exactly what you say about apples to apples. Taking the Mscaler output to the Dual BNC inputs of the Dave but taking PGGB playback to the usb input of the Dave is not an apples to apples comparison. Both playbacks need to be compared on the dual bnc inputs to the Dave.

[Fourlegs]

21 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

As a rule of thumb, every 11 minutes  25 seconds of your track at 16FS 32 bits will occupy 4GB, so you can fit 35 minute track in your RAM and still have 4G of RAM left. I don't think the issue is your RAM, the player needs to handle gapless playback at the relatively modest 12.48 minute track length.

and sometimes players can handle gapless playback but it requires to be enabled in the settings. For instance I use MPD and it was giving a two second or so gap between the parts and then I realised I had simply not enabled gapless playback in the settings menu.

[Fourlegs]

5 minutes ago, hanshopf said:

Hello everyone!

 

So today I did the proof-of-concept experiment I recently suggested for PGGB - and the result was not at all what I expected!

 

Let me report directly and present the technical details afterwards: 

 

I recorded a track from Vinyl to digital in 16/44.1 and then had the file transferred to 24bit PGGB. The file was then played through Mscaler plus DAVE (hereby bypassing Mscalers upsampling stage) and compared to the 16bit file, upsampled by Mscaler. 

 

DAVE was connected to Phonitor2, as was the phono amp. Both files this way could be compared directly to the master, which obviously was the LP. 

 

After my initial scepticism towards PGGB, I was surprised to find, that the PGGB file sounded more similar to the LP than the file, which had been upsampled by Mscaler. To be more precise: the space and air around the instruments, which on the PGGB file was much better defined than through "Mscaling", was really there on the LP and not artificially added by PGGB. But what I also found was, that timbre seemed to be slightly more similar to the LP on Mscaler. I perceive a slight added brightness on PGGB, not present on the LP and through Mscaler. I have got no idea, where this could possibly come from. There may be several reasons for this. Is it possible, that the computer, on which the upsampling is done, can be of any influence in this case? 

 

Anyway, against my recent bias, I must conclude, that PGGB ist doing what it is supposed to do - concept proven, at least to my ears! To bullet proof my findings I recorded the track from vinyl as well in 24/192 and compared this file upsampled through Mscaler with the 16/44.1 file upsampled by PGGB. The absolutely stunning finding was: PGGB from 16bit source sounded still more similar to the LP master than the 24/192 file upsampled through Mscaler.

 

The only suggestion for further improvement I can see is in timbre. Mscaler seems to be more genuine to the source in this aspect. Maybe others could make similar experiments in order to either confirm or refute these findings. 

 

In the end the LP still sounded better than its digital copies. But this I think has mainly to do with the non-professional A/D converter I used. Or at least I hope this is the reason, because otherwise this would mean that digital is still not able to make lossless copies from analogue... .

 

 

Technicals:

 

The LP was played on a Technics 1200GR with SME IV arm plus Oyaide BR-12 platter mat and Audio Technica AT750SH cartridge. The signal was sent via XLR to Pro ject Phono Box RS. From here it was sent via XLR to Apogee Duet 2 A/D converter and recorded in CD-format for obvious reasons (and for those to whom it is not obvious: think about it :)).

 

The file was then upsampled to 24/705 in the PGGB cloud and played through Audirvana on a battery driven Macbook Air 2018. The 16/44.1 file was as well played with Audirvana. Both files were sent via USB to a battery driven Mscaler, the PGGB file hereby bypassing Mscalers upsampling stage. 

 

Mscaler was obviously connected to DAVE. I used the latters XLR outs to connect to Phonitor 2, because this amp has got two XLR inputs, so that the Phono Stage could be connected with the same cable to the Amp as DAVE. 

 

I listened through Focal Utopia headphones. 

 

 

 

 

 

 
It is interesting to read of your further experiments. The biggest flaw I can see in your method is that you were playing files through the MScaler on the so called pass through setting. Unfortunately the MScaler is still processing the signal on pass through, to a greater or lesser extent, and this will be altering the sound of the pggb file. Although it is not upscaling it is still reprocessing the signal and possibly it is also noise shaping. In other words it is not a bypass feature. Anyway, whatever the reason I have done many listening tests and MScaler on pass through does not sound the same as not having the MScaler in the system. So your comparison of MScaler upscaling and pggb upscaling will have degraded the pggb playback to some extent. Having played many pggb files through the MScaler on pass through I think it is a significant degrading of the pggb sound to play it through the MScaler on pass through. 

[Fourlegs]

15 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

I agree about the change in sound when played via Mscaler. But it should not be noise shaping a 24bit 16FS signal, I am not very sure of this though. Is there a change in level when played via Mscaler in pass through mode? if yes that is indicator of noise shaping and will explain slight hardening of sound.

Yes the output level on pass through is dropped by the same amount as when it is MScaling. 

[Fourlegs]

6 minutes ago, hanshopf said:

When I recently played them via USB directly into DAVE I was critizised for hereby not doing an apple to apple comparison. So I had to pass them trough Mscaler.

I understand why you did it but unfortunately it is still not an apple to apple comparison and is interfering with your assessment of pggb. 

[Fourlegs]

7 minutes ago, blueninjasix said:

I wonder if a 32 bit version of SRC-DX might eventually become available? Or is it limited to 24 bit by the dual BNC connectors?

It is the BNC inputs on the Dave and the spdif protocol which are limited to 24bit . . . . . . . .

[Fourlegs]

7 minutes ago, hanshopf said:

 

 

 

Thank you, Zaphod, for the files!! It's astonishingly obvious: 32bit without noise shaping is the way to go via Mscaler. It's so much better than 24bit or 32bit noise shaped, that there is no doubt at all. 

 

The noise shaper in Mscaler obviously works extremely well. Does noise shaper inside DAVE work identically? In that case Mscaler may work like a shield between the source and DAVE similarly to inserting SRC-DX between the source and DAVE.

 

I find no need for experimenting with different settings in PGGB. I believe the way I hear it now is optimal. I cannot wait to get the new Macbook Pro in November to transfer my collection to PGGB. 

 

Thank you so much for your amazing work!

 

P.S. Maybe Rob Watts tried PGGB 24bit or 32bit noise shaped into Mscaler or DAVE and therefore was not convinced. He should definitely try again with 32bit without noise shaping into Mscaler!

 

Ah!!! Success!!!

 

Now you have set me a new listening challenge -

32bit no noise shaping to Mscaler on pass through versus 24bit with noise shaping to SRC-DX

 

Happy days.

 

By the way, I use a DC4 to power my Mscaler because I could not get on with (did not like) battery power to it.

[Fourlegs]

7 hours ago, happybob said:

@Fourlegs - this is my new challenge too - that of comparing 32 bits vs 24 bits and noise shaping on or off as it goes through the MScaler. And then comparing this to the SRC-DX (which requires 24 bit). I'd talked to ZB earlier about this issue and he initially thought that 32 bit with noiseshaping by PGGB was not optimal if going through the MScaler, but now considering this "no noiseshaping and 32 bit" option for PGGB files is intriguing. 

 

One issue I have with these variants though is that as I process more and more music (with quite a lot left to do), I'd rather not have different (each large) files for different ways that I do my playback. i.e. don't want to need a different version for MScaler playback vs SRC-DX vs perhaps some other future option that goes to other systems I have (not Chord DAC based). But maybe these variants are unavoidable for the optimal sound... 

I will try to accept the challenge. When I have settled on my favoured playback/processing method it is my intention to just use that for my PGGB library.

 

Live streaming and other albums that did not get processed (I only have 12TB local storage 🤣) will be played with HQPlayer or possibly the Mscaler depending on which streamer I am using (Antipodes K50 for HQP and Innuos Zenith for HMS).

[Fourlegs]

9 minutes ago, HeeBroG said:

For those with multiple server playback options; is PGGB a leveller or do high-end servers still come out on top?

 

If I just say that many of the guys who helped develop PGGB have Taiko Extremes and I haven’t noticed any of them selling those for anything cheaper afterwards!!

 

[Fourlegs]

On 7/3/2021 at 6:25 AM, romaz said:

I'm currently testing a prototype server from a certain manufacturer and so part of my testing process has been to compare this server against other servers including a basic NUC, an Innuos Zen Mk3, and the Extreme. 

  Playing standard Redbook files, the differences among the servers are easily apparent but with PGGB files, the superiority of the Extreme becomes much more apparent. 

Can you tell me how you are playing 705/768 PGGB files on the Zen? I don’t know of any way to do this with its current software. However when Innuos 2.0 is released for the Zen that will play 705/768 PGGB files (and sounds very good).

[Fourlegs]

Are any PGGB users out there using an Innuos streamer? Or if you have an Innuos streamer are you thinking of trying PGGB?

 

Well the Innuos 2.0.4 app can play up to PGGB 768 kHz files but the 2.0.5 update will temporarily lose this feature (see the explanation from Innuos below). Innuos need to do some work before reintroducing the ability to play up to 768 kHz files and they are prioritising the requests for features and debugging depending on how many people contact them about each bug or feature.

 

Can I issue a plea therefore to Innuos owners to email Innuos at the email below to ask them to prioritise the reintroduction of being able to play PGGB / Remastero files? More people emailing will get it higher up the priority list!

 

[email protected]

 

 

PS. I am sticking with 2.0.4 rather than updating to 2.0.5 and will only update when the feature is reintroduced.

[Fourlegs]

ANTIPODES Streamers and PGGB Files.

 

For anyone owning or looking to own an Antipodes streamer and use it to play PGGB files they might be interested that since the roll out of the new Antipodes 3.1 software we now have access to later versions of the Server and Player apps.

 

Some of us have been playing with the Squeeze Server and Squeezelite Player apps and have been pleased to find that when the C-3PO plugin is enabled it is possible to play the PGGB 705 and 768kHz files through Squeeze / Squeezelite.

 

I had previously been using MPD to play PGGB files on my K50 but I am now totally bowled over by the SQ of PGGB when played through the Squeeze Server and Squeezelite Player apps on the K50. This is outputting USB to a PhoenixUSB connected to a SRC-DX which then outputs via dual BNC to a DC4 ARC6 Dave. The SQ with Squeeze/Squeezelite just took a big leap forward for me playing PGGB files (this is with 24bit files which is the limit for BNC).

[Fourlegs]

29 minutes ago, seeteeyou said:

Very bold statements IMHO, maybe results really are DAC-dependent (i.e. no such thing as NOS from iFi) while we might also need either MPD or LMS + Squeezelite to keep PGGB tracks "untouched" so to speak?

 

Indeed and as you allude to, the software playback can have a significant effect on the overall sound quality such that if I was comparing PGGB I would want to use LMS server and Squeezelite player when comparing PGGB to anything else.

[Fourlegs]

4 hours ago, musicme2 said:

After more advice , looking into the costs in setting up a Intel nuc just for play back of PBBG files I would not be happy with just a standard Nuc so I would be tweeking it and then the costs would mount up . I am thinking sell my Innuos and buy a ready made branded  ,  something like a Innuos that will play PBBG files is there any thing on the market that would suit my options .

Before you sell your Innuos, get in touch with Nuno there because I have a feeling they are looking into a software update to enable their devices to play PGGB files. 
 

If you do swop then there are others such as Antipodes which already play PGGB files very well. I use the K50 but others in the range also play PGGB. 

[Fourlegs]

3 hours ago, Progisus said:

A question when playing 705/768 24b pggb files using an MPD player. The player I use is either the one in my poly/mojo 2 or my Antipodes K30 or EX. More often than not when pausing or stopping a track I get a high pitched tone. Fast forw or rev to track beginning or end can reduce this tone or clear it. If the album or single track ends on it’s own there is no tone. Using roon, hqplayer or squeeze is tone free. I thought this was Antipodes specific but since starting to use the poly for pggb it has cropped up there. 

I used to get this high pitched tone when pausing or stopping 705/768 files on an Antipodes K50 using MPD player. I am pretty sure a later release of the Antipodes operating system cured this (might have been 4.0, latest is 4.3) but in any case I transferred to using LMS server and Squeezelite player on the K50 for 705/768 PGGB files because I found the sound better than MPD and as you say, there is no high pitched tone anyway on that.

[Fourlegs]

42 minutes ago, Mista Lova Lova said:

I've repeated the most recent tests today and the results are the same - when it comes to the aforementioned hip-hop material, HQPlayer's poly-sinc-gauss filters provide a very significant improvement (in PCM; if I switch to DSD then it's not even close). The best way I can describe it is how the audio reviewer GoldenSound described his comparison between the Holo Audio May DAC and the Chord Dave with the MScaler - he said that the Dave was super-detailed, high-res etc. but it still didn't have the May's presentation of music as if it was "simply there", present and seemingly real. To me that's how HQPlayer sounds with those filters (+ the added reconstruction of the relevant frequency domain, which the May wouldn't have in NOS mode, I guess).

I have been following the recent discourse with interest but at the end of it all we are of course judging by subjective standards. Witness your reference to the Holo May and Dave/Mscaler comparison and GS’s comments in relation to that. My point being that when I had a Holo May in my system comparing it to Dave/Mscaler it was the Holo May that to my ears failed to reproduce music as music. I only had to play Mars from Holst’s Planets Suite for that to be glaringly obvious. I simply cannot relate to GS’s description of the May vs Dave comparison. What I don’t know though is how much my preference was due to me entirely listening to a speaker system and not ever using headphones. This does make a difference to what each of us is looking out for in the music such as sound stage, depth, placement of instruments, shape and character of notes etc.

I guess I am just reiterating that all each of us can do is choose what we like and that the next person and with a different system not to mention different tastes in music might prefer something else.