Jump to content

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


ray-dude
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 7/2/2021 at 8:37 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

PGGB does not care if you have HT on or off, as long as you set the number of workers to the physical cores (which is the default).  But, yes the performance will degrade if you use virtual cores with PGGB too as it also increases the memory pressure. Overclocking definitely helps with performance and you will get even more performance if you can bump your RAM up by 32G more. I have a silent workstation, and it will shutdown due to overheating if I overclock with PGGB running, especially when gargle-blasting DSD.

 

 

On my 4790k, which is a quad core, Auto shows 2 workers. (Auto (2)) If I manually set it to 4, I swear it says 2 workers as it flies by in the processing window.

TIDAL - Qobuz - ROON - Euphony - HQPlayerD 4 - NUC DNKE - NAA - Pi4 4gb - Signature Silver DC - Keces P3 PS - Lush USB - Holo Spring Dac Level 3 - Bottlehead Crack Upgraded w/ GEC or Tung-Sol 6as7/vt231 - Triode Wire Labs AC - HD-650 - EQ’d in ROON - N400 - GR Research V2 - Dennis Murphy Pioneer BS22 - DIY Open Baffle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jkelly said:

 

On my 4790k, which is a quad core, Auto shows 2 workers. (Auto (2)) If I manually set it to 4, I swear it says 2 workers as it flies by in the processing window.

PGGB counts physical cores not logical cores and the auto workers will match the physical cores.

Author of PGGB, remastero

New: PGGB-RT for foobar2000 (foo-RT) has been released!

Tip: Turn PGGB-RT into an offline remastering tool using PGGB.IT! V2.2

☁️PGGB.IO (Another way to audition PGGB, with credits towards PGGB purchase)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

PGGB counts physical cores not logical cores and the auto workers will match the physical cores.

That's interesting - On my i7 9700k which has eight physical cores and no hyperthreading, PGGB defaults to 4 Workers (Auto).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

PGGB counts physical cores not logical cores and the auto workers will match the physical cores.

 

I am sure I am just not understanding something - but the 4790k has 4 physical cores and 4 virtual cores.

With Hyperthreading on - I have 8 cores. It defaults to 2 workers.256221111_ScreenShot2021-07-07at3_39_34PM.png.be230884f7e9e71e4d8ab83cc330d6e4.png

TIDAL - Qobuz - ROON - Euphony - HQPlayerD 4 - NUC DNKE - NAA - Pi4 4gb - Signature Silver DC - Keces P3 PS - Lush USB - Holo Spring Dac Level 3 - Bottlehead Crack Upgraded w/ GEC or Tung-Sol 6as7/vt231 - Triode Wire Labs AC - HD-650 - EQ’d in ROON - N400 - GR Research V2 - Dennis Murphy Pioneer BS22 - DIY Open Baffle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, LowOrbit said:

That's interesting - On my i7 9700k which has eight physical cores and no hyperthreading, PGGB defaults to 4 Workers (Auto).

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, jkelly said:

 

I am sure I am just not understanding something - but the 4790k has 4 physical cores and 4 virtual cores.

With Hyperthreading on - I have 8 cores.256221111_ScreenShot2021-07-07at3_39_34PM.png.be230884f7e9e71e4d8ab83cc330d6e4.png

Thanks for pointing out, the API I used always provides the logical cores which I divide by two (on windows). With Hyper threading you are able to treat on physical core as two virtual cores. While this is helpful for some applications, it does not help PGGB in speeding up. 

But in the case of  @loworbit since there is no hyperthreading, logical and physical cores are both 8 and dividing by 2 like I do on windows reduces the workers to 4.

I am aware of the issue and I have already switched to a different API call on windows to detect the correct number of physical cores. 

Author of PGGB, remastero

New: PGGB-RT for foobar2000 (foo-RT) has been released!

Tip: Turn PGGB-RT into an offline remastering tool using PGGB.IT! V2.2

☁️PGGB.IO (Another way to audition PGGB, with credits towards PGGB purchase)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK good. Just to let you know I am running with HT OFF. Total 4 physical cores. So perhaps that is why my 4 physical cores are showing 2 workers?

TIDAL - Qobuz - ROON - Euphony - HQPlayerD 4 - NUC DNKE - NAA - Pi4 4gb - Signature Silver DC - Keces P3 PS - Lush USB - Holo Spring Dac Level 3 - Bottlehead Crack Upgraded w/ GEC or Tung-Sol 6as7/vt231 - Triode Wire Labs AC - HD-650 - EQ’d in ROON - N400 - GR Research V2 - Dennis Murphy Pioneer BS22 - DIY Open Baffle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jkelly said:

OK good. Just to let you know I am running with HT OFF. Total 4 cores. So perhaps that is why my 4 physical cores are showing 2 workers?

Ha yes that will explain it.

ps: If you turn HT on, till I release my next version, you will be able to use all 4 cores. My next version will also have PGGB-EQ

Author of PGGB, remastero

New: PGGB-RT for foobar2000 (foo-RT) has been released!

Tip: Turn PGGB-RT into an offline remastering tool using PGGB.IT! V2.2

☁️PGGB.IO (Another way to audition PGGB, with credits towards PGGB purchase)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TY!

TIDAL - Qobuz - ROON - Euphony - HQPlayerD 4 - NUC DNKE - NAA - Pi4 4gb - Signature Silver DC - Keces P3 PS - Lush USB - Holo Spring Dac Level 3 - Bottlehead Crack Upgraded w/ GEC or Tung-Sol 6as7/vt231 - Triode Wire Labs AC - HD-650 - EQ’d in ROON - N400 - GR Research V2 - Dennis Murphy Pioneer BS22 - DIY Open Baffle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Is anyone else having problems getting PGGB to create WavPack files?

 

I swear I had it working at one point along the way, but haven't gotten it to output wv files since. I have "WavPack or FLAC" checked, sample rate set to 16fs, and bit depth at 24 or 32 (I've tried both).

 

 

hqplayer, pggb > src-dx > opto-dx > dave > pass labs x150.8, bakoon amp-13r, cayin ha-300 > abyss phi tc, susvara, utopia, auteur

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, llamaluv said:

Is anyone else having problems getting PGGB to create WavPack files?

 

I swear I had it working at one point along the way, but haven't gotten it to output wv files since. I have "WavPack or FLAC" checked, sample rate set to 16fs, and bit depth at 24 or 32 (I've tried both).

 

 

That is strange, the only way this can happen is if the wavpack executable is missing. We can debug this offline, please email me and let me know if you are on Windows or Mac also send me the logs.

 

On Windows wavpack.exe must be in  C:\Program Files\PGGB\application\wavpack.exe

Author of PGGB, remastero

New: PGGB-RT for foobar2000 (foo-RT) has been released!

Tip: Turn PGGB-RT into an offline remastering tool using PGGB.IT! V2.2

☁️PGGB.IO (Another way to audition PGGB, with credits towards PGGB purchase)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love to see a HD 650 EQ file if ever possible!

TIDAL - Qobuz - ROON - Euphony - HQPlayerD 4 - NUC DNKE - NAA - Pi4 4gb - Signature Silver DC - Keces P3 PS - Lush USB - Holo Spring Dac Level 3 - Bottlehead Crack Upgraded w/ GEC or Tung-Sol 6as7/vt231 - Triode Wire Labs AC - HD-650 - EQ’d in ROON - N400 - GR Research V2 - Dennis Murphy Pioneer BS22 - DIY Open Baffle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cx-ex-k-s-antipodes-owners-unite.932942/page-46#post-16466560

Quote

You will need to use an MPD (not upnp) controller such as Rigelian to control direct play MPD. For PGGB files stored on your server it is the best sonics I have found. Beats out HQPlayer and Squeeze imho.

 

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cx-ex-k-s-antipodes-owners-unite.932942/page-46#post-16466931

Quote

Thanks for that. Easy as heck to get this running. I already had 8player on my iPhone so it was easy to get music playing. Bloody hell this sounds great. Yeah I know @Triode User told me so, but I can occasionally be stubborn.

 

Well, I guess that's gotta be convincing enough for some of us to jump ship then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m still interested in what other users think of PGGB EQ? 
 

I tried a few songs yesterday using PGGB files but no EQ. Although still sounds amazing, you lose the extra layers & depth of music. 
 

Please report back your findings also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've processed five hundred albums so far, applying an eq curve to optimise for my Raal SR1a's. Very happy with the results in everything I've had a chance to listen to so far. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, LowOrbit said:

I've processed five hundred albums so far, applying an eq curve to optimise for my Raal SR1a's. Very happy with the results in everything I've had a chance to listen to so far. 

 

 

 

Thanks for allowing me to make your EQ curve available for others to use.

Author of PGGB, remastero

New: PGGB-RT for foobar2000 (foo-RT) has been released!

Tip: Turn PGGB-RT into an offline remastering tool using PGGB.IT! V2.2

☁️PGGB.IO (Another way to audition PGGB, with credits towards PGGB purchase)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wanted to add that I’ve been using the new version since it was released, and if I’m not mistaken, I am getting faster processing times. 

 

I’m just on a MacBook Pro/Bootcamp 16Gb Ram for PGGB. So, I’ve been tossing about the idea of building a dedicated machine. There were times when the progress bar on PGGB would just stop in place for a couple minutes (probably b/c my low RAM I imagine).

 

I know you shouldn’t watch the progress bar. It’s like watching paint dry or a pot full of water waiting to boil. But, since the new build I happily take glances to see it churning right along. 

 

ZB, is the new build a bit faster, or is the difference just other changes in what I’m processing? If the code has been tightened, can we expect little bumps in processing efficiency over the course of future updates? 

 

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are running windows, yes you may see a bump because the Auto (workers) is more accurate now so the heuristics use the right number of parallel threads if HT is disabled. This will be most noticeable for 1FS or 2FS input files.

Author of PGGB, remastero

New: PGGB-RT for foobar2000 (foo-RT) has been released!

Tip: Turn PGGB-RT into an offline remastering tool using PGGB.IT! V2.2

☁️PGGB.IO (Another way to audition PGGB, with credits towards PGGB purchase)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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]

 

E8A528DE-01F8-4FE7-B11F-AAAFADF01478.thumb.jpeg.554f703be2eb625a3b779148fc3f7ca5.jpeg

 

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

Innuos Zenith + Antipodes K50 + PhoenixNET + PhoenixUSB,

Sablon 2020 USB to Mscaler, WAVE Storm BNC to DAVE (Sean Jacobs external DC4 power)

Pass Labs XA60.8 power amps + Spendor SP200 speakers, ATC150 actives.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question on PGGB: If using PGGB gargle blasted files with noise shaping turned off - is there any difference between a 32 bit output and a 24 bit output other than the truncation of the bottom 8 bits for the 24 bit version?

 

The reason I ask this is: I want to have one set of PGGB processed files for all of my use situations, and there are two primary uses:

 

1. Highend listening: PGGB files get played back directly (not via Roon) to an SRC-DX via USB and then out to an MScaler via dual SPDIF cables. The MScaler output goes to a Dave DAC via another set of dual SPDIF cables. In this scenario only 24 bits get sent to the MScaler. The MScaler then (unavoidably unfortunately) does a 3dB level adjust AND more importantly does its own noise shaping (can't disable this). The MScaler out to Dave is also 24 bits. So for this mode, either 32 bit or 24 bit "no noise shaping" is optimal, but does it matter which?

 

2. I use Roon for multiroom listening and need to have all Roon endpoints playback at 192KHz (long story). So in this mode, playback via Roon of the PGGB (705K or 768K) files must be downsampled by Roon to 192K. This means that some of the downsampled content will NOT be power-of-two downsamples. In this case, I'm wondering if having 32 bit PGGB files will allow for a better downsampling of say a 705K file to 192KHz (not power of 2) than will a 24 bit PGGB file?

 

Thanks for any insights!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, happybob said:

Question on PGGB: If using PGGB gargle blasted files with noise shaping turned off - is there any difference between a 32 bit output and a 24 bit output other than the truncation of the bottom 8 bits for the 24 bit version?

 

The reason I ask this is: I want to have one set of PGGB processed files for all of my use situations, and there are two primary uses:

 

1. Highend listening: PGGB files get played back directly (not via Roon) to an SRC-DX via USB and then out to an MScaler via dual SPDIF cables. The MScaler output goes to a Dave DAC via another set of dual SPDIF cables. In this scenario only 24 bits get sent to the MScaler. The MScaler then (unavoidably unfortunately) does a 3dB level adjust AND more importantly does its own noise shaping (can't disable this). The MScaler out to Dave is also 24 bits. So for this mode, either 32 bit or 24 bit "no noise shaping" is optimal, but does it matter which?

 

2. I use Roon for multiroom listening and need to have all Roon endpoints playback at 192KHz (long story). So in this mode, playback via Roon of the PGGB (705K or 768K) files must be downsampled by Roon to 192K. This means that some of the downsampled content will NOT be power-of-two downsamples. In this case, I'm wondering if having 32 bit PGGB files will allow for a better downsampling of say a 705K file to 192KHz (not power of 2) than will a 24 bit PGGB file?

 

Thanks for any insights!

For you use case I suggest using 32bit without noise shaping. it provides additional resolution that will help both when Mscaler reduces gain and noise shapes and with Roon. 

Author of PGGB, remastero

New: PGGB-RT for foobar2000 (foo-RT) has been released!

Tip: Turn PGGB-RT into an offline remastering tool using PGGB.IT! V2.2

☁️PGGB.IO (Another way to audition PGGB, with credits towards PGGB purchase)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

For you use case I suggest using 32bit without noise shaping. it provides additional resolution that will help both when Mscaler reduces gain and noise shapes and with Roon. 

Yes, thanks! My main question though is if the difference between 32 and 24 bits (no noise shaping) is just truncation of the bottom 8 bits, or something different? Or is there ever any reason (other than saving space) to use 24 bits instead of 32 bits for “no noise reduction” PGGB gargle blasts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...