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

[Miska]

6 hours ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

Currently PGGB does not use filters or taps in the same sense as Chord, it is not a longer version of Chord's filters. Any discussion along these lines is simply not true hence any conclusions reached from the discussion along those lines are also incorrect and misleading. 

 

Just for clarity - what I stated was based on my testing and analysis of PGGB behavior in practice, regardless how you prefer to word it. And of course I answer when someone asks a question about HQPlayer.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Just an update, thanks to feedback from beta testers, we are at the home stretch of PGGB DSD release, so I thought I will provide some sneak preview of what is to come. I have tried to keep the interface as close to the current UI as possible, to avoid the case of missing or moved cheese.

 

PGGB DSD will support DSD rates up to 1024, and there will be an option to choose between single stage and two stage processing for each of the DSD rates. Single stage processing will be more memory intensive and take longer to process but will provide the best reconstruction accuracy. Two stage processing will first upsample to 16fS rate or higher and then use a simpler algorithm to do the second stage processing to the final DSD rate. Two stage processing will be less memory intensive and faster, the higher the rate of the first stage, the better the reconstruction accuracy. There will be multiple options for two stage processing.

 

Some of the DACs we have tested include T+A 200 (DSD512 and DSD1024), HoloAudio May (DSD512 and DSD1024), Gustard x26Pro (DSD512), Vinnie Rossi LiO 2 (DSD512).

 

There will be a choice of 3 DSD modulators, The 9th order modulator will be available only DSD rates 512 and 1024. The higher order modulators will have lower noise floor in the audible range compared to the lower order modulators for the same rate, but the higher order modulators will take slightly longer to process. The modulators are rate adaptive, i.e. optimized for a given rate to achieve the lowest quantization noise in the audible range while keeping the slope of the noise shaper gentle.

 

 

Both PGGB DSD and PGGB PCM will now allow inter-rate conversion, this is will provide better flexibility in choosing the DAC and players.

 

I have made changes to better handle memory and also make it easier for Mac users to get around how Mac manages paging. This will allow processing longer tracks on Mac.  Memory handling is a lot better optimized to where paging does not affect processing speeds much.

[kennyb123]

51 minutes ago, Miska said:

Just for clarity - what I stated was based on my testing and analysis of PGGB behavior in practice, regardless how you prefer to word it. And of course I answer when someone asks a question about HQPlayer.

When you test or analyze a competitor’s product - do you adhere to the same standard of fairness that you demonstrate when you speak about your competitor’s products when asked about them?

[tedacura1]

Will there be a 30-day free trial for the DSD PGGB software?

[austinpop]

29 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Just for clarity - what I stated was based on my testing and analysis of PGGB behavior in practice, regardless how you prefer to word it. And of course I answer when someone asks a question about HQPlayer.

 

You have always been shown respect here, yet you take every opportunity to disparage PGGB. That’s not classy, and I’m puzzled why you do it.

 

in any event, soon enough folks using PGGB > HQP will not have any need to do so, so hopefully we can just coexist. 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

6 minutes ago, tedacura1 said:

Will there be a 30-day free trial for the DSD PGGB software?

It is the same as before, but if you have already used up your free trial, just email me and I will issue a trial license.

 

To be clear it is not a separate/different software, it is the same software with DSD included, branding will be slightly different.

 

 

 

[Miska]

3 minutes ago, austinpop said:

You have always been shown respect here, yet you take every opportunity to disparage PGGB. That’s not classy, and I’m puzzled why you do it.

 

I have my opinion, which I also explain when asked, in technical terms, and can show objective data to back up what I'm talking about. And I've been equally puzzled what you PGGB guys have been doing behind the scenes.

 

[chelseafc]

1 hour ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

Thanks for your interest and feedback.

 

It is really up to you to see what fits your needs best. Audiowise licenses PGGB and the processing is the same whether you get it from remastero or Audiowise, as you found the difference are really in how the interface and output formats differ. PGGB-IT! has some additional bells and whistles such as multi-channel processing, allowing multiple tracks to be processed (if there is enough RAM and CPU cores).

You can move from PGGB-IT! to PGGB from remastero at no cost anytime at the same level of license. Moving from PGGB from remastero to PGGB-IT! will incur a small fee. That may make the decision easier for you.

 

PGGB-IT! is Windows only, so if you plan to use Mac, the choice is remastero. But if you are open to both Mac and Windows, I strongly suggest Windows as Windows is more flexible (compared to Mac) when it comes to memory allocation. Windows will let you get the most out of your Hardware in terms of processing speed. If you were to go with Mac, PGGB does not run natively on Apple Silicon, so will require Rosetta and is less efficient running on emulation. 

From performance: Windows > Mac (Intel) > Mac (M1/M2/M3)

 

It is better to think in terms of 'per minute of track' because albums can be of varying lengths. Then there are additional factors:

1. What precision do you plan to use?
2. What is the typical sample rate of the albums (CD/Hires/DSD)?
3. What is the typical length of tracks?

Windows will work cheaper most of the time, a used Mac Pro running Intel may also work.

Thanks for clarifications.

 

1. I plan on using 256 precision

2. No DSD, only PCM

3. New conversions will be mostly from Hires

4. Typical length is 5 min, which I would like to convert in 2 minutes

 

Thinking of spending around $1.5K on a PC

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

11 minutes ago, chelseafc said:

Thanks for clarifications.

 

1. I plan on using 256 precision

2. No DSD, only PCM

3. New conversions will be mostly from Hires

4. Typical length is 5 min, which I would like to convert in 2 minutes

 

Thinking of spending around $1.5K on a PC

1x rate is likely achievable at that price point, but not sure about 2.5x rates at 256 bit precision. A PC with 128GB RAM with two tracks being processed in parallel (using PGGB-IT!) and with 16 to 24 physical cores and that can run at 4GHz would likely be able to do 2x rates for 5-minute tracks.

[chelseafc]

22 minutes ago, austinpop said:

You have always been shown respect here, yet you take every opportunity to disparage PGGB. That’s not classy, and I’m puzzled why you do it.

 

So true!

 

I've always wanted to dump HQPlayer if for nothing else but shear arrogance and disregard to paying customers from the owner, but happy to report that I stopped using it purely on the basis of its inferiority when compared to the M Scaler and even more so PGGB.

[kennyb123]

49 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

I have made changes to better handle memory and also make it easier for Mac users to get around how Mac manages paging. This will allow processing longer tracks on Mac.  Memory handling is a lot better optimized to where paging does not affect processing speeds much.

This is a really big deal for those who prefer using Macs.  Macs can now pretty much process any track regardless of length, but they may end up waiting a very long time for DSD512 or greater in one stage of processing.

 

At this point, a custom PC build will be the most cost effective and most performant choice for DSD.  Despite that, I stubbornly just purchased a 2019 Mac Pro   It was one of these listed here.  A smoking deal as this would have set on back nearly $10k had they purchased it this from the time it was introduced until last June.  The prices tanked because Apple Silicon is so much faster than the Intel Xeon processors in this series.  She advantage these Intel machines have though is that they support up to 1.5 TB of RAM.  This will matter much more with DSD processing.  
 

One expected benefit of the new-old-stock model I purchased is that Apple is treating it as a brand new Mac so it is covered by Apple’s one year limited warranty starting on the day it was purchased.  Mine actually wouldn’t power on.  The seller offered to replace it but also mentioned that I could lug it to an Apple Store and have them repair it.  I did that an am expecting it to be returned to me this week.  
 

 

[austinpop]

2 hours ago, Miska said:

 

I have my opinion, which I also explain when asked, in technical terms, and can show objective data to back up what I'm talking about.

 

You are the Goliath of this field going after a small competitor. Justify it however you like — the rest of us can see you're just being a bully. I'll let @The Computer Audiophile decide if a Member of the Trade trashing a competitor's product is OK or not.

 

2 hours ago, Miska said:

And I've been equally puzzled what you PGGB guys have been doing behind the scenes.

 

 

First point: only ZB is the "PGGB guy." I'm not a DSP expert, nor do I have any business affiliation with PGGB. I paid exactly what all other customers did for my license. 

 

As for you being puzzled about your competitors internals: I'll bet you are! Isn't that the very nature of business? 

 

[Miska]

19 minutes ago, austinpop said:

As for you being puzzled about your competitors internals: I'll bet you are! Isn't that the very nature of business? 

 

No, nothing technical or software related, just perplexed about some aspects of what certain people associated with the project are doing regarding HQPlayer.

 

Quote

going after a small competitor

 

I'm not going after anybody. If someone asks me a question related to HQPlayer, I answer, and I also explain technical reasoning for my opinion. And I'm saying just minimal amount necessary to explain my point. Or if someone makes some claims/statements about HQPlayer, then I of course also respond. Otherwise, I don't care.

 

[Mista Lova Lova]

15 hours ago, Miska said:

Otherwise, I don't care.

 

It is really not my intention to add fuel to the fire as I have no skin in the game, this is coming from the bottom of my audiophile heart - I'm sure that you mean this as an engineer in relation to your product and your engineering philosophy; however, I do urge you to use the DSD version of PGGB when it becomes available and simply listen to it for the pleasure of listening to music, before you inevitably dive deeper into the technical aspect of it (as any engineer would, I guess). If you can approach it this way and allow your ears to hear what is there to be heard, regardless of whether you personally agree with the product's design philosophy or not - I bet that you'll be blown away.

 

I would be astounded if this wasn't the case, to be honest. It's the kind of experience where theoretical disputes kind of become irrelevant as the empirical, audible evidence of what is clearly the most life-like and the most detailed reproduction of digital audio that we have ever had is just too obvious to ignore. It really is that plain to hear and despite my history of going back and forth between various other digital filters/modulators, looking for one with the fewest trade-offs - I am now quite convinced that we will no longer be arguing over how to extract the most out of our digital audio files, only whether it's worth going to such lengths, resource-wise (this is where your product has a very significant advantage) - but that's a different conversation.

[taipan254]

9 hours ago, Mista Lova Lova said:

 

It is really not my intention to add fuel to the fire as I have no skin in the game, this is coming from the bottom of my audiophile heart - I'm sure that you mean this as an engineer in relation to your product and your engineering philosophy; however, I do urge you to use the DSD version of PGGB when it becomes available and simply listen to it for the pleasure of listening to music, before you inevitably dive deeper into the technical aspect of it (as any engineer would, I guess). If you can approach it this way and allow your ears to hear what is there to be heard, regardless of whether you personally agree with the product's design philosophy or not - I bet that you'll be blown away.

 

I would be astounded if this wasn't the case, to be honest. It's the kind of experience where theoretical disputes kind of become irrelevant as the empirical, audible evidence of what is clearly the most life-like and the most detailed reproduction of digital audio that we have ever had is just too obvious to ignore. It really is that plain to hear and despite my history of going back and forth between various other digital filters/modulators, looking for one with the fewest trade-offs - I am now quite convinced that we will no longer be arguing over how to extract the most out of our digital audio files, only whether it's worth going to such lengths, resource-wise (this is where your product has a very significant advantage) - but that's a different conversation.

 

Agreed - it comes down to the listening. 

[MemoryPlayer]

On 3/19/2024 at 4:21 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

8kHz/96kHz/293kHz

293kHz ???

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

16 minutes ago, MemoryPlayer said:

293kHz ???

48x rates, 48kHz/96kHz/192kHz :) sorry

[Schafheide]

On 4/2/2024 at 8:25 AM, chelseafc said:

So true!

 

I've always wanted to dump HQPlayer if for nothing else but shear arrogance and disregard to paying customers from the owner, but happy to report that I stopped using it purely on the basis of its inferiority when compared to the M Scaler and even more so PGGB.

I have been using HQPlayer for a while now.  I am very pleased with the HQPlayer SQ and enormously impressed with the support from @Miska. Time and time again I see that he is extremely patient with somewhat annoying folk, so I must disagree with your dislike of support from HQPlayer.  Nonetheless I am still interested in exploring what PGGB can do for me as suggested by @Mista Lova Lova.

[seeteeyou]

For those of us who aren't familiar with the differences between regular DDR4 and Intel Optane Persistent Memory, here are some examples

 

https://glesys.se/blogg/benchmarking-intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory

https://www.hpcwire.com/2020/02/19/japans-aist-benchmarks-intel-optane-cites-benefit-for-hpc-and-ai/

https://infohub.delltechnologies.com/en-US/l/r740xd-servers-with-intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-handle-more-than-with-nand-flash-nvme-or-sata-ssds-2/performance-results/

 

Used 512GB sticks are going for $219 a piece or best offer

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/126343937974

 

Even cheaper ones were also available but not sure about the longevity since they wouldn't last as long as the "immortal" DDR4

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/115939077343

 

128GB sticks are like 50 bucks or so a piece

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/296134704782

https://www.ebay.com/itm/305353892919

 

---

 

Asus WS C621E Sage is it still worth it

https://forum.level1techs.com/t/asus-ws-c621e-sage-is-it-still-worth-it/208746/2

Quote

If you are planning to use these CPUs, remember Optane DCPMM is a Cascade Lake feature (82xx CPUs, not Skylake 81xx CPUs). If you want a good LGA 3647 workstation CPU for cheap with Optane DCPMM support, look into the 6268CL or 8273CL.

 

Xeon Platinum 8259CL

https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon 8259CL.html

https://www.cpumodel.com/cpu/intel-xeon-platinum-8259cl-24-cores-lga3647-server/

 

Xeon Platinum 8272CL

https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon 8272CL.html

https://www.cpumodel.com/cpu/intel-xeon-platinum-8272cl-26-cores-lga3647-server/

 

Xeon Platinum 8273CL

https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon 8273CL.html

https://www.cpumodel.com/cpu/intel-xeon-platinum-8273cl-28-cores-lga3647-server/

 

Xeon Platinum 8275CL

https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon 8275CL.html

https://www.cpumodel.com/cpu/intel-xeon-platinum-8275cl-24-cores-lga3647-server/

 

All of them are well over 20 cores while they're also able to support Optane DCPMM mentioned above, therefore PGGB should be able to reap the benefits then?

 

8272CL with 26 cores turned out to cost about $269

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/144688611079

https://www.ebay.com/itm/175151808032

https://www.ebay.com/itm/385618513299

 

650 bucks (or best offer) for 8273CL with 28 cores

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/255969531554

 

Even cheaper here

 

https://www.bargainhardware.co.uk/intel-xeon-platinum-8273cl-srf81-28-core-2-20ghz-lga3647-38-5mb-165w-cpu

 

---

 

Finally it's just a matter of picking the right motherboard.

 

ATX-sized ones would come with relatively weak VRMs and therefore maximum TDP for the CPU turned out to be 165W

 

https://www.provantage.com/supermicro-mbd-x11spm-f~7SUPM5QR.htm

https://www.acmemicro.com/Product/15828/Supermicro-X11SPM-F-Motherboard-Intel-Xeon-Scalable-Single-Socket-P-

https://www.dihuni.com/product/supermicro-mbd-x11spm-f-o-x11spm-f-server-motherboard-intel-chipset-socket-p-lga-3647/

 

We could also go for E-ATX with beefier VRMs (up to 205W TDP) as well as 12 DIMM slots, prices should be just under 700 bucks at the moment

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/304932239836

https://www.ebay.com/itm/325924480668

https://www.ipcstore.com/supermicro-mbdx11spatfo-motherboard-intel-c621-lga-3647-socket-p-extended-atx-3010579

 

Other than that, check this out if we're interested in VRM mods since the kit would cost only 50 bucks

 

https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/vrm-modify-icc_max-to-run-high-current-tdp-oem-processors.38686/

 

Previous releases of Supermicro BIOS

 

https://drunkencat.net/misc/SupermicroBIOS.html

 

---

 

Intel Xeon Platinum 8273CL Complete Info Guide

https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/intel-xeon-platinum-8273cl-complete-info-guide.41479/

 

512 GB Intel Optane DDR4-2666 RDIMM PMEM NMA1XBD512GQS

https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/512-gb-intel-optane-ddr4-2666-rdimm-pmem-nma1xbd512gqs.40019/

 

Basically the caveat emptor here should be all about the longevity of used Optane DCPMM since they could have the potential to be REALLY worn out already

 

https://seitics.de/files/ipmctl/

https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/512-gb-intel-optane-ddr4-2666-rdimm-pmem-nma1xbd512gqs.40019/page-3#post-379460

https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/512-gb-intel-optane-ddr4-2666-rdimm-pmem-nma1xbd512gqs.40019/page-4#post-388714

Quote

Also good luck trying to wear out these Optanes. They'll just last until you are fed up with Cascade Lake and get something better.

 

---

 

While Optane DCPMM might not be as good as the regular DDR4, it's still a relatively affordable way to boost the performance while getting such an impressive amount of persistent memory.

 

Always remember to RTFM since we've gotta pay attention to the ratio between regular DDR4 and Optane DCPMM

 

https://lenovopress.lenovo.com/lp1167.pdf

https://lenovopress.lenovo.com/lp1192.pdf

[Schafheide]

Addendum

Being only a recent contributor to this topic, I now also notice that, on more than one occasion @Zaphod Beeblebrox acknowledges that HPQPlayer is better at doing some jobs.  Obviously this is very fair, on the part of @Zaphod Beeblebrox.

In any case, I have started my own comparison of HQP processing vs PGGB + HQP processing of my local files.

I do understand that, given the increased size of PGGB'd files, I will need to rethink my local storage situation.  At the moment, I am thinking - local files on NAS and favourite local PGGB'd files on my Mac Studio integral SSD.

Have yet to try PGGB conversion to DSD output - but it seems like it has been very well thought out.

[HeeBroG]

@Zaphod Beeblebrox

With the new PGGB (PCM + DSD); can 16/44 files processed to DSD256 be potentially better than PCM 705.6? 

I still use DAVE/DC4;ARC6/SRC-DX so I think I am limited to those rates.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

1 hour ago, HeeBroG said:

With the new PGGB (PCM + DSD); can 16/44 files processed to DSD256 be potentially better than PCM 705.6? 

I still use DAVE/DC4;ARC6/SRC-DX so I think I am limited to those rates.

I don't think SRC-DX supports DSD256 rates. Assuming you are going through USB, on Windows based setup you could go up to DSD512 (but to my knowledge only DSD512 at 44.1k rates). Regarding if there will be an improvement, I am unable to provide a firsthand impression.  With DSD256 and DSD+, only HF filter is used with no decimation, DSD512 undergoes HF filter followed by simple decimation to DSD256. There is a potential for improvement, however the feedback I have received (a sample size of 3 people)  have been mixed from 'I hate it' to 'this is the only way I will listen'. YMMV applies, we may have broader impressions and hopefully some kind of consensus later.

 

 

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

31 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

I don't think SRC-DX supports DSD256 rates.

 

Correction: Looks like SRC-DX supports DSD256 using DoP, so you could stay with SRC-DX.

[seeteeyou]

Got a confirmation from @dmance and he's stating the same limitation with DBNC output of SRC•DX / input of Chord DAVE

 

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1552/8145/files/SRC-DX_User_s_Guide_2021.pdf#page=8

Quote

● Does not support DSD or DOP (DSD over PCM)

 

Then he also added that we've gotta stick with USB whenever we're trying DSD256 with Chord DAVE.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

I will let @danmance clarify here.