Bit perfect software changing sound. How?

[manueljenkin]

2 minutes ago, Racerxnet said:

For anyone looking for a custom bios for their motherboard, you may be able to find it here.

https://www.win-raid.com/

Thanks.

[manueljenkin]

16 minutes ago, Racerxnet said:

A linear supply does not gaurantee the best fit for the application. We can find that switching supplies can be engineered to fit the application much better and have a lower noise floor over the demands applied from the device. So as above, I agree. But, you have explained nothing in reference why your software is creating a better listening file experience. How does the code work within the operating system and data memory device? 

The dev hasn't explained so I don't know what the code exactly does, but it does copy the files to RAM as the dev claimed (verified in task manager twice and another person also saw part of code corresponding to that execution having mov to ram operation). I only can make guesses on where the changes come from physically and the only place I know of for this case is access noise differences from the charge distribution differences in the storage cells. It could be some other digital noise phenomenon too but I donot have other guess.

 

And if you're wondering about noise due to different data access, the entire last 7 pages is for you, don't want to repeat all those again.

 

btw the Berkeley alpha looks cool but crazy expensive. Any teardowns available?

[manueljenkin]

20 minutes ago, Racerxnet said:

A linear supply does not gaurantee the best fit for the application.

Too high output impedance with LPS? I'm not aware of very low noise SMPS above a few 10s of watts of power (PCs require a few 100s of watts of power, generally atleast 500w for a desktop tower).

[manueljenkin]

6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

OK, here's the deal. My inbox and reported post inbox are full of items from this thread. I can't spend 50% of my time on 0.00001% of the members of this community because a couple of you can't stop arguing. You're reporting each others' posts like children running to the school teacher at recess. 

 

You're adults. Get over the nonsense of trying to prove something at all costs. Trust me, the more ridiculous posts you have, the worse you look, no matter the outcome. If people just can't handle themselves, they can go to a number of other forums and duke it out to their hearts' content. 

 

This is the one warning. 

I'm sorry for your experience. I'll just ask you one thing. How many times have you had to face this prior to March audio joining this place? That would give you the answer already. There have been threads closed almost everywhere March Audio has joined (this is the most frequent I've witnessed this ever since I joined AS).

 

If he was truly in search of seeking answers instead of trying to disguise his catcalling with pseudo aggressive posting no one would have bothered to come up to this thread as there is nothing to defend in terms of our morality. The amount of aggression he has shown on a simple player suggestion is staggering, just with the intent to derail any possible experiments (he'll word it in a way telling that he encourages experimentation but the entire comment will be a carefully crafted vitriol spewing).

 

The entire thread, outside of calling us names or throwing his tantrums, has been all about his incorrect assertions and his moving goalposts that we have successively refuted. It started with him calling the software dev a liar because he couldn't seek the change in task manager, which is an unreliable probe. I showed him that was not the case and that the software does load into RAM. Then the whole saga of moving goalposts has happened, from every single differences to him claiming there is magic fix for everything, which again has been refuted. And the post just above does show the tool has all specific code commands that the dev has mentioned so he is not lying.

 

Now March audio is onto the next personally inflicted assertion. And also tries to play victim safely while throwing all sorts of aggressive abuse at the rest of us (happens ever so frequently in his comments).

 

Maybe just look up the first post in this thread, there are so many nice ways to begin this thread in a useful way instead of shoving my name in, and throwing his misguided tantrum of how the tool works (you can check the very next post where I've shown his assertions to be wrong). I can share you every single of his comments where he always begins in a passive aggressive tone, if you do need.

 

Tldr: there would have been no problem had March audio not tried to disguise his personal rant and moving goalposts as objectivity.

[manueljenkin]

6 hours ago, Racerxnet said:

The software moves the file to RAM (volitile) and then back to the drive (nonvolitile)? Is this correct?  If I remember correctly, it stores the new file in the software subfolder. So you have taken the file, moved it to RAM, and copied it to a new folder and it sounds better. 

 

There are only 2 instances where I actually heard a diffrence between Foobar2k and other playback software. One was with Cic's software some years ago, and HQplayer. After some investigation, on my Pc, I set the MMCSS mode in Foobar to Pro Audio, thread priority to 7, and disabled all non essential background applications. I did a A/B comparison to HQplayer and found the playback consistent between the 2. There have been some registry tweaks per some online discussions for foobar also. 

 

The best estimate of wide gaps in playback from my perspective is: 

Stabilize the OS and hardware to run consistently. (memtest 64)

Use quality components that do as suggested with evidence. (berkeley Alpha)

Don't overclock the bejeesus out of it. Don't under volt it either.

Watch your 'RAM timing and get compatible sticks. 

Adequately cool it.

Look for and think about qualified tweaks that can make a difference. (mmcss Pro Audio settings)

Prevent the hard disk from sleeping to limit voltage transients.

Use ASIO drivers if possible. (theysecon for the Berkeley) 

Don't digitally clip the volume.

Room treatment with DSP and the best speakers you can afford. Amplifiers to match.

 

With that said, I don't hear all the hype from people about drastic improvements in playback. That does not mean I will not keep looking. I have tried many different things along the way, but am skeptical of many. 

 

Here is a link to some foobar tweaks I used along the way. 

https://www.tirnahifi.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2456&i=1

Thanks. Those are a lot of hardware tweaks, so I'll have to see how I can go about it, but I'll try to experiment. I have tried a few tweaks on foobar before giving up and moving to other players, but I'll try again after a while.

[manueljenkin]

9 minutes ago, Racerxnet said:

I changed some registry Dwords based on the linked article.

 

Thanks. I'll try the software part of the tweaks tomorrow.

 

I use headphones so no need of room treatment dsp here.

[manueljenkin]

31 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

To avoid *any* misunderstanding, in my opinion ( as a dual qualified SW/EE ) this software will do nothing but waste ( not many ) CPU cycles for no benefit. 

Ah, sweet appeal to authority. Fyi I'm an EE as well, so are a lot of people here.

[manueljenkin]

40 minutes ago, March Audio said:

Manuel.  It's plainly obvious that you and Peter have been thread crapping.  

No. Definitely not in my case.

41 minutes ago, March Audio said:

Your own subjective experience is entirely down to the power of suggestion and expectation bias and faulty comparison methods.

Again no. You don't have the authority to tell that (considering the fact that the software does something different and the effects have not been explored thoroughly), and ironic that you mention faulty analysis methods because your entire 10 pages of posting has been mostly just that.

[manueljenkin]

4 hours ago, March Audio said:

My suspicions are confirmed.

Last I remember, your suspicion was that the software doesn't load the file to RAM which the post debunked. Lovely that your suspicion and argument keeps changing goalposts.

[manueljenkin]

18 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I asked my doctor the other day if the degrees on her wall were an "appeal to authority".

 

Unfortunately, I should have mentioned this after the prostate exam, not before...

A doctor is going to treat your illness so his/her qualifications cater to that (and beyond that if you still have your suspicions, I'm not going to argue on that). An EE/sw engineer is going to code things to make good computation performance in general or other branches of electrical engineering. Unless you're a quantum physicist, material science engineer, a hardcore analog designer (which does indeed need ee as a foundation, but the contrary need not be true), a psychoacoustic researcher, I don't think the ee appeal to authority has any bearing on what a code sequence can impart in terms of noise performance in a mixed signal system or its audibility.

[manueljenkin]

15 minutes ago, Racerxnet said:

At least he attempted to see what the code was doing and is much more intuitive than the power of suggestion. If you care as a EE, run IDA Pro and reverse engineer it for your own peace of mind. Maybe you can then explain what it does in a more definitive manner. Right now it appears to do nothing. Maybe the developr can come forward and explain a bit better? 

 

Sorry about the Foobar tweaks, I know it is off topic. I'll leave this discussion alone for now. 

Sorry I don't intend to violate someone else's IP/hardwork. I appreciate his efforts but refute his conclusion. He carefully sneaks in the word "imo" to be on the safe side and rearguards it with an irrelevant appeal to authority.

 

17 minutes ago, March Audio said:

Apart from ill informed speculation what objective contribution did you make?

 

Considering the software has been demonstrated to do nothing relevant that could possibly have any impact on the audio quality, the only conclusions to draw are that your subjective findings are faulty.  Pick whatever reason you like, but the 3 I mentioned are the most likely.

That assertion that it cannot do anything is also a speculation, that is quite well refutable if you have any understanding of digital systems and the associated electrical/magnetic phenomenon.

 

Audibility is a different area, and we likely need a psychoacoustic researcher/properly conducted tests to conclude. I have had decent set of people who could hear it in sighted test which does indeed mean it is worthy of a dbt trial, but done in a proper way within the usage bounds of the tool.