Jump to content

numlog

Members
  • Content Count

    237
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About numlog

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. USB3.1, like PCIe 4.0, features twice the bandwidth of its predecessor. A few of us noticed the USB 3.1 cards sounding better than 3.0, both of which were vastly better USB2.0 when connected to USB2.0 devices. To support higher bandwidths they must be built to higher specifications, so they are overspec'd when operating at low bandwidths. In practice this does appear to have benefits, at least in the case of USB.
  2. Those chipset fans are a huge turn off, but the worst part for us I think is the needlessness of that power consumption and resulting heat. You'd have 2 bifurcated CPU Gen4 slots, and CPU Gen 4 Nvme/SATA slot, enough for the majority of situations to fully avoid the chipset. I wonder how much of that power consumption is constant, and how effective disabling all chipset features could be at reducing the footprint of the chipset.
  3. I did, Alex. You can also parallel these for any current requirement. The catch? $10 per reg!
  4. I got away using a 5A LM338 LPS for my Ryzen 1700, really cheap and simple to build. The Ryzen 1700 has quite low power consumption I noticed, the supply is viable for native PCM and probably upsampled PCM too, note the LM338 can handle 12A peaks. It sounds great, and easy to replace the LM338 with LT3045 5A board using the same transformer. As has been noted by others a big, oversized transformer seems to be the core of a good sounding power supply. No idea how it compares to commercial LPS offerings, but it well outperforms my decent SMPS - Corsair RM650X. P.S TDP is not power consumption, you can find power consumption for your CPU under different loads on many review sites.
  5. I used a program call process explorer, it allows you to maximise background process but gives the error that the process has no window, It seems that the window is created by clicking the tray icon.
  6. I had tried that, along with everything else google had to offer, im able to launch the exe in explorer so that's not the issue. The control panel launches minimised, creating a shortcut and setting it to launch maximised does not change that. In GUI you have to click the icon in the tray to open the control panel, running exe just adds another instance to the tray. its a [email protected] soundcard. I think this a unique circumstance for server core that would require some manual fix so I guess im out of luck
  7. in core with fod is there anyway to bring up programs that normally start in the tray (bottom right) in GUI? they are visible in task manager as background services and it doesnt let you into them, it is the control panel for my sound device.
  8. I loaded the wav into ''IR File'' area of convolution, thats all. where would you specify that? ok I see it in pipeline, L is for linear instead of decibels, not left.
  9. @Miska Pipeline is sending ch1 data from file to ch1+2 outputs and ch2 data to ch3+4 output, this works but inverting ch2+4 with convolution wav is not working. I applied -1db inverted pulse to both those channels with no effect, any ideas what wrong? this is demo version of HQP btw
  10. Have you ever done any comparison with native DSD recordings (on DS DAC?) and native PCM with R2R DAC? Probably never a fair comparison as you pointed out DSD cant be edited, so it will always be the ''purer'' option but with a very limited selection.
  11. PCM to DSD is mostly inferior in terms of accuracy and transparency to native PCM (I still think DSD conv. sounds more organic) even when I know my 9038Q2M DAC sounds significantly better with native DSD vs PCM (including hi res) . IME PCM upsampling also comes with negatives effects along with the positives, even with players that pre-upsample before playback OR listening to pre-upsampled files (HQPPro). Some of us believe it could be that ''noise'' gets stored in the data. I think 44.1kHz also lacks the required data to accurately reproduce the original recording that no amount of processing can change. Remaining ''bit-perfect'' is an appealing concept with practical benefits too. I still believe the powerful PC have benefits for bit-perfect playback, when I switched from 6600K to Ryzen 1700 my preferences was for native PCM playback (but files are pre-upsampled before playback regardless) and the improvements were still clear as anything. Further more upsampled or converted data remained inferior. Im talking about official releases, converting the hi res SACDs versions which are usually mastered very well and tastefully (far more important than resolution imo) is a quicker, easier and probably less costly option compared to remastering the originals. DSD also has its advantages when it comes to the DAC, so there is not much desire to look for original PCM remasters that match or exceed the DSD version from SACD. I remember reading some SACDs were taken directly from master tapes but doubtful if thats true, it is possible If only some basic remastering/restoration was needed that could be done with purely analogue means.
  12. You can already be sure Ralf11 and his friends will have plenty of ''helpful'' input.
  13. Hi res PCM remasters can be very hit or miss, some really bad, some decent, and a lot of the good ones are just sourced from SACD making them redundant.
  14. good headphones or speakers make a difference, but without blind testing I cant say for sure its not expectation bias
  15. yeah , Im not sure there is any solely digital soundcard in existence
×
×
  • Create New...