Jump to content

Luca72c

  • Content Count

    118
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    Italy

About Luca72c

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    Ok, i now understand better. Thank you for patiently clarifying 👍
  2. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    Maybe this is what i didn't understand: is (re)modulation needed in convolution even if the stereo file already is in DSD format, no additional oversampling is requested and receiving only convolution? I was (probably wrongly) thinking that EC modulation was only needed in the process of converting PCM to DSD or DSD to different sampling rate DSD... Because convolution can be offloaded to CUDA, modulation can't, and after convolving PCM you'd find yourself with 8 PCM channels to be modulated in the conversion to DSD process. That's what i was thinking. But if you say the
  3. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    Interesting. This means there's some sort of random component in the modulation process? Are 2 modulated DSD versions from the same PCM source content substantially different or equivalent in practice? Isn't a modulated DSD stream (converted from a PCM source) equivalent to a normal DSD file stream? I ask because you say a normal DSD file can receive convolution as is, so why a modulated, converted-from-PCM DSD stream cannot? For example, a stereo DSD file obtained through conversion-from-PCM in Hqp4 pro cannot receive channel copy + convolutions in matrix pipeline to o
  4. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    So isn't the ability to offload convolutions to CUDA able to move the balance in favour of the first case i guessed, performance wise? Just because EC modulators calculations (needed to convert 8ch of PCM into 8ch of DSD) cannot be offloaded to CUDA, instead...
  5. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    This is surely unexpected for me! So this means that performing EQ convolution on 8 DSD channels is heavier than performing DSD conversion (using EC modulators) on 8 PCM channels? Then performing convolutions on DSD is so heavier than performing convolutions on PCM? Great, this is a unique feature in a DSP engine!
  6. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    @Miska, sorry if this has been asked already: if i have a stereo PCM file and i want to convert it to a crossovered 8ch DSD stream using matrix pipeline + convolutions, to be sent to a multichannel DSD dac, i obviously have to set both DSD conversion/upsampling work and matrix pipeline work. But which one is performed first? To be clearer, i just want to know if being set such way, hqplayer is going to convert the PCM stereo stream to DSD and then apply convolution to that DSD stream (2 ch DSD conversion + channel copy in DSD + 8ch EQ on DSD), or is it going to apply convolution to the PC
  7. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    Noisy? I think your PC or your setup (so complicated) surely have some problems... I compared W10 HQP with Linux and Mac versions, on the same PC or in others (no Winserver as it is unsupported). Some friends were attending and sharing impressions. We all heard differences, in terms of fullness/richness, soundstage width and depth, maybe some slight detail (but i cannot swear about this). But surely not in noise! How could noise be involved in such a thing?
  8. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    So i do and in facts HQPlayer sounds very well on my windows system. Better than on any other OS i tried. More, i'm a lowish class man and i can't change my PC once an year or two just to have a compatible platform for a new OS image released. I think i'm not the only one. So i'm totally ok using windows and i don't miss HQP OS even a bit, as long as windows is supported so well by HQPlayer - thanks again, as i understand your difficulties! The only problem for me is Embedded functionalities not being available for my OS. But that's an old debate that i'm better avoid resurrecting...
  9. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    Surely it sounds different, as nearly everyone reports this. But stating it sounds better is totally subjective, and i found many people reporting the opposite. Just the same as "windows sound vs linux sound": it's a matter of taste... More, i strongly doubt the reason for "sounding worse" (that is questionable, as i said) is to be related to more or less processes running: that is simply an audiophile legend, imho. As i reported some time ago, and ted_b and many others agree, i find windows sound to be better than linux sound, despite windows having many more processes than linux running
  10. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    Yes, you already reported that, but as i said - and thanks to your great optimization work, first of all - i found not even a tiny increase in performance or reliability going from windows to linux, so i can't confirm what you say, in my experience. About HQP OS specifically, it runs very bad and slow on my PC (and it's from 2013, not from the 80's), so my experience totally diverges from what you say. But i am a clear case of incompatible system... That's exactly the reason why i say that for normal desktop PCs, windows is much more compatible
  11. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    You're wrong. Miska explained very well this some days ago: windows server has not the required software components (including DLLs) to run hqplayer and it's not supported as a platform to run hqplayer onto. It's an OS meant for pro server purposes, not for home/multimedia personal use. So this is not a windows issue, but simply a problem due to running hqplayer on a non-supported platform. Windows 10 (that is instead supported) has no problem with asio and other drivers, including nearly any existing PC hardware's, as it's the most compatible OS on the market. HQP OS, in contrast, has ma
  12. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    I think you can find wider differences in dacs SQ depending on the implementations than on the chipset used... Not all 9038pro dacs sound the same, just like not all multibit or R-2R dacs do. You can't judge a dac chip after listening to one or two implementations, expecially if they are from the lowish-end of the market: that would just MAYBE tell you something about how easy and cheap a decent implementation of that chipset can be in that price level - but in many cases it wouldn't tell that either. And obviously you can't compare a 1000 (or below) usd dac to a 2000 or 3000 usd dac
  13. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    Maybe we can ask users what they would prefer... For me, server side would be more useful
  14. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    Miska, maybe i am amongst the few that do so, but i really like you HQP client app, much better than Roon for me. But i miss one functionality - maybe i simply wasn't able to find how to do it: how can we save the playlists we arranged in the transport view? Not that playing by playlist is a frequent thing i do, but sometimes it can be useful...
  15. Luca72c

    HQ Player

    And you did a great work then, thanks! Please keep going on this way, the result is certainly worth your effort... To be honest i started comparing in HQP desktop v3 times and i found no performance difference then, too. But i have to say that my PC is only quad core, so maybe i have fewer problems about core workload distribution. And i repeat, i absolutely understand your disregard for windows in a developer point of view, all my programmer friends did confirm your difficulties, more or less - but windows is the big IT world outside and no commercial programmer can avoid messing wi
×
×
  • Create New...