HQPlayer , anyone using it?

[Ken Moreland]

For computer based music , Foobar is excellent, free and easy to set up, but is anyone using HQPlayer available on trial from http://www.signalyst.com/consumer.html ? I am currently trying it out for a month then it's pay-up time. From a sound quality point of view it is as good or better than Foobar, more awkward to use and does not play all file types.
KM

[Fran]

I had a look, but when it didn't do either WMA or even MP3 I didn't bother. Whats the SQ like?


Fran

[Ken Moreland]

Hi Fran , sound quality is excellent , I think it's better than Foobar. I am using it without any filters etc and the level of detail/atmosphere is very special. I tried a few others like Winamp and the impossible xxhighend also but I prefer HQPlayer. I'll try it for the month and see.
KM

[jkeny]

Fran,
This is the player I wanted to fire up in Ivor's when we listened to the Lector Vs Hiface but I couldn't find my way around it. I must revisit this, Ken but I found the interface a bit cumbersome - I think my trial period has probably elapsed though. BTW, what OS are you using? I found a big leap in SQ when using Foobar (on Win 7) & changing to Wasapi as the output driver. I was using Kernel Streaming driver in Foobar under Win XP which sounded great as it exclusively talked directly to the Hiface without going through Windows Kmixer. In WIn 7 this is no longer the case, KS now uses Windows Kmixer, Wasapi avoids Kmixer & sounds much, much better as a result.

[Ken Moreland]

Hi John, I've recently been using W7 and I already followed your suggestion to change to Wasapi from KS and it was an improvement. HQPlayer is easy enough to set up but it isn't as easy to use as Foobar. To play an album you need to define a path to it an put it in a collection of paths etc . Also you cannot select one track to play , it's necessary to play the album and then forward to the track, if you can remember it's number. There are two versions of the player and the best looking is the embedded one which is designed to suit touch screens. Overall though , I think the sound quality is excellent.
KM

[jkeny]

Thanks Ken,
Now the big question - would you buy it? What's the price again?

[Ken Moreland]

Hi John, I'd hate to pay for software but I think in this case I will. When you consider some of the things I have bought such as numerous cables, valves , anti-vibration rings, cushioning material , marble slabs etcthen maybe 118 euro is not so bad. I'll continue to try it until near the end of the free period. By the way it happily plays Flac and Wav files. Give it a try and tell me what you think.
KM

[jkeny]

I did try it & thought that there was a subtle improvement but found the interface too awkward & frustrating. I wante dto get Fran & Ivor's opinion when I brought the Hiface along to Ivor's but couldn't navigate the interface to play a track that we had been listening to in Foobar & so gave up on it.
If you are willing to pay for it you obviously find it a worthwhile improvement - I have to admit I may not have given it the necessary time & attention it deserved!

[Fran]

God, €118 is saucy enough isn't it?!

[Ken Moreland]

Hi Fran, it's pricey all right, especially compared to Foobar and Winamp which are both free! In my opinion the sound quality improvement is worth it and I'd put up with the difficult interface for that. I guess if I add up all the junk I bought and compare it doesn't seem so bad.
Another player is XXhighend but I found it a horror to get working. There are plenty of smoothly operating players which are easily operable , show album art etc but I think the concentration is on user friendliness rather than SQ.
KM