Tír Na HiFi

sbgk wrote:

Karl wrote:I do not believe Clapton plays a spanish guitar.

Peng is correct.

I can see the attraction of 4.54, what do others think ?

I feel is is not in the same league as these 4.74/4.75's.
4.54 doesn't have the clarity and singing character as the 4.75's. It sounds a bit muddied by comparisson.

It is not one I would like to go back to.

Cheers

Aleg

Aleg wrote:

sbgk wrote:
I can see the attraction of 4.54, what do others think ?

I feel is is not in the same league as these 4.74/4.75's.
4.54 doesn't have the clarity and singing character as the 4.75's. It sounds a bit muddied by comparisson.

It is not one I would like to go back to.

Cheers

Aleg

4.54 was the first in a batch and it got worse over the next few before it got better again
There's much improved with the 4.7x that definitely shouldn't be lost
4.74s and 4.75s I like
Need to go over the 4.74 252 again
The labeling is getting confusing
Listened to 4.75 252 252 and the 128 versions the 128 seems to be more delicate or sophisticated but the 256 has more weight neither seems ideal
Maybe lead with the 128 and try another way to add a little weight back in

nige2000 wrote:

Aleg wrote:

sbgk wrote:
I can see the attraction of 4.54, what do others think ?

I feel is is not in the same league as these 4.74/4.75's.
4.54 doesn't have the clarity and singing character as the 4.75's. It sounds a bit muddied by comparisson.

It is not one I would like to go back to.

Cheers

Aleg

4.54 was the first in a batch and it got worse over the next few before it got better again
There's much improved with the 4.7x that definitely shouldn't be lost
4.74s and 4.75s I like
Need to go over the 4.74 252 again
The labeling is getting confusing
Listened to 4.75 252 252 and the 128 versions the 128 seems to be more delicate or sophisticated but the 256 has more weight neither seems ideal
Maybe lead with the 128 and try another way to add a little weight back in

+1

128 gets my vote right now, but differences are becoming subtle imo.
Will have to do longer listening to all kinds to get a proper feeling of the differences.

+2

4.75 128 gets my vote as well. just had a glorious evening listening to albums on it from Rudimental to Bon Ivor to Ray Charles.
Happy for the bus to stop here and carry this one off with me :-)

4.77 avx, makes the previous ones sound lumpy, based on 4.74 256 which was 64 byte loop, can do a 128 loop, but like this.

has the most amazing timing and drum/bass articulation I've heard.

uploaded a 128 version, might be better. Can't believe what's coming out of the speakers, irresistible sound.

explain this 64 byte loop thing
bit confused

do a 128 loop for comparison if it isnt difficult
edit: wow thats fast

nige2000 wrote:explain this 64 byte loop thing
bit confused

do a 128 loop for comparison if it isnt difficult
edit: wow thats fast

64 byte

vmovdqa ymm0, ymmword ptr [r14+r15]
vmovdqa ymm1, ymmword ptr [r14+r15+32]

vmovdqa ymmword ptr [r12+r15], ymm0
vmovdqa ymmword ptr [r12+r15+32], ymm1

128 byte

vmovdqa ymm0, ymmword ptr [r14+r15]
vmovdqa ymm1, ymmword ptr [r14+r15+32]
vmovdqa ymm2, ymmword ptr [r14+r15+64]
vmovdqa ymm3, ymmword ptr [r14+r15+96]

vmovdqa ymmword ptr [r12+r15], ymm0
vmovdqa ymmword ptr [r12+r15+32], ymm1
vmovdqa ymmword ptr [r12+r15+64], ymm2
vmovdqa ymmword ptr [r12+r15+96], ymm3

sbgk wrote:4.77 avx, makes the previous ones sound lumpy, based on 4.74 256 which was 64 byte loop, can do a 128 loop, but like this.

has the most amazing timing and drum/bass articulation I've heard.

uploaded a 128 version, might be better. Can't believe what's coming out of the speakers, irresistible sound.

Prefer 4.75 256 avx 128 over 4.77 256 avx 64 or 128.

I feel the 4.77's take the leading edge away from the notes which negatively influences the (perception of) the timing of notes which become somewhat soft and blurred.
The leading edge is imho vital for properly perceiving the timing aspects of music.

sse version pls?

Aleg - big thanks for keeping up such active interest in reviewing and reporting on the new versions as they flood out. Your insightful and descriptive comments are really most helpful to me (and many others I expect). Are you by chance a professional audio engineer?

One question if I may - what settings are you using in Pro Audio Clock Rate with the different 128, 256, 512 versions? I am using 3.61 512 Control and had Clock Rate at 448 as you suggested. But with SSE2/3 512 MQnplay versions (I do not have avx so many versions have to pass me by) I moved Clock Rate to 512 with slightly better results I think and have left it there since.

I am assuming that Gordon is not now changing Clock Rate within his code, which was the case a while back, I believe.

Thank you as always
Jonathan