Tír Na HiFi

dont think everything is better in 8.59 over 8.58
can seem a little strained or noisy at times
but as you say much is better
were there other changes?

Windows 8.1, APL-HiFi DAC-S
I only use 1644 Normal.
8.42 and 8.45 only gave distorted sound.
8.55 and 8.59 both work fine. They are clearly better than 8.16 which I used until now.

quite like the sound of 8.60.

what's better - a 32 bit register or a 64 bit one ? you would think a 32 bit one would be because it's smaller and so should be faster and is better for holding smaller numbers, however in a 64 bit cpu the 32 bit register gets auto zero extended to 64 bit, so you don't get any benefit from the 32 bit if it's constantly being updated because the zero extend has an effect on the sq. Just one of the thousand things to think about.

without assembly code the compiler will try and use 32 bit where possible.

8.60 uses 64 bit registers.

Gordon your work ethic is amazing, where did you find such drive?

nige2000 wrote:dont think everything is better in 8.59 over 8.58
can seem a little strained or noisy at times
but as you say much is better
were there other changes?

Yep agree.
But amazing detail.
May be a little less good in bass.

8.64 should have enough detail for everyone, back to using 32 bit registers where possible.

Just tried 8.61, so I must improve on my speed of testing!

8.61 Normal I would have said had enough detail for anyone. Quite amazing amount. And it had brought back a lovely bass underpinning that was missing in 8.59 Normal.
Lovely taut attack and relaxing decay.
All round my new reference. ...may be until 8.64?

Is 8.61 good enough to win round nige to WDM-KS? Got to be getting close I reckon.

Jonathan

8.64 is very nice.
Very good tonality, very realistic.
Good in details
Well balanced overall.

Would like to have a 176.4/24, just for once, to be able to test this quality player on a DoP file.
Could you do this with the 8.64, just as a one off for now?

8.64
Good detail

tracks with a little static background still seem to be amplified when compared to wasapi
maybe thats noise?
agility seems a little slow maybe something similar to difference between avx and avx2 wasapi

nige2000 wrote:8.64
Good detail

tracks with a little static background still seem to be amplified when compared to wasapi
maybe thats noise?
agility seems a little slow maybe something similar to difference between avx and avx2 wasapi

With 8.64 Normal, I am getting an over-exaggerated emphasis on the vocals centre compared with the excellent more balanced 8.61 Normal. A bit strained.