Yes its fantastic indeed. More air. Again more insight. Seems a bit more body aswell. Love it.sbgk wrote:no comments on 258/102/47 ? I thought the new alignment made it sound pretty fantastic.
Well done again!
yes, I mean't noises the musicians make while playing were more prominent due to the amount of detail.minionas wrote:On pimped audiopc it feels like more definition, not noises. At least for me.sbgk wrote: uploaded 258/102/47 - new alignment technique. The best yet, problem is more noises off are audible now.
yes, don't think that was a good version, too much loss of bass.janh wrote:Listening to play/Loader v260/103 with rewrite v 48 vs v258/102 with rewrite v47.
Quite noticable difference. v258/47 has more reverb. I prefer the less reverb of v260/48, love the clearity. Thank you again, Gordon.
P.S. My recent problem with downloading your files in Firefox was due to a faulty antivirus add-on. Disabled it, now ok.
sbgk wrote:yes, don't think that was a good version, too much loss of bass.janh wrote:Listening to play/Loader v260/103 with rewrite v 48 vs v258/102 with rewrite v47.
Quite noticable difference. v258/47 has more reverb. I prefer the less reverb of v260/48, love the clearity. Thank you again, Gordon.
P.S. My recent problem with downloading your files in Firefox was due to a faulty antivirus add-on. Disabled it, now ok.
uploaded 261/104/49 which is better all round, think I was using the wrong instruction for the loop (technically it was clearing the instruction pipeline which I hadn't realised), so better detail and air now.
Notice that before the track starts there is zero noise and then an audible background noise that is part of the recording then the music, mainly in classical tracks. Ironic for those searching for a black background when the background noise is captured as part of the recording, so if you have a black background you're missing some of the detail.
put them back up, wasn't sure about them as was working on something else, but couldn't get the balance right.Aleg wrote:sbgk wrote:yes, don't think that was a good version, too much loss of bass.janh wrote:Listening to play/Loader v260/103 with rewrite v 48 vs v258/102 with rewrite v47.
Quite noticable difference. v258/47 has more reverb. I prefer the less reverb of v260/48, love the clearity. Thank you again, Gordon.
P.S. My recent problem with downloading your files in Firefox was due to a faulty antivirus add-on. Disabled it, now ok.
uploaded 261/104/49 which is better all round, think I was using the wrong instruction for the loop (technically it was clearing the instruction pipeline which I hadn't realised), so better detail and air now.
Notice that before the track starts there is zero noise and then an audible background noise that is part of the recording then the music, mainly in classical tracks. Ironic for those searching for a black background when the background noise is captured as part of the recording, so if you have a black background you're missing some of the detail.
Hey Gordon
On Google drive you removed the '260-generation' but did not upload any of the '261-generation'.
Got my DAC back yesterday, so now I'm curious of course.
Cheers
the thread op says that this is the first device he's had where jplay doesn't have an effect on sq, if so then we are in new territory where the upstream source doesn't matter. Mines been shipped so may find out sometime.sbgk wrote:no comments on 258/102/47 ? I thought the new alignment made it sound pretty fantastic.
Have one bought one of these http://www.ebay.com/itm/F-1-XMOS-USB-Di ... 1a11703c3c, causing great excitement on headfi.