FAT sounds best

[Veri]

Looking at reviews of the SMSL iDea and the Sabaj Da3 I came across this post and felt it was worth a chuckle and a share..
https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=152638.msg1634194#msg1634194

Just a reminder for PC users: make sure you've spent time optimizing your PC. Go through your bios, check your control panel/Power options, format your drives properly (FAT sounds best), etc. If you have ASIO or similar drivers like XMOS etc., play with all the settings, doublecheck your Audio adapter settings (sometimes your PC will reset sample rates, you never know). Test different USB outputs. All of this is free.

I myself forgot to turn off C-States in Bios and some other settings and now I get another bump in sound quality. Cost me nothing.

Make sure to use Deoxit to clean contacts before using. All contacts actually in your chain. Another little bump in sq for very little money. Tested last night with SATA for instance, dac jack and usb inputs and it definitely helped. Easy to forget little things like that.

I swear only the audio hobby brings out such hocus pocus into otherwise logical-thinking people.

 

[wgscott]

Especially when these same people advocate loading the whole track into memory prior to playback. (I like this too, but for boring mechanical reasons.) Some of these folks even claim to be able to hear differences due to different compiler optimization flags being used.

 

[jmlpartners]

Some of these folks even claim to be able to hear differences due to different compiler optimization flags being used.

Compiler settings that control code generation certainly can effect the sound. For example, directing the compiler to generate a CVTSD2SI instruction when converting a sample value to integer has an effect that most audiophiles claim to be able hear.

 

[DonH56]

Why? Truly curious as to what that instruction does and why it corrupts the audio. I assume it is going from full-float (64 bit mantissa) do dword (32-bit) integers? I'm an analog guy...

I have no problem believing compiler etc. options can cause trouble, just curious about the ones that do -- and why folk do not know to not use those particular options. Truncating all floats to 8 bit integers probably speeds up processing but kills the dynamic range.

Wonder if FAT32 sounds better than plain old FAT?

 

[Ron Texas]

It can seem weird when one group says optimize the PC by cutting processes which use almost no cpu cycles and the others want to upsample using huge amounts of CPU power, or even both at once.

 

[Alexander Gödde]

The new measurements guy for Innerfidelity plays WAV files instead of FLAC since this sounds better to him - with less processor load given as a reason.

Now, for a modern system the difference in processing power required is essentially meaningless. Computer audio can have its problems, but decoding audio file formats is not among them.

 

[FrantzM]

Especially when these same people advocate loading the whole track into memory prior to playback. (I like this too, but for boring mechanical reasons.) Some of these folks even claim to be able to hear differences due to different compiler optimization flags being used.

They do hear differences between Ethernet cables and even notice better pictures from "audiophile" (read High End Audio priced) HDMI cables ... Nothing new ...

 

[Dialectic]

I use a legacy 32-bit processor in my music playback system. It sounds better than a 64-bit processor because 32-bits is closer to the bit depth of my music.

 

[Sal1950]

I swear only the audio hobby brings out such hocus pocus into otherwise logical-thinking people.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

I use a legacy 32-bit processor in my music playback system. It sounds better than a 64-bit processor because 32-bits is closer to the bit depth of my music.

Hey, if that sounds better to you, then go for it. But, color me skeptical or worse, an outright disbeliever, unless there is some data supporting the notion under controlled DBT conditions. Good luck finding that. I will be astounded.

I don't think the logic of your position proves anything at all, given something more than a superficial understanding of how computers work. My music is all 16- or 24-bit, so do I want an exclusively 24-bit playback path including the computer OS? Sorry, I don't think so, and it would be slow as molasses, laughably so. Plunking 24-bit data into a 64-bit register, then playing that back via a 32-bit DAC with digital volume control is just a total non-problem these days.

 

[dc655321]

Hey, if that sounds better to you, then go for it. But, color me skeptical or worse, an outright disbeliever, unless there is some data supporting the notion under controlled DBT conditions. Good luck finding that. I will be astounded.

I don't think the logic of your position proves anything at all, given something more than a superficial understanding of how computers work. My music is all 16- or 24-bit, so do I want an exclusively 24-bit playback path including the computer OS? Sorry, I don't think so, and it would be slow as molasses, laughably so. Plunking 24-bit data into a 64-bit register, then playing that back via a 32-bit DAC with digital volume control is just a total non-problem these days.

Or, maybe @soundArgument was just joking?

 

[Wombat]

Or, maybe @soundArgument was just joking?

That is why we have ' '.

 

[Wombat]

I thought I had a reasonably solid, no-BS record in these parts, and suddenly, some users here think I'm getting stoned with [a well-known audio gear reviewer who writes and behaves as though he gets stoned a lot] and listening to a Schiit DAC fed by a 386.

Maybe that no BS record gave some reason to question?

 

[Ron Texas]

Digital cables made from pure silver will protect your system from werewolves, LOL.

 

[darmanastartes]

I notice less EMI noise with C-States turned off.

 

[Veri]

I notice less EMI noise with C-States turned off.

C-States making a difference is imo a myth. I don't buy it.

 

[restorer-john]

listening to a Schiit DAC fed by a 386

Based on the schiit test results we've gotten used to, the '386 won't be the limiting factor...

 

[bennetng]

I ran the C-States on vs off tests several times and found no difference apart from CPU idle temperature and power consumption. Disabling C-States does not cost nothing, it wastes energy and generates heat, and shortens battery life for laptops. I was testing an internal PCIE soundcard so theoretically the test should be very sensitive to EMI.

If there is any significant difference then either the DAC or the computer motherboard is outdated or poorly designed, it's not something to be happy about.

Archimago even ran some Prime95 + Furmark torture tests to stress the SMSL iDEA and measured no difference.
http://archimago.blogspot.com/2017/05/measurements-smsl-idea-usb-dac.html

 

[derp1n]

FAT sounds best? Maybe, but I prefer the accurate frequency response of NTFS.

What you really should be worrying about is whether your memcpy is audiophile quality or your memory allocator is sucking the life out of your music.

 

[Veri]

I ran the C-States on vs off tests several times and found no difference apart from CPU idle temperature and power consumption. Disabling C-States does not cost nothing, it wastes energy and generates heat, and shortens battery life for laptops

Thank you very much for confirming this for me. Considering current processors are so damn advanced it bothers me that someone would think that simply forcing them to disable smart C-states will change anything. I've seen people mention better frame rates too which is just as impossible, your processor will go to whatever state is necessary for your workload, it does not change anything but waste tons of energy when idle!