XXHighEnd - Ever Heard of it?

[DaveK]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Folks,
Just lifted this off the Amarra posting 'cos it doesn't seem to be getting the response I expected, so listed under it's own heading.


"Quote:
Originally Posted by fungke
Hi Everyone,

Just been reading this thread on Computer Audiophile over the weekend. Has anybody come across this software, or indeed heard it in action?

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Amarra

Seems fairly expensive. $1500 for just for a piece of software

Forgive me for being sceptical but I think some might be mistaking better for different. Anyway, be interesting to hear your thoughts."

Hi Y'all,
Hope this is not too far off topic but reading further about Amara led me to a PC bit-perfect (claimed) playback system called XXHighEnd.

http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=112.0

Has anyone heard of it/ tried it (demo mode freely available)/any opinions on it.
Sounds good to me but what's that worth on this forum ??
Cheers,

[lovejoy]

I tried XXHighEnd back at the start of the year.

Without doubt, the most poorly designed piece of software I have ever used. The user interface is a complete mess, it only supports a very small amount of audio formats, there are no library functions, no playlist abilities, no audio conversion routines, oh and each song has to be completely read into memory before it will play, so it's not exactly gapless playback. It is merely a file player.

Supposedly, the guy has put all of his efforts into what he thinks is the best playback you can get from a computer, but having compared it with Foobar at the time, I couldn't tell even the slightest difference, so considering the how bad and basic the interface was and the fact that it was paid for software, it got deleted within hours.

0 out of 10 I'm afraid.

[DaveK]

Hi Rich,
Thanks for that - brief and to the point - if you don't rate it I don't think I'll risk downloading it - I have enough detritus on my PC already !
Cheers,

[PeterSt]

Hi there,

I hope it is allowed to jump in here, but I coincidentally ran into this and can't resist saying something about your observations. I'm fine with whatever is said, but please don't make it a 100% wrong. So, allow me :

(and please forgive me my sarcasm, at thinking something is really wrong here; just making fun a bit, no accusements !!)

The user interface is a complete mess

I'll let you have that one, because the GUI is just temporary, and any remark about that is justified IMO. A complete mess is another thing though, and or indeed this is so, or somehow you may have problems I can't guess. But we'll stick to the complete mess for now. You win. See below too.

each song has to be completely read into memory before it will play, so it's not exactly gapless playback.

which is defined by ... your standards about this ?
Even if you coincidentally downloaded the oldest version instead of the newest, all is as gapless as can be, but may you notice a click anywhere in between, please met me know so I can repair that.
I don't see the sense in just shouting this, the most obvious without a single attempt to try.
But maybe it is so outrageously beyond what you think is possible, that you now may think at least this is any good.
Btw, please keep in mind that a "memory player" is for better SQ, and not because it was more easy to create or anything.

it only supports a very small amount of audio formats

Of course, always measure the quality of a player by its number of supported audio formats. Funny thing is, that it just supports what everybody asks for, so the only reason to not support (e.g.) ape is ... because nobody wants it.
You can check it out; nothing asked for wasn't made. Nothing.
May you want to look for a specific format and whether it was asked for, do a search in the forum over there. It's not difficult.
If you have a pile of whatever it is, go ahead and ask me to do it. But not here, not now. The atmosphere might be wrong today.

In the mean time I challenge you to find a player that supports more in the area of 8/22050 up to 32/352.8. Might you find one with an equal amount, then start comparing the real merits of it (like how to play 24/96 on a 18/96 DAC). Please let me know.

there are no library functions

Yeah, well, it possibly depends on how super messy that interface is, but I'd say that a tab out of 6 labelled "Library" hardly can be missed. Funny ...

no playlist abilities

We do talk about the same player, right ?
XXHighEnd opens with the Playlist tab on front and there's no way to miss it.
May you mean "saved playlists", well, there's a rather large combo on the main screen labelled like that. This is oldfashioned stuff though, and the real thing is happening in the "Galleries" which everybody raves about. Of course to ever get there you first have to find that Library tab, because it is there were all begins (IIRC it is the second tab, just start counting from the left ).

no audio conversion routines

Hmm ... maybe things fell of your screen then ? never heard of such a thing, but maybe it can be.
Well, despite you missed them, what to want that for anyway.
Might you want to retry at some time, don't forget there's something like rightclick on things, and it might bring you some more options. You'll never know !

0 out of 10 I'm afraid

Hey, you must have a rather official means of rating in here. Cool.
This time, allow me to rate you, and state that somehow you missed 10 out of 10. Yep, I include that messy user interface, because by now I just refuse to see that you ever touched the player. Maybe you have a good explanation yourself ?

brief and to the point

Brief allright, but not much to the point I' afraid.


Ok, in order to avoid getting banned after such a first post, I'll be serious now. And hope you're not offended. As said, just made some fun.

The GUI is just nothing allright, but also it never got much attention which I keep till the end (please remember, the player is still in beta). Besides that, I'm not even allowed to change much on the user interface, because people think/know/expect that SQ will change because of it.
In the end this by itself is avoided to let the player run in "Unattended mode" which means no GUI is there at all, the sound engine being there just on its own (but with control via remote control commands).

Anyway I am not here to advertise my player, and only jumped in because too many things being wrong in that post. But while I'm here anyway, please note that this project is about sound quality only. If you don't hear a difference with e.g. Foobar, fine, and don't think you will want this player for other reasons than SQ. So, skip it; no problem. However, notice that you can't do and judge this in an hour or so, because quite some settings are in there which will improve sound in your situation, and it is not easy to try them all in the first place. An advice would be to stay away from the Q2/Q3/Q4/Q5 sliders, but use the other stuff (incl. Q1) to your conveniency.
Always keep in mind that no matter what setting (but leave Double etc. unticked) this is bit perfect and you need Vista to have that.

If you really don't hear a difference, slide up Q2 and Q3 all the way. But do that as a last resort (say, just before you delete XXHighEnd from disk again ).

Below links guide you to some pictures (scroll down all the way at the first link), possibly indicating that you looked at quite another player before. I don't know.

http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=833.0
http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=847.15

Well, thanks, and sorry for the sarcasm.
Regards,
Peter

[DaveK]

Hi PeterSt.
Can I be the first to welcome you to the forum, afterall I am probably responsible for causing you to join us. New members are very welcome and someone usually asks them to post an introduction in the 'Welcome' area - this time it looks as though I am the first to do so. Ideally your introduction should provide details of your background in hi-fi, (authorship of XXHighEnd) and other relevant information, the sort of equipment you use to listen to your music, and the sort of music that you like listening to. If you could also post some pics (we really like pics !!) of your set up in the 'Gallery' area that would be particularly welcome.
Hope you stay around and enjoy contributing to this very friendly, knowledgeable and helpful place.

[lovejoy]

Yep, I include that messy user interface, because by now I just refuse to see that you ever touched the player. Maybe you have a good explanation yourself ?

Good reasoned argument there then. Calling someone a liar on your first post is sure to win you new friends here too.

This is the typical reply of the sort of posts you get on other, less friendly forums. Please keep your sarcasm away from this one. If you are, as you appear, a developer of XXHighEnd then you should treat these forums as a place to offer customer service. You don't win customers by pissing them off and ridiculing them.

Dave asked for opinions of people's experiences with XXHighEnd, and having tried it for myself, I offered mine. I may have missed a few features and made a couple of errors in my evaluation, for which I apologise, but my overall viewpoint stands, that it is not commercial standard software, and is some way off it at present.

[Mike]

Ok, in order to avoid getting banned after such a first post, I'll be serious now. And hope you're not offended. As said, just made some fun.

Very unlikely to happen, Peter.

[Jason P]

Good reasoned argument there then. Calling someone a liar on your first post is sure to win you new friends here too.

This is the typical reply of the sort of posts you get on other, less friendly forums. Please keep your sarcasm away from this one. If you are, as you appear, a developer of XXHighEnd then you should treat these forums as a place to offer customer service. You don't win customers by pissing them off and ridiculing them.

Dave asked for opinions of people's experiences with XXHighEnd, and having tried it for myself, I offered mine. I may have missed a few features and made a couple of errors in my evaluation, for which I apologise, but my overall viewpoint stands, that it is not commercial standard software, and is some way off it at present.

I think our friend Peter's native tongue isn't English, and as is so often the case in communicating via the web some of the nuance has been 'lost in translation' - I took his reply to be a good natured swipe at your scathing criticism of something he's obviously worked hard to produce!!

Kudos for coming here Peter, and answering the points raised. It's only through that feedback from customer and developer alike that products mature. I'll certainly be having a look at it whan I need a player.

Jason

[Mike]

I think our friend Peter's native tongue isn't English, and as is so often the case in communicating via the web some of the nuance has been 'lost in translation' - I took his reply to be a good natured swipe at your scathing criticism of something he's obviously worked hard to produce!!

Kudos for coming here Peter, and answering the points raised. It's only through that feedback from customer and developer alike that products mature. I'll certainly be having a look at it whan I need a player.

Jason

I'll second that!

[lovejoy]

Sorry, but if I'd been talked to like that in a shop (and I get served by plenty of people these days whose first language is not English) then I'd have walked out and probably complained to the management.

Why should standards be any lower just because people can hide behind computers?