I find the discussion with the jplay developer at hydrogen audio interesting. As always (in my experience too) no evidence for the claims was presented when asked for some.
Jplay - just another scam? - Hydrogenaudio Forums
Jplay - just another scam? - Hydrogenaudio Forums
I tried Jplay but I don't recall Hibernate mode? I suppose I'll have to reinstall it.
How do we know the player doesn't change the pitch or add reverb, tricking customers?
I'm trying cMP cPlay now thanks. It seems to have SoX and SRC and pretty pictures too!
Still not quite sure why either of these should sound better than Kernel Streaming out of Foobar, WinAmp, Internet Explorer, a toaster... etc.
How do we know the player doesn't change the pitch or add reverb, tricking customers?
I'm trying cMP cPlay now thanks. It seems to have SoX and SRC and pretty pictures too!
Still not quite sure why either of these should sound better than Kernel Streaming out of Foobar, WinAmp, Internet Explorer, a toaster... etc.
It surprised me a bit Erin, but then I haven't really had any hands-on experience with computer audio. The real point was to listen to a pair of open baffle speakers and the turntable, so it was all new to me. It seems computer-based systems have become a perfectly valid way of listening to music at home and are probably the best in terms of the cost/ performance ratio. Change the pitch or add reverb n1cky? Why on earth would anyone want that- and more to the point why would you suggest it? Strange comment. Anyway, it doesn't. With the system I was listening to any such (unlikely) manipulations would have been glaringly obvious.
Yes indeed, this raises serious questions about this piece of software.
cPlay on the other hand does provide a great deal of information, and also provides jitter measurements to back up the claims of better sound quality.
Of course I don't know if the measurements provided really are correct, but at least some evidence is given. cMP² | CMP / 03Jitter
Unfortunately the measurements are not compared against different "presumably suboptimal" cplay setup or different "presumably worse sounding" player, all performed on the same hardware to keep the other conditions identical. Then the measurement would back up the better sound claim.
That is why a single chart does not back up better sound quality - better is comparative, "better than something else". E.g. comparing to charts of foobar on stock winXP (i.e. no cmp modifications) on the same HW.
Last edited:
My interpretation of the cPlay website is not that the author claims that it is "better" but offers the software and OS optimisations as a method of obtaining a transport of a certain implied quality, which (from the website) "yields an overall Jpp RSS of 51 ps." It would be up to the individual to determine if the assertion stacks up sonically.
Mmm don't know if I'm doing the right thing posting in this thread, but just wanted to endorse jplay and it's sound quality. So much so I actually paid for it. Why am I doubtful about posting? Well I'm not particularly interested in arguments and doing experiments to satisfy one poster who already has their mind made up 
!
Don't forget pureplayer - the thread for that is here too.
! Don't forget pureplayer - the thread for that is here too.
This is the blurb from jplay themselves :
JPLAY: beginner’s guide | JPLAY - hi-end audio player for Windows
JPLAY: beginner’s guide | JPLAY - hi-end audio player for Windows
Thanks for the link. I can see closing down a lot of processes being beneficial, especially if you use the analog out of your computer (I don't). Buffer under-runs cause skips and pops no matter what the stream.
Other than no interruptions in the stream, I don't see an advantage when using the same hardware and a digital output. Still wonder what the difference is.
Analog out of the computer?
Other than no interruptions in the stream, I don't see an advantage when using the same hardware and a digital output. Still wonder what the difference is.
@n1cky: Fair enough, but really, there were no such effects I could detect. I must emphasise though that I haven't heard other alternatives to J-Play- it just sounded very good in the context of a very good system. My host had tried other options on his computer and preferred J-Play- which was why he was using it of course.
@Woodturner-Fran: Interesting that you're using the JKDAC32 too. This seems to be getting some very favourable reactions on various forums.
@Woodturner-Fran: Interesting that you're using the JKDAC32 too. This seems to be getting some very favourable reactions on various forums.
Last edited:
Exactly same feeling I got when compared jriver & foobar vs jplay. It was also confirmed by more than 10 people on our local audio forum.
As for cplay, never test it myself but lot of people says good things about it so it must be good. But to achieve that quality the OS must be optimized (read: mutilated) a lot so it will not be useful for other purpose anymore and not everyone have neither knowledge or guts to do such modification on their system or they still need their machine for other purpose. This is where IMHO jplay came into play, good output without too much fuss.
Frankly, if the great & free Pureplayer can be integrated with more advanced music library system like jriver or foobar, I will use it. Until then I'll stick with foobar + jplay combination and throw the rants in Hydrogen Audio to the bin.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.