By the way an audiophile is not into recording per se, they are into the playing back of already recorded music. Its not money that makes an audiophile its the concern of getting gear that will sound the best with the resources they have. 

John
By the way an audiophile is not into recording per se, they are into the playing back of already recorded music. Its not money that makes an audiophile its the concern of getting gear that will sound the best with the resources they have. 

I would say that many audiophiles couldn't care less about "audio" - by which I mean a real thing in the real world. Because if you don't care about differentiating between real stuff and idiotic BS you don't care about "audio" - by which I mean a real thing in the real world. For those people it's about gear or pretension or whatever, not audio - by which I mean a real thing in the real world.
 
 
Anyway, there is no way of "improving" audio quality by removing or optimizing drivers or whatever because it's already bit perfect until the point at which you get dropouts. Optimizing a DAW for low latency so that we avoid dropouts is different than "improving" audio quality.
 
That's complete and utter nonsense - the number of tasks and task switching has zero effect on jitter. It's an attempt to exploit people who lack a technical understanding of how computer audio works by making claims that might sound plausible to those people but are complete nonsense. 

drewfx1

John
By the way an audiophile is not into recording per se, they are into the playing back of already recorded music. Its not money that makes an audiophile its the concern of getting gear that will sound the best with the resources they have. 

I would say that many audiophiles couldn't care less about "audio" - by which I mean a real thing in the real world. Because if you don't care about differentiating between real stuff and idiotic BS you don't care about "audio" - by which I mean a real thing in the real world. For those people it's about gear or pretension or whatever, not audio - by which I mean a real thing in the real world.
 

I don't know whom you are talking about but they are not audiophiles. Sound is everything to an audiophile. They are the ones that build their own speakers and amps. It isn't how much one spends on gear its how much one cares about the music. They are not the ones that buy Monster cables. They know better. Believe me when I say this, its not audiophiles that a HI FI store wants to see come into their store. Its those that will buy any hype if a label of "audiophile" is placed on it. They love those shoppers. 

JohnI don't know whom you are talking about but they are not audiophiles. Sound is everything to an audiophile. They are the ones that build their own speakers and amps.

What audible problems are they trying to solve by building their own? And how do they evaluate that they've improved things when they are done?

In many cases the same way you would by listening. 

Attempting to get this thread back on course....
 
My question had nothing to do with AUDIO QUALITY, but with APPLICATION (DAW) PERFORMANCE and RELIABILITY.
Seems logical to me that the less unrelated tasks the CPU is performing, the better the application will perform.
 
I was hoping that someone had experience or knowledge, even second hand, of whether AO works with a DAW, as opposed to simple streaming applications, or if it shuts down services required for DAW functionality.

rd2rk
Attempting to get this thread back on course....
 
My question had nothing to do with AUDIO QUALITY, but with APPLICATION (DAW) PERFORMANCE and RELIABILITY.
Seems logical to me that the less unrelated tasks the CPU is performing, the better the application will perform.
 
I was hoping that someone had experience or knowledge, even second hand, of whether AO works with a DAW, as opposed to simple streaming applications, or if it shuts down services required for DAW functionality.

If you don't have drop outs at a desired latency and workload, there is nothing to "improve". OTOH, removing unnecessary processes does leave more resources available for potential DAW related tasks.
 
But since AO is completely BS when it comes to its supposed purpose in life, why would you even want to go there?

Drewfx1 - 
 
You obviously have nothing to contribute to this discussion but ignorant vitriol, so please, STFU.
Thank you.

A quick glance at the website and the opening page of their linked 62 page pdf has my woo, magical thinking, sales spiel and bs detectors well into the yellow and heading for the red.

A SinglePC setup is not as good in terms of audio quality as a DualPC one linked via TVP/IP apparently. Who knew? And they emphasise you must only do what they tell you and only use the software and settings they tell you to use. If you do you get "analogue like sound" apparently. Which I can only assume means they process the binary data to add in some distortion, a bit of background noise, a phasing issue or two and for all I know or care real genuine emulated wow, flutter and vinyl scratches.

I couldn't be bothered to see if any DAWs are on their list of approved software. Digital audio is complicated in many ways, but very simple in one way. If the 1s and 0s are streaming nicely and without interruption from the disk to the driver's buffer en-route to the DAC chip nothing at all done in the computer will improve the quality of those 1s and 0s. They are fine just as they are. And even a by current standards ancient PC or Mac can play back stereo or 5.1 surround audio without a problem.

The only real-world problem in the computer is crackles and drop-outs caused by too low a buffer for the OS/hardware to handle. Which is usually cured by running latencymon to see what it finds, checking power settings and cpu sleep states/core parking and if necessary considering hardware upgrades. And dropouts are something that affects people like us who need as close to real-time computing as possible to create, mix and produce audio, not the people the product is aimed at who play stereo or surround files.

I will say one thing though, this is the first time I've seen it suggested that you can improve the audio quality of a media player by loading an alternative shell instead of Windows. Must be serious stuff then.

Applying a bunch of "audiophile tweaks" to the operating system is about as necessary as using silver mains cables to reduce the smearing in the treble and improve bass timing. Or is it to improve the depth of the mid range? No, sorry, I remember now.

It's to improve the bank balance of people who sell solid silver mains cables, and serves no other purpose at all.

rd2rk
Drewfx1 - 
 
You obviously have nothing to contribute to this discussion but ignorant vitriol, so please, STFU.
Thank you.

Sorry, but no, I won't allow lies intended to take advantage of others to be discussed seriously and unchallenged. 
 
You and everyone else are of course allowed to believe whatever you want. But you shouldn't expect your opinions to go unchallenged just because you don't like it.