# Lilith Audio Player



## Enthusia

Most of you use foobar 2000 with either the asio or kernel streaming configuration, at least I hope you all do. But I've recently found a new player recommended by a fellow audiophile. It is called Lilith and it is made by the Japanese software developers project9k. I'd even say this audio player ranks high up there with the famous foobar2000.

 Here is the guide. It's for X-fi users, but its basically the same set-up if you have a different sound card.

ASIO Native Soundcard(X-Fi) with Lilith Music Software - Overclock.net - Overclocking.net

 Use this link to download Lilith
Translated version of http://www.project9k.jp/

 (Update) 9/23/2011 
   
  Tomoyo found the english version of Lilith
   
  Use this link to download the latest 32bit edition http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2011-09-15_x86.7z


----------



## TopPop

Buggy follow-up link... sends me to an error page, and then straight to Ebay...


----------



## Enthusia

Not sure how that happened, try clicking it again.


----------



## TopPop

Still no go.

 I click on the link on the first page that says "download Lilith here", and get an error page with the message, "Sorry, the file you requested is not available."


----------



## TopPop

At least no redirect to Ebay this time, though!


----------



## Enthusia

Oh you were talking about the link inside the guide, here is the good one.

Translated version of http://www.project9k.jp/


----------



## nor_spoon

Thank you for the info. I am going to check it out.


----------



## nor_spoon

Yeah, it is a no-go for me as well...

 [EDIT] I got it now, following the download image. Thanks. [/EDIT]


----------



## Al4x

i still use wmp 11, tried the rest, not very nice layout compared to wmp11


----------



## Enthusia

If your looking for aesthetics... I don't think this is the right place for you. It's all about sound quality. But the foobar is highly customizable, there are tons of guides out there to make it look better than wmp 11. For people who want only the best, then definitely try Lilith.


----------



## nor_spoon

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Enthusia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If your looking for aesthetics... I don't think this is the right place for you. It's all about sound quality. But the foobar is highly customizable, there are tons of guides out there to make it look better than wmp 11. For people who want only the best, then definitely try Lilith._

 

One thing is the asthetics, another problem is that I have to learn Japanese to use it. The context menu is filled with Japanese...


----------



## Enthusia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nor_spoon* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_One thing is the asthetics, another problem is that I have to learn Japanese to use it. The context menu is filled with Japanese..._

 

That is why I included a picture guide, just follow the steps.


----------



## nor_spoon

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Enthusia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That is why I included a picture guide, just follow the steps._

 

Ah, sorry, did not notice that... I will look into it.


----------



## gyrodec

Why is this player going to sound better than WinAmp or MediaMonkey, let alone Foobar? What technical advancement have they come up with?


----------



## Enthusia

Its made by Japanese people and the people who have listened to it, like it better than foobar.


----------



## royalcrown

There's no way to get better sound than ASIO or kernel streaming with foobar/winamp/whatever, if by "better" you mean more faithful to the source. If you're looking for tone, just get an EQ and add all of the coloration you want.


----------



## gyrodec

Enthusia, I wasn't looking for a trite statement that they think it sounds better, I wanted to know why their code is special. What majic code discovery did they make so that their player does sound better than foobar or others (if it does, which we have little evidence on either way).


----------



## TopPop

I can't read anything when I try to install it... so I didn't...


----------



## nor_spoon

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TopPop* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't read anything when I try to install it... so I didn't...




_

 

There is a link to a how-to in the first post. I do not see any benefits with this player, so foobar is still my choice.


----------



## jinp6301

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Enthusia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Its made by Japanese people and the people who have listened to it, like it better than foobar._

 

HAHAHAHHAHAHHAHA


----------



## Enthusia

Come on man, its JAPANESE! But seriously speaking I am not trying to be trite at all, I think this player sounds better than foobar2000. It is my opinion and I just want others to download Lilith and to see if they prefer it over foobar2000. All I can say is, just download and try it, takes like 2 seconds.


----------



## b0dhi

I just want yuo to send me some moneys. According to my calulcatians, the more money I have the better. Therefore, in my opinion, you should send me some. Come on, just takes 2 seconds! 

 You know what else takes 2 seconds? Placebo.


----------



## Enthusia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *b0dhi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just want yuo to send me some moneys. According to my calulcatians, the more money I have the better. Therefore, in my opinion, you should send me some. Come on, just takes 2 seconds! 

 You know what else takes 2 seconds? Placebo._

 

Okay, can you please stop. I am trying to actually share something useful I found, not beg for money. If you don't have anything useful to say then don't say it. There is a link to download an audio player, that's it, try it or not, just don't act dumb.


----------



## AudioPhewl

I can't try it, as I don't use Windows. I run Linux, and find Amarok takes care of all my needs.

 In exactly the same way as decoding a .doc file gives you a visible document, there is only one way to correctly decode a digitally-stored music file. Why would "Lilith" be better than any other program?

 If it is streaming accurate audio, then it should be identical, should it not?

 ~Phewl.


----------



## Enthusia

Not exactly my friend, just like with different text files requires different text readers, such as adobe reader and microsoft word. Not all software programs are the same and that is why different people or groups create programs that seem like they are the same, but actually one works better than the other. That is what I am trying to say with Lilith and foobar2000, but it is based on my opinion, so if you can't test it out yourself, well that is too bad then. Although linux is a great operating system it does lack alot of programs that windows has. This isn't a thread for arguing, just try it out the software for those of you who can, if you like it then keep using it, if you don't then go back to the regular audio player you've been using, it is as simple as that.


----------



## V1P

Just Foobar ( Sometimes old version - 0.8.3 because it have *soft* sound than 0.9.* ) + ASIO.


----------



## AudioPhewl

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Enthusia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Not exactly my friend, just like with different text files requires different text readers, such as adobe reader and microsoft word. Not all software programs are the same and that is why different people or groups create programs that seem like they are the same, but actually one works better than the other._

 

No. Microsoft Word will decode Microsoft Word files how they are meant to be. Other programs may do it in a similar fashion - even exactly how MS Word does it. But they cannot do it better, because there is only a certain amount of information and detail in there.

 A program cannot add information. If it does, then it is not accurately rendering the information available to it.

  Quote:


 Although linux is a great operating system it does lack alot of programs that windows has. 
 

That has nothing to do with this conversation?

  Quote:


 This isn't a thread for arguing 
 

Very true. So, how about being factual and telling us exactly how it sounds better? 100 bytes is 100 bytes. Anything that decodes the 100 bytes accurately and renders audio will give the same output time after time...

 ~Phewl.


----------



## Enthusia

You absolutely have no idea what your talking about do you, programs get updated everyday meaning they get better and better, a program doesn't have to add information to be better, it can use less memory, it can be coded to work faster than that other program. You want to know why I think Lilith is a superior program, well when I listen to music with it, I feel more immersed, it is as though the sound is more realistic more detailed. It brings me more joy listening to Lilith than any other player. Like I said before this is my *opinion*, please read the messages before. People just don't get it do they. Let me say this again this thread isn't about arguing, use the player, post your opinion on it, don't question why it's better because obviously I would use my opinion in describing it.


----------



## Chri5peed

I use foobar V0.9.2.


 Won't ever upgrade, it works exactly how I want it to.

 Getting a new PC w/Vista might force me. Does V0.9.2 work on Vista?



 Edit - The only reason I see to upgrade, is it being slow. Which it is not.

 Besides wouldn't more RAM and a faster CPU/s inherently make any program faster?


----------



## AudioPhewl

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Enthusia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You absolutely have no idea what your talking about do you_

 

Cheers for that. You've made an excellent argument as to why this program is better than anything else, congratulations. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


 , programs get updated everyday meaning they get better and better, a program doesn't have to add information to be better, it can use less memory, it can be coded to work faster than that other program. 
 

Faster decoding or using less memory is an obvious improvement. But it'll make no difference what-so-ever to the sound produced.

  Quote:


 You want to know why I think Lilith is a superior program, well when I listen to music with it, I feel more immersed, it is as though the sound is more realistic more detailed. It brings me more joy listening to Lilith than any other player. Like I said before this is my *opinion*, please read the messages before. People just don't get it do they. Let me say this again this thread isn't about arguing, use the player, post your opinion on it, don't question why it's better because obviously I would use my opinion in describing it. 
 

Well, let's try this.

  Quote:


 <Font size="10"><Font face="Verdana"><b>Hello. I am a digital representation of some text, stored in a file.</b></Font> 
 

The above digital file will, if correctly decoded, write a text string on the screen, with a font size of 10, using the font "Verdana", in bold.

 How the heck can you improve on that? So long as the file is being read correctly, and rendered how it should, how can it be improved upon? Don't start with such nonsense as anti-aliasing or font colours - the file is very specific as to what needs to be done to render the text as it was intended to be...

 Simple answer - it can't be done.

 ~Phewl.


----------



## Enthusia

Your so off topic and I've already proven to you how a program can be better than another program at doing the same thing, I think everybody can agree with me. Also your taking things wait out of hand here, and we definitely need to jump back on topic. It is to share your opinion on the player, which you can't use. So I suggest you go over your friends house and try it and then come back and post again.

 Also quoting everything I say does not make it wrong.


----------



## royalcrown

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Enthusia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Like I said before this is my *opinion*, please read the messages before._

 

No, that's stupid. I don't feel like going over this in detail, because I've already elaborated in depth about how prefacing claims with "it's my opinion" doesn't change the fact that what you're saying is NOT an opinion.

 If I say "The sky is green... that's my opinion," then I have not made an opinion even if I said that I just did. I made a claim, a claim that is either true or false.

 You've made a claim, not a truth, that the audio quality is better in Lilith than in Foobar. Note, this may have been an opinion, had you not actually said that it _sounds_ better, because by using that in reference to two programs that are, with regards to audio quality, equal, you're setting up a verifiable claim (is Lilith better at decoding the audio than foobar or not).

 Finally, just because people update programs does not mean they're making it sound better. It's most often fixing bugs and updating the user interface, sometimes it's optimizing and compacting code, etc. etc. There are several reasons for updating, but it's 100% of the time NOT to make something "sound better" (unless there was some massive defect in the audio decoding aspect, which would violate decoding standards... despite that, I've never seen it happen in practice).


----------



## AudioPhewl

I was quoting it so I could respond to particular points. This is why there were multiple quotes in each post.

 You have consecutively failed to explain why, or how, it sounds better. Nobody will try and argue that reduced memory overheads or faster decoding aren't improvements - they blatantly are. But you are totally failing to explain how this program sounds better.

 ~Phewl.


----------



## Enthusia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *royalcrown* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, that's stupid. I don't feel like going over this in detail, because I've already elaborated in depth about how prefacing claims with "it's my opinion" doesn't change the fact that what you're saying is NOT an opinion.

 If I say "The sky is green... that's my opinion," then I have not made an opinion even if I said that I just did. I made a claim, a claim that is either true or false.

 You've made a claim, not a truth, that the audio quality is better in Lilith than in Foobar. Note, this may have been an opinion, had you not actually said that it sounds better, because by using that in reference to two programs that are, with regards to audio quality, equal, you're setting up a verifiable claim (is Lilith better at decoding the audio than foobar or not).

 Finally, just because people update programs does not mean they're making it sound better. It's most often fixing bugs and updating the user interface, sometimes it's optimizing and compacting code, etc. etc. There are several reasons for updating, but it's 100% of the time NOT to make something "sound better" (unless there was some massive defect in the audio decoding aspect, which would violate decoding standards... despite that, I've never seen it happen in practice)._

 

Woah woah woah, calm down there. I never said that updating a program will always sound better, I said updating a program would make it better, so stop putting words in my mouth. 

  Quote:


 You have consecutively failed to explain why, or how, it sounds better. Nobody will try and argue that reduced memory overheads or faster decoding aren't improvements - they blatantly are. But you are totally failing to explain how this program sounds better. 
 

As for me failing in explaining how the Lilith is superior than the Foobar2000, well the only reason I can give is that you haven't tried it yet. Other than that there's really not much more to say.


----------



## nor_spoon

Come on guys. If he thinks it sounds better what is the problem with that? This is just one guys opinion. I do not see why he have to explain what makes it sound better to him. 
 I always welcome new software to try out, and are thankful to the OP for sharing, but I am not sure if I want to recommend something on this board if I get bashed because a small detail in how I write my post...


----------



## Enthusia

Thanks nor_spoon, now I will try to keep the programs I like to myself, it seems as though people don't like it when someones shares their opinion. I guess I might be violating their space? Although this is my thread.


----------



## AudioPhewl

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nor_spoon* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I do not see why he have to explain what makes it sound better to him._

 

Because he came on here trying to tell the world that it was better. If I were to say to you that I think bitter tastes better than lager, then it'd be pretty pointless trying to push that argument without me listing what makes it better to my tastes. If I were to try and tell the world that I thought Toyo tyres were better than a Michelin, nobody would take me seriously unless I could make comment on how they handle in the wet, how they compare in terms of useful tyre life, or how they worked when pushed toward the limit in the dry.

 This thread exists because of a claim made. It is nobody elses fault if the original poster can't produce any supportive evidence to back up his claim.

 Nothing against the guy, nothing at all. But it's not exactly overflowing with anything to support the beliefs he chose to share with a whole forum...

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Enthusia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks nor_spoon, now I will try to keep the programs I like to myself, it seems as though people don't like it when someones shares their opinion. I guess I might be violating their space? Although this is my thread._

 

No need for that, but only praise them where you can back up your claims. It'd be a different story if you preferred the UI or media database function, but to rave about it having better sound quality... you're asking for troubles on an 'audiophile' forum 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




.

 ~Phewl.


----------



## Enthusia

I understand, but when somebody just comes out to you and starts disrespecting your opinion, not calling out any names here, its only instinct that you try to defend yourself. Although I still believe Lilith is an awesome player, causing such a stir over such a small topic is not wise and definitely time consuming. I am just glad all this ended here, we can all keep our *opinions* and still be friends.


----------



## royalcrown

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Enthusia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Woah woah woah, calm down there. I never said that updating a program will always sound better, I said updating a program would make it better, so stop putting words in my mouth. _

 

I was saying that because your original context of "better" was related to sound quality. Either way, that was a tangential point - my main point is that what you're saying is not an *opinion*, but a *claim*. They're two distinct entities. 

 So stop putting opinion in bold!


----------



## LightZY

Well, i don't know how this Lilith Sound Player program works but it sounds better than Foobar2000, to me, at least. However Foobar2000 is good too but i guess i'm sticking to Lilith for the time being. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 On the side note, the sound quality will be improved by updating Lilith.

 Just navigate your way to, C:\Program Files\Project9k\Sound Player Lilith 0.991b and open the "Online Update" file. It takes about 2 updates which is very fast to be fully updated though.


----------



## Enthusia

Nice find LightZY, I didn't even know that myself, I will add it to the main post.


----------



## vegaman

If it does actually sound better than foobar2000, there must be a technical reason for it.

 Either foobar2000 is doing something wrong, or Lilith is using some sort of DSP. Does anyone know which it is?


----------



## indikator

I really wonder here why are you guys attacking OP?
 is Foobar is the ultimate absolute (nothing can be better)?
 what about professional recording player then?

 lets put it this way, why is foobar sounds better than other(winamp, etc)?
 isn't it just ASIO (said by you guys), well just put the same ASIO to the other and they will all sound same right? even foobar writer said foobar is not an improvement in soundwise

 I'm not familiar with multimedia player, but isn't decoding job is done by the codec? so the decoding result quality will depend solely on the codec, isnt it?
 And then it is the player job to manage the decoded file to be send to DAC, and I think this step is what makes difference, it can something like bit-perfect stuff or memory management to ensure the data will be sent on time, something like those

 Unless you guys really understand how the program works and gives results, I don't think you can make such a claim like "this is the best program, nothing surpass it", so the only way is to try the program itself, if you feel it is the same then so be it.....


 and for the Lilith, hmmmm, sounds a bit different than foobar, but just not enough to drag me off from the convenience of foobar


----------



## shigzeo

so is foobar the new ipod? can i add a line out application to or frontend to make the sound better from an amp? i don't particularly like japanese programming so... id rather stick with the one that everyone use. it is silly really to shift to this new better application as i am not a true audiofile and foobar will do me just fine...


----------



## royalcrown

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *indikator* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I really wonder here why are you guys attacking OP?
 is Foobar is the ultimate absolute (nothing can be better)?
 what about professional recording player then?

 lets put it this way, why is foobar sounds better than other(winamp, etc)?
 isn't it just ASIO (said by you guys), well just put the same ASIO to the other and they will all sound same right? even foobar writer said foobar is not an improvement in soundwise_

 

Correct. ASIO is ASIO, whether through foobar2k or winamp. That's it. Foobar doesn't sound better than winamp - it just DOESN'T. That's what the foobar writer is trying to say: the media player does *not* affect the sound in any way unless its defective.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *indikator* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm not familiar with multimedia player, but isn't decoding job is done by the codec? so the decoding result quality will depend solely on the codec, isnt it?_

 

Codecs follow standards- either they decode the file properly, or they do not. It's the SAME decoding algorithm for MP3 regardless of the program.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *indikator* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And then it is the player job to manage the decoded file to be send to DAC, and I think this step is what makes difference, it can something like bit-perfect stuff or memory management to ensure the data will be sent on time, something like those_

 

Correct. You just described how ASIO/kernel streaming works. You act like it's extremely hard to do any of these things.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *indikator* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Unless you guys really understand how the program works and gives results, I don't think you can make such a claim like "this is the best program, nothing surpass it",_

 

It's not hard to understand how audio playback software works - they perform a very simple function. The hard part is making media management libraries, aesthetics, functionality, etc.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *indikator* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_so the only way is to try the program itself, if you feel it is the same then so be it....._

 

That's a horrible suggestion. If you just haphazardly try like that, you'll end up (whether you like it or not, vehemently deny it or not) being subconsciously influenced by the placebo effect, or at least false expectations. Plus there's always the possibility of Lilith just DSP'ing the sound, and you wouldn't even notice that tomfoolery if you just randomly opened up programs and A/B tested it.


----------



## b0dhi

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *royalcrown* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Correct. ASIO is ASIO, whether through foobar2k or winamp. That's it. Foobar doesn't sound better than winamp - it just DOESN'T. That's what the foobar writer is trying to say: the media player does *not* affect the sound in any way unless its defective.


 Codecs follow standards- either they decode the file properly, or they do not. It's the SAME decoding algorithm for MP3 regardless of the program._

 

Well, no. Different players have different decoders, each with different levels of conformance to standards. Some also go beyond standards to provide higher sound quality, such as the case with MAD, which can decode in 24bit or 32bit and dither down to 16bit, which can increase perceived sound quality. See here.

 Although I very much doubt Lilith has any higher sound quality than a properly configured Foobar or Winamp setup, this is because both of those setups would be at the limits of audible quality in terms of MP3 playback.


----------



## Chri5peed

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *royalcrown* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Correct. ASIO is ASIO, whether through foobar2k or winamp. That's it. Foobar doesn't sound better than winamp - it just DOESN'T. That's what the foobar writer is trying to say: the media player does *not* affect the sound in any way unless its defective._

 

Completely true, the only way one could be better than another in SQ is a cack-handed user, but that is not the fault of the player. _Heh, maybe not true!_


 Mind you, what is not in any way subjective is use of plug-ins* and DSPs...I do not know, does using a DSP[I use an EQ & noise sharpening] negate bit-perfection?


 *Like searching for stuff via meta-data tags, like iTunes', do not know its name.


----------



## vegaman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chri5peed* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I do not know, does using a DSP[I use an EQ & noise sharpening] negate bit-perfection?_

 

Well it will no longer be exactly the same as the original file, but it won't stop you getting a bit-perfect output (of the DSP'd sound) to your DAC.


----------



## royalcrown

Yeah, I mentioned usability and aesthetics and stuff as ways to make a player better, but the original claim was that it sounds better, not necessarily that it's more user-friendly. Also, while Lilith could be using DSP, it's hardly better in terms of sound quality in the conventional sense of the word (i.e. as close as possible to the original file, which in most properly designed media players is 100% with ASIO/KS). 

 b0dhi: Fair enough, but I was mainly going for the fact that foobar has compliance with playback decoders AFAIK... hell, it also allows for 16-bit dithering as well. I just don't see how Lilith can go above and beyond this in terms of sound quality, and if it somehow can, if that difference is appreciable/audible/etc.


----------



## LnxPrgr3

Because I'm bored and curious, I took Sheryl Crow's "Lucky Kid" from ALAC, encoded it with LAME 3.98, then decoded it with madplay and mpg123 (representing two very common decoder libraries). I used audacity to line up the waveforms (zoomed in so I could see individual samples) and compute the difference.

 The result? A whopping -89.9dBFS peak. An extra 66dB boost later, I hear mostly noise, but in the background lies a very distorted version of the song.

 Attached is a spectral plot over time, in case anyone's interested.

 So there is a difference, in raw bits output, between two major decoders. Whether this difference is audible is another question


----------



## Enthusia

You actually took the time to do that, amazing. Definitely a great find.


----------



## Chri5peed

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vegaman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well it will no longer be exactly the same as the original file, but it won't stop you getting a bit-perfect output (of the DSP'd sound) to your DAC._

 

I suppose the biggest reason to use ASIO/Kernel-streaming is to bypass the XP Kmixer/resampling rather than being completely bit identical...which it is always going to be doing.

 I like how it operates too. In that it plays music exclusively, i.e. whenever your media-player is musictating every other sound is switched off, but comes back on music stopping.


----------



## Enthusia

Quote:


 I like how it operates too. In that it plays music exclusively, i.e. whenever your media-player is musictating every other sound is switched off, but comes back on music stopping. 
 

I've actually just noticed that 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




! It's a good function depending on the situation, but if I wanted to listen to music and play games then that would be a negative.


----------



## Chri5peed

^ Yeah, I could see that. Looks like switching to Direct Sound for games?


 I first used Kernel-streaming[when I bought my DAC, Nov 2005...a few months after coming on here!] and noticed that feature.

 Blimey, it is exactly how I'd choose it to work, I'd ask Father Christmas to do it!


----------



## XSAlliN

15 hours, different translation tools and this is the result:

Lilith.rar






 One thing's for sure - Babel fish is the worst translator I've tried so far and Google Language Tools worked best for me. Anyway this is not the final version with English translation since Unicode is on the way:

  Quote:


 By the way, I am now developing new version of Lilith.
 It based on Unicode programming.
 So that it can support for multi-lingual translations.
 I will split all strings from programs, and merge into single resource dll file.
 It may help to create translations. 
 






 I almost forget, this is the author's site -= Project9k =- - since the link posted in the fir post is not valid, that was the only place I could download the player. I used the last version from the test section which comes withe an online updater. With that I manage to update some files to last version as is in 2008.

 PS.The Authors of this player is a real nice guy, but he didn't knew that other people from different countries were interested in "Lilith" - that's why there was only a Japanese version. As mentioned above an Unicode version is on the way. And no, I'm not from Japan and English is not my native language, actually I'm from Romania and since I was allowed to translate it, I'm sharing it with others that like/or might like (if they haven't tried it yet) this player.


----------



## uhcmos1

One thing is the asthetics, another problem is that I have to learn Japanese to use it. The context menu is filled with Japanese...


----------



## XSAlliN

I forget the test version iside the last one, sorry for that, here's the UPDATED ONE:

*Lilith Audio Player (project9k)*

*Alternative link (Rapidshare)*









 LE:LE: Uncheck "Using floating-point" from Sound Output, you might need a capable card to use that.


----------



## EnOYiN

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I forget the test version iside the last one, sorry for that, here's the UPDATED ONE:

*Lilith Audio Player (project9k)*_

 

"Sorry, the free service is at full capacity."






 Edit: I got it after all. Took a few times trying.


----------



## Chri5peed

Is this a _Frasier_ Media player?


----------



## Henmyr

I've now tried it. I used the link provided on this page by XSAlliN. 

 I unpacked it, then used the updater and updated to 0.992 (if I did it right by checking the 0.992 and unchecked the 0.991).

 I then followed the guide on the first page on this thread to get asio out.

 When I first played a song, I did indeed hear a difference to my foobar2000 0.9.5.5 ASIO, but I did NOT think it was an improvement however.

 I managed to find the equilzer in Lilith, and saw that it was activated with preset Jass (IIRC). I turned the equilizer off and listened again.

 This time I could not hear a difference between the two players. I might think I hear a difference, but then I listen again and find that both sound the same. I've listened by using the same song at the same place, listening about 3 seconds with one and then the same 3 seconds with the other.

 Conclusion:
 The conclusion of this short listening test, when the EQ of Lilith is turned off, they sound the same to me.


----------



## XSAlliN

*DON'T USE THE UPDATE FEATURE!* It already updated, by trying to update it finds some difference in some files (the translations) and updated those files, turning back to japanese language. By default (my last settings) de Equalizer is OFF and can't use the Jazz preset unless it's on.

 If you want to feel a huge difference, you have to get better hardware, since Foobar2000 is a Top 3 audio player (from his category) and Lilith is slightly better. Don't get me wrong, Lilith is good but not magic, it can't make you 200$ hardware, sound like one that cost 2000$.


----------



## Henmyr

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*DON'T USE THE UPDATE FEATURE!* It already updated, by trying to update it finds some difference in some files (the translations) and updated those files, turning back to japanese language. By default (my last settings) de Equalizer is OFF and can't use the Jazz preset unless it's on._

 

Missed that. 
 I deleted the Lilith directory and unpacked it again. Tried the listeing test again. Still can't hear any difference.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you want to feel a huge difference, you have to get better hardware, since Foobar2000 is a Top 3 audio player (from his category) and Lilith is slightly better. Don't get me wrong, Lilith is good but not magic, it can't make you 200$ hardware, sound like one that cost 2000$. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

k. So if I don't buy better hardware, my comparisons fail.

 I think it should be stated in the first post that: *IF YOU DO NOT HAVE $2000 WORTH OF HARDWARE, DON'T BOTHER WITH THIS PLAYER*. That way I would have known that it's a waste of my time trying this player.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 So, in what way is the sound better when using Lilith? Better bass? More detail?

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------

 I'm all open to sound differences in different players IF it can be explained. What does Lilith do that Foobar2000 doesn't?


----------



## XSAlliN

No, you missed something again. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I was saying that the difference between two good software players (like Foobar2000 and Lilith) can't be huge, only slightly better. If you want a huge difference you'd have to change the hardware. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


 I'm all open to sound differences in different players IF it can be explained. What does Lilith do that Foobar2000 doesn't? 
 

At first sight, they don't use identical filters and also has some extra features. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 With my configurations, I can't hear the difference. Unfortunately, I'm not hardcore Audiophile therefore, I can't explain all differences. Besides a small increase in clarity, some sounds (pipes, electric) sound more intense, they have more effect.

 One more thing, since I've converted to audiophile side I only listen to .wav, .flac files. You might say I've learned to hear the difference and if you can't hear the difference between an .Mp3 with a Bitrate of 128 kbps and a .wav with a Bitrate of 1411 Kbps, don't bother cause would be pretty hard to feel/hear a difference between this players (even WinAmp with default settings might sound the same).


----------



## Henmyr

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, you missed something again. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I was saying that the difference between two good software players (like Foobar2000 and Lilith) can't be huge, only slightly better. If you want a huge difference you'd have to change the hardware. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Yes, I really did miss what you said
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 After listening further, I THINK that I'm starting to hear slight differences (eq off). I will not tell yet what differences I think I hear so that my placebo won't affect others.

 The settings in Lilith seem to be 96/88.2 kHz and 24bit. Would this change the sound?

 EDIT: I'm not certain at all that I really do hear differences. Might be all in my head.


----------



## XSAlliN

Quote:


 All I can say is, just download and try it, takes like *2 seconds.* 
 

By trying some people understand: Install -> Play 2 minutes, hmm -> can't hear the difference -> Uninstall -> Delete...

 ------------

 Just use it for two days and switch back to foobar2000 at the end of the second day, by then you should have some valid opinions based on experience. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 When I tried it I heard the difference in a short time. After using Foobar2000 for years, I got used to those sounds and knew how they were suppose to play, but in the first 30 minutes of Liliths some of them felt different, some voices were slightly clearer, the instruments were more intense. 

 What can I say, if it was worst then foobar or even the same, I wouldn't bother with a player in a foreign language which I don't understand. But since I fought is was worth it, I even spent 15 hours translating it in English (yet I'm from Romania - but don't like my software in Romanian Language). 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 If you missed my first post, I've also talked with the creator of Lilith and he said that there will be a Unicode release (multilanguage) in the near future future (until then you have the translated alternative, just don't use the Online Update tool, or used it but don't update the Lilith.exe).


----------



## uhcmos1

I use foobar V0.9.2.


----------



## exe163

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *uhcmos1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I use foobar V0.9.2._

 

Nobody gives a dam about what you use 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




, comment on Lilith or don't comment at all. I will try this when I get home, I am no audiophile (at least not yet) chances are I probably won't hear any difference.


----------



## vegaman

People still seem to think they can hear a difference between players 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Newcomers, if you like Lilith, then by all means use it. But don't believe these weird ideas that it will magically make your music sound better when you can already play lossless files bit-perfect in another player (is it supplying better bit-perfect data or something? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ).


----------



## Planar_head

I'm plenty happy with my cPlay, but it was a step up from foobar2000, all on stock, not filters, eq, ect.

 Now, what I'm not saying is that it will make a huge difference, but I must say it was a free upgrade that had better dynamics and more tight and controlled bass from a dirt cheap sub. My cheap sub that came with my Monsoons isn't even worth considering next to my Grados, or even cheap bookshelfs, but I noted a much less flubbier and controlled bass, and to me, that was good enough to keep.


----------



## Pushifer

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *exe163* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nobody gives a dam about what you use 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




, comment on Lilith or don't comment at all. I will try this when I get home, I am no audiophile (at least not yet) chances are I probably won't hear any difference._

 

i use foobar, and if you hear differences look for the EQ part.


----------



## Pushifer

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, you missed something again. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I was saying that the difference between two good software players (like Foobar2000 and Lilith) can't be huge, only slightly better. If you want a huge difference you'd have to change the hardware. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






 At first sight, they don't use identical filters and also has some extra features. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 With my configurations, I can't hear the difference. Unfortunately, I'm not hardcore Audiophile therefore, I can't explain all differences. Besides a small increase in clarity, some sounds (pipes, electric) sound more intense, they have more effect.

 One more thing, since I've converted to audiophile side I only listen to .wav, .flac files. You might say I've learned to hear the difference and if you can't hear the difference between an .Mp3 with a Bitrate of 128 kbps and a .wav with a Bitrate of 1411 Kbps, don't bother cause would be pretty hard to feel/hear a difference between this players (even WinAmp with default settings might sound the same)._

 


 You made me laugh, this post was even better than the one where you need 20000000 dollars in the bank to hear the differences. 
 You need to have super powers, and if you don't get it you are so dumb you can distinguish a 128kbps from a wav.

 You are funny sir.


 From the foobar2000 site but you will see lots of posts like this on http://www.hydrogenaudio.org

*Does foobar2000 sound better than other players?

 No. Most of “sound quality differences” people “hear” are placebo effect (at least with real music), as actual differences in produced sound data are below their noise floor (1 or 2 last bits in 16bit samples). foobar2000 has sound processing features such as software resampling or 24bit output on new high-end soundcards, but most of other mainstream players are capable of doing the same by now.
*


----------



## XSAlliN

To bad some people spend thousands of dollars on audio equipment, using DAC, SPDIF or other options that in their opinion improves the sound quality - when all that in your opinion is just Placebo effect. 

 I don't even now, what you're doing on this forum since for you better sound quality is just a Myth. I didn't knew you have to have super powers to distinguish a 128 kbps from a WAV, so guess your are one of those people. 

 In your case, x-fi extreme music/ sennheiser 555 or wasted money since on board sound would do just the same.

 PS.Learn the meaning of some phrases in English, cause you obviously don't understand them.


----------



## Pushifer

you don't get irony....

 I will explain it simple to you. 

 1- You where cocky telling ppl don't notice difference because they can't tell difference from a bad mp3 from a wav.

 2 - You where even sillier telling that you can only notice difference in the players if you have real great stuff.

 3 - Yes, you suffer from placebo effect if you have EQ's off.

 4 - Don't try to rebate the other ppl arguments making up stuff like you did with me. Read my post first and think about what you are saying. 
 Like when you say 

 " To bad some people spend thousands of dollars on audio equipment, using DAC, SPDIF or other options that in their opinion improves the sound quality - when all that in your opinion is just Placebo effect. "

 Of course good equipment makes a difference, the placebo is just your better player .......


----------



## XSAlliN

Quote:


 1- You where cocky telling ppl don't notice difference because they can't tell difference from a bad mp3 from a wav. 
 

*My quote:*

_You might say I've learned to hear the difference and if you can't hear the difference between an .Mp3 with a Bitrate of 128 kbps and a .wav with a Bitrate of 1411 Kbps_

 I was speaking in generally since the majority of people on this planet can't, cause they don't give a damn about sound quality - when it comes to every detail (like lossless formats or compressed ones). Other people have other hobbies, so that doesn't mean their dumb.

  Quote:


 2 - You where even sillier telling that you can only notice difference in the players if you have real great stuff. 
 

This was my quote:

_If you want to feel a huge difference, you have to get better hardware, since Foobar2000 is a Top 3 audio player (from his category) and Lilith is slightly better. Don't get me wrong, Lilith is good but not magic, it can't make you 200$ hardware, sound like one that cost 2000$._

 Like I said above: LEARN ENGLISH! - cause I never said what you stated...

 This was my point with that phrase: 

  Quote:


 I was saying that the difference between two good software players (like Foobar2000 and Lilith) can't be huge, only slightly better. If you want a huge difference you'd have to change the hardware 
 


  Quote:


 4 - Don't try to rebate the other ppl arguments making up stuff like you did with me. Read my post first and think about what you are saying. 
 

You should listen to you own advice, before saying things like this:

_You made me laugh, this post was even better than the one where you need 20000000 dollars in the bank to hear the differences.
 You need to have super powers, and if you don't get it you are so dumb you can distinguish a 128kbps from a wav._


----------



## Henmyr

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vegaman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_People still seem to think they can hear a difference between players 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Newcomers, if you like Lilith, then by all means use it. But don't believe these weird ideas that it will magically make your music sound better when you can already play lossless files bit-perfect in another player (is it supplying better bit-perfect data or something? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )._

 

There is a possibility that there really IS a difference, but if it is, either foobar or lilith is doing something wrong. I really doubt it's foobar which is wrong though.

 EDIT: I REALLY don't want to hear a difference, and especially not think that lilith sounds better, but this is exactly what my placebo is telling me. I think Lilith indeed is doing something it shouldn't do.


----------



## Pushifer

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
You made me laugh, this post was even better than the one where you need 20000000 dollars in the bank to hear the differences.
 You need to have super powers, and if you don't get it you are so dumb you can distinguish a 128kbps from a wav._

 


 Again I'm sorry if you don't get irony.


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 I don't even now, what ....

 PS.Learn the meaning of some phrases in English, cause you obviously don't underestimated them. _

 

And you tell me to learn English ? 

 Man give me a break.

 Like Henmyr said the only possibility is that one of the players is doing something wrong decoding or applying some EQ.


----------



## Enthusia

This thread has been full of arguments lol.


----------



## XSAlliN

I'm new here, but does this forum alow (the moderators) tons of off-topic posts? You started this topic about a player but not even 10% of the people posting here tested it. Most of them talk about all kinds of things except this player and the experience with it._Anyway Jessica Alba is married, so...have you seen the *steering contest...* those phones look like their edited with Photoshop._ - something like that.


----------



## Mikeb

Interesting audio player, wish I knew japanese as I am not sure what each of the buttons do, interestingly in Vista some of the buttons are identified in english when the cursor is placed on the button, but in Xp this doesn't occur. I haven't as yet been able to get 88/96khz upsampling working, also my Lynx soundcard has it's asio missing after the second start of the player and I have to revert to Direct (any thoughts why this should be?). The sound is very good (using direct) if a little different to Foobar which I generally use with the WASAPI plugin (pity this new player hasn't got this feature). With this new player the voices appear to be projected more foreward although it seems to be a little coarser or harder sounding than Foobar, I must stress any differences are relatively minor and all the well known players such as Foobar & XMPlay do a fine job, although I think at present that CPlay is probably the best overall sounding player in my setup.


----------



## XSAlliN

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Mikeb* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Interesting audio player, wish I knew japanese as I am not sure what each of the buttons do, interestingly in Vista some of the buttons are identified in english when the cursor is placed on the button, but in Xp this doesn't occur. I haven't as yet been able to get 88/96khz upsampling working, also my Lynx soundcard has it's asio missing after the second start of the player and I have to revert to Direct (any thoughts why this should be?). The sound is very good (using direct) if a little different to Foobar which I generally use with the WASAPI plugin (pity this new player hasn't got this feature). With this new player the voices appear to be projected more foreward although it seems to be a little coarser or harder sounding than Foobar, I must stress any differences are relatively minor and all the well known players such as Foobar & XMPlay do a fine job, although I think at present that CPlay is probably the best overall sounding player in my setup._

 

Here you go my friend (ENGLISH):

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I forget the test version iside the last one, sorry for that, here's the UPDATED ONE:

*Lilith Audio Player (project9k)*

*Alternative link (Rapidshare)*










 LE:LE: Uncheck "Using floating-point" from Sound Output, you might need a capable card to use that. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_


----------



## TopPop

XSAlliN said: 

 To *[sic]* bad some people spend thousands of dollars on audio equipment, using DAC, SPDIF or other options that in their opinion improves *[sic]* the sound quality - *[sic]* when all that *[sic]* in your opinion *[sic]* is just Placebo effect. 

 I don't even now *[sic]*, *[sic]* what you're doing on this forum since for you better sound quality is just a Myth. I didn't knew *[sic]* you have to have super powers to distinguish a 128 kbps from a WAV, so *[sic]* guess your *[sic]* are one of those people. 

 In your case, x-fi extreme music/ sennheiser 555 or *[sic]* wasted money since on board sound would do just the same.

 PS.*[sic]*Learn the meaning of some phrases in English, cause you obviously don't understand them.



 Dude, if you're going to be low enough to bash somebody's grammar in an internet forum about headphone fidelity... you should probably make sure your own is better than this....


----------



## Enthusia

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *XSAlliN* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm new here, but does this forum alow (the moderators) tons of off-topic posts? You started this topic about a player but not even 10% of the people posting here tested it. Most of them talk about all kinds of things except this player and the experience with it.Anyway Jessica Alba is married, so...have you seen the *steering contest...* those phones look like their edited with Photoshop. - something like that._

 

The picture is straight from a video, so the headphones are real.


----------



## uhcmos1

If you're looking for tone, just get an EQ and add all of the coloration you want.


----------



## Planar_head

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *uhcmos1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you're looking for tone, just get an EQ and add all of the coloration you want._

 

Why? What if we feel as if the sound can't be changed by EQ? I doubt you could make bass tighter by messing with EQ, or better dynamics, or maybe even transparency?

 If it's all in my head, thats fine with me. It's my head, after all.


----------



## XSAlliN

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TopPop* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_XSAlliN said: 

 To *[sic]* bad some people spend thousands of dollars on audio equipment, using DAC, SPDIF or other options that in their opinion improves *[sic]* the sound quality - *[sic]* when all that *[sic]* in your opinion *[sic]* is just Placebo effect. 

 I don't even now *[sic]*, *[sic]* what you're doing on this forum since for you better sound quality is just a Myth. I didn't knew *[sic]* you have to have super powers to distinguish a 128 kbps from a WAV, so *[sic]* guess your *[sic]* are one of those people. 

 In your case, x-fi extreme music/ sennheiser 555 or *[sic]* wasted money since on board sound would do just the same.

 PS.*[sic]*Learn the meaning of some phrases in English, cause you obviously don't understand them.



 Dude, if you're going to be low enough to bash somebody's grammar in an internet forum about headphone fidelity... you should probably make sure your own is better than this...._

 

It was not about grammar, since english is not my native language. It was about the meaning of some phrases.

 "I like the sound of that _car_, it definitely sound better then mine"

 -------------

 "_OMG, his such a loser saying that card has the best sound ever_"


 Something like that happen before and I personally don't like other people putting words in my mouth (or writings in a Topic) which I never used. And all that in a offensive way, saying it was just irony. 

  Quote:


 The picture is straight from a video, so the headphones are real. 
 

Was just an example on how off-topic this topic is, you didn't have to answer to that.


----------



## hybrid.e

uLilith (Unicode OS, I believe Windows 2000 and up)looks to be in test phase so if you want to check it out. There isn't a configuration/preferences section as of yet. 

 It also requires Visual C++ 2008 Redist before you can run it. I'm not sure if you need Visual C++ 2005 but it won't hurt either. 

Index of /download/uLilith


----------



## XSAlliN

The setup works now, but I still use the English translated version.


----------



## nipponbiki

Hey all,

 Just for your info, I live in Japan, speak/write fluently, and even translate Jap-Eng as a freelancer, so if anyone wants some help with the Japanese stuff, just shoot me a PM.


----------



## XSAlliN

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nipponbiki* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hey all,

 Just for your info, I live in Japan, speak/write fluently, and even translate Jap-Eng as a freelancer, so if anyone wants some help with the Japanese stuff, just shoot me a PM._

 

Man, how I wish you had made that statement sooner. Back then, I've speed a lot of time translating it:

*Lilith Audio Player (project9k)*

*Alternative link (Rapidshare)*

 My native language is Romanian, so I did it based on translation engine like Google Language Tools - boy was that hard and long lasting.


----------



## leeperry

hehe, 6 pages of thread crapping...well done!






 I like how it sounds...might be even better than Reclock tbh


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *hybrid.e* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_uLilith (Unicode OS, I believe Windows 2000 and up)looks to be in test phase so if you want to check it out. There isn't a configuration/preferences section as of yet. 

Index of /download/uLilith_

 

good point! the latest version is only a few days old: 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 it does gapless FLAC of course


----------



## donunus

Thanks for the link. I don't quite like the looks right now though


----------



## leeperry

there's zillions of skins on the official site 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 well, it sounds as good as Reclock...but different, tell me your thoughts and I'll tell you mine 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I currently run it in 16/44.1 w/ ASIO4ALL


----------



## donunus

Ok i'll take a look at it. Can you give me the exe link of the latest on so that I wont make a mistake of trying a different one


----------



## leeperry

exe: Index of /download/uLilith

 decompress "*2010-02-06_Core2.7z*" then overwrite w/ "*2010-02-06_SSE2Diff.7z*"

 skins: FACE collection


----------



## donunus

Thanks. I'll check it out later today


----------



## leeperry

it also seems to do WASAPI btw, but I can't get the skins to work...maybe they're for lilith and not ulilith.


----------



## donunus

listening now and I cant hear a difference between this player and foobar 1.0 on windows 7. They sound identical. I used to be able to hear the differences of all the different players with vista. I think It might be because of windows 7... I dont know.


----------



## leeperry

even in ASIO/ASIO4ALL/WASAPI?

 anyway it does gapless on FLAC/APE, and you can cache the file in RAM...and on XP it really kills, love it


----------



## leeperry

it even does gapless on MP3..which is IMPOSSIBLE in foobar AFAIK.


----------



## donunus

my foobar is gapless with mp3 on w7


----------



## leeperry

O RLY? well it clearly isn't for me...not on this live concert I have, I think foobar can be gapless only if the mp3s come from LAME and have the right header or sumthing.

 anyway, it's really too bad you can't hear a diff between foobar/Reclock/uLilith+ASIO4LL on W7...coz man, is there a diff on XP 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 W7 really doesn't seem like an upgrade to me(forcing a fixed sample rate and all), I'll wait for W8 mid-2011


----------



## donunus

It might not be too bad because it could be that W7 makes foobar sound as good as this player on w7 instead of lilith sounding better than foobar on xp. w7 might have cleaned up the code where it makes the differences of these players moot. In other words, maybe foobar/W7 still sounds better than xp with whatever player you throw at it is what I'm getting at. Ive heard linux is even better still.


----------



## leeperry

well, there's sure been a lot of changes...like the mandatory fixed sample rate in the audio config...both the VIA and Musiland Monitor drivers only carry an "auto" sample rate option on XP...so W7 might not only be an improvement because m$ says so.

 of course, the whole system is based on very tight timings thanks to HPET: Guidelines For Providing Multimedia Timer Support

 anyway, yes I will try it soon or later...but the diffs are so huge on XP between all these players, and uLilith sounds so good w/ ASIO4ALL...that I might just take my time 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 a good OS needs very tight timings and a low latency/low jitter bit-perfect oriented audio engine...Linux has an edge because it can be made to work in realtime, windows is not meant for realtime...so you throw data and hope for the best


----------



## donunus

hehehe I like that one... Throw data and hope for the best hahaha. Why are we not using linux by the way ... We should have a separate computer just for audio with Linux running


----------



## leeperry

clearly, Linux should be way superior!

 tbh, the first change will be that you'll have proper audio drivers made by skilled engineers....not the usual c-media/asus/creative crapola 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 and you can get direct access to hardware very easily...this is forbidden in the NT core AFAIK, and realtime isn't possible at all.

 when they started BeOS, they were selling it as being a true realtime OS...I'm entirely willing to believe ppl who say that MacOSX/Linux sound better than windows, it makes perfect sense.

 this said, uLilith+ASIO4ALL sounds amazing on XP....a far cry from everything else I've heard


----------



## b0dhi

The default linux scheduler is not "realtime". Nor does it need to be for audio. And Windows doesn't "throw data" anywhere, the soundcard accesses it via DMA. "Realtime" is entirely unnecessary for absolutely flawless audio playback on a PC. I suggest you spend some time with a book on psychosomatics.


----------



## leeperry

hehehe, well linux can be made realtime if you compile the kernel to be so.

 and yes, windows is always dependent on the system timer granularity and the tightness of the buffer sent to the soundcard.

 I suggest you spend some time studying how audio works in computers: cMP² | CPlay / SoftwareInducedJitter


----------



## donunus

I'm not gonna join in the argument of what computer audio needs but I know one things for sure... The OS matters in the way the music sounds


----------



## b0dhi

That's why I wasted the necessary time to say "default" scheduler, and also why I pointed out that realtime is not required for perfect audio - the two points being related. But hey what would I know, I just write software for PCs and microcontrollers professionally. 

 By the way, if you go by what it says on that page, increasing the granularity of the scheduler would increase jitter due to more noise on the power rails thanks to the increased cpu switching noise. Some of the points made on that page are, if you have a really good imagination, plausible, but the "realtime"/small-buffer thing is misguided. It isn't the only thing either.


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *donunus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm not gonna join in the argument of what computer audio needs but I know one things for sure... The OS matters in the way the music sounds 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

it's completely pointless anyway...see the 6 pages of threadcrap in this topic.

 there's 2 sides:

 -those that think that bit-perfect is exactly that..and that the OS/player/type of renderer does not matter, and that ppl who hear differences should stop smoking thai stick.

 -those who hear differences between players/renderers/OS and think that non-believers have wooden ears and/or crappy gear

 Amarra is said to be bit-perfect, yet it's also said to KILL the stock itunes....and there's zillions of testimonials like this one on the web: XXHighEnd Player Sounds!!!!! better than my foobar...
  Quote:


 The XX is the best player I've used in my system in terms of sound. Larger soundstage, everything fleshed out better/of a whole, low bass/bass/drums more impact better defined, everything highs on down more articulate.... [..]
 My 11 year old daughter was brought in blind [..] she quickly responded there was a difference and she thought and chose XX as the better player. 
 

you even told me in the past that you were also hearing differences between players...and sure as hell uLilith + ASIO4ALL sounds completely different from Reclock in KS...why is that so? I don't care tbh


----------



## donunus

I'm sure there is a lot more to it... The question is when will we ever know we are getting bit perfect audio. If OSa sounds different from OSb when both using this player with wasapi for example then how come we still get different sound quality from OS to OS? hmm or is it maybe like I said earlier where the cleaner the OS code, the variation between audio players for example becomes smaller and smaller when using the same audio output scheme.


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *b0dhi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's why I wasted the necessary time to say "default" scheduler, and also why I pointed out that realtime is not required for perfect audio - the two points being related. But hey what would I know, I just write software for PCs and microcontrollers professionally. 

 By the way, if you go by what it says on that page, increasing the granularity of the scheduler would increase jitter due to more noise on the power rails thanks to the increased cpu switching noise. Some of the points made on that page are, if you have a really good imagination, plausible, but the "realtime"/small-buffer thing is misguided. It isn't the only thing either._

 

ok my bad! what the XXHighEnd coder says sounds like major bs...but what about these results? Measuring XXHighEnd ...

 anyway, I've spoken to the Reclock coder about this matter to great extend...he believes that it's all bs too.

 but many ppl feel(including me) that Reclock sounds miles better than foobar: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f46/tu...player-438010/

 the Reclock coder has told me that he runs a small buffer in WASAPI exclusive in realtime priority.

 I have to admit that it really annoys the hell outta me that all the BIT-PERFECT players sound different...because noone can come up w/ a proper explanation as to WHY???

 when you ask the cPlay coder, he comes up w/ vastly smokey theories(his software is free btw), and if you ask the XXHighEnd coder...hahahaha

 and if you ask about Amarra, they tell you: "well yeah" 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I run my XP SP3 box on the PM Timer w/ the shortest granularity(9766 ms)..it does make a visible difference on the Reclock jitter...I can reach 0.17ppm


----------



## donunus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *leeperry* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have to admit that it really annoys the hell outta me that all the BIT-PERFECT players sound different...because noone can come up w/ a proper explanation as to WHY???_

 

There... We both have the same question... When will there be a REAL bit-perfect hehehe

 Were getting closer when we have a better OS like W7 since sound quality from player to player is harder to discern than when I was using Vista for example, but the phrase BITPERFECT? hmm I really dont know if we are really there yet. One speck of dust can already cause so many errors for example on a spinning cd to correct perfectly in real time that I highly doubt we will ever get there. How much more the combination of computer code, data reading from the transport, real time transfer of data to the dac, etc... too many places possible to lose data although getting almost to an amount that is insignificantly small but nonetheless Not BitPerfect


----------



## b0dhi

leeperry, I'm not saying that the software makes no difference. It may well, I don't know. However smaller buffers won't help there, and probably would make it a little bit worse.

 The other, more important point IMO is that the way these software try to improve sound is backward. What I mean is they take a computer and reduce its functionality until its not really useful as a computer, only as a poorly designed music player. So why not just make a music player?

 That's the DAC I'm designing now anyway. It doesn't go through any sound layer at all, audio data goes through ethernet to a microcontroller. Jitter is nonexistent due to the architecture. Only thing is it can only be used with a computer and with custom software, but at least the computer remains a fully functional computer


----------



## leeperry

hehe, yes the cPlay coder is too extreme...tbh, if you got a XP box around try comparing foobar/Reclock and uLilith 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I could share my thoughts on these 3 players, as I've A/B'ed them to death...but better not influence you.

 there's also this minimalist WASAPI/ASIO player: StealthAudioPlayer

 it also sounds very different from the 3 aforementioned players...all in bit-perfect audio renderers, using windows drivers that forbid resampling 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I also tried XXHighEnd but the GUI is too annoying, and I've never managed to make it output any audio at all...plus it costs $100 so fuggedaboutit, and cPlay only plays FLAC and .CUE and has no GUI at all 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 to me the best music player so far is uLilith in ASIO on XP...try them if you can.


----------



## donunus

back to this player. I just tried it with asio4all and compared it to foobar using asio4all. Wow it sounds different now compared to foobar unlike when both using directsound. Now foobar sounds better. More defined, more slam, less of a distorted feeling to the sound. Maybe something with w7 again


----------



## leeperry

I never said that uL was less "distorted" than foobar...or even worse than Reclock, but it sounds better to my ears. The sound is just less edgy and more laid back...why will have to remain a mystery I guess


----------



## donunus

now were back again to the age old question... which one is bitperfect 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 hehehe Or from now on we should abolish that question and probably ask... Which one is closer to being BitPerfect?

 This is nuts... I'm gonna stop this and be content with foobar hahaha


----------



## leeperry

I'm exchanging emails w/ the uL coder, I will ask him! He will also send me the ressource file so I can fix all the typos


----------



## leeperry

so I asked its coder and he told that all it does is bit-perfect ASIO, hah!

 and it supports VST plugins in 64bit float apparently...I learned it by fixing the resource file, I'll look into it.

 there's also some known issues w/ tags in FLAC/APE files, as EAC adds non-standard ones...he will also fix it.

 I think we're all set! gapless APE/FLAC/MP3, VST plugins in 64bit float...now all I need is a custom mixing matrix, he's told me that such a plugin was in the works


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *donunus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_now were back again to the age old question... which one is bitperfect 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 hehehe Or from now on we should abolish that question and probably ask... Which one is closer to being BitPerfect?

 This is nuts... I'm gonna stop this and be content with foobar hahaha_

 

I would just worry about which one sounds the best to you.


----------



## b0dhi

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *leeperry* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think we're all set! gapless APE/FLAC/MP3, VST plugins in 64bit float...now all I need is a custom mixing matrix, he's told me that such a plugin was in the works 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Yep, you're almost there - Winamp functions available 5 years ago.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *b0dhi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yep, you're almost there - Winamp functions available 5 years ago._

 

LOL!

 Funny to want bitperfect and VST DSP support. Let's make sure our files are perfect so we can ruin them with DSP effects.


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *b0dhi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yep, you're almost there - Winamp functions available 5 years ago._

 

hehe, born to troll right?

 winamp plugins only work in 16int AFAIK...and there's no custom mixing matrix possible, to go 5.1 > binaural stereo either from what I've seen...ffdshow and foobar have it, though.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *leeperry* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_hehe, born to troll right?

 winamp plugins only work in 16int AFAIK...and there's no custom mixing matrix possible, to go 5.1 > binaural stereo either from what I've seen...ffdshow and foobar have it, though._

 

You would know.

 LOL, yes let's take your stereo music files....make sure they are bit perfect through ASIO, then jam them through a bunch of DSP effects and if that is not enough up mix them to 5.1? Wait, wait, you would probably further mess with them using reclock also right?

 Wow, sounds like a great plan!


----------



## b0dhi

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *leeperry* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_hehe, born to troll right?

 winamp plugins only work in 16int AFAIK...and there's no custom mixing matrix possible, to go 5.1 > binaural stereo either from what I've seen...ffdshow and foobar have it, though._

 

I'm only kidding 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 There's a vst wrapper plugin so you could do any kind of DSP you want. The bit depth is up to the vst wrapper, I'm not sure what it is, but it would be higher than 16bit I think. Not sure about 5.1 sound though. Never used that. I do see a "surround sound" option.


----------



## leeperry

yes, I just double checked...winamp5 only support winamp2 DSP plugins apparently, and these are limited to 16int by design.

 foobar does 32float DSP, and Lilith does it in 64float...I've also sent the author the int<>float Reclock code several VST plugins coders(such as WingFeather) fixed for me....soon Lilith will meet all my expectations! and I looooove how it sounds w/ ASIO4ALL on XP SP3 anyway 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 the VST wrapper in winamp is also limited to 16int, and 16int is not cool for DSP...especially if you run several DSP plugins in a row.

 well, in foobar or ffdshow you can input a 5.1/7.1 file, run a custom mixing matrix to get a 3Dish "out of head" binaural sound by putting the surround channels in inverted phase...the effect is 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 it's been thoroughly discussed on David Griesinger's site: http://www.davidgriesinger.com/

 the deal breaker for me is that foobar won't do gapless mp3(apparently it requires LAME encoded files w/ the right headers??), and uLilith will...also foobar won't let you set automatic profiles for stereo/5.1 files. Who wants to select profiles manually in 2010? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ffdshow isn't really an option either as it can't do gapless by design, and is also limited to 16int DSP due to the winamp2 DSP implementation...plus, uLilith's coder is very friendly and is only willing to improve his player, so the better!


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *b0dhi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm only kidding 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 There's a vst wrapper plugin so you could do any kind of DSP you want. The bit depth is up to the vst wrapper, I'm not sure what it is, but it would be higher than 16bit I think. Not sure about 5.1 sound though. Never used that. I do see a "surround sound" option._

 

There are a couple VST and DirectX effect wrappers for Winamp.


----------



## b0dhi

Hmm yeah, if the wrapper only does 16bit in a chain that's not so good. 

 Interesting about the 5.1/binaural stuff. I don't have any 5.1 music but it would be cool for DVDs. VLC probably has a plugin for that already...it has a plugin for itching your ass for you. I am pretty sceptical about it being "out of the head" soundstage though. I've only heard such a thing once, through cheap earbuds during the Sensaura 3d sound demo from an integrated sound chip. And I've tried probably a dozen things that claim to do it, all failing miserably, but they all worked with 2-channel audio only. Will check it out, thanks.


----------



## leeperry

hummm, I still can't find where to set the VST plugins?!?! I will wait for the author's reply.

 well, I did a demo for the guys on the reclock forum...that's a 2 mins audio excerpt from the tornado scene in the movie "The Lucky Ones".

 the original 5.1 AC3 file: tornado.ac3

 a dummy 23.976 MKV file w/ a 32float stereo downmix using Ozone4 + a 3D'ish custom matrix that David Griensinger gave me: Scrolling_23.976fps_720p.rar

 you need to use Haali's Media Splitter, as it's the only does that does 48/32float WAV files AFAIK.

 I believe I've managed to get a 3D'ish sound w/o being as wet as DH, the rain hits HARD as hell on my cd1k...you try, you tell me


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *b0dhi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_VLC_

 

AFAIK, VLC doesn't support any kind of bit-perfect audio rendering...no ASIO/KS/WASAPI, no soup.


----------



## b0dhi

I think you're right. I wouldn't worry too much about it while watching a movie though. Also, pretty sure the kmixer is bit-perfect so long as only one thing is using the sound device.


----------



## leeperry

DS can be made bit-perfect on XP if all the sliders are set to the max apparently, but it would appear to be impossible on Vista/7: Homebrew CMI 8738 drivers - Hydrogenaudio Forums

 Dogbert is not exactly a clown when it comes to windows audio, as he happens to be a highly skilled drivers engineer.

 well, Reclock allows you to watch movies in KS/WASAPI exclusive...that's good stuff


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *b0dhi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think you're right. I wouldn't worry too much about it while watching a movie though. Also, pretty sure the kmixer is bit-perfect so long as only one thing is using the sound device._

 

There is a Kmixer in XP, but it was removed and the entire audio stack was redesigned to the UAA in VISTA/WIn7.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *leeperry* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_DS can be made bit-perfect on XP if all the sliders are set to the max apparently, but it would appear to be impossible on Vista/7: Homebrew CMI 8738 drivers - Hydrogenaudio Forums

 Dogbert is not exactly a clown when it comes to windows audio, as he happens to be a highly skilled drivers engineer.

 well, Reclock allows you to watch movies in KS/WASAPI exclusive...that's good stuff 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

..you sure about that?
 Is this what your basing you assumption on:

 "the underlying reason for this is that the kernel mixer of vista isn't bitperfect anymore unlike its predecessors from XP and 2000. In vista either kernel streaming (non-WaveRT version) or wasapi (both WaveRT/non-WaveRT versions) is thus required to get bitperfect PCM sound and thus supported."

 Do I need to point out what is wrong with that statment?


----------



## leeperry

the skins are available here btw: Skin in DT / Moe Side


----------



## leeperry

you can find the player here: Index of /download/uLilith

 my resource file has been merged into the latest builds.


----------



## leeperry

BTW, today's update adds a fully working VST plugin support: 



 it will automatically save/load your current VST preset at startup(you can also hide the VST plugin GUI)...so you can easily apply this tutorial: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/how...torial-413900/

 all DSP is applied in 64bit float...it sounds gooood


----------



## Magedark

Quick question, where exactly do you put the skins? I seem to get errors...


----------



## leeperry

if you click on the "
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




" icon in the GUI, it will allow you to open them apparently...I didn't try.


----------



## FinnishPower

could somebody please explain how to open vst's in this player


----------



## leeperry

right click on the GUI and click on "VST plugins"


----------



## FinnishPower

its all in japanese and when I used the resource file you posted above when I right click to access the menu nothing happens


----------



## FinnishPower

never mind the above post, works on another computer


----------



## leeperry

my resource file has been merged into the latest builds anyway


----------



## MusiCol

Hi, I just stumbled on this thread and started with the first version of iLilith this morning (v0.9.0...?) and was able to get the menu in english (right click on the GUI - sorry I'm not as computer-literate as you folks), but as I found later versions, and finally uLilith in your post above, I've been unable to get English. Please can someone point me in the right direction?

 Thanks


----------



## leeperry

mine is in english...do you have this file? _\ulilith\Common\Resource0x0409.dll_

 that's the english resource file...you could also try deleting _Resource0x0411.dll_(the Japanese res file) and/or rename _Resource0x0409.dll_ to _Resource0x0411.dll_ but that really shouldn't be needed AFAIK.


----------



## MusiCol

I only have Resource0x0411.dll - can't see the 0x0409.dll anywhere.

 What do you suggest?

 Thanks for the help


----------



## leeperry

http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLi...03-09_Core2.7z does have 409


----------



## MusiCol

Sorry, I downloaded the version at the top of the page - doh! Just seen the dates order!

 Will try the recent version


----------



## MusiCol

Got it. I'm really sorry for that, been working since 2am and can hardly see straight!

 The previous versions I listened to were awesome.

 Thanks again for all the work and help.


----------



## MusiCol

Yep, it's all there, and it's Awesome! This version recognises multiple monitors too - I couldn't get the earlier versions to go where I wanted them!

 Cheers


----------



## leeperry

np, let us know how you like the sound 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 its coder is very responsive if you have feature requests.

 I'm messing around w/ the priorities...as I was getting glitches from time to time when going back from minimized, it looks fine like this:





 I've also set ASIO4ALL for low latency/hardware buffering etc


----------



## MusiCol

I would like to say a big thank you to leeperry and everyone else who's been involved in the creation and evolution of iLilith / uLilith because the sound quality is so profoundly superior to anything else I've used. I had some issues with the player freezing when opening my browser (Mozilla Firefox, but also with IE9, and the standalone Google Earth). Fortunately these issues appear to have resolved themselves, but if the problem recurs I'll let you know. But so far so good! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I use a PreSonus Firebox external soundcard (which uLilith recognized) and Beyer DT100 and DT 770 Manufaktur (low impedance) phones. For work I use the DT100's, and then the DT770's for pleasure, but uLilith has upset that... Now, the DT770's sound very harsh, and it's as if the DT100's have been reborn! Ulilith through the Firebox and DT100's has become my preferred choice for listening pleasure! I can't put all the sonic characteristics into words yet but as soon as I can I will make another post.

 For portable use I have grudgingly relied on mp3's on an 8GB memory stick in my phone (SonyEricsson c902) but the sound quality was obviously terrible!

 As part of my modest "pro audio" gear I have a nice little Edirol R-09 two-channel recording device but it was limited to 2GB SD cards. A recent firmware update has allowed it to handle 16GB SD HC cards (although Edirol say it will not handle SDHC cards, just plain SD). So, now that it has become a viable audio player I'm using uLilith to rip CD's into PCM WAVE 16/44.1 onto a Samsung 16GB Plus SDHC card (nice metal shell and 10year Warranty!). With the quality of uLilith in my R-09 the sound is several orders of magnitude better than my old phone! In fact it's nearly as good as the PreSonus sound quality, just using its onboard amplification! Obviously I'm just starting out in this direction so it's hard to give an accurate assessment of the sonic characteristics yet. The R-09 has a 3.5mm optical output and I'm thinking of buying some UE TripleFi 10 (or similar), and maybe an iBasso D10 to add the finishing touch.

 I have used the Edirol R-09 for field recording of nature sounds (birdsong, etc) so the addition of VST hosting in uLilith allows me to process those sounds without resorting to Cubase or any other big clunky DAW. I have a vast collection of VST's, many of which require Cubase SX3 or later to operate, so I can't use some of my favourite plugins. However, there are plenty which uLilith can host - especially freeware VST's which are, in my experience, often as good, if not better than their costly commercial counterparts. This enables me to work in a much more simplified and straightforward manner, with files opening and closing immediately - unlike Cubase, etc. For me this VST hosting is like a gift from the gods, and at this point I can't think of anything more I'd like to add to uLilith - but if I do I'll let you know!

 Thanks again.


----------



## leeperry

no thank you, all credits go to Northern Verse! I only did quite a lot of bug hunting and improved the english localization(BTW, if you see typos tell me)

 yesterday I was comparing this plugin in foobar 1.01 and uLilith(both at 100% volume in ASIO using the same exact audio files and preset): Trident A-Range Equalizer by Softube

 it really sounded WAY better in uLilith, foobar had that nasty "digitis" sound I hate so much 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I know that uL's audio pipeline runs in 64bit float, and that all the int<>float conversions are done in asm...maybe that's why! but even in 100% bit-perfect it does sound way better than foobar, no idea why...but I sure like it


----------



## leeperry

ok, today's version adds ID3v2 support in FLAC/APE and a much improved VST plugins support!

 Also the 64bit float volume control can be set to a much lower granularity(0.01%), and next on the list is custom matrixing(to make nice 5.1 > stereo downmixes for headphones use for instance)..yay


----------



## Minbeo

new here,but this player is so good,i like it much more than foorbar,cplay or xxhighend...don't know how to explain but it suit my RS1 completely:warm,detail but not analytical sound,great attack,very involving 
 thanks you all


----------



## MusiCol

I downloaded the new version and experienced some good points and some bugs.

 The good thing is that uLilith no-longer interferes with my browsers, and it doesn't mind having other software opened before or after it. (uL used to freeze or caused other program(s) to freeze / crash.

 However, I'm having problems with the VST functionality. The list of VST's I have set up includes Native Instruments' Kore 2 and whenever I open uLilith the Kore 2 hardware module lights up - regardless of whether it is listed as "on" or "off", and when I close uL it doesn't shut down. I have just cleared the list of all VST's in uL and it still triggers the Kore 2 hardware to open. Maybe that will change after a restart.

 But the big problem happens once the VST dialogue is open and I ask it to "Show" a VST. The first VST GUI sometimes opens after about 10seconds, during which time any music that is playing stops. It then starts with the VST effect. Other times uL freezes with the last fraction of a second of audio cycling endlessly - like a scratched CD that's "skipping". This sometimes also happens when asking it to open the first VST, or it just freezes and stops playing completely. When this happens the only option is Ctrl+Alt+Delete and End Program (or hit the "hard reset" button on the computer itself). uLilith will reopen and play music after just doing an "End Program" - as long as I don't subsequently ask it for any VST function; if I do, it completely freezes and a complete restart can be necessary. On the positive side, this drastic action is becoming less of a necessity as uLilith now has little or no effect on any other software I may have open (browser, Microsoft Outlook, documents, pictures, etc). That's a big improvement.

 I ought to say that my PC has a long history of problems with media/audio players, especially ripping and playing music CD's, and in fact Lilith is the first software in a long time to get my computer to recognize, open, and rip music CD's! I don't understand the reasons. If anyone has any suggestions why this problem exists / existed I'd be very interested.

 Due to the fact that I can now rip and play music CD's I'm pretty ecstatic, especially considering the quality of uLilith's music! I just invested in Sennheiser IE8's, primarily to go with my Edirol R-09. When I get the fit right they are very revealing - much better, clearer sound than my DT100's or DT770's, but they are taking some time to get accustomed to. Pairing the IE8's with uLilith is amazing - I'm discovering even more notes, drum-hits, etc., that I had never heard before... My favourite music just got even better!


----------



## leeperry

send a detailed bug report to the author if you wanna see it fixed


----------



## leeperry

if anyone's getting glitches, I've settled down to those settings(the worst was w/ 24/96 files and minimizing/maximizing the player several times in a row):



 



 I have to use 768 samples otherwise 24/96 doesn't play over toslink...I just get a bunch of static.

 I hate it when everything works perfectly...need to find new bugs to report!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 BTW, there's also a registry trick to hide the tasktray icon of ASIO4ALL, so convenient.


----------



## MusiCol

I had a feeling that my Native Instruments VST's were to blame due to their tight integration between software and hardware controller module - and sure enough, after deleting the NI plugins from the list it worked fine.

 I had the same freezing and crashing problems when trying a VST with Novation's "Automap wrapper" for use with their "SL" class MIDI controllers. (I have a Novation SL61 MIDI controller keyboard)

 So I cleared the VST list, leaving just one "lightweight" multi-FX plugin (Delay, Reverb, EQ, Noise Gate, Filter / Overdrive, and Autopan / Tremolo), and Lilith has no problem with it. All functions in the VST work seamlessly with just a little noticeable latency.

 With that success I decided to add a lightweight spectrum analyser. Lilith did that "CD skipping" thing while it loaded (which only took a couple of seconds) but then both VST's were running happily together. However, as soon as I clicked "OK" on the VST dialog box to close it, the skipping started again and this time Lilith froze completely... "This program is not respoding" > "End program"!

 It seemed that the right way to close the VST dialog box is by using the standard red close button in the top corner. Having said that I just tried it again with only the multi-fix VST loaded and clicking OK closed the VST dialog box instantly with no unwanted "side-effects"!

 Conclusion: Don't run plug-ins which are mapped to hardware controllers, and; uLilith may become unstable when more than one VST are loaded. Having said that, uLilith is an audio player, not a DAW!


----------



## duckymcse

I'm really impressed with this uLilith player. The sound quality it produce is much better than other media players I had tried(Foobar2000, J River Media Center, WMP, Wimamp, etc..). Since I use it for my CarPC audio, it's difficult to navigate with my 5" touchscreen. Is there a way to make the player fit the whole screen or at least make it looks bigger?


----------



## leeperry

you can set hotkeys, I've assigned a bunch of them to my Griffin Powermate..pause,vol -/+, previous, next, close player.

 the only thing I miss so far in this player is custom matrixing, but it's in the works...w/ automatic profiles of course, like in ffdshow. foobar does it, but w/ manual presets only


----------



## duckymcse

Yeah, I'm using hot keys currently. It would be nice if you can resize it. I really like the looks of it.
 Any chance this will work with the M2Tech Hiface in kernal streaming? That would be an awesome sound quality combo IMO.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *leeperry* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you can set hotkeys, I've assigned a bunch of them to my Griffin Powermate..pause,vol -/+, previous, next, close player.

 the only thing I miss so far in this player is custom matrixing, but it's in the works...w/ automatic profiles of course, like in ffdshow. foobar does it, but w/ manual presets only 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_


----------



## leeperry

w/ ASIO4ALL, I don't see why it wouldn't...it currently does for me over toslink.

 ask the coder if he wants to allow resizing it


----------



## gattari

I like ulilith, in my opinion is no better nor worse than foobar, who finds mystical superiority has problems with his PC or his ears or am I having trouble  because for me they sound the same.
 It's now two months since I use ulilith and this is my thought.
 Ciao


----------



## leeperry

oh wow, now we got master thinkers who are able to diagnose our computer problems remotely...you're a star!

 and BTW, audio is very different in XP/W7...and I happen to run XP, Mister Mystical 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 can you bring back the loved ones too? how much would it cost? in PM if you prefer.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gattari* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I like ulilith, in my opinion is no better nor worse than foobar, who finds mystical superiority has problems with his PC or his ears or am I having trouble  because for me they sound the same.
 It's now two months since I use ulilith and this is my thought.
 Ciao_

 

Nothing compred to Foobar IMO. If you have bitperfect output on both players there should be no difference.
 I read a couple guys telling people they hear differences but claim they have bit perfect output. I think your right they have troubles with their system or sources.


----------



## MusiCol

I believe that every part of the signal chain (in its wider sense) affects the quality of sound we hear - everything from the way it was recorded, mixed, and written onto CD, then read, ripped, and travelled through the computer, soundcard, and finally into the 'phones (which obviously impart their own imperfections). How can this Not be the case?

 No matter how well the various components are designed and assembled, they cannot be absolutely perfect - and the same is true for audio players since their signal path travels through many imperfect components!

 I think the big question is whether or not these imperfections are bad enough to cause a noticeable degradation in sound quality.

 Without understanding the "nuts and bolts" of how audio players work, I believe uLilith uses a better signal path than other music players, resulting in a superior musical experience. The difference in sq between uLilith and the other audio players I've tried is simply too clear and obvious.

 Just my thoughts.


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The difference in sq between uLilith and the other audio players I've tried is simply too clear and obvious._

 






 bit-perfect *on a PC* doesn't mean jack, look at nick charles preliminary tests w/ toslink: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f133/p...ml#post6494504

 uLilith runs a 64bit float audio pipeline...and all conversions are done in asm.

 anyway, it's like cables and whatever...by all means if everything sounds the same to you, well enjoy it! you'll save money in the end 100% sure.


----------



## LightZY

Been some time since i visited this forum and great to see this thread alive and kickin'.

 Just tried the uLilith and the Lilith 0.992 and personally i find that the 0.992 is of much better clarity.. the uLilith sounds dead, as if it's behind a veil.

 I've set the uLilith to output WASAPI/ASIO in case anyone is wondering about the settings.

 Could i have done anything wrong with the settings? Enlighten me please, anyone.

 Thanks! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 UPDATE: Maybe it's not veiled but a darker sound COMPARED to the brighter sound produced by 0.992


----------



## leeperry

I haven't heard any diff between Lilith and uLilith in ASIO+ASIO4ALL tbh...but yes, the sound is WAY darker than in Reclock/foobar on XP for me. It feels like digitis is *GONE*, I have the feeling to be listening to an analog source of some sort...the SQ of this player keeps amazing me every day.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I believe that every part of the signal chain (in its wider sense) affects the quality of sound we hear - everything from the way it was recorded, mixed, and written onto CD, then read, ripped, and travelled through the computer, soundcard, and finally into the 'phones (which obviously impart their own imperfections). How can this Not be the case?

 No matter how well the various components are designed and assembled, they cannot be absolutely perfect - and the same is true for audio players since their signal path travels through many imperfect components!

 I think the big question is whether or not these imperfections are bad enough to cause a noticeable degradation in sound quality.

 Without understanding the "nuts and bolts" of how audio players work, I believe uLilith uses a better signal path than other music players, resulting in a superior musical experience. The difference in sq between uLilith and the other audio players I've tried is simply too clear and obvious.

 Just my thoughts._

 

We are not talking about analog components or other factors we are talking about two players set for bit perfect running on the same exact system using the same components.
 If everything is as it should be then why wouldn't they sound the same? 
 They are producing a 1:1 copy of the original material so where does any interference or coloring come in? I am not saying they do sound different or they don't, I am asking where is the difference? 
 Further, if there is a difference between these players when in bitperfect mode then why even worry about it at all? You are never getting the audio as intended you're getting it bit perfect with coloring added from this or that. Not sure if I am explaining it correctly.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *leeperry* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 bit-perfect *on a PC* doesn't mean jack, look at nick charles preliminary tests w/ toslink: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f133/p...ml#post6494504_

 

You constantly contradict yourself.


----------



## MusiCol

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ROBSCIX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You constantly contradict yourself._

 

I think the point being made is that even high grade optical fibre imparts a degree of imperfection into the data stream.

 With that being the case, how can plain old PCB's and wires - regardless of their quality - transfer every single bit, perfectly, from the source (CD, hard drive, etc) to our amps, 'phones, and ears?

 Software can be designed to send data exactly as it was laid down, through our computers and ultimately into our ears - but that will only ever happen in a theoretical model! When the software is applied to a real, physical system, the hardware will always apply its own imperfections - resulting in an output signal which is never perfect.

 I can't tell you why uLilith produces a higher sound quality, but I can tell you that my ears perceive a difference - and I like what I hear!

 PS. I'm not an expert, so if any of my logic is flawed please tell me?


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't tell you why uLilith produces a higher sound quality, but I can tell you that my ears perceive a difference - and I like what I hear!_

 

you're a victim of placebo, you have tin ears and crappy gear. life sucks


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think the point being made is that even high grade optical fibre imparts a degree of imperfection into the data stream._

 

in what sense? We are not talking about distortion of an analog signal.
 The data is either yes or no...aside from that you get into timing issues which is basically the conversation of jitter.
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_With that being the case, how can plain old PCB's and wires - regardless of their quality - transfer every single bit, perfectly, from the source (CD, hard drive, etc) to our amps, 'phones, and ears?_

 

That is how the PC works with just plain old PCB sending digital signals back and fourth from one part to the next. Certain situation can impart errors but such situation usually have error correction involved such as LAN neworks etc.
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Software can be designed to send data exactly as it was laid down, through our computers and ultimately into our ears - but that will only ever happen in a theoretical model! When the software is applied to a real, physical system, the hardware will always apply its own imperfections - resulting in an output signal which is never perfect._

 

If we were talking about analog I would agree with your argument. Digital does work aside from a theoretical model. Again digital is a very simple idea, yes or no and timing. The only thing I would give is any errors that are intorduced would be in regards to timing and not of the original data.
 If you lose data or it is affected to the point that you can hear it...the bits would actually have to change.
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't tell you why uLilith produces a higher sound quality, but I can tell you that my ears perceive a difference - and I like what I hear!

 PS. I'm not an expert, so if any of my logic is flawed please tell me? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I am not saying you are not hearing an improved signal. Perhaps it is something within the output plugin itself. 
 I just figured you may have an idea of what was causing the differences as I am still unsure of where they stem from. I am quite intrigued by this to tell you the truth. If we had different players all running bitperfect output plugins on the exact same hardware then technically they should sound exactly the same right? However, there is a great deal of information to suggest they don't from many different people if various places. I will have to try and find more information on this.

 Sorry guys, it wasn't my intention to take the thread off topic, Just an interesting topic.


----------



## MusiCol

Thanks for taking the time to explain. Head-Fi is a good place to learn.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks for taking the time to explain. Head-Fi is a good place to learn. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

No problem, not sure I explained it properly but I think I got the idea across.


----------



## c001m4n

I dunno if it's been mentioned, but VST plugins does not work in the latest x64core2 release. They work fine in the core2 version.

 (opps nvm...I guess I should have used the search function -_-; )


----------



## mamba315

I've been playing with Lilith and I tend to think it sounds better. This is the first player I've been able to hear a difference with.

 Regarding VST compatibility, I'm using Electri-Q with it just fine, but Vnophones doesn't seem to work correctly. I can't modify the settings. Anybody else have this problem?

 Is there a setup guide? I want to try RAM buffering and make sure I'm using the best settings for quality playback.


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *mamba315* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Vnophones doesn't seem to work correctly. I can't modify the settings.

 I want to try RAM buffering_

 

1) right click, "open parameters windows"

 2) enable it, set a high figure. done.


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Having said that, uLilith is an audio player, not a DAW_

 

it's still pretty darn close 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





: 



 I use Ozone4 to check if I don't go over -0.1dB, the Trident tube EQ because it's a PRaT killing machine...and I'm currently comparing the Sonnox/DMG EQ's to kill middle ear resonances on headphones 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 the DMG EQ sounds great in "linear phase" mode, but this mode adds 4096 samples latency, and uLilith's author has told me that he can't do anything about it...losing gapless support is a major deal breaker 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 anyway, w/ the EXACT same settings I think Sonnox is flatter and DMG more "sparkly".

 the DMG coder is not quite a newbie, but it's hard to beat the Sonnox plugins code...that comes from the legendary Sony OXF-R3 board 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 OTOH, the GUI is far more convenient in the DMG plugin.


----------



## Rokoko

Leeperry, thanks for revealing this player to all of us.
 I know that this is a bit off topic, but anyway let me ask your opinion:
 A while ago you were evaluating ShaPlay - free software player for DVD-AUDIO. After the Russian guy, who wrote it, stopped development, but Russians community is still very exciting how this player works. 
 I would appreciate for your opinion, is it better to rip the DVD-A and play wav files by uLilith for example or play them straight using ShaPlay? What is your experience?

 And yes, I am already testing uLilith w/ ASIO4ALL outputting through hiFace USB/SPDIF adapter. Well, it definitely sounds noticeably different, but I need more time to analyze what exactly is different.


----------



## leeperry

don't mention it 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 all credits go to the OP for sharing his discovery and to Northern Verse(uLilith's coder)...I'm just a very dedicated bug hunter 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Well, uLilith doesn't allow to downmix 5.1 to stereo yet...so ideally I'd advise to downmix to stereo in ffdshow+graphedit, output to 32float WAV and play it back in uLilith.

 Northern Verse has told me that custom matrixing in uLilith was in the works, so soon this player will be matching ALL my expectactions, then I'll be bored to death....coz I just hate it when everything works perfectly


----------



## Rokoko

Leeperry, thanks, now is almost clear.
 I am not the 5.1 MCH fan, I like 2-ch stereo only, even I have good equipment for MCH, but I really prefer 2-channels only. ShaPlay is attractive solution for quick hi res music access, for those DVD-A which I did not make by my self and do not have files on PC. Only that attracts me for this player.
 Now, for stereo only case, is ShaPlay “good quality” enough or you would recommend to rip DVD-A to wav and listen it by uLilith???


----------



## leeperry

well, compare shaplay+reclock(in KS/WASAPI) to uLilith(in ASIO/WASAPI)...and tell us what you hear?

 David Griesinger believes that you can make a better stereo downmix from 5.1 than what you can find as stereo on most commercial discs...and I'd agree: http://www.davidgriesinger.com/


----------



## leeperry

hah, the author told me that someone's nagging him to hell to add ALAC support...but it's been illegally reversed engineered, and he doesn't want to use that 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I don't use ALAC, so I couldn't care less...anyway, he's found a way to compensate for the latency some plugins add(like Electri-Q and EQuality in "linear phase" modes)...I'll extensively betatest this patch now, as it would allow gapless


----------



## leeperry

humm, wow, the automatic latency compensation works perfectly now...that's the only media player I know of that does that...gapless playback and glitch-free seeking w/ VST plugins that add latency(EQuality adds 4096 samples and ElectriQ 8192)....now all we need is a custom mixing matrix, and I'll be out of ideas


----------



## MusiCol

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *leeperry* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_it's still pretty darn close 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




: 

._

 

You're right, it does a very good job of processing audio with VST's.

 PS. Apologies for my earlier post - I should not have posted my assumptions out of turn - especially as I was incorrect! But I would like to say that my equipment is reasonably good, my hearing is fine, and when I first discovered the 2002 Japanese version iLilith I would not have persevered and found this thread if it wasn't for the sound quality, so no placebo effect. Oh, and life does not "suck"!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Sorry for going off topic, and thanks to leeperry for your continued work on this excellent audio player.


----------



## leeperry

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MusiCol* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_life does not "suck"_

 

I was being terribly sarcastic, because to me this player kills everything else...but there's always the usual clueless naysayers that basically say what I said(they already filled the 6 first pages of this thread 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




), so I tried to save them some time.

 the latest beta is really great, VST support has been greatly improved...next is ASIO, as I've notified the coder of a few little problems....it's great when a coder cares about bug reports and always finds solutions in a timely manner


----------



## donunus

now the last thing so that everyone will want to use this player.... foobar style playlist with all the tracks on the side ready to be played. All the album art displayed there too


----------



## leeperry

a friend of mine said he'd like to have covers flying around like in foobar...I personally love how it is right now, and instead of doing a lot of things poorly...it does a few things really well, that is playing audio files.


----------



## leeperry

BTW, there's been a new beta a few days ago that includes the improved VST support...now it's got automatic latency compensation and adds some dummy samples the first time it's started, because some VST plugins need some latency to sound their best(like that Trident EQ for instance).

 Northern Verse has been kind enough to accept one of my feature requests, so the next version will have an "Open current folder" right-click option on each audio file...you can just click on it, and it will automatically add all the files in the current folder alphabetically-sorted and play them...all in one click..no need to make pesky .m3u files anymore 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It's definitely becoming the KMPlayer of audio playback, like in the good ole'days when anyone could just ask kyh96403 for feature requests...and he would just add them within a few days...ah, those were the days


----------



## Rokoko

Leeperry, good news, I see on project9k uLilith index place that an updated version available.
 Now its getting confusing, what is exact procedure to update uLilith for Win XP for 32-bit machine? I know I know that my question it sounds strange.
 Should I download Core2.7z file, take all the files inside and override with them all files in the C:\Program Files\Project9k\uLilith folder? OK, what to do with the other file x86.7z ? And also SSE2Diff.7z ??
 Can you please provide the simple a few text line instructions how to get this done?

 Appreciate for your patience


----------



## leeperry

yes, I'm also testing a new beta patch that works like wonders so far 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 you need the Core2 version if you have an intel CPU, SSE2Diff is a patch to go from generic x86 to Core2 so you don't need it.


----------



## Rokoko

Leeperry, thanks for clearing things up. Few more worries:
 I am using hiFace (by M2Tech) USB-SPDIF device, it has its own driver allowing direct link to the hardware layer by using KS.

 Before I will completely settle on uLilith I need finish my auditioning/comparison and make sure all settings are right.

 I have two options to configure uLilith player in Settings/Audio/Sound Output/Rendering Device:
 #1: Rendering plugin – ASIO (with Mixer) and Rendering device – ASSIO4ALL v2.
 #2. Rendering plugin – WaveOut and Rendering device – HIFACE Kernel streaming

 Both, #1 and #2 play just fine, which one is RIGHT???

 Second question, my external DAC accepts only 24-bit, should I set “Output Format” to 24-bit it or 32-bit ???

 Interestingly that DAC display in both cases shows 24-bit depth if playing 24-bit material.


----------



## leeperry

your hiface drivers prolly trim the 8 bottom bits of PCM32, so you still get 24 of them in the end....actually very few drivers accept PCM24 IME(and the XXHighEnd coder said the same thing)...your choice to hear if you can discern a difference.

 hah, so they made bit-perfect MME drivers then? if you choose that Waveout in MPC, does the built-in volume control work?

 BTW, there's been a new public beta of uLilith today, it fixes a few minor bugs.


----------



## hybrid.e

May be a bit off topic but I have finally gotten uLilith to play ALAC to work. I've tested with uLilith 1.0 pre-Beta.4 (2010/05/21). I use K-Lite Codec Pack for DC-Bass source 1.2.0 (where do I download it seperately?) and I added M4A extension in uLilith for "File extensions" and "Direct Show File". I don't know about sound quality but it appears to be well. I like foobar2000 but the equalizer adds some odd noise behavior when I listen to electronic music with headphones.


----------



## leeperry

http://www.free-codecs.com/download/DC-Bass_Source_Filter.htm
   
  but when you seek within a DS file, it randomly freezes from time to time...the author is well aware of this problen and said he couldn't fix it. I've given up on WV files for this reason.


----------



## Jtacdf

Anyone knows how to contact the author of ulilith? I've managed to get vst working in the x64 core2 version by trying a x64 (host) to 32bit plugin bridge. So I'm wondering if the author could add his own plugin bridge into ulilith...


----------



## leeperry

you could try to send him an email.


----------



## Mad Max




----------



## Br777

well i exaustively a/b'd lilith and foobar all throughout the day, with no expectations one way or the other, and decided that either i couldnt tell a difference or   If there is indeed a difference, it is so slight to my ears that its not consistently identifiable. 
   
  when i compared 4 amps or roll tubes in said amps, the differences were obvious.. though sometimes small, they were consistently identifiable.. definately enough to make concrete assertions.  I couldn't even come close to that with foobar vs. lilith...
   
  to me the fact that some people claim OBVIOUS DIFFERENCES, such as what i stated above, and some claim NO DIFFERENCES (yes, im aware that caps lock means shouting 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




) is just odd.  i know we all have different gear and ears but come on...I still stay with my theory that most people hear pretty much the same unless some of them have severe hearing damage.. and if they do they almost always know it.   I dont know what point im making by saying this.. but come on!!!  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  I know some people have better trained ears than others, but still.  I'm pretty sure my ears are pretty darn good and well trained.. they certainly outta be with my history...
   
  anyway whatever, i dont really care who believes what... just stateing my own experience...


----------



## leeperry

did you try VST plugins? they sure as hell don't sound the same in both players...foobar processes them in 32fp and uLilith in 64fp, so stack a few of them and the sound will be quite different.
   
  Anyway, XP sounds different from W7...and I only tried ASIO4ALL on XP, Donunus heard some diference on W7 I think.
   
  you could also give a go at Reclock in WASAPI Excl. mode, this is a drastic change from foobar in many ppl's opinions...and you could also try XXHighEnd's demo while you're at it.
   
  What's your set up? are you sure there's no audio drivers resampling everything behind your back?


----------



## Br777

i used two vst's.
  i tried extensively with both together, and each one independantly
  nyquistEq5 (parametric EQ)
  Isone Pro (room simulator and crossfeed)
   
  blah blah xp... blah blah.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




   *hrrhemm cough - cyborg ears - ehhhheemm*
   
  ill try reclock eventually.... link...??


----------



## leeperry

so you're on XP? tried ASIO4ALL?
   
  what's your soundcard/transport? sure there's no nasty resampling in the back?
   
  Reclock: http://forum.slysoft.com/forumdisplay.php?f=85
   
  Well, dononus and I heard the same differences between foobar/Reclock/uLilith, so I dunno what to say...The true difference would seem to be windows-induced jitter, and if you run XP you may wanna add "/USEPMTIMER /NODEBUG /TIMERES=9766" to your boot.ini. This will provide tighter windows timings.


----------



## Br777

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> so you're on XP? tried ASIO4ALL?
> 
> what's your soundcard/transport? sure there's no nasty resampling in the back?
> 
> ...


 
   
  no i dont have xp.. just giving you a hard time for always claiming that as your holy grail.
  win7 64 bit wasapi
  im in between dacs at the moment
  please explain "nasty resampling in the back"  this is an area i need to learn more about.
   
  thanks


----------



## leeperry

what's your transport? what's your soundcard if there's one?
   
  you need to use MPC/KMPlayer or PotPlayer to play audio through Reclock.


----------



## Br777

as i am in between dacs, im plugged directly into my integrated  motherboard sound card.  so its computer - Cavalli CTH amp - cans


----------



## MadMike

Question: I downloaded the latest version of uLilith- How do you get VST plug-ins to work?


----------



## Mad Max

Onboard sound? That might be why you don't hear the difference as much.
   
  I wouldn't call it drastic, but the difference is very noticeable.  I love how sounds come through a little pure-er with uLilith, and the treble is less harsh and slightly more analogue-like.  I kind of wish the interface was more like Foobar2k's, though.
   
  I find myself liking ReClock best, but I really mostly just use that with anime and movies.
   
  Windows-induced jitter... Any way we can take more control over it in W7 and Vista?
   
   

 Edit:
  Quote: 





madmike said:


> Question: I downloaded the latest version of uLilith- How do you get VST plug-ins to work?


 

 You second-click on uLilith's interface around where the play/stop/etc. buttons are, click _VST Plugins_, then click _Add_ to add vst plugins from your computer.  It's self-explanatory, then the VST plugins need to have the little boxes next to them checked in the _VST Plugins_ window for them to be used in uLilith.


----------



## MadMike

Quote: 





mad max said:


> Onboard sound? That might be why you don't hear the difference as much.
> 
> I wouldn't call it drastic, but the difference is very noticeable.  I love how sounds come through a little pure-er with uLilith, and the treble is less harsh and slightly more analogue-like.  I kind of wish the interface was more like Foobar2k's, though.
> 
> ...


 
   
  Thanks! I will give it a try when I get home.


----------



## leeperry

mad max said:


> Windows-induced jitter... Any way we can take more control over it in W7 and Vista?


 

 Well, those 2 OS use HPET...which kills the XP PM Timer by a long shot: http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysinternals/mm-timer.mspx
   
  I guess you could still do what I do on XP: disable as many background processes as possible(might require a "lite" unattended version of W7 to remove the bloat), run them in low prio on single cores...run your media player in high priority on all cores and set uLilith's audio rendering thread to realtime priority. That sounds crazy, but Reclocks does run a small WASAPI buffer in realtime priority....this ensures the tightest timings possible.
   
  And you apparently can get bit-perfect audio through Reclock using JRiver's software: http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=58524.msg395968#msg395968
   
  I'm just put off by the ugly/bloaty GUI of their player...uLilith is slick, fast, and bloat-free.


----------



## Mad Max

Thanks!


----------



## leeperry

np, it's all explained in that PDF from the cMP coder actually: http://photos.imageevent.com/cics/v03theartofbuildingcomputertrnsp/The%20art%20of%20building%20Computer%20Transports%20v0.3.pdf
   
  I've got a process.exe batch running when windows starts.
   
  BTW, I've just compared players again:
  -the latest beta of foobar sounds like ****, whatever in DS/KS/A4A/native ASIO...nothing can be done about it.
  -Reclock + PotPlayer, movies sound much better w/ it than in uLilith...like on that TrueHD Transformers2 90 secs sample: http://www.mediafire.com/?xrfcj9rm2od453k
   
  this FLAC sounds too bright and boring in uLilith+A4A, but I love the analog color uLilith adds to music..especially if it's been recorded in the 70's, it completely removes digitis..it works like a time machine, sounding like a good ole'Revox reel to reel to my ears


----------



## ROBSCIX

Good players do not add "Color"....  Why would you want that, a player to change your music?
  If you like it all the power to you...but I want to hear what was put down by the artists, not some color added by bad coders or half finished hacks and mis-used plugins.
  I will still take Foobar or Winamp over this player any day if it is a question of transparent reproduction over colored none sense.  Just my opinion.


----------



## Mad Max

Wouldn't Foobar2000 count as colored too? It doesn't exactly convey with absolute purity what the artists put down. =\
  ReClock may be the only "player" for you, though I can't say as far as Winamp since I haven't gotten ASIO working with that player.
  I don't think coloration is nonsense, and even if it were to be, shouldn't be nonsense when the coloration added is so little.  At least uLilith is closer to "faithful" than Foobar2k despite the pinch of coloration it seems to add.


----------



## shimm

Why we need _colored_ player? Hmmm... Cause we have gear that _already colored_ maybe? So, finally that colored gear makes _colored_ tastes in music (and players, yes).


----------



## leeperry

hehe, looks like the short bus dropped by...anyway, I'm gonna try Reclock in JRiver's software as it should provide gapless transitions: http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=58524.msg395968#msg395968
   
  SQ is fantastic in Reclock/ffdshow/PotPlayer, but gappy playback no goodee!


----------



## xnor

Can you guys provide _*any facts *_that player x sounds colored?


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote: 





mad max said:


> Wouldn't Foobar2000 count as colored too? It doesn't exactly convey with absolute purity what the artists put down. =\
> ReClock may be the only "player" for you, though I can't say as far as Winamp since I haven't gotten ASIO working with that player.
> I don't think coloration is nonsense, and even if it were to be, shouldn't be nonsense when the coloration added is so little.  At least uLilith is closer to "faithful" than Foobar2k despite the pinch of coloration it seems to add.


 

 I have never heard people consider Foobar to be "colored" when set up properly.  Well if you want true accurate reproduction, then coloration is the last thing you want.
  You have people here saying they here no difference, other people saying it is colored....etc...Seems like people are unsure what they hear consider the opinion keeps changing.
  To each their own I guess...I try and stay away from any added coloration in my current system.... If you want it then enjoy!


----------



## Mad Max

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> hehe, looks like the short bus dropped by...anyway, I'm gonna try Reclock in JRiver's software as it should provide gapless transitions: http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=58524.msg395968#msg395968
> 
> SQ is fantastic in Reclock/ffdshow/PotPlayer, but gappy playback no goodee!


 

 Playback in Foobar2k and even uLilith is always gapless for me.

  
  Quote: 





xnor said:


> Can you guys provide _*any facts *_that player x sounds colored?


 

 Not really, lol, Foobar2k was supposed to be neutral if you use KS, WASAPI, or ASIO with it and all the DSPs disabled.  It sounds slightly muddy compared to my transport.  Lacks a bit of bass in comparison as well.  uLilith is none of that.
  Foobar2k seems to have a bit of a white-ish tone whereas uLilith is slightly reddish.  uLilith mostly just tames treble ever so slightly.
   
  I did notice a very slight improvement in sound by prioritizing Windows processes.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote: 





mad max said:


> Playback in Foobar2k and even uLilith is always gapless for me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
  Yet another member says he hears no differences.  I said to each their own, just wondering why you guys use a player and yet suggest it has obvious coloring.  Isn't the idea to get as transparent a sound as possible?


----------



## leeperry

mad max said:


> Playback in Foobar2k and even uLilith is always gapless for me.


 
   
  yep, but I'd love a gapless Reclock solution.
   


mad max said:


> Foobar2k [..] sounds slightly muddy compared to my transport.  Lacks a bit of bass in comparison as well.  uLilith is none of that.
> 
> Foobar2k seems to have a bit of a white-ish tone whereas uLilith is slightly reddish.  uLilith mostly just tames treble ever so slightly.


 
  Andrea, get out of this body..now! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  yes, the sound is utterly bass shy and blurry in foobar, even a blind man can see it.


----------



## Mad Max

Oh right, ReClock.


----------



## xnor

Quote: 





robscix said:


> Yet another member says he hears no differences.  I said to each their own, just wondering why you guys use a player and yet suggest it has obvious coloring.  Isn't the idea to get as transparent a sound as possible?


 

 Maybe we should just let them hear what they want to hear...


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote: 





xnor said:


> Maybe we should just let them hear what they want to hear...


 


 Yes, you're right.  What I find weird is some say normal stock players sounds bad.  The only players that sound good on their gear are players with DSP, hacks and other garbage that changes the sound.
  Perhaps it is not so much the player that sound bad but what they are using for hardware and their settings? 
  Anyway, if that is what you want to have play your tunes, enjoy.


----------



## Mad Max

It is indeed an even mixture of both software and hardware.  Rather stupid that we endlessly tinker with such flawed players/hardware, still, having your whole library at the tips of your fingers sure is nice.
  I know I still can't get my PC to sound as good as my DVD player feeding my DAC.  At least the software tinkering is free. =D
  In the end, it is all small differences which is why some hear it and some "don't." (Disregarding how revealing or not your DAC is.)
   
  leeperry, I don't think Andrea is on right now, and this happy little catholic man would be a better suited exorcist.


----------



## thuantran

Hellsing huh? That OVA has great OST and audio effect.


----------



## Dalamar

Mmmm placebo.


----------



## leeperry

dalamar said:


> placebo.


 
  exactly my thoughts, young ppl use drugs excessively


----------



## Mad Max

Quote:


dalamar said:


> Mmmm placebo.


 
   
  Quote: 





leeperry said:


> exactly my thoughts, young ppl use drugs excessively


 

  
  Aren't ya'll the ones hooked on Obecalp, old men?


----------



## leeperry

are you being sarcastic? I can't tell


----------



## wushuliu

I've spent the past few hours comaring uLilith w/ Media Monkey with a Teralink X2 w/ Linear PS and W7. Perusing this thread I'm not sure if I've selected the appropriate version: I have a 3Ghz P4 w/ HyperThreading, so I just went w/ the x86 Ulilith 6/4/10. DAC is a DIY AD1865.
   
  I played around with bit settings and settled on 24 bit as the best sounding. I'm not well versed enougn in computer audio to know what the 32 and 64 float are supposed to do. Are they for regular audio listening or are they related to all the VST plugin stuff?
   
  Media Monkey used KS. The two programs sound nothing alike to me. Media Monkey had a more pronounced low end, vocals were smoother,a nd overall less fatiguing. Ulilith I found more transparent to certain degree but also a little bit treble heavy. Slightly fatiguing in the long run. I took a look at the priorities section and selected Real TIme for Playback. This improved things a notch. There is an engaging quality to uLilith but at this time its hard for me to say how much may be dependent on settings I have not selected appropriately so I will continue to play around.For the moment I find Monkey the more 'analog' of the two.


----------



## leeperry

wushuliu said:


> The two programs sound nothing alike to me.


 
  Congratulations, you're not deaf! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  You may wanna use this version: http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-06-06_x86.7z
   
  32fp or 64fp is the accuracy of the lossy audio decoding, VST plugins processing and volume attenuation...in the end, uLilith adds noise shaping/dithering if needed(depending on your output bitdepth setting).
   
  You may also wanna try Reclock(in KS/WASAPI) to get a bit more perspective on what your PC can really do....but tbh, your set up will sound MILES better w/ an ADUM4160 dongle to boot


----------



## wushuliu

So is Reclock a separate program to use instead of ulilith or is it a plug-in?
   
  The dongle should be on its way...
   


  
  Quote: 





leeperry said:


> Congratulations, you're not deaf!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## leeperry

there's a somewhat outdated tutorial here, I would personally use MPC or PotPlayer and force ffdshow to output 32bit float for lossy audio. I think I posted instructions about that in the last pages: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/438010/tutorial-wasapi-support-for-kmplayer-having-a-top-notch-video-audio-player#post_5901597
   
  Reclock is an audio renderer, and if you're on XP I posted some stuff to add to your boot.ini for tighter timings in this very thread a few days ago. You need a DirectShow player to transport music to Reclock.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote: 





wushuliu said:


> I've spent the past few hours comparing uLilith w/ Media Monkey with a Teralink X2 w/ Linear PS and W7. Perusing this thread I'm not sure if I've selected the appropriate version: I have a 3Ghz P4 w/ HyperThreading, so I just went w/ the x86 Ulilith 6/4/10. DAC is a DIY AD1865.
> 
> I played around with bit settings and settled on 24 bit as the best sounding. I'm not well versed enougn in computer audio to know what the 32 and 64 float are supposed to do. Are they for regular audio listening or are they related to all the VST plugin stuff?
> 
> Media Monkey used KS. The two programs sound nothing alike to me. Media Monkey had a more pronounced low end, vocals were smoother,a nd overall less fatiguing. Ulilith I found more transparent to certain degree but also a little bit treble heavy. Slightly fatiguing in the long run. I took a look at the priorities section and selected Real TIme for Playback. This improved things a notch. There is an engaging quality to uLilith but at this time its hard for me to say how much may be dependent on settings I have not selected appropriately so I will continue to play around.For the moment I find Monkey the more 'analog' of the two.


 
  Seems like your testing is anything but accurate as you are not even sure if you have the proper version, right plugins etc..
  Thanks for the impressions anyway but they are to many variables in your testing to be considered proof of actual differences in sound.  I have heard others say that ulilith is a fatiguing player with many setups.  Others say they sound the same...etc.


----------



## wushuliu

Easy partner. I didn't post it for your approval, or as a submission for AES. Nor did I mention it being accurate. You don't know my setup or my audio experience, so take your bait somewhere else.
   
  christ, i swear this place is like being in high school.

  
  Quote: 





robscix said:


> Seems like your testing is anything but accurate as you are not even sure if you have the proper version, right plugins etc..
> Thanks for the impressions anyway but they are to many variables in your testing to be considered proof of actual differences in sound.  I have heard others say that ulilith is a fatiguing player with many setups.  Others say they sound the same...etc.


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote: 





wushuliu said:


> Easy partner. I didn't post it for your approval, or as a submission for AES. Nor did I mention it being accurate. You don't know my setup or my audio experience, so take your bait somewhere else.
> 
> christ, i swear this place is like being in high school.


 
  I never said you did post for mine or anybody Else's approval.  You suggested your experience is rather limited...
  As for that being bait..I don't think so.  Just pointing out what others will...
  I thanked you for the results and agreed with some parts so if you think that is some "bait"
  maybe it is time to unplug?


----------



## wushuliu

I think that the language used on this forum is extremely repetitive and easily become signifiers, essentially determining where the course of conversation is going to end up, so i jumped the gun. I apologize if you were not baiting, but your post implied that my impressions were an argument for a difference in sound and they were not. They are just impressions. I have zero interest in the does x component sound the same debate. 
   
  I am usually unplugged, hence only 57 posts here. Not gonna lie, not a huge fan of the overall tone/discourse.
   

  
  Quote: 





robscix said:


> I never said you did post for mine or anybody Else's approval.  You suggested your experience is rather limited...
> As for that being bait..I don't think so.  Just pointing out what others will...
> I thanked you for the results and agreed with some parts so if you think that is some "bait"
> maybe it is time to unplug?


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote: 





wushuliu said:


> I think that the language used on this forum is extremely repetitive and easily become signifiers, essentially determining where the course of conversation is going to end up, so i jumped the gun. I apologize if you were not baiting, but your post implied that my impressions were an argument for a difference in sound and they were not. They are just impressions. I have zero interest in the does x component sound the same debate.
> 
> I am usually unplugged, hence only 57 posts here. Not gonna lie, not a huge fan of the overall tone/discourse.


 

 Language gets repetitive because the topics are similar.  Some thread go great and are great discussions and others can go bad usually it depends on who is in the conversation.
  Anyway, back on topic.


----------



## leeperry

wushuliu said:


> I think that the language used on this forum is extremely repetitive and easily become signifiers, essentially determining where the course of conversation is going to end up, so i jumped the gun. I apologize if you were not baiting


 

 no need to apologize, add the ppl who annoy you to your ignore list. problem solved


----------



## Mad Max

Quote: 





wushuliu said:


> Easy partner. I didn't post it for your approval, or as a submission for AES. Nor did I mention it being accurate. You don't know my setup or my audio experience, so take your bait somewhere else.
> 
> *christ, i swear this place is like being in high school*.


 

Or like a certain forum full of anonymous people.  This place has the same feel to an extent, but with its own unique style, yet kind of held back (which is good).
I sure wish we had Miku Mondays in General Discussion, but I get a strong feeling it won't be much of a hit or I would start the thread myself.


----------



## leeperry

mad max said:


> Foobar2k [..] Lacks a bit of bass in comparison as well.


 
   
  a bit?? hah. I can't be hassled to reconfigure uLilith when I play Q3 and want some DNB playing in the back, the latest beta of foobar is so bass shy...bit-perfect really doesn't mean jack.


----------



## Mad Max

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> a bit?? hah. I can't be hassled to reconfigure uLilith when I play Q3 and want some DNB playing in the back, the latest beta of foobar in is so bass shy...bit-perfect really doesn't mean jack.


 

 No, it doesn't mean jack at all.


----------



## leeperry

mad max said:


> No, it doesn't mean jack at all.


 
   
  Following this idea, I've followed uLilith's coder recommendation that's always been to output 64fp to A4A instead of 16int. You can transport 23int in 32fp so 64fp can be as bit-perfect as you'd like...and I have to admit that it seems to sound better than 16int, just like 16int Vs 32fp in Reclock. Maybe I'll get bored of it after a while, but it seems to add more clarity/articulation to the trebles somehow. I might be reaching XP's audio stack limitations(or more likely because I'm using volume attenuation), but I sure like what I'm hearing


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote: 





mad max said:


> No, it doesn't mean jack at all.


 

 Yes, but it takes some a very long time to understand that.


----------



## JulioCat2

I'm vitalized!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ulilith at 64 bit float and SPL Vitalizer, fantastic wonderful sound!!!!!!!!!!!!
   
  I lost bit perfection, yes i know but, who cares with than kind of sound!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## ROBSCIX

Quote: 





juliocat2 said:


> I'm vitalized!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ulilith at 64 bit float and SPL Vitalizer, fantastic wonderful sound!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> I lost bit perfection, yes i know but, who cares with than kind of sound!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


 
  Well that is the point.  Who cares about the settings if you like the sound?


----------



## leeperry

juliocat2 said:


> I'm vitalized!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ulilith at 64 bit float and SPL Vitalizer, fantastic wonderful sound!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> I lost bit perfection, yes i know but, who cares with than kind of sound!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


 

 VST plugins sound sheer awesomeness in uLilith...try SPL TwinTube on top while you're at it, and EQ down those nasty ear resonances: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/413900/how-to-equalize-your-headphones-a-tutorial


----------



## leeperry

ah well, 16int ain't enough if you use volume attenuation...but 64int is too much, I don't think XP does anything good out of it. The sound is too bright, I'll stick to 24int for now...it's more accurate than 16 and yet not utterly bright.


----------



## leeperry

new build available! http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/
   
  and its coder told me:
   
_"uLilith already has Direct2D drawing mode. The option to switch to Direct2D mode is not present in English resources. But, it is possible to use Direct2D on English resource. First, please shutdown uLilith. And next, please open uLilith.cfg file by NotePad and find the keyword "IsUseDirect2D". Please change "False" to "True". Last, please launch uLilith. It will execute on Direct2D mode, If your OS support it._
   
_But, be careful. WOW64 has some bugs, so on WOW64, Direct2D mode does not work fine. If you use x64 version OS, please use x64 version of uLilith, and do not use x86 version on Direct2D mode."_
   
  Direct2D is a W7-only feature apparently.


----------



## Mad Max

What's that for? Prettier presentation/animations?


----------



## leeperry

you try it, you tell us if you see any improvement...I guess it'd make the GUI refreshing smoother.


----------



## JulioCat2

I notice 2 things, the GUI runs smoothly and it's better on the eye the little letters are easy to read.


----------



## inarc

I'm really glad I can hear the difference between Foobar Asio and uLilith... uLilith is definitely the best sounding player for me.
   
  And that Direct2D made the overall feel of GUI feel smoother... and maybe easier to read text like Julio said.
   
  I just wish this player has decent playlist, like AIMP...


----------



## leeperry

inarc said:


> I'm really glad I can hear the difference between Foobar Asio and uLilith... uLilith is definitely the best sounding player for me.


 
   
  congratulations, you're not deaf


----------



## pumin

jump the boat from foobar, and satisfied.
   
  for me, uLilith has more headroom, warmer, more detail, and more musical.  Difference can be heard (and especially on VST).    I'm using cans Ultrasone Pro 900, soundcard RME HDSPe, and testing via Ultrasone demo cd.


----------



## ROBSCIX

This player is like any other, some like it and some do not...


----------



## moriez

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> new build available! http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/


 
   
  Any idea what version to download? Core2 or X86? I noticed that Core2 has a big dll file with it..


----------



## leeperry

it depends on your CPU...there was a problem w/ the ICL11 Core2 version on my Q9450, but after sending several logs to its author, he's fixed the glitch 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  I'm trying to see if he'd agree to provide support for UV22HR dithering, that'd be the shiznit!


----------



## c61746961

I'm listening to the latest version and I think I can hear difference between this and fb2k both with ASIO output and no plug-ins (Win7), hard to put my finger on but feels as if uLilith has a slight crossfeed effect and a weighter low end, weird. Still trying to come up with a method to accurately ABX both outputs.


----------



## leeperry

make sure to run its playback thread in realtime priority


----------



## shimm

@leeperry
  Why UV22HR? Did you see this:
http://audio.rightmark.org/lukin/dither/dither.htm
http://www.24-96.net/dither/results.htm ?


----------



## leeperry

mostly because it's available as a discrete DLL from Cubase...but yes, if he agrees to allow using a VST dithering plugin, we could try L1 and so.


----------



## moriez

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> it depends on your CPU..


 

 Ofcourse, it didn't occur to me that core2 refers to the processor. x86 on the other hand did make sense. Ow, my small world 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  There is definitely another sound to uLilith ASIO compared to WinAmp ASIO. Clearly warmer. The big but is that in this latest beta version my processor has to work harder than in WinAmp which results in more glitches with my set-up. I will try another/stable version.


----------



## shimm

So the reason is availability. BTW, why James doesn't use dither for volume regulation?


----------



## leeperry

the volume attenuation in Reclock is done in 53bit, and James doesn't care/believe in dithering apparently.


----------



## K3cT

Since uLilith is all the rage now in a local forum, I've decided to give it a thorough A/B with Foobar. I've set both players to output data via WASAPI, output data format is in 16-bit integer, buffer length is set to 50ms, and all DSP/resamplings are turned off in both Windows and the players.
   
  The result? Both players sound exactly the same but frankly even if uLilith is slightly moar better than Foobar, I wouldn't use a player that won't even allow me to do a proper search in my playlist.


----------



## ExCelciuS

Quote: 





k3ct said:


> Since uLilith is all the rage now in a local forum, I've decided to give it a thorough A/B with Foobar. I've set both players to output data via WASAPI, output data format is in 16-bit integer, buffer length is set to 50ms, and all DSP/resamplings are turned off in both Windows and the players.
> 
> The result? Both players sound exactly the same but frankly even if uLilith is slightly moar better than Foobar, I wouldn't use a player that won't even allow me to do a proper search in my playlist.


 
   
  Hi K3cT, it's me 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  Well, I have tried uLilith + WASAPI and the result is better than foobar 2K + WASAPI, I don't know how, it's just the fact that my ears heard the improvement and out of happiness founding the best sound player I've ever heard, I tried to share it with the other members on the forum.
   
  If I would rate, the sound quality of Foobar 2K + WASAPI is 7/10, and Lilith + WASAPI is 10/10, lilith is simply outstanding, the best sound player I've ever heard.
   
  I'm talking and only focused on *sound quality* here, everything else is just second matters.


----------



## xnor

And I just played a 24bit 96kHz flac file through a virtual sound card with both foobar and ulilith, recorded both (also in 24/96) and used diffMaker ... couldn't find the differences e.g. leeperry claims to hear.
   
  Maybe he should stop calling others deaf... Anyway, anyone who says that foobar is "bass shy and blurry" deserves something like the golden raspberry or a special kind of jacket. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  ... enough time wasted ...


----------



## ExCelciuS

[size=medium]Hi leeperry,
   
  I have downloaded the latest version of uLilith from here http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_Core2.7z
   
  For me, uLilith is the best sound player I've ever heard, simply outstanding, 10/10 for sound quality 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  But, I've read a post that said lilith 0.992 is better than uLilith, is that true?
   
  And how to update uLilith?
   
  I'm using Intel core 2 duo 2.2 GHz, do I need to use 2010-10-14_SSE2Diff.7z, which I can download at http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_SSE2Diff.7z ?
   
  What is SSE2Diff.7z? Can it make the sound quality better?
   
   
   
  Thank you.​[/size]


----------



## leeperry

excelcius said:


> If I would rate, the sound quality of Foobar 2K + WASAPI is 7/10, and Lilith + WASAPI is 10/10, lilith is simply outstanding, the best sound player I've ever heard.
> 
> I'm talking and only focused on *sound quality* here


 

 Well, yeah, all those players are bit-perfect...the rage lies in the software induced jitter these days, which depends on your OS, gear and ears.
   
  some links, again:
http://www.cicsmemoryplayer.com/index.php?n=CMP.03Jitter
http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=692.0
   
  And it's good to set uLilith's audio thread in realtime priority...like Reclock does for its WASAPI buffer.
   
  Be happy if you can't hear a difference, it either means that:
  -your DAC has an excellent reclocker built-in
  -your phone or DAC isn't transparent enough
  -your ears aren't too picky
  -you run an early alpha of Windows 12, and they've fixed all those jitter issues


----------



## leeperry

excelcius said:


> I've read a post that said lilith 0.992 is better than uLilith, is that true?
> 
> And how to update uLilith?
> 
> ...


 

 1) dunno, it's not in english and they share the same audio engine
   
  2) manually
   
  3) you wanna use the core2 ICL11 build
   
  4) it patches the X86 build to Core2


----------



## ExCelciuS

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> 1) dunno, it's not in english and they share the same audio engine
> 
> 2) manually
> 
> ...


 

 1) understood.
  2) understood.
  3) and 4) what is core2 ICL11 build? I have downloaded uLilith from http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_Core2.7z , it is core2 build, isn't it? If I have downloaded the core2 build, then I do not need to patch and use SSE2Diff, don't we?


----------



## leeperry

excelcius said:


> 3) and 4) what is core2 ICL11 build? I have downloaded uLilith from http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2010-10-14_Core2.7z , it is core2 build, isn't it? If I have downloaded the core2 build, then I do not need to patch and use SSE2Diff, don't we?


 

 Yes, it's Core2. The SSE2Diff package patches the X86 build to Core2, you don't need it.
  


xnor said:


> time wasted


 

 everyone but you hears a difference...Realtek aren't what they used to no more


----------



## ExCelciuS

Thanks leeperry 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 , lilith has bring me a new blissful listening experience...


----------



## xnor

Quote:


leeperry said:


> Well, yeah, all those players are bit-perfect...the rage lies in the software induced jitter these days, which depends on your OS, gear and ears.
> 
> some links, again:
> http://www.cicsmemoryplayer.com/index.php?n=CMP.03Jitter
> ...


 
   
  Yes, we know that you like to paste links...
   
  "software induced jitter", that is a bold statement
   
  Let's see. Running foobar and ulilith in parallel, same song. After a couple of seconds I can see that:
   
  ulilith:
  1) spends 54% more total time (kernel + user time)
  2) needs 25% more cpu cycles
  ...
   
   
  Shooting yourself in the foot, you're doing it right!
   


  
   
   
  Quote: 





leeperry said:


> everyone but you hears a difference...Realtek aren't what they used to no more


 
   
  Thank you for that priceless moment.


----------



## leeperry

excelcius said:


> Thanks leeperry


 

 You're most welcome, enjoy the sound


----------



## Mad Max

Quote: 





k3ct said:


> Since uLilith is all the rage now in a local forum, I've decided to give it a thorough A/B with Foobar. I've set both players to output data via WASAPI, output data format is in 16-bit integer, buffer length is set to 50ms, and all DSP/resamplings are turned off in both Windows and the players.
> 
> The result? Both players sound exactly the same but frankly even if uLilith is slightly moar better than Foobar, I wouldn't use a player that won't even allow me to do a proper search in my playlist.


 

 The biggest difference I hear between the two is the soundstage.  uLilith sounds more like my DVD player feeding my DAC and Foobar2k just sounds messed up, flatter, and unnatural by comparison.  It also sounds fuzzier to me, though I wouldn't say "bass-shy."  As nice as uLilith + WASAPI is, uLilith + ASIO4ALL sounds slightly better overall to me, and a touch richer.  Less treble harshness from the slight warmth, it seems to me.  Not as clean, neutral, and airy as Reclock, though.
   
  I do agree uLilith's GUI isn't the best, and I wish it would support ALAC at least 'cuz I'm too lazy to go dig up my FLAC backup archives from which the ALAC collection is based on. (lol)


----------



## googleborg

anyone got some measurements?


----------



## K3cT

Quote: 





mad max said:


> The biggest difference I hear between the two is the soundstage.  uLilith sounds more like my DVD player feeding my DAC and Foobar2k just sounds messed up, flatter, and unnatural by comparison.  It also sounds fuzzier to me, though I wouldn't say "bass-shy."  As nice as uLilith + WASAPI is, uLilith + ASIO4ALL sounds slightly better overall to me, and a touch richer.  Less treble harshness from the slight warmth, it seems to me.  Not as clean, neutral, and airy as Reclock, though.
> 
> I do agree uLilith's GUI isn't the best, and I wish it would support ALAC at least 'cuz I'm too lazy to go dig up my FLAC backup archives from which the ALAC collection is based on. (lol)


 

 I thought the biggest drawback is the inability to do a proper search which is even more apparent if you have a humongous playlist like me. I'm aware you can search using the first string of the filename but it's near unusable for me.
   
  If you have Foobar, try loading everything to RAM first as some people claimed that it reduces potential jitter. I couldn't tell a difference but it's nice not to have stutters when you experience heavy network or HDD activities.
   
  And also hello, Excelcius. Nice to see you're posting here too.


----------



## nagual

Here,  Athlon Venice 3200+/ Audigy SE (shielded)@X-Fi Xtreme Audio,  I have to set all threads to "real time",  to avoid crackling.  Less, or none at all,  clipping than in Foobar.  
  Lilith + Asio4all + CMSS-3D =


----------



## inarc

@Leepery
   
  Do you mind trying version 0.992 of Lilith with "asio(project9k)" and asio4all plugin? I find it even better... nay noticeably better than even the newer ulilith version.
   
  It is in Japanese and haver godawful UI, but imo the sound it produce is very worth it.


----------



## xnor

Quote: 





nagual said:


> Here,  Athlon Venice 3200+/ Audigy SE (shielded)@X-Fi Xtreme Audio,  I have to set all threads to "real time",  to avoid crackling.  Less, or none at all,  clipping than in Foobar.
> Lilith + Asio4all + CMSS-3D =


 

 a) it's a very bad idea to randomly set threads to real-time
  b) audio glitches have nothing to do with clipping, you're confusing things
  c) foobar plays audio 1:1 like any other non-defective audio player so there cannot be "less clipping"
   
  d) this thread gotta be a joke


----------



## leeperry

inarc said:


> @Leepery
> 
> Do you mind trying version 0.992 of Lilith with "asio(project9k)" and asio4all plugin? I find it even better... nay noticeably better than even the newer ulilith version.
> 
> It is in Japanese and haver godawful UI, but imo the sound it produce is very worth it.


 

 It doesn't support VST plugins, does it?


----------



## ExCelciuS

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> It doesn't support VST plugins, does it?


 


  Hi leeperry,
   
  What is VST plugins? Is this plugins can make uLilith sound better? How to use it with uLilith?
   
  Thanks.


----------



## Mad Max

Quote: 





k3ct said:


> I thought the biggest drawback is the inability to do a proper search which is even more apparent if you have a humongous playlist like me. I'm aware you can search using the first string of the filename but it's near unusable for me.
> 
> If you have Foobar, try loading everything to RAM first as some people claimed that it reduces potential jitter. I couldn't tell a difference but it's nice not to have stutters when you experience heavy network or HDD activities.
> 
> And also hello, Excelcius. Nice to see you're posting here too.


 

 Nah, I have no problems with stuttering.  The most I'll usually be doing is playing around with Photoshop or messing around on the web, like now.  I'm not sure if that counts as heavy network or hard disk activities, and plus I have stuff downloading in the background, kind of.  I'll give the RAM thing a try.


----------



## nagual

Quote: 





inarc said:


> @Leepery
> 
> Do you mind trying version 0.992 of Lilith with "asio(project9k)" and asio4all plugin? I find it even better... nay noticeably better than even the newer ulilith version.
> 
> It is in Japanese and haver godawful UI, but imo the sound it produce is very worth it.


 


  Would you mind posting a link to it ?  I will try google...


----------



## leeperry

excelcius said:


> What is VST plugins? Is this plugins can make uLilith sound better? How to use it with uLilith?


 

 right-click/VST plugins/ then you can load them. VST plugins are the most widespread plugins in the PC pro-audio world for EQ, crossfeed and so on. They're processed in 64fp in uLilith, and only 32fp in fubar. Very useful if you wanna follow this tutorial: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/413900/how-to-equalize-your-headphones-a-tutorial
  


mad max said:


> I'll give the RAM thing a try.


 
   
   I found the SQ even worse when caching the files in RAM in fubar, using XP SP3


----------



## s4nder

I tried uLilith but compared to foobar the soundstage collapsed, especially vertically. Sounds are more pinpointed in uLilith so foobar may be a bit blurrier, but I prefer the larger soundstage. uLilith also had slightly sharper highs that got annoying in songs I have no problems with in foobar.
   
  I couldn't get WASAPI output to work in uLilith though, it said the device was already allocated, so I used ASIO in Lilith. This may amount to the differences I think I heard.


----------



## leeperry

s4nder said:


> I tried uLilith but compared to foobar the soundstage collapsed, especially vertically. Sounds are more pinpointed in uLilith so foobar may be a bit blurrier


 
   
  foobar has automatic HDCD decoding and mixing matrix, but g*ddamn this player sounds horrid. I've tried really hard, but this player is dull as a dish washer...it'd make me sell my audio gear and buy a jackhammer as a new hobby.
   




   
  it's not uLilith that sounds "better", it's just foobar that sounds....fubar: http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/messages/2/21586.html
   
_"the best player I've used in my system in terms of sound. Larger soundstage, everything fleshed out better/of a whole, low bass/bass/drums more impact better defined, everything highs on down more articulate"_


----------



## xnor

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> foobar has automatic HDCD decoding and mixing matrix, but g*ddamn this player sounds horrid. I've tried really hard, but this player is dull as a dish washer...it'd make me sell my audio gear and buy a jackhammer as a new hobby.


 
   
   

```
<°))))><
```


----------



## Mad Max

I think he was agreeing with dropping Foobar2k since the fish symbolizes change according to Greco-Roman mythology. =P


----------



## moriez

When I play a song with uLilith through ASIO4ALL and open a .avi the volume of the song goes up. When I quit the .avi the volume goes back to normal again. How come?


----------



## Mad Max

That's weird, I can't play anything else if uLilith is playing.  Having uLilith open but not playing anything then play a video or something in another application does nothing to that other app/video.  I, too, use ASIO4all.


----------



## leeperry

moriez said:


> When I play a song with uLilith through ASIO4ALL and open a .avi the volume of the song goes up. When I quit the .avi the volume goes back to normal again. How come?


 
   
  your video player messing w/ the windows master volume or so? I often do this w/ PotPlayer+Reclock and uLilith+A4A, everything's fine.


----------



## leeperry

Anyone tried Reclock  in JRiver's software? It should allow gapless and VST plugins...godd----, that must be amazing! but seriously:


----------



## moriez

Quote: 





mad max said:


> That's weird, I can't play anything else if uLilith is playing.  Having uLilith open but not playing anything then play a video or something in another application does nothing to that other app/video.  I, too, use ASIO4all.


 

 Here it plays just the movie, not the sound of the movie.

  
  Quote: 





leeperry said:


> your video player messing w/ the windows master volume or so?


 
   
  Well, the windows volume sliders remain untouched. I will try another player


----------



## xnor

Quote: 





mad max said:


> I think he was agreeing with dropping Foobar2k since the fish symbolizes change according to Greco-Roman mythology. =P


 
   
  Not even close. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  Since he was trolling so nicely I thought it'd be a nice idea to give him a fish.
  

  
  Quote: 





leeperry said:


> well yeah, tone deaf and ppl using ibuds off a realtek can't hear a difference...I can't read your post, but I guess that's what it boils down to.


 
   
   
  ...


----------



## moriez

Stop hating each other please. No need for this


----------



## leeperry

Reclock allows to play several streams simultaneously, it will route your video player to a dummy rendering device..it works like a charm in PotPlayer: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=148745
   
  To be fair, I run PotPlayer in high priority(to get perfect Reclock smoothness in 48/50/60Hz) and in foobar you can only pump up the audio thread priority...playing both together would end up in smooth video and glitchy audio, duh. I wonder how foobar became the standard...prolly coz it's free, has many cool plugins and very easy to please users.
   


moriez said:


> Stop hating each other please. No need for this


 

  Thread crappers are here to save us...they're in every thread that talks about stuff they can't hear. They feel like they have a mission from God to save the stray sheeps. It prolly makes them feel good too, and they had nothing better to do anyway..it was either this or play the windows built-in games


----------



## JulioCat2

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> Anyone tried Reclock  in JRiver's software? It should allow gapless and VST plugins...godd----, that must be amazing! but seriously:


 

 How can this be done leeperry?? where did you register the reclock render in Jriver ???


----------



## Mad Max

Don't you just configure Reclock to load when the JRiver app loads?


----------



## leeperry

juliocat2 said:


> How can this be done leeperry?? where did you register the reclock render in Jriver ???


 

 didn't try it myself: http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=58524.0


----------



## s4nder

OK, I'm listening to MPC using ReClock and being a foobar2000 loyalist, I'm surprised to say the least.
   
  I was skeptical to this whole media player comparison thing, but music sounds more alive somehow. Less harsh, more involving and inviting. It's hard to put my finger on it, but leeperry may be on to something here. I am aware that this may be placebo and first impressions can be deceiving but I'm definitely interested now and will be possibly reconfiguring my entire playback software setup to include ReClock if these impressions persist after a few days of listening.


----------



## moriez

Quote: 





			
				moriez said:
			
		

> When I play a song with uLilith through ASIO4ALL and open a .avi the volume of the song goes up. When I quit the .avi the volume goes back to normal again. How come?


 

 Yeah! This is solved. The Envy (Gold) drivers of the HD2 soundcard where causing this. The EWDM drivers are back in place


----------



## leeperry

BTW, uLilith's audio pipeline works in 64from the lossy audio decoding/VST plugins processing to volume attenuation...here's a link explaining that 64fp kills everything else resolution-wise: http://www.jamminpower.com/PDF/48-bit%20Audio.pdf

 For uniform unit random numbers as input(that is, random numbers between 0 and 1), there is a difference between the output of the two forms that hits a maximum value of about 0.2%. This is even with using 64-bit floating point! *There is no hope for realizing this performance using either 32-bit floating point or 24-bit integer*.
 


  Clearly, *the performance of 32-bit floating point and 24-bit integer will be considerably inferior to that of 64-bit floating point*, so we might conclude that it is not possible to achieve high-quality results

 

  And a paper explaining what a higher resolution does IRL: http://akmedia.digidesign.com/support/docs/48_Bit_Mixer_26688.pdf
   
  So much for voodoo magic, heh. VST plugins sound amazing to my ears in uLilith.


----------



## xnor

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> So much for voodoo magic, heh. VST plugins sound amazing to my ears in uLilith.


 

 Well, I guess if you do heavy processing it can possibly make a difference. No voodoo magic involved.
   
  decoding, volume attenuation are moot points..


----------



## thuantran

Citing a scientific paper does not prove one's claim right or wrong. You're just half way there, proving your claim is the other half to establish fact, and it should be done in a scientific way, IOW through math and/or experiments. On that note, leepery's argument ended at being a claim (not to mention the context he cited is not related to what he claims) and it seems like he only believes he's right. Ergo, it's a waste of time to *claim *otherwise. On that note, I'm impressed that you're still hanging in there reasoning with him, "exclusive not or".


----------



## leeperry

s4nder said:


> I was skeptical to this whole media player comparison thing, but music sounds more alive somehow. Less harsh, more involving and inviting. It's hard to put my finger on it, but leeperry may be on to something here. I am aware that this may be placebo and first impressions can be deceiving but I'm definitely interested now and will be possibly reconfiguring my entire playback software setup to include ReClock if these impressions persist after a few days of listening.


 
   
  How is that placebo of yours going then?


----------



## s4nder

After a week of careful comparisons, getting used to Reclock, switching back to foobar2000, etc, I've now completely given foobar2000 up and am listening to the purest, most inviting sound I've ever heard from my setup through MPC-HC using ReClock and madFLAC.
   
  foobar2000 is still handy for tag and file management, but it sounds slightly harsher and less clear in comparison. The difference is subtle but it persists and is enough for me to switch over. At this point it doesn't matter if it's placebo or not - I'm enjoying the sound too much to care.


----------



## Danutz

Hi,
   
  Impossible for me to add a Vst plugin from Spl (vitalizer). How do you do it? When I select the dll-file after having pressed the "Add"-Button, it will never figure in the list, which stays empty.... X86 version, which I tried also, crashes/closes sfter the same procedure....
   
  Do I miss something?


----------



## JulioCat2

My spl vitalizer works wonders in ulilith, no problems at all, with it and a lot more vst's


----------



## leeperry

If you have problems w/ the x64 version, tell uLilith's author about it. You may wanna check whether they work in other hosts first.


----------



## Danutz

Hi Juliocat2, leeperry,
   
  Which version of uLilith do you use with Win7? I really want to try this vitalizer... where could I copy the .dll-file "manually" if it doesn't work the usual way...
   
  I also tried the x86 version with the ss2 overwrite
   
  Thanks for helping,
   
  Dan


----------



## JulioCat2

Nothing special Danutz, i have ulilith in C:\Ulilith folder and install de vitalizer in the default setup dir c:\Program Files\Steinberg\VstPlugins, i'm using version 1.0 pre-beta 4 in windows 7 32, when you click add and go to the directory yo install vitalizer, it will not appear by default.


----------



## Danutz

Hi Juliocat2,
   
  Quote: 





> [size=13.1944px]when you click add and go to the directory yo install vitalizer, it will not appear by default[/size]


 
   
  Aha, what should I do then, in order to be able to use it, when it does not appear by default??? Where can I see if it is working/used? 
   
  Thanks,
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  Dan


----------



## JulioCat2

Play some music in Ulilith, vst plugins-add- search for the SPL Vitalizer MK2-T.dll, open, SPL Vitalizer will appear on the list,  then check the box next to SPL Vitalizer, then click show, Ok


----------



## XSAlliN

I see this project evolved pretty nicely in terms of support and features for the last 2 years...  Back then only Japanese version (non Unicode) was available, so I made a translation with the help of "Google Translate" (don't know japanese), it took me more than a week... yet some function were hardcoded and couldn't translate them... was among the very few who saw some potential in this player, I'm glad to see others "heard it as well". I knew since then about an unicode version - after talking with the dev of this player, I did ok with the translation and was going to help him with the unicode version - but also glad he found one who knows japanese, cause for one who doesen't even with GT is kinda hard. 
   
  PS. Do you guys know any "non-pedophile" faces/skins?!  - cause 5 - 12 years old girls with tits is not what I like to see on my desktop...  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I like animes but not the ones intended for pedophiles and now, i'm not refering to hentai.... there use to be some, but don't remember where i got them from...


----------



## Mad Max

_LOL!_


----------



## evgenrave

my favorite player. played on the ASIO(sound card) .192hz/64bit...in the setting of prioretet affect the sound quality? if so, how best to configure?


----------



## xnor

Quote:


evgenrave said:


> my favorite player. played on the ASIO(sound card) .192hz/64bit...in the setting of prioretet affect the sound quality? if so, how best to configure?


 

 Wrong process/thread priority and also wrong output format settings (^) certainly have a negative impact on performance (and the format settings also on quality).
   
  That's the reason why there's a recommendation (with bright red font) to leave the default priority settings untouched..


----------



## fufula

Quote: 





xsallin said:


> PS. Do you guys know any "non-pedophile" faces/skins?!  - cause 5 - 12 years old girls with tits is not what I like to see on my desktop...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

Click here for slightly less pedo skins. btw, does anybody have any idea how / where to download the skins that are listed on that site but are unavailable (i.e. skin no. 0050) for some reason? Google translate didn't really help much.


----------



## Mad Max

Quote: 





fufula said:


> Click here for slightly less pedo skins. btw, does anybody have any idea how / where to download the skins that are listed on that site but are unavailable (i.e. skin no. 0050) for some reason? Google translate didn't really help much.


 
   
  Quote: 





> ＷＲＹＹＹＹＹＹＹＹＹＹ―――ッ


 
   
  lol
   
  Edit: The home page link leads to other areas and sites with more uLilith, Winamp, and other skins and I've only been running into SFW s-
   
*>Miku*
  Downloading like the Fist of the North Star!!!!
   
  Plenty of other anime-related/like ones.


----------



## leeperry

new build! lot of new features I had been whining for since forever, like logarithmic volume control and a new ASIO mode...it's xmas baby!


----------



## evgenrave

Question: why the first time you turn the song is downloaded
player but not play it? Playlist is empty. But it works
it's always the next attempt. The settings included Add
and Play. May cause a priority?
Sorry for the еnglish.


----------



## pifski

Hello, any idea how to play Wavpack files in Lilith player ?


----------



## leeperry

yup, install a DirectShow decoder.


----------



## pifski

I have DirectShow decoder 1.1.1 but can't add .wv files to playlist


----------



## leeperry

ffdshow works w/ WV(same goes for AAC/ALAC/MKA and so):


----------



## pifski

thanks


----------



## fufula

I made a few skins for Lilith. There's 5 of them and they're all very tiny and simple, as to take up as little screen space as possible. For example, my latest skin (Aero Wannabe,) has only 5 buttons (play/pause, stop, back, forward, playlist.) The seeker, title and time / total time display share the same area; time / total time are displayed on hover.
   
  I don't have anywhere to host them, so in order to download them, you need to click the preview image on the left, let it fully load, right click > save as... wherever you like, rename it to rar and unpack it. It goes into your Lilith\Face directory. I hope I didn't complicate it too much...


----------



## Mad Max

Miku >>>>>>>> *


----------



## c61746961

Pedobear approved!

Seriously, though, regardless of the subjective appreciation (pretty negative on this side), are you really suggesting that people actually use that?, it's like the antithesis of ergonomics.


----------



## Mad Max

Really?  I have no issues with it whatsoever.  (Or perhaps I'm too flexible.)  You don't have to bother with it if you don't want to.
   
  She's way too old for pedobear's tastes, by the way.


----------



## thuantran

Asian women look younger than they actually are and that transcends over to fictional characters. Sometimes the artists push this too much though. Anyway nice... oppai and waki... not to mention ingenious use of headphone too. Me go hide in a corner .


----------



## Mad Max

lol, I know, and I know how old Miku's supposed to be.  Pedobear would not want.
   
  Personally, I don't approve of pedobear.


----------



## bluelans

Thank you for the info. I am going to check it out.


----------



## kn19h7

Just tried to play with the uLilith today but failed to let it works..
  The uLilith.exe thread was running but nothing showed up, no matter what version I tried (x86/x64/core2/etc)
  Any idea? I'm using win7 x64, cpu is q6600.


----------



## kinonotabi

Can someone help me find "search" button for uLilith playlist? cause I have thousands songs file ... and sometimes wanna hear specific title but cannot find it without search individually 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  Thanks


----------



## Tomoyo

The F3 button on your keyboard should bring up the search list on ulilith.


----------



## kellzey

Is there a straightforward set of instructions in English or an English version of this?


----------



## kinonotabi

Quote: 





tomoyo said:


> The F3 button on your keyboard should bring up the search list on ulilith.


 
  Why I cannot bring search list up with F3 button 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




  
  F3 on uLilith didn't give response both in Windows XP nor Windows 7 but bring up Windows default search folder when I used with FN key button.
  But of course I don't want to use Windows search folder instead of uLilith self function. I do want playlist search likes on Foobar2000 with its CTRL+F search function.


----------



## Tomoyo

Quote: 





kellzey said:


> Is there a straightforward set of instructions in English or an English version of this?


 

 There is an english version of uLilith on http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/
   


  Quote: 





kinonotabi said:


> Why I cannot bring search list up with F3 button
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


  Hmm, while on the playlist you can add a query to narrow your playlist. An example would be putting artist and then typing SID. Your playlist will then display all artists with the word SID in it. You can later remove the queries if you want to see your whole playlist. I hope that helps as a substitute for search funtcion.


----------



## kinonotabi

Quote: 





tomoyo said:


> There is an english version of uLilith on http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
   
  Woww ... It can be done with that method, although not as simple as common search command
  Make me wonder why a media player so great as uLilith doesn't have simple but important search command LOL


----------



## fluet

Hi
   
  i'm using this little player for 1 day and i already like it very much.
   
  But as i'm using also Last.fm i would be more happy if lilith could scrobble my music, but can't find the proper way to make it work...
   
  So far trying to follow this tutorial: http://rainy.seesaa.net/article/91980354.html
   
  But i'm stuck at the last step, already copy/paste the content of "mp3infp254a_dll.zip" and "lilith.fm.zip" into the same folder as lilith.exe, but don't understand what's the next step.
   
  Thanks in advance.
   
  Sorry for poor english.


----------



## ninjikiran

I am guessing x64 core2 works.  Whats this ASIO with mixer stuff though?
   
  Also what should my asio settings be in this program?  I cant seem to push it onto my digital output...
   
  It is translated awkwardly
   
  Dummy                        0
   
  Number of                   8
   
  Buffer Size                  4


----------



## padam

Can I use reclock with the lilith player? Thanks.


----------



## leeperry

padam said:


> Can I use reclock with the lilith player? Thanks.


 

 nope, DS/ASIO/Waveout/WASAPI only.


----------



## Nachash

is there some way to view the cover?
  because i can't see it...

   
  even if i actually have one, i can see it in mp3tag.
   
   
  edit.
   
  done, i actually need to extract the cover into the folder.


----------



## leeperry

so anyone compared uLilith to jplay? I was told that its "beach" mode sounded great, and that you can integrate it within foobar too.
   
  I'm still utterly impressed by uLilith's SQ in 64bit float, it's pure bliss through ASIO4ALL. And the latest builds support automatic VST latency compensation so you can use linear mode EQ's w/o any audible glitch


----------



## fufula

Are you still using Windows XP or is there a reason why you choose to output through ASIO4ALL over WASAPI?


----------



## leeperry

yup, still XP here...so I can't try jplay, which is Vista/W7 only. W8 will be here within around 6 months, maybe I'll finally upgrade after all.
   
  I've set the system timer granularity from the default 7.8ms to 0.9, so it ain't so bad


----------



## wushuliu

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> so anyone compared uLilith to jplay? I was told that its "beach" mode sounded great, and that you can integrate it within foobar too.
> 
> I'm still utterly impressed by uLilith's SQ in 64bit float, it's pure bliss through ASIO4ALL. And the latest builds support automatic VST latency compensation so you can use linear mode EQ's w/o any audible glitch


 


  Jplay, especially in hibernation mode is something special. I do like Ulilith, though MPCHC/Reclock sounds better in my setup. 
   
  All players sound *much* better in Windows 8. You should try out the pre-beta, man. Really a big step up for SQ.


----------



## padam

How can I play wavpack files in ulilith? I know I need to install some directshow codecs but which ones and how to do that in detail?

 Thanks!


----------



## leeperry

ffdshow: http://www.xvidvideo.ru/ffdshow-tryouts-project-x86-x64/


----------



## padam

Still doesn't work, how can I add ffdshow as a plug-in?


----------



## BrainFood

How do you uninstall Lilith in Windows 7 ?  Doesn't show up in list of programs, nor have an uninstaller.  Should I simply delete the folder where it downloaded?


----------



## fufula

If it didn't install, there's no need to uninstall. Just delete it. As for file associations (in case you let uLilith handle it,) just run whatever program you're switching to and let it work its magic.


----------



## BrainFood

Well, I deleted the installation folder (in the place where my downloads go to) but noticed it still left a different folder in AppData/ Roaming.  Have deleted that too.  
   
  BTW, I'm only getting rid of it because I've experienced some driver instabilities and I want to eliminate all possible causes.
   
  Briefly comparing ulilith to my regular Foobar 2000, I found it to be slightly more prominent in the top frequencies, as if leading edges were slightly better defined.  I preferred this subtle increase in liveliness over Foobar.  Please take that with a grain of salt, however, because comparisons were brief and I have also been playing with a new spdif converter and different drivers.


----------



## fufula

Quote: 





brainfood said:


> BTW, I'm only getting rid of it because I've experienced some driver instabilities and I want to eliminate all possible causes.


 


  It's not possible for a program like uLilith to cause any kind of driver instabilities when it isn't running.


----------



## BrainFood

Quote: 





fufula said:


> It's not possible for a program like uLilith to cause any kind of driver instabilities when it isn't running.


 


  I'm sure you are right but I also want to set up MPC, safe in the knowledge that nothing else is interfering with it.  Thanks anyway for your concerns.


----------



## leeperry

w00t, new beta w/ a few features I had been waiting for since forever(no glitches when mounting DVD and improved caching behavior off optical drives)


----------



## fufula

I was a little behind on the updates. I see there's a new option in the device settings when outputting through WASAPI: Event driven / Timer driven. What's the difference between these two?


----------



## s4nder

I don't know the difference but I finally got WASAPI to work with the timer driven mode, it hasn't ever worked for me before. Now I can properly compare uLilith to MPC-HC with Reclock.


----------



## fufula

I'd be interested in hearing your opinions when you're done testing.
   
  I'm guessing the timer driven mode is somehow more desirable. Another question for someone knowledgeable enough to answer, how does the latency setting tie into this? Lower = better or is it a little more complex?


----------



## s4nder

First of all, my current setup: Auzentech Prelude SPDIF out -> Meier StageDAC -> Meier Cantate -> 1 m Cardas cable -> Sennheiser HD800. WASAPI is used in both ReClock and uLilith.

After several days of comparison, I've noticed these (slight) differences between uLilith and MPCHC-ReClock-madFLAC:

Reclock: lush, detailed, organic sound. However, soundstage seems to be slightly closed in and diffuse. The sound is intimate and intense, instruments are big and "in your face" with little space in between. This leads me to think ReClock may raise the volume somehow as the effect is similar. There also seems to be less energy in highs, nothing is ever sibilant, even badly recorded songs that should be. It makes the HD800 sound more HD650-ish.

uLilith: soundstage is just amazing, almost holographic. Instruments can be pinpointed. The sound breathes, there is more air and highs are slightly more prominent. Very clean and clear.

I'm still not sure which one I prefer but I'm slowly leaning toward uLilith. It's a more relaxing presentation with a wide open soundstage that just sounds right.

I briefly also listened to XXHighEnd but it's a hassle to get to work and still crashes quite often. It sounded good, more similar to uLilith than ReClock.


Disclaimer: all these impressions may well be placebo, state of mind, tired ears, etc, and are not to be taken as fact.


----------



## leeperry

Did you try jplay? Anyway, uLilith is so convenient to use(native 64fp VST plugins support, "open current folder" in the right-click menu of any audio file) and sounds so good via native ASIO/WASAPI excl. that I really can't be hassled trying anything else. Reclock can't do gapless, so it's a no-go either way. And most audiophool players require CUE/M3U files


----------



## plin

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> uLilith is so convenient to use(native 64fp VST plugins support, "open current folder" in the right-click menu of any audio file) and sounds so good via native ASIO/WASAPI excl. that I really can't be hassled trying anything else. Reclock can't do gapless, so it's a no-go either way. And most audiophool players require CUE/M3U files


 


  +1. You have expressed my thoughts, also.


----------



## leeperry

Well, Reclock can supposedly do gapless in JRiver but its GUI makes me wanna jump off a cliff ^^


----------



## s4nder

leeperry said:


> Did you try jplay?



Unfortunately jplay doesn't get along with my sound card. It doesn't support kernel streaming so jplay only shows wasapi output. However, when I try to play a file jplay gives an error message that it couldn't initialize the device for kernel streaming. Other users have reported the bug on their forum as well, maybe it'll be fixed in future versions.

One minor gripe with uLilith this far: column widths and positions in the playlist don't get saved. I have to manually rearrange them to my liking every time.


----------



## cd-r

prying for a 5.1 to stereo option for ulilith like foobar has. *sigh*,really need this.
   
  anyway since such an option may not happen tomorrow any other ultra quality music player have a  similar  option ?? any vst do this ???
   
   
  i really love and often used foobar 5.1 to stereo option.but it's just that i love ulilith's sound that much more so hoping... 
   
   
  me and leeperry can't be the only ones to hope ulilith adds this feature,right ????


----------



## BrainFood

Got a few 'beginners' questions.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
   
  1. When turning off upsampling, is there a simpler way of doing it other than going into ulilith settings/ device and ticking all the allowed SR boxes?  With JRMC, for example, you just needed one click to turn upsampling on or off, not several.
   
  2. To use the digital volume attenuation a little without reducing sound quality, select 64 bit Floating Point?
   
  3.  You cannot open a file through windows explorer by making ulilith the default program?   You have to open files from ulilith itself or by 'dragging' files from Windows Explorer?
   
  4. Where can I get more skins from?
   
   
  Thanks in advance!
   
   
   
  (OS is Windows 7, 64 bit. I'm using the latest build of x64 Core 2.7z)


----------



## leeperry

1. there's an option to toggle upsampling: /audio/sound output/"allow sample rate conversion if needed"
   
  2. the whole audio pipeline is processed in 64fp(VST plugins/lossy audio decoding/volume attenuation) but in the end it has to be converted to 24int anyway(avoid 16int, it's too lossy)....either you let windows(choose 32fp/64fp output) or uLilith(choose 24int output) do it.
   
  3. run Associater.exe and assign all the filetypes you like to uLilith
   
  4. no idea, there are some kawai ones around I think
   
  Quote: 





cd-r said:


> praying for a 5.1 to stereo option for ulilith like foobar has.


 
   
  whine to the coder as I've been doing since forever, but that most likely will NEVER happen.


----------



## BrainFood

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> 1. there's an option to toggle upsampling: /audio/sound output/"allow sample rate conversion if needed"
> 
> 2. the whole audio pipeline is processed in 64fp(VST plugins/lossy audio decoding/volume attenuation) but in the end it has to be converted to 24int anyway(avoid 16int, it's too lossy)....either you let windows(choose 32fp/64fp output) or uLilith(choose 24int output) do it.
> 
> ...


 
   
  Thanks for your help
   
  1.  I'm already aware of the 'allow sample rate conversion' box.  But the way it sees to work with ulilith is that to upsample to, say, 192k, you need to deselect all the other SR boxes (eg 44/48/88/96) plus tick the 'allow sample rate' box.   If you then want to turn off upsampling, you have to tick all the bloody individual remaining SR boxes again. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 . Just unticking the 'allow sample rate box' is not enough.
   
   
  3.  By run associater.exe you simply mean, right-click on a particular file, 'open with', choose default program (ie ulilth) and make sure that 'always use selected program to open this kind of file' box is ticked?  Well, I have to browse to my downloads folder because that's where the ulilith application is- ie it didn't install to C/ program files.  Might that have something to do with it?


----------



## leeperry

SRC sounds bad in uLilith IME, try the DP-1's upsampler instead?
   
  I'm talking about \ulilith\Associater.exe


----------



## BrainFood

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> SRC sounds bad in uLilith IME, try the DP-1's upsampler instead?


 
  I thought that ulilith sounded better last time I compared, but I'll give it another try .  You can't do the integer upsampling (whatever it's called) with the DP-1 because it only upsamples to 96/192 and most files are 44khz.
   
   
   


> I'm talking about \ulilith\Associater.exe


 
  Ah, brilliant!!  
   
  I think with some other programs, you can make them the default player of particular files through windows explorer without necessarily having to select the associations within the player itself.


----------



## leeperry

The king of upsampling is Reclock via WASAPI exclusive in "best sinc interpolation" mode anyway 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  It's never been proven that 2X upsampling would do a better job than arbitrary 96/192kHz....neither can it be proven in WaveSpectra. I hate upsampling myself, all it does is flood the DAC oversampling stage w/ bogus interpolated data....shrillness and colored sound is all you'll get IME.


----------



## Matt head 777

How's foobar compare to lilith?


----------



## leeperry

Quote: 





matt head 777 said:


> How's foobar compared to lilith?


 
   
  Compare them and let us know what you hear.


----------



## BrainFood

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> I hate upsampling myself, all it does is flood the DAC oversampling stage w/ bogus interpolated data....shrillness and colored sound is all you'll get IME.


 
   
   
  Through my (older 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ) ears, the difference is more subtle than pronounced.
   
  BTW, I _only_ upsample MP3.  Being a dance music aficionado, I'm unable to avoid lossy files if I want to listen to other's mixes, and various links.
   
   
  Anyhow, big thumbs up for ulilith. It's a great player, despite the silly name


----------



## kiteki

enthusia said:


> Most of you use foobar 2000 with either the asio or kernel streaming configuration, at least I hope you all do. But I've recently found a new player recommended by a fellow audiophile. It is called Lilith and it is made by the Japanese software developers project9k. I'd even say this audio player ranks high up there with the famous foobar2000.
> 
> Here is the guide. It's for X-fi users, but its basically the same set-up if you have a different sound card.
> 
> ...


 
   
  Thanks for this.


----------



## rictee

Tried Ulilith and IMO it sounds better than Foobar (ASIO or Wasapi).  I'm very happy with the SQ improvements but wished there was a skin for large window size - which would make the playlist much more convenient and easier to scroll...


----------



## BrainFood

Quote: 





rictee said:


> Tried Ulilith and IMO it sounds better than Foobar (ASIO or Wasapi).  I'm very happy with the SQ improvements but wished there was a skin for large window size - which would make the playlist much more convenient and easier to scroll...


 
   
   
  I was about to make exactly the same point 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




. 
   
  I'd ideally like there to be an option for filling the whole screen (or at least bigger) for viewing from the couch a few feet away, with a wireless mouse.  Of course, this would mean increasing font size along with window size.
   
  If not uLilith, anyone know any players that can do this? (e.g. J River has a theatre mode that makes it bigger for viewing from distance, if you are willing to pay for the player itself)


----------



## BrainFood

Quote: 





> Originally Posted by *BrainFood* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> If not uLilith, anyone know any players that can do this? (e.g. J River has a theatre mode that makes it bigger for viewing from distance, if you are willing to pay for the player itself)


 
   
  Bump


----------



## kiteki

LILITH is very intuitive and excellent player.
   
   
  Let see new toy effect wear thin valley, Chinese goddess syndrome of lotus petal fire!!!


----------



## BrainFood

Quote: 





kiteki said:


> LILITH is very intuitive and excellent player.
> 
> 
> Let see new toy effect wear thin valley, Chinese goddess syndrome of lotus petal fire!!!


 
   
  Absolutely!


----------



## cd-r

lee,maybe if i get a ulilith tattoo the coder will finally do the gig and allow the 5.1 to stereo via ulilith thing to happen.
   
  lee, you recommend the wave arts vst pre amp.but this is a tough one. anything you recommend for a vst power amp ?? non guitar amp vst, i mean something that functions like a power amp for home audiophile listening or whatever.
   
  anyway i think (yes the novice is speaking) that the "high end triode pre-amp" setting in the diamond cut products virtual amp collection (i think in ulilith you have to get this vst in your dsp list and then click on it and pick the select title option which allows you to bring up the presets of diamond cuts virtual amp collection.)
   
  i think the diamond cut's "high end triode" setting digs into notes a bit more than the wave arts.but the wave arts is sooooo much more larger sounding.
   
  and special bonus points the diamond cut virtual amp collection has a  purist pentode preset(i set it for warm and 2 stage class a) that works great for listening via media player or for fooling around with songs before burning to cd-r or whatever.great...
   
   
  anyway i'm still pretty new to ulilith is there a version that's prefered sound quality wise ???


----------



## kiteki

I just read the first 12 pages of this thread, well... that was entertaining.
   
   
  I think these posts deserve a quote...
   


musicol said:


> I believe that every part of the signal chain (in its wider sense) affects the quality of sound we hear - everything from the way it was recorded, mixed, and written onto CD, then read, ripped, and travelled through the computer, soundcard, and finally into the 'phones (which obviously impart their own imperfections). How can this Not be the case?
> 
> No matter how well the various components are designed and assembled, they cannot be absolutely perfect - and the same is true for audio players since their signal path travels through many imperfect components!
> 
> ...


 
   


musicol said:


> Originally Posted by *ROBSCIX* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> _ You constantly contradict yourself._
> 
> 
> ...


 
   
   
  This is true, no part of the signal chain is absolutely perfect.
   
  Perfection when it's posited on head-fi, is usually referring to theoretical models of such. 
   
  The escape clause used is the components are not perfect, but the imperfections are outside of the human audible range.  The issue is that is a theoretical model too using a strict parameter system on what is audible, and where it's limits are.
   
  The next escape clause is the human mind is allegedly very weak in perceiving audio, so the default position is to dismiss perceptions on audio unless there is a valid theory or some kind of hard evidence to support it.
   
  The issue there is your entire stance on audio will be defined by what has been pre-evidenced.  As a statistical model that isn't very intact if you look at the flux of discovery and innovation over time.
   
  In other words if you look at audio 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago, the statistical chance that flac via ASIO in foobar2k is 100% perfect and will still be the reference standard in 2050 is less than 1%.


----------



## musimath

I just downloaded Lilith. It's great. I also found it sounds better than many others players, including foobar and aimp. But I ahve a problem: I downloaded it in my Downloads folder, as a compressed file. I didn't know if it were a standalone application or required installation, so I extracted the file in the same Downloads folder. It was a standalone application, and I ran it from there. But when I copied the extracted file to a folder in my Program Files folder the program refused to open. I got a popup telling: missing VCOM.cfg.
  Could anybody help me? Thanks


----------



## fufula

I'm guessing one of uLilith's cfg files stores the path to VCOM.cfg which resides in uLilith\VCOM. uLilith's cfg files are stored in:
   
  C:\Users\[username]\AppData\Roaming\Project9k
   
  Unless you wanna go in and edit the paths by hand, simply delete the *.cfg files contained in this directory. Hope this helps.


----------



## musimath

Hi fufula! Thank you.
  I discovered this folder yet, and tried what you suggest, changing its name to _Project9k (I think it's riskier to delete it), copying all files in \Downloads\\2011-09-15_x86\2011-09-15_x86 to \Program Files\uLilith and running uLilith.exe from there, but again I got the error
   
  "NVLibCore.dll Load Error!
  An error occurred while initializeing VCOM library. VCOM.cfg file may not be found. "
   
  When I ran again uLilith.exe from its \Downloads\\2011-09-15_x86\2011-09-15_x86 location the program opened, creating a new Project9k folder.
  Then?
   
  NVLibCore.dll is included in \Downloads\\2011-09-15_x86\2011-09-15_x86, and its date is the original 09/15/2011.


----------



## fufula

Hi, sorry to hear it didn't work. uLilith stores its settings in the registry as well. If searching there and removing all its entries doesn't help, you could try contacting the developer. He's a nice guy and he answers his e-mail.


----------



## kiteki

I just ordered the Musiland 02 US DRAGON as a new USB device (for coax) and DAC->Amp in itself.  Since it's a true 32bit/384kHz device any idea what to select in the Settings -> Audio -> Sound output window, i.e. with 16-bit music?


----------



## rictee

Try 64bit. It is one of the reasons ulilith sounds so amazing.


----------



## Deathwish238

Just had a chance to check this out...
   
  Compared to Foobar2000 I find that it has even higher clarity and richness. Notice it especially in the cymbals for example, they have more of a ring to them.


----------



## leeperry

foobar is literally unlistenable to my ears, uLilith is a God send.
   
  This said, I was going a bit crazy with random freezes after +8H of playback and it would appear that setting the ASIO buffering to 8/8 was pushing it....either playback would freeze and I'd need to press STOP then START again, or uLilith would simply exit.
   
  I was using modified 1.43 XMOS drivers from the DacMagic+ on my DP1 so I thought this was the problem, but the stock 1.22 work perfectly fine with 2/8 so I'll let it play for a few days(I never turn off my rig, can't be hassled to wait for the damn thing to "warm up") then I'll try 2/8 w/ the 1.43 all over again


----------



## kiteki

leeperry, try a Sony Xperia Ray smartphone with ICS 4.0 and Neutron player, if you're looking for a portable, convinient, uLilith type sound.


----------



## leeperry

Quote: 





rictee said:


> Try 64bit. It is one of the reasons ulilith sounds so amazing.


 
   
  Personally, I've never been too fund of 64fp....it's being downconverted to 24int by Windows AFAIK so you'd be better off outputting 24int to boot.
   
  I used to prefer 24int over 16int(especially because I use a bunch of VST plugins for EQ and xfeed) but the revision history of the XMOS drivers is very clear about the fact that 32int is fully supported over ASIO since 1.33: http://pastebin.com/nmWumqPK
  Quote: 





> New: ASIO supports 32 bits per sample transparent data path.


 
   
  I don't really know/care about what happens after it exits the XMOS controller considering that PCM1794A is capped to 24/192, but on slightly sibilating vocal tracks 64fp sounds shrill as hell and 32int much clearer/"holographic" than 24int


----------



## kiteki

I found the sweet spot with 24-bit integer as well, that's when I felt like uLilith with my AK4396 DAC into my Tesla T5p's had something special going on.  The difference was faint, like a phantom difference, but the music sounded more effortless somehow.
   
  With my new Musiland Dragon on the way with native 32bit/384kHz support I'll try 32-bit.
   
  I read an article once that computers 'prefer' 16-bit and 32-bit on a code level.


----------



## Deathwish238

Wouldn't be surprising if they did like 16 and 32 bit more, they're powers of 2.


----------



## leeperry

24bit requires a 3-byte alignment so it's problematic indeed, I've already encountered windows audio drivers that would instantly BSOD when fed PCM24....you had to send it padded to PCM32 to make them happy. The AMD graphic cards will also only agree to output 24bit over HDMI if it's padded to 32(they won't output full scale 32bit, though).
   
  I'm still not sure whether I prefer 24int or 32int, the former sounds quite mushy but the trebles of the latter sound very colored in comparison...but clarity and holographic'ness are truly amazing, as you would expect from better roundings from its internal 64fp processing.


----------



## kiteki

Yup, this is why I picked up the Dragon, native 32-bit / 384 kHz support via USB and in the DAC chip, plus no I/V stage, so I can connect the RCA to an amplifier with peace of mind there's no op-amp in the signal path (apart from the internal one in the voltage-out D/A chip itself).
   
  Hopefully I'll get good sound via uLilith.


----------



## leeperry

Well, after a few days of 32int ASIO there is no way in hell I would ever go back to 24int 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  Quite frankly, 32int is a bit over the top but hey ProTools works in 48int: http://akmedia.digidesign.com/support/docs/48_Bit_Mixer_26688.pdf
   
  This said, SRC sounds terrible in uLilith so maybe the bitdepth conversion is also a bit shoddy....but hey, I'm used to the killer sounding "best sinc interpolation" SRC of Reclock so competition is tough 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  Apart from its super-sweet SQ, the strong points of uLilith are the support of 64fp VST plugins(even those that don't come with a GUI) and ASIO/WASAPI OOTB, its winamp'ish non-invasive GUI(vade retro JRiver ^^) and that "open current folder in Ulilith" right-click option available on every audio file.....love it!
   
  I was told that JRiver could do gapless via Reclock but forget it, its GUI makes me wanna jump off a cliff.
   
  Don't get too hung up on voltage output DAC chips because they use sloppy I/V, such as PCM1793 that sounds really nasty. You need a proper I/V stage for prime SQ, no free lunch.


----------



## leeperry

Anyway, I've spoken to the coder of uLilith and he's translated some of the japanese release notes for me and we found the culprit to my random ASIO freezes duh....I'm using the latest beta with an older ASIO plugin et voilà, problem solved 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  The 1.54 XMOS release notes seem to imply that it's not the OS that takes care of the fp>int conversion, but it's actually the drivers on their own: http://pastebin.com/jatqjVP6
   
  I've upgraded my DAC with a top of the range USB PSU and I think that I now prefer 32fp, the sound is just more natural and less colored.....maybe the XMOS drivers actually add dithering...ah well, audiophoolism 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  I spoke to a pro audio VST plugin coder who told me that usually 32int ASIO means that the last bit will be used for dithering, but I've been confirmed that uLilith does put all the bits to good use so you can rest assured at some point the 8 least significant bits will be trimmed in 32int ASIO.


----------



## JulioCat2

Hello Leeperry, could you please tell us what USB to Spdif converter are you using?? i'm thinking about buying one based on the Xmos circuit.


----------



## leeperry

Hi Julio, long time no see. I don't use any S/PDIF converter, the Stello U3 that's embedded into my DP1 is internally wired via I²S


----------



## ScottMurphy

How do we deal with wireless setup? Does the stello U3 work fine? Will you please share it's configuration details?
  _______________________________
  Anyone ever watched 3D movie with swim goggle !


----------



## leeperry

The U3 works fine, and it's got its own dedicated thread: http://www.head-fi.org/t/562732/
   
  I dunno anything about wireless setups, sorry.....I'm from Team "good ole copper wire"


----------



## leeperry

Humm, I really prefer the sound of the October 2011 version over the latest builds.....it's just more focused to my ears


----------



## Nachash

What's with the 64bit floating point? Should I use it even if mostly of my files are 44/16?  (FiiO E10)
  thanks


----------



## Nachash

Quote: 





nachash said:


> What's with the 64bit floating point? Should I use it even if mostly of my files are 44/16?  (FiiO E10)
> thanks


 
  mh, anybody?


----------



## drez

Quote: 





nachash said:


> What's with the 64bit floating point? Should I use it even if mostly of my files are 44/16?  (FiiO E10)
> thanks


 
   
  64 bit floating point refers to the instruction set your CPU uses - most modern computers will use this instruction set.  IMO this has nothing to do with file format.


----------



## leeperry

The audio pipeline of uLilith runs is in 64fp from start to end: volume control, VST plugins, EQ and all other built-in DSP's. Either you send it as-is to your audio drivers and hope for the best, or you convert it to 32fp/24int/32int, your choice.
   
  I've gone back to 32int ASIO myself because the XMOS drivers state clearly that it's bit-perfect and I don't really care about where the 8 least significant bits go, I just find the trebles clearer


----------



## drez

Quote: 





leeperry said:


> The audio pipeline of uLilith runs is in 64fp from start to end: volume control, VST plugins, EQ and all other built-in DSP's. Either you send it as-is to your audio drivers and hope for the best, or you convert it to 32fp/24int/32int, your choice.
> 
> I've gone back to 32int ASIO myself because the XMOS drivers state clearly that it's bit-perfect and I don't really care about where the 8 least significant bits go, I just find the trebles clearer


 
   
  This is pretty interesting, I never thought about whether the player is outputting floating point or integer mode to the drivers.  What is the final word with this player, I have downloaded a few of the installers after a bit of effort but I'm still not sure which one to install.  The english version download link from the lilith website doesnt seem to work.  I also read a while back that this player isnt bitperferect - does it use some kind of DSP or something?


----------



## leeperry

the best place is here: http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/
   
  there's of course the usual bunch of bored ppl who like to make accusations w/o showing a single proof, but this player can be made bit-perfect AFAIK(no DSP/volume control enabled) via ASIO/WASAPI Exclusive.


----------



## Nachash

Quote: 





drez said:


> 64 bit floating point refers to the instruction set your CPU uses - most modern computers will use this instruction set.  IMO this has nothing to do with file format.


 
  Oh I see, then I'm gonna stuck with 64bit and 16bit for the dac.
   

   
   
  anyway, when I first used lilith I was using this skin:
   


nachash said:


> is there some way to view the cover?
> because i can't see it...
> 
> 
> ...


 
  It's unavailable now on the skin site, somebody still have it?


----------



## leeperry

anyway, I see that the ASIO plugin of foobar was completely rewritten from scratch at the end of last year....it now even runs a standalone "ASIOhost32.exe" helper in high priority(that sends 32int), it sounds a hell less colored than uLilith fosho! I find it even more annoying that after A/B'ing a dozen times, the latest build of uLilith and that October 2011 build sound drastically different too 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  I really don't like the GUI of foobar though, but finding a compact player that supports VST plugins, gapless playback and ASIO is easier said than done. XMPlay is great but the only way to use VST's is to use winamp DSP wrappers that work internally in 16int, duh.


----------



## leeperry

and just for the record, there's a number of ways to convert fp to int: http://www.diycalculator.com/sp-round.shtml
   
  uLilith uses “Financial rounding”, also known as “Banker’s rounding” or “Round-Half-Even”.


----------



## HeatFan12

Been a while since I used uLilith and some things have changed...Been listening for a few hours and sounding good.
   
  1) Are there skins nowadays that support album art?
  2) Can't find the ALAC plug-in.  Is it in a codec package I missed?
   
  Thanks in advance!


----------



## leeperry

No idea about skins, but if an audio file format is not natively supported it will try to find a compatible DS decoder. ALAC has recently been GPL'ed so you should be able to find one.


----------



## Nachash

New version released
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2012-11-02_WP5Ent.zip
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2012-11-02_x64.7z
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2012-11-02_SSE2Diff.7z
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2012-11-02_x86.7z
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2012-11-02_x64Core2.7z
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2012-11-02_Core2.7z


----------



## Schonen

You people know that ASIO is  meant for recording purposes so that there is less delay and has nothing to do with audio quality, right? I've tested ASIO, WASAPI amnd Kernel streamimng and they do not sound better than Directsound. Sorry, but it is just BS.
   
  http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_out_asio
   
  Please note that this component is meant for systems where ASIO is the only available output method. It is highly recommended to use the default output modes instead of ASIO. Contrary to popular "audiophile" claims, there are NO benefits from using ASIO as far as music playback quality is concerned, while bugs in ASIO drivers may severely degrade the performance.


----------



## rictee

I have been using ulilith for a few months now, impressed with the SQ compared to other players. Does anyone know if there's a changelog from the developer? It's really hard to find any info on the website which might be why so few people try ulilith.
   
  EDIT: found a changelog file in the 7z download - just need to translate to English.


----------



## drez

are there any english instructions for setting up this player?


----------



## kiteki

schonen said:


> Please note that this component is meant for systems where ASIO is the only available output method. It is highly recommended to use the default output modes instead of ASIO.


 
   
  Lower latency is better than higher latency.  There are a lot more applications for ASIO than recording purposes, since very low latency can be vital in a dozen different applications, I've used it in three myself.
   
  A concept in high-end audio is the_ pursuit _of higher quality sound, you _don't _have to necessarily hear the difference all the time.  No one cares if you can't hear the difference in KS or ASIO since we all know that a 5ms signal is more pure than a 150ms signal.  Similarly, everyone knows that their FLAC library is more pure than their MP3 library, even if they may not hear any clear difference.
   
  What we don't know is why uLilith has more efficient code than the other media players, we just know it sounds better.  You don't need to have a degree in how a blu-ray player works at the laser nanosecond level to appreciate the quality of the picture.
   
  Some users are satisfied with the _pursuit_ or_ perception _of higher sound quality, other users need to have evidence before they actually concede to any difference, sorry we don't have evidence of ASIO or uLilith for you, just some common sense that they're more efficient and some listening skill.


----------



## kiteki

Any idea what the difference is between these two?
   



2012-11-03_x64.7z       03-Nov-2012 12:58   3.1M 



2012-11-03_x64Core2.7z  03-Nov-2012 12:58   4.6M


----------



## fufula

I would say the x64Core2 one is for multi-core processor systems.


----------



## Schonen

Quote: 





kiteki said:


> Lower latency is better than higher latency.  There are a lot more applications for ASIO than recording purposes, since very low latency can be vital in a dozen different applications, I've used it in three myself.
> 
> A concept in high-end audio is the_ pursuit _of higher quality sound, you _don't _have to necessarily hear the difference all the time.  No one cares if you can't hear the difference in KS or ASIO since we all know that a 5ms signal is more pure than a 150ms signal.  Similarly, everyone knows that their FLAC library is more pure than their MP3 library, even if they may not hear any clear difference.
> 
> ...


 

 But this discussion is about SQ and not "other" applications. There is no benefit SQ wise to using ASIO. /END


----------



## kiteki

It delivers the bits faster, so the 1's and 0's are more 1-ish and 0-ish.  Like 101110001, instead with directsound could be 101010001.


----------



## drez

schonen said:


> But this discussion is about SQ and not "other" applications. There is no benefit SQ wise to using ASIO. /END




Just because you cant hear a difference and do not understand how a difference is possible doesn't mean a difference is not there, but you are entitled to to have an opinion as we all are. /Peace.

Kiteki its not worth trying to explain compter audio and SQ if someone has clearly already made up their mind, best to save the effort for people who will listen. You know where I stand on the issue though . What do you think about ulith i haven't tried yet, seems tricky to set up...


----------



## lee730

Quote: 





kiteki said:


> Lower latency is better than higher latency.  There are a lot more applications for ASIO than recording purposes, since very low latency can be vital in a dozen different applications, I've used it in three myself.
> 
> A concept in high-end audio is the_ pursuit _of higher quality sound, you _don't _have to necessarily hear the difference all the time.  No one cares if you can't hear the difference in KS or ASIO since we all know that a 5ms signal is more pure than a 150ms signal.  Similarly, everyone knows that their FLAC library is more pure than their MP3 library, even if they may not hear any clear difference.
> 
> ...


 

 Do you think it sounds better than cPlay? For me it's quite easy for me to tell the differences between cPlay and foobar. The treble is a dead giveaway plus the spacial positioning within the sound stage. It just appears to be bigger, more air within that sound stage. But treble is still the biggest giveaway to my ears.


----------



## kiteki

I don't like colour, for it makes me duller. I am a neophyte, in black and white. 1's and 0's, are my new heroes. I need a sage, in a digital age.
   
  Take my digital dust, for your economic lust.  Take my bits and bytes, so you can sleep at night. Take my voltage over time, as your paradigm.  Take my digital love, to kill your analog dove.


----------



## kiteki

"Listen to the sound of wallpaper - look at the colour of wind"
   
  -- Japanese haiku, 1571, monk kiteki from Niigata,


----------



## Nachash

Is there a way to play aac files without converting them?


----------



## Nachash

http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-01-18_SSE2Diff.7z
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-01-18_x64.7z
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-01-18_x86.7z
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-01-18_Core2.7z
  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-01-18_x64Core2.7z

 New version released
   
   
 ● Updated the association tool for Vista or later

 ● DisableRegion, with items StaticString / DynamicString, fix the collision detectionwhen non-Aling = TopLeft
 ● Correcting collision detection when non-Align = TopLeft, were ZoomItem is funny

 ● Rewrite the Copyright -2013
 ● The OS version information acquisition, adding because I had forgotten to add thedecision of Windows 8


----------



## Digiti

Lilith player [latest version] which has been working flawlessly in Windows 7 Sp1 for some time is now all of a sudden crashing with MSVCR90.dll version 9.0.30729.6161 as the faulting module.. Does anyone know how to fix this?
  I have tried sfc /scannow which found no errors. Thanks very much.


----------



## Digiti

Quote: 





digiti said:


> Lilith player [latest version] which has been working flawlessly in Windows 7 Sp1 for some time is now all of a sudden crashing with MSVCR90.dll version 9.0.30729.6161 as the faulting module.. Does anyone know how to fix this?
> I have tried sfc /scannow which found no errors. Thanks very much.


 

 I was able to fix the crashing problem by reverting to the February 2011 build of uLilith. The sound is glorious using DirectSound but WASAPI for some reason causes distortion and sound breakup. I guess DirectSound has to be fine.


----------



## kattara

Hey all,
   
  I'm loving uLilith, but how do you make it play mp4 files?  Or is it even possible?


----------



## Digiti

I corresponded by email with Northern Verse the developer of Ulilith. He suggested I try the 5-5-2013 version of his program because of some recoding he did for this version. I tried it and the error does not show up for this version either. Problem solved!


----------



## kattara

Where did you download this? The latest I could find was the Feb 2013 version? 



digiti said:


> I corresponded by email with Northern Verse the developer of Ulilith. He suggested I try the 5-5-2013 version of his program because of some recoding he did for this version. I tried it and the error does not show up for this version either. Problem solved!


----------



## Digiti

Here you are:  http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/  . Quick service!


----------



## kattara

Thanks so much!! But what is the difference between the x64 and x64Core2? And can you tell me if I can get mp4 files to play in uLilith!


----------



## Digiti

I have only one mp4* audio* file on my collection. It plays in ulilith fine after adding"mp4" to file extensions list in settings manually in the File Operations menu; then use the open folder option in ulilith, navigate to the folder where the mp4 resides then choose "all files" to see the file; it should then play. If it does not play you may lack the Microsoft DirectShow Filter[DTV-DVD] which can be installed with the K-Lite Codec Pack found here:
http://codecguide.com/index.html Let me know your results.

Core 2 64 referrs to your processor..I do not know what diiference the regular 64 vs Core 2 64 makes.


----------



## Digiti

Please excuse the double post.


----------



## kattara

Quote: 





digiti said:


> I have only one mp4* audio* file on my collection. It plays in ulilith fine after adding"mp4" to file extensions list in settings manually in the File Operations menu; then use the open folder option in ulilith, navigate to the folder where the mp4 resides then choose "all files" to see the file; it should then play. If it does not play you may lack the Microsoft DirectShow Filter[DTV-DVD] which can be installed with the K-Lite Codec Pack found here:
> http://codecguide.com/index.html Let me know your results.
> 
> Core 2 64 referrs to your processor..I do not know what diiference the regular 64 vs Core 2 64 makes.


 
   
  Ughh... I'm sorry, I meant m4a not mp4. I checked the file operations menu, and m4a is listed there, but it still will not add m4a files to a playlist. And I have the CCC Pack installed. Is that good enuff, or do I have to specifically install the K-Lite codec pack?
   
  And I got a i7 processor. Which uLilith should I be using?
   
  Thanks again for all your help!!


----------



## Digiti

Using the open folder option in Ulilith navigate to the folder with the m4a files choose "all files" otherwise the file is not visible. It should play with your CCC codecs. You have a i7 which is multi core so core2 64 should work.I don't know what difference it makes in functionality or sound..give it a try you can always delete the folder if it does not work for you.


----------



## kattara

Quote: 





digiti said:


> Using the open folder option in Ulilith navigate to the folder with the m4a files choose "all files" otherwise the file is not visible. It should play with your CCC codecs. You have a i7 which is multi core so core2 64 should work.I don't know what difference it makes in functionality or sound..give it a try you can always delete the folder if it does not work for you.


 
  What I've done, is open the playlist, and either dragged over a m4a file or chose "Add".  I can see the file(s) when I choose "all files", but it doesn't actually add the file(s) to the playlist.  Are you able to play m4a files?


----------



## Digiti

Yes they play fine on my setup using the method I described. The codec filter that is used is the "Lav Filter"


----------



## kattara

Quote: 





digiti said:


> Yes they play fine on my setup using the method I described. The codec filter that is used is the "Lav Filter"


 

 Do I have to manually add the filter to the plugins folder or something?


----------



## Digiti

I would be surprised if you do not have the proper codec installed in that codec pack. Yes you can manually install the Lav codec if you want to go that route or you could uninstall your codec pack then install the K-lite Mega Pack. Of course you also could convert your M4a files to flac or some other format as well using the free software:  FormatFactory or FreeMake Audio Converter.


----------



## kattara

Hmm... I already have the LAV splitter installed.  It is part of CCCpack.  I've emailed Northern Verse as well, but so far nothing is working.  lol


----------



## Digiti

Good. He is pretty fast in his replies.Let's see what he says.


----------



## kattara

Update:
   
  So now I'm able to actually add m4a files to my playlists, but they sound like the Chipmunks.  LOL!  But at least I'm getting somewhere.  The thing I was missing on how to be able to get uLilith to recognize the m4a was this (thanks to Northern Verse!!):
   
  Quote: 





> [size=10.0pt]MP4 Splitter[/size]
> [size=10.0pt]http://mpc-hc.org/downloads/[/size]
> [size=10.0pt](Please download “Standalone filters (x86)” ) _or x64 depending on ur OS_[/size]
> 
> ...


 
   
  He also told me to download and install Haali Media Splitter and ffdshow, but since I already had those installed, I skipped those.


----------



## Digiti

Great he gave you some incites. I have the Lav Splitter set up as my MP4 Splitter instead which works for me.


----------



## Digiti

Double post again for some reason Sorry
Probably a fault in my android tablet. Please delete


----------



## kattara

Quote: 





digiti said:


> Great he gave you some incites. I have the Lav Splitter set up as my MP4 Splitter instead which works for me.


 

 I tried using the LAVSplitter, but it had the same problem.  Finally got it resolved thanks to Northern Verse again!!
   
   
  Quote: 





> [size=9.0pt]It is Microsoft DTV-DVD Audio Decoder’ s bug.[/size]
> [size=9.0pt]Please change AAC decoder filter.[/size]
> [size=9.0pt]You can do with below tool.[/size]
> 
> [size=10.0pt]http://www.codecguide.com/windows7_preferred_filter_tweaker.htm[/size]


 
   
  Now playing m4a files work like a charm!!  Thanks for your help, Digiti!!


----------



## Digiti

You are very welcome. I hope you enjoy the audio


----------



## Digiti

There is a newer version of Ulilith available for download dated August 16,2013. Go the my message # 446 for the Ftp download link.


----------



## kattara

Quote: 





digiti said:


> There is a newer version of Ulilith available for download dated August 16,2013. Go the my message # 446 for the Ftp download link.


 

 Do you know what has been updated/changed/etc?


----------



## Digiti

I am using the new version but notice no new changes in features or sound. I always try the latest version of programs like this. Your impression may be different.


----------



## Digiti

I am using the new version but notice no new changes in features or sound. I always try the latest version of programs like this. Your impression may be different.


----------



## kattara

Quote: 





digiti said:


> I am using the new version but notice no new changes in features or sound. I always try the latest version of programs like this. Your impression may be different.


 

 Yeah, I'm not seeing any new changes either.


----------



## rictee

The changelog is available in the download package - 更新履歴.txt
   
  Seems to have added a function to run in window mode but I have no idea how it's supposed to work.
  Quote: 





> ★ Changes 2013/08/16
> 
> ● Added toggle to the argument of DDE commands / windowmode
> 
> The windowed minimized, if minimized mode if window mode.


----------



## MartinV56

Hello,
 Currently use foobar, I try Lilith,
 pc: asus 701 XP-2000-SP2
 Spidf coaxial Ha infoU2 asio
 Dac: Zhaoulu 2.5, modified, 
  
 What version of Lilith recommend, 
  
 Download lilith992.exe and 991b.exe 
  
http://translate.google.co.jp/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=ja&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.project9k.jp%2F&act=url
  
 Thanks
  
 Or: http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/stable/
  
 again thanks


----------



## Nachash

```
[img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-10-31_x64Core2.7z]2013-10-31_x64Core2.7z[/url] 31-Oct-2013 18:36 4.7M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-10-31_Core2.7z]2013-10-31_Core2.7z[/url] 31-Oct-2013 18:36 4.3M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-10-31_x64.7z]2013-10-31_x64.7z[/url] 31-Oct-2013 18:36 3.2M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2013-10-31_x86.7z]2013-10-31_x86.7z[/url] 31-Oct-2013 18:36 3.0M
```


----------



## Digiti

~~Use the latest October,2013 version either 32 or 64 bit depending on you OS as the previous post suggested. Also install a codec pack to extend the file playback abilities of the player like K-lite Codecs.


----------



## MartinV56

Thanks,  Use the  uLilith_beta.1_Core2


----------



## MartinV56

IMHO in my configuration Lilith better than foobar , here my Lilith


----------



## thaxyouheng

i think so,the foobar is highly customizable, there are tons of guides out there to make it look better than wmp 11. For people who want only the best, then definitely try Lilith.thanks


----------



## urtv

what is the difference between uLilith and the DDEClient?


----------



## Nachash

```
[img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-03_SSE2Diff.7z]2014-01-03_SSE2Diff.7z[/url] 03-Jan-2014 18:57 201k [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-03_x64Core2.7z]2014-01-03_x64Core2.7z[/url] 03-Jan-2014 18:57 4.7M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-03_Core2.7z]2014-01-03_Core2.7z[/url] 03-Jan-2014 18:57 4.3M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-03_x86.7z]2014-01-03_x86.7z[/url] 03-Jan-2014 18:57 3.0M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-03_x64.7z]2014-01-03_x64.7z[/url] 03-Jan-2014 18:57 3.2M
```
 Quote:


martinv56 said:


> Thanks,  Use the  uLilith_beta.1_Core2


 
 Kinda late, but that's a 2008 build...


----------



## dpure

link for the english version with instructions?


----------



## Nachash

dpure said:


> link for the english version with instructions?


 

```
[img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_x64Core2.7z]2014-01-10_x64Core2.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 4.7M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_Core2.7z]2014-01-10_Core2.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 4.3M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_x64.7z]2014-01-10_x64.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 3.2M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_x86.7z]2014-01-10_x86.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 3.0M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img] [url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_SSE2Diff.7z]2014-01-10_SSE2Diff.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 201k
```


----------



## dpure

nachash said:


> ```
> [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img][url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_x64Core2.7z]2014-01-10_x64Core2.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 4.7M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img][url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_Core2.7z]2014-01-10_Core2.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 4.3M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img][url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_x64.7z]2014-01-10_x64.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 3.2M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img][url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_x86.7z]2014-01-10_x86.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 3.0M [img]http://www.project9k.jp/icons/unknown.gif[/img][url=http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/2014-01-10_SSE2Diff.7z]2014-01-10_SSE2Diff.7z[/url] 10-Jan-2014 20:11 201k
> ```


 

 Thanks. I d/l the most recent version but no idea what to do with it now. I unzipped it but I dont see a install .exe or a tutorial doc.


----------



## Nachash

You don't need to install it, just start uLilith.exe and you're done.


----------



## Digiti

You can open the readme text in the Lilith folder in the Chrome browser for an English translation of the Japanese......for an in depth tutorial


----------



## dpure

nachash said:


> You don't need to install it, just start uLilith.exe and you're done.


 

 I tried that but am getting a not valid operation pop up.


----------



## Digiti

Did try an earlier version or download the latest version again? Perhaps it I a wonky download. You can email Northern Verse the author with your question. He is very fast with an answer.


----------



## Digiti

I believe this is the email address:webmaster@project9k.jp


----------



## MaDMaxiBo

i downloaded this : http://www.project9k.jp/download/lilith/lilith0992.exe
 last version april 2014
  
 is there a language file for it ?
  
 its ok for now buy i wish understand some specific pages on settings.


----------



## Digiti

You seem to have a very old version. Chose the latest build from here:http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/


----------



## leeperry

Good to be back home, uLilith really does everything I want after all 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




  
 I got sick of foobar, its VST plugin wrapper that barely works(the foobar ppl even advise steering cleal from it as it's the cause of many crash reports and it's leaking memory like crazy with some EQ plugins IME).
  
 Native VST plugin/WASAPI/ASIO support, 64fp pipeline, a very convenient GUI, freeware and only consuming 50MB of memory, I don't see any competition to uLilith 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 
  
 It even does automatic latency compensation allowing the use of any linear phase EQ without any glitch, no other player does that AFAIK.


----------



## donunus

Is there any advantage in using 64 bit ulilith over the 32 bit version on windows 8.1?


----------



## s4nder

For ultimate sound quality from the PC, I recommend checking out Jplay. It far, far surpasses anything foobar or uLilith alone can output. In my system it made a bigger difference than the last DAC upgrade I made. Absolutely amazing. I'm not affiliated with them in any way but I did purchase the full version after listening for about half an hour.


----------



## reagannism

hey guys ! 
  
 well I've tried Foobar2000 and Ulilith. Finally decided to go with Ulilith due to superior sound quality  However, I notice that setting my output to DirectSound produces much louder sound than WASAPI, although the latter one wins in terms of sound quality. But I'm curious because I googled for this phenomenon (DS louder than WASAPI) but no one seems to mention it. Does it only happen to me ? Is there anyway to fix this problem ?


----------



## leeperry

s4nder said:


> For ultimate sound quality from the PC, I recommend checking out Jplay. It far, far surpasses anything foobar or uLilith alone can output. In my system it made a bigger difference than the last DAC upgrade I made. Absolutely amazing. I'm not affiliated with them in any way but I did purchase the full version after listening for about half an hour.


 
  
 no VST plugin support and headphones require EQ in order to sound neutral: http://www.head-fi.org/t/413900/how-to-equalize-your-headphones-a-tutorial
  
 uLilith outshines foobar by a long shot on my rig, which makes KS sound harsh and WASAPI/ASIO flabby compared to the former IME.
  
 And again it supports automatic VST latency compensation allowing the use of TOTL Linear Phase EQ's, no other player supports this AFAIK.


----------



## Kempy

Hi,
  
 I just found Lilith Audio Player, looking for an alternative for Foobar.
  
 I downloaded and use version '2015-07-31_x64Core2' and the thing is great sounding.
  
   
G.


----------



## kattara

Hey all,
  
 Sorry if this has been asked before, but are there any skins for uLilith?  The only skins I've been able to find are Obsidian and Vintage Lilith.
  
 Thanks!


----------



## Kempy

leeperry said:


> The audio pipeline of uLilith runs is in 64fp from start to end: volume control, VST plugins, EQ and all other built-in DSP's. Either you send it as-is to your audio drivers and hope for the best, or you convert it to 32fp/24int/32int, your choice.


 
 Hi,
  
 is that for sure.
  
 I thought VST's are limited by spec. to max 32bit float for input and output audio bit-depth, even 64bit VST's and even those are doing 64bit float math or higher internally.
  
 G.


----------



## Priscilla Rose

How do I have multiple playlists like foobar? I mean the tabs.


----------



## donunus

Which version of ulilith would be best for an i3 running windows 8.1? Is there any advantage to running anything other than the x86 version?


----------



## Nachash

x86 is for 32bit systems
 ​
 ​x64 is for 64bit systems


----------



## donunus

I got that but there are other versions as well. SSE2, core2 etc...


----------



## Nachash

​It depends on which processor you have, if it's dual core use the dual core version. You don't need the SSE2 one


----------



## donunus

Its an i3 laptop


----------



## kattara

Does uLilith work in Win10?


----------



## leeperry

kattara said:


> Does uLilith work in Win10?


Only W3.11 & maybe W95, not sure


----------



## kattara

kattara said:


> Does uLilith work in Win10?



Confirmed uLilith working in Win10.


----------



## donunus

Is this still being updated? Whats the latest link for ulilith?


----------



## Digiti

This link still works:http://www.project9k.jp/download/uLilith/..The latest is May 2018


----------

