JPLAY Responds: An Open Letter

There has recently been some hubbub online (and even within some applications!) surrounding the media player JPLAY. Essentially, claims have been made by the people behind two competing (actually complementary) media players that JPLAY is nothing more than a "hoax" and an "audiophile scam". The former claim was leveled by JRiver, both in their software as a warning to JPLAY users as well as online on the JRiver forum (among others), and the latter claim was made by Foobar2000. As you may be aware, our own Steve Plaskin reviewed JPLAY (see review) and found it did in fact improve the sound quality of his system so our position in this skirmish is clear.

A screenshot of the message in JRiver

Josef Piri and Marcin Ostapowicz, the people behind JPLAY, have submitted a response to these claims and I chose to publish it here on AudioStream in our Industry Voice section to allow them the opportunity to speak directly to these claims and offer up their side of the story.


JPLAY Responds: An Open Letter, Josef Piri and Marcin Ostapowicz

'Simpler is better' is an old rule frequently quoted by designers of audio-equipment. However, some say we should completely forget this rule when it comes to computer audio: They say, computers are so 'fast' and audio reproduction such a relatively 'easy' job for a computer, that any computer, regardless of hardware or software used, will sound absolutely identical provided the data is 'bit-perfect' (as in: digital audio bits are not modified by equalization, digital signal processing, etc). And they add that once a computer outputs 'bit-perfect' data then all those who claim to hear a difference between software players or operating systems or computer hardware are ‘delusional’ at best and, at worst are 'scammers' and 'hoaxsters'!

We at JPLAY believe the old rule 'simpler is better' should not be ignored for computer audio—to the contrary: We believe that the less work a computer has to do the better it will serve as a digital audio transport.

Why? Because neither Windows nor the MacOS are designed for 'real-time' operation: In other words, any task involving time is a 'best-effort exercise' as opposed to a 'guaranteed execution'.

Unfortunately, for digital audio, timing is an essential requirement: the official standard for CD playback says 32 bits must be played precisely every 22 microseconds: if this timing is 'off', even by a very, very small amount, the output, by definition, is no longer in line with the technical specification for CD playback. In other words: digital playback must not only be 'bit-perfect' but also 'timing-perfect'. That is why many modern DACs often showcase 'jitter' measurements (denoting a DAC’s timing precision) at the _pico_second level (1 picosecond is only 0.000001 microseconds!).

And that is what JPLAY is all about: improving timing.

What JPLAY does is simply 'slow down' any task in the computer not related to audio (the average PC can easily have hundreds of those). Even more extreme, in JPLAY’s ‘Hibernate mode’ many tasks are stopped altogether, rendering the computer unusable for any 'normal' work and in effect, 'brute forcing' Windows to treat audio-playback as the only remaining job—all in order to give audio the best chance of 'perfect timing' possible!

While some audiophiles will manually optimize the Windows OS on their servers, JPLAY adds to that process by increasing the computer's timer resolution accuracy to the maximum possible. JPLAY uses special ultra low-latency RAM to store music samples and massively pre-queues them so the sound driver can access them faster. It also leverages the lowest latency networking available (in a unique 'StreamerMode' mode involving two PCs) to utilize the smallest playback buffers of any software player on the market. This is all done in a fanatical attempt to attain the absolute minimum number of computer cycles needed to accomplish 'perfectly timed' digital audio playback.

It’s important to note that the corporation accusing JPLAY of being a 'hoax' does not, in fact, deny JPLAY is performing this massive "audiophile re-programming" of Windows. No—Instead, this corporation denies that, despite JPLAY’s actions, JPLAY has any impact on sound quality whatsoever. Their "proof" is that JPLAY does not have any 'technical measurements' to demonstrate an improvement in sound quality.

Sure, we don’t have all the 'technical measurements' we would like: The simple fact is, while there are plenty of DAC measurements regarding jitter, when it comes to using a computer as a digital transport, there simply aren’t any! Nobody has quite figured out how to measure ‘computer jitter’ (or 'computer noise'), which others propose is the "real" cause of the sonic differences in software and/or hardware.

While we’re certain technical measurements will come in time, computer audio is still a new field—and while we're certainly looking forward to working with anyone advancing the state of art, we do believe we have the best measurement equipment on the planet: the ears of thousands of passionate and discerning audiophiles who have tested dozens of JPLAY versions by ear alone…

All of them simply cannot be wrong: 'Simpler IS better' with computer audio.

P.S. A free downloadable trial of JPLAY is available at www.jplay.eu. Please listen for yourself and decide.


For those interested in further discussion on this subject, check out our Media Player Q&A: 10 Questions for 8 Companies. The participants include JRiver and JPLAY and one question posed was, "What makes one media player sound different from another?".

COMMENTS
Michael Lavorgna's picture

Jim Hillegass, CEO and Founder of JRiver, has responded to this post via email. Here is his response in its entirety:

Hi Michael,
 
Jplay continues to make false statements claiming superior sound quality of their "bit perfect" player compared to other such players.
 
If two players are bit perfect, they cannot produce different sound unless they are set differently, or they are modifying the sound, in which case, they are not bit perfect.
 
There are two very good technical analyses of JPlay linked from our Jplay warning page.  Both conclude that it does nothing.  That is also our opinion based on listening tests by several people from our staff and another person who is the founder of a well known high end audio company.  It is also the opinion of the author of foobar2000.
 
Please include the link itself rather than a screenshot since new evidence is added as we find it.
 
 
You may publish this e-mail in its entirety if you wish.
 
Regards,
 
Jim Hillegass
hotsoup's picture

jvlata's picture

How Mr. Plaskin wrote "A real audiophile enjoys music; not waveforms." and I found JRiver statement at their website very arrogant.. I have just deleted JRiver from my system.

Jorge

electrao's picture

I am sorry but if they cannot measure their own timing ajustments how did they test their product ?!? This is a computer software so they can control and monitor all the signals/data inside the computer. Moereover since audio is slow compared to eveything else in teh computer you can simply buffer lots os samples to bypass any delay and just control teh data output precisely. No need to cripple the rest of the computer! 

Jonahsdad's picture

I'm puzzled by JRiver making a stink about this.  Does JPlay actually screw stuff up?  If so, say it's not compatible, and we can't support it.  If not, it's one more piece of audiophile mystery meat.  Might as well fight cables and tube amps. 

I tried JPlay.  So if I give up all convenience, I can hear an "improvement"?  I've got a better idea, I'll just hire a string quartet to play in my living room.  Much more lifelike, and I don't have to sit in the dark.

edit:  I forgot to mention that quoting Hydrogen Audio to prove that which can't be measured does not exist is like quoting the Paul Ryan to prove the value of Republican economic policy (no political stance intended; substitute "Chuck Schumer" and "Democratic" if you like).

Excuse me now, must get back to work on my turntable.

Bob Sherman's picture

I am glad you posted the JPlay letter and I hope this foolishness by Mr. JRiver will cease and desist.

What in the world is he thinking. I even called him to politely ask him to please stop invading my computer with his silly re-director.  He is allowed to express his opinion, no matter how ridiculous it is on the JRIVER site or anywhere else he wants, but not on MY COMPUTER with the JRiver software I paid for!!! 

It is really such a simple concept to understand how JPlay can and does sound better. IMO The more stable a platform the OS can be, the less it will alter the music playing.

IMO One can even use simple physics to understand this concept. 

Nobody is asking JRiver to support JPlay in any way, just stop trashing Jplay and stop trashing peoples computer systems.  It now  seem if you run the JPlay demo the new JRiver or Foobar causes JPlay to stop completely. 

How stupid can some humans be. smh...

Why cant I take MY data from MY copy of JRiver and output it anywhere I want???

If I use KS or WASPI output to my DAC, or ASIO to Jplay how does this affect JRiver???

What's next??? Is Microsoft going to stop me from outputting an MS Word document to an Adobe PDF???

regards

Bob

tnargs's picture

Err, you *phoned* the owner of jriver to ask him to rewrite his software for your convenience? Rather than simply delete jriver and us jplay instead? You must *really* love jriver!

ednaz's picture

I decided to try jplay after reading the review here. I've made a lot of audio video decisions by testing, using my own ears and those of friends, family and guests.  

What's that mean?  For my main listening system, I switched to higher end interconnects after testing them against my "came with the gear" interconnects (both RCA and XLR), but didn't go to the ultimate end because when I compared them to higher end (but not ultimate) I couldn't tell a difference.  Not saying that with some other setup there wouldn't be a difference with the ultimate level interconnects - just that with mine, there seemed to be some point of diminishing returns.  I did the same with speaker connect wires - there was a level of upgrade that I could hear improved things, and a level above that where I couldn't.  I found significant improvements in USB cable that seemed to continue to a point well above what I wanted to spend, but found that with a USB/SPDIF converter that shortened the USB run and used SPDIF coax, I got a better sound than even with the breathtakinginly expensive USB cable I'd borrowed.  Interestingly (to me at least) I couldn't find any reason to upgrade my HDMI cables, although maybe that's because they weren't the cheapest to begin with.

On the sound system in my studio, I did the same testing, and got very different answers. Diminishing returns points for different connections were quite different.

So when I downloaded jplay to try it out, I was pretty confident I'd either like what I heard, or wouldn't notice a difference.  I listened to two favorite HD albums that seem to sound better on better gear, worse on worse gear, with Jriver, as I had for years.  Installed jplay, and listened again.  I was surprised at how much difference I heard.  More than switching from heavy duty commercial speaker wire to fancy speaker wire, more than interconnect upgrades.  I uninstalled jplay, and it was clearly missed.

I went through a couple more cycles of playing with and without jplay, over a couple of days time.  Each time I uninstalled I manually checked and cleaned out the registry and driver files.  I tried to tweak JRiver alone to match... maybe using Asio with JRiver instead of wasapi, since jplay uses asio?  No matter what I did, there was clearly a difference.  For a bit I thought that jplay was boosting gain, since that can produce a feeling that there's more resolution and depth, and checked that, but it wasn't boosting the signal. 

I'd just about made my decision, and did one more test using some jazz that both my wife and I like to listen to. When I'd uninstalled jplay and was playing with just JRiver, my wife, who'd been in and out of  the room throughout, came back in and asked me  what I'd done to the system, it sounded flatter and less interesting than before.  She had no idea what I was testing, or which was which, and listening to JRiver as she had for a long time, found it less engaging than what she'd heard with jplay.  I reinstalled jplay a few minutes later, and she came back to the room and said, yeah, that's it, now it's better, what did you do?

So, a relatively disengaged, non-audio-hobbyist passer by heard the difference enough to be concerned that I'd futzed up the system.  She had a very hard time believing that what she had found lacking was what she'd been enjoying before hand.

I find JRiver's reaction to be bizarre. No amplifier manufacturer critiques manufacturers of pre-amps, or speaker wire. Accessorizing and tweaking is part and parcel of many hobbies - cars, fashion, and ayup, audio.  Get over it!

I know for certain that jplay bogs down all kinds of system functions - trying to look somethign up on the web is painfully boggy.  I know for certain that it's buffering and staging the files differently - hit pause, and it takes seconds to get to a pause.  I have no way to determine exactly how it does what it does (I could read the code, but that kind of work is my day job, not something I do for fun at home...)

Jplay is installed on my system to stay.  (Only my main one - I haven't purchased licenses to go with the multiple jRiver licenses that I own, since systems other than my main one are typically background listening and not active listening.)  I love JRiver, and hope they get over their unseemly grumpies, because it too is on my systems to stay. (And I own five licenses, across two operating systems...) I'm willing to wager that there are systems where there's no noticeable difference.  I know that I own one where there is.

Audiofanatic's picture

Perhaps JRiver would be kind enough to explain how come bit-perfect player like JPLAY can degrade sound quality? I mean it's fine that one doesn't hear any improvement, but why JRiver claims jplay adds "a layer of sound processing that can degrade sound quality" when jplay is in fact a bit-perfect player?! What's going on here? 

jhwalker's picture

. . . to limit what "add-ons" can and cannot be used with their product, and to explain their position on their website

I tried "JPlay" myself and heard no difference.   Others have tested and showed the analog output from all the players is virtually identical - no difference whatseover.

JPlay did, however, stuff up my PC so that it no longer worked properly with any other software - particularly JRiver Media Center + JRemote.

So I'm sure JRiver was getting all kinds of support requests for assistance wtih "freezing" and JRemote not working, etc. - common denominator is JPlay.

I'd do the same if I had written and was selling a player that worked and I had to support if some interloper came along and tried to bolt some other piece of software onto my baby.

andy_c's picture

I'm delighted that the JRiver and fb2k authors are calling out these clowns and their by-default enablers in the audio press for what they are.  As to the above poster who states:

I know for certain that jplay bogs down all kinds of system functions - trying to look somethign up on the web is painfully boggy. I know for certain that it's buffering and staging the files differently - hit pause, and it takes seconds to get to a pause. I have no way to determine exactly how it does what it does (I could read the code, but that kind of work is my day job, not something I do for fun at home...)

This is evidence only of incompetence on the part of the Jplay developer and nothing else. Any software developer who gives their own program high priority, regardless of the consequences to the system, is a complete hack who has no business writing software at all, let alone software that people actually pay for.

The father of incompetent audio playback software is XXHighEnd, whose forum is amusingly where the author of Jplay got the idea for his software.  But at least XXHighEnd was a standalone application that did not affect the performance of existing, competently-designed applications.  Once you step into the realm of breaking existing apps, you've opened yourself up to the appropriate response.  And JRiver's response was entirely appropriate in my view.

Martin Osborne's picture

when a demo of JPlay software is available for free download enabling potential buyers to check it out with their own ears?

Listening sure beats flinging marketing copy around. 

Steven Plaskin's picture

I would like to add a few comments to this discussion.

My reviews of JPlay and the MSB Technology Analog DAC should actually have been written as one review. The MSB Technology transport (an optimized computer for music reproduction) exposed the “flaws” in the all-purpose computer we use for music reproduction.

While I feel that JRiver is an excellent program, it does not address the shortcomings of a device designed to perform many tasks.

I will continue to be an “enabler” of whatever it takes to advance my pursuit and passion of music reproduction.

Best regards to all,

Dr. Steven Plaskin

Clive's picture

There's a vocifierous set of people on forums saying all well designed amps and DACs sound the same.  We have the same being said about bit-perfect players too and you must use DBT to validate any claims.  As for DBT - what I find far more useful is long-term listening but I'd better not digress.  I agree that as technical quality has improved it's harder to discern differences, indeed many DACs sound more similar than different but differences do exist.  We all listen to those aspects of music which interest us, we are not all the same.  Some listen more intently than others too.  Whilst some I'm sure genuinely don't perceive differences between amps, DACs and Jriver/Foobar/JPLAY others do genunely hear differences.

When the internet started out it was about freedom of expression - where has this gone?  It seems now the internet is sometimes used to tell people what to think.  I'm all for hearing other peoples' opinions but I do not want to be told what I must think or hear.

BTW I believe the JPLAY guys are doing a really great thing with their product.  I'd like to add that some folks don't seem to realise that JPLAY is not just a plug-in to Jriver, it is also a fully functioning player which works just fine without Jriver.

meraklya's picture

..that's exactly what I thought about it after trying it out for a few days, hoax. In fact, it was so buggy that it was unusable. Of course, that's just how it worked for me. And in case it was an honest effort to write a genuine music playback program, as opposed to scam, then it would have improved in a couple of years... so who knows. I do think that the asking price is unrealistic for what it offers in terms of overall user experience.

rdsu's picture

This behaviour from JRiver is really ridiculous!!!

I changed a few emails with Mr. Jriver (Jim Hillegass) about this.

I told him that they should focus their work on JRiver and live the other applications alone!

Everyone is free to buy whatever they want, so they must stop doing websites like this one http://jriver.com/jplay.html, and take off the detection of JPlay from their software!

It seems that JRiver, besides a Media Software, now is an Anti-Hoax, Anti-Scamware, Anti-Malware and Anti-Whatever...

Then I asked a few questions that have not been answered:

Think about these:
- Why different audio outputs sounds different, even if they are bit-perfect?
- Why do you recommend the use of ASIO, provided by DDC/DAC manufactures, when all outputs should sound the same because they are bit-perfect?

- JPlay is also an ASIO driver, and Mitcho already made a great service to us on proving that it's bit-perfect, like it should be!

- If JPlay is bit-perfect, and I prefer the sound through it, because I clearly listen differences, like we also listen with different DDC/DAC manufactures drivers/firmwares versions, why should I not use it?

 

He just said that he understand my position, but he just don't completely agree.

 

This clearly show that his attitude is not in good faith!!!

 

(I have a JRiver license, and have not yet bought JPlay!)

Vincent Kars's picture

"JPLAY uses special ultra low-latency RAM to store music samples and massively pre-queues them so the sound driver can access them faster."

I wonder how this piece of software is able to mount special ultra low-latency RAM in my laptop.

Clive's picture

"I wonder how this piece of software is able to mount special ultra low-latency RAM in my laptop."

I'm guessing here but probably cache memory which already exists....

gefski's picture

 

I wouldn't play my computer files without JPLAY mini. Despite being clunky and fiddley to set up, it delivers open, dynamic, realistic music, exactly as advertised.

 

Tried and didn't buy JRiver about a year ago. Guess I could have whined about it being a "hoax"  since for me it was not the "...Premier Audio Solution..." they claimed it to be.

 

Shame on JRiver. Why not invest your time in improving your product instead of bashing others?

Priaptor's picture

Until 5.1 I had no use for JPlay.  In fact, I was bummed that I was an early adopter as it was more a pain than it was worth.  However, with 5.1 there was a noticeable improvement with my system, with a caveat.  That caveat was I am using an MSB Diamond and with the prior firmware and Win7 drivers, there was not contest-dual PC JPlay kicked butt over JRiver.

However, new firmware and driver for the MSB and now I find their ASIO + JRiver, with a single PC sounds better than my JPlay solution.  

My point being, there is no "correct" or "definitive" answer as to what is better per DAC as the variables are so numerous.

However, I applaud JPlay in their efforts and the more I learn what they are doing the more I understand.  JPlay has opened up new horizons both on a hardware and software level  I have fortunately been introduced to Paul (Pang) as a result, whose cables and USB card has enabled me to have by far the best music server I have heard to date.  I am not sure if MSB made changes to their USB drivers based on what they heard from JPlay (I doubt it) but I can say that without a doubt prior to their new release of drivers/firmware, JPlay was superior to their Win7 driver/firmware.

The point being, that no matter how you cut it and no matter which side of the JPlay v. JRiver v. Foobar controversy one resides in, JPlay has clearly raised the bar both on the hardware and software side of things and they are NOT a hoax.

Even though my software of choice "currently" is JRiver + MSB ASIO DRIVER, I can and will not refer to JPlay as a "hoax" as prior to the new drivers and firmware from MSB, JPlay clearly was superior.  Plus JPlay has clearly moved the hardware bar up a big notch.   

jaro's picture

I am scared of people who know so little about computer audio and despite of that they pretend to create the audio software.

Michael Lavorgna's picture

Over on the What's Best Forum there's some interesting discussion of JPLAY where Josef from JPLAY offers some additional details  (starting on Page 2):

JPLAY Responds: An Open Letter

There are also two threads on Audio Asylum:

JPLAY Responds

AudioStream posts a response from JPlay

exile_ken's picture

Foobar2000 reference is a red herring

JRivers assertion that their position is supported by one of their competitors, Foobar 2000, is misleading.  Foobar 2000 has long been of the opinion that their player does not “sound better” than other players: 

 

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 the other mainstream players are capable of doing the same by now.

 

Read between the lines and that tells me that the author of Foobar doesn’t believe that any “software” player setup correctly and with the same feature set available in other players “sounds better” than any other.  You are free to agree or disagree, but the people from JRiver referencing the authors of Foobar to prove their point is disingenuous in my view.

 

I tend to agree with Mr.(Ms?)  Foobar.  My own experience is that about 14 months ago I  installed JRiver on a trial basis and could not honestly say that it sounded better, or even different than my normal setup, which is Media Monkey 4 configured for WASAPI output with Windows 7 OS.   I uninstalled it near the end of the trial and went back to MM, which I still use today.  I also tried Foobar on an alternate, lower end desktop system but didn’t like the reliance on playlists.  So I am still a Media Monkey user and will  continue to be until I find a compelling reason to change.  I realize some on this board may look down their noses at this, but to quote my 12 year old, IDC.

prerich45's picture

I'm a JRiver fanboy....I mean really!  I love that product, and I will continue to use it and buy it.  However, I can't condone it's actions by placing the warning in the software. If any of the JRiver people are out there reading this, my advise would be to let JRiver stand on its own merit. You don't need to put a warning out - foobar as well.  You will lose customers behind this action.

I actually tried Jplay for about three days about a year ago and I took it off of my machine. My reasoning was I didn't want to give up that bit of convinence for my preceived slight audio improvement (to me there is a slight improvement).

If people want to add JPlay to JRiver or Foobar - to each his own.  Let your products stand on their own merit. 

deftoejam's picture

...since I first tried jplay:

- I discovered that my initial conclusion that things sounded different (and better) with jplay was a combination of a flawed setup, flawed testing, and flawed conclusions by me.

- Jplay was killing my computer: the thermal load by jplay jacking the CPU and shutting down my cooling fan was going to destroy it, and jplay made it clear they felt no liability for such damage.  Getting my money back for buying jplay won't even come close to covering the inevitable damages.  People who post that their computers were damaged seem to have their posts very quickly removed from the jplay site.

- I wasn't pleased to see they misappropriated trademarks and intellectual property until publically called out

[unsupported legal claims deleted. Ed.]

- I found the jplay developers' responses to what appear to be scientifically rigorous tests to be insulting to even my limited intelligence through their heavy use of logical fallacies, inconsistent, evasive, self-contradictory responses completely devoid of any rigorous test results to back up anything they claim.  They even admit to not have tested against what they claim as design goals they claim to have achieved!

I don't care how all of that is characterized as "scam", "hoax" or "to each his own", but I'm just glad I seem to have gotten all of the jplay stuff off my computer before it died, and thankful my natural gullibility and desire for something magical did not separate me from my money and a working computer.

Michael Lavorgna's picture

I've deleted your references to apparently non-existent forum posts and their claims since this does not even qualify as hearsay since you did not provide a reference and even if you did a forum post is hardly credible evidence for the serious nature of the claims you made.

deftoejam's picture

Nonexistent?  Really?  For example:

http://jplay.eu/forum/jplay/jplay-rights-violation/

And even if you still are geared up to delete my proven-to-be-accurate references for reasons other than journalistic accuracy and objectivity, then educate yourself on the following:

http://www.javaforge.com/project/jplay which proves another music-related app named "jplay" existed before the app currently under discussion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrid_system which, if you can't or won't look into it, provides for the protection of "jplay" for the original app because it existed first - no registration was required to receive the rights to that trademark.  Simply put, the developers of the jplay app being discussed in this thread do not own the trademark to "jplay".  If you have a registration or filing reference that shows transferred ownership, provide it.  This is pretty basic stuff and tested in many courts internationally for countries that have signed on the the Madrid system.

The above is merely an example and hardly the only proof of the accuracy of everything I originally posted and you erroneously deleted.  If you have proof that the jplay developers are not under legal scrutiny as you seem to claim, produce your proof.  I guess when the EU or other jurisdictions formally file things we'll learn more.

Michael Lavorgna's picture

...on a forum that's no longer there is not true? I'm not sure how I could do that. But I do appreciate the link to the JPLAY name issue.

I guess when the EU or other jurisdictions formally file things we'll learn more.

When/if that happens we will indeed learn more.

Shike's picture

JPlay did a lot of nasty things that could hurt Jriver's and FB2K's reputation.  They infringed on their IP by using both JRiver's and Foobar's logos on the main page associating themselves with the other products as a valid addition.  Equally, the program creates massive stability issues which can only hurt JRiver and Foobar users trust of the products.  It's also quite possible the JPlay has broken the FB2K SDK ToS.

In terms of programming, the author has been unable to answer basic questions such as how he is limiting loading into cache, how it's taken into accounts varying sizes, and has contradicted himself more than a few times.

For those that want to just listen though, HA agrees!  Just do it in an ABX - they believe in music too, and if it's a solid change you should be able to tell right?  HA even offered to help the author setup a test, which he said he would . . . wonder how that's going for him . . .

ABX would put an end to this "bit are bits" argument if you truly believe there's a difference.  The phrase is "put up or shut-up", the HA community has already shown their evidence (and that was being nice).

Michael Lavorgna's picture

I'm assuming you are referring to Hydrogen Audio. I'm not so sure everyone reading this will know the reference.

prerich45's picture

Wow....the last (and only time) I tested JPlay it appeared to be an approved plug-in (kinda lets you know when I tested it blush).  I just went to the JPlay site and yep all references to it being a JRiver plugin are gone.  I also looked at my JRiver 18 and the Jplay option is gone. I didn't even noticesurprise!!!!! 

As far as hardware damage - I didn't feel the consequences of JPlay turning off the fan (I don't think the version I tested did that), besides my cooler can run with it's heat pipes alone on a Quad Core cpu (non overclocked).  However - if this is true, there should be some type of warning by Jplay to inform users of what it actually does.

To me Jplay was just ...clumsy when used by its lonesome - and took away some of the advantages of JRiver when used as a plugin. I'm staying with JRiver myself (yes ...I'm biased, love the program). Now I'm curious to see what everyone else has to say and who's performed what test and how.

jplay's picture

prerich45 - where did you get the idea jplay turns off the fan?

it doesn't - in fact, it's not even possible for Windows app to do it even if it wanted to...

prerich45's picture

  I didn't get the ideal - one of the other posters mentioned it - I stated that I never noticed it doing it to mine - and if it had - my computer is designed to run silent.  I just feel comfortable having a fan.  I could run without it if I wanted to. I'm refering to the comments of another poster as I was shocked to learn this.  

Here's the comment from one of the people posting here:

"- Jplay was killing my computer: the thermal load by jplay jacking the CPU and shutting down my cooling fan was going to destroy it, and jplay made it clear they felt no liability for such damage. Getting my money back for buying jplay won't even come close to covering the inevitable damages. People who post that their computers were damaged seem to have their posts very quickly removed from the jplay site".

The user was "deftoejam"  - Your beef should be with him.  Re-read my post, it was in reaction to infomation from another post....and if you read all of my post - you will find that I think all olf the products should stand on their own merits.  I actually went against the actions of the product I enjoy (JRiver)  - not wanting them to put the "warning" in their software - just let it stand on its own.  I'm not against you JPlay...I admitted to hearing a small improvement, however it was not enough to warrant a $130 purchase and I lost many of the features I've come to love in JRiver. 

As a JRiver fan....I'm actually as neutral as you can get! If people love your product - fine and dandy - buy it, if they don't - its no skin off of your back.  Same with JRiver, (Foobar is freewink - so they have the least to loose). For the record, I don't look at your product as a hoax or scam, but its not for me.

jplay's picture

deftoejam - Posting fake links as 'evidence' is really bad form and pretty much disqualifies you for any response.

Just for the record: unlike JRiver which routinely removes/edits posts on their forum, not a single comment on jplay forum has ever been removed apart from a single post with torrent to some pirated music..(hopefully that was not you again?)

shike - JPLAY is and was a stand-alone player yet our users demanded a convenience plug-in for foobar and JRiver: FYI Both foobar/JRiver support a countless number of plug-ins and encourage new ones be developed.

However, no logos are featured on our main page as you claim (or anywhere on our site for that matter) and JPLAY uses _none_ or depends on _any_ of foobar's or JRiver's technologies. Please verify your claims before posting - Thank you.

Shike's picture

They are NO LONGER on your page, jriver had to ask you to remove them.  They were on your website (main or other) at one point in time.  Trying to get out of this with weasel words isn't going to help you.

If you're using a front-end, you are depending on them - but that's not what I was getting at with IP infringment (copyright and trademark was more like it).

>and encourage new ones be developed.

Correct, when they don't hinder stability and hurt their user base based on a, for all intents and purposes likely, scam.  The devs have made it clear, yours is not approved or recommended in any way shape or form - it's considered a joke at best.

 

Do proper ABX testing if you're going to make a claim that you can't measure differences but claim they exist, that's what ABX is FOR.  It's not up to anyone to prove a null.  ABX testing involves music, so you can't claim all we're asking is for some random waves or number crunching.

Michael Lavorgna's picture

I guess you didn't read the AudioStream Terms of Service where we strictly forbid any mention of ABX testing?

Of course I'm kidding but I'm not kidding when I point out that we're not on Hydrogen Audio so there's as much point in demanding ABX testing as there is in threatening to hold your breath until you get your way. Although you might feel better if you stomp your feet!

Cheers.

Shike's picture

If you read the thread at HA, jplay was told to provide proper testing.  He asked what proper testing was, was informed of ABX, and said he would perform said testing.  Where is that testing, hm?

 

Now in this open letter he's saying "we can't measure or test" -- even though they ARE aware of a form of testing (one that isn't even measurements, but invovles music of their choice!).  So I take it he's reneged on his mention of doing said test?

Excuse me while I play a dirge on the smallest violin while his grasps at straws falls on not so deaf ears.

Michael Lavorgna's picture

Boy have you got the wrong guy.

Shike's picture

Who?  The guy who developed jplay and said he'd do ABX testing or you?

Michael Lavorgna's picture

Me. I don't read HA and if I was JPLAY, and I'm not, I wouldn't engage in the kind of discourse that goes on there.

Shike's picture

It certainly would've been smarter to not discuss something you have no intents on proving in a forum that basically requires proof just to post.

 

Reneging, contradictions, ripping off logos (removed when contacted by jriver) . . .

 

Just from a business standpoint beyond the current fiasco that creates other issues.  It would have been better to be closed lip and ignore accusations like other larger businesses (addressing rumors tends to actually hurt a business without intent to litigate).

 

Once again though, HA does advocate listening with one's ears though - moreso than anywhere else in many ways.

Bob Sherman's picture

"I guess you didn't read the AudioStream Terms of Service where we strictly forbid any mention of ABX testing?"

Michael,

Not such a bad idea. I cannot understand when it comes to audio why some people do not trust their senses? Are they that insecure? Do they need testing to know what dog s--t smells like also. The HA types actually sadden me. Music is one of the special things in life, a gift. The whole HA mentality poisons it. 

regards

Bob

Clive's picture

JPLAY is a product whereas jPlay just seems to be a project someone has dreamed up.

As for EU action, if someone has emailed the EU then fine let's see what they say.  They are more likely to be concerned about the anti-competitive actions of Jriver. This is the EU not the US.

Shike's picture

How is it anti-competitve?  Saying "we won't support use of jplay" isn't anti-competitive.  At best jplay can claim defamation - IF they can prove a difference.

In comparison, JPLAY is being looked at as if it were a blue pill you get from a spam company.

Clive's picture

How's Jriver anti-competitive?  Because they redirect a user of Jriver with JPLAY to their hoax spam page.  This is trying to stifle a company who at times can be a competitor (when viewed as a complete player provider).  

 

I hardly think the EU is going to be concerned about a 2 person company selling functioning audio software which many people use standalone.  The EU however take restricive trading practices much more seriously.  Look at what they did with Microsoft but are they really going to waste time on a storm in a teacup?

Shike's picture

 It's up to jplay to prove they aren't a scam.  When it's used with jriver breaking stability and measurably provides bit-perfect output we're going to go with the null hypothesis.  In this case, that jplay doesn't make a difference.

Until jplay takes a solid step into proving otherwise they can't prove defamation, and as long as what Jriver wrote isn't false they are perfectly free to express that opinion (*cough* fact *cough*) as they please.

Clive's picture

Amongst the whining about JPLAY, it not being bit-perfect isn't one of them.  

When you take a balanced view of JPLAY most people will see it as a fully functional standalone player.  Yes it can be used in conjuction with ANY ASIO compliant player too but this is a side issue.  It's a standalone player which works.  How can it be a hoax....you may not like it but that's your perogative and you can try before you buy.  JPLAY have nothing to prove.

Oh yes, it's ASIO compliant.  Other ASIO players leverage the same standard for free so why can't JPLAY?  BTW one of the primary reasons for standards in the software industry is INTEROPERABILITY.  That's what we have when JPLAY is configured to work with other ASIO compliant players - this is by user choice.  Standards without interoperbility make little sense.

Shike's picture

You can't be bit-perfect and claim to sound better without violating the other with our current understanding of physics.  Bit perfect means it's matching what's being sent perfectly - the other players do this too and it can be measured.

The only argument available is that there's some thing that can't be measured, but we can test audibility with ABX.  When the provider does that (which they claimed they would at HA) we'll see.  They're claiming they can't measure or test this now which is amusing.

Interoperability is great!  Unfortunately, JPLAY ruined the stability of players.  After getting reported enough via troubleshooters it got put under scrutiny.  This is the result of that.

 

The scam/hoax claim comes from the fact that the "improvement" claimed hasn't been proven.  At best the player is bit-perfect as claimed, but really doesn't improve anything.  At worst it isn't, and may subjectivley sound better (unlikely).  That's what jriver claimed, and at this point has shown to be true.

Clive's picture

Jriver say JPLAY sounds worse than Jriver.  How can this be as it's bit perfect, it doesn't stack up.

I don't know whether there's an issue with stability.  I've not once had JPLAY crash my PC so I don't see a problem.  There will be an occaisional problem for sure - SHOCK, HORROR - SOFTWARE ISN'T 100% RELIABLE - show me any software that is 100% reliable.  I bet Jriver wouldn't claim it is 100% reliable and pay damages if it ever failed.

Shike's picture

>Jriver say JPLAY sounds worse than Jriver.  How can this be as it's bit perfect, it doesn't stack up.

False, they say it CAN cause sound degredation, performance, or stability issues.  If it works properly the first won't happen, no matter what the others do.

At best, jplay can be bit-perfect and not effect the sound.  If that's the case, it doesn't sound different so what's the point in using it?  If it does sound different, then it's not bit-perfect.

>I don't know whether there's an issue with stability.  I've not once had JPLAY crash my PC so I don't see a problem. 

It breaks visualizations, seeking in tracks, and slows the system down for no reason other than unproven audiophile paranoia.

And by the way, I'm not even speaking from the Jriver perspective or camp, I use FB2K (whose developer had tons of jplay junk in the troubleshooter that he modified the description to 'audiophile scam').

joelha's picture

"The scam/hoax claim comes from the fact that the "improvement" claimed hasn't been proven.  At best the player is bit-perfect as claimed, but really doesn't improve anything.  At worst it isn't, and may subjectivley sound better (unlikely).  That's what jriver claimed, and at this point has shown to be true."

Shike,

A hoax is an intentional deceptive act.

Can you prove that in regards to JPLAY's claim that their software betters the sound of Foobar or JRiver (and other players as well, in my opinion), that Josef and Marcin know their claim is false and yet still persist in misrepresenting their product?

You make up your own definition for hoax and then you publically slander a couple of guys with your (I presume) baseless claim.

In my opinion you should prove the intentional deception, apologize, or be bounced off this forum.

Easy to sit behind your keyboard protected by your anonymity and sling your personal attacks (if you can prove your claim, I'll apologize).

And no, not being able to prove something doesn't mean you're a con artist. It just means you can't prove something but you can still believe it to be true.

What is wrong with you that you need someone to explain this to you?

Joel

Shike's picture

Do not libel me (the correct term).  I never referred to them as a hoax, and only once as a scam using FB2K's author's terminology in layperson term.  If I was to acuse them of fraud that's much more specifc.

Language and how it's used changes, that's why we have archaic usages of words today.

You're right in that they may believe it does better, but they have been informed on how to test this.  So here are all the posibilities:

  • They believe it works, but have chosen not to test.
  • They know it works based on tests, but haven't released the results.
  • They believe it doesn't work, and as such chose not to test.
  • They know it doesn't work, and haven't released the result.

So take your pick of what you think, I believe those are all the valid options - three of which are likely and absolutely no insults.

Michael Lavorgna's picture

The debate is whether or not using JPLAY as a plugin along with other players improves the resultant sound.

There are those that abide by "listen for yourself" and those that prefer ABX testing. JPLAY is hardly alone in its position in the middle of this never ending and pointless, imo, skirmish.

Shike - your repeated focus on the intentions of the JPLAY developers strikes me as nothing short of an unhealthy obsession and I've heard enough of this point of view and what amounts to a guessing game at the expense of people's reputations.

So....any additional posts that guess at people's motives or otherwise demean or insult anyone by anyone, will be deleted and I will block the offending parties account.

Shike's picture

>"The debate is whether or not using JPLAY as a plugin along with other players improves the resultant sound."

That is what I mean by saying "works", as in as they claim (improving resultant sound).  If you're using the Windows mixer and Direct Sound then under circumstances it would, but plenty of players do that.

> your repeated focus on the intentions

I feel that's an unfair representation.  The previous post is the only one where I discussed any potential intentions, otherwise I've stuck to business practices, promises, and claims.  I also think the "unhealthy obsession" comment is a rather unnecessary pointed insult, especially when there's plenty of audiphiles who have had that used to describe their hobby here - I mean look what this discussion is even on and many would raise eyebrows.

Regardless I enjoy debating those with opposite viewpoints, it has sometimes changed my and others' perspective.

 

Also, I decided to give jplay a fair shake and download the trial, it sounded like FB2K in WASAPI to me.  It seems that the program is basically acting as a ramdisk holding the playlist, which for a few people may be kind of neet to prevent HDD access (clicking, etc).  I wouldn't be surpised if there's another way of doing it for other players, something I may look into.  That's about the only redeeming feature I could immediately find though at the cost of things like replaygain and room correction . . .

deftoejam's picture

...to also be applied to jplay's posts and those containing claims about jplay's virtues - evidence, proof, test results, etc.  Clever marketing-speak doesn't qualify.  (waiting....) (crickets...).. I thought not...

Michael Lavorgna's picture

...their experiences with JPLAY, both good and bad, and the section of your comment that I deleted, I'm afraid we're not going to come an understanding.

Steven Plaskin's picture

A few misconceptions have been suggested here. JPlay did not kill or harm my computer nor did it turn the fans off. 

It does not harm JRiver or Foobar. jPlay has suggestions for proper hardware to use with their program. 

i honestly don't care what people use for their software, but I feel that some of the comments are simply beyond the pale.

Shike's picture

It's hindered stability of both players.

jplay's picture

'stability'

shike: Not sure what you have in mind by stability as post is a bit light on specifics but perhaps you had in mind couple reports of Windows blue-screens reported on our forum? That is a valid point so let me try to explain it in more detail:

Unlike MacOS which fully supports HiRez formats 'out-of-the-box', Microsoft deemed audiophiles an ultra-small market not worth investing in and left Windows USB Audio driver at its initial Vista level (when all drivers had to be rewritten due to switch from XP architecture): hence only DACs that go up to 24/96 are supported on Windows...

This forces DAC manufacturers to spend additional funds acquiring a Windows driver capable of higher resolutions and, predictably, some have tried to cut corners.

Luckily, after more than two years and dozens upon dozens of DACs we run into only one or two DAC drivers which when presented with ultra-small buffers (a key feature of jplay not explored by either foobar/JRiver) just crash so Windows Blue-Screens... These are simply bugs in DAC drivers and only developer of said drivers is able to fix them - regardless of anything, driver should never crash - period.

If anything, our insistence on ultra-small buffers has pushed DAC manufacturers to pay more attention to software drivers (as they are a critical component of computer audio and irrespective of jplay!) so many now regularly use jplay not only for usual DAC listening tests but also as 'endurance test' of driver itself which clearly benefits consumers too and regardless of player used...

Shike's picture

I mean breaking player stability.  Tracking issues, visualization issues, crashes with other plugins that 100% abide by SDK ToS as intended.

As for your complaint about Windows and the mixer - merely using WASAPI fixes the issue providing a bit-perfect output with provided drivers and no crashing.

 

I'd also be interested in what you consider an "ultra-small buffer" since you've mentioned fitting in cache multiple times before in areas.  So please, do tell the size and how you're sure only the music is loaded into cache effectively - a question you dodged when programmers at HA pressed you.

jplay's picture

shike - sorry I misunderstood but it seems you're not up to speed: I see you are talking about v4 which admittedly wasn't the last word on user-experience ultimately because plugin APIs simply were never designed for replaceable playback engines. Took as a while to learn that they cannot be fixed either so we ended up removing all JRiver/foobar plugin code and standardised on ASIO interface which proved very robust. v5 has been publicly available since January and you may be pleasantly surprised if you give it a try.

What we mean by ultra-small buffer is a single sample - smaller is simply not possible. 

Hope that clears it up if not please feel free to direct any technical questions you still have in our forum or support mail as we should not misuse the hospitality of this site - thanks.

mav52's picture

This whole thing sounds like a bunch of kids arguing over who's got the best bike, totally unprofessional from all parties involved. 

bsm's picture

"If anything, our insistence on ultra-small buffers has pushed DAC manufacturers to pay more attention to software drivers (as they are a critical component of computer audio and irrespective of jplay!) so many now regularly use jplay not only for usual DAC listening tests but also as 'endurance test' of driver itself which clearly benefits consumers too and regardless of player used..."

Please list those manufacturers.

jplay's picture

We had great cooperation with M2Tech whose drivers we always recommend as gold-test in case driver is suspect (HiFace being so widely available made it a de-facto measuring stick) and also Audiophilleo who where extremely helpful and even provided Beta drivers literally within days.

meraklya's picture

Exactly how I imagined it to be.

 

http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013_06_01_archive.html

Bob Sherman's picture

Absolutely!!!! 

Just like trying to measure the diameter  of a  human hair with a yardstick!!!  smh
 

"Here are some objective measurements of JPLAY performance

 

Exactly how I imagined it to be.

 

http://archimago.blogspot.ca"/2013_06_01_archive.html"

 

gorkuz's picture

I note that Mr. Hillegass goes on about "bit perfect" in his response, but sidesteps the matter of "timing perfect", or jitter, which we have learned over and over is critical to best results in digital reproduction. Just how shortsighted and nose-led are we expected to be? We learn it applies to DACs, but cannot mentally extend ourselves to realize this must apply to music handling inside a computer?

His protectionism and trashing of JPlay is rather unseemly and suspect in any case, and all too reminiscent of some of the ugly things done over the years by RIAA.

Had he attacked something more concrete, if it is, such as the deactivation of cooling fans mentioned above (not from my experience, just quoting an assertion made above for example only) he would be bringing up a more legitimate sounding concern. To say that there is no measured evidence, so there cannot be any difference, in a matter of audio is absurdly arrogant. We've heard that egocentrism all too often from mind-ossified engineers who feel that if They don't know how to measure it, it can't exist, since they are self-assuredly the end-all of all knowledge. You know, the sort that once insisted that all bits were alike and any perceived differences were entirely audiophile imagination...until Sony itself started writing papers about jitter.

OTOH, JPlay's avoiding responsibility for damage from turning off the fans, if true (again quoting from above text for example only) isn't "cricket", either. We certainly do know how important heat extraction is to processors, even if I personally do abhorr the fan noises most computers make.

Maybe the the "scam" namecalling should be dropped and more solid assertions discussed, like what we can hear. The human ear still is, and will be for a long time, be the most sophisticated and developed measuring instrument around. Note that not every instrument is as good as another, so go with what fits your level of equipment and hearing. Go by that , and not philosophical, PR-prejudicial, or quasi-legal arguments. And don't insist that something can't exist or be true because you didn't hear it, in one of thousands of possible configurations available to us. So long as your computer doesn't get damaged, of course.

joelha's picture

Gorkuz,

I know you're only quoting someone else, but JPLAY absolutely does not turn off the fans in PC's.

I use JPLAY and frequent their forum and neither I nor anyone whose post I've ever read has indicated otherwise.

Josef at JPLAY confirms this point. He goes further in saying that for his software such an action is impossible.

Honestly, what people are willing to say to trash a product or prove a point, with no facts to suport their statement, is hard to believe.

At best the comments are mis-informed . . . and I don't want to say what I think they are at worst.

Joel   

gorkuz's picture

Joel,

Tx for the detail, we are not in disagreement. I twice was careful to point out I was only quoting for procedural example, with a clear "if true" qualifying, rather that meaning to promulgate what may not be so.  I'm quite happy to hear it is not. Doing that did not make sense to me, or really seemed likely.

I have not noted JPlay doing that on my computer, either, but have used it very superficially and not in some time. But there are so many versions of everything nowadays that there's no being sure of this unless the designer, who is the only person that can be familiar with every one, weighs in on this. I am happy to hear something more concrete than the scurrilous blather flying around in this matter.

deftoejam's picture

... and I blame jplay for killing it.  jplay killed whatever process(s) controlled my cooling fan, and the damage is irreparable.  jplay's claims that they didn't do this lacks any credibility - by their own admission they kill any process not related to their narrow focus of audio, and jplay has not shown any awareness or provided separate executables for each the many CPU/OS/PC manufacturer/PC model/firmware combinations to prevent thermal overload.  Simply put, they kill many processes without knowing what they do, and it could prove fatal to your computer, too.

joelha's picture

deftoejam,

That you blame JPLAY, I have no doubt.

That you can prove JPLAY is responsible, I have a very strong doubt.

And there's your post on this site from June 19: "I don't care how all of that is characterized as "scam", "hoax" or "to each his own", but I'm just glad I seem to have gotten all of the jplay stuff off my computer before it died, and thankful my natural gullibility and desire for something magical did not separate me from my money and a working computer."

If you were so certain JPLAY was harming your computer, and you uninstalled it, presumably on or before the time of your 6/19 post, then how did it come to kill your computer in the middle of July?

You'd be better off not posting on this topic any further.

You're not doing yourself any favors.

Joel

lvc10000's picture

I am quite saddened reading this discussion. 

JRiver is such a great program for an audiophile with a dedicated computer with its greatly customizable design/display that can be configured just the way we like it, it reads all the file formats we dream of and improves to new ones, you can parameter everything down to fine details, has all the output plugins already there for our convenience, awesome sound, open user approach that can create skins for the community and what have you, has a killer remote ap, handles large collections of files from our favorite artists so well. It's just a wonderful job they did for us by having such an open mind in creating such a program. How could it not seduce most of us!?

Personally I have been playing JRiver for 3 to 4 years and JPlay probably about a couple of years. Both in my main system. And they both do wonderful jobs but to say the difference is not audible is hard to believe as it is fact on quite resolving systems and less on others (as I've witnessed). I am not saying you have to like it or not. And yes I do have my preference just as does mr. Plaskin - and my tastes are not universal. I am just another audiophile on the quest of his happiness.

So Mr. JRiver; we all appreciate to have your opinion especially when properly moderated, take notice and are still as convinced you are doing your upmost for our ears' happiness. Please do continue to make your program as flexible and wonderful as you have and continue letting us choose the setups we prefer. It's as simple as deleting a plugin we wouldn't happen to like. And just about everyone debating here can go on happily listening using JRiver just the way he or she likes it! :-)

deftoejam's picture

- Never had a thermal problem before installing jplay

- Had repeated tripping of thermal overload protection on PC immediately after installing and using jplay.

- Thermal tripping went away immediately after uninstalling jplay.

- Took recently dead PC to PC repair shop, and without telling them anything, they immediately observed that the thermal overload protection had been overwhelmed and noted heat marks on my PC board.  They told me that depending on thermal overload protection, especially repeatedly, is not infallible, the resulting damage is cumulative and irrepairable, and that such overloads significantly shorten the life of any PC.

If you have any evidence that thermal damage is self-healing, does not damage PCs, or does not shorten integrated circuit life, produce it.

The lesson: even removing jplay after repeated thermal issues may not save your PC, since the damage is permanent, and failure can happen at any time even after removal because of the cumulative nature of thermal damage.

joelha's picture

So let's see, the programmer of JPLAY says that it's not possible to shut down the fan of your PC as a result of JPLAY. You say you know better.

There is no other report which I've seen or heard about (and if you have one which is documented on-line, please post it) of another JPLAY user suffering a similar problem of excessive heating resulting in damage to the PC.

You can say that your excessive heating issue began with your use of JPLAY, but you can't prove it wasn't due to some other change in your system.

And finally, a month after you uninstall JPLAY your PC dies and you still attribute the issue to JPLAY.

A description of "unfair bias" seems to understate this case.

Joel

deftoejam's picture

>So let's see, the programmer of JPLAY says that it's not possible to shut down the fan of your PC as a result of JPLAY. You say you know better.

- Read much?  I stated I oberved a cause-and-effect relationship.  Proposing that I said anything about knowing better is a strawman fallacy.

>There is no other report which I've seen or heard about (and if you have one which is documented on-line, please post it) of another JPLAY user suffering a similar problem of excessive heating resulting in damage to the PC.

- Another fallacy-based argument.  Validity of what I observed depends on how closely I tracked the cause and effect.  Jplay was the only change to my system that I made.

>You can say that your excessive heating issue began with your use of JPLAY, but you can't prove it wasn't due to some other change in your system.

- You really studied fallacies to come up with that - you can't prove a negative and the inability to do so doesn't prove your assertion.

>And finally, a month after you uninstall JPLAY your PC dies and you still attribute the issue to JPLAY.

- Again, the PC repair shop implicitly did so when attributing the failure to thermal overload issues which I had directly observed in a cause and effect manner.  Again, if you believe that thermal effects ca't be cumulative, etc, prove it.

>A description of "unfair bias" seems to understate this case.

- You wrap up with a thinly-veiled ad hominem attack.  Nice.

If your response was an attempt to shift discussion to fallacy-based arguments, I won't bite.  It would be interesting for you to demonstrate your objectivity in using your same methods in evaluating jplay.  Or better yet, skip the fallacies and just wonder why there has not been a single fact-based, data-driven analysis showing what jplay does backing jplay's claim that PC players like JRiver and foobar2000 are bitperfect but timing incompetent, showing in detail how jplay fixes this issue and showing double blind audibility tests of the result.  When you respond, keep in mind the jplay developers' repeated reponses that they neither had the ability to measure the claimed deficiency in their software design stage nor the ability to measure their supposed fix after development.  (What would you think of a developer who said to you "We had a design goal that we could not measure or track before, during or after development, but we are nevertheless claiming we achieved this design goal!") Their claim is ironically like insisting there is an undetectable teapot circling the Sun, and then demanding that skeptics prove it doesn't exist - among the many fallacies invoked in lieu of credible proof.

joelha's picture

"Read much?  I stated I oberved a cause-and-effect relationship.  Proposing that I said anything about knowing better is a strawman fallacy"

Do you read what you write much? You stated a cause a cause-and-effect relationship which, assuming the JPLAY programmer is correct (and I certainly do), is flat out wrong.

 

"- Another fallacy-based argument.  Validity of what I observed depends on how closely I tracked the cause and effect.  Jplay was the only change to my system that I made."

Great. So you're the only posted case out of thousands of users that either of us knows of and can reproduce in which such an event took place. Some would call that a reason to question your conclusion. You obviously don't.

 

"You really studied fallacies to come up with that - you can't prove a negative and the inability to do so doesn't prove your assertion."

Same story. Your issue appears to be unique. We'll leave the reader to make his own conclusions.

 

"Again, the PC repair shop implicitly did so when attributing the failure to thermal overload issues which I had directly observed in a cause and effect manner.  Again, if you believe that thermal effects ca't be cumulative, etc, prove it."

The same remarkable mystery which only you seem to have experienced.

And finally, earlier in this thread, you accuse JPLAY of having removed posts from their forum related to similar issues, which they absolutely deny having done. Yet one more unprovable assertion you have made.

Your experience with JPLAY seems to be wrapped in uniqueness and mystery.

I'll just continue to listen to and enjoy and JPLAY as will most all of the other users.

Joel

 

 

 

 

deftoejam's picture

...so at the end of this all you have to add is the argumentum ad populum fallacy.

>"You stated a cause a cause-and-effect relationship which, assuming the JPLAY programmer is correct (and I certainly do), is flat out wrong".

The jplay developers got pwned on every single technical aspect they attempted to discuss, resulting in their backtracking to a Russell's Teapot fallacy defense, yet you think that their claims of control of the processes they kill are credible?  It would be unique that the jplay developers stated anything technically credible, much less proven.

The irony of labelling and condemning the apparent uniqueness of my experience (made apparently unique by mysteriously missing posts for which you again demand the impossible proof of a negative), while simultaneously invoking the same in your response, is just too funny...

Michael Lavorgna's picture

....I can assure you of that.

You are talking about one case out of how many users (rhetorical question)? If in fact JPLAY caused thermal overload as you suggest, my feeling is we'd be hearing from more people with similar stories to yours.

The notion that there were other incidences which were deleted from the JPLAY forum is not very credible imo since these same people would most certainly complain somewhere else. Just as you are doing. Besides the JPLAY people have said they did not delete any posts from their forum and I have no reason to believe otherwise.

But you've made your case and people can certainly read your claims and make of them what they wish.

It's time to move on.

joelha's picture

Sorry Michael.

I'm done.

Joel

PeterSt's picture

Hi y'all,

I'm the guy of that dreaded XXHighEnd and I have been following this blog for a week or two. When I read about processors heating up, my right away literal thinking was "yea, I saw *that* one coming". Didn't want to interfere until now people imply it over and done with.

Never mind what the JPlay boys think or (not) tell, trust me, you will be steaming up your processor when the explicit advice on the JPlay forum is been followed (what that advice is is for you to find out). Whether your processor can take it depends on many other (also environmental) things and of course it is so that any processor can take more heat than advised, but it won't live longer because of that for sure.

Not wanting to think negatively (hence JPlay developers may not know themselves), I think I know a few more things about this and it is sufficiently proven that I do by referring to my own explicit warnings and "test in advance !" kind of texts some Release Notes to versions of XXHighEnd bear. One thing is 100% sure : of course playback software can control the cooling of the processor. But I guess JPlay (forum) is a bit of a wild bunch were it about trying or proposing tweaks - something I just don't allow on my forum (Phasure). You can even see an example of that in a very recent post from today, including the Why. And hey, wasn't that the sheer reason why Marcin and Josef left XXHighEnd ? I think it was ...

Happy tweaking, but be careful.

Peter

Disclaimer : I too, of course, can not say that this really happened but it is in the logical line of thoughts (for me) once such a story is there and after seeing meant "advice" maybe two months ago.

 

 

 

Bob Sherman's picture

Peter,

Can you please give some specifics as your assertion make little sense to me, Sorry.

" When I read about processors heating up, my right away literal thinking was "yea, I saw *that* one coming". Didn't want to interfere until now people imply it over and done with."

I read the foolishness and ignored it but when you decided to comment I felt it necessary to say something. JPlay cannot overheat ones CPU! There is nothing JPlay does to cause this. I would love for you show otherwise. Of course we are talking about a proper functioning system, not some substandard junk... Aren't we???

"Never mind what the JPlay boys think or (not) tell, trust me, you will be steaming up your processor when the explicit advice on the JPlay forum is been followed (what that advice is is for you to find out)."

Sorry I don't trust you.  I know better. Why the cloud of  mystery? Please tell us.

At the moment I am running an Atom Caps FANLESS server (can't get a much more anemic CPU) and pushing my max settings, upsampling in JRiver and very aggressive JPlay setting I am running 50% CPU utilization.  I have no problem, and never will for maybe the next 100 year!

"Not wanting to think negatively (hence JPlay developers may not know themselves),"

I think they do. I do! Can you provide some info about CPUs? Why do you even think that a properly designed and working system would overheat? It will not! And please tell us what a Intel CPU does when it does overheat? 

"I think I know a few more things about this and it is sufficiently proven that I do by referring to my own explicit warnings and "test in advance !" kind of texts some Release Notes to versions of XXHighEnd bear."

Just because you say you do, does not make it so! Sorry....

"One thing is 100% sure : of course playback software can control the cooling of the processor."

Please tell us how JPlay does this??? It does not 100% on my system. Maybe I should try the other 15 computers I have?

regards

Bob

Eltonnotjohn's picture

Michael say "Enjoyment is not governed by one's understanding of the mechanics..."

True. But enjoyment is not IMPROVED by misunderstanding them either.

And I see these misunderstandings everywhere. On this site, as well as others. At least this site has clear articles which one may dismiss as nonsense or agree with.  But audio 'experts' (mainly self-appointed) writings on computers are taken as 'gospel' whereas computer  'experts' (usually working as one of many respected employees) writings on computers are not. Why is that? Obvious. No magazine or forum devoted to computer audio is going to get many buyers or subscribers if they always say "The computer you use makes no difference so look at other aspects", are they?

JRiver.

ALL software companies ask you to remove 'foreign attachments'  before they are willing to investigate your problem. A very sensible thing to do and JRiver is doing the same. So don't complain about them. Anyone possessing a brain cell would have done it anyway. It is the standard thing to do and you should, as a matter of commonsense, do it. If it still broken then, the 'base' software has a fault. If it works without the 'add-on' then the add-on has a fault. Neither JRiver or anyone else can  devote their time to checking if it works with all the unapproved add ons that exist in the software business. Don't forget, it is JPlay that says it works with JRiver, not the other way around.

But they did handle it badly. The 'hoax' comments were unnecessary. Their Conditions of Service (if they have any) would cover such eventualities. As do MicroSofts, Apples, IBMs, etc. Go complain about them on this matter too.

Finally, 'All amplifiers, software players, whatever, sound the same'. Of course not. They are all imperfect, but their imperfections are different. Take your choice on which imperfections you like the most. If the 'high end' was as good as it pretends, they WOULD all sound the same. Only the 'budget' ones would souind different from each other.

DH's picture

All these JPlay/JRiver threads are tiresome. Stop arguing about it. JRiver clearly has a position on JPlay. Doesn't look like they have any plans to change their position.

If you don't like it, don't update your version of JRiver and keep using it with JPLay. You actually don't HAVE to update your JRMC - the older versions still work! Or use Foobar.

Listen to music instead of warring online about the 2 software companies.

X
Enter your AudioStream username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
Loading