Windows XP or Windows 7?

Thanks for the info. I am a 20 yr retiree from Navy. My last Command was a Bird Farm, The U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln
based at Everett WA.
Do you know how many so called High End external
Computer DAC's claim that USB 2.0 can only handle Music
Files from 33kHz to 48kHz? They build the reciever chips
for USB 2.0 Input to only handle CD 44.1kHz for this
reason, or so they claim. It is just like I was told that
DVD ROM couldn't rip Multi-channel High Resolution Disks.
They can and Media Players DO exist for storing these type
of recordings. Still couldn't even get verification for this from DVD ROM Manufacturer, they were clueless or even didn't care!
You can understand why trying to learn about PC Music
Storage for the first time is such an uphill battle. Oh, but don't use Windows XP for Music Storage, so says some
so called Expert in PC Music Storage of a Major Nat'l
Stereo Magazine. One Gross Conceptual Error on top of
another. Contact PC Manufacturer to get the straight scoop.
High Definition? Multi-Channel? 24/96,24/192? What the hell is all of that! Hey Pal, it's just what ya see! Nice
vacuum, and convenient at that! You need the patience of an
Owl, and the dogged determination of a Pit Bull to wade
through this mountain of misinformation. Are these people
just purposely trying to deter anyone from using their PC
for Music Storage? It makes you wonder.
Thanks again, Blindjim. You are probably the first and
only reliable source of info I have found so far. I will keep working on this thing.

I’m surely not the ONLY source and definitely not the LAST word on PC audio affairs. There are several right here on Agon which exceed easily my knowledge base. Consequently, I try to stay within my own experiences not postulating on exacts, and only’s.

I was on the Saratoga & Franklin D. both as ships company in the Engineering Division.

This isn’t too different than what goes on about the flight deck. You got your Green, red, purple, White, brown, and blue shirts. All are a part of a singular enterprise, yet each has varied jobs to promote that particular end. You got your CAT people, Weapons crew, fuelers, traffic and parkers group, medics, and command. Although they do an exemplary job I’ve seen some horrific events take place on the flat top. Absolutely stomach turning events.

You might be better served to remember too, that different sects of PC users abound. PC makers . PC users . PC operating system makers Recording sorts which go all out digitally to capture their sessions or the “Pro” sect then comes the Audio nut that sees how flexible a PC ‘can’ be utilized for home entertainment.

The PC hard and soft ware makers sphere is quite myopic. The recording industry alone has enabled ‘us’ the PC for audio nuts, a much greater insight into the ‘how’s’ & ‘why’s’ for our own uses..so with that in mind, I’d pretty much refrain from areas of info other than those expressly dedicated to the actual end you seek.

Vista, Win 7, or XP, can all be made to sound great! Just as so can a Mac or Lenox based box. Each one has it’s own pluses and minuses. Each brings something to the table and each has it’s quirks. The thing to know here is actual improvements in computer performance often translate to better audio & video reproduction. Fill up the RAM. Get a hot shot CPU. SS hard drives are getting more press and getting cheaper . And are faster. Speed is key. Make your pc as fast as is reasonably possible. That’s just sound thinking.

No one has quantified sound quality gains from a 64 bit to 32 bit rig thus far to my knowledge . And hardware always runs in front of the software. 64 bit rigs are reputedly faster workers, yet seldom are there enough software applications suitable to 64 bit rigs from the jump! So there’s some lag for software to catch up to them. Just like hyper threading was, and Dual CPUs once were . You could buy them but some very popular apps werent’ written to take full advantage of the hardware tech driving them.

HP now has advertised a laptop dedicated to music uses and home entertainment . Reportedly. I saw an ad on TV about it just the other day. I’ve not wasted anytime checking it out however. I doubt seriously HP made an all out attempt to formulate an ‘audiophile’ pc in truth. There’s still that windows OS TO WORK AROUND, remember? It may have added interfaces, and sharing capabilities and perhaps it has some greater horsepower too all of that does add up, but there is more to it.

Again, the numbers game in both thru put and sampling rates gets over played and over hyped. Routinely. The big deal is jitter. Period and paragraph. There’s DACs out there which handle ONLY 16/44.1K and do a damn fine job, costing tons of bucks.

Just as with high end, or even ultra high end audio equipment, numbers matter some, but the parts being used and the tech, often matter far more. An optimized truly very high end 16/44 DAC very well can outperform one which handles far higher rates like 24/192. That aren’t built or aren’t appointed quite so well. Of course not everyone can afford a 15K DAC either. Or even one costing half that much. It’s the same thing everywhere else.

We have our own little budgetary constrainsts and we try to optimize what we have within those confines. The main notion I’ve found out for myself is this . Once you get to a certain point, the improvements you gain are dramatically more costly and become immensely disproportionate to the actual gains you will or can perceive. IOW the diffs from a 3K DAC to that of a 6K DAC Aren’t always a night and day experience. It likely will only be marginally better. Noticeably perhaps, but most often, not spectacular . With all else being the same of course. That said, results will vary to the ears of some more so than to others.

All of this is as involved as you want it to be, or not to be. it should always be fun, and ultimately satisfying for you.

When or if it becomes all comsuming or an obsession, quit. Quit and seek professional help. for in those accounts, it's not the hobby doing it to you, it's the hobbyist themselves.

Blindjim, good advice. I do have a preference when listening to my Stereo via an optical Universal Player. I still listen mostly to CD. Can't stand 2 Channel SACD or 2 Channel High Resolution DVD Audio. IMHO..both lack dynamics
when compared to CD, even though they might have better resolution. There is also some kind of serious electronic haze with some of these SACD/High Res. DVD Audio Disks. I was completely blown away by Multi-Channel SACD, Multi-Channel High Res. DVD Audio (what the hell!) especially when downmixed to 2 Channels. I hear 1/3 larger and deeper
Soundstage with a complete absence of digititus in the upper frequencies when compared to CD. It sounds about as close to Analog Record as I have ever heard off of an Optical Disk. These Disks are no longer being manufactured I suppose due to Downloading (sad!). These type of Recordings are certainly my personal preference. I am also familiar with the improvement in sound quality when listening to Music Files via PC hard drive as opposed to CD version via Optical Drive. Alright, my only option for my preference will be Downloading , and Ripping the few Multi-Channel Disks that I currently have. Tried to play catch-up with PC and Multi-Channel High Resolution Recordings. Ended up finding myself stuck between misinformation Rock and Gross Conceptual Error Hard Place. Been spending weeks trying to study up on the subject, but more than half of what I have read is....well....you've seen it! It seems that we are all being driven like cattle towards Downloading by the Market, but no technical leadership with Music Storage on PC. Sound Quality becomes arbituary, lost in the 100,000 other applications for PC. Audiophiles put stock in Sound Quality, arbituary concern by PC Manufacturers for Sound Quality is confusing. Atleast when our CD's sounded God Awful, you knew who to blame! I will keep trying despite the apathy of PC Manufacturers towards Sound Quality, and the Market collapse of other alternatives. It is not like we have much choice!

The bulk of one’s digital array has to be pointed towards red book CD 16/44.1K. it ‘SHOULD’ have a greater range, if possible up to 24/192, but 24/96 IS QUITE NICE.

Your comment on SACD vs CD seems a bit odd to me. Well done SACD vs the same well done CD? The CD normally is found lacking in every aspect in the context of my own system. Such as Alison Krauss’ Live hybrid SACD/CD. The SACD side is noticeably better in every way. Same thing with Pink Floyd’s ‘DSOM’ hybrid.

The quantity and diversity of downloadable soft media is pitiful now. It begs you alter your musical preffs and just ‘try’ something new or different or merely revised or rerecorded..

IF however you have the full range flexibility of 16/44 – 24/192 avialable to you going in, your choices become more widespread . Such as they are now. Again, the bulk of your music is flat out going to be Red book 16/44.1K . and for a long time to come.

SACD’s and DVDA are out there naturally, you’ll now or soon, have the opportunity to go rebuy your favs in Blue ray format very soon. Decrypting those, and placing them onto a hard drive is definitely involved but it can be done!

High res downloads currently do not offer much selection. Especially for the more pop & rock enthusiasts. As far as I’ve seen, perusing the high res file sites, the selection is pretty poor in fact. That’s why I tehnd to see HD music as more a treat than my focus.

These two version is old and you will not get the benefit for good resolution because technology has changed many things or feature. I had the same issue while I am  migrating and my window has become an error but I have found a good solution on error 0x8024200b for my window error