I tested both “overlap-add” (which is default) and “overlap-save”, and to my ears “overlap-save” sounds better but seems to take a little more CPU and add a little latency.
Anyone else tested? The difference isn’t huge but “overlap-save” seems to give a little more clarity. Or am I imagining things 
The setting is in the convolution window if you want to try, and obviously its only applicable if you use a convolution file (for example for room correction):
Yup, also prefer “overlap-save” here.
Question that perhaps the OP or someone here might be able to answer:
It looks as if HQPlayer has two options for Convolution filters.
One is under Convolution Tab; the other under Matrix Pipeline.
Do you use both or just one of them? If only one of the two, which one is better?
I would guess they are the same option in 2 different places, both windows can use convolution files. In my case I use only the Convolution window and not the pipeline since I only use one convolution file.
Same algorithms on both, but they are mutually exclusive. The one under Convolution dialog is simpler one, it doesn’t have all the features of Matrix process. Thus the Convolution one may be also also somewhat lighter to process (matrix can utilize more CPU cores though) if you don’t need the extra features.
So why does overlap-save have much more latency? Any way to lower it? My 352khz convolution file results in 11 seconds from pressing play in Roon until the music starts. Without convolution its less then 2 seconds.
Sorry about nagging yet again about latency. Btw, the quick-pause is awesome!
Either use overlap-add, or use shorter filter. Main driver for the latency is length of your convolution filter. Resulting latency is directly proportional to length of your convolution filter. Make the filter shorter and the latency gets shorter too.
It is how things used to be, and works fine if your don’t get snap-rattle-and-pop.
