2channelaudio wrote:Aleg wrote:
What needs addressing?
I absolutely don't agree with JC's assessment and interpretation of the effect of affinity. Single core for mqnplay hugely improves sound quality.
Don't forget JC is listening via his mobo onboard DAC-chip through a pair of headphones.
Not comparable to setups of most other people.
Aleg, I don't listen to symphonic music.
Me neither ;-).
I do like and listen to classical music, but to chamber music, vocal, and piano solo.
But I also listen to jazz very often.
So my remarks are not driven by the representation of a single style or genre of music.
2channelaudio wrote:
But I do listen to many other music genres......anything from Jazz, Rock, Indy, Punk, New Age, Folk, Electronic, drums, big band....
Some recordings are fantastic some are ok.... But all of my recorded content is redbook 16/44....
I therefore need a player that sounds great across all genres and music types... not just classical.
That's why I said in my previous post, the player should have a neutral tonal balance, be dynamic and expose all details. That way you get an uncoloured replay with the maximum available musical information. You could/should add
other components in the chain behind MQn, either DSP or analogue EQ, to shape the sound to your musical style of that moment if you wish to have a different tonal balance for different styles of music. There are plenty of EQ type of devices or software that have these kinds of presets that change the tonal balance to suit a particular style of music.
I would like Mqn to be as neutral as possible. The difficulty is of course knowing what is neutral as none of us have heard the recording/mastering session and we don't know what it is supposed to sound like.
2channelaudio wrote:
The last few revisions of MQN after extended listening sessions have left me with ear fatigue, that's all. If this can be fixed with an updated revision then great, if not I will just use an older revision.
I find the term 'ear fatigue' very difficult to understand in the sense of what aspect of the sound is causing this, and if that would be the same for everyone?
I personally can't listen for even 30 seconds to a booming bass replay. The idea of adding a subwoofer to a setup and turning its volume up is for me absolutely incomprehensible. Rock music with a lot of bass is something that I will probably never ever listen to.
2channelaudio wrote:
There's a time and a place for detail and a time and a place for musicality. I like and enjoy both...
I just want a player that is detailed but still remains musical, and yes there are many versions of MQN that do this, however I'm not certain the latest rev's tick this box.
Detail and musicality are in my view not exclusive, and maybe even part of, so what do you view as 'musical' that is opposing 'detail'?
For me the so-called 'analogue', slick, fluid type of sound is not musical at all. For me that is casual, like elevator- and restaurant style. (No offense intended ;-))
Musicality in replay for me is insight in detail of the act of playing the instrument (the touch, attack, bow strike, plucking, decay, etc), placement of musicians, interplay of musicians, accurate timing, proper dynamics, rhythm and texture of instruments.
2channelaudio wrote:
Sure everyone loves detail for a little while, its impressive..... but after some time at least for me I always prefer a richer more textured musical presentation.
And maybe that's where personal preferences come into play. But would one want the software player to enforce that one individual preference on all or should each find other means to achieve that effect with the rest of the replay chain.
My point-of-view is that the software player as the very beginning of the replay chain should preserve the maximum amount of musical detail in a neutral way. Because whatever is lost in this stage can never be regained, while tonal balance and details, etc can be adjusted further on.
Interesting topic
Cheers
Aleg