MQN

[jesuscheung]

why 5ms... make it to 1 to 2ms or 32/64/96/128

[nige2000]

why 5ms... make it to 1 to 2ms or 32/64/96/128

Some dacs can't cope with 1ms

[jesuscheung]

5ms could be a working progress, think it was only Jonathan that found it sharp edged,
i find the extra resolution has a relaxed effect without loosing the detail,
yes it is less bass, surely theres a way round it?

5ms is relax here too.

sharp edged is a typical feature of win8/R2. probably OS was poorly configured and ks made it worst.
(back in win7, edges were non-existence. win7 has other issues... win7 bass win7 treble signature)

[nige2000]

Hi I have been following this forum for several months trying and testing MQN (Thanks Gordon for the great job!)
I could only run normal versions of it, however since MQN development tends to use only AVX2 I want to upgrade my current system to be able to enjoy MQN AVX2 versions as well.
At the same time and do not want to spend much money on it.
So I think about upgrading only my current iIntel processor from G2020 (LGA1155) to Intel i3 3220.
Although i3 3220 does not have AVX2 it has AVX and I see that some of you report that MQN AVX2 version works on Ivy AVX.

Guys, Gordon can you tell whether it should work and make sense from future MQN development perspective?

Thanks,

Msi h81-e33 and i3 4130 cpu
Is likely one of the cheapest way to get true avx2 compatability

[jesuscheung]

why 5ms... make it to 1 to 2ms or 32/64/96/128

Some dacs can't cope with 1ms

sbgk, just wondering what is the exact buffer size is this 5ms version?
just want to test it with a corresponding clockrate

[nige2000]

5ms could be a working progress, think it was only Jonathan that found it sharp edged,
i find the extra resolution has a relaxed effect without loosing the detail,
yes it is less bass, surely theres a way round it?

5ms is relax here too.

sharp edged is a typical feature of win8/R2. probably OS was poorly configured and ks made it worst.
(back in win7, edges were non-existence. win7 has other issues... win7 bass win7 treble signature)

Do you have less bass quanity with 5ms too?
5ms was one of the least edgy versions

[jesuscheung]

bass quantity is plentiful here. maybe lowest bass not enough

the bigger issues is tiny/micro details seem missing
but then, latest versions may have fixed it i wouldn't know... no sound...

[nige2000]

bass quantity is plentiful here. maybe lowest bass not enough

Mostly low bass lacking
[/quote]

the bigger issues is tiny/micro details seem missing
but then, latest versions may have fixed it i wouldn't know... no sound...

Yes the lack of micro detail is worrying
New versions have not fixed it
The 1ms, 5ms and the realtime versions gave me hope for ks
I know you don't like rt
Feel free not to mention it :)

[jrling]

uploaded 7.63 24/96 ax2, it's got the recommended loop, does it solve any issues ?

7.64 maybe sounds better

Don't know as there are no Normal or 1644 updated versions?

[sima66]

Thanks, Gordon, for looking into this "clipping problem" and special thanks for fixing it! :)))

I never got a chance to listen the 7.63 because the 7.64 is a such big improvement (comparing to the latest 7.61) that I could not stop listening!
Huge step forward! :)

is resolution not still a problem
only ks with good resolution was the 5ms and the realtime version
dunno why were ignoring it instead of working with it

I just saw the 7.65 in the end of the night! :( Will try tonight.
Compared to the latest versions 7.64 sounds full and detailed, a lot more resolutions than the latest ones.

Which ones are the 5ms versions?!
If you are talking about the PA v93 avx2 0.005, that one had the best details I ever heard, but lacking on body a bit.
Interesting thing is that it was more detailed, but LESS harsh than the others, the highs were "laser sharp"!

I'm always in for more details and resolution! I can always smooth the sound (if need), but never get back the lost detail!