Page 102 of 804
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 12:52 pm
by cvrle59
jesuscheung wrote:
"i see!
i assume you had default 10000 clockrate in the old days.
do you remember the best buffer size for jriver/foobar back then?"
I really didn't spend too much time to test different setups on JRiver, I used Foobar only for short time only. I tried to keep buffer as short as possible to avoid long time of buffering when I skipped from track to track. I couldn't here the difference back then. With MQn, I played 46440 for a while, and I changed to 4644 on your suggestion, but it didn't feel it was right to me. So I went the other way to 464400 after your discussion with SBGK, and it sounded better to me, more relaxed and better detailing. I need to do more listening before my final word.
BTW, friend of mine who has a reference Naim/Linn setup, LP12/CDS2/XPS/52/SC/135's/Harbeth 30.1 (whoever understands Naim/Harbeth line up - this is hell of system), was last night at my place. I was still running JRiver on his previous visit. He was shocked how much better everything got. No more comments, "it sounds slightly digital".
+1 to MQn
Thanks SBGK!
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 1:55 pm
by sbgk
cvrle59 wrote:jesuscheung wrote:
"i see!
i assume you had default 10000 clockrate in the old days.
do you remember the best buffer size for jriver/foobar back then?"
I really didn't spend too much time to test different setups on JRiver, I used Foobar only for short time only. I tried to keep buffer as short as possible to avoid long time of buffering when I skipped from track to track. I couldn't here the difference back then. With MQn, I played 46440 for a while, and I changed to 4644 on your suggestion, but it didn't feel it was right to me. So I went the other way to 464400 after your discussion with SBGK, and it sounded better to me, more relaxed and better detailing. I need to do more listening before my final word.
BTW, friend of mine who has a reference Naim/Linn setup, LP12/CDS2/XPS/52/SC/135's/Harbeth 30.1 (whoever understands Naim/Harbeth line up - this is hell of system), was last night at my place. I was still running JRiver on his previous visit. He was shocked how much better everything got. No more comments, "it sounds slightly digital".
+1 to MQn
Thanks SBGK!
JRMC has been shientrifically proven to be the same as every other bit perfect player, so I hope your not suggesting it was the player that made the difference. Hope that placates the JRMC truth monitors.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 2:08 pm
by cvrle59
sbgk wrote:cvrle59 wrote:jesuscheung wrote:
"i see!
i assume you had default 10000 clockrate in the old days.
do you remember the best buffer size for jriver/foobar back then?"
I really didn't spend too much time to test different setups on JRiver, I used Foobar only for short time only. I tried to keep buffer as short as possible to avoid long time of buffering when I skipped from track to track. I couldn't here the difference back then. With MQn, I played 46440 for a while, and I changed to 4644 on your suggestion, but it didn't feel it was right to me. So I went the other way to 464400 after your discussion with SBGK, and it sounded better to me, more relaxed and better detailing. I need to do more listening before my final word.
BTW, friend of mine who has a reference Naim/Linn setup, LP12/CDS2/XPS/52/SC/135's/Harbeth 30.1 (whoever understands Naim/Harbeth line up - this is hell of system), was last night at my place. I was still running JRiver on his previous visit. He was shocked how much better everything got. No more comments, "it sounds slightly digital".
+1 to MQn
Thanks SBGK!
JRMC has been shientrifically proven to be the same as every other bit perfect player, so I hope your not suggesting it was the player that made the difference. Hope that placates the JRMC truth monitors.
I hope I was clear...MQn rocks!
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 3:12 pm
by cvrle59
It is disappointing that we still didn't achieve SBGK's target of £250.00.
For those who haven't seen it yet.
The very first link on this page...
http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/
will take you right here...
http://www.justgiving.com/MQn-Just-Good-Music
Thanks
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 3:57 pm
by jesuscheung
hey sbgk, read my tweak number 9 at
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2456&p=47118#p47118
see if this changes your mind on clockrate/buffer.
i have no technical reasoning. just listening reasoning. i could very well be wrong.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 9:30 pm
by tony
I am selfishly waiting for 24bit. Terrible really I should just give now.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 10:11 pm
by jrling
tony wrote:
I am selfishly waiting for 24bit. Terrible really I should just give now.
If you give now, he might be more encouraged to do 24 bit!
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 10:30 pm
by sbgk
tony wrote:
I am selfishly waiting for 24bit. Terrible really I should just give now.
is the debate over whether you can hear any difference between 16/44 and hirez settled on this forum ?
I'll try and get something out for 24 bit this weekend.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 10:53 pm
by nige2000
sbgk wrote:tony wrote:
I am selfishly waiting for 24bit. Terrible really I should just give now.
is the debate over whether you can hear any difference between 16/44 and hirez settled on this forum ?
I'll try and get something out for 24 bit this weekend.
lol'ed
Re: MQN
Posted: Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:46 am
by cvrle59
Led Zep #1 (my favorite Zep) has never sounded better...glass of wine may do something to it too, not sure...lol.
Dazed and Confused is like from the other planet, no kidding!
Black Mountain Side...unreal.
I've been waiting for 24 bit version as well, but I am wondering if it can get any better than this. Never say never, but this damn good!
MQn 2.70 + W8.1 + 464400 clock = "I can't stop listening"