Tír Na HiFi

uploaded a bug fix and took opportunity to change 16 bit to 512 samples.

play/control 24 bit R1.0 512

Bug was that 24/192 would stop randomly.

Much improved on 16 44
I'm Trying to hold back till I test more
but its probably the best version
In saying that I think the figure 448 seems to be significant to my system in both clock rate and buffersize
Tried clock rate at 512 but need up going back to 448

Think a r1.1 448 might sound marginally better for me
448 is not going to suit the alignment and that likely important too

Anyway this hopefully is the keeper
I'll have to look at the donation pot again

THANKS

nige2000 wrote:Much improved on 16 44
I'm Trying to hold back till I test more
but its probably the best version
In saying that I think the figure 448 seems to be significant to my system in both clock rate and buffersize
Tried clock rate at 512 but need up going back to 448

Think a r1.1 448 might sound marginally better for me
448 is not going to suit the alignment and that likely important too

Anyway this hopefully is the keeper
I'll have to look at the donation pot again

THANKS

I assume you're talking about 24 R1.0 512? I am listening to it, it does feel good!

nige2000 wrote:Much improved on 16 44
I'm Trying to hold back till I test more
but its probably the best version
In saying that I think the figure 448 seems to be significant to my system in both clock rate and buffersize
Tried clock rate at 512 but need up going back to 448

Think a r1.1 448 might sound marginally better for me
448 is not going to suit the alignment and that likely important too

Anyway this hopefully is the keeper
I'll have to look at the donation pot again

THANKS

24/192 is period size 53333, 1024 samples 6144 bytes, what would be your preferred setting for that one ?

Sorry I've been buried in 16 44 so long I haven't even tested 24 bit yet
I don't fully understand the math
Unless I had two versions to compare I wouldn't have a clue

24 bit conversions sounded better on 2.73 448 than any other player until I heard mqn avx 24 bit

Some feedback from the Scalford Show just to confirm we are on the correct path here, most of the feedback centres on the Speakers but believe me Quads are very truthful of the source so the good reaction is due to the source!!
I forget which version of MQN we were running on the day as Tony just had downloaded it that morning but the MQNControl I was running was "4 core affinity" as the recent MQNControls will not work with the Meitner, at least I have not managed to get them to work.

http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?23 ... erypeccary
Really enjoyed Sligolad's system
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?83-Beobloke
Sligolad – Talking of Quad ESL63s, they sounded fabulous in this room. Expansive, detailed and punchy. I’ve often felt that the ESL63s seem to be viewed as something of a poor relation compared to both their older and newer brothers, but the more I hear them, the more I like them.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?166674-deejaitch
So much to try and remember but immediate stand-outs for me were Sligolad (how did you get that bass from the 63s?),
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?11 ... igmclellan
Heard electrostatics for the first time today. I can honestly say, I do adore my Yamaha NS-1000Ms and I still will not be parting with them, but I will definitely be getting a pair of ESLs when we have a bigger place. I have never heard anything quite like it. Even stood in front of one, I wasn't really "aware" the music was coming from the panel itself!
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?10 ... nobsession
Yes I was also impressed with the quad 63 electrostatics, for the money you can pick them up for there hard to beat smooth and natural, I found the Yamaha ns 1000 speakers a little bright and lack a natural tone. not to my liking.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?11187-Gizza
Sligolad's system with Conrad Johnson/Quad ESL63s
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?368-HoopsOnToast
The various Quads about were great, even in some of the smaller rooms like Pauls and the massive space like the dealer room in the main lounge.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?3473-browellm
I didn't get to hear everything, but I don't think i came across a bad room this year and there was some drooltastic kit on display - Meitner DACs, BAT power amps, Shindo, Audio Note, Io Ltds, Motus.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?48686-edd9000
Sligolad: Fantastic quad esl63s and put up with my music.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?11 ... sbelieving
Sligolad: ESL63s sounding superb with very nice bass for 'statics
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?8338-Pete-the-Feet
Sligolad What a lovely easy sound those ESL63's are. I want some and I want them now, I could live with those if I had the space for them.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?5324-diceman
Sligo lad had the nicest sounding Quad 63s I have heard (being a 57 fan, I have never liked the 63s much) so nice to be proven wrong.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?1148-misterpete
Room 37. A nice system from Sligolad. Computer based and the Quad ESL63s sounded smooth and detailed. A very engaging system.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?9477-edavey
- Jen Chapin singing Stevie Wonder through Quad 67 electrostatic speakers in Room 37 - thanks Sligolad
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/member.php?16387-Crom
- Sligolad's PC-based setup...I've never heard Quads sing like this - and from a computer too!!

nige2000 wrote:Sorry I've been buried in 16 44 so long I haven't even tested 24 bit yet
I don't fully understand the math
Unless I had two versions to compare I wouldn't have a clue

24 bit conversions sounded better on 2.73 448 than any other player until I heard mqn avx 24 bit

think it's just a compromise, 24/192 at 100000 doesn't sound good, the copy instructions work best with a certain size chunk of data to copy etc.

Great reports Pearse
Well done

Great bass from 63's
Slightly helped along with heavily modified pc and Mqn
There's nothing like bass from mqn and a pc with a dc converter bybass

One day these guys will see the whole picture

sbgk wrote:

nige2000 wrote:Sorry I've been buried in 16 44 so long I haven't even tested 24 bit yet
I don't fully understand the math
Unless I had two versions to compare I wouldn't have a clue

24 bit conversions sounded better on 2.73 448 than any other player until I heard mqn avx 24 bit

think it's just a compromise, 24/192 at 100000 doesn't sound good, the copy instructions work best with a certain size chunk of data to copy etc.

Horrible word compromise shouldn't be used in audio
Lol
OK
24 192 sounded better on the 512 than the r1.1 original if that helps
Dunno if we're going to clog it making it very small

Sligolad wrote:Some feedback from the Scalford Show just to confirm we are on the correct path here, most of the feedback centres on the Speakers but believe me Quads are very truthful of the source so the good reaction is due to the source!!
I forget which version of MQN we were running on the day as Tony just had downloaded it that morning but the MQNControl I was running was "4 core affinity" as the recent MQNControls will not work with the Meitner, at least I have not managed to get them to work.

great stuff, hope you like the latest version. Never heard electrostatics.