MQN

Anything to do with computer audio, hardware, software etc.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

Aleg wrote:
sbgk wrote:uploaded 2.94.zip, think am happy with the sound

uploaded 2.95.zip, there's no point trying to please others if I'm not happy with the sound, so think this is the final version for now. Shall get the rest of the rates and 24 in 32 out over the next week.
Have got the impression 2.95 is again the 4 8 version.
A shame; it is unbalanced and lacking the excitement of the other versions.
no, it is an 8 8 16 version without the fast setting, so = 2.90 and without another setting which made it sound harsh.

what music are you listening to that you think it's unbalanced ?

16 16 just seems to act like a filter removing some of the incidental detail, so you hear what's left, that to me is not correct.
Last edited by sbgk on Sat Apr 26, 2014 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Aleg
Posts: 1381
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: MQN

Post by Aleg »

sbgk wrote:
Aleg wrote:
sbgk wrote:uploaded 2.94.zip, think am happy with the sound

uploaded 2.95.zip, there's no point trying to please others if I'm not happy with the sound, so think this is the final version for now. Shall get the rest of the rates and 24 in 32 out over the next week.
Have got the impression 2.95 is again the 4 8 version.
A shame; it is unbalanced and lacking the excitement of the other versions.
no, it is an 8 8 16 version without the fast setting, so = 2.90 and without another setting which made it sound harsh.

what music are you listening to that you think it's unbalanced ?
Jazz: vocal, drums, bass, jazz guitar.

The effect is the same as with the 4 8 version that when vocals and jazz guitar are playing together, that jazz guitar is reduced or overtaken by vocals. Thereby the interplay between vocals and guitar is taken away. The 2.90 16 16 and 2.92 8 16 did not have this effect. All 2.93 had this effect in varying degrees except the one in 2.93 zip. Now 2.95 also has it again comparable to 2.93 4 8.

It disturbs the instrumental balance of the composition.
HDPLEX;picoPSU;ASUS Q87M;i7-4770T;PH SR7EHD;Server2012R2;Thesycon 2.24;
JCAT USB;Sonicweld DiverterHR2;Naim DC1;Chord Hugo;Morrow Audio MA6;Naim NAC-282,SuperCapDR;NAP-300;
AQ Cinnamon;GISO GB;Netgear Pro+XM21X;Cisco SG300;NAS-ZFS.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

hmm, I like to hear the vocals. maybe there's something else wrong, but 16 16 doesn't seem to be the answer.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

Aleg wrote: Jazz: vocal, drums, bass, jazz guitar.

The effect is the same as with the 4 8 version that when vocals and jazz guitar are playing together, that jazz guitar is reduced or overtaken by vocals. Thereby the interplay between vocals and guitar is taken away. The 2.90 16 16 and 2.92 8 16 did not have this effect. All 2.93 had this effect in varying degrees except the one in 2.93 zip. Now 2.95 also has it again comparable to 2.93 4 8.

It disturbs the instrumental balance of the composition.
which album is it ? Is it available for download, I haven't bought any music recently ?
Aleg
Posts: 1381
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: MQN

Post by Aleg »

sbgk wrote:hmm, I like to hear the vocals. maybe there's something else wrong, but 16 16 doesn't seem to be the answer.
These are all relatively variances of course. The guitar is still there, but it's role is clearly reduced in importance compared to the vocals, while the composition I use is a delicate balance and interplay between vocal and guitar of handing over to each other and supporting/strengthening each other. With the 2.95 and 2.93's this balanced interplay is no longer in balance.


You are lucky: the tracks happens to be part of a free download of tracks offered by the label: http://soundliaison.com/all-our-products/88-free-tracks
"A Thousand Shades of Blue" by "Carmen Gomes Inc.". The download is a 96/24 but I downsampled it to 44/16 to be able to use MQn for playback
HDPLEX;picoPSU;ASUS Q87M;i7-4770T;PH SR7EHD;Server2012R2;Thesycon 2.24;
JCAT USB;Sonicweld DiverterHR2;Naim DC1;Chord Hugo;Morrow Audio MA6;Naim NAC-282,SuperCapDR;NAP-300;
AQ Cinnamon;GISO GB;Netgear Pro+XM21X;Cisco SG300;NAS-ZFS.
jesuscheung
Posts: 2491
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: MQN

Post by jesuscheung »

cvrle59 wrote: BTW, I had a chance to hear Hugo on Thursday night . We played different music starting with MQn 2.82 (for an hour and a half). Suddenly, it came to my mind that I had 2.84 on a memory stick, as I downloaded it at work just before I left. So, I switched to 2.84, and nothing than wow. I just couldn't believe how much different. I have never experience such a difference between two versions on my V1 dac.
yes!
R2.84>R2.82
R2.84 = old mqn.exe2.82
hard to beat the classic version

R2.84 > 2.95

only tested briefly
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

uploaded mqnplay1644.exe no initterm or merge and 2496

this has the same settings as 2.84 and the vocals are a little bit suppressed

listened to the carmen gomes track using 2.95, the no initterm version and xbox music player (all in 2496)

I can see the attraction of the voice being suppressed a little so the guitar is more prominent, but not sure that is how it is supposed to sound. 2.95 and xbox music player both have the vocals more prominent.

So to me the song is about the vocals with the drums and guitar more incidental than equal to the vocal.
tony
Posts: 3144
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: MQN

Post by tony »

Away for a few days I was very happy with 2.78 but looks like 20 odd versions since then. Had a read of the thread and tried 2.92 8 16
and only get 16/44 playing. White noise on anything else. Has any consensus formed? Still use 2.31 also and it plays all for me.
GroupBuySD DAC/First Watt AlephJ/NigeAmp/Audio PC's/Lampi L4.5 Dac/ Groupbuy AD1862 DHT Dac /Quad ESL63's.Tannoy Legacy Cheviots.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

tony wrote:Away for a few days I was very happy with 2.78 but looks like 20 odd versions since then. Had a read of the thread and tried 2.92 8 16
and only get 16/44 playing. White noise on anything else. Has any consensus formed? Still use 2.31 also and it plays all for me.
have split out the sample rates into their own exe files, use the control in the zip file. Don't rename the play files.

current debate is whether 2.95 or the no initterm merge versions are more correct. 2.95 is technically more correct and sounds similar to the default windows player, but Aleg and Adam prefer the vocals to be less pronounced.

Aleg posted a link to a free song for comparison.

http://soundliaison.com/all-our-products/88-free-tracks

have bought the album and sounds good.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

uploaded 2.96.zip, tuned using the thousand shades of blue track, just 16/44 and 24/96

think the vocals, detail and guitar/drums are in good balance now.

makes my Claire Martin Lazy Afternoon test track sound spectacular.

http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-to ... -care.aspx
Post Reply