Tír Na HiFi

Following Gordon's latest comments and guidance, I updated the v27, set up both LMS and Squeezelite to run as a service and adjusted to -a 23 and, blow me down, I think there's a definite gain. Needs more listening and transferring from the study to the main rig, but on the headphones there's little bit of a "wow" going on between my ears as I type this!

LowOrbit wrote:Following Gordon's latest comments and guidance, I updated the v27, set up both LMS and Squeezelite to run as a service and adjusted to -a 23 and, blow me down, I think there's a definite gain. Needs more listening and transferring from the study to the main rig, but on the headphones there's little bit of a "wow" going on between my ears as I type this!

No kidding...he is getting there!

I too was getting a little ahead of myself with JLP, just because I really want it to sound better.
Why? because it is convenient, plays flac/wav and has the potential to sound excellent....

However a friend of mine got me to listen to Mqn v2.59 again... And wow my perspective changed instantly.
Personally, I think its very important for all of us to constantly check JLP's progress against MQN's yard stick.

I'm not sure there's magic happening quite yet in JLP. Headphones or not...
Its good, but JLP is still missing alot of air, presence and dynamics that Mqn brings to the table.

In my opinion the current version v27 of JLP is doing an admirable job, but playback is noticeably flatter with a digital sounding playback quality, I guess you would call it thin?!. Mqn in contrast presents a more dynamic, yet analog + rich texture and tone.

Don't get me wrong I love the progress JLP has made, and I want it to be just as good if not better than MQN due to the undeniable convenience it offers, but if that is to happen JLP must be compared to its software nemesis.

In the interest of transparency, I seem prefer older versions of Mqn because I find later 2.7+ voiced a little too forward and aggressive for my liking...... And I'm not a vinyl guy.

Now for a particularly important criticism of JLP.
Even though bass weight and attack was improved on V24 onwards, I am finding JLP is missing bass attack and detail around the mid to upper bass region 60-150hz range when compared to Mqn. It very apparent on tracks with drum and percussive bass work. Lower bass weight seems ok at this stage. Mqn also displays alot more bass texture and tone.

Spinning Chris Issak's (WAV) "go walking down there" on Mqn v2.59 the percussive drums and bass really hit with attack and gusto, and Chris's twangy guitar renders with awesome tone. Mqn really shows off with its ability to drive this percussive presence/force throughout the track, JLP doesn't display any of Mqn's ability, JLP unfortunately renders flat & digital in comparison.

Just my 2 bob, I hope these evaluations help development further.
I would be interested in other members thoughts here.
2CA

Which Os and pro audio settings are you using for mqn?
It took almost a year for sbgk to build mqn
I feel jlp will best it one day
Been much improvement over the last wk
Will take time and we will have to be patient

2channelaudio wrote:...interested in other members thoughts here.
2CA

2CA

Eloquently put what I'm trying to say all along, MQn shows more microdetails and what I call 'texture inside a tone' (i.e. The opposite of a flat tone).

I must say JLP has made huge improvements compared to standard Squeezelite. It shows much more transparancy and details in mid/high frequency. E.g. Better decays and better in showing soft signals alongside louder signals. It has a good soundstage and has improved spatial acoustics (Germans have a nice word for this: Raumklang).

These are all impressive improvements, but ....... if you put it alongside MQn, than MQn has more and more in the way you just described.

IMO this also must be possible for JLP using KS-drivers. LMS server is imo a continuous source of CPU activity that isn't required if you look at the way MQn did this. I think Gordon also senses this because he is thinking about writing LMS out of the picture and work from RAM loaded tracks.

As Nigel says, MQn has had a long development process, so JLP must be allowed to have its time too to grow.

I think many will support Gordon in this process by giving their feedback from time to time.

Cheers

Aleg

Aleg wrote:

2channelaudio wrote:...interested in other members thoughts here.
2CA

I feel very similar. I had always preferred 2.59 and 2.66 and regarded the 2.71's as possibly heading towards Jplay territory. But since gong linear supply and battery/core server etc 2.71 sounds great to me and is the benchmark.
But I will go back and try 2.59 again as I do remember really being bowled over by it at the time.

As Nigel has said it will take time and I will dip in and out and watch developments.
Gordon will probably end up getting a bit tetchy as I am sure no one likes being constantly reminded their first wife was great!

2channelaudio , would you be able to expand your instructions on just your blog on how to setup
JLP , please ?

Now The info to do it is scattered in forums , different websites , blogs and with each change of which there are a dizzying number its hard to keep up for donkeys like me.

Could we not set up an editable wiki , so with each iteration the instruction set might change by only a line or two.

What it boils down to is : I want to read the manual. Icing on the cake is a FAQ

If I can assist in any ,I would like to.

+1

A wiki would be gold!
Otherwise, stupid questions need to be asked. :-)

What's the issues guys?
Will try to answer and maybe 2CA will add them to his blog

The issue is integration and self interest for me . It feels like I'm having to flick back and forth through a textbook with no index to find a flow of instructions to make it all work at its best.

I 'm sometimes reluctant to post because the questions seem so basic I should be able to figure it out for myself and I don't want to waste people's time and occupy forum space with simplistic questions.

But I'll provide 2 examples but I have many more:

In the latest development is it necessary to run JLP as a service ?

Now that we are back to portaudio do we go back to non service mode too ?

2 supplementaries .

The batch file in MQN was straightforward , despite trying I can't get a JLP batch file to work

The parametrs in squeezelite where exactly are they set.?

Now its not that I need these questions answered ,(there are many more). I have a basic working setup , but implementing changes is frustrating/akward and sometimes I can't make it work.
The obsessive in me wants to give these new things a go , and when obsessives don't get their way it does their head in .