Page 365 of 804
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 10:59 am
by darkpink
I think that fuctionality Gordon suggested is a good idea , foobar implemenation. And then we will be able to controll it with some thing like the Remote app for ipad.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 11:08 am
by jrling
2channelaudio wrote:I think we are all just splitting hairs now guys!
With so many varieties of MQN that sound great, shouldn't we all just select the revision that suits our system?
Is it not pointless/fruitless trying to find the ultimate MQN version (when its already so good)? we all run different OS's and configs, different system components.... I'm not sure their will ever be a winner, am I wrong?
I am also not sure there's much more to gain by endless tweaking, when much bigger gains can be had with small component changes such as USB to spdif converters, amps, speakers, room acoustic treatment or dare I say it equalisation/room compensation (yes I said equalisation).
I think functionality should be the next stage of development...
How much functionality can we put back into MQN without affecting its sound?
I would be one to vote for html control, ipad control or similar.
Or how about network streaming?
Thoughts?
+1
[I would be one to vote for html control, ipad control or similar.
Or how about network streaming?]
Of course, any controls that degrade SQ materially are not worth considering for this project, but has anyone had the opportunity to test that?
An approach would be to have code to do control as you propose that can be switched on or off. Would enable A/B comparison, but also would enlarge the potential audience if it was a simple option to have control or switch it off. Best of both worlds?
I suspect many of us are also keen for Gordon to develop a KS version, as everyone, including Gordon, acknowledges that it is a technically superior option compared to WASAPI and one adopted by competitors. But it is also a difficult technical challenge.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 11:25 am
by jesuscheung
pretty sure plenty of programs already exist that remotely execute an executable (e.g. mqn)
just need to find one that affects SQ the least.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 12:15 pm
by m5lig
We've said many a time when previous versions have appeared that " this is the one " . And yet Gordon keeps tweaking the code and MQN gets better and better.
To me anything peripheral to the sound , like remote control is unimportant.
I hope sbgk never stops developing his player for the sound, although I know that somewhere a limit will be reached when no more improvements are possible.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 12:24 pm
by jesuscheung
3.53 little better in many micro ways.
prefer 3.43 because it is less intense less strain than all software.
even headphones sound can feel free.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 12:40 pm
by 2channelaudio
jesuscheung wrote:2channelaudio wrote:
I think functionality should be the next stage of development...
How much functionality can we put back into MQN without affecting its sound?
I would be one to vote for html control, ipad control or similar.
Or how about network streaming?
Thoughts?
cannot think of single functionality i want...
starting to think functionalities are for losers. no offense
in my low end setup
enable LAN = -5% SQ
plugin a mouse = -1-5% SQ
1 GPU = -5%
2 GPU = -7%
1 USB port = -0.5%
10 USB ports = -10%
....
pretty sure i lost about 400-500% SQ with "funtionalities".
maybe you are so deep underwater starting to give up hehehe
JC my comments were meant to be constructive.
I am suggesting:
If SBJK can produce MQN, he can possibly produce a version of MQN with control that sounds similar.
I think you would agree a package with SQ and convenience is the ultimate rendering solution.
Not sure that is giving up?! I still like great audio and more importantly
music....
Sound quality can still remain the most important factor, to qualify functionality additions.
my 2 cents....
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 12:56 pm
by jesuscheung
sorry, my comments tend to be direct and offensive.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 1:03 pm
by sbgk
jesuscheung wrote:3.53 little better in many micro ways.
prefer 3.43 because it is less intense less strain than all software.
even headphones sound can feel free.
thought 3.53 sounded pretty good, shall go back and listen to 3.43.
should be able to have fwd, back, track select, pause etc without affecting MQn in any way.
streaming is incompatible with MQn
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 1:07 pm
by 2channelaudio
sbgk wrote:jesuscheung wrote:3.53 little better in many micro ways.
prefer 3.43 because it is less intense less strain than all software.
even headphones sound can feel free.
thought 3.53 sounded pretty good, shall go back and listen to 3.43.
should be able to have fwd, back, track select, pause etc without affecting MQn in any way.
streaming is incompatible with MQn
That would be great.... great news
Some control would be nice.
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 1:21 pm
by John Dot
sbgk wrote:
thought 3.53 sounded pretty good, shall go back and listen to 3.43.
should be able to have fwd, back, track select, pause etc without affecting MQn in any way.
streaming is incompatible with MQn
I was out for some days and last version tested by me was 3.31, so I have to try ALL new versions this weekend. Looking forward to it!