Tír Na HiFi

Clive wrote:Which control for 3.61? 1.6? The recent control seems to have been pulled.

1.6 should be ok, control 3.61 512 for mqnplay 3.61 512

3.62 512 sounds quite nice

well, not that good.

found a setting which I'd assumed was the best, but was introducing a digital edge and added another instruction that's improved separation.

have uploaded 3.64 avx 128, which is very good, very live sound, what more do you want, sets a new standard for me.

uploaded 3.65, spotted a dependency in 3.64 which produces a register stall

see if you can hear a difference between 3.64 and 3.65, explanation below

line 2 depends on line 1 completing because it is subtracting r15 from r12 and the r12 mov in line 1 must complete first before it's available for line 2

1 mov r12, QWORD PTR pData$[rsp]
2 sub r12, r15
3 sub r14, r15

swap line 2 and 3 then line 1 and line 2 can execute at the same time

1 mov r12, QWORD PTR pData$[rsp]
2 sub r14, r15
3 sub r12, r15

sbgk wrote:well, not that good.

found a setting which I'd assumed was the best, but was introducing a digital edge and added another instruction that's improved separation.

have uploaded 3.64 avx 128, which is very good, very live sound, what more do you want, sets a new standard for me.

this one is too sharp for me maybe it will work ok on well recorded mellow stuff. Switched back to 3.56sse find it more enjoyable music is more liquid sounding for me anyway

3.65 is really good though. Maybe another breakthrough.

2channelaudio wrote:


I also enjoy playpcmwin...
Which although is not as accomplished as MQN in rendering detail, does provide a relaxing listen when you just wish to enjoy the tunes. In fact I'm using playpcmwin right now

Just my 2 cents. Don't shoot me.

To me it seems that some of the main contributors to feedback on this thread prefer a slightly forward and thinner sound... Just saying.
I think this may have something to do with music genre preferences and MQN system synergy.
I think more resolving solutions do better on less forward MQN versions.

Nobody picked up on this but it is a very good point. I like detail but want a nice dollop of warm mid range also.
But 2channel is possibly on the ball with regard to the preferences of some of the main contributors. Do people agree on that? Maybe a new thread for people to indicate their preferred presentation as it would at least set the context to comments on this little thread!

jesuscheung wrote:

2channelaudio wrote: Today I listened to MQN 3.56 for a few hours. After some time MQN became fatiguing.
I didn't experience this when I switched across to playpcmwin.
Both were outputting via my Yellowtec PUC2 lite (USB to AES/spdif) to my NOS TDA1541a DAC.

JC, I would also not consider my system bright.
It is however quite neutral and resolving.

quickly tested playpcmwin64. yes, not lean.
mqn is lean because affinity is changed. (in my much earlier post, i called it strain. same thing)
restore mqn 3.56 to affinity to full. not lean. maybe a bit... that's what i do.
when you fix processes onto one core only, it strains the sound, seems as though more crispy/clean, actually bass is less.
glad someone has same experience as me, finally.

EDIT
uploaded FullAffinity.exe
https://drive.google.com/#folders/0B9ZK ... ERHWTJXYjA

i made it to restore affinity of processes. only tested on my i7.
i run it everytime after mqn is started

SBGK

is this on your radar to change?
I think it needs addressing

tony wrote:

2channelaudio wrote:


I also enjoy playpcmwin...
Which although is not as accomplished as MQN in rendering detail, does provide a relaxing listen when you just wish to enjoy the tunes. In fact I'm using playpcmwin right now

Just my 2 cents. Don't shoot me.

To me it seems that some of the main contributors to feedback on this thread prefer a slightly forward and thinner sound... Just saying.
I think this may have something to do with music genre preferences and MQN system synergy.
I think more resolving solutions do better on less forward MQN versions.

Nobody picked up on this but it is a very good point. I like detail but want a nice dollop of warm mid range also.
But 2channel is possibly on the ball with regard to the preferences of some of the main contributors. Do people agree on that? Maybe a new thread for people to indicate their preferred presentation as it would at least set the context to comments on this little thread!

Tony

I wholeheartedly agree.
In the end it is what YOUR brains do with what YOUR ears pick up from YOUR system setup.

The first two YOURs are your personal preferences and physical capabilities.
The last YOUR is your personal system setup.

I know I like a bit more clean, dynamic and detailed presentation, over a warm, bassy, fluid (I'd say slick) presentation.

Of course I have chosen all my hifi components on that basis too, but a software player that diverts from that path won't get my vote.

Therefore I believe a software player should be neutral in sound balance, dynamic in character and as highly detailed as possible, and all adjustments to your personal preferences should be done in/with your system and not with the software.

Otherwise you will never get a piece of software that can blend in all systems regardless of ones preferences.

Good point to bring attention this back to this.

Cheers

Aleg

2channelaudio wrote:

jesuscheung wrote:

2channelaudio wrote: Today I listened to MQN 3.56 for a few hours. After some time MQN became fatiguing.
I didn't experience this when I switched across to playpcmwin.
Both were outputting via my Yellowtec PUC2 lite (USB to AES/spdif) to my NOS TDA1541a DAC.

JC, I would also not consider my system bright.
It is however quite neutral and resolving.

quickly tested playpcmwin64. yes, not lean.
mqn is lean because affinity is changed. (in my much earlier post, i called it strain. same thing)
restore mqn 3.56 to affinity to full. not lean. maybe a bit... that's what i do.
when you fix processes onto one core only, it strains the sound, seems as though more crispy/clean, actually bass is less.
glad someone has same experience as me, finally.

EDIT
uploaded FullAffinity.exe
https://drive.google.com/#folders/0B9ZK ... ERHWTJXYjA

i made it to restore affinity of processes. only tested on my i7.
i run it everytime after mqn is started

SBGK

is this on your radar to change?
I think it needs addressing

2CA

What needs addressing?

I absolutely don't agree with JC's assessment and interpretation of the effect of affinity. Single core for mqnplay hugely improves sound quality.
Don't forget JC is listening via his mobo onboard DAC-chip through a pair of headphones.
Not comparable to setups of most other people.

Aleg wrote: Therefore I believe a software player should be neutral in sound balance, dynamic in character and as highly detailed as possible, and all adjustments to your personal preferences should be done in/with your system and not with the software.

I agree with you.