Page 413 of 804

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 2:39 pm
by jesuscheung
nige2000 wrote:is this texture/boomy bass/ underwater sound issue the same problem ?
which version are you on aleg?

22/23 seem a little backward or slow
still missing a little atmosphere over the 10ms/448 avx's, hf maybe
much else is better
tested 12,15,21,22,23,
21 been ahead for me atm
bass is great. not boomy.

i modded my headphones to detect jitters/micro. most forward sounding.
i get earaches within 20 seconds. because refinement is messy at micro level. makes dirty sound.

micro is vital. small change in texture implies different soundstage.
anyone looking for soundstage, they need to listen to micro and DON'T listen soundstage itself.

because false micro can make "correct" stage.

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:01 pm
by Sligolad
Aleg wrote:(the modification date is changed) but is in effect not overwritten, so you are listening to an older version and not the one you selected in the control panel of mqnload. I was able to confirm this by doing a byte comparison with the actual mqnplay.exe playing vs the one I thought I had selected (not equal) and vs one that was an older version (was equal) {Just checked: it is equal to "mqnplay.exe 1644 24 bit 3.40 sse2"}.
How to resolve this?
In your explorer window colum bar select "More ....", check the line "Attributes". Click OK.
In your explorer window find all the files that have an R in that newly added column "Attributes".
Select one by one each of those files and right-mouse click, select properties, uncheck read-only checkbox.

After that you can again select the proper version inside MQNLoad control panel and be confident that you are actually listening to that one.

Cheers

Aleg
Hi Aleg,
I did notice some time ago that the default MQNPlay.exe created by MQNLoad always has read only attribute and the date does not change when you select different versions, at the time I did have a concern that MQNLoad may not have been loading different versions but then I was hearing differences so I did not pass any heed......it will be a good example of expectation bias and delusion on my part if indeed it has been the same version all along but I would be surprised given the differences I am hearing but you never know!!

Maybe Christoph can check MQNLoad and see if it is actually loading the different MQN versions even if it cannot overwrite the MQNPlay.exe files date.

Will play with it further this evening getting rid of those read only checks to see if I am deluded :-))
Cheers, Pearse.

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:10 pm
by sbgk
2channelaudio wrote:
sbgk wrote:uploaded 4.21, now with extra space and detail

4.22
SBGK
What about the mid range points I raised

Aleg? Thoughts
Did you not hear this when you were listening to the latest versions

I agree, have they not improved ?

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:12 pm
by jesuscheung
hahaha Sligolad.... maybe you were listening to 2.73 raw background...

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:28 pm
by Sligolad
jesuscheung wrote:hahaha Sligolad.... maybe you were listening to 2.73 raw background...
Anything is possible JC now that I find all downloads from Google Drive are Read Only checked....might have to disqualify myself from the listening panel is this turns out to be correct that the file gets copied as read only by MQNLoad and after that no other version can overwrite it, at least I can blame the obligatory bottle of red on a Friday for some of the music enhancements I heard :-)

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:49 pm
by satshanti
it will be a good example of expectation bias and delusion on my part if indeed it has been the same version all along but I would be surprised given the differences I am hearing but you never know
Before I read Aleg's post, I gave the magical folder a spin, and was very happy to get the avx's to play music. I then also noticed that the version in the MQNload options window doesn't change, but the version showing in the MQN control window does match the one selected. Plus, the differences I heard were unmistakable and consistent with the various tracks I was playing and know really well. So I can almost certainly say this was not delusion and Pearse's folder does work.

Thanks anyway Aleg, for sorting out the problem though. Now I can move back to my own folder. :-)

Now for the report on the session itself... what amazing revelations!

I took my own currrent top 3: 4.08 sse, 4.04 sse and 3.14 avx
and then added 4.08 avx (to compare with the sse version), 4.15 avx and 4.23 avx

As expected, as this has always been the case in the past, 4.08 avx was more detailed and more coherent than 4.08 sse.
4.15 avx was slightly better than 4.08 avx, but not by much, a bit more space (similar to the slight improvements 4.10 sse and 4.12 sse showed versus 4.08 sse).

As I mentioned before, 4.04 is an odd one, much better than the one on either side, 4.03 and 4.05, with a certain quality of coherence, presence and realism that's really drawing me in. And that's with the sse version! This one seems to have a kind of perfect balance, similar to the old 100000, but on a much higher level.
3.14 is still better overall, but yet, something does seem to be missing as well, compared to 4.04.

But then, just as unexpectedly and completely as our orange team beat Spain yesterday night (YAY!) :-)
there's 4.23 avx, finally besting good old 3.14 avx! 4.23 takes the best and complementary aspects of 3.14 and 4.04 and combines them into a foot-tapping, but extremely musical, detailed and realistic tapestry of sound.

I also just saw that 4.21 is a favourite, so I should give that one a try too later.

And Gordon, I also have a special request. If it's not too much work, could you create a 4.04 avx and upload it to the archive? To my ears that one really is a magical edition, and I'd love to try out an avx version of it and compare it to the amazing latest avx's.

It's so amazing to experience that it can still get better in such amazingly clear jumps. It's time again for some well earned thanks and huge appreciations for Gordon!

This is off topic, but Aleg, don't you think as well that, after making it to the final twice and losing twice, it's high time we finally get our hands on that world cup? :-)

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:50 pm
by nige2000
jesuscheung wrote:
nige2000 wrote:is this texture/boomy bass/ underwater sound issue the same problem ?
which version are you on aleg?

22/23 seem a little backward or slow
still missing a little atmosphere over the 10ms/448 avx's, hf maybe
much else is better
tested 12,15,21,22,23,
21 been ahead for me atm
bass is great. not boomy.

i modded my headphones to detect jitters/micro. most forward sounding.
i get earaches within 20 seconds. because refinement is messy at micro level. makes dirty sound.

micro is vital. small change in texture implies different soundstage.
anyone looking for soundstage, they need to listen to micro and DON'T listen soundstage itself.

because false micro can make "correct" stage.
Ok boomy is a bad description bass is almost great some aspects are better than ever
But nearly all aspects need to be better to be better on average
But something is off
Think a fix will come

Tip: Styles can be applied quickly to selected text.

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 4:42 pm
by Aleg
nige2000 wrote:is this texture/boomy bass/ underwater sound issue the same problem ?
which version are you on aleg?

22/23 seem a little backward or slow
still missing a little atmosphere over the 10ms/448 avx's, hf maybe
much else is better
tested 12,15,21,22,23,
21 been ahead for me atm

Have had little time today to do comparative listening, had friends over so no opportunity.
Just a short run of the 12,14,15 early this morning and just a quick check later on, on the texture remark by JC.

My underwater description was on the 4.14, just trying to illustrate in another way, what I meant with topped off highs and the effect is has on me/my system.

So still have a lot of catching up to do. Probably tomorrow at the earliest.

Cheers

Aleg

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 5:55 pm
by Aleg
Still would say 3.14 tops 4.23/4.21 with respect to micro details in deep bass range.

Listened to "Prayer" from Kiyoshi Kitagawa Trio "Prayer" CD, which begins with a short double bass solo. 3.14 can reproduce the vibrating of the bass strings where as 4.23/4.21 cannot and can only create a full bass sound.

Not saying that one aspect is all that matters, but it is something 3.14 is very good at.

Cheers

Aleg

Re: MQN

Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2014 10:52 pm
by tony
Gordon must be burning the midnight oil I thought I was at the races on the early 4.0 versions but we are in the 20's now. Thanks for cutting to the chase Aleg. 3.14 still is the one? I don't mind using either 3.14 or 3.27 can't really identify differences.

Gordon haven't a clue in relation to the programming but how different are the 4.20's to 3.14/3.27?
Is it night and day?

BTW why is nobody singing the praises of 4.09sse512. Detail warmth no harshness,pleasant.
For long term listening I would be using this.