Page 462 of 804
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:44 pm
by sbgk
anyone tried running as a super administrator account ?
http://en.kioskea.net/faq/29289-windows ... count-mode
just enabled it, hasn't made it sound worse.
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:46 pm
by nige2000
sbgk wrote:Ken Moreland wrote:24/96 5.15avx2 is better than 5.14 . Bass is tighter and treble is wonderful. I did a comparison using only one track between Jplay 24/96 PCM , MQN 24/96 PCM and Jplay DSD. MQN is ahead of Jplay PCM in terms of detail/emotion and close to Jplay DSD IMHO
KM
do you disable the jplay service and reboot before using mqn ?
likely not
is jplay service messing with the registry outside of playback
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:51 pm
by sbgk
nige2000 wrote:sbgk wrote:Ken Moreland wrote:24/96 5.15avx2 is better than 5.14 . Bass is tighter and treble is wonderful. I did a comparison using only one track between Jplay 24/96 PCM , MQN 24/96 PCM and Jplay DSD. MQN is ahead of Jplay PCM in terms of detail/emotion and close to Jplay DSD IMHO
KM
do you disable the jplay service and reboot before using mqn ?
likely not
is jplay service messing with the registry outside of playback
sets the system time and reserves ram and other things, I always preferred mqn without jplay service running.
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:52 pm
by sbgk
think it's made a difference, more transparent ?
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:41 am
by sima66
dannyhc wrote:sima66 wrote:Did not do much listening lately, but 5.14 avx2 is out of this world!!!
I did not try anything higher than 5.14, but I don't understand how I can play avx2 with Ivy Bridge?!
Please list control version used and what memory configuration you have?
I have no problems in getting it to play it's just the sound has a metallic sound to it and produces a lot of background noise.
I tried playing back off the onboard sound card via optical into my DAC, still exhibits the same issue. I am beginning to suspect my memory might be at fault although I run loose timings at 1333Mhz.
The only version that runs perfectly is 4.08 even the newer SSE2 ones fail, will continue troubleshooting tonight.
I'm still using the 2.97 control, but I don't understand what you meant about what memory configuration I have! If you meant the RAM settings, I never changed anything.
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:10 am
by dannyhc
sima66 wrote:
I'm still using the 2.97 control, but I don't understand what you meant about what memory configuration I have! If you meant the RAM settings, I never changed anything.
Thanks, I mean by how many RAM modules are you running and what timings they are at? Do you have 4 banks populated or just 2? Do you know if your Ram are single sided or double sided modules?
I will try 2.97 control tonight and see if this is the silver bullet, thanks for your insight.
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2014 5:21 am
by Aleg
nige2000 wrote:sbgk wrote:Ken Moreland wrote:24/96 5.15avx2 is better than 5.14 . Bass is tighter and treble is wonderful. I did a comparison using only one track between Jplay 24/96 PCM , MQN 24/96 PCM and Jplay DSD. MQN is ahead of Jplay PCM in terms of detail/emotion and close to Jplay DSD IMHO
KM
do you disable the jplay service and reboot before using mqn ?
likely not
is jplay service messing with the registry outside of playback
JPlay sets TimerResolution to 0.5 ms. This timing gives strained sound as it is too tight.
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2014 5:31 am
by Aleg
sbgk wrote:
think it's made a difference, more transparent ?
users of Server2012 are normally using this account as it is the default one on this OS.
It is on the Windows 8/8.1 (more focussed on consumer level users) that is disabled by default.
After enabling it, you are logged in as user Administrator I assume, otherwise I wouldn't expect any differences.
Also in the Local Security Policy there are some settings that influence how this super-administrator and usesr from the Administrator Group are treated, securitywise.
Cheers
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:25 am
by jesuscheung
5.20 see is superb!
nothing to criticise apart from micro-tuning! moving forward.
micro-details is abstracted away into dryness. result sounds very clean. also less real.
e.g. guitar almost shines and nearly feels watery. not quite. only one reason i think. micro is slightly drier than norm.
vocal also... rather clean.
no lean no strain no harsh no weird nothing. one of the highest listenable version.
Re: MQN
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:38 am
by sbgk
sbgk wrote:
think it's made a difference, more transparent ?
didn't like it, so back to normal