MQN

[jesuscheung]

5.64 sse seems like the current best of sse ?

the sound is solid here. density seems ultra-high. never higher
very real sound!
doesn't sound like 16/44100 at all. feels like > 24/96100

has typical mqn harshness in treble. probably coz of sse2

one of the few versions without the lean sound. makes it listenable

if it can be a little bit more relax. it will be perfect

[satshanti]

I'd love to test different versions and give feedback, whatever that's worth, but I found out I do need 2496 avx versions to make a proper judgement, and they are very sparsely available. The last one I have is 5.51 and that one does sound pretty good, with some songs I even prefer it over my still favourite 3.39, which seems to work without hiccups on my system. For most material I still prefer 3.39, despite some lack of detail. Its overall presentation is very realistic and involving.

I gave sse and avx2 another try the other day, pitting 3.51 avx againsts 5.69 avx2 and 5.64 sse. As before avx sounded much better than the other two, with avx2 slightly ahead versus sse.

So... if my feedback is of some value, please give me avx 2496 versions and I'll happily do my bit. :-)

[sbgk]

5.81 16/44 avx2 any good ?

[sbgk]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... 85%29.aspx

anyone tried this

[jesuscheung]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... 85%29.aspx

anyone tried this

tried it a few months ago. bad tweak

tried it again just now... SQ got worse

[Aleg]

5.83 is best of the bunch IMO. Upwards to 5.87 there is a gradually increasing loss of microdetails.
5.81 and 5.82 also show a lack of microdetails.

On acoustical jazz trio 5.83 approaches 5.14, but 5.14 still tops 5.83 clearly on the microdetails (in voice one can hear hear all the microvariations of the singer's voice and little swings) and is still the more engaging and more musical version, it also has still better and more natural extended decays than 5.83.

Cheers

Aleg

[sbgk]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... 85%29.aspx

anyone tried this

tried it a few months ago. bad tweak

tried it again just now... SQ got worse

seems to indicate it disables the protected process for the audiodg. DRM requires a protected process, is it stopping DRM running ? You would think that was a good thing when just playing wav files. Seems to affect the sq, not sure if it's good or bad, removes sibilance ?

[jesuscheung]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... 85%29.aspx

anyone tried this

tried it a few months ago. bad tweak

tried it again just now... SQ got worse

seems to indicate it disables the protected process for the audiodg. DRM requires a protected process, is it stopping DRM running ? You would think that was a good thing when just playing wav files. Seems to affect the sq, not sure if it's good or bad, removes sibilance ?

micro is unstable. earaches

forget this tweak... you have more important tweak to do.
1. try small icon on desktop + medium icon on file explorer
vs
2. smallest icon on desktop + smallest icon on file explorer
(ctrl + mouse wheel to change icon size)

you will be surprised the amount of SQ changes.
(i think 1 is more correct. no other combo beats these two)

i am guessing 1=cpu rendered. 2=gpu rendered.
(typical SQ change of cpu rendered vs hardware offload. this applies to network card too)

[jesuscheung]

5.64 sse is extremely goood.
first i thought mqn is harsh...
it seems to be correctly reporting OS/bios jitter.

in my setup, most software translates OS/bios jitter as hard or "difficult to vibrate".

mqn translates jitter as harsh/sour tune.

however, mqn strain/lean is mqn strain/lean.
this jitter is part of mqn. not OS/bios

5.64 sse is leanless.

[nige2000]

Jitter shows up as harshness in mqn it's the way the micro details comes out of a jittery noisy pc and or dac

Usually any attempts to reduce harshness the micro details take a hammering

Micro detail reverb vibration decay is very important
Its the difference between good and spectacular