MQN

[sima66]

Taggart that sounds quiet a job. I don't think I would have the cheek to add anymore requests to that list!

Sima66 I would agree with a few versions covering the spectrum of albums out there. Of course realising making that statement /typing takes 30 seconds. It really depends how much work is involved in coding mutliple versions.

BTW Just to confuse things I prefer the bass shy version which is the opposite 2.59 that Pearse likes. So go figure. Maybe you need to put your sub back in Pearse? or get another one!!

maybe I can offer a consultancy service and build a version specific to the clients wishes/listening room etc. Not what I envisaged, but might pay the bills.

Just to make myself clear.
I meant that we can pick 2-3 versions, from the already dozens different MQn's and choose which one suits better the particular album (song).
For example albums heavy on bass will be better to play on 2.59.
In any case there a lot of options and choices for everybody.

[taggart]

sima66, your idea is not bad and I understand what you like to achieve. I also experienced that different sound settings could be helpful, when listening to different recordings. I've put it on the list and will think about how this feature could be implemented.

[tony]

AudioPhil has just convinced me to try a KS version of MQn, apparently KS has 1 dll and 1 sys file so shall see if it makes a difference. Suppose it would increase the desire for his core optimisation, wonder if he would sell it with MQn as part of a bundle.

This is the conundrum on a product like this. The motives of the developer will be questioned once money is on the table.
Personally can't see how it can be fully developed for nothing. Sbgk is either a philantropist, hobbyist, retired engineer with a love of audio or a developer who eventually gets to the point where to go further or maintain interest there has to be some reward for the effort.

The luddite brigrade who want somebody to work for nothing and give the product away are in cloud cuckoo land. I just don't see any of them applying the same logic to their own line of work.

Like Pearse would happily pay for it but if we digress into marketing strategies a once off payment is the only logical way imho.
The trick is having a market ready product at a realistic price again imho. Think that is awhile off. Jplay is very polished now.Website is professional comprehensive I assume Jriver the same.

The link up with Audiophil will certainly give a window to the player but as you well know it will have to be more advanced and polished
to be chargeable. The issue I believe with 2012/R2 is the licence cost which is prohibitive and I raised that with Audiophil.
There is going to be a limited market(maybe I don't understand the potential) for this. Musing I would think audiophil should do a version for 8.1 at a cheaper price. I think a lot more people would dive in to these tweaks/improvements/foo or whatever name is correct if the pricing was lower. To me better to get it out to the masses then only a small minority if priced too high.

Everybody is so used to getting stuff for nothing that pricing for any music player generates noise on some forums anyway.
Again pricing is the issue. Jplay despite the fantastic support is probably priced too high as per all audio products.

Maybe just to separate this out I will start a 2012/R2 thread for those interested in discussing the merits/otherwise of
2012/R2 and the optimising script. Personally very happy with it as I have been a beta tester for awhile. Like others here wouldn't be without it and feel the combination of the various things here all lead to a really highend audio source. Maybe the logic of bundling with a product like MQn but also offering optimisation for 8.1 without increasing price might be compelling. It would certainly be a great combination.

On kernel streaming Sbgk will have to quantify the benefits compared to the current set up. I take it that will facilitate keeping our lan cables,isolators and
other stuff beloved of Jplay streaming to reuse with MQn.

Ok Pearse will try your fav without the subs. Will you take your old one back?

I am beginning to see Gerry's point maybe testing and tweaking can take over and the love and enjoyment of music could be forgotten.
It becomes all consuming. I think most people just want a decent working solution to implement and forget about until upgradeitis occurs maybe 4-8yrs later!

[nige2000]

sima66, your idea is not bad and I understand what you like to achieve. I also experienced that different sound settings could be helpful, when listening to different recordings. I've put it on the list and will think about how this feature could be implemented.

id prefer it to be more like system compatibility settings, like phil has

accurate playback shouldn't be genre or album specific, but it may need to match your system, same as speaker amp etc

anyway that new 2.60 cp version
damn it anyway i like it more
didnt think there was room for more bass but there was

there might never be a release version
have to do one at some point

[taggart]

id prefer it to be more like system compatibility settings, like phil has

Which settings do you mean? Sound Signature and Digital Filter Modes?

[sbgk]

The link up with Audiophil will certainly give a window to the player but as you well know it will have to be more advanced and polished
to be chargeable. The issue I believe with 2012/R2 is the licence cost which is prohibitive and I raised that with Audiophil.
There is going to be a limited market(maybe I don't understand the potential) for this. Musing I would think audiophil should do a version for 8.1 at a cheaper price. I think a lot more people would dive in to these tweaks/improvements/foo or whatever name is correct if the pricing was lower. To me better to get it out to the masses then only a small minority if priced too high.

On kernel streaming Sbgk will have to quantify the benefits compared to the current set up. I take it that will facilitate keeping our lan cables,isolators and
other stuff beloved of Jplay streaming to reuse with MQn.

Ok Pearse will try your fav without the subs. Will you take your old one back?

Just to be clear there is no link up with AudioPhil,we just exchanged some emails.

I started MQn as an experiment, but also because I thought it would give the other developers a kick in the pants and then I would get a proper player that I like the sound of, that doesn't seem to have happened and MQn has taken on a life of it's own.

My preference is for a neutral sound, but if people want a different sound then that is a different matter.

KS doesn't mean streaming between pcs, it's just a way of getting music to the end device, like asio/wasapi, but at a low level in computing terms.

[Clive]

The 2.60 cp version is very enjoyable. There's no shortage of bass for sure and it doesn't get in the way of the rest the music. Vocals are more "there" and expressive. Detail is good and not at all in your face. I'd say this is the best 2.60 version and better than the 2.59s too.

[sbgk]

sima66, your idea is not bad and I understand what you like to achieve. I also experienced that different sound settings could be helpful, when listening to different recordings. I've put it on the list and will think about how this feature could be implemented.

id prefer it to be more like system compatibility settings, like phil has

accurate playback shouldn't be genre or album specific, but it may need to match your system, same as speaker amp etc

anyway that new 2.60 cp version
damn it anyway i like it more
didnt think there was room for more bass but there was

there might never be a release version
have to do one at some point

2.60 8 4 just has such a live feel to it, when I listen to another version I miss that. The cp version seems to cut back on the detail so that I'm not getting the emotional cues from the vocals.

[Sligolad]

Tried 2.60 CP and did not win me over from 2.59 sse4 Intel 8 4 16 16 8 .
Just listened to 2.60 8 4 and it has just replaced 2.59 sse4 Intel 8 4 16 16 8 as my favourite.
Not much in it but I liked it from the off, going to listen to some more music on 2.60 8 4.

Thank You Sir.

[Sligolad]

This is mad stuff, after listening to some vocals on 2.60 8 4 I found myself missing 2.59 sse4 Intel 8 4 16 16 8.
Went back and the vocals sounded much sweeter and more lifelike in 2.59 sse4 Intel 8 4 16 16 8.

Tried swapping back and forth again and arrived at the same conclusion.
No more messing for tonight just going to listen to music.