Page 561 of 804

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2014 11:00 pm
by Fran
OK, will try that..... its 5.14 from what I can tell.


Fran

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2014 11:23 pm
by sbgk
the next level has been reached

uploaded pa v91

you'll need to alter the device no in the mqnparam.txt file

mine used to say 1 and 4 and I used 4 as 1 was the laptop, though can't seem to play via the laptop.

now I use 0, is it because I have only 1 device that works ?

the reason for the change is that before capture devices were considered as well as render. now only render.

anyway, if you get it working it's a treat

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 1:53 am
by cvrle59
0 device works here too with v91...pretty good!
Actually, the best, I've heard so far!

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 4:50 am
by sima66
cvrle59 wrote:0 device works here too with v91...pretty good!
Actually, the best, I've heard so far!
+1
Better focus and even tighter bass.

Question: Why the MQn window doesn't close after the song is finished?!

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:53 am
by satshanti
Haven't had much time lately so I can't keep up with the speed at which new versions are appearing, but I noticed an interesting snippet:
sbgk wrote:uploaded v89 normal for those in the cheap seats.
there is an avx setting I could try as well, but avx2 is definitely better than normal.
With wasapi on my system with AMD CPU there was a clear order of preference when comparing the same version in the various instruction set iterations:
avx amd > avx > avx2 >sse2
Now that you mention an avx setting you could try, I wonder if that would still improve things with KS over the normal versions for the folks like me that can't play avx2.

I also would like to request a 2496 normal version of MQN 7.41 if possible.

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:18 am
by jesuscheung
v91 better. bass control is superb here.

probably can retire wasapi now?

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 11:08 am
by nige2000
jesuscheung wrote:v91 better. bass control is superb here.

probably can retire wasapi now?
v91 is very good and enjoyable great progress,
takes longer to test now (good sign)

resolution/detail/focus, dynamics/definition still a little behind yet
other stuff ks does better?

KS is going to be great :)

is reducing the buffers not gonna help the resolution?

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 12:19 pm
by sbgk
nige2000 wrote:
jesuscheung wrote:v91 better. bass control is superb here.

probably can retire wasapi now?
v91 is very good and enjoyable great progress,
takes longer to test now (good sign)

resolution/detail/focus, dynamics/definition still a little behind yet
other stuff ks does better?

KS is going to be great :)

is reducing the buffers not gonna help the resolution?
still think the kernel is trying to handle 10ms of data at a time. Did try smaller buffers, seemed noisier to me and there was loss of bass.

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 12:39 pm
by nige2000
sbgk wrote:
nige2000 wrote:
jesuscheung wrote:v91 better. bass control is superb here.

probably can retire wasapi now?
v91 is very good and enjoyable great progress,
takes longer to test now (good sign)

resolution/detail/focus, dynamics/definition still a little behind yet
other stuff ks does better?

KS is going to be great :)

is reducing the buffers not gonna help the resolution?
still think the kernel is trying to handle 10ms of data at a time. Did try smaller buffers, seemed noisier to me and there was loss of bass.
Same with wasapi lower buffer less bass quanity
I haven't been testing all the versions
Which are low buffered?

Think low buffer and try to find another way to get the bass back should be an option

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 1:10 pm
by sbgk
lowe