Page 564 of 804
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 2:23 pm
by sima66
Nigel, can you please compare the 24/96 versions.
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 2:37 pm
by nige2000
sima66 wrote:Nigel, can you please compare the 24/96 versions.
Which versions to which versions?
I know there's not that many but still
All 24 bit mqn wouldn't be as well optimised as 16 bit
But I think 24 bit has much more potential and scope than 16 bit had
Makes me wonder if converting all to 24 bit should be an option?
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 4:54 pm
by sima66
nige2000 wrote:sima66 wrote:Nigel, can you please compare the 24/96 versions.
Which versions to which versions?
I know there's not that many but still
All 24 bit mqn wouldn't be as well optimised as 16 bit
But I think 24 bit has much more potential and scope than 16 bit had
Makes me wonder if converting all to 24 bit should be an option?
Your favourite 24/96 WASAPI to the latest 24/96 KS.
I found that 5.14/2.97 in 24/96 to be better, but not on 16/44!!!
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 5:25 pm
by cvrle59
I have never liked any hirez version as much as I have 5.14 or even more 7.41/91 for 16/44. I probably didn't give them enough chance, so I have focused to dsd instead, in hirez domain.
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:02 pm
by Karl
Hello Gordon,
how about 24/44.1 and 48 for 7.41?
Karl
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:02 pm
by sbgk
found a few more settings
uploaded portaudio v92 with different buffer sizes
0.01 s
0.001 s
1 s
5 s
the 1s and 5s take a while to start playing. 0.01 sounds best to me, well better than 0.001 which sounds digital. didn't test the larger sizes long enough to decide on those.
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:03 pm
by sbgk
Karl wrote:Hello Gordon,
how about 24/44.1 and 48 for 7.41?
Karl
it's definitely on the plan
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:39 pm
by Aleg
sbgk wrote:found a few more settings
uploaded portaudio v92 with different buffer sizes
0.01 s
0.001 s
1 s
5 s
the 1s and 5s take a while to start playing. 0.01 sounds best to me, well better than 0.001 which sounds digital. didn't test the larger sizes long enough to decide on those.
0.01 >> 1=5>>0.001(crackles)
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:43 pm
by sbgk
uploaded v92 seq and cache, prefer cache
Re: MQN
Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:47 pm
by Aleg
Aleg wrote:sbgk wrote:found a few more settings
uploaded portaudio v92 with different buffer sizes
0.01 s
0.001 s
1 s
5 s
the 1s and 5s take a while to start playing. 0.01 sounds best to me, well better than 0.001 which sounds digital. didn't test the larger sizes long enough to decide on those.
0.01 >> 1=5>>0.001(crackles)
V91 >>> v92 0.01