Page 569 of 804

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 3:16 pm
by jesuscheung
Aleg wrote:
nige2000 wrote:I'd like it to be settable too
You can always override it, as with my batch the tasker command follows the start of mqncontrol+mqnplay and will set the final value.
But agreed these things should best not be fixed inside an executable.
guys maybe it is threading priority. not process priority.

try test it see which is best

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 3:26 pm
by jrling
Aleg wrote:
nige2000 wrote:I'd like it to be settable too
You can always override it, as with my batch the tasker command follows the start of mqncontrol+mqnplay and will set the final value.
But agreed these things should best not be fixed inside an executable.
Surely the whole pursuit of MQn is to provide a minimalist player. So having user configurable settings built in for Priority, could be considered to be unnecessary, when we can all do that ourselves (to suit our taste) easily in a batch file.

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 3:28 pm
by Aleg
jesuscheung wrote:
Aleg wrote:
nige2000 wrote:I'd like it to be settable too
You can always override it, as with my batch the tasker command follows the start of mqncontrol+mqnplay and will set the final value.
But agreed these things should best not be fixed inside an executable.
guys maybe it is threading priority. not process priority.

try test it see which is best
No, the terms are of process priority.
Thread priority uses other terminology.

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 3:43 pm
by sbgk
uploaded 7.51 24/96 avx2

process high, thread critical priority

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:31 pm
by Ken Moreland
7.50 16/44 above norm avx2 plays fine for me but 7.51 24/96 avx2 doesn't play at all.
KM

Hold the page , just reset the PC and it's playing fine now too.

KM

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:35 pm
by Aleg
what's the change with 7.52 9624?

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:37 pm
by nige2000
High priority is ok
real time has much better resolution
Suppose a 5ms real time version would out of the question?

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:53 pm
by Aleg
Aleg wrote:what's the change with 7.52 9624?
Playing Gregory Porter Liquid Spirit in 96/24 is just wonderful, good clean bass, well controlled, good ease to the sound.

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:04 pm
by nige2000
I though I'd heard better detail in wasapi 24 bit

Good test track
Clapping tambourine and bass
Aleg wrote:
Aleg wrote:what's the change with 7.52 9624?
Playing Gregory Porter Liquid Spirit in 96/24 is just wonderful, good clean bass, well controlled, good ease to the sound.

Re: MQN

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 8:59 pm
by jrling
sbgk wrote:uploaded mqnplay 16/44 7.48, found some settings and code were wrong, getting there.

7.49 set's mqnplay to realtime priority, improves another unmeasurable aspect of the sq

the exe is back up to 140kb, so the next thing is to trim that down to 2kb and that'll be that.
7.49 1644 Normal is stunning. Def my best yet and my new reference.
Everything about it is a step up from 7.41 V93PA which was itself very good.
A proverbial veil lifted. Dynamic and detailed but also no hint of harshness.

One thing I noticed in Task Manager which I haven't seen before was that MQnPlay.exe when a single track was played took 2GB of RAM and CPU % a steady 30.5%. Both readings somewhat surprised and concerned me.

Is that to be expected, Gordon?