Page 688 of 804

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:07 am
by elaprince
v11 is excellent

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 9:22 am
by Octagon
sbgk wrote:uploaded v10 aleg, bit more detail, using 64 bit registers instead of 32 bit.

strange thing is the bass is washed out a bit, v11 is maybe a good compromise.
Hi Gordon,

Would be great if you could use a longer string for the device name. maybe you can add 10 open digits to Alegs name of the device in general? That would allow the ones like me with a longer device name to test as well.

Many thank's
Thomas

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:14 am
by nige2000
aleg
is the device name the same for the waveio as the sonicweld
cheers

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 1:17 pm
by Aleg
nige2000 wrote:aleg
is the device name the same for the waveio as the sonicweld
cheers
No it won't be. As the VID and the PID are also part of the USB device name.

But you can easily change the device string in mqnplay.exe using a HEX editor, as long as it fits the available length.

Sebna wrote an easy howto guide: http://tirnahifi.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 18&p=66788

The Sonicweld HR2 has the following deviceID:
\\?\tusbaudio_enum#vid_23db&pid_0002&ks#0208#{6994ad04-93ef-11d0-a3cc-00a0c9223196}\pcm_out_02_00

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 1:20 pm
by Aleg
elaprince wrote:v11 is excellent
I wouldn't know as I haven't yet had time to listen ;-(
Hope to do it later today.

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:10 pm
by Aleg
sbgk wrote:uploaded v10 aleg, bit more detail, using 64 bit registers instead of 32 bit.

strange thing is the bass is washed out a bit, v11 is maybe a good compromise.
V10 falls back behind the others.

I prefer V9 to V11.
I feel the V9 has a tighter control over bass and other frequencies too, while keeping an open sound character as well.

Cheers

Re: MQN

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 9:56 pm
by sbgk
uploaded v14 with a long device name, this is probably the most correct version code wise. Just a tad less control than with v9, but gives more atmospherics.

v16 has the v9 mod for some more bass and some other optimisation, best so far ?

Re: MQN

Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:48 pm
by Octagon
sbgk wrote:uploaded v14 with a long device name, this is probably the most correct version code wise. Just a tad less control than with v9, but gives more atmospherics.

v16 has the v9 mod for some more bass and some other optimisation, best so far ?
Hi Gordon,
thank's a lot for the longer device name! Great improvement with both versions. I can only compare them against each other as I have just installed new speakers KEF LS50 with the coax drivers from KEF Blade. Measurement and room correction is done but not finalized and they need to burn in as well...

I prefer V14 as it has all the details but more dept in stage. Bass seems to be a bit less detailled/clear in V16 which might be the reason for the difference in stage details?

Both versions supersede on my system the "best so far" combination MQncontrol 3.92 avx2 & MQnplay 9.00 avx2 oct. That might also be because they are playing in R2 Core Mode fully optimized with AO1.30 whilst the full version is in R2 Minimal Server fully optimized with AO1.30. As always OS is fully loaded into RAM.

Great work again
Thomas

Re: MQN

Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 5:36 pm
by Aleg
sbgk wrote:uploaded v14 with a long device name, this is probably the most correct version code wise. Just a tad less control than with v9, but gives more atmospherics.

v16 has the v9 mod for some more bass and some other optimisation, best so far ?
Now you've made things difficult.

As Thomas says V14 has a somewhat bigger soundstage, which suits e.g. orchestral music very well. Listening to a violin concerto (Isabella Faust with the new Schumann Violin Concerto) I like the bigger soundstage of V14 better than the increased directness and somewhat increased bass of V16.

But listening to a very close miked jazz duo of double bass and piano (Bert v.d. Brink & Tony Overwater), I prefer the directness, and somewhat more forward presentation and increased bass of V16 over the bigger stage and spacial atmosphere of V14.

So now it becomes dependent on genre of music and personal preference for that genre, which one of the versions to prefer.

One would almost hope for two types of 'sound engine' configurable/switchable from the outside ;-)

V9 is also still holding its ground, I think I prefer slightly over the V14 in orchestral music as well, because it has a slightly more forward presentation and additional 'presence'.

Great development again I must say, but now what to do?

----------
Update:

I think overall I would give preference to V16, just listened to female jazz vocal (Carmen Gomez Inc) and the additional bass, warmth of V16 does suit her very well

Cheers

Re: MQN

Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:26 pm
by DJ le Roi
Are the new versions only for Haswell computers?