MQN

Anything to do with computer audio, hardware, software etc.
sima66
Posts: 872
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 7:35 pm
Location: Canada

Re: MQN

Post by sima66 »

elaprince wrote:
Gordon after listening to your newest and greatest ever version I still can feel the goose bumps
This is nothing like anything out there
To be honest I went and try BHE and I can safely say that your player is 100 light years ahead
After v123 I though can anything be better? And again you prove it that it can
Anyone following this amazing project give yourself a favor and please listen
I think now you can really stop and call this a REFERENCE
Thank you
Than must be your lucky day when you were introduced to MQn........very, very lucky day!!!
I5 4440+TXCOmobo+JCAT Femto-Intona-JKRegen+HynesPS+TeraDak ATX-820W=JCATusb=DiverterHR=Wadia 931/922(GNSC mod)=PassLabsXA100.5=2xValhalla=Stacked&moded ESL57+JAS SuperTweet+2MJ Acoustics Ref.I
4SteinHarmonizers;RR777;Tellus;StillpointsUltraSS
iori
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 2:43 pm

Re: MQN

Post by iori »

v124 matches very well with w10 enterprise LTSB mildly optimized with just some services disabled. While analytical, tonal balance does'nt have a sense of edge.
seems 35Mb is the upper limit on file size, then playback stops.

there is no file size limitation in r2 core.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

uploaded control v38 and play v125, they should be used together, just tuning a new setting which I haven't used before.

still a bit of work on play and counter to come which should improve things further.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

iori wrote:v124 matches very well with w10 enterprise LTSB mildly optimized with just some services disabled. While analytical, tonal balance does'nt have a sense of edge.
seems 35Mb is the upper limit on file size, then playback stops.

there is no file size limitation in r2 core.
don't know why that should be, am playing 90 mb file ok.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

elaprince wrote: Gordon after listening to your newest and greatest ever version I still can feel the goose bumps
This is nothing like anything out there
To be honest I went and try BHE and I can safely say that your player is 100 light years ahead
After v123 I though can anything be better? And again you prove it that it can
Anyone following this amazing project give yourself a favor and please listen
I think now you can really stop and call this a REFERENCE
Thank you
never tried BHE, he believes playback removes something that can be added back in by altering the data. I believe the data is ok and the playback needs to be improved. He uses a basic compiler so control over how the code is running is less. He also says some registers sound better than others which is a bit limiting.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

uploaded play v126 and control v39 (should be used together), a return to form, optimised the counter loop think there is an improvement in sq as a result, everything sounds in the correct place, very good echo and sounds musical. There is such good detail retrieval with these versions that it can be exhausting to listen to, but this version seems to bring it together musically.

Think the setting I was trying before added too much digital noise, might try it with another method.

so it seems that having the minimum amount of code in the render loop is best, even moving the counting out to another exe improves things. The render loop now consists of 2 waits and 2 io function calls and some move instructions to move values from registers to registers, which are required for the function calls. Modern cpus remove the moves by register renaming, so basically it's :-

wait 1
load buffer 1
wait 2
load buffer 2

if that was happening in kernel space it would be better, but as it is it sounds very good. Still a bit of optimisation to do, but the end is in sight.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

play v127 and control v40 should be used together, managed to apply the setting without adding digital noise, does turbocharge the sound a bit, amazing presence and detail. Shall see if it's a keeper.
janh
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:24 pm

Re: MQN

Post by janh »

Listening to mqnplay v124 - v127 with their controls.
v124 I like least, it has less detail/clarity.
v126 -fine, but a little too much echo/reverb for my taste, piano can sound a bit widescreen.
I like v127 best.

Cheers
Jan H.
Gigabyte H97M-D3H with PPA OCXO module. i7-4790T, 800MHz. 8GB Ram, 800MHz.
PPA 2-rail LPSU & Pico. JCAT battery for OS-SSD and PPA v3 USBcard.
Server 2012 R2, AO 1.40. APL HiFi DAC-S, upd. Only use 1644 .wav
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

yup, agree with v127.

uploaded v128 and control v41 based on v127, should be used together, this one forces a calculation into kernel mode I think, seems better.

Got to say think that's the best yet, great bass articulation, detail, reverb, echo etc. Sounds like listening to some serious hifi.

Shall call that the last iteration and next release will be a finished version.

v128 was too digital, detail fine.

uploaded v129/v41 which uses an alternative setting that doesn't require calculations. Sounded ok on first listen, treble maybe reduced a bit.
sbgk
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: MQN

Post by sbgk »

Will there be an Irish presence at Scalford this year ? MQn might be finished by then.
Post Reply