Tír Na HiFi

impressed with the detail and speed of 2.69, might be a new fav
reminds me of 2.67 only better and more likeable

sbgk wrote:given how good the sound can be with MQn, you've got to think that the rest of the signal route doesn't affect the SQ that much, in which case getting the cpu to transfer the data is more of a problem than a solution and the sooner we can remove the player/cpu from the process the better.

Is this towards a DAC design which would be able to suck the whole file (s), and arrange the bits and timing on it's own way straight from the file, or I'm just dreaming not fully understanding your message?

Have to say that I have always dreamed of just that as the ultimate solution and was inspired by Tony's Player see here - http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaud ... 11496.html

but I don't believe that either Tony or John Swenson took it further. Pity. I would be interested in doing so.

MQn doing its rendering in the DAC box reading from RAM would stand a chance of being the ultimate solution?

jrling wrote:

sbgk wrote:given how good the sound can be with MQn, you've got to think that the rest of the signal route doesn't affect the SQ that much, in which case getting the cpu to transfer the data is more of a problem than a solution and the sooner we can remove the player/cpu from the process the better.

Is this towards a DAC design which would be able to suck the whole file (s), and arrange the bits and timing on it's own way straight from the file, or I'm just dreaming not fully understanding your message?

Have to say that I have always dreamed of just that as the ultimate solution and was inspired by Tony's Player see here - http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaud ... 11496.html

but I don't believe that either Tony or John Swenson took it further. Pity. I would be interested in doing so.

MQn doing its rendering in the DAC box reading from RAM would stand a chance of being the ultimate solution?

Sounds like a good project for Kickstarter...

right, another go at a final version.

uploaded 2.70 sse2 intel

sbgk wrote:right, another go at a final version.

uploaded 2.70 sse2 intel

You have 2 times listed the same file name. It's got to be an error.

cvrle59 wrote:

sbgk wrote:right, another go at a final version.

uploaded 2.70 sse2 intel

You have 2 times listed the same file name. It's got to be an error.

google drive was being a bit sticky, doesn't affect the SQ.

sbgk. try a 4 digits clockrate. 4644 instead of 46440. no need of 6 digits never sounded good.

jesuscheung wrote:sbgk. try a 4 digits clockrate. 4644 instead of 46440. no need of 6 digits never sounded good.

Hi,
Could you please share a registry path to clockrate variable?

minionas wrote:

jesuscheung wrote:sbgk. try a 4 digits clockrate. 4644 instead of 46440. no need of 6 digits never sounded good.

Hi,
Could you please share a registry path to clockrate variable?

Same registry path as changing Background from False to True listed in the Readme. The clock rate is right above it. Guessing you just modify to one of the numbers mentioned. It would be good if someone could clarify that part.

wushuliu wrote:

minionas wrote:

jesuscheung wrote:sbgk. try a 4 digits clockrate. 4644 instead of 46440. no need of 6 digits never sounded good.

Hi,
Could you please share a registry path to clockrate variable?

Same registry path as changing Background from False to True listed in the Readme. The clock rate is right above it. Guessing you just modify to one of the numbers mentioned. It would be good if someone could clarify that part.

Thanks, i'll check this with some of earlier jesuscheung's mentioned numbers!