Jump to content
IGNORED

Visual studio 2012 c++ and wasapi minimalist player


sbgk

Recommended Posts

have uploaded 2.40 sse4 intel which I think is as good as I can get it for now ( the plan is to do the complete render loop in assembly so that it saves initialising the memcpy function every time it is called), think 2.39 had a false 3d effect, this version backs it off a bit, bass and detail are good, piano sounds good. Thanks for all the feedback.

 

thanks sbgk. you has done a lot for us. last versions are excelent, especially vocal. nothing in this world is absolute.

Link to comment
sometimes i really love foobar XA900B. in order for it to sound really good, the bios and OS must be tuned to the extreme, otherwise it will sound so wrong in my system. in many ways it can compete with the best of MQn.

 

MQn sounds analog out of the box.

 

what does xa900b do to the sound ? does it alter it in some way, how does it alter the timing ? Why is it just set to 16/48 ? MQn just loads the data into memory and renders it to the end device. The first thing I did was move the render loop from it's own thread to the main thread as the interaction of the main thread waiting for the render loop function to complete was affecting the sound, think xa900b probably has something like that going on.

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment
what does xa900b do to the sound ? does it alter it in some way, how does it alter the timing ? Why is it just set to 16/48 ? MQn just loads the data into memory and renders it to the end device. The first thing I did was move the render loop from it's own thread to the main thread as the interaction of the main thread waiting for the render loop function to complete was affecting the sound, think xa900b probably has something like that going on.

 

why you say 16/48? it uses waveout, requires you to set 24/44100 in system sound and DAC. how can it become 16/48?

don't think XA there is any audio processing, not like JIE at all. i heard he say no computation is best for audio, no idea what it meant, until i come across MQn. almost every tweak on his blog is about reducing computation on CPU... he always says oversampling screws up SQ.

Link to comment
why you say 16/48? it uses waveout, requires you to set 24/44100 in system sound and DAC. how can it become 16/48?

don't think XA there is any audio processing, not like JIE at all. i heard he say no computation is best for audio, no idea what it meant, until i come across MQn. almost every tweak on his blog is about reducing computation on CPU... he always says oversampling screws up SQ.

 

ok, I got the sample rate wrong, but from what I understand it is aimed at a specific dac that can only play 24/44.1, so as a minimum it is converting the data to that format. There is something that tries to fix the timing, it works, but gives a digital edge.

 

you can adjust it to whatever rate/sample you want , but it is fixed and requires a manual change to play at other rate/samples

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment
2.40 is very very good! i have nothing to bitch about. this is at least 99% integration of every version.

 

just one request, make a non 3D version?

 

stereo is supposed to be 3d, are you saying the instruments are not in a single point. Does adjusting your speaker position make a difference ?

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment
ok, I got the sample rate wrong, but from what I understand it is aimed at a specific dac that can only play 24/44.1, so as a minimum it is converting the data to that format. There is something that tries to fix the timing, it works, but gives a digital edge.

 

yea, it downsamples anything to 24/44.1. i get digital edge too if i don't tune my bios for it. XA is a daddy's little princess, if you system isn't tuned right, it doesn't sound good like MQn. but XA does sound different to MQn. XA does a poor job with piano sound. MQn is more real. but XA has great vocal, only if system is properly tuned.

Link to comment
stereo is supposed to be 3d, are you saying the instruments are not in a single point. Does adjusting your speaker position make a difference ?

 

i prefer the stage of 2.37- any one of them will be fine. 2.40 sounds too much like i am working in a studio correcting/looking for mistakes in sound. 2.40 is like a hd800. i want to enjoy music with a hd560, hd580, hd600 with no sound effects.

Link to comment
yea, it downsamples anything to 24/44.1. i get digital edge too if i don't tune my bios for it. XA is a daddy's little princess, if you system isn't tuned right, it doesn't sound good like MQn. but XA does sound different to MQn. XA does a poor job with piano sound. MQn is more real. but XA has great vocal, only if system is properly tuned.

 

it only downsamples because he tells you to select that bit/sample rate to 24/44.1 - if you set it to the rate your file is at then it won't downsample. As I understand it is written specifically for a dac that is popular in Asia that has a fixed bit/sample rate, he doesn't really mention it in his site, maybe it is implicit. It's a strange player because of this restriction, why shackle it in such a way.

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment
it only downsamples because he tells you to select that bit/sample rate to 24/44.1 - if you set it to the rate your file is at then it won't downsample. As I understand it is written specifically for a dac that is popular in Asia that has a fixed bit/sample rate, he doesn't really mention it in his site, maybe it is implicit. It's a strange player because of this restriction, why shackle it in such a way.

 

yes. because he said his DAC sounds best at 24/44.1 only. you can choose 24/96 if you DAC sounds best with it. he uses a audiofire DAC, and he modded it. he is looking for true/real/analog sound like us, that's why he praises his STAX.

 

i mean it does make some sense. what if you DAC sucks at say 24/192, when it could sound better at 24/44? yes, some detail will be lost, still better.

Link to comment
i prefer the stage of 2.37- any one of them will be fine. 2.40 sounds too much like i am working in a studio correcting/looking for mistakes in sound. 2.40 is like a hd800. i want to enjoy music with a hd560, hd580, hd600 with no sound effects.

 

which version of 2.37, there was quite a variety ? I'll do a comparison with 2.40. If I hear incidental noises because the instruments are well separated then I tend to think that's a good thing, the brain can fuse it all back into one. Is that not why we are listening to hifi, to hear individual notes, instruments, timbres and a stereo 3d effect is part of that.

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment
yes. because he said his DAC sounds best at 24/44.1 only. you can choose 24/96 if you DAC sounds best with it. he uses a audiofire DAC, and he modded it. he is looking for true/real/analog sound like us, that's why he praises his STAX.

 

i mean it does make some sense. what if you DAC sucks at say 24/192, when it could sound better at 24/44? yes, some detail will be lost, still better.

 

so does he recommend downsampling/upsampling all your music to 24/44.1 ? it can't be optimal for that to be happening during playback, not sure if it loads into memory first.

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment
which version of 2.37, there was quite a variety ? I'll do a comparison with 2.40. If I hear incidental noises because the instruments are well separated then I tend to think that's a good thing, the brain can fuse it all back into one. Is that not why we are listening to hifi, to hear individual notes, instruments, timbres and a stereo 3d effect is part of that.

 

2.37 wc no xmm sub -128 will do. background music brings out main music quite well with this version. good enough for me. most important is main music sounds great, you did it! i am assuming 2.40 sounds good with piano, if doesn't, i just use 2.82. otherwise, i can use 2.40 for everything else.

 

this is a discussion of what you think people should focus on listening. this is a tough one. not a question of whether sound is analog/digital... for some people like me, i just need background music brings out the main music. other people love all details. 2.40 seems to encourage(push/force) me to listen to everything. 2.37 doesn't. there is a difference. 2.40 emphasis on positionings. 2.37 doesn't. yes, i am more old school. like new headphones like 650, 701 focus on effects, soundstage, i prefer headphones 10-20 years ago that focus on music.

Link to comment
so does he recommend downsampling/upsampling all your music to 24/44.1 ? it can't be optimal for that to be happening during playback, not sure if it loads into memory first.

 

good question. i shall ask him the downsampling procedure. wtf don't downsample your music! you can't get it back once you lose the content!!!

Link to comment
good question. i shall ask him the downsampling procedure. wtf don't downsample your music! you can't get it back once you lose the content!!!

 

actually, it is good to fix rate for average user. imagine you are playing 24/96, and you don't downsample, your clock rate can be set for 44100 in registry can be wrong! and some people like me uses reclock, which setting fixes the sample rate too! a lot needs to be changed for playing 24/96 file!!! also DAC might require manual changing of sample rate too! god save me... unless you use native ASIO/kernal streaming to bypass all that?

 

yea, how about a native ASIO version for MQn? would it sound any better? never heard a player with good implementation with native ASIO.

Link to comment
actually, it is good to fix rate for average user. imagine you are playing 24/96, and you don't downsample, your clock rate can be set for 44100 in registry can be wrong! and some people like me uses reclock, which setting fixes the sample rate too! a lot needs to be changed for playing 24/96 file!!! also DAC might require manual changing of sample rate too! god save me... unless you use native ASIO/kernal streaming to bypass all that?

 

yea, how about a native ASIO version for MQn?

 

thought wasapi was asio for windows, it's quite easy to set the clock rate in registry (you mean the frequency in mmcss pro audio profile ?, plan to dio this in MQnControl)

 

have'nt liked the sound of asio players I have tried, so haven't pursued it.

 

ok, can see the issue with 3d now, think I prefer the 2.38 1 loop or 2.37 wc no xmm add 128, did you try those ?

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment

yes songs are very sad indeed! emotionally, 8 8>1 loop>2.38. 2.38 is rather rich/intense/not airy in vocal, more difficult to connect to emotionally. 1 loop is better, vocal is airy, but slightly control. 8 8 is almost perfect, vocal is airy/100% details/free, all the important elements are there. however, 8 8 vocal is like walking the beach... hmm... sandy. it needs to sound smooth like 2.82 like water, 8 8 annoys my ears with the sandy/earache sideeffect. thx sbgk!! you almost did it! combine everything into one!

 

so, do you still prefer 2.37 wc no xmm sub -128 ? 2.38 8 8 has something missing, 8 4 seems to be the optimum for alignment, I don't find the treble of 2.37 wc no xmm sub -128 to be realistic

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment
good question. i shall ask him the downsampling procedure. wtf don't downsample your music! you can't get it back once you lose the content!!!

 

in resampling, only upsampling bitrate by multiply integer number, for example, 48000=>96000=>192000 (x2, x4), or 44100=>88200=>176400, may be acceptable. not use as 44100=>96000 (x2.17), 96000=>44100... because it very very difficult in mathematical algorithms, must be use many approximate numbers, simulators on soundwave graph => sound is much different from the original.

downsampling is bad way, moreover, 96000=>44100. i never use. r8brain is best doing it.

Link to comment
thought wasapi was asio for windows, it's quite easy to set the clock rate in registry (you mean the frequency in mmcss pro audio profile ?, plan to dio this in MQnControl)

 

have'nt liked the sound of asio players I have tried, so haven't pursued it.

 

ok, can see the issue with 3d now, think I prefer the 2.38 1 loop or 2.37 wc no xmm add 128, did you try those ?

 

don't forget you need change settings in reclock too, if user has installed reclock! some DAC needs changing settings too, this is tough to code.

 

prefer 2.37 wc no xmm add 128.

Link to comment

so, do you still prefer 2.37 wc no xmm sub -128 ? 2.38 8 8 has something missing, 8 4 seems to be the optimum for alignment, I don't find the treble of 2.37 wc no xmm sub -128 to be realistic

 

what is 8 4? i have only listened to 2.24 8 4. this version is ok too in terms of background music brings out main music without 3d. 2.37 wc no xmm add 128 is better than 2.24 8 4

 

2.38 8 8 has 3d, so no...

Link to comment
what is 8 4? i have only listened to 2.24 8 4. this version is ok too in terms of background music brings out main music without 3d. 2.37 wc no xmm add 128 is better than 2.24 8 4

 

2.38 8 8 has 3d, so no...

 

now i remember. 2.37 wc no xmm sub -128 is very good with piano- more crispy than 2.82, which is rare. only the treble is wrong. yes, if possible, use this.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...