Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sbgk

Visual studio 2012 c++ and wasapi minimalist player

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

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.

 

thought xa??? had reclock built in


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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

in my laptop, 23220 or 46440 firstly it seems better, more emotional. so i listened more carefully, i feel sound is bundle, package. vocal emotion is false, not true.

windows have many secrets, depending of its tweaking, i get different results.

i feel my last windows update (newer versions of hdaudbus.sys, audiodg.exe,...) give better sound and i don't need so much tweakings.

try windows update, i think that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in my laptop, 23220 or 46440 firstly it seems better, more emotional. so i listened more carefully, i feel sound is bundle, package. vocal emotion is false, not true.

windows have many secrets, depending of its tweaking, i get different results.

i feel my last windows update (newer versions of hdaudbus.sys, audiodg.exe,...) give better sound and i don't need so much tweakings.

try windows update, i think that.

 

don't use it. 10000 is good for you. long time no win update! will do that. thx!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

am inclined to go with 2.38 1 loop as don't like the treble of 2.37 wc no xmm sub -128. 8 4 is the default alignment, so they all use that unless 8 8 is specified etc. 2.82 was using environment variables which I didn't understand, so left them out in the end, but they can be added back in. 2.38 1 loop might sound a bit harder than other versions because I took out the unrolling of the render loop, so there are more goto statements firing - 65 times more in fact. Hopefully this will be fixed when the whole render loop is in assembly.


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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2.40 is very good with piano reproduction. but it is 3D lol... sounds very weird/funny to me who plays the instrument haha... no piano sounds like this, but it is real/analog lol.

 

piano sounds in 2 frequency ranges: mid and bass. if you don't care about bass you never get true piano sounds. i care about it for you.

((2.38 1 loop) + (2.40)) / 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
piano sounds in 2 frequency ranges: mid and bass. if you don't care about bass you never get true piano sounds. i care about it for you.

((2.38 1 loop) + (2.40)) / 2

 

thankyou, but which is which ?


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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
piano sounds in 2 frequency ranges: mid and bass. if you don't care about bass you never get true piano sounds. i care about it for you.

((2.38 1 loop) + (2.40)) / 2

true. yes actual piano sound is important. but the musical soul is about how the fingers press the piano keys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rapidshare have lost their minds and decided to upgrade to an unusable web page in the middle of Friday afternoon, it is painful to use, I shall be looking for an alternative, here is the link (only got it working using chrome) the link opens at the mqn folder click on it to expand, maybe takes several clicks, it says select file and click on the download button, there is no download button just double click on the file

 

 

have uploaded mqnplay 2.38 sse4 intel

 

this is the wc version that I mentioned in previous posts, I think I like it. Have moved the other 2.36 and 2.37 files to the testing folder.

 

archive share

 

 

RapidShare

 

mqn and test share

 

RapidShare

 

Anyone recommend a file sharing site that treats their users with respect.

 

Hi all,

 

I tried Explorer, Firefox and Chrome, but I can't find how too download files from the new Rapidshare GUI.

" Select the desired data and click on Download below on the left to save the files onto your computer. "

I manage too select the desired file, but than: where is the "download below on the left" ?

I don't see anything 'Below on the left' that looks like "Download".

What do I miss?

 

I also don't see version 2.38.

I only see 2.37 versions and 2.39.

No 2.38

 

Mark


Cable Modem/Router < Cat 7 -> Netgear Switch GS108Ev3 -> Cat 7 (25 meters) -> 2nd NIC on Thunderbolt -> Mac Mini (HD-plex -> Uptone DC-Conversion / Linear Fan Controller Kit (MMK), OSX on SD-card, Wifi-module physically removed, SSD unplugged from power and SATA, Audirvana, Sonarworks Room EQ).
* Mac Mini -> Cat 7 -> Merging Hapi -> Vovox Mucolink D-sub 25 Direct SD 100 -> Vovox Direct SD XLR -> PMC TwoTwo.8
* Mac Mini -> Supra USB 2.0 -> Crane Song Solaris -> Vovox Direct S XLR -> PMC TwoTwo.8
All LAN cable: ISTP Belden Cat.7 1885ENH with Telegartner MFP8 Cat 6a RJ45 plugs.
LAN shield connected at both ends to plug. Modem & switch powered with Linear PSU.
All interconnections: Vovox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all,

 

I tried Explorer, Firefox and Chrome, but I can't find how too download files from the new Rapidshare GUI.

" Select the desired data and click on Download below on the left to save the files onto your computer. "

I manage too select the desired file, but than: where is the "download below on the left" ?

I don't see anything 'Below on the left' that looks like "Download".

What do I miss?

 

I also don't see version 2.38.

I only see 2.37 versions and 2.39.

No 2.38

 

Mark

try clicking on the filename, works in chrome, there is no download button

other versions are in test folder or archive folder


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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
true. yes actual piano sound is important. but the musical soul is about how the fingers press the piano keys.

 

have uploaded 2.41 sse4 intel, I had discounted it before, but it does have better piano, unfortunately for you it is a 3d version.


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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
have uploaded 2.41 sse4 intel, I had discounted it before, but it does have better piano, unfortunately for you it is a 3d version.

 

2.41 sound is more sharp then norm => drum beat sound is better (little), but bass vibration is not good, bass soundstage is not good, vocal is more sharp and dry.

feel like as more clearly, but sound is not true.

2.38 8 8 & nopgomemcpy better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
have uploaded 2.41 sse4 intel, I had discounted it before, but it does have better piano, unfortunately for you it is a 3d version.

 

2.41

-pretty much a derivative of the great 2.40

-slightly harder than 2.40. 2.40 has extremely good(perfect?) softness.

-2.36 no wc no xmm is most 3D(good for gaming??); 2.40 is less 3D(just enough?); 2.41 is even less 3D. 2.36 is muddy with piano; 2.40 is cripsy+little boomy piano; 2.41 is crispy+little boomy piano. 2.37 wc no xmm sub -128 is the last non-3D version in my memory. it is non-3D, (most?)crispy/non-bloomy. only treble is wrong

-2.41. i can focus a little more on main music. 2.40 it is like listening to all details. nothing wrong with that. just matter of people's listening preference.

 

2.40 should a reference version for its great balance and monitoring style. everything is good to a point- not too much, not too less. (3D is an issue for me with piano, i am probably wrong)

Edited by jesuscheung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sbgk given 2.40, you probably only have to focus on making the best musicality. for me, musical equals to background music bringing out the main music. background music should sound like it is there but not not really there, such that, listeners should be focusing/enjoying on the greatness of the main music.

 

great work! sbgk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sbgk given 2.40, you probably only have to focus on making the best musicality. for me, musical equals to background music bringing out the main music. background music should sound like it is there but not not really there, such that, listeners should be focusing/enjoying on the greatness of the main music.

 

great work! sbgk

 

I found 2.41 piano to be quite different to 2.40, shall see what it sounds like today. I guess music is mixed using studio monitors so it is likely that a good player will make it sound like that, unless there is a domestic listening button on the mixing desk which they press just before release. If you are at a live concert all the instruments are heard and you just have to concentrate on the instrument you are interested in or just let the whole thing fuse together. Think 2.40/2.41 are a step above the others in that they can resolve detail and staging, I find them more entertaining.


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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I found 2.41 piano to be quite different to 2.40, shall see what it sounds like today. I guess music is mixed using studio monitors so it is likely that a good player will make it sound like that, unless there is a domestic listening button on the mixing desk which they press just before release. If you are at a live concert all the instruments are heard and you just have to concentrate on the instrument you are interested in or just let the whole thing fuse together. Think 2.40/2.41 are a step above the others in that they can resolve detail and staging, I find them more entertaining.

 

 

Hi sbgk

 

 

Man, you are in a hurry ! I can't keep up with carefully listening too all the new versions and reading the comments of the reviewers.

 

On reviewing MNq-versions:

In my opinion it is essential too use recordings that are well known for there good recording and sound quality. And also using a variety of musical styles is essential too judge the sound quality between different MNq-versions.

 

Reading comments like "if you use good recording, more difficult to tell differences in piano sound." makes me wonder. Big chance that this way you are 'voicing' MNq too compensate for short comings in lesser recordings or equipment being used. Not too mention the acquired sound-taste of the reviewer. Many audiophiles like a silky, smooth and airy 'tube-sound' and never visit concerts with acoustic music.

 

I noticed that the level of tweaking the 2012 server does make same versions sound different. Without any tweaking except for disabling performance counters with the exctrlst.exe application and lowering USB polling frequency, makes same MNq version sound different.

 

I would like too encourage you too follow your own ears.

I'm not particularly interested in home-hifi-gear, but I joined a friend too the Wifimedia. Maak kennis met de toekomst! store for a thorough listening session too your Nad M5x DAC on high quality passive speakers (I forgot the brand). This is where a good sound quality starts IMHO. And I'm also very familiar with most of ATC's active pro speakers.

Not knowing what your amp and speaker cables are doing too the sound, but your NAD DAC and ATC's are 'voiced' too sound natural, uncoloured with good resolution and detail.

 

So I think it is not a coincidence that most of the time I prefer the same versions as you do. (because of the equipment being used) but I need a lot more time too listen too all the different versions.

Coming week I will again try some versions, so more feed back in one week.

 

Thank you for al the good work!

I never enjoyed my setup so much!

MUCH better than Tiny Core + Deadbeef.

Edited by markvandepas

Cable Modem/Router < Cat 7 -> Netgear Switch GS108Ev3 -> Cat 7 (25 meters) -> 2nd NIC on Thunderbolt -> Mac Mini (HD-plex -> Uptone DC-Conversion / Linear Fan Controller Kit (MMK), OSX on SD-card, Wifi-module physically removed, SSD unplugged from power and SATA, Audirvana, Sonarworks Room EQ).
* Mac Mini -> Cat 7 -> Merging Hapi -> Vovox Mucolink D-sub 25 Direct SD 100 -> Vovox Direct SD XLR -> PMC TwoTwo.8
* Mac Mini -> Supra USB 2.0 -> Crane Song Solaris -> Vovox Direct S XLR -> PMC TwoTwo.8
All LAN cable: ISTP Belden Cat.7 1885ENH with Telegartner MFP8 Cat 6a RJ45 plugs.
LAN shield connected at both ends to plug. Modem & switch powered with Linear PSU.
All interconnections: Vovox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a 24 bit dac and I have a 24 bit version of MQn that it works with, but it doesn't seem to work with other 24 bit dacs. Someone is sending me a J Kenny Ciunas dac next week so shall hopefully get it working with that.

 

does your dac play 16 bit ok ? have uploaded mqncontrol.exe 2496 24 bit v5 in the test directory for you to try using a 24/96 24 bit file

 

My dac plays everything up to 24/96 with no problems (jplay, foobar and etc.).

Your mqncontrol.exe 2496 24bit v5 worked like a charm on 2496 files: 1-3 seconds of minor clips and pops and then file plays. Quick impression vs single pc Jplay 5.1 ultrastream - MQn 2.40 "gave" more details, better clarity and microdinamics. And that is Jplay on fully tweaked core vs mqn on not tweaked full gui 2012 server! Further details after more serious listen.

But what to do with other files?

16bit gave error and mqncontrol forceclosed. 24/48 - mqncontrol hung..

Could anything be done?

Thanks and congrats for player which has a future! Minimal, no gui, superb sound reproduction - is what i personally seak for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My dac plays everything up to 24/96 with no problems (jplay, foobar and etc.).

Your mqncontrol.exe 2496 24bit v5 worked like a charm on 2496 files: 1-3 seconds of minor clips and pops and then file plays. Quick impression vs single pc Jplay 5.1 ultrastream - MQn 2.40 "gave" more details, better clarity and microdinamics. And that is Jplay on fully tweaked core vs mqn on not tweaked full gui 2012 server! Further details after more serious listen.

But what to do with other files?

16bit gave error and mqncontrol forceclosed. 24/48 - mqncontrol hung..

Could anything be done?

Thanks and congrats for player which has a future! Minimal, no gui, superb sound reproduction - is what i personally seak for!

 

ok, that's progress. mqncontrol.exe 2496 24bit v5 only works with 24/96 for 24 bit rate formats although 16 bit may have worked.

 

Do other versions of MQn play 16 bit ok ? If not I'll try to build another version of mqncontrol.exe 2496 24bit with the a different coding for 16 bit.

 

note - I advise to stop the jplay service as it sets the system timer to 0.5s which I think affects the sound of MQn. Fidelizer does the same thing.

Edited by sbgk

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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi sbgk

 

 

Man, you are in a hurry ! I can't keep up with carefully listening too all the new versions and reading the comments of the reviewers.

 

On reviewing MNq-versions:

In my opinion it is essential too use recordings that are well known for there good recording and sound quality. And also using a variety of musical styles is essential too judge the sound quality between different MNq-versions.

 

Reading comments like "if you use good recording, more difficult to tell differences in piano sound." makes me wonder. Big chance that this way you are 'voicing' MNq too compensate for short comings in lesser recordings or equipment being used. Not too mention the acquired sound-taste of the reviewer. Many audiophiles like a silky, smooth and airy 'tube-sound' and never visit concerts with acoustic music.

 

I noticed that the level of tweaking the 2012 server does make same versions sound different. Without any tweaking except for disabling performance counters with the exctrlst.exe application and lowering USB polling frequency, makes same MNq version sound different.

 

I would like too encourage you too follow your own ears.

I'm not particularly interested in home-hifi-gear, but I joined a friend too the Wifimedia. Maak kennis met de toekomst! store for a thorough listening session too your Nad M5x DAC on high quality passive speakers (I forgot the brand). This is where a good sound quality starts IMHO. And I'm also very familiar with most of ATC's active pro speakers.

Not knowing what your amp and speaker cables are doing too the sound, but your NAD DAC and ATC's are 'voiced' too sound natural, uncoloured with good resolution and detail.

 

So I think it is not a coincidence that most of the time I prefer the same versions as you do. (because of the equipment being used) but I need a lot more time too listen too all the different versions.

Coming week I will again try some versions, so more feed back in one week.

 

Thank you for al the good work!

I never enjoyed my setup so much!

MUCH better than Tiny Core + Deadbeef.

 

Thanks, but I would say all feedback is appreciated and if the factors are known then we can apply our own interpretation to them, I personally use recordings that I know are bright so that I can more easily judge if the the sound is more sibilant, others that I know sound bluesy, hard rock for speed etc

 

Find the 2l sample downloads to be a high standard if people are looking for high quality music High Resolution Music DOWNLOAD services .:. FLAC in free TEST BENCH eg Mozart: Violin concerto in D major - Allegro Marianne Thorsen / TrondheimSolistene is very good. There is a piano sample there as well. When discussing piano it takes a certain standard of system to be able to reproduce piano so the player is only part of the chain. Also live music is not always a comfortable experience so that's another factor.

 

Not sure it is worthwhile listening to all the versions of MQn, the latest from 2.36 onwards are probably the best as they explore the different ways of copying data through the cpu with everything else in the program optimised. 2.40/2.41 for me.

 

The Linn Klout is supposed to be a high standard neutral amp, very fast. Use Townsend Isolda speaker cables and balanced Missing Link interconnects.

 

Haven't heard of the exctrlst.exe application and is it just a registry setting for the usb polling frequency ?


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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi sbgk

 

 

Man, you are in a hurry ! I can't keep up with carefully listening too all the new versions and reading the comments of the reviewers.

 

On reviewing MNq-versions:

In my opinion it is essential too use recordings that are well known for there good recording and sound quality. And also using a variety of musical styles is essential too judge the sound quality between different MNq-versions.

 

Reading comments like "if you use good recording, more difficult to tell differences in piano sound." makes me wonder. Big chance that this way you are 'voicing' MNq too compensate for short comings in lesser recordings or equipment being used. Not too mention the acquired sound-taste of the reviewer. Many audiophiles like a silky, smooth and airy 'tube-sound' and never visit concerts with acoustic music.

 

I noticed that the level of tweaking the 2012 server does make same versions sound different. Without any tweaking except for disabling performance counters with the exctrlst.exe application and lowering USB polling frequency, makes same MNq version sound different.

 

I would like too encourage you too follow your own ears.

I'm not particularly interested in home-hifi-gear, but I joined a friend too the Wifimedia. Maak kennis met de toekomst! store for a thorough listening session too your Nad M5x DAC on high quality passive speakers (I forgot the brand). This is where a good sound quality starts IMHO. And I'm also very familiar with most of ATC's active pro speakers.

Not knowing what your amp and speaker cables are doing too the sound, but your NAD DAC and ATC's are 'voiced' too sound natural, uncoloured with good resolution and detail.

 

So I think it is not a coincidence that most of the time I prefer the same versions as you do. (because of the equipment being used) but I need a lot more time too listen too all the different versions.

Coming week I will again try some versions, so more feed back in one week.

 

Thank you for al the good work!

I never enjoyed my setup so much!

MUCH better than Tiny Core + Deadbeef.

 

Mark - that's a sensible and helpful summary and suggestion. I agree with all of your thoughts. I have been active over many months testing SBGK's versions and actually he and I usually end up at the same conclusions. We are both running more or less the same WS2012 OS which helps (and IMHO is the best yet for MQn). But there again, I have an Atom D510 dual core mobo with SSE2 and not SSE4 and so we have parted significantly in recent versions, until I upgrade (to Haswell).

 

The trouble is that no two auditioners are playing MQn on the same PC hardware or version of Windows, not the same 'optimisations', not the same replay chain and not with the same likes and dislikes. How can SBGK please any of them any of the time?!

 

I am amazed at his energy and determination - this is a man on a mission and we are indeed fortunate that he is generous enough to let us join in at no cost.

 

Jonathan

 

PS Please could you enlarge on "Without any tweaking except for disabling performance counters with the exctrlst.exe application and lowering USB polling frequency."

Do you disable all Performance Counters with exctrist.exe?

How and what do you apply USB polling frequency to? I actually disable all USB root hubs except the one attached to my USB/SPDIF converter (WaveIO).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't heard of the exctrlst.exe application and is it just a registry setting for the usb polling frequency ?

 

I used this tweak in my cMP / cPlay setup

 

Step 7 - Reduce USB Polling

 

Default polling of USB (Controller) devices under XP is 1ms. Use following registry change for each USB Controller to increase polling interval to 5ms.

Select HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Class\{36FC9E60-C465-11CF-8056-444553540000}\0000

Right-click in right pane > Select New > DWORD > Rename to 'IdleEnable' > Set value to 1

Repeat for each subkey \0000, \0001 ... that has the 'Controller' key

 

I found the same USB polling registry values in server 2012

 

Same for the exctrlst.exe application

Two-Minute Drill: Disabled performance counters and Exctrlst.exe - Ask the Performance Team - Site Home - TechNet Blogs

 

May be I'm fooled by the placebo-effect, but I think I also hear sound quality improvement not only in XP but also in server 2012.


Cable Modem/Router < Cat 7 -> Netgear Switch GS108Ev3 -> Cat 7 (25 meters) -> 2nd NIC on Thunderbolt -> Mac Mini (HD-plex -> Uptone DC-Conversion / Linear Fan Controller Kit (MMK), OSX on SD-card, Wifi-module physically removed, SSD unplugged from power and SATA, Audirvana, Sonarworks Room EQ).
* Mac Mini -> Cat 7 -> Merging Hapi -> Vovox Mucolink D-sub 25 Direct SD 100 -> Vovox Direct SD XLR -> PMC TwoTwo.8
* Mac Mini -> Supra USB 2.0 -> Crane Song Solaris -> Vovox Direct S XLR -> PMC TwoTwo.8
All LAN cable: ISTP Belden Cat.7 1885ENH with Telegartner MFP8 Cat 6a RJ45 plugs.
LAN shield connected at both ends to plug. Modem & switch powered with Linear PSU.
All interconnections: Vovox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok, that's progress. mqncontrol.exe 2496 24bit v5 only works with 24/96 for 24 bit rate formats although 16 bit may have worked.

 

Do other versions of MQn play 16 bit ok ? If not I'll try to build another version of mqncontrol.exe 2496 24bit with the a different coding for 16 bit.

 

note - I advise to stop the jplay service as it sets the system timer to 0.5s which I think affects the sound of MQn. Fidelizer does the same thing.

 

 

None of mqn versions work with 16 bit files (tried 1.10; 2.35..2.40; 3.10). I always get same info in cmd window:

"valid bits 16 conteiner bits 24 rate 44100

Audio device does not support the requested format."

And then it force closes.

Hope you could develop a version of mqncontrol, capable to "talk" to my dac for also playing 16/44 and 24/48 (now it shows as everything would be alright, but no sound and just hungs and i can not even kill it and have to make reset). Maybe this version would work for others who struggle like me. Huge thanks in advance!!!

 

note: i do not have jplay installed in my fresh 2012 server gui install yet, so i guess system timer is untouched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How can SBGK please any of them any of the time?!

 

Hi Jonathan,

 

He can't and shouldn't.

That's why I wrote 'I would like too encourage you too follow your own ears.'

 

I disable all Performance Counters with exctrist.exe

 

Please report back if you hear any improvement in SQ when disabling performance counters and lowering USB polling frequency.

The SQ improvement in XP is significant

Especially lowering USB polling frequency

But in 2012 is only subtle

I could be fooled by the placebo-effect.


Cable Modem/Router < Cat 7 -> Netgear Switch GS108Ev3 -> Cat 7 (25 meters) -> 2nd NIC on Thunderbolt -> Mac Mini (HD-plex -> Uptone DC-Conversion / Linear Fan Controller Kit (MMK), OSX on SD-card, Wifi-module physically removed, SSD unplugged from power and SATA, Audirvana, Sonarworks Room EQ).
* Mac Mini -> Cat 7 -> Merging Hapi -> Vovox Mucolink D-sub 25 Direct SD 100 -> Vovox Direct SD XLR -> PMC TwoTwo.8
* Mac Mini -> Supra USB 2.0 -> Crane Song Solaris -> Vovox Direct S XLR -> PMC TwoTwo.8
All LAN cable: ISTP Belden Cat.7 1885ENH with Telegartner MFP8 Cat 6a RJ45 plugs.
LAN shield connected at both ends to plug. Modem & switch powered with Linear PSU.
All interconnections: Vovox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Jonathan,

 

He can't and shouldn't.

That's why I wrote 'I would like too encourage you too follow your own ears.'

 

I disable all Performance Counters with exctrist.exe

 

Please report back if you hear any improvement in SQ when disabling performance counters and lowering USB polling frequency.

The SQ improvement in XP is significant

Especially lowering USB polling frequency

But in 2012 is only subtle

I could be fooled by the placebo-effect.

 

well, I sometimes struggle to identify the best version (Jonathan will attest to that) so that's why all opinions are valid, obviously I am not going to use a version that doesn't sound good to me, but the feedback has been useful - so no complaints from me. Shall try the tweaks, thanks.


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/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...