Visual studio 2012 c++ and wasapi minimalist player

[jesuscheung]

Purely my personal take: I don't use headphones and I wouldn't use them at max volume, I value my hearing too much. My thoughts on the sound of MQn relate to my normal listening which is via my open baffle speakers. I can't comment on any headphone effects. sbgk will hopefully take everyone's views into account along very much with his own.

 

If you find the soundstage too 3D via headphones, how do you find the soundstage with a high-end record deck, is this also too big? Soundstage is one area where redbook playback has lagged behind vinyl, MQn for me fixes this.

 

wait! for 2.43 prefetch nt x 4, i am not hearing explicit boarders of 3D like previous versions, so don't think 3D is a problem. i think the soundstage sounds different to previous versions because the strength/power are redistributed. power got more power, weak got weaker, i think, not sure.

[sbgk]

wait! for 2.43 prefetch nt x 4, i am not hearing explicit boarders of 3D like previous versions, so don't think 3D is a problem. i think the soundstage sounds different to previous versions because the strength/power are redistributed. power got more power, weak got weaker, i think, not sure.

 

Is there any improvement in the piano with 2.43 prefetch nt x 4 ?

[jesuscheung]

Is there any improvement in the piano with 2.43 prefetch nt x 4 ?

in terms of musical soul, this version equals to 2.82 and 2.41 movq and 2.37 wc no xmm sub -128- these are the great versions for piano in my opinion.

2.43 prefetch nt x 4's tune sounds most correct.

2.41 movq has most vibration.

2.82 has cold treble&doesn't vibrate but most correct in weight (relatively).

2.37 wc no xmm sub -128 is most crispy but treble is wrong.

i mean, there isn't a all-around best version. they are all crispy enough, vibration is only good to have, weight is most important, so 2.82 wins slightly for now. 2.43 prefetch nt x 4 should be the 2nd best at least coz strong notes are really strong but i am not sure if the weak notes are too weak. 2.43 prefetch nt x 4 brings out the right hand(the main music) extremely well(too much?). the left hand is good or not?

[lekt]

wait! for 2.43 prefetch nt x 4, i am not hearing explicit boarders of 3D like previous versions, so don't think 3D is a problem. i think the soundstage sounds different to previous versions because the strength/power are redistributed. power got more power, weak got weaker, i think, not sure.

 

you are right.

bass is too much so i think it is near and soundstage/3Dwide is issue, i was wrong. but better if it will be reduced a bit, so that vocal would better, more clarity, 3Dwide still is a bit more.

bass weight is more than other mqn versions and many players, it affects to other sounds, something is obscured. i think need to reduce bass.

 

many factors are better, especially bass vibration.

piano sounds have bass vibration on low-notes and micro-vibration on high-notes, very difficult present. I have not seen any good player for piano, especially classic piano. we are wating for MQn.

[markvandepas]

Hi SBGK,

 

 

Friday night 2 friends are coming over too listen too the spectacular sound quality of Win Server 2012 and also too MQn-player.

 

 

We are going too listen too all kinds of music ranging from classical, to live jazz, to pop-music. But all from recordings to be of known good quality.

 

 

My friends also have neutral, detailed, good sounding equipment (Event Opal, Apogee Quartet, PMC DB1S, Steinberg MR816x). They are used too listen critically.

 

 

I lost track of all versions.

Which one do you think we should audition/review coming Friday?

(max 3 versions or so)

[sbgk]

Hi SBGK,

 

 

Friday night 2 friends are coming over too listen too the spectacular sound quality of Win Server 2012 and also too MQn-player.

 

 

We are going too listen too all kinds of music ranging from classical, to live jazz, to pop-music. But all from recordings to be of known good quality.

 

 

My friends also have neutral, detailed, good sounding equipment (Event Opal, Apogee Quartet, PMC DB1S, Steinberg MR816x). They are used too listen critically.

 

 

I lost track of all versions.

Which one do you think we should audition/review coming Friday?

(max 3 versions or so)

People seem happy with 2.43 prefetch nt x 4. Have unrolled the loop on that version and the sound is smoother and more detailed, but Rapidshare is down so can't upload or download.

[nige2000]

that new rapidshare is not nice to use at all, seems like their going backwards. Can you use another maybe

dropbox?

just a matter of draging the files into a dropbox folder youve designated as shared and uploads straight away

 

to download its just a link address

[sbgk]

that new rapidshare is not nice to use at all, seems like their going backwards. Can you use another maybe

dropbox?

just a matter of draging the files into a dropbox folder youve designated as shared and uploads straight away

 

to download its just a link address

http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.com/2013/09/mqn-just-good-music.html

 

click on file and you get an error saying no preview available, but there is a download button bottom right.

 

 

[jesuscheung]

http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.com/2013/09/mqn-just-good-music.html

 

click on file and you get an error saying no preview available, but there is a download button bottom right.

 

 

 

2.43 loop

-each note cannot sink more naturally, more deeply, into infinity! whether it is drum or piano. previous 2.43 prefetch nt x 4 is relatively forceful, heavy in execution.

-music just naturally and effortless goes into the ears. difficult to find earache. difficult to get hit by drum.

-this version is rich not because of condensation or spotlighting, but because of good vibration.

-good amount of vocal emotion but 2.10>2.38 8 8>2.43 loop.

-vocal detail: probably the best.

-probably the best in piano sound reproduction- crispy, well-tuned, can hear vibration, weight seems great, can hear some bouncing.

-needs space/air or what? too close to ear? something is making me turning down the volume slightly! given the extremely easy-going/smooth nature of this version, i should be turning up the volume!

-instruments works very well together. heard better. can be better.

-maybe need more vivid like the good old 2.2x, e.g. 2.27.

 

excellent version! this can be another reference version

[jesuscheung]

you guys are welcomed to criticize my negative comments on 2.43 loop. i am already thinking i am wrong. coz this version is really good on my system.

[lekt]

mqnplay.exe 2.43 sse4 intel loop: many factors has more correct setting, so sound has become more true, clarity, pretty. I first say that this version better than any other.

- soundstage/3Dwide is reasonable for stereo, so:

+ solo-vocal is ~exactly in one point/focus, excellent!, true/natural/emotion

+ piano sound is better, there's rustic sound of beat/knock => more true

- bass vibaration is better: piano low notes pretty vibrates, sound of guitar and many other instruments which having layer bass is now good, good..

- bass volume has reduced, but seems a bit much? i will test at home by speakers.

jesuscheung, i think there piano sound must be better, try more test, and micro-vibration of high notes.

 

i first say that mqnplay.exe 2.43 sse4 intel loop is better nopgomemcpy (excluding bass volume?).

excellent! thanks, sbgk.

[jesuscheung]

2.43 loop needs more emotion in vocal to equal 2.10. and if possible, more bouncing like 2.41 movq. also some bass is missing. i think missing bass causes loss of portion of vocal emotions. more cold than warm.

 

2.43 loop is already the best. get these done we will have the most real/true sound of all versions.

[Clive]

2.43 loop

 

Using a track with strong bass, clear vocals with lesser vocal to right and quiet sounds to the left...I find central focus is great, the quieter sounds to left and right are very clear to hear without being masked by the main vocals. I can focus on any instruments/vocals rather than being forced to listen to a particular aspect of the track. Bass seems well balanced but my system reproduces bass very easily, small differences in level tend not to be so obvious to me as whilst I love bass focus on the mid-range. There's no trace of harshness.

 

Given only a few minutes listening I'd say this is the best yet. I will listen more throughout the day.

[sbgk]

2.43 loop needs more emotion in vocal to equal 2.10. and if possible, more bouncing like 2.41 movq. also some bass is missing. i think missing bass causes loss of portion of vocal emotions. more cold than warm.

 

2.43 loop is already the best. get these done we will have the most real/true sound of all versions.

 

could these issues be a result of the various bios tuning you have done to enhance/remove noise/detail etc ?

[sbgk]

2.43 loop

 

Using a track with strong bass, clear vocals with lesser vocal to right and quiet sounds to the left...I find central focus is great, the quieter sounds to left and right are very clear to hear without being masked by the main vocals. I can focus on any instruments/vocals rather than being forced to listen to a particular aspect of the track. Bass seems well balanced but my system reproduces bass very easily, small differences in level tend not to be so obvious to me as whilst I love bass focus on the mid-range. There's no trace of harshness.

 

Given only a few minutes listening I'd say this is the best yet. I will listen more throughout the day.

 

Maybe the loop unrolling needs some tuning, but, in theory, it is a glimpse of what could be possible if I could get the render loop in assembly as that will cut out a few more instructions. Also, I am allocating the temporary buffer outside the memcpy function, but it actually sounds better inside as it is closer to the cpu, but there is a digital overlay as the allocation happens 80 times a second. With the loop in assembly it would only be allocated once.

[Clive]

could these issues be a result of the various bios tuning you have done to enhance/remove noise/detail etc ?

I was going to mention this yesterday but didn't want to rock the boat....

 

One problem is that everyone's setup is different. If some extreme tuning is performed the differences become even greater. We end up with needing a version of a player for a finely tuned machine and a different player for a computer that is only lightly tuned. Maybe the same player is good for all states of tune but I suspect not.

 

Ideally someone would produce a £500 cut down computer and player optimised for it.

[jesuscheung]

could these issues be a result of the various bios tuning you have done to enhance/remove noise/detail etc ?

 

yes. very possible. my CPU speed is 100%. nopgomemcpy and 2.10 do sound better when CPU speed is 100%. and new versions sounds better when CPU speed is 0%.

 

i have no other bios setting that removes details.

[jesuscheung]

I was going to mention this yesterday but didn't want to rock the boat....

 

One problem is that everyone's setup is different. If some extreme tuning is performed the differences become even greater. We end up with needing a version of a player for a finely tuned machine and a different player for a computer that is only lightly tuned. Maybe the same player is good for all states of tune but I suspect not.

 

Ideally someone would produce a £500 cut down computer and player optimised for it.

 

the only real difference between sbgk's setup and other people is CPU speed and RAM speed. not everyone downclocks. other tuning doesn't matter too much.

 

i mean, if someone uses jplay or JIE, they would have been recommended CPU speed =100% .

[Clive]

Listening more to 2.43 loop I feel it portrays music with a confident presentation and energy, the sound is assertive without being pushy. It's easy to listen to yet hard to ignore. My feeling is that this comes from the music timing very well.

[sbgk]

the only real difference between sbgk's setup and other people is CPU speed and RAM speed. not everyone downclocks. other tuning doesn't matter too much.

 

i mean, if someone uses jplay or JIE, they would have been recommended CPU speed =100% .

 

If you can hear a increase in digital noise at 100% it is logical not to run it at 100%.

 

I tried running it with MMCSS service disabled in the early versions, did affect the sound, but one of the testers had issues with system stability. Might be something worth trying, you need to alter the dependencies to disable it. Can also remove wdm from using MMCSS (would be done in mqnplay) which might be useful in win8/ws2012 as wdm can't be stopped.

[jesuscheung]

If you can hear a increase in digital noise at 100% it is logical not to run it at 100%.

 

I tried running it with MMCSS service disabled in the early versions, did affect the sound, but one of the testers had issues with system stability. Might be something worth trying, you need to alter the dependencies to disable it. Can also remove wdm from using MMCSS (would be done in mqnplay) which might be useful in win8/ws2012 as wdm can't be stopped.

 

disabled MMCSS and MQn had no sound.... (both audio services still enabled)

[jesuscheung]

yes. very possible. my CPU speed is 100%. nopgomemcpy and 2.10 do sound better when CPU speed is 100%. and new versions sounds better when CPU speed is 0%.

 

i have no other bios setting that removes details.

 

alright, restarted PC. CPU=0%. just testing vocal emotion.

 

2.43 loop (sounds much better than CPU=100%)

amount of emotion is about 95% of that in 2.10. 2.10 is more warm/airy/spacious in vocal(is this why?) 2.43 is better in everything else, e.g. richness, vibration, details. in 2.10, think it has more weight in bass, not sure. 2.10 definitely has warmer bass. i mean, when it sounds warmer, it also sounds sweeter, which helps better emotion.

 

the difference in emotion is not small, i notice it within 5 secs of listening. in my system, it sounds like somehow 2.10 has all the elements needed for vocal emotion. 2.38 8 8 is closest to 2.10, but 8 8 can sound hard.

 

the vocal test is in english, chinese and japanese and french singing english.

 

sorry but this is just so close to perfection.

[jrling]

hi Jonathan hows R2 settling in?

 

Hi nige

Pleased to say that I am on holiday this week in italy. Following posts on nook hd which is challenging.

I applied more registry changes that I had in ws preview and it gets better all the time. Definitely a keeper.

 

Jonathan

[jrling]

the only real difference between sbgk's setup and other people is CPU speed and RAM speed. not everyone downclocks. other tuning doesn't matter too much.

 

i mean, if someone uses jplay or JIE, they would have been recommended CPU speed =100% .

 

The fact is everyones system is different. Sbgk runs a laptop with minimal bios tuning ability. I have an atom sse2 mobo with no bios tuning options. Other tuning does matter a lot. Ws2012 registry settings make a difference. I could go on.

 

However I have been pleased that mqn is less affected by tuning than other players I have tried a testament to its fundamentals being good.

 

It would be difficult to standardise a pc for mqn yet anyhow, as mqn is pushing the technical boundaries of intels sse instruction sets and register sizes. The latter moves to 256 in haswell and sbgk has not yet got a haswell pc to compile mqn on.

 

Item Audio do recommend a low power dedicated audio pc spec but not haswell yet.the

CAPS spec on CA too of course.

[sbgk]

disabled MMCSS and MQn had no sound.... (both audio services still enabled)

Shall try it myself