sbgk Posted June 18, 2013 Author Share Posted June 18, 2013 MQn doesn't use CLR and uses native c as much as possible, so hope that allays your .net fears. I try to encourage people to listen first and then comment, but there are those who feel a bit threatened who attack first, for some reason they only do it once. If you can spread the word that MQn is a joke in other forums then it would be much appreciated. No one else was going to remove the digital glare that players induce, so I wrote my own memory player when JPlay jumped the shark and went commercial. I'm happy with the results, maybe I've just got high expectations of what digital music should sound like. 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
dean70 Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 I cant get it to work. Tried 2.100v6 on i5 Sandy Bridge system with Realtek onboard audio - states it is playing, but get no audio. It is the only sound device & works fine using WASAPI in JRiver. Alchemy Desktop http://www.origen.net.au/Alchemy/ Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 18, 2013 Author Share Posted June 18, 2013 I cant get it to work. Tried 2.100v6 on i5 Sandy Bridge system with Realtek onboard audio - states it is playing, but get no audio. It is the only sound device & works fine using WASAPI in JRiver. the 2.100 version is a prototype and I haven't released the other versions. Have you tried MQn before ? try 2.87, 3.82 or 1.82. Also 2.100v6 works only for 16/44.1 wav files at the moment. What windows version are you using and is it 64 bit ? might be a permissions thing, try running mqn and mqnplay as administrator. I develop it on an i3 with win 7 64 bit and use the realtek onboard audio during build so shouldn't be an issue. were you running it at the same time as JRMC, maybe the device wasn't released. have you got the allow applications to take exclusive control of this device setting ticked ? 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
dean70 Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 the 2.100 version is a prototype and I haven't released the other versions. Have you tried MQn before ? try 2.87, 3.82 or 1.82. Also 2.100v6 works only for 16/44.1 wav files at the moment. What windows version are you using and is it 64 bit ? might be a permissions thing, try running mqn and mqnplay as administrator. I develop it on an i3 with win 7 64 bit and use the realtek onboard audio during build so shouldn't be an issue. were you running it at the same time as JRMC, maybe the device wasn't released. have you got the allow applications to take exclusive control of this device setting ticked ? Running W7 x64. Ran MQn as administrator - was playing 24/192k files, so that was probably the issue. Will try the older versions. Alchemy Desktop http://www.origen.net.au/Alchemy/ Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 I cant get it to work. Tried 2.100v6 on i5 Sandy Bridge system with Realtek onboard audio - states it is playing, but get no audio. It is the only sound device & works fine using WASAPI in JRiver. think the issue is you don't have mqnplay.exe in c:\mqnplayer folder the mqn console window should close down once it's loaded the music into mqnplay.exe's memory, so the fact you saw the console window and thought it was playing means it couldn't find mqnplay.exe, I just replicated this by renaming mqnplay.exe and the console window just hangs. cheers 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
Julf Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 pulled what off ? it's just a hobby, you're taking it all too seriously. Exactly. That's what you have proven in a brilliant way, by pulling off the audiophile equivalent of the Piltdown Man. Respect! Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Exactly. That's what you have proven in a brilliant way, by pulling off the audiophile equivalent of the Piltdown Man. Respect! please enlighten me about which part of MQn is a hoax ? take you haven't tried it yet, is speaking from a point of ignorance your normal modus operandi 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
Julf Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 please enlighten me about which part of MQn is a hoax? Well, calling anything that uses .NET and Visual Studio "minimalist" is a bit of a stretch to start with. I would love to see measurement results that show your optimisations actually make a difference to the sound quality. Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Well, calling anything that uses .NET and Visual Studio "minimalist" is a bit of a stretch to start with. I would love to see measurement results that show your optimisations actually make a difference to the sound quality. as I said in my previous post it doesn't use .net, it doesn't require .net runtime to be installed, it is a win 32 console app. I would love to see measurements that can measure the differences I hear between players. The measurement results I have seen show that they can't differentiate between different players, yet anyone can hear the difference between asio and wasapi, JPlay and JRMC etc and yet it can't be measured. When measurements can differentiate between players then I think they might be of use. What measurement is able to predict the quality of the stereo imaging of a player ? there have been 267 downloads of mqn and yet the only criticism I have received is from those who haven't tried it. Think it is you who is propagating a hoax, by implying that measurements prove that players sound the same. 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
Julf Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 I would love to see measurements that can measure the differences I hear between players. Unfortunately I am afraid cognitive neuroscience isn't quite there yet. Think it is you who is propagating a hoax, by implying that measurements prove that players sound the same. Where have I implied that? All I am saying is that all your optimisations, if they work, ought to produce measurable differences. That doesn't yet say anything about the audibility of those differences. Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Unfortunately I am afraid cognitive neuroscience isn't quite there yet. Where have I implied that? have there been any measurements that have shown a difference in bit perfect players ? If measurements show that JRMC sounds the same as JPlay then that shows to me that the measurements are flawed. All I am saying is that all your optimisations, if they work, ought to produce measurable differences. That doesn't yet say anything about the audibility of those differences. How do you know they don't produce measurable differences ? I am sure if you did a brain scan on someone who was listening to different players then different areas of the brain would be affected depending on whether they found it pleasurable to listen to or not (I am assuming most people don't find digital noise pleasant). There you go Julf, you can make your fortune by inventing such a device and then tuning hi-fi would be easy. Until then, I think ears are the best measuring devices, that and whether you tap your feet to the music, after all it should be an emotional experience (that's measured with a smile) 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
Julf Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Until then, I think ears are the best measuring devices, that and whether you tap your feet to the music, after all it should be an emotional experience (that's measured with a smile) OK, so your "improvements" are an article of faith. As such, they probably work. Audioskeptic's blog: Why We Hear What We Hear, Part 4 (end) Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 Running W7 x64. Ran MQn as administrator - was playing 24/192k files, so that was probably the issue. Will try the older versions. you might be surprised at how much detail MQn can extract from 16/44.1, it really brings out everything from a format which sounds flat in most players. 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
sbgk Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 OK, so your "improvements" are an article of faith. As such, they probably work. Audioskeptic's blog: Why We Hear What We Hear, Part 4 (end) Take it you haven't tried it yet ? 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
Julf Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Take it you haven't tried it yet ? Take it you haven't read it yet? Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 Take it you haven't read it yet? how can you be a sceptic when you don't try new things ? 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
Julf Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 how can you be a sceptic when you don't try new things ? To quote Richard Feynman (yes, look him up): "keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out" Link to comment
Jud Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Unfortunately I am afraid cognitive neuroscience isn't quite there yet. Oohashi did it. It isn't the technology, it's the availability of funding to pay for same. My guess is that corporations and (especially) governments are not lining up to throw grant money at proposals for experiments on this. One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
Julf Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Oohashi did it. I am not entirely sure about what he did. Wikipedia still has his studies labelled as "controversial scientific study" - seems nobody has been able to replicate his work - and from what other work he has done, he seems more of an artist than scientist. Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 To quote Richard Feynman (yes, look him up): "keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out" Take it you haven't tried it yet. must be a terrible to be an audiophile and yet doubt the reliability of your own senses, I can see why you are so frustrated. 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
Julf Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Take it you haven't tried it yet. Indeed. I haven't let my brain fall out yet. must be a terrible to be an audiophile and yet doubt the reliability of your own senses, I can see why you are so frustrated. Yes. Must be much easier to be able to switch off the rational part of your brain. Most people need drugs or alcohol to do that - but you must be happy to have it as a natural condition. While I hate generalisations, why is it that most subjectivists tend to resort to personal insults when faced with arguments they can't deal with? Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 Indeed. I haven't let my brain fall out yet. Yes. Must be much easier to be able to switch off the rational part of your brain. Most people need drugs or alcohol to do that - but you must be happy to have it as a natural condition. While I hate generalisations, why is it that most subjectivists tend to resort to personal insults when faced with arguments they can't deal with? Take it you haven't tried it yet ? 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
Julf Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Take it you haven't tried it yet ? Switching off the rational part of my brain? Drugs? Alcohol? Insults? Link to comment
sbgk Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 Switching off the rational part of my brain? Drugs? Alcohol? Insults? it's free to try, go on, you know you want to. 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
sbgk Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 I like this Feynman quote “Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts” I believe you call yourself an expert, non ? 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
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now