Visual studio 2012 c++ and wasapi minimalist player

[Julf]

By the way, is the source code available for download?

[sbgk]

2.60 sse4 intel 8 4

-you are totally right. 8 8 does compress the sound, that's why the micro-details are missing in 8 8! this 8 4 opens up/decompresses vocal's micro-details a lot!

-i would say 8 4 needs to decompress a little more to equal the micro-details of 2.56 8 8 16 16 8 eax add.

-this also explains why 2.58 tot align sounds weird to me. coz the vocal was compressed!!! possible to open up/decompress the tot align version as well?

 

give you a version that is able to communicate the emotion in the music and you start talking about height and depth, I don't know.

 

Compared 2.56 8 8 16 16 8 eax add to 2.60 8 4 and couldn't really tell them apart, think 2.60 was more musical and 2.56 had more micro detail, will try 8 8 add instructions with the 2.60 version later.

[Clive]

I just now compared 2.59 sse4 intel 8 8 with 2.60 sse4 intel 8 4.

 

2.59 initially sounds more interesting in the mid-range with 2.60 seeming more restrained but slightly longer acquaintance tells me that 2.59 has just a trace spitch on vocals, I wouldn't go as far saying it's sibilance it's seems like a very slight boost in detail or a small amount of harshness.

 

I find the spread of bass across the soundstage different between the two versions. 2.59 only fills 2/3rds the width of my room whereas 2.60 does the full width. Presumably the bass effect is in the upper bass but I can't know for sure.

[jesuscheung]

give you a version that is able to communicate the emotion in the music and you start talking about height and depth, I don't know.

 

Compared 2.56 8 8 16 16 8 eax add to 2.60 8 4 and couldn't really tell them apart, think 2.60 was more musical and 2.56 had more micro detail, will try 8 8 add instructions with the 2.60 version later.

 

i don't really know what i meant lol. i could well be wrong. coz lekt doesn't think i am right. he is good with depth, width kind of things.

 

2.60 8 4 is really really good. loving it by the minute. just saying maybe it can be fuller. definitely can have more micro details.

 

maybe tot align is giving me false hope.

[jesuscheung]

for anyone interested in bios tweaks to boost SQ.

 

go to bios. just turn off all fan control, voltage monitor. my motherboard has about 10 of these.

 

if possible, unplug all fans in PC. if you have a tower CPU cooler, can unplug the cpu fan too.

 

cleaner audio and always better clarity. i was able to add 10% volume doing this.

[sbgk]

for anyone interested in bios tweaks to boost SQ.

 

go to bios. just turn off all fan control, voltage monitor. my motherboard has about 10 of these.

 

if possible, unplug all fans in PC. if you have a tower CPU cooler, can unplug the cpu fan too.

 

cleaner audio and always better clarity.

 

but don't disable wifi, lol

[jesuscheung]

but don't disable wifi, lol

 

wifi is actually interesting thing. for some board, it is better to use wifi than ethernet! you need to check the IRQ table of your board.

 

coz some board have wifi sharing with USB IRQ resources. if someone has USB DAC, hmm.....

 

other board has dedicated IRQ for USB 3.0. one should use that port for USB DAC

[sbgk]

I just now compared 2.59 sse4 intel 8 8 with 2.60 sse4 intel 8 4.

 

2.59 initially sounds more interesting in the mid-range with 2.60 seeming more restrained but slightly longer acquaintance tells me that 2.59 has just a trace spitch on vocals, I wouldn't go as far saying it's sibilance it's seems like a very slight boost in detail or a small amount of harshness.

 

I find the spread of bass across the soundstage different between the two versions. 2.59 only fills 2/3rds the width of my room whereas 2.60 does the full width. Presumably the bass effect is in the upper bass but I can't know for sure.

 

thinking is that the extra alignment instructions in 2.59 were just adding noise, for me 2.60 is the future, whether it can be improved upon we shall see.

[cvrle59]

2.60 is a monster!

What made me to write this after only a few tracks, was the voices. I have never heard anything like it in my living room.

I used to owe CDS1/CDPS, Naim's flagship CD player at the time. People still argue if its the most "analog" sounding player from Naim lineup. It was followed by NAC82/SC, NAP250 and Neat Elites. This system was new, roughly $20,000.

It's been replaced with Dell Laptop/NAIM DAC-V1/NAP100/P3ESR/...should I mention, MQn player too...roughly $6000.

This new tiny system is killing it, big time. The music presentation is at completely different level.

When I went into an adventure of unknown, and I purchased V1/100/P3's, I couldn't even think of, where that was going to take me.

Thanks again!

[jesuscheung]

What made me to write this after only a few tracks, was the voices. I have never heard anything like it in my living room.

I used owe CDS1/CDPS, Naim's flagship CD player at the time. People still argue if its the most "analog" sounding player from Naim lineup. It was followed by NAC82/SC, NAP250 and Neat Elites. This system was new, roughly $20,000.

It's been replaced with Dell Laptop/NAIM DAC-V1/NAP100/P3ESR/...should I mention, MQn player too...roughly $6000.

This new tiny system is killing it, big time. The music presentation is at completely different level.

When I went into an adventure of unknown, and I purchased V1/100/P3's, I couldn't even think of, where that was going to take me.

Thanks again!

 

$20,000 - $6000 = $12000 is the worth of MQn. buy MQn now! price will go up each week

[cvrle59]

$20,000 - $6000 = $12000 is the worth of MQn. buy MQn now! price will go up each week

You got it...

Some looser still talk about it as a piece of crap, not even trying it.

[jesuscheung]

You got it...

Some looser still talk about it as a piece of crap, not even trying it.

 

i knew MQn will be great that's why i started to participate testing since version 2.10. unbelievable how far it comes... i used to thought XA was the limit. the new XA 1030A got slightly better from the last release a month or two ago. the SQ improvement is good. but if you compare MQn a month ago to this 2.60, the SQ improves exponentially.

[sbgk]

don't these bits are bits evangelists realise they are driving up traffic to the very thing which they can't abide. lol

 

So good of them to be concerned about what we are wasting our time on, they all have perfect systems, yet feel the need to come and warn us not to do or think anything different.

 

If AdamDea on PFM is the character who I think he is then be prepared to be very bored and confused at the same time, should you come across one of his logical fallacies.

[Julf]

According to MQn - Just Good Music MQn is covered by The GNU Project's General Public License. That license states that "if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must pass on to the recipients the same freedoms that you received. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.".

 

I looked at the binary distribution of MQn, but couldn't find any source code. I also could not find any reference in the distribution that would show the terms of the GPL, nor any information about the availability of the source code. As such, it does seem like MQn violates the terms of the GPL.

 

Could I please hereby request that either MQn be made GNU GPL-compatible (by adding the references to the GPL and the means to access the source code) or that the claim that MQn is covered by The GNU Project's General Public License be removed?

[cvrle59]

i knew MQn will be great that's why i started to participate testing since version 2.10. unbelievable how far it comes... i used to thought XA was the limit. the new XA 1030A got slightly better from the last release a month or two ago. the SQ improvement is good. but if you compare MQn a month ago to this 2.60, the SQ improves exponentially.

We need to give you credit too. Your testing and observation has a lot of influence on this project as well!

[sbgk]

$20,000 - $6000 = $12000 is the worth of MQn. buy MQn now! price will go up each week

 

I've just put the source code up for sale for a £10000 donation after people were moaning about the GNU license meaning they should be able to have the source code as well.

 

GNU doesn't mean it's free numbskulls.

[sbgk]

We need to give you credit too. Your testing and observation has a lot of influence on this project as well!

 

there have been more influential testers, just they don't make their findings public, but appreciate all the help.

[cvrle59]

there have been more influential testers, just they don't make their findings public, but appreciate all the help.

I don't find my ears and my equipment sharp enough to participate at that level, sorry. I just bring some general opinion to support you in your journey, it is remarkable.

[sligolad]

I've just put the source code up for sale for a £10000 donation after people were moaning about the GNU license meaning they should be able to have the source code as well.

 

GNU doesn't mean it's free numbskulls.

 

Why not add another zero and really get the propellors moving.....nothing like big numbers to get the detractors interested!!

[Julf]

GNU doesn't mean it's free numbskulls.

 

I suggest you read the GPL.

[Julf]

GNU doesn't mean it's free numbskulls.

 

I do notice that you have removed the false claim of compatibility with the GNU GPL. Thank you.

[jesuscheung]

I do notice that you have removed the false claim of compatibility with the GNU GPL. Thank you.

 

big deal. assume sbgk breaches the GPU. he might as well get a copyright. that's real business.

[erin]

I've got the disappearing speakers thing going on with this latest version....

[sbgk]

Its really perverse how some people who were the very ones criticizing, moaning, disputing, demanding proof etc. earlier on in this thread are now wanting the source code.

 

Its utterly beyond belief.

 

Wouldn't you be worried if you made a living from hi end hifi and people were discovering ways to improve the sound that cut out the middle man, I guess these guys see their livelihood threatened in some way.

[sbgk]

I do notice that you have removed the false claim of compatibility with the GNU GPL. Thank you.

 

As MQn is still an experiment the GNU GPL didn't apply to it so it was removed.