Page 764 of 804
Re: MQN
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 3:36 pm
by iori
there is a separate driver with more functions from Thesycon requiring license
Re: MQN
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 4:23 pm
by Aleg
fadolfo.a.aguiar wrote:Aleg wrote:
I always check if the DAC uses the Thesycon USB-drivers, which I consider to be the best and are certainly the most configurable I have seen. Though the Thesycon sometimes still had issues where Gordon's drivers did not (I'm not sure which drivers Gordon is actually using).
I have been in (sometimes nasty) discussions with manufacturers about their drivers and (lack of) support for kernel streaming.
I have rejected certain DACs just on the basis of this, regardless of how well they were perceived or reviewed by others.
As it now shows, these drivers and they level they can be configured are crucial for getting best out of computer audio.
Aleg,
I have a Chord Hugo too. Does Hugo use the Thesycon USB driver? How can I configure it? My Hugo produces noise for MQn versions above mqnplay v134.
Adolfo
Adolfo
I have a USB SPDIF converter in front of the Hugo, and the converter uses Thesycon drivers. I find Hugo performs better over SPDIF than USB, esp. with a good USB SPDIF converter in front.
Also in my office system I use a USB SPDIF converter (a Mutec) which again uses Thesycon drivers.
I rejected RME-products because they use a home made USB driver and also the ExaSound DACs because they don't support Kernel Streaming.
And no I don't believe the native Hugo driver is by Thesycon and it doesn't have any configuration either I believe (I have never really checked that).
Re: MQN
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 4:24 pm
by Aleg
iori wrote:there is a separate driver with more functions from Thesycon requiring license
Both the Mutec and SonicWeld I have, use the licensed drivers by Thesycon.
Re: MQN
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 6:22 pm
by iori
Thanks aleg,
very useful information.
cheers
iori
Re: MQN
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 6:50 pm
by maroni
iori wrote:Thanks aleg,
very useful information.
cheers
iori
Hi Iori,
do not know, if a Theyscon driver is a "must have" for you, but for my Hugo using the fidelizer (free) helped a lot (on top of AO and OS in RAM).
Latest MQN versions seem to be a bit challenging for our setup :-)
Good Luck,
Markus
Re: MQN
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:20 pm
by sbgk
uploaded control v22 and play v145, how's that for a final version ? use with control v51
v22 replaces v21, found a setting which lifts the proverbial veil
final decision, which is better play v145 or v146 ?
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 1:51 am
by elaprince
sbgk wrote:uploaded control v22 and play v145, how's that for a final version ? use with control v51
v22 replaces v21, found a setting which lifts the proverbial veil
final decision, which is better play v145 or v146 ?
I think v147 LOL :)
Definitely v146 here
Thank you
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 6:34 am
by iori
maroni wrote:
do not know, if a Theyscon driver is a "must have" for you, but for my Hugo using the fidelizer (free) helped a lot (on top of AO and OS in RAM).
Latest MQN versions seem to be a bit challenging for our setup :-)
Hi Markus,
Thx
been looking for hardware possibilities. system improvement is an ongoing task.
haven't tried the OS in ram yet.
cheers
iori
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:06 am
by Aleg
sbgk wrote:uploaded control v22 and play v145, how's that for a final version ? use with control v51
v22 replaces v21, found a setting which lifts the proverbial veil
final decision, which is better play v145 or v146 ?
Think I prefer v145, but not done extensive listening.
The top end of V146 is bit rounded off and also looses somewhat insight in low bass regions (listening to a Charlie Haden solo on double bass).
V145 keeps more clarity in tone also in these lower bass regions.
It's again the old dilemma: more insight vs a more rounded tone.
Cheers
Re: MQN
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:50 am
by sbgk
I thought 146 was initially attractive to listen to, but after a while it wasn't giving me what I expected so went back to 145.