Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jhameeh]

Have someone compared the SQ between MC18 / MC19 latest version? I still prefer the MC18..It seems their SQ is different. ?..I am not using any DSP...Using exasound E20 DAC and Zuma v3....

YMMV..

[rayooo]

This will likely get moved to a different forum section...    I used 18 since the beginning and have used 19 now. I can't discern any SQ difference between the two.

I don't use any DSP whatsoever either.. On either version.

[jhameeh]

That's should be the case that's why I bought it. There should be no sound difference. I A/B them with the same settings and the same recordings...different SQ  

Please move it where it belong. Sorry for that.

[kstuart]

The memory playback is done differently in MC18 and MC19.  If you had "play from memory" checked in MC18, then the MC19 installation will also have it checked.   But it is done differently, and many people report it sounds different.  Of those who think it sounds different, almost all report that the difference is an improvement.   Everyone's ears and system are different...

[preproman]

I've used JRiver for a few years now.  Also using a Zuma v3 with a PWD2 DAC.  No difference in SQ what so ever to my ears.  I get different SQ from different amps, DACs and headphones / speakers.  Not the player..

[Blaine78]

MC19 overall SQ is a step up in my system and configuration.

[Chopsrr]

It sounds great!

When I installed v18, I just set it to WASAPI, no conversions, no DSP stuff, no nothing. It operates perfectly, is rock stable and sounds excellent.

Well today, I decided to upgrade to v19.0.32 since they call it the "recommended version" now, figuring it has to be at least just as good and stable as the last 18 version. When installed, it took on all the same settings already existing in 18, so I just let it reload the library and then selected an album to play. Again, excellent sound. Whether it sounds any better or worse than v18 with these settings is hard to tell. I really couldn't tell either way.

After playing a couple different albums today while doing some reading on a couple different forums, I decided to try the option of loading the tracks into memory and playing them from there. Personally, I was expecting chaos since the Compaq laptop I'm using isn't optimized for anything other than the power settings being tweaked. It is running Windows 8 Pro 64-bit, but only has 2gb of ram.

To my surprise, it has been running flawlessly all day without one single glitch or noise artifact coming through. I'm about 7 full albums in now and it just keeps going without any fuss. No bogging down, no stuttering, no hesitations, no freezing up... I thought for sure I would have some kind of weird little issues popping up considering all the stuff I have read regarding playing from memory on other peoples full-on dedicated hi-end computer systems.

Something else I'm surprised to discover, is that it actually does sound better playing from memory. There more flesh, more texture, even blacker blacks, more subtle details present, more acoustic detail of the recording venue. I'm quite impressed! These are all subtle improvements, but when combined, paint a much bigger, brighter, more vibrant musical picture. I have to admit, I never tried playing from memory in v18, so can't compare the two versions there, but I'm totally happy with the sound I'm getting.

I did look at the system resources while playing JRiver this way and there's just a short wifi network spike when the track loads, after that, it goes dead silent as does the harddrive activity. Out of a total of 1.7Gb of ram available, not even 800Mb of it is being used, and the little 2.1GHz AMD Sempron processor is just purring along at 12-14%. And keep in mind, this is with a non-optimized laptop. In fact, some of you may remember, this is the same laptop that I used to use to browse the internet, check my emails, watch YouTube, etc, etc with just a couple weeks ago. It hasn't been cleaned or stripped or anything.

[jhameeh]

Thanks a lot for all your replies. Maybe its just me or maybe my arc ls27 preamp is still breaking in. I tried to compare allan taylor colour to the moon between mc18 and mc19. There is a diff in vocals (highs) but not night and day. Same settings...memory playback chk...no dsp...just "pure mode"...

[icstm]

It sounds great!

Something else I'm surprised to discover, is that it actually does sound better playing from memory. There more flesh, more texture, even blacker blacks, more subtle details present, more acoustic detail of the recording venue. I'm quite impressed! These are all subtle improvements, but when combined, paint a much bigger, brighter, more vibrant musical picture.

can we actually say such things on the JRiver forum, I thought they take an almost Hydrogen Audio TOS approach to such comments 

[JimH]

We're a little more liberal than HA.  We appreciate it if people don't represent their opinions as fact.

[kstuart]

Some of these sorts of differences are very subtle.

One example is the sound of an acoustic guitar.   With one setting, the note sounds as if a finger is being held on the string with the lightest possible touch, like a fraction of an ounce, barely touching.  And then with the other setting, the slight touch of the finger is removed.

That is what people mean by a slight "hardness" of the sound...

[mykillk]

I'm not discounting the possibility, but I have a hard time imagining how changing the way files are loaded could have a sound quality impact. It seems more likely a case of people wanting or hoping to hear a difference and then convincing themselves they do. Is there any solid evidence that this setting actually does have an impact on SQ?

If there's one thing I've learned after getting into speaker calibration over the last few months is that my ears are great liars I don't trust going by ear at all anymore, I only pay attention to the microphone measurements.

[Chopsrr]

I'm not discounting the possibility, but I have a hard time imagining how changing the way files are loaded could have a sound quality impact. It seems more likely a case of people wanting or hoping to hear a difference and then convincing themselves they do. Is there any solid evidence that this setting actually does have an impact on SQ?

If there's one thing I've learned after getting into speaker calibration over the last few months is that my ears are great liars I don't trust going by ear at all anymore, I only pay attention to the microphone measurements.

Two things...

1) With your first statement, that's exactly how I used to feel about power cable upgrades, until I decided to try upgrading one power cable in my system. After that one cable, many more power cable upgrades came because of the improvements I could actually hear. I'm glad I did.

2) Trusting your ears is what you should do most. It doesn't matter how something measures, it's how it ends up sounding to you. Just because a speaker measures good, doesn't mean it's going to sound good.

Just like with cooking... You season to taste, not to the recipe. The recipe is just a guideline to go by.

[phusis]

I'm not discounting the possibility, but I have a hard time imagining how changing the way files are loaded could have a sound quality impact. It seems more likely a case of people wanting or hoping to hear a difference and then convincing themselves they do. Is there any solid evidence that this setting actually does have an impact on SQ?

If there's one thing I've learned after getting into speaker calibration over the last few months is that my ears are great liars I don't trust going by ear at all anymore, I only pay attention to the microphone measurements.

I haven't been able to discern any noticable difference in SQ between using memory playback or not in MC19. If hard pressed: the splitting-hair difference that may possibly be at play(no pun intended) falls in favor of non-memory playback - in my setup, and according to my ears. Via MC18 my preference was more clearly in favor of non-memory playback - i.e.: there was a noticable, albeit not outspoken difference in the sonic signature.

However, and I can say this with confidence - again, via my setup and to my ears: MC19 not only sounds different, but also better than MC18(and its earlier siblings). I have no clue why, but it does, and two (audio-)friends of mine have independently reported the same impressions(obviously, via their own setups and ears): the sound via MC19 is more organic and open, and with a more natural "fill"(as if the sound unfolds more fluidly and with better texture). MC18 in comparison sounds slightly anemic and less open.

I don't need any evidence to account for my listening impressions, nor do I hold them as facts I'd impose on others. Measurements and numbers are only that though, and are dependent on our telling them what to quantify; if numbers tell there's no difference, and I clearly hear a difference, then the numeric parameters, in conjunction with their implementations, are limited as far as sonic importance goes.

The proof's not only in the pudding, but first and foremost in the eating of it...

[kstuart]

However, and I can say this with confidence - again, via my setup and to my ears: MC19 not only sounds different, but also better than MC18...

The problem here is you are not being specific enough.

MC18 is 200 different builds, and now MC19 in 30+ different builds.

The change you are hearing is unlikely to have suddenly occurred with the very first build of MC19 - it might have been identical to MC18 with the sole addition of something trivial like "User Accounts".

So, for starters, you would need to say "MC18 build NNN" and "MC19 build YY", and then you would need to go through all the settings to make sure they were identical.  Certainly you would need to not be using the new Volume Leveling feature of MC19 that works differently than the one in MC18.

In contrast, if you test the Memory Playback, you can just press stop, check the box, press play, listen, press stop, uncheck the box, press play, listen...

[phusis]

The problem here is you are not being specific enough.

MC18 is 200 different builds, and now MC19 in 30+ different builds.

The change you are hearing is unlikely to have suddenly occurred with the very first build of MC19 - it might have been identical to MC18 with the sole addition of something trivial like "User Accounts".

So, for starters, you would need to say "MC18 build NNN" and "MC19 build YY", and then you would need to go through all the settings to make sure they were identical.  Certainly you would need to not be using the new Volume Leveling feature of MC19 that works differently than the one in MC18.

In contrast, if you test the Memory Playback, you can just press stop, check the box, press play, listen, press stop, uncheck the box, press play, listen...

kstuart --

I may not have been openly specific, but I'm aware of the need for an identical frame of reference, as well as a sense of build-continouity, when making comparisons between MC18 and 19.

MC18, through all its builds, didn't to my ears "jump out" sonically to where MC19 sits(the inclusion of 24-bit dithering, with the use of DSP/internal volume etc., made one of the biggest sonic changes in my setup with MC18). My last reference with MC18 was its latest builds, and the difference here compared to MC19 was imminent from the latter's first official build. This impression has maintained through the cycles of new MC19 builds up until the current v. 19.0.37.

Of course I'm using the same settings; no DSP, (other than) internal volume control enabled, etc. Where DSP is involved is with 2-channel Blu-ray playback, but this is not my point of reference when speaking of the sonic changes between version 18 and 19.

Re: memory playback or not; the approach pointed out by you was the exact way I committed to testing it.

My reason for not being specific was for the above to be (largely) naturally assumed; not out of mere ignorance. Still, sorry for not making it more clear.

[Arcturus]

I think the only way to resolve the sound quality differences between normal and play from memory would be with a double blinded study and a 100 volunteers

[kstuart]

I think the only way to resolve the sound quality differences between normal and play from memory would be with a double blinded study and a 100 volunteers

The reason that DBT never works, is that the other side always replies:

" The study was flawed. "

I have seen this from both sides of the argument, which is why the claim "we would believe you if did a DBT" is not true.  Evidence does not sway either side.

For example, the theory behind the MC19 memory play - that PC resource use affects sound quality - was demonstrated in a DBT with probably more than 100 subjects, but that did not get anyone to believe it.

[JimH]

And with that, the sound of a thread closing.  Both of the last two posts are valid, in my opinion.