Didee QM vs. other high bitrate Qms

[rjc7394]

I was reading this thread.

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=54147&highlight=matrix
The finer the detail, the higher the detail has to stand out of the rest of the picture to be encoded and not thrown away.
Didee's high bitrate QM high frequency #'s are extremely low vs. other high bitrate QMs (Sharktooth, etc.) but produces fine detail. I'd like to know why this is the case? I guess you could write a page about this. (What other high bitrate QMs are worth trying?)

[Teegedeck]

The thread you've read already explains CQMs very well and exhaustingly. And the basic logic, lower coefficients for high frequencies --> preserves minute detail --> triggers larger filesizes, seem quite easy to grasp even for technically ungifted folks like me. :p