Skunk said the following on 24/12/2005 03:57: > Yes I do see more clearly that the SB is not a USB DAC. My only > confusion now is how you fail to see the direct comparison between > these PC audio devices.
I don't veiw the SB as a PC audio device. It is a piece of audio equipment. > My initial question was 'how does the SB WITH a DAC compare to the > brick'. > > I know what a DAC is, and will build a TDA 1543/41 NON OS DAC ASAP for > the SB. BTW, the Brick has a filterless NON OS DAC as well. Your > comment 'the squeezebox has one, but is not one' is a riddle to me. > > Please illustrate the differences between these setups: > PC>Cat5>44.1k clock>low jitter signal>NON OS DAC > > PC>USB>USB receiver>low jitter signal>NON OS DAC > > The only difference I see is the short 75ohm RCA connecting the SB and > DAC. There are a LOT more similarities. One glaring difference is that Cat5 (i.e. Ethernet) has a lot longer range than USB, i.e. you can have the "server" PC a lot further away from the NOS OS DAC with Ethernet than you can with USB. > But don't reviewers compare turntables with CD players all the time > anyway? (there's a new SB3 review at silentpc.com- and they compare it > to a Linn rig). Well, yes. And your point is? R. _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
