Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
Robin Bowes;225780 Wrote: P Floding wrote: seanadams;225730 Wrote: Yes. I have presented a plausible explanation which is supported by 100% of the evidence at hand, and I have explained why it is so. I have also explained why other mysterious phenomena, such as jitter, would not cause the reported symptoms. Do I think I'm right? Yes. Do I mind if I'm wrong? No. As I said earlier, I would welcome evidence to the contrary, but given my level of certainty and all the other circumstances surrounding this issue, I have better things to do than to go looking for new evidence myself. Is that really what you expect me to do here? If so, how would you suggest I go about it even if I wanted to? Your best course of action is, obviously, to tell the customer off for being an idiot, and that you have better things to do than listening to BS like that. That's part one in 101 in customer relations. Of course, Sean can't do that. I, however, can. Stop being an idiot - Sean is being entirely reasonable in his approach and has got better things to do that listen to your BS. R. Mr. Bowes, He already has. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
opaqueice;225827 Wrote: This is at least the second time you've declared in a huff you were leaving the forum permanently and then come back a little later. I see the time off hasn't improved your personality. Is it? Nice to see you too! And you haven't changed a bit. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
seanadams;225730 Wrote: Yes. I have presented a plausible explanation which is supported by 100% of the evidence at hand, and I have explained why it is so. I have also explained why other mysterious phenomena, such as jitter, would not cause the reported symptoms. Do I think I'm right? Yes. Do I mind if I'm wrong? No. As I said earlier, I would welcome evidence to the contrary, but given my level of certainty and all the other circumstances surrounding this issue, I have better things to do than to go looking for new evidence myself. Is that really what you expect me to do here? If so, how would you suggest I go about it even if I wanted to? Your best course of action is, obviously, to tell the customer off for being an idiot, and that you have better things to do than listening to BS like that. That's part one in 101 in customer relations. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] System shakeup -SB3 on the throne
NewBuyer;225451 Wrote: P Floding, I am trying exactly the same thing as you. What sound card(s) do you have in mind please? Hi there! I'm using a modified E-MU 0404 (PCI). I bought it modified, so I bought a couple of non-modified 0404 as well so I can compare and do my own modifications. Even the stock 0404 sounds pretty good I think. They use AKM DACs that are very similar to the DACs in the Transporter. (And there is nothing wrong with the specifications of the cards either.) My current trouble at the moment is to get two 0404 to work together in XP so I can do some A/B. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=31662 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] System shakeup -SB3 on the throne
Deaf Cat;225483 Wrote: Hiya, I had a M-Audio audiophile card, but luckly enough I prefer the dac in my Arcam AVR so the wireless SB feeds that. The pc/laptop is somewhere else now (not with the stereo). Are you guys happy with a pc in the music room, or are you connecting another way? :) I already have an HTPC in my listening room, so for me it makes no difference. (Instead I can now justify making the HTPC even more quiet.) For me it is more of an issue if the audio performance will drop when I hook up the LCD TV to the audio/HT-PC. Currently I'm experimenting, so the audio PC is not the actual HTPC. I have had bad experiences before with connecting too much stuff to the audio system. (Collapsed sound stage, squashed highs, fatigue.) An HDMI-breaker would be a possible solution, if there are such things. Pulling the HDMI plug is not a very nice solution.. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=31662 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
I'm not sure why Logitech seem to base all responses on the assumption that their product is flawless? I have never heard of a body of code that is bug-free. Also, end-users can't be expected to roll out a full-fledged digital and EE test environment. Not even if they are positive they can hear a problem. I agree that placebo is the most likely casuse here, but the initial discovery is less likely to be a placebo effect since it seems like one of those unexpected findings. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
seanadams;225665 Wrote: I don't. I base them on extensive knowledge of digital audio, how the product is designed, what has been tested already, what kinds of phenomena people often hear or think they are hearing, and what are the most plausible explanations for them. I employ the scientific method to determine the facts of the situation using careful observation and simple controls, because I understand the fallibility of our senses. I believe it is perfectly sensible to assume that the device is operating correctly until observation shows otherwise. Nobody is saying that the product is flawless. It's just a process of eliminating the most likely explanations first. The SB3 must be a pretty advanced device -a small computer in fact. As a user I have no real insight into what is going on in there. Are there not possibilities of processes misbehaving -CPU hogging, for example, screwing up (to some degree) real-time demands? Perhaps looking into the more advanced debugging options could be a possibility to see if things are problematic? Can Slimserver alter play back quality on the fly (or after pause) if bandwidth is decided to be too low? Or is the transcoding option a static function only? (I haven't used this feature much.) Just a couple of thoughts while we wait for the results of that double blind test. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
snarlydwarf;225685 Wrote: The DT-Passthrough ability pretty well removes oddities like that from the digital outputs. If there was such a problem, encoded material would sound not just subtly off, but like noise. (The SB and Transporter are both dumb: they just decode flac and put it on the output... they don't bother with transforming it in any way...) No one has complained that playing DTS encoded flacs makes the second track go to white noise until you pause/play it. That would be a glaring error in the firmware... and it is exactly what would show up if the OP's observations were real and not imagined. Again, the SB/Transporter doesn't know if something is encoded or not: it just sends the uncompressed stream on. You can never dismiss reported bugs/problems on the basis that others would have seen this or that. Bugs are sometimes triggered by circumstances that may be particular to just a few users. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
snarlydwarf;225692 Wrote: Can you provide a test case where this can be seen/heard/diagnosed is essential to fixing bugs... It is hardly a sin to ask for a demonstration. If a bug can not be reproduced or demonstrated, then how on earth is it to be fixed? This actually warrants a separate reply! I don't know if you have noticed, but today Windows gathers local information about the problem on the actual computer where the problem occurs. Recreating the massive amount of possible permutations of end user configurations in the lab is too time consuming just to see if there actually is a bug. And asking end users to provide proof, or else tell them there is no problem, is bound to piss users off. (Not to mention let loads of bugs linger.) -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
snarlydwarf;225718 Wrote: I did no such thing. I said it was perfectly valid to ask for information in order to reproduce the report. Well you seemed very impressed by it. As I said, it was irrelevant to the discussion. And in the case in question, the dependencies consist of the files in question and the firmware version. It is just like a PC in the same way that a bacteria is just like a human. Windows bug reporting mechanism has nothing to do with it. Please file an enhancement request for Automatic Bug Reporting addition where anyone can send in an automatic bug report with their entire system configuration, the tags from their library, etc, and have the same swift response to their bug reports that Microsoft provides. I am sure you have used that Send Bug thing and have heard back from MS about how useful the information you provided was in making the Windows Experience what it is. They certainly wouldn't silently discard all those reports, would they. Jeee... I think I'll leave it at that. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
snarlydwarf;225707 Wrote: It does? Why? Wow, Windows innovated ' reportbug' (http://packages.debian.org/etch/reportbug)! Debian has done that since at least 1999. BFD. I don't see any relevance to the rest of the post either: wtf does have the right DLL's on your Windows box have to do with the firmware in a Squeezebox? You implied that it was the end user's responsibilty to hand info on a plate to the manufacturer in order to be able to reproduce bugs. I can't remember saying anything at all about who invented automatic system status reporting? The SB is a complex multitasking device, just like a PC. It can have hard-to-diagnose issues just like a PC. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
seanadams;225708 Wrote: You're confusing the issue by conflating not reproducible with caused by placebo effect. I don't think that the placebo effect would be likely to convince you that your brakes are failing even though they're working correctly. So you have indeed already decided what is the issue here? Placebo, user error, what's the difference? They at least didn't tell me that I must have pressed the accellerator instead of the brake pedal.. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Design miss in SB3 digital output? or Slimserver problem ?
snarlydwarf;225692 Wrote: Bugs that are not reproducible are impossible to diagnose. This is true of computers as well as cars. My car makes a funny noise, but stops when I take it to the shop problems go back 100 years. It is actually more true of computers than cars: the nature of digital computers makes their behavior predictable excepting for very very few environmental factors (compared to a car, which has thousands of moving parts, tons of vibrations, etc). Can you provide a test case where this can be seen/heard/diagnosed is essential to fixing bugs... It is hardly a sin to ask for a demonstration. If a bug can not be reproduced or demonstrated, then how on earth is it to be fixed? Not reproducible off-site, given known data, and not reproducible at all are two different things. Funny you should mention cars! My swedish made car from some years ago, who's brand shall remain name-less, but starts with an S, had a scary brake problem that only I experienced, and I was unable to reproduce at will. S**B tested the car and replaced various parts. The never found any problem, but they never hinted that I might be imagining things. Later the MOT (annual test) guys discovered that a brake hose had a flaw in the wall that allowed a rubber balloon to form outside the hose at certain pressures -thus instantly reducing hydralic pressure to zero. Scary stuff! So just because sometimes things seem impossible, it ain't always necessarily so. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36503 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] System shakeup -SB3 on the throne
empty99;172084 Wrote: I tested my setup per P Floding request, a brief description of room and equipments is needed here: SB3-SS ver 6.5.2-WAV audio Musical Fidelity A3.24 DAC 50Kohms Alps volume pot IC all RG59 or RG6 terminated with gold plated Neutrix plugs Two Nakamichi PA7s 200w/ch stereo amps, each biwired to one side of a pair of BW 802 Nautilus The listening room is of decent size 40Wx35Dx20H, with some considerations for good sound deadening, low reflectivity and early echo, I have virtually no sidewalls or rear wall to deal with (lucky me!) Follows are the results and as P Floding said, I also trust what I hear: -Direct SB3 to amps: sounded like a good connection with clear, strong emphasis on midrange, upon further listening, it's obvious the SB3 built-in DAC levels off at the extreme low and high frequencies, still OK for background listening. Also, built in volume control makes low level listening somewhat weak. -SB3 to 50Kohm pot to amps: Sound became leaden, almost hard, after one hour. I tried various settings, ie max on pot then control w/ SB3 and vice versa w/ everything in-between. Not recommended. If one chooses this route, I recommend using fixed value resistors to pad down volume instead of a pot. -SB3 (coax) to MF DAC to pot to amps: Very good sound, almost identical to source Sony, just a touch warmer though but the highs still very very good. Downside: light-dimming circuits wreak havoc with SB3-DAC connection, causing loud scratchy sounds, bad. -SB3 (optical) to MF DAC to pot to amps: Same as above, but I thought maybe just a teeny bit (God forbids!) clearer sounding, and less grain. No problems w/ any house light dimmers. (I knew this since last year) Ugh, but with both connections, I think I can hear jitters: the highs are still very very good, but individual timbres of instruments have just a tiniest bit of twist or bent to them. BTW, either sourced from Sony or SB3, the sounds are identical coming out of the DAC. The following statements is purely speculation on my part: I think the MF DAC is superior to the DAC inside the Sony, both in background noise and decoding accuracy, but, the added jitters from external connections cause it to suffer somewhat. I find it hard to accept that a PS mod can bring the SB3 analog SQ to par. I also find it very likely that a Transporter with matched analog outputs (see various posting about this) will top many digital source+outboard DAC setups on the market for its tremendous all-in-one low jitter advantage, simplified connection and good DAC implemention. OK, thanks for your interesting findings! I must have just missed this posting before stopping frequenting this forum for a while. My latest direction is to use a very good sound card in an HTPC as the DAC. Pre-amp will be analogue again. (bye, bye TacT, and SB3 is getting a rest for now) I believe I can get a sound card that's about as good as a Transporter for almost nothing. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=31662 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anybody Hacked SB3 External Clock?
Mark Lanctot;193293 Wrote: The WAF must be through the roof on that mod! :-) FÖck the WAF! (literally) -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32761 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Blown away by Transporter
evert;191216 Wrote: (from another note from me on this Forum) Just got mine today. Hooked up and I am amazed by the quality. Compared to what came from my Denon player using the DAC in my HK AVR 8500 (and that's a good DAC), the Transporter is impressively better. It even outperforms my SuperAudio player (HK DVD 47) as far as I can tell now. I just can't stop listening, I keep hearing new things all the time. I am taken by storm! Since 8 this night (now past midnight) I keep listening to old albums, and keep finding new things. I am so impressed can hardly describe the feeling. Just wanted to share. It's all in your mind, matey! ;-) Did you try reconnecting your Denon, with clean contacts? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32969 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] What's better?
325xi;190301 Wrote: It worth noticing that here lays the major difference between tcp/ip audio data transfer SB implements, and isochronous USB used by USB DACs. TCP/IP is asynchronous, so the very word jitter isn't applicable to a path between a computer and SB, appears only in between SB and SPDIF receiver, and after that. Isochronous USB act in a manner very similar to SPDIF, so you could have jitter started on one stage earlier - already between PC and the DAC. Yes, altough USB CAN be properly used asyncronously, but almost never is.. However, I did read about an interesting USB clock recovery chip that brought down jitter to extremely low levels -better than existing SPDIF receivers. Seems that the harder the problem the better the solution. SPDIF looks simple, so hasn't been properly engineered (quick lock-on being top priority, it seems). -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs SB3/Elpac vs SB3/Lavry
Ben Diss;191022 Wrote: Thinking about this some more I wondered if the RF interference might be a problem for some systems and not for others. I run balanced from the DAC to the preamp to the amp. Maybe my system is immune? -Ben This is most likely the case. Seems, for exmple, that TacT RCS equipment is generally sensitive to EMF noise issues. Potentially any type of equipment can be sensitive however. Let's just stress that a negative AB or ABX means very little. Certainly proves nothing in the general sense. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33986 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs SB3/Elpac vs SB3/Lavry
Pat Farrell;191340 Wrote: jeffmeh wrote: P Floding;191291 Wrote: Let's just stress that a negative AB or ABX means very little. Certainly proves nothing in the general sense. Agreed, but let's also stipulate that it does prove that the SPECIFIC subject of the test CURRENTLY cannot discern an audible difference. Note the emphasis, as it says nothing about other subjects or even that subject in the future. Statistical testing never says anything about specific people or samples, and only addresses probabilities in general. Well, we could say that at the time of the test, that specific person found X. But it says nothing about whether they would fix X again if tested again, or if they would find Y. What random testing does is expect that people would in general be 'right' 50% of the time, just like guessing a fair coin flip. That you test and find 10 heads in a row does not mean that the coin was rigged (unfair) there is a non-zero probability that will happen in a fair random test. The proper phrasing is to say the null hypothesis is that there is no difference detectable by listening to a SB3 versus a SB3 feeding a Larvy and then say that in our testing, we reject the null hypothesis with a confidence level of 95% (or 99% or whatever you want). Meaning that we are 95% sure that there is an audible difference. Difference does not always mean better. -- Pat http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html Sounds pretty. However, it is meaningless given that we do not have the perfect system to test components in. I.e your null hypotheses is incomplete. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33986 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Cheap tweaks that really work
Anne;191395 Wrote: I guess the blind guy for testing comes free of charge ? I tend to do that. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33956 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anybody Hacked SB3 External Clock?
Phil Leigh;189773 Wrote: I was wondering how hard it is to add a wordclock out to the SB3 and a wordclock in to my DAC (MF X-DACv3)...so that the DAC can slave to the sb3 without relying on the SPDIF clock...anyone done anything like this? - is it a DIY option? I assume you mean a wordclock input (or clock input) to the SB3, and a wordclock output from the DAC? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32761 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] What's better?
jhm731;189931 Wrote: You're right, I shouldn't expect the Mac Mini's and SB3's digital outputs to sound exactly the same, so I'd like to revise the expectation of my original suggestion to creativepart Option one: Mac Mini's built in optical digital output to an external DAC. Option two: a Mac Mini wirelessly connected to a SB3, and then digital out to the same external DAC. Revised expectation: Option one should sound better. Yet again a total and utter misunderstanding of how things actually work. Don't worry though, prominent hifi reviewers are often equally confused. The wired or wireless TCPIP (network) connection is TOTALLY transparent to the SB3. The SB3 _asks_ for data and buffers lots of it and plays it back AT ITS OWN CLOCK'S SPEED. I believe it is exactly this lack of understanding of the massive benefits of _pulling_ the data from a TCPIP network that keep making reviwers have silly preconceptions. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Power supply (technical)
Skunk;189170 Wrote: Only if you underpower the Sb3 to disable the display and analog circuitry :) http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32398 I seriously doubt that would make SPDIF, problem free. Especially not in the general sense. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33669 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] For Sale Brand New Unlocked Motorola E1000 For $175 Nokia N95 For $220.
I would NEVER buy knowingly from a company that SPAMS. Idiots. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33783 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audio Trends TA-10 Amp (t-amp)
jimmyfergus;189257 Wrote: I have to correct myself here in my mp3 vs FLAC tangent-upon-a-tangent on this thread. What I actually used was lame --alt-preset extreme, which is supposed to be equivalent to -V0. However, I also used a version of lame that is not current (3.91). I downloaded the latest (3.97) and the -V0 --vbr-new setting gave me something -far- superior. I only managed a _very_ brief listen, and the differences between this, -b 320, and the FLAC were *not* stand-out obvious. I have to give it a proper listen later. The previous VBR encoding had sections as low as ~128kbps. In the end it just goes to show that lossy is not to be trusted to sound indistinguishable from lossless. I'd never archive material for the future in a lossy format. (Unless originally recorded as such, of course.) -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33112 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter review at Positive Feedback
CardinalFang;189285 Wrote: It uses CLI to talk to the SlimServer. My installation uses Slim on a Mac outside the listening room and I have the laptop with this Java app on it in the room since it is silent most of the time. As for the source code - it's very suboptimal, a real hack and needs more work, but if there's a place to upload it so that others can improve it or change it to their suiting, then I'm happy to do that. Finding such a place won't be a problem. I can put it on sourceforge.net for you, or you can start your own account there. Rgds -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33777 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
killie99;188967 Wrote: Personally I found the midrange background accoustic noise floor ceiling lacking with this wall socket. Much preferred this one http://www.toolstation.com/search.html?searchstr=10119 :) Well, it's even cheaper, so I'd say -go for it! -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Power supply (technical)
Skunk;188934 Wrote: Robin was pointing out that you wouldn't be adding anything redundant, like sending analog to a receiver that does AD|DSP|DA. Adding a benchmark is completely different in that you still only have one digital to analog conversion. Also, its marketing material suggests any digital redundancy that might be added to the signal would be easily overcome. I thought RB made a valid and craftily worded point. Not sure what you are trying to say. That SPDIF is problem free? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33669 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter review at Audioholics
Nostromo;188701 Wrote: My guess is that it depends mainly on the room you put it in and on the amp. As for $100k speakers, ask the happy few who can afford them ;) But I would assume that for traditionnal speakers (monkey coffins), the law of diminishing returns jumps in at about $4K or $5K. But the Beolab 5 sure are weird and intriguing. Unfortunately, they're $16K :( He he.. Monkey coffins are really bad, but open monkey coffins are the dog's bollocks! -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33368 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs PC as a source
adamslim;188811 Wrote: Yeah there are soundcards that are meant to sound good. I bought an Audigy 2 hoping it would one of these, and, err, it wasn't. Turns out it upsamples everything to 96kHz internally. Whatever, it is worse as a digital source than a reasonable CD player (my old Arcam Alpha 5+, both into a Meridian 566 DAC). I would be interested if anyone has managed to make a PC a good digital source, but I suspect that the amount of EMI in a computer would probably make it impossible to get a good SPDIF output. One of the things I like about the SB3 is its taking all the important stuff (sound-wise) out of the computer. Adam Well, the SB3 is a computer too... -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33724 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Power supply (technical)
Pat Farrell;188819 Wrote: jgueron wrote: I disagree with Pat Farrell, when he says There can be no audio quality improvement in adding anything to the audio chain I connected the SB3 to a DAC, the Benchmark DAC1, and the improvement in quality of sound was remarkable! You are correct. I was a bit sloppy in my wording. I also added a Benchmark DAC1 to the output of my SqueezeBox, and it was wonderful. But I still say that adding a box, such as a preamp, does not improve the signal. There are times, when specialized boxes such as room correction devices, can help change the signal in 'good' ways, but they are not improving the signal, just your listening experience. Please try it! I have not tried the Benchmark with my new Transporter. I'm happy with the Transporter. -- Pat http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html A buffer, such as a pre-amp may well improve sound if it presents a lower impedance to the next stage (normally a power amp). A passive pre may instead degrade sound by makeing the audio signal dependent on the input impedance of the next stage. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33669 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Power supply (technical)
Robin Bowes;188857 Wrote: jgueron wrote: I disagree with Pat Farrell, when he says There can be no audio quality improvement in adding anything to the audio chain I conneted the SB3 to a DAC, the Benchmark DAC1, and the improvement in quality of sound was remarkable! Please try it! Ah, but strictly speaking, that's not adding anything to the audio chain - it's adding to the *digital* chain, and replacing part of the analogue chain. R. In that case, strictly speaking, you can only add things to the audio chain before the microphone and after the loudspeakers. It's not as if an electrical signal is sound. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33669 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
Seems that this upgrade (the new unswitched power outlet) was more significant for sound quality than I thought. The sound improvement has been fundamental. Of course, it could all be placebo, but then again, we might all be imaginary as well. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: What exactly is break or burn in time?
Wilfred;188382 Wrote: Most people aren't scientists, and thus usually don't understand what it is. The main goal of science is do build a model of an observed phenomenon that can be used to predict its behavior under different conditions. Also, when someone bemoans the ignorance of 'science', it is often because they are reading stupidified reports by journalists. Burn-in and, another favorite, cryogenics, are real physical phenomena abused by the hucksters and their ignorant marks. For some truly wacky nonsense, check out this raving lunatic: http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue30/belt.htm. For more fun one might go directly to the horse's mouth: http://www.belt.demon.co.uk Here is a free tip from this site: Align the slots in all screw heads so that the slots are parallel to the earth's surface. ALL screws - screws fastening light switches to the wall, screws fastening AC power sockets to the wall, screws fastening shelves to the wall etc. Listen to some music for a short time and then move any of the screw slots away from being parallel to the earth's surface and see if you can listen to the same music with the same pleasure !! http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/Free_Techniques/Free_Techniques.html -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33615 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: What exactly is break or burn in time?
Here is some more fun: http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina64.htm Even Schrödinger's Cat gets involved in this one! -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33615 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Nuforce monobloks
harmonic;188284 Wrote: Yes exactly tape connection in copenhagen vesterbro. The millennium wich is sensetic to placment wher placed on the floor we hooked it up with semicore dvd player cant remember wich one. Im giving the audio physics Avanti some serius thourgts. i have only heard my moddified tact millennium mk3 with my owen tempoary speakers that cost me 1000 dkr (system audio ) before the audio physics regards Which Calderas did you listen to? The current model or the previous one? Rgds -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33327 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
jmourik;188444 Wrote: Darn, I'm jealous of you, P! You keep doing these tweaks and keep having good results! I put in a Furutech FP15A (cu) receptacle a few weeks ago, and noticed absolutely no difference whatsoever :-( I do like the good grip of the Furutech though, that's an improvement. jan Well, it could all be imaginary, I suppose. I'm generally sceptical about paying a lot for mains electricity connectors. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Nuforce monobloks
harmonic;188445 Wrote: Dont know but the shop i new so i ges its the newest model i must say the sounded awsome (with both amps) regards ok, I have the previous model of the Calderas. Bit too big for my room though, so not in use at the moment. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33327 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
jmourik;188454 Wrote: Me too, that's why I went for the $40 one... Of course now I wonder if the $70 Oyaide would have made a difference... In my book $40 is a lot! I think contact cleaning would do just as well or better than special contacs. It's only metal after all. This is what I got, Superswitch unswitched, ironically: http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/pro.jsp?cId=A441565ts=50002id=75828 About $4. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
tyler_durden;188469 Wrote: If you didn't get the expected results, it is because you were either too ignorant or too cheap to spring for a set of these: http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina44.htm TD He he.. And the same site sells the CD treatment Intelligent Box and Intelligent Card. I guess they are intelligent compared to the purchasers.. How about this one: http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina41.htm Seems the jokes never end on this kind of sites. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: What exactly is break or burn in time?
tomjtx;188473 Wrote: At least we haven't (yet) suffered May Belt hopping on this forum and pushing her husbands ideas. On the stereophile forum she has gone on and on with her obfuscating arguments designed to conceal the snake oil. Spare us that here please. They are some serious loony tunes :-) I wouldn't mind the Belts coming over here. I might even change my signature to _promote_ ABX if that happens! -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33615 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Nuforce monobloks
harmonic;186688 Wrote: Hi all My main amp is a tact millenium . when i use the transporter as an transport into the emillennium the sound i get is very close to perfect . its no contest vs the ice amp wich is a moddified version of the asp1000 modul with a much larger power supply. But what i do like about the ice amp is its bass dynamics wich i thing is just a littel better then the mk3 and have thinking about a replacement of amp. But it better be pretty damm good to better the millennium mk3. Now the nuforce ref 9 se amps when i read about it it pretty much describes what i would like from a amplifire . Big bass dynamics grainfree treble layered soundstage that opens up bacwoards wich i thing is perfect for a smalle 16 sq meter room . My tact millennium tends to create the soundstage infront of the speakers wich is good but when you only sit 3 meter from the speakers it can make the soundstage to much in your face . So i kind of hope the ref se would be what i have been looking for . regards Does the TacT Millennium provide any parametric equaliser functions? If so, you should be able to get a soundstage that suits your room by adjusting, especially, the 3 kHz region. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33327 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] FLAC - WAV or ALAC on iTunes. (With some AIFF thrown in.)
kphinney;188348 Wrote: It looks like the difference is entirely within my Mac. I can't tell WAV and ALAC apart when played on my meager system. Looks like I'll stay with ALAC for the size and tag benefits. Has anyone else experienced this, _or_ could it be that my system is showing me the difference? I'm planning for the future. I'd hate to finish this project, upgrade my system and then realize I've made a mistake. Could you describe the applications and system things (mixers etc) involved in playback, and how they differ, if at all, between ALAC and WAV? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33641 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AIFF vs Apple lossless
mmg_fan;188364 Wrote: In latest UHF magazine in the article about modding the power supply to the SB, the author mentions that there 'is a slight but noticeable' difference in audio quality between Apple lossless and AIFF. Please tell me this isn't so! I don't want to re-rip my entire cd collection! It isn't so. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33671 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: What exactly is break or burn in time?
GaryB;187975 Wrote: For another and perhaps better informed opinion, take a look at the following FAQ written by Jim Hagerman of Hagtech. He's a very good engineer and makes quality audio products and kits at reasonable prices. The FAQ is here: http://www.hagtech.com/burn.html And Jim's Frykleaner product for helping accelerate burn in is here: http://hagtech.com/frykleaner.html I have no connection with Hagerman or Hagtech. ---Gary Unfortunately the scientific explanation contained no real science. Better then to admit to not knowing what is going on. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33615 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audioengine 5 thread
325xi;188052 Wrote: Audioengine 5 active speakers have been mentioned many times lately, but the contexts were so different it's quite difficult to get more less clear picture of how good or bad they are for a person used to audiophile quality gear. If anyone compared, or heard and remembers the impression on how they sound comparing to low- or mid- priced audiophile integrated amp with *unpowered* bookshelf speakers - please post here. I don't think it's fair to compare them to WATT/Puppy speakers driven by Lamm monoblocks, therefore I'm looking into comparison with up to $1000-1500 amp, and the same price range speakers. Yes, I know it's 10 times more, but the purpose of this thread is to get the overall picture of where Audioengine stands relatively to the real stuff. One thing to keep in mind is that how good something sounds is correlated to how much clean audio power they can emit and the size of room used for listening. My mini Warfdale Diamond 8.1 and a T-Amp sound very good in my small office, but I'm sure they would sound puny in a larger room. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33632 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: What exactly is break or burn in time?
tyler_durden;188062 Wrote: What engineering? The guy simply recognizes that there are a number if insecure in-duh-viduals out there with disposable income to throw away on junk, so he provides the junk. Here's an old saying that may help you through the rest of your audio life: if there ain't no numbers, there ain't no engineering. TD I don't agree with your portrayal of these kind of people. Some people simply have a vivid imagination and are able to convince themselves that their theories are almost certainly true. You most probably find them amongst the self-taught engineering types. It doesn't make them devious scammers, even though it might look like that in the eyes of people with a different disposition. The problem is that we all need mental models of the world, and sometimes this model can become all too real. It happens to the sceptics too. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33615 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: What exactly is break or burn in time?
ErikM;188119 Wrote: Here's a simple test that anyone can try. It validates what Hagerman is saying, to an extent. Asumming that one has a decent system and can hear differences say between speakers ( we can all agree that speakers sound different)listen to your system for a few minutes. Then remove the interconnect between say amp preamp or better yet the interconnect between SB and preamp or CD player and preamp ( you get the idea) now take that cable and loosely wrap it around your hand doesn't have to be tight just coil it up,say 4-6 diameter coils. This test assumes that the cable in it's normal position is extended to it full lenght between components. Now uncoil the cable and put it back on the system, and LISTEN. What you'll most likley hear is that your system now sounds brighter, less good, less as it sounded before. This effect will pass in a few hours to as much a day, and your system will sound as before. The question, if you hear this phenomenon, is why? I have an idea but before I present my conclusions maybe one of those who don't believe material changes effect the sonics of audio electronics will have a go. Unless one is afraid of finding out the world maybe isn't flat :-) Unfortunately, whenever you remove and reattach cables (interconnect or power) you affect the surfaces of the connection. Usually you get an improvement simply by removing and reattaching things. Does your system sound a bit tired? Try removing and reattaching all cables. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33615 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: What exactly is break or burn in time?
ErikM;188131 Wrote: Certainly unhooking and rehooking will slightly clean the connections.. but that would make things sound better asumming that ones contacts are that dirty or corroded. Of course if you did try what I suggest (maybe clean the contacts first) and heard a diference what would you do?? Would you even admit you heard a difference? For some having ones beliefs challenged can be , well challenging. I don't belong to those who say cable affecting sound is impossible. Not even burn in. But I think it is incorrect to jump to conclusions as to what exactly has affected the sound. (And I always keep in mind that it is easy to imagin things. Very easy.) -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33615 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] FLAC - WAV or ALAC on iTunes. (With some AIFF thrown in.)
kphinney;188191 Wrote: This may be a bit longwinded: I've read a good portion of the posts regarding FLAC / WAV, etc. quality, but I feel this may be of particular interest to Mac/iTunes users, given the transcoding and playing software. After reading the posts I took the general consensus of users and stuck with ALAC as a Mac acceptable FLAC alternative. I also learned that SS streams WAV to the SB3 (please correct me if I'm mistaken). I'm knee deep in re-ripping my CD collection directly into iTunes as ALAC (Apple Lossless) and converting my FLAC files into ALAC using Max. My FLAC collection is +200GB so it could be daunting if I had to type a lot of file names. This evening I found a FLAC compilation that wouldn't transfer tags over to ALAC (who knows how it was originally ripped), so out of laziness I converted it to WAV using xACT and then ALAC using iTunes. iTunes doesn't automatically delete the old file so I was left with a .m4a (ALAC) and a .WAV. Well, I listened to them both and was a bit put off by the big difference: WAV sounded a lot better than ALAC using only headphones out from my Mac. ALAC doesn't seem all that Lossless - even my wife could hear the difference. Naturally, the ALAC is much smaller at 29MB vs. the WAV at 44MB. The original FLAC was also the smaller 29MB. So then I did some other conversions: FLAC - AIFF (44.6MB) FLAC - WAV (44.6MB) FLAC - ALAC (29.4MB) FLAC - ALAC -WAV (44.6MB) FLAC - AIFF - ALAC (29.4MB) FLAC - WAV - ALAC (29.4MB) FLAC - WAV - ALAC - MP3 @192 (6.1MB) Perhaps I've been listening to long and have developed my own bias, but it seems to me that the WAV files sound better, regardless of whether they came directly from FLAC (26MB) or from FLAC (26MB) to ALAC (26MB) to WAV (44MB). To sum it up: xACT and Max work very well for re-encoding your FLAC on a Mac. WAV is almost twice as large and sounds noticeably better. My questions: Why does WAV sound more crisp when compared to ALAC? When I stream ALAC or WAV to my SB3 will I hear a difference since the SS encodes as WAV for the SB? Extra info: I can't use the SB3 for a comparison until tomorrow - in-laws are in town. I rarely use my Mac as a sound source. I have a lot of disk space but of course I'd like to save as much as I can. You say WAV sounds better, but fail to mention on what system and any other context that might be useful to know. Unless SB3 handles ALAC natively it will be translated to WAV (I believe) by SS before being sent to the SB. Have you checked that you don't inadvertently convert any of the formats to compressed (on SlimServer)? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33641 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] FLAC - WAV or ALAC on iTunes. (With some AIFF thrown in.)
kphinney;188196 Wrote: I know it was a long post and it may seem hidden in the text but I did state WAV sounded a lot better than ALAC using only headphones out from my Mac. Perhaps if you quantify what context you feel would be useful I could attempt a more well rounded answer. Right. Thanks for reaffirming that. I feel that I am misunderstanding your question. I mentioned that I am not using the SB at this time, but I'll be sure to look into it when I can access it. In the meantime if anyone could field my hypothetical question I'd appreciate it: Best Regards. OK Perhaps the MAC does something bad when decoding ALAC? I know nothing about MACs, but since you don't mention any spcific application I assume you are using something that comes with the computer? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33641 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] FLAC - WAV or ALAC on iTunes. (With some AIFF thrown in.)
kphinney;188206 Wrote: Perhaps the Mac does something bad, but with Apple's anal attention to detail I thought that their proprietary ALAC would sound at least as good as WAV. Especially when using their own software. I'll post when I get a chance to stream to the SB3. I'm hoping that ALAC and WAV sound the same since Apple Lossless appears to save 1/2 the space. The player program I used was iTunes and the transcoders are iTunes, xACT, and Max. If it's lossless you don't have to hope anything. Just transcode from WAV to ALAC and back to WAV and compare the source WAV and the resulting WAV. They should be identical. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33641 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
tomjtx;187749 Wrote: Are you saying your outlets are better than ours? Must we suffer this US bashing by the Brits? Watch it , or we'll send Captain America after you...oh wait.he just died. We'll send Bush after you..oh.he is too stupid to find Great Britain. Never mind, your outlets probably are better... Please let us have something that is better! -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox on Steroids?
mmg_fan;187386 Wrote: Has anyone read the article in the most recent issue of UHF magazine on improving the Sb powersuply? http://www.uhfmag.com/Issue79/Issue79.html The Squeezebox does a great job of pulling music from your computer and into your DAC, but how much better does it sound if you give it a lot more electrical power? If someone writes something like this you might as well stop reading immediately. It's a bit like how many volts does this amplifier draw. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33548 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox on Steroids?
seanadams;187517 Wrote: Hah! So the 2A rating is suspect because of the _size_ of the power supply? He must really be suspect of things like tiny ethernet chips which supposedly go at 1Gbps or iPods which claim to hold 10,000 songs. As everyone knows, size doesn't matter. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33548 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
Today's upgrade consisted of replacing the power wall outlet. It used to be switched (pretty normal here in the UK). Now it isn't. Sounds a bit like someone gave the amp a good talking to, telling it to stop dragging its feet. A clear improvement in other words. And no, I didn't ABX, or even AB, this tweak. Makes me wonder why I put doing this off so long.. The replacement outlet is nothing fancy. Cost a couple of pounds at Screwfix. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
tyler_durden;187569 Wrote: Is it hospital grade? TD I don't think you get hospital grade for a few pounds at Screwfix. I suspect unswitched is more important than hospital grade anyway. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audio Trends TA-10 Amp (t-amp)
jimmyfergus;187590 Wrote: Nothing in the Panasonic amplifies... The direct output of a DAC in the Panasonic is connected to speakers. There is no point, buried within a chip or in an external component, where a low level analog signal is converted into a higher level one. Unless digital to analog conversion is a form of amplification? It seems more akin to transduction to me. If it's an amplifier, then so is a relay. If taking a binary signal and producing a mathematically equivalent binary signal with a different voltage is amplification, then yes, it is an amplifier and a CPU is full of amplifiers. Perhaps a calculator is also then an amplifier, when you use the multiplication key... So the panasonic doesn't accept an analgue input? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33112 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audio Trends TA-10 Amp (t-amp)
jimmyfergus;187609 Wrote: Sorry, no. By that logic a relay is an amplifier. All the transistors in the Panasonic amp are used as switches - they -all- are either on or off, just like in a computer CPU. Nobody argues a CPU is full of amplifiers. Also, by that logic, a DAC is an amplifier. Is anything electrical not an amplifier (some with gain 1)? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_amplifier Check spcifically Class D. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33112 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Today's upgrade
Phil Leigh;187680 Wrote: Hospital Grade is a US thing...the UK plugs are rather different in construction in the first place and IMHO fundamentally better than the typical 110v US mains plugs (I've spent a few years in the US enjoying those :0) ) The UK ones are built like tanks (-parts)! You usually have to use quite some force just to remove the plugs. Massive contact thingies (plugs, tounges?). Not sure why UK went with such overkill in this area when everything else is built -ehrmm..- not so well.. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33562 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audio Trends TA-10 Amp (t-amp)
jimmyfergus;187666 Wrote: It doesn't also have a DAC, it -is- a DAC. That is the point. The digital PCM input is converted to a PWM stream in the digital realm, and then the pulses are smoothed out directly for the speaker output. This is definitely an over-simplification, as I originally pointed out, and in fact that was the truly interesting area for discussion. To reiterate: this unit is not a DAC and amplifier integrated into one box. On the contrary, to provide analog inputs, it runs them through an ADC to generate _PCM_ input. In that case it, in composite, forms what is effectively a variant of a class D amp, but with digital conversion into the PWM stream. I can't imagine you're suggesting that, you can compare a digital input power and the output analog, with a higher powered output than input represents gain- that the gain of the Panasonic can be measured in terms of the power of the S/PDIF input vs the speaker output? The issue is that there is nowhere in this amp where you could find an analog signal to compare with the output, to measure gain. That's one indication that this isn't an amp. As I said before, there will be a place where a binary digital signal is turned into another, higher power binary digital signal, but that's never really been considered amplification in the past has it? - that's switching. So, to call these amplifiers, needs a new and very loose interpretation of what an amplifier is, no matter what people's gut feelings may tell them about what it looks like, or the what position it sits in in their hifi cabinet. Sorry, but I believe you are just complicating things. An amp is an amp is an amp. No matter how it is implemented. That non-technical consumers tend to think of an amp in one specific way has very little to do with anything. They just have to re-learn. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33112 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Classical Binaural recording download
inguz;187657 Wrote: This sounds quite good on loudspeakers, when processed using InguzDSP crossfeed. For the crossfeed filters, I just chopped Angelo Farina's inverse Neumann 30-degree HRTF (http://pcfarina.eng.unipr.it/Public/Verdi-Project/) into two (since InguzDSP only processes symmetrical crossfeed filters not 2x2). - Download http://inguzaudio.com/Data/Inverse-Neumann-IR-L30+R30-A.wav and http://inguzaudio.com/Data/Inverse-Neumann-IR-L30+R30-B.wav into the InguzEQ/MatrixImpulses folder - From the remote control, select EQ - Settings... - Enhanced Stereo... - Inverse-Neumann-IR-L30+R30-A or Inverse-Neumann-IR-L30+R30-B (try them both - you'll need to rewind the track before your selection takes effect). That sounds pretty ultra cool! Seems I have missed some major trick here.. Is there a webpage on this plugin? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33557 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Optical connection - inferior by default?
jeffmeh;186773 Wrote: Actually, I was not referring to the differences between different sources, but between the same source connected via coax vs. toslink. Two different connection methods are comparable to two different sources. If one of the cases can sound different, so can the other. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33146 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
Pat Farrell;186352 Wrote: P Floding wrote: In addition I don't think cranking out DACs is such an impressive thing compared to a lot of electronics engineering. It's a bunch of standard parts, after all. Isn't that where we were in the late 70s, all amplifiers sound alike because they all have the same parts and same gross ratings (power, THD, etc.) :-) Audiophiles, by definition, believe there are differences. The art of engineering is not to make the best possible thing, it is making the best things at a specific price. It is not a lot of challenge to make, say an FM radio, but to make one with under $1.50 worth of parts requires thinking. Doing it under $0.75 takes far more. And don't discount layout quite so quickly. How you arrange the parts makes a big difference. YMMV, etc -- Pat http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html Yes, but the issue here was the difficulty of understanding the fundamental operation of a DAC. That is not a big issue, and credibility is not an issue in this case. Anyone with the right engineering skills can verify John's claims. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
Ben Diss;186290 Wrote: Don't miss these two threads: http://lavryengineering.com/lavry_forum/viewtopic.php?t=337 http://lavryengineering.com/lavry_forum/viewtopic.php?t=180 I don't have a login at Lavry.. But thanks anyway for the tip. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
Phil Leigh;186293 Wrote: This thread is one of the funniest things I've ever read... bit accurate apparently is the be all and end all...if only life were that simple. Bits are easy - analogue is really the hard bit! Seems bits are not so easy for some designers. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
slimkid;186305 Wrote: But, that thread opens very interesting question, for me at least. Assuming that the price/sound quality ratio of DA10 is right, and assumig that it works as advertised with regarding to its features, do we even care that there are questionable technical explanations made by its creator, or that there are some parts that are non functional? I would care a great deal, as in one case I can forget about interconnect problems, noise entering the SPDIF link, etc, etc, and in the other case all things that should not matter suddenly do matter. What a bummer. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
mlsstl;186331 Wrote: I would not want to do business with a entity with such low integrity. I think you are rushing to judgment. I own a DA-10 and think it sounds marvelous. I've also followed the discussion over at diyhifi.org and at lavry.com. Several points to consider. 1. The fellow who started the debate (JohnW) basically admits he does not fully understand the design. Much of his criticisms is based on his projection of what he thinks may be happening. I think he states that he can't see (understand) how it possibly can do what it claims to do. Not that he doesn't understand in general. I don't think credibility is an issue here at all. Anyone with some technical knowledge and the right tools (and a DA-10) can verify John's claims. In addition I don't think cranking out DACs is such an impressive thing compared to a lot of electronics engineering. It's a bunch of standard parts, after all. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HDCD ripping
Phil Leigh;186009 Wrote: ? - I'm confused. My Sony DVD player upsamples DVD to 1080i and outputs to HDMI...am I missing a subtlety? It was legendary for a few months before everybody else offered this too. I have an Oppo too -it is (was?) good value. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32967 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter Review in Hi-Fi News (UK)
cliveb;185345 Wrote: This statement calibrates their credibility to zero. There is absolutely no way that the signal emerging from a Transporter fed from one of its SPDIF inputs can possibly be more accurate than from its network interface. So if we are to accept that HiFi News genuinely believed it sounded better that way, then we must conclude that they like a bit of added distortion. What might this have to say about their preference for the Townsend player? Afterthought: Wouldn't it be deliciously ironic if the reason for their preferring the SPDIF input turns out to be that they inadvertantly had bitrate limiting switched on in SlimServer? In theory you are right, and it is an indication of their basic lack of technical understanding that they did not question this result and look for errors or bad judgement. However, in practice it is possible that a wired interface introduces noise into a system, noise which will depend on the wires, the way the wires connect and what's hanging on the other end of the wires. Reviewers everywhere seems almost universally technically challenged, unfortunately. (At least when it comes to the digital world.) -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33276 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
mmg_fan;185487 Wrote: Why does MF make 'limited production' units? Because it sells well. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Do you use WAV or FLAC ? Pros vs Cons.....Please :-)
AndyC_772;185674 Wrote: There's no 'potentially' about it - an 802.11g interface is a radio transmitter - plenty powerful enough to be picked up by your WAP on the other side of the house, and undoubtedly going to be picked up as interference by analogue circuits inside the same box. I'm actually quite surprised that more people haven't mentioned this - we have talk of alleged or potential interference from the display, from the PSU and from the added load on the CPU when we change formats, but little mention of the intentional radio transmitter. Of course, my hearing doesn't extend all the way up to 2.4GHz, but you can hear 900MHz interference from a mobile phone easily on unshielded equipment. (Of course, what you're hearing in this case is the modulation, not the 900MHz fundamental - if anyone can describe to me the modulation pattern of a Wi-Fi transmitter than I'd be interested to know. I've never actually heard interference from one, but then again I've never heard interference from a CD player's front panel display either). The interference you hear from mobile phones is most likely caused by the TDM (time division multiplex) that causes transmission to happen in small time slots, rather than continously. Seems this aspect of noise generation was overlooked when the specs were drawn up. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32999 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Do you use WAV or FLAC ? Pros vs Cons.....Please :-)
Skunk;185576 Wrote: Please Anne, we're up to our knees in BS already! There is no reason that I know of, but an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Truth be told I wanted it to be easier to modify. Besides, why would I want a wireless device in such a sensitive stage of the playback chain, when a WAP five feet away with a short ethernet cable could do the same thing? I'm sorry to say that I wouldn't buy a wireless equipped Sb3, and am thus SOL. Now excuse me while I get stoned. [meant figuratively, especially if you're reading is background check related] Anne had a perfectly legitimate question. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32999 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
johann;185691 Wrote: Some of the nuvista have limited supply, meaning they will have to limit production in order to have enough components for both production and as spare parts. Yeah, but after the limited Nu-Vista pre-amp was sold out another nuvista based component came out, and then another, and so on. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
johann;185738 Wrote: So you know the components in the different Nuvista based products are exactly the same? No, but does it matter? If you sell something exclusive, based on a nuvistor (a small metal canned valve), and then keep selling Nuvista stuff after the exclusive series is finished you dilute the exclusivity. I'm not saying this is wrong, just that marketing tactics may have portrayed the initial Nuvista stuff as far more exclusive than it ended up being. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] $1000 DAC: Lavry DA10 vs used MF Trivista 21
Phil Leigh;185780 Wrote: I think you'll find that they managed to source some more (from pretty exotic places) and they wanted to build a variety of components (pre-amp, DAC etc). I don't believe it was a marketing gimmick. The Trivista is a small glass valve (with solder-in leads, I believe), wheras the original Nuvistor (a marketing name too) was a metal contraption. I'm not sure that one is used any more, but it did, unexpectedly, show up in another product, and MF's explanation was that this other product wasn't a pre-amp (like the first unique product). Never mind. It is just funny how marketing was done with fantastic exclusivity which then turned to well, sort of exclusive. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33304 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeeze Box and TacT
ColSanders;185857 Wrote: Greetings, I am a fairly new Squeeze Box 3 user (I was using it with a DAC) and a very new TacT user. ( I have the M/S 2150 XDM amp). I'm having a strange problem where I get a burst of static between songs played through the Squeeze Box (digital out to the TacT). This does not happen with Internet radio. I called Slim Devices technical support and they suggested resetting the audio chip, which I did -- predicatably, to no avail. Clearly, this is a problem is on the TacT side. Now, there are many TacT users on these forums, from what I can tell. Surely this is not a common problem! Or, perhaps, someone has seen it, and knows fix? Are the units losing sync for some reason? Any other explanations? Thanks. I use the SB3 with a TacT RCS 2.2x. I have never had the problem you describe. Perhaps your digital signal is marginal due to a bad cable? Have you tried different cables, and also using different inputs on the TacT? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33341 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Please recommend best quality solution
regalma1;184943 Wrote: You wrote that you had an RCA connection between your computer and your receiver. I am assuming that this is an analog connection, not SPDIF. Most computer sound cards are pretty poor quality. Why not make a connection to your receiver from your USB port. You can either buy an external DAC or you could get a USB to SPDIF convertor (coax or Toslink, either is dirt cheap compared to a good DAC). I would buy the convertor first and see how you like it. And create some lossless files to do an A/B comparison with your MP3 files. I don't know what, if any, losseless files Winamp supports, though I have read that there is a FLAC plug in for it. For the time being try downloading www.monkeyaudio.com. It is free. I just started using it and am pretty much impressed so far. Much easier than the other favorite here, Foobar2000. Be sure to rerip your CD for the lossless files. Converting MP3 to lossless is pointless, though I am sure you already know that. I am using USB connection to a MP-Audio Transit ($80 on EBay), which converts it to Toslink, feeding that into my pure digital equalizer then into my receiver where it it converted to analog. I am pretty darn happy with this. If you are still not happy with this setup buy a DAC with a USB input. There are lots of audiophile versions available from about $500 on up. Just do a search in this forum on the subject. Though there are people who participate in this forum who feel USB is awful there are high end DAC designers who think USB from a computer with lossless files is the best possible way of playing digital music, better than any CD player. There are also people who think Toslink is horrible, yet I can't find a single test to confirm this. These people may very well be happy listening to their SB or Transporter through WiFi. If they were familiar with the circuitry involved with electrical to RF and RF to electrical conversion, and the compromises needed I think they would be amazed. Electrical to optical and O to E is such much simpler and less compromised. Anyway, my feeling is don't let all our opinions color your listening experience. Decide for yourself. One other thing. I would recommend against the Transporter. I am sure is very good electronics. But, ater living with the Squeezebox for over a year I have abondoned it and Slimserver because of the overhead. When they work they work very well. But I have found Slimserver to not be a robust program. It seemed everytime I tinkered with my computer I would lose Slimserver and have to play around till I got it back up. Some people like doing this, some of us are tired of always working on their computers just so we can use them. I read a definition of technology recently that went something like: technology is an idea that doesn't work well yet. I haven't heard many say that TOSLINK is horrible. It is however, very, very irritating that a supposedly digital interconnection method gives results that vary depending on cabling, etc, etc. And since this is the audiophile section, after all, I'd question the quality of a USB to TOSLINK converter. But I could be wrong.. Any links to suitable such converters? Rgds -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33197 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Do you use WAV or FLAC ? Pros vs Cons.....Please :-)
Deaf Cat;184555 Wrote: Just tried streaming FLAC and then streaming WAV, (all my files are stored in FLAC). Believe it or not I too could hear a slight difference. Streamed flac's seemed to have slightly sharper sounding edges to each sound, where as the streamed wav's seem to have softer edges to each sound, even though the sounds seem to be slightly more in their own space - weard. So I'm streaming WAV's now :) I guess its testing a wav against a flac source next, Oooo, ears and kit and brain a! what a mix. This is my experience too. WAV seems to sound a bit more like I want it to -more analogue! I transcode on the server. (FF and RW are almost useless anyway.) -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32999 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Do you use WAV or FLAC ? Pros vs Cons.....Please :-)
Codmate;185013 Wrote: It's up to the people claiming that it's audible to explain the differences they are hearing with a bit more precision IMO. Is it a dynamic difference? Does it effect a certain frequency range? Can people hear artifacts and pinpoint them in time, so that the rest of us can hear them too? Is the sound lower resolution? Unless these things can be fully identified (and then tested properly) I remain skeptical, unless I can hear the differences myself. I've worked with audio for long enough now to know what constitutes a difference and what does not. If I'm playing a gig and my lower 'A's are way louder than the rest of my guitar's audible spectrum I know to tell the engineer to cut 110hz, 220hz and maybe 440hz by a few db for instance. Lack of dynamic range is similarly obvious - but harder to explain. Panning is the killer, as our ears are not great at perceiving direction. Try tilting your head to one side very slightly when listening. For this reason all tests that don't relate to stereo effects should be conducted in mono with one speaker. I often turn my head to one side to remove this confusing positional info when mixing. Brian Wilson never had this problem of course ;) Also remember that you have fluids in your ear that are constantly moving around. There are so many extenuating circumstances that, unless the difference is really concrete - to the extent that you can say I would do such and such specific operation to correct this, the perceived difference should be questioned, and preferably measured in a scientific manner (you *need* an anechoic chamber for some things). If I had to worry about CPU load when I'm working with Cubase, I wouldn't do anything at all. If engineers worried about how hot their outboard compressor got - or felt they had to put it on a rubber tyre with a duck watching, no music would ever be recorded. OK - some engineers do do things like this, but you get my point ;) Then again - it's not my disk-space... Do what you will with your drives if it makes you happy :) I take it from your explanations that you don't bother mucking about with the recorded sound then? That would be a good thing. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32999 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Please recommend best quality solution
Phil Leigh;185023 Wrote: I'm afraid that the fact you find SB not robust is entirely down to you tinkering with your computer. Speaking personally I find that USB DAC's suck from a sound quality perspective... that may be down to the implementations rather than anything inherent in the technology though. My experience is limited to an M-Audio (normally very good IMHO) USB DAC. YMMV. Huh? I find the SB roboust. When did I say anything else? And when did I ever mention tinkering with my computer? I barely touch it.. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33197 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Please recommend best quality solution
Phil Leigh;185029 Wrote: I wasn't replying to YOU PF! I was replying to regalma! Oh.. You quoted me.. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33197 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Please recommend best quality solution
Phil Leigh;185041 Wrote: Yes that is totally corrrect. Toslink vs. TCP/IP = apples vs. elephants. Personally I have NO issues with Toslink. It works fine. I know we can't wind back the clock but I'm sure this prejudice must date back to a time when digital was poorly understood. These days it's an even call. You have to rememmber that a lot of the CD's we are listening to have (parts of) tracks that at some point went down an optical connnection... OK, I've seen this mentioned a couple of times now. Is this a fact? That the industry uses non-masterclocked toslink in their studio work? Because if you are running a synchronous environment with a distributed master clock, all what has been said about using ONLY SPDIF is not applicable at all. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33197 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HDCD ripping
Eric Carroll;185058 Wrote: While I was with you on this initially, after pulling the documents from the wayback machine I am not sure I agree anymore. Speaking from a theory perspective there is no reason except thrust (cpu performance) you can't do a chip in software. Having read the documentation, such as it is, it sure looks to me like a specialized DSP processor. I might be wrong... of course this doesn't mean that M$ implemented it fully. But if you get the same result on analog capture vs. 24b capture, that's pretty suggestive to me that they did, assuming all the features are enabled on the track Olav chose. Now, if we really have confirmed decode, the audibility of any difference is the issue. With digital versions of both we cam match levels digitally and using ABX software, decide if its the difference is in fact audible. Maybe I should write an ABX slimserver plugin ;-) The problem with the software approach is not how to construct a correct HDCD decoded signal (and store it), but how to get that signal out of the computer into your hifi. You need a good sound card that surpasses 16/44 enough to let the HDCD processing shine through. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32967 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Please recommend best quality solution
regalma1;185054 Wrote: If routine ugrades to Slimserver or Mozilla is tinkering, then I am guilty of tinkering. Otherwise I am not a tinkerer. I don't particularly enjoy working with computers. Too many rounds with Windows 95, 98 and ME, not to mention SCSI have pretty much purged me of any joy I ever got from them. I haven't had to reformat my C drive in years and I want to keep it that way. I only appreciate what they can accomplish for me. So I don't go out of my way to tinker with them. This is especially the case with the Laptop I use to run Slimserver. At present Slimserver is non-functional on both my desktop and my laptop and I have no idea why they went down. It happened at very different times. Like I said I have given up on the software and will use direct connections only from now on. When I sit down to listen to music I want to be able to listen to it without having to put on my nerd hat and troubleshoot a problem, even if it is only occasionally. Anyone want to buy a wireless SB2? Sure! How much, and where are you? (I'm in the UK) -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33197 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Optical connection - inferior by default?
Eric Carroll;184313 Wrote: And, by the way, its not an assumption, I said there are papers on this issue. For example, 'here is a paper on this issue.' (http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/ast/26/1/50/_pdf). There are others I don't have handy right now. Unfortunately studies of the effects of _random_ jitter have little significance when it comes to correlated jitter. There are other issues with the test you are refering to -such as the simulation of jitter effects. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33146 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Optical connection - inferior by default?
Phil Leigh;184345 Wrote: Sorry Eric - I didn't mean to steal your thunder! I use to believe that toslink was bad too - until I realised what I had in my studio was piles of the stuff! (ADAT lightpipe anyone?)...that started me thinking...and testing...and now I don't care - both work fine most of the time...but sometimes toslink can help (certainly my studio benefitted from the removal of certain ground loops! - and that strange tingling feeling when you brush against a rack full of gear at slightly different ground potentials...) Anyway, on the other hand, I do feel that jitter (especially synchronous jitter) is still a problem today. In the studio of course most gear is wordclocked...which helps! But the bad effects of jitter are only actually realised during the analogue conversion (until then, bits are just bits) so provided you minimise it just before that point... Your last point is not quite true nowdays, with ASRC and other asynchrounous digital domain processing going on. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33146 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Optical connection - inferior by default?
pablolie;184348 Wrote: He stated what *really* matters: The identical framing protocol (S/PDIF) runs on top of both optical and coax, meaning you'll get identically timed data out of the two - whatever jitter there is at a physical layer is immaterial. The clock is embedded into the signal via BMC. BMC provides a very solid clock for synchronization. The jitter thus doesn't matter, nor does noise in coax, by the way - this is digitally encoded data and thus remarkably noise resistant. If interface jitter rejection is good at the DAC, this would be correct. Unfortunately digital audio is badly engineered from the very start since jitter effects weren't understood at the time of designing the SPDIF interface. Today we live with at variety of equipment with varying susceptibility to SPDIF jitter. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33146 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Optical connection - inferior by default?
pablolie;184686 Wrote: Biphase Mark Coding is encoding for *digital* data, plus the frequency of the clock is twice the frequency of the original signal. The result is that at the physical level it's not about 0 and 1, but about even simpler polarity changes, which makes data *and* clock *easier* to recover. I never claimed there are no analog elements at the transmission layer - my point is that analog signal integrity is less critical for sound purity than with pure analogue signal transmission. Are you questioning that? Truly don't know what we're arguing about here? Are you claiming digital data transported via SPDIF is prone to bit errors? Are we back to the jitter issue, which you labeled immaterial yourself? Or are you saying that signal integrity is just as critical for purity in the pure analog as it is in the digital domain, as the person I was countering seemed to maintain? I think the OSI layers are getting mixed up in there discussions. At the lowest physical layer, there'll always be analog effects. but the interface to the data link layer is purely digital, and as long as it presents the same digital information for the higher layers to process whatever signal distortion at the physical analog level does not matter an ounce provided everything is properly contained in its respective module. Easier said in theory than done in practise. How is that saying now? A little knowledge kan be a dangerous thing? I bet you can't even imagine the flaws inherent to the old SPDIF system. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33146 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Optical connection - inferior by default?
Phil Leigh;184748 Wrote: Yes but...it is entirely possible to remodel the clock at the DAC input (ie right on the SPDIF socket) - see here http://www.altmann.haan.de/jitter/english/engc_navfr.html A lot of things are possible. But those claiming that SPDIF is a non-issue are not talking about what is possible, but what they think is the current state of things. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33146 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] FM Stereo Transmitter vs. Squeezebox
frjame;184667 Wrote: I have been using an FM Stereo transmitter for years,(ccrane) to broadcast streaming radio through my stereo or portable radio. I am interested in your opinions that compare audio from streaming radio or Pandora via wireless Squeezebox in comparison to using an FM transmitter to help me decide whether or not to purchase Squeezebox. Thanks, Frjame Since you already re-broadcast an internet radio stream (if that's what you are saying?) you will get the same quality using an SB -minus any degradation that you FM transmitter introduces. Out of curiousity: Are you using one of the iPod-style transmitters, or something more powerful? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33214 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Please recommend best quality solution
spooley;184760 Wrote: Quote , if your receiver doesn't have analog pass through, then feature where the bigest improvement in transporter is, its DAC, will be useless to you Are you saying that the reciever might take an analog signal from the Transporter, then convert it to digital and then convert it back to analog? By doing this it effectively nullifies the Transporter DAC. A lot of surround processors do this. It's the cheaper way of doing it, and it is good enough for most purposes. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33197 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Please recommend best quality solution
jdbaker;184786 Wrote: Quote from Integra web site For analog sources, the direct/pure audio mode can bypass all digital processing for super-high sound quality. I believe your receiver has this mode so you can bypass the internal dacs. As I stated previously I have the Integra 8.2 and it is a great piece if equipment for the money. In 2002 Wes Phillips described it as the best HT receiver he had ever heard http://www.onhometheater.com/product/20020715.htm I am assuming the DTR 5.5 is of the same quality, just less powerful. If you feel strongly about it give the Transporter a shot, I will say I am extremely pleased with both of my SB3s. 1 digital to Parasound C2/A51 with PSB Triad speakers and the other strictly 2 channel analog to Arcam A32 with Monitor Audio Silver S6. Please look at your receiver manual and check into the Direct/Pure Audio mode. I don't think turning off digital processing is seen as the same thing as avoiding A/D-D/A, in the home theater world. My best guess is that it simply turns off any reverb effects and dolby processing. Looking in the manual on page 60 I found this information: Direct The selected input source is output by the front left and right speakers only, with minimal processing for a pure sound. Pure Audio As an extension of Direct mode, this mode turns off the display, turns off the power to the video circuitry, and minimizes any other possible noise sources, providing a high fidelity sound thats true to the original. (Since the power to the video circuitry is turned off, no video signals are output while this mode is selected.) Also, Pure Audio can be used with digital sources according to the table on page 59. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33197 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Optical connection - inferior by default?
pablolie;184727 Wrote: Basic voice communication codecs from 10 years ago did, so I am pretty sure DAC designers would take starvation issues into account. How old do you think the CD system is? Getting close to 30 years now, I believe. I know the problem at hand is EASILY solved, but you make the logical error of assuming that so has been done in all modern audio equipment. This is simply not true. A one-box solution, like the SB, solves this problem, but it would be nice if SPDIF-usage was better implemented. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33146 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Please recommend best quality solution
spooley;184807 Wrote: P Floding - I just read that section of the manual as well. Its not really very clear. So I called Integra's support line and the tech I spoke said that if there is an analog feed, there would be no processing and the signal would go out directly as analog, but to be honest I didn't get a warm fuzzy feeling that this guy really understood the question. He most likely had no idea. The manual is pretty clear. Having a full analogue path is pretty expensive, and requires quite a lot of extra outlay in components if it is to be any good. Especially if the same physical input should be able to be used both for processing and for an analogue direct path. And if they really had such a path then they would be boasting about it a lot more. Also, if they shut down video processing etc, why don't they shut down the D/A and A/D stuff too? That's switching digital too which may well compromise a pure analogue path. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33197 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HDCD ripping
Eric Carroll;184427 Wrote: Courtesy of the wayback machine, 'an AES technical paper' (http://web.archive.org/web//20050205152857/www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/AES_Paper.pdf) on HDCD is available. The 'overview web page' (http://web.archive.org/web/20050205152857/http://hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/overview.html) can also be found on the archive site. And the 'decoder FAQ' (http://web.archive.org/web/20050205152857/hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/DecoderFAQ.pdf) is also worth reviewing. They take a while to load. Very interesting reading! Especially the section discussing their audibility tests for various filter side-effects. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32967 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The bottleneck for the ultimate sound experience?
)p(;183866 Wrote: Yes we did. And the Sb3 was only plugged in when it was its turn to be compared. Peter Then the test was good. Of course, hearing no difference does not prove there is no difference -unfortunately. But for your purposes you might as well assume there is no difference. Rgds -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33105 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The bottleneck for the ultimate sound experience?
ezkcdude;183860 Wrote: Right on cue, P. Now, isn't it the pot calling the kettle black just a little bit? I mean, when you tell us the differences you hear between components, we are supposed to believe your ears, right? But, along comes someone who doesn't hear a difference, with his own ears, no less, and here *you of all people* are telling him his test is flawed. That's rich. No, you are not supposed to believe anything. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33105 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] An end to A/B/X (DBT) debates? (No, but...)
ezkcdude;183868 Wrote: In the Now, why didn't I think of it? department (well, actually, I did have such an idea once), here's a discussion from Pete Aczel (aka The Audio Critic) of an A/B technique using software to record and normalize the differences induced by changing components in a system (*Audio DiffMaker*, sort of a play on the Unix diff command, I suppose): http://theaudiocritic.com/blog/index.php?op=ViewArticlearticleId=35blogId=1 There is nothing new about this method. It's a bit embarrassing for them that they claim it is new. -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33127 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The bottleneck for the ultimate sound experience?
mglaudiolabs;183903 Wrote: I don't understand the problem. Why does one need to force oneself to find sonic differences between transport setups when there are obviously none? It just shows how well engineered the SB3 is and we should be happy to have saved money that can be better invested in music... Would you like to qualify that, or do you mean that all DACs and other digital-input equipment are independent of digital source quality? -- P Floding No, I didn't ABX it. And I won't even if you ask me. (Especially not if you ask me.) P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33105 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
