Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter digital out won't sync with DAC at higher than 48kHz
Have you tried a different coax cable? A lot of these boutique digital cables are made for form over function. Try a plain old RCA video cable. Also, try both the RCA and BNC outputs. I have similar concerns about the DAC. So this is an older unit that was later converted somehow to support 24/96? I am suspicious as to whether the original connectors and board layout were properly specified and tested for the higher speed. One thing you can do to test the Transporter's output is set it to digital effects loop mode. Then loop one of the outputs to one of the inputs and make sure you can play 96 KHz and hear it on the analog outputs. When you unplug the loop cable it should go silent. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82341 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Stereophile Review II: What conclusion can be drawn from the Measurements?
OGS;578329 Wrote: Well it isn't. At -54dB ref 0dBFS 16bit we're at 7bit resolution, not 16. At -66 to -72dB where vinyl surface noise is (and maybe some tape hiss) we're at 4 to 5 bit resolution. Try recording something at 6-7bit resolution. It sounds bad! Huh? If the levels are maxed into the ADC then you are getting all the dynamic range of the LP, and then some. If the source medium is in a quiet passage then whatever resolution you're talking about (relative to its peak amplitude in THAT little section) was already lost when it was pressed. It is simply gone, and boosting the level or using a higher res ADC isn't going to bring it back. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82050 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Stereophile Review II: What conclusion can be drawn from the Measurements?
adamdea;577568 Wrote: I am waiting to be shot down in flames but wouldn't that have a dynamic range of 140db but 1 bit resolution ? I think the dynamic range in that case is undefined, as you only have absolute amplitude to talk about, but yes that's the idea. And you can in fact have 1-bit DACs if they are internally oversampled to a very high rate. Most actually are some form of that internally, i.e. #8710;#8721; converters, although newer DACs are usually something like 4-bit converters at the DA stage, which might run internally at several MHz . 1-bit stored data streams even exist, i.e. DSD. And there are now 1-bit DACs that don't even convert to analog but drive a switched amplifier directly with a logic signal. Amazingly, with the required analog filter this works fine - essentially you can trade higher sample rate for fewer bits per sample to maintain the same effective dynamic range (at the low frequencies of interest), while gaining better conversion accuracy (higher SNR, lower distortion). -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82050 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Stereophile Review II: What conclusion can be drawn from the Measurements?
adamdea;577672 Wrote: It seems to me that resolution innthis sense means the ability to distinguish between increments not only at lowest absolute level but at each level up to the top. Right, it's all the same thing. There is no special case for near 0. Indeed any offset you pick is completely arbitrary and has nothing to do with amplitude. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82050 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Stereophile Review II: What conclusion can be drawn from the Measurements?
I haven't read the review yet but if the touch is resolving 17 bits that is probably the correct maximum capability of the DAC chip. All things have a noise floor and that's what it is - and it certainly doesn't indicate anything wrong with the digital signals. Transporter has an obscenely low noise floor and it is not realistic to expect that performance from a $300 device employing a single-chip, single rail DAC + output stage. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82050 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Stereophile Review II: What conclusion can be drawn from the Measurements?
michael123;577259 Wrote: sure, the DAC in test was Transporter, and I think Sean himself wrote somewhere on this forum that Transporter is not forgiving.. But still.. The measurements that Slim published for Transporter's DAC were taken with TP acting as master clock from a slaved s/pdif instrument. Stereophile IIRC used s/pdif but no word clock - it would have scored a little higher if they had, but only by a hair on these tests, which aren't really looking for jitter. They did not do a proper test of DAC jitter susceptibility - the tool they used for data correlated jitter in a machester receiver was incorrectly applied to ethernet streaming. Obviously for Touch there is no s/pdif input so they would have been playing files over the network, which uses its local (only) clock. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82050 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Stereophile Review II: What conclusion can be drawn from the Measurements?
Digital cameras are a helpful analogy - more megapixels don't help much once the CCD resolution exceeds the clarity of the optics. But unless one or the other is overwhelmingly the limiting factor, we can talk about how they interplay in different scenarios. When we say a DAC can resolve so many bits, that is the same as stating its SNR, just in terms of bits instead of db. Dynamic range is a very similar concept, defined by the smallest variance in level the DAC can output that is detectable, compared to its max output level. They're measured differently but the number is usually about the same since SNR will be the limiting factor on a 24 bit DAC. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82050 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter blowing internal fuse.
If that transformer is hot, then you are probably looking for a problem with the 5VDC super regulator on the far right hand side of the board, and perhaps the DAC chip. You could try replacing the transformer first, however my guess is not a bad transformer, but something shorting out those DC rails that is causing the transformer to overheat. You could test the transformer by temporarily removing the rectifier module on its output. I think you should see something like 12-15VAC open circuit voltage across the AC pins. If the transformer is bad just replace it - digikey has, or at least used to have them. If the transformer is OK then defeat the super reg by removing some series element - I don't know which component off the top of my head but you will be able to find general schematics for a Jung regulator. Then apply clean 5VDC from a bench supply to the labeled test point and see if the DAC works. I have never heard of this problem before so I'm just giving you some things to try. Where to go next depends on what you find. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=81822 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] S-Booster
JohnSwenson;573339 Wrote: The switching supply that comes with the SB3 is abysmal. It emits large amounts of EMI and sends copious amounts back into the AC mains. Both the emitted and AC born noise can wreak havoc with stereo systems. There is some that does make it into the SB and this can cause issues in the box, but most of what you hear is this extra junk getting into your system. Pretty much ANYTHING is better than this. At least two different power supplies shipped with SB3 over the years. The newer ones are way better. To which are you referring? The Unifive ones were barely FCC compliant, but the Logitech branded ones were vastly quieter. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=81454 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Switching to slow rollof filter in AK4396
JohnSwenson;568984 Wrote: This is a controversial subject because I don't think anybody really understands whats going on. After building a lot of DACs with different digital and analog filters and a lot of listening my current theory is that it has nothing to do with the ultrasonic content of the material but an aspect of the filter itself. Brick wall filters close to the audio band do SOMETHING to the music that detracts from its naturalness, usually manifesting as a closed in soundstage, less sense of space of the original recording venue and a subtle smoothing over of emotional expression of performers. There have been several proposals as to what is causing this but to date I don't think anybody really knows for sure. Personally I think its more than one thing, which makes tests trying to nail down one culprit inconclusive at best. There should also be a different _phase_ response, and that is not shown from the simple sweep of amplitude response. It makes sense to me that this could affect positioning and realism, even if a tonal change is not detectable. But I'm still not sure why it should be better with either curve in particular. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76763 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Switching to slow rollof filter in AK4396
Nice Andy! At the risk of pointing out the obvious... this is NOT supposed to have a gross tonal effect like cranking up the treble. What we're talking about is near fS/2 and above. See the first charts on pages 11 and 12 of the ak4396 data sheet. I believe this this is an FIR that is applied to the internally upsampled stream, which is something like DSD data. Slow filter specifies -3dB at 18.2kHz whereas sharp is -6dB at 22kHz. So in either case it's bat country and a well mastered 44.1KHz track would have been rolled off properly in analog land before the ADC (to prevent aliasing) so there should be nothing there. Same thing applies for other sample rates, just double the cutoff frequencies. Honestly I'm not sure what one should expect to hear in either case and it would depend very much on the recording having any content up there. I vaguely remember talking to AKM about this years ago but I just can't remember what the deal was exactly. Certainly if they had told me slow filter is awesome I would have used it. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76763 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital OUT encoding on TP, now AES S/PDIF together
michael123;564559 Wrote: What are the technical arguments to use RCA over BNC and XLR AES/EBU? It's not a medium designed for RF. Low bandwidth, can't transmit a fast slew rate, and doesn't even make an attempt at impedance matching. Slow edge - jitter. AES/EBU was invented by people who didn't understand s/pdif performance, before the issue was even appreciated by professionals. Professionals like(d) it because it used their favorite analog connector - and don't get me wrong, balanced analog on XLRs is a good thing. It is true that RCAs aren't proper RF connectors either, but BNCs certainly are, and in either case the correct type of _cable_ is used, and that is critical. RCAs connectors aren't _that_ bad anyway - we manage to run high def component video over them, right? -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80480 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital OUT encoding on TP, now AES S/PDIF together
your momo;562730 Wrote: Currently I made very good experience with the BNC out, but I could not hear clear difference between AES or S/PDIF data format. There isn't supposed to be. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80480 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital OUT encoding on TP, now AES S/PDIF together
your momo;562634 Wrote: I know AES S/PDIF are very close data format, but voltage level are also much higher with AES and I imagine that this could lead in saturation of the input, thus not sound on some material, especially on Toslink. Indeed, the voltages are completely different. However, they will always be correct on the respective interface - each has its own electronics for the driving circuit. The software setting only controls the contents of the data stream, which is sent to all ports the same. Good to now, so I can avoid to use my Boom on the balcony and now listen direct form my HT/amplifier zone 2 to my outdoor speakers, even while I keep AES data format on my TP. Actually for the best signal you should use either of the 75#937; coax outputs. Although TP implements AES/EBU as well as possible, it is a defective specification and its only practical use is to take advantage of microphone cables you might have lying around the studio, which are terrible for this purpose. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80480 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital OUT encoding on TP, now AES S/PDIF together
This has always been the case. Both outputs are active at all times, while the software setting allows you to choose the data format. In other words you can send s/pdif data on an AES/EBU electrical connection, or vice versa, and I have never heard of a DAC that won't accept that. It's quite silly that they are even different data formats in the first place. They just rearranged a few bits in the data structure. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80480 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AC Power Overload Error on Transporter
Again, **it's NOT an electrical problem** and the +/-5% error has absolutely nothing to do with the glitches - it's not meant to be more precise than that, nor does it need to be. The only purpose of the voltage measurement is to select the correct primary winding configuration for the transformers. It is a rough estimate based on the voltage seen on the secondary side. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71526 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Tact RCS 2.2X
callesoroe;527027 Wrote: Regarding upsampling. Is there any difference between doing the upsamling on SBS server or let the Tact do the upsampling itself?? As discussed at the top of this thread, the Tact will ALWAYS be doing ASRC even if the same rates are nominally matched. As such I would think that you're best off letting it do all the resampling in one pass. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70166 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Does Transporte need a grounded outlet
Phil is correct. The grounded plug is for safety, as required for UL compliance. It ensures that an internal wiring fault could not cause the metal case to be hot (or cause damage to connected equipment). -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76331 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Questions re Transporter, amplifiers voltage
This is actually a bug in the firmware and has NOTHING to do with the reliability or quality of the mains or your hardware. It is going into a failsafe mode when it shouldn't be. If anyone know how to reproduce this I'm sure Logitech would be very eager to fix it. In the mean time I will add some notes because the failsafe behavior is excessively touchy and should not be triggered by a single spurious reading the way it does now. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75177 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] DAC Upgrade. Weiss DAC202 (Minerva) or Berkeley Alpha?
michael123;516473 Wrote: for example, one that does not show me 'overvoltage protection' every two weeks see comments in other thread. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75180 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Questions re Transporter, amplifiers voltage
michael123;516486 Wrote: Looks like. I have power conditioner. And this happens when I switch tracks frequently with very high bitrate (for example, 192/24) That makes sense, since I believe it is a race condition (timing/threading problem) in the firmware. I had a problem opening a bug in bugzilla, but I have sent them an email with some suggestions. If you are familiar with assert() in programming, it is used where you consider it better to halt than to continue in the event that some test fails. That's kind of what this is. The problem here is that the test itself is bogus. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75177 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter over ethernet
garym;514066 Wrote: NONE of them have ever been able to correctly identify even a 128kbs mp3 compared to FLAC or CD on my better than average home system (with Transporter as my digital player direct into analog inputs of preamp). Really? At 128K I can do that easily, even on a crap system. Try focusing on the drums, cymbals, and audience clapping in a live concert recording. The attack is muddy and you will sometimes also hear little squeaky artifacts. AAC, by the way, tries to address this limitation with the addition of a feature called temporal/perceptual noise shaping. I guess you do have to know what to listen for. Most people probably focus on the tone and timbre in the foreground which is where mp3 has the least difficulty. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74721 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter over ethernet
Phil Leigh;514105 Wrote: By the way, here's another moneysaving tip. Don't waste money on fancy support platforms for the SB3 or Touch if you use an external DAC. I did a test with a cordless hammer drill and a piece of plywood underneath them and there was no difference in the spdif output with the drill on or off. You mean no -detectable- difference. I'm pretty sure I could contrive a scenario that would demonstrate that but it would probably involve some high frequency transducer directly against the crystal and a scope or spectrum analyzer to look at the s/pdif. So much for the crystals (or other components) being sensitive to vibration!. Many components are microphonic, including vacuum tubes and higher density ceramic caps. The fact that you didn't detect any problems might be a testament to someone's deliberate design efforts rather than evidence against the existence of microphonics in general. ;) -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74721 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter over ethernet
Phil Leigh;514160 Wrote: I'd call a -144dB null no difference :-) Yep, me too. Just pointing out where there is still wiggle room for people to claim they can hear stuff at that level (of course, while refusing to ABX). -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74721 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audio Always On - Transporter option
It saves a little electricity but one thing to be aware of is that the outputs may give a small low frequency thump during power on/off. This is not a problem with correct gain staging. As for auto-sensing amps - Transporter's outputs are so quiet that they are actually quieter when ON (actively driven to 0) rather than floating. This was different with SB3, where shutting off the DAC was necessary to reduce the 20KHz noise floor below a level where it would trigger some amps. I do not think any difference in component wear should be a practical consideration. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74930 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter over ethernet
Kuro;513485 Wrote: Yes, I know about the psychological effect, and I've been very careful with my listening tests. FWIW, in my old system, I was not able to hear such differences because either the resolution is not high enough, or there is a higher noise floor. My current system offers such high resolution that I can discern such small differences. In my experience, 2 main issues muffle the music you hear: noise on AC and jitter. Noise from switching PS is especially bad and can cross pollute other components via the AC sockets. You need component isolation on the AC. Jitter can be induced by noise on the power supply. I've a custom made balanced transformer with Faraday shield and a PS Audio PPP AC regenerator (cascade connection). These take care of common mode and differential mode noise on my AC line. PPP's output offers component isolation. The jitter is dealt with using linear PS on all components (my TacT 2.2xp and Big Ben). BB is really just the icing on the cake, it takes TP to the last little mile where it cannot do by itself. 2/10 I think we should start scoring the trolls. This post lacks originality - you were doing better earlier with the bath tub business. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74721 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter over ethernet
Kuro;512749 Wrote: The latency causes the uneven filling of the buffer may lead to PLL perturbations, ending up in jitter at the output of the PLL. This is totally wrong. There is no PLL and that is NOT how network streamers work AT ALL. (although it has been done that way for satellite and isochronous USB for example). In SB/TP, the outgoing data is clocked directly by a fixed crystal. The incoming data is pulled on demand. There is no feedback from the buffer fullness to the clock rate. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74721 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter over ethernet
Kuro;513102 Wrote: Hi Sean, I know Logitech lists TP having crystal clock, but it never mentioned whether there is a PLL anywhere in the design. It is good that it doesn't. Can you explain the meaning of incoming data is pulled on demand? Because this would imply you're doing it in packets and sudden movements in an electronic circuit can produce jitter. It's called TCP. Now, do you have testable claims or do you expect me to address your hand-waving on the subject? -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74721 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter over ethernet
cliveb;512515 Wrote: If (and it's a big if) the WiFi signal is affecting various analogue audio devices, then the fact that there are other WiFi devices around doesn't mean that the additional traffic generated when using your TP in wireless mode won't add to the RF pollution. Keep in mind I am talking about the packets being _transmitted_ by Transporter during playback. These are the empty TCP ACKs that are sent, approximately 1 for every 2 packets received. The incoming data stream, or whatever else is in the air is not the problem - those signals are very weak. But where you have cables running right next to the transmitting antenna, that's where you can transfer some energy. This is not any fault of Transporters - I have never heard any evidence that its own analog outs are susceptible to wifi. But once the signal is coupled onto the cables it can be demodulated by a downstream amplifier, and that has happened before. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74721 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Coax vs. BNC connector for Transporter to Processor?
johnM;510330 Wrote: I haven't even checked my Transporter to see which kind of connector they use, hopefully the 75 ohm type. Yes they are 75#937; -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73093 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter: Wordclock in and Processor Loop
Can you explain in more detail what you want to accomplish? I don't think word clock has been tested in this context, but it's not clear to me that what you're doing is a valid application for it either. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74426 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter: Wordclock in and Processor Loop
Valentino;510033 Wrote: Thanks for replying, seanadams. The basis is that I would like to syncronize the receiving end of the effect loop to word clock in instead of the clock embedded in the spdif signal as I do believe that it will reduce jitter in the system. It will not. Word clocks should never be used to drive a DAC. It should only go in the _opposite_ direction as the data signal. The loop is as follows: Transporter - Behringer SRC2496 (converts all to 44.1) - RME Fireface UC + PC with crossover running at 44.1 - Transporter (- Tweeter amp.) To clarify: My little digital round trip works fine if the Transporter uses SPDIF input as clock source, I assume the reason for the SRC is that you may be playing 96KHz tracks? If everything were the same rate and there is no asynchronous conversion taking place, then you could run the effects loop in synchrnonous clock mode. This is the absolutely ideal scenario where the clock path never leaves the Transporter - your effects loop is only a data path. but Wordclock in seems to OUTPUT something when I select it as clock source. Data sources take word clock in. DACS produce work clock out. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74426 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter: Wordclock in and Processor Loop
Valentino;510043 Wrote: Okay. I may be getting it if you can help me with a couple more questions: Even if the BNC is labeled Wordclock In it is actually Wordclock Out? No, it is a word clock in, as labeled. It is used when Transporter is acting as a data source (clock slave) feeding data to an external DAC which has word clock out. Transporter _also_ supports word clock out - in this mode the s/pdif output connectors are repurposed as word clock outputs. That allows Transpoter to act as a DAC for an external data source (eg a CD transport having word clock in). This is not applicable in your case. If so: Is the wordclock signal generated from the spdif input Transporter receives from my RME? Can you rephrase that? Trying to incorporate a word clock into a effects loop context is a weird case because the Transporter is both the data source and the DAC, and yet these functions are decoupled across either side of the effects loop. But I did foresee the value of being able to have the DAC as clock master while in loop mode, and that is exactly what the synchronous clock mode is for. Even if we had supported a word clock in this mode via a dedicated output port, it would still necessarily have the restriction that the loop processor not modify the clock rate. So there was no point - it already does exactly what you want without needing the external connection. There are not a lot of definitive reports as to what digital processors work properly in synchronous loop mode. I know that behringer DEQs do, but Tact DRCs do not (due to ASRC). It would be a good subject for a wiki page. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74426 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter: Wordclock in and Processor Loop
Valentino;510059 Wrote: Trying to rephrase: Judging by the behaviour of seems to me that Wordclock In OUTPUTS something when I try to use it in my application with the RME as master. Quite unexpected. I still don't know what you mean by that. It is an input and that's all there is to it. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74426 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] My Transporter makes strange noises
Ethernet is transformer isolated and will not make ground loops. Unless you use shielded cable, which is a dumb thing to do. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73247 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] How to make vacuum tubes by hand....
This is next on my list of post-apocalyptic skills to master by 2012. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74088 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Antipodal filtering
DaveWr;503411 Wrote: Back to definitions: Cliveb is right, his definition of oversampling, is the original, and if using a straightforward old 14 bit or 16 bit current source DAC is true. Virtually all 24 bit DACs including the Transporter AK4396 use some form of Delta Sigma DAC. In the AK4396 it is still multi-bit but not 24 bit! In the ultimate case many DACs can be one bit, this guarantees fantastic easy linearity. However the sampling rate required to use these low bit DACs would be astronomic if using a basic oversampling technique alone. This is where all the DAC black magic starts - first there is simple oversampling to get higher sample rate, then a digital filter, usually multiple order, is used to achieve noise shaping. This moves the DAC conversion noise that is massive with low bit DACs, up to a high frequency band, that is easily removed post DAC. This is up-sampling, it has filtering coefficients, dither etc. not just basic stuffing of new values. It is not just BS. You would need a sample rate of many MHz to achieve 24bit DAC resolutions without it. The clever bit the manufacturers don't seem to brag about is that once you have done your digital magic upfront, the DAC being 1 bit 4 bit or 8 bit is a easy and cheap, and similarly the post DAC recovery filtering is relatively easy and cheap. At the time I was working on Transporter I was in touch with a very knowledgeable FAE at AKM who was most helpful in explaining the internal architecture of the AK4396 and how to get the most out of it. You're absolutely correct on the above, and the AK4396 in particular focuses on putting the conversion noise way up above 100Khz where it is easily dealt with. IIRC it is a 4-bit conversion at the end. This and other features such as direct voltage outputs also makes it less sensitive to board layout, process variance, component tolerances and such, which I found was a significant challenge with other DACs we looked at. The specs were realistic, not best case - I had no trouble matching them on the first board spin. This moves all the design and cost issues to clocks, power and good analogue design practice. Indeed the 4396 performs very well even with barebones external circuitry - a key selling point for a DAC is not just the price of the chip but the total system cost. Since that was just not a limiting factor, I goosed it quite a bit further from the reference design by upgrading passives, using super regulators and good clocks. No big secrets there, although other designs will have varying degrees of headroom for such improvement. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69145 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and phantom power during Inguz measurements?
I would say yes, that is almost certain to damage TP's outputs. At best it'll screw up your test. It should be OK if you used an isolation transformer (available in XLR M-F packages), but that's going to compromise the signal quality slightly, and if you're doing precision measurements it may be a problem. Can you use the RCA outs instead? -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73781 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and phantom power during Inguz measurements?
Besides the power issue - does that unit even support simultaneous microphone level on one input and line level on the other? -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73781 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] My Transporter makes strange noises
gsawdy;503243 Wrote: Can the wireless card and antennas be removed from the Transporter? Is there a link to the how-to-do-that info? TIA, George It's easy but there's really no reason to. When you're on ethernet it is totally inactive. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73247 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] My Transporter makes strange noises
dizzysnakepilot;501924 Wrote: i noticed a faint ticking sound a few weeks ago. by reducing the transporter volume and increasing my pre-amp volume i was able to make it obvious. i traced the problem to some wires near the transporters antennas. moving the wires away cured the ticking problem the linked threads does not address this issue so i am adding it to this thread. so the upshot for me is the transporter antennas can pick up interference. You're close but it's the other way around - those are intentional 802.11 emissions being picked up on those cables, then amplified by your receiver. Occasionally people ask whether wired or wireless sounds better. Usually there is no difference because the data stream is identical. However, if you have a situation where some piece of equipment is demodulating 2.4GHz into the audible band, then you can hear it. This, among other reasons is why you should use ethernet if it's available. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73247 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and word clock base-rate multiplying support
Elberoth;499226 Wrote: Your seem to have a very strong opinion against the external clocks, which I might add, is in strong contrast to what appears to be an industry accepted standard. If so, then what is the purpose of the Word Clock input on the Transporter ? It's an optional mode where an external DAC may serve as the master clock. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73025 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and word clock base-rate multiplying support
Also, you did not answer my (serious, non-rhetorical) question: How exactly is your high quality clock going to survive being transmitted to the DAC, not to mention divided down to word clock speeds and then multiplied back up to master clock speed? If you just begin to think about this for one minute, instead of blindly accepting the dogma of an overpriced audiophile snake oil vendor, you might begin understand where I'm coming from. Sometimes I wonder why I still visit this forum. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73025 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and word clock base-rate multiplying support
adamslim;499256 Wrote: Are there actually any DACs that do respond by changing the clock out according to the SPDIF metadata? That would be cool, although since they could only be used properly with a single transport system (the Transporter), I guess the market would be a tad limited! Not that I know of... and in fairness, Transporter has a word clock output mode which only does 44.1, but as far as I know nobody has EVER used it for anything except my own performance testing. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73025 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and word clock base-rate multiplying support
adamslim;499385 Wrote: It does seem a shame that so much hand-wringing goes on about jitter, yet it is a problem almost completely solved by a clock from the DAC. If indeed it is an audible problem at all. Still, fills the hifi mags, eh? :) Agreed, plus it sure confuses the heck out of everyone which makes it easy to sell any kind of cure. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73025 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Coax vs. BNC connector for Transporter to Processor?
Actually, both RCA and BNC are coax connectors so you shouldn't say coax in reference to a particular one. As to which is better, BNC is a better connector in all regards - it is designed for high frequencies whereas RCA isn't. It has a locking fit which won't come loose. It's just a better, more modern (and more expensive) connector. But just to make things exciting for you, TP uses two different transmission circuits on each of the respective interfaces. The BNC has a transformer whereas the RCA has a capacitor. Capacitor coupled outputs are most common these days, but the transformer has the advantage that it isolates the grounds between the two devices. In terms of signal quality the differences are not going to be huge - try them both. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73093 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Coax vs. BNC connector for Transporter to Processor?
See this thread about analog vs digital inputs on an A/V receiver: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=14599highlight=denon -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73093 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and word clock base-rate multiplying support
Why should the data source second-guess the rate it is being fed? Would you then toggle a multiplier setting on the source whenever you switch between 44.1/48 and 88.2/96KHz material? DACs that provide word-clock output should respond to the clock rate bits that are encoded in the s/pdif meta-data. If they can't do that, at least provide manual settings for all the supported rates! Unfortunately your proposed workaround (using another clock source) defeats the purpose of a word clock connection, which is to confine the clock signal path to the DAC. Clock signals recovered from word clock connections should never be used to actually drive a DAC. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73025 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and word clock base-rate multiplying support
Elberoth;499183 Wrote: Sean, I'm not sure we understood each other. I understand exactly what you propose to do. I'm not gonna use a DAC's clock to drive the Transporter, but a separate, high quality clock to drive BOTH the DAC and the Transporter. How exactly is your high quality clock going to survive being transmitted to the DAC, not to mention divided down to word clock speeds and then multiplied back up to master clock speed? Having a separate clock to drive multiple devices is a standard right now in ProAudio industry and is also used by such a renowed companies as dCS and Esoteric in their top of the range CD transport/dac/clock combinations. Just because some people successful market expensive products for this purpose doesn't make it a smart thing to do. I'm at a loss why Logitech Transporter/dac/clock combination should be any different. You fail to understand the most basic principles of DAC clocking. Maybe DCS does too - or maybe they do get it, but they'd rather sell you an overpriced, utterly useless but impressively Italian-sounding word clock box. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73025 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter loses sync with AES/EBU..
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262 -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72497 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Very very strange Transporter problem
the best workaround is to use flac to re-encode that one track. It'll probably work with the default settings. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72413 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Very very strange Transporter problem
callesoroe;494393 Wrote: Done. Plays perfect as WAV file. I understand that already - please re-read my previous posts. What I'm telling you is that you may be able to make it into a FLAC file that plays OK by re-encoding it. For example, try this: flac -3 -o filename_new.flac filename.flac -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72413 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Very very strange Transporter problem
We used to have problems where TP would run short of cpu cycles on certain 24/96 material but I thought that was not an issue any more. It may be that this material was encoded using the highest compression settings which results in slightly more CPU-intensive decoding. You might try re-compressing the file using the default FLAC settings, and if that doesn't work try turning the compression level down a notch. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72413 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
tonyptony;487812 Wrote: Sean (or John S. or Phil L. if you've measured it), what is the output return loss from the Touch SPDIF? And, if the numbers are available, over what bandwidth? I'm not an expert on RF measurements but I doubt if that is a good metric per se for s/pdif performance when we can observe jitter directly. For example, we already know that RCA connectors have issues but that is really a minimal factor compared to things like the oscillator's noise and the particular design's s/pdif transmitter circuitry. However, do check out ar-t's TDA measurements which are really interesting. The tests I usually did were with a Lecroy 64xi reporting RMS variance from an ideal time interval, in a few configurations: 1) to measure the internal oscillators and to look for the added jitter as signal passed through logic gates (prior to s/pdif encoding), I would use the standard lecroy probe with a modified bayonet tip, having a minimal ground lead. This is where we get figures like 11ps at the oscillator or 17ps at the DAC for Transporter. 2) to measure the jitter of the s/pdif signal I would usually use an RG6 cable with an RCA crimped directly on one and and a BNC crimped directly on the other end. The RCA goes into the Squeezebox and the BNC goes into a tee with a terminating resistor right onto the scope input. The Lecroy has the ability to recover a clock from an arbitrary data signal. This is where we get figures like 50 ps at the DAC. 3) there is another test that is interesting which is to feed an s/pdif receiver chip and look at the MCLK coming out of it. Sometimes I would do this with Transporter's outputs looped to it inputs. I did not spend a whole lot of time on this but it was an interesting way to see the total performance difference between the various media. If anyone actually has a high-end scope and would like to try these sort of tests I could provide more guidance on how to do it. I think it's a shame that everyone seems content to speculate about jitter while so few people actually test it. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
Phil Leigh;486277 Wrote: Sean who designed the TP stated otherwise quite recently. The AES/EBU output is not as good (or at least no better) than the coax s/pdif, with the toslink the worst. How much this matters depends on your DAC. Just to clarify I was talking about AES/EBU _in general_. There's nothing wrong with how I did Transporter's AES/EBU output. The interface is defective by definition, and therefore not possible to execute reasonably by anyone. Linky: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262. Also note JohnSwenson's comments about the high voltage. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AC Power Overload Error on Transporter
Transporter has auto ranging linear power supplies. The way this works is by measuring the incoming voltage, and arranging the transformers' primary windings appropriately via some relays. There are three possible states: low voltage (make them parallel for 110), high voltage (make them series for 220) or too high (freak out and disconnect them). Although it's obviously undesired behavior, I wouldn't worry about a single incident of the overvoltage alert. The system is ultra conservative and goes into a failsafe mode if it detects an overvoltage. However, it might not be your AC power - I suspect a firmware bug that can cause a very rare, spurious false positive. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71526 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter factory reset on power off???
callesoroe;485609 Wrote: I have a remote controlled outlet, which powers all my equipment off when I got to bed. Does this reset The Transporter. Because my settings regarding effect loop is disabled every day at startup, eventhough I have changed settings to active and saved them in the settings menu in Squeezebox server ??? Power cycling will NOT affect any settings saved internally in Transporter - those are only the network settings anyway. All the interesting settings that affect audio playback are maintained by the server/. You may have found a bug in SqueezeCenter where it is not properly reinitializing the player when it connects. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71415 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Kellen;485819 Wrote: All this talk about transmission problems with S/PDIF and USB . can the Ethernet protocol (TCP/IP) not be used for the transmission of these digital files in place of the current problematic ones? I think there are products that do that -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Kellen;485831 Wrote: I mean connecting an external DAC to a transport. The hard drive is the transport, Squeezebox/TP is the DAC. Is this not feasible to do with TCP/IP? If so, is it not better than SPDIF and USB? Yes of course it's better, but I'm not sure what you're suggesting that is different than what these products do. When you say transport do you mean a CD player or what? -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Tact RCS 2.2X
callesoroe;484748 Wrote: Sean was right about the clock settings. You always have to let the Tact be master to effect loop. I tried selecting Transporter, but that resulted in distorted sound. Why is the possibillity there??? There might exist other DSP products which maintain a synchronous clock from input to output. I.e. there is no ASRC going on. In that case, you would be able to let Transporter clock its own DAC, since the internal clock would be in sync with the data coming from the processor. This would result in much lower jitter than passing the clock out through the external processor. I haven't tested it but I suspect the Behringer DEQ2496 might be suitable for this mode. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70166 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Tact RCS 2.2X
callesoroe;484748 Wrote: Wordclock on S/PDIF-out : Wordclock-out signal activated - Transporter is Master You should disable this one. It's only usable when Transporter is being used as a DAC, AND is connected to a source that accepts a word clock input. Apparently the firmware is doing the right thing and ignoring this setting, but to be on the safe side it should be off unless you intend to use it. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70166 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Tact RCS 2.2X
Rodney_Gold;484794 Wrote: So if im using a DEQ2496 (I use either a Z-sys RDP-1 or a DEQ in the efects loop) I should be using Asynchronous- external processor is master in the effects loop clock mode? I have been using the synchronous setting and have noticed a distorted effect in the DEQ - I thought it may be digital clipping , despite reducing the gain of the DEQ prior to eq'ing. I am giving lower midbass a very small boost with the DEQ - less than 3db I was suggesting the other way around. If it supports the transporter is master mode then that would be better. But I don't know if it will work or not, I'm just guessing that it might. If the clocks are not in sync then probably what you will hear is occasional clicking caused by bit errors, like a single sample was in error here or there. Or it may be more subtle than that depending on how far apart the clocks are. By the way asynchronous (external is master) is always going to work. Synchronous is an optimization for jitter that only _might_ work. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70166 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Help: Best new device for audiophile with DAC?
AES/EBU is a defective technology, use coax S/PDIF instead. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Help: Best new device for audiophile with DAC?
SuperQ;484186 Wrote: Wait? What? I thought the reason that they were included on the TP was because they fixed the S/PDIF issue with embedded clock. You're think of the word clock feature. AES/EBU doesn't fix anything in s/pdif, it makes it worse. It uses wiring and connectors that lack the bandwidth and impedance matching for RF signaling. Just because XLRs are suitable for analog audio doesn't make them good for high frequencies. It's included on Transporter frankly because of legacy expectations, and perhaps in a pro environment you might need it for one reason or another (got the cable handy, used up all the other inputs, etc) but I don't recommend it. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Problem with Transporter Toslink Input
It seems the receiver in Transporter just needed more light. If the ends weren't well aligned, didn't butt close enough together, had poorly polished surfaces, or weren't of a transmissive enough material then that would explain the difference. I'm not really an optics expert, but then again I suspect neither are the guys who manufacture plastic toslink adaptors... -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70437 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Help: Best new device for audiophile with DAC?
MortyEU;484449 Wrote: That is not clear to me -- I thought the Touch 'only' has optical digital output; it seems that way from the marketing material that is available now... In the photos, the back side with connectors seems identical to the classic? It has coax and a properly designed and tested output circuit... you'll be happy. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter users: Balanced or unblanced?
A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71190 Question: Are you using the Transporters BALANCED outputs to make connection to your amp? - Yes - No pippin;483646 Wrote: Hm, well, the WORD,... In digital signaling you usually speak of differential signaling, maybe that makes more sense to some and it's also probably the more common term (except for audio). The words don't exactly mean the same thing. Differential refers to the complementary signals, whereas balanced refers to the property where impedances are equal between both legs, for each of: cable phase to ground, cable phase to phase, driver, and receiver. That requires symmetry throughout the system and is necessary to get the full benefit of noise rejection. The vast majority of the time one will design for both but I guess there could be exceptions. Although I'm not sure why you would ever want one and not the other. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71190 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Why Tranporter's balance out sounded infeior???
Pneumonic;483413 Wrote: Sean, if I may ask. While studying the various DAC chipsets prior to deciding on the 4396, did you find that most of the serious contenders outputted a balanced signal? I have never seen a high end (120+ dB) DAC with single ended output. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70969 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter users: Balanced or unblanced?
A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71190 Question: Are you using the Transporters BALANCED outputs to make connection to your amp? - Yes - No The other oft-overlooked advantage of balanced signaling is that it is not affected by ground loops. Even if you're not hearing 60Hz hum, ground loops can put other crud in your noise floor that would be eliminated if you use balanced. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71190 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter users: Balanced or unblanced?
A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71190 Question: Are you using the Transporters BALANCED outputs to make connection to your amp? - Yes - No Phil Leigh;483501 Wrote: Most analogue sources are balanced ... mics, cartridges, guitar pickups etc - certainly anything with a coil of wire in it... A simple transducer isn't anything per se. It's not until you discuss a transmission scheme - how it's connected to something, whether one side is ground and how it is seen by an input, that you can describe the system as balanced or not. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71190 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter users: Balanced or unblanced?
A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71190 Question: Are you using the Transporters BALANCED outputs to make connection to your amp? - Yes - No pfarrell;483502 Wrote: Isn't every electrical signal balanced in the respect that they generate or modulate a voltage based on the received signal. One electron goes out, one comes in. No. That's what we'd like to happen, but it doesn't because of noise, ground loops, asymmetric properties of the cable, and transmission line effects. The only difference that I see is that XLR and TRS have two wires for signal and one for a separate ground. RCA just uses the ground wire for both DC ground and one leg of the signal. Well I guess you've described the pinouts correctly but you've totally missed the point. The difference is that there are two COMPLEMENTARY signals referenced only to each other, NOT to ground. This has profound implications, it's not just a different wiring scheme. If this just doesn't make any sense maybe start with the wiki pages on the subject which are not bad: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_signaling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_line http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_circuit Balanced signaling is not just some mumbo jumbo that audio marketers cooked up. As I mentioned before it's also the basis for every modern digital interface, and not just for interconnecting cables but (for high speed signals) even at the board and die level. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71190 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter looses contact with squeezecenter
If the router is on the blink then all bets are off. Since that's also your DHCP server, it could be causing devices on the network to have to obtain new IP addresses which would break all active connections. Next time it happens you might check the status page in your router to see if its uptime has been reset (i.e. it crashed and rebooted). -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71173 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Why Tranporter's balance out sounded infeior???
jmsun;482038 Wrote: Thanks everyone for weighing in. I have tried both Transporters on two different preamps (i even used balenced to RCA converters to ensure the loudness is not due to the input sensitivity on the preamps. So I'm pretty sure the balanced output on the Transport is lower than RCA. I just was not sure why this is happening. Maybe i will keep using the RCA from now on. Sigh. Like we're telling you, it depends on the amp because you are using DIFFERENT INTERFACES. Transporter's RCA output is 2.0 VRMS and the balanced outputs are 3.0VRMS. However, it's not apples to apples: each of those values is something of a de-facto industry standard for that respective interface, so both could be considered 0 dBr. If you have the specs for your amp we can calculate the exact difference in decibels that you should expect. Then if you want to do a better A/B test, you can offset by that much. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70969 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Why Tranporter's balance out sounded infeior???
Pneumonic;482025 Wrote: Loudness issues aside, keep in mind that, compared to single ended ins/outs, balanced designs typically require extra circuitry in the signal path and that extra circuitry, many people believe, degrades the signal. In products which are fully balanced this is not true, in fact you have it exactly backwards. The extra signaling is needed to make it UNbalanced. Certainly in Transporter, it's all balanced from the DAC all the way to the XLRs. Any respectable amp that takes balanced inputs would be designed similarly. As to whether twice the circuitry is somehow bad - you're missing the point of balanced signaling. It's TWO complementary paths, but neither one is more complicated than its single-ended alternative, and having two complementary paths is what gives you the common mode noise rejection. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70969 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter suddenly dead and not responding to anything
That is too bad. I wish I could be of further help. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70283 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter digital outputs?
reprogramming the xilinx never hurts but that's a long shot. Hold power until it resets, then press 1 when the logo appears. The only setting I can think of that might interfere with the digital outs is word clock on digital outputs - make sure that is DISabled (the default). But that's only supposed to come into play when TP is being used as a DAC. Unfortunately, I think you will probably need to send it in for a main board replacement. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70343 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter suddenly dead and not responding to anything
If you want to check the power supplies it is easy enough to do - IF it is the PSU then there's only one it could be in this case, which is a separate 5VDC module mounted between the main board and the display. If you see 110V going in (3-pin connector) and nothing coming out (4-pin connector), then it's bad. You might even convince Slim to send you just the module and save everyone on shipping. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70283 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Problem with Transporter Toslink Input
maybe it's using a surround encoding? Any option in system preferences - sound to change it to PCM? Other than that, maybe try playing it into an AV receiver and confirming that it works and comes up as PCM. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70437 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter suddenly dead and not responding to anything
The right tool is a 1/16 allen (hex) wrench, but a 1.5mm will also work. Often the easiest way to get these smaller tools is as part of a set - this one is my favorite: http://boxertiedown.com/wholesale/-c-33/30-piece-4mm-precision-screwdriver-set-p-513 A torx T-6 also fits almost perfectly. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70283 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Problem with Transporter Toslink Input
Sorry but I can not imagine any reason for this not to work! -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70437 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter suddenly dead and not responding to anything
What makes you think it's the PSU? If the CPU doesn't boot for _any_ reason, you will get the same behavior. I would recommend sending it in. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70283 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Tact RCS 2.2X
Phil Leigh;475873 Wrote: One thing I urge you to try (for either option) is to set the SB Server to upsample EVERYTHING to 24/96 before sending it to the TP. This will force the TACT to do no ASRC internally which IMO improves the audio performance. I don't think that's true... the Tact passes everything through ASRC processing even if the sample rates are nominally matched. I remember testing this when developing the TP effects loop feature - you always have to let the Tact become the master clock. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70166 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter and Tact RCS 2.2X
Phil Leigh;476028 Wrote: Sean - it goes through the ASRC chip for sure, but if it is 24/96 inbound it is doubled to 192 for internal dsp processing. No I really meant what I said. The conversion is _asynchronous_, meaning if you compare the signal in to the signal out on a scope, the output trace will not be synchronized to the incoming*. _even if the nominal rates are the same, let alone an integer multiple_. That means ASRC is taking place, so from 96 to 192 it's not exactly doubled, it's multiplied by 2.05 or 1.98 or whatever. This avoids the nasty non multiple 44.1-192 or 88.2-192 conversions - I should have been more precise. But you're just doing it on the server - and as an intermediate stage in addition to the ASRC. Either way, the Tact still resamples and not by exactly 2x. * I actually tested this - it wasn't assumed or anything you could infer from the Tact specs alone. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70166 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Refurbished Transporter
I'd say go for it. The returns they get are mostly nothing wrong - the customer just didn't want it or had software/network trouble, for example. Of the ones with defects they swap entire modules (main board, display board etc) so in a refurb there is no higher likelihood of failure than on a new unit. Actually, given the way the bathtub curve works, a well-burned-in Transporter that still passes factory testing is statistically _less_ likely to fail. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69763 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;467211 Wrote: I don't know how it happens generally, you may be right. Huh? He is absolutely right. A passive preamp is just a potentiometer. A variable resistor. A voltage divider. It has a low-impedance input and a higher-impedance output, period. Google voltage divider impedance or read the first chapter of The Art of Electronics. Nevertheless, this one specs input 20kW and output 20kW. Don't know whether it enters your trouble category. That's ohms, not watts. And the specs make no sense - if he wanted to do his customers a favor he would just come out and SAY what the pot's value is. I'm guessing 20K but I'm not sure if he actually groks the implication of that from the way he's written his specs. The correct answer, of course, is that it depends where you set the knob! Whether a higher Z output (Z means impedance) is a significant problem depends on what you're feeding. If it's going a short distance straight into an op-amp buffer then you're probably fine. But if it's got some capacitance or noise nearby, then you may have a problem. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;467310 Wrote: probably was a way of speaking, Sean. Certainly, should have been better, I admit. I didn't open this device, don't know what it is or how it is made, but I'm curious to know what makes you think that a firm that makes amplifiers don't know about all what you say. And why they couldn't (or wouldn't) produce a passive amp (to switch sources that have only fixed outputs, I presume ?) correctly ? The firm is Creek, not Crook. :) I don't mean to give the manufacturer too hard of a time, in fact it looks like a reasonable product and I think just a pot might be OK for many situations. But it is no panacea... personally I would prefer a) full level signals going into an amp with a gain knob on it or b) an active preamp with very low noise floor or c) stepped attenuation using quality metal film resistors. In roughly that order of preference, using a few dB of digital attenuation in the TP as needed. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Improving Sound of Transporter
peechus;466505 Wrote: I feel up a tree. What it is Introduces new issues to the mix with SPDIF From abuilding a high end computer audio system, issues I don't need. The Transporter is nailed, might you offer an alternative or enhanced suggestion to accompany this Transporter / Anthem lot? Thanks,Peechus I thought I was clear: If you want the absolute best performance, as I already said, run analog from Transporter to the Anthem and use analog direct mode - that is _precisely_ what they provided it for. If you feel you must have the DSP processing, then use a digital connection as this bypasses the superfluous A-D-A conversion that is otherwise incurred. S/PDIF is has issues but it's not as bad as feeding a signal through A-D-A again. If you're still not sure I would suggest simply running both types of cabling to different inputs, try it out, and choose whichever you prefer. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69058 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Improving Sound of Transporter
The Anthem (as with nearly all a/v receivers) normally digitizes all its inputs which is probably not what you want. This both introduces a superfluous A-D-A stage, and places an upper limit on your performance to that of the Anthem's internal ADC and DAC. However the D2 lets you bypass the digital path which is probably the best solution for you. See page 34: http://statement.anthemav.com/HTML/Products/D2/Operating_Manual/download/d2_manual.pdf I would not recommend an external DAC with Transporter. Not only is it already the best DAC you can buy, but you also introduce new issues by adding s/pdif into the mix. If you just want to hear it with a different DAC, you could compare it with the one in the Anthem by connecting it with s/pdif. That would also let you do a real easy a/b. It would be an interesting test actually, since the Anthem use the AK4395 which is similar to the chip in Transporter - although it lacks the Jung power supplies and low-jitter clocking which will give TP a distinct advantage. If you want to do a serious test it would be necessary to match levels using a voltmeter on the pre-outs. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69058 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] wii causes ticking sound on transporter
dizzysnakepilot;458190 Wrote: it might cause it on other inputs, but the transporter has its own volume control that, when turned down, reveals other noises in the signal. unplugged the wii and the ticking went away. fast ticking, 5/second, not constant volume? unplug your wiis! or is there a better solution? This is almost certainly a problem with your receiver, not the Transporter. Turning down the volume on a source will reveal the noise floor of the rest of the chain, and an amplifier, which must take inputs from the outside world, is inherently more susceptible to this sort of thing. A few things you could try: Are you using the wii's 802.11? Use ethernet if possible. Connect the wii with optical s/pdif if available. Clamp ferrite cores around the wii's cables. Try them near either end of the cable. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67896 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Splitting unbalanced TP outputs
amcluesent;439601 Wrote: But I feel that this isn't so good due to impedance mismatches. Nonsense. Line-out RCA connections are not even impedance matched in the first place. It's perfectly OK to use a splitter for this. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=65462 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is there a basic 12V line in the TP?
There is no 12V rail but you could take a high enough unregulated voltage from either C96 or C141 (that's from the input sides of the +15V and +5V jung regs, respectively). The latter is probably close enough to 12V that you could just use it directly for this purpose. And as a bonus, it would switch on and off under software control if you enable shutdown of the analog power supplies in player prefs. You should do something to protect Transporter's transformer from an external short on this line. A 100 ohm resistor in series with the positive lead would be perfect, provided that the impedance of the trigger input is high enough that it doesn't get loaded down too much. If that doesn't work, use a 50mA PTC (resettable fuse) instead. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=65299 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Why Reclock If Using Low Jitter DAC
duke43j;427380 Wrote: There is a lot of bad information floating around with respect to hi-fi equipment. A digital cable either works, or it doesn't work. If it doesn't work you would hear pops, skips or dropouts in the audio. There is no way you would hear a change in tonality. A digital cable carries 1's and 0's. If it was faulty, 1's would be mistaken for 0's, and vice-versa. This would cause the data to fail an error check and the sample would be discarded. If one or two samples are discarded, the unit is supposed to keep playing the same sound as the last good sample; but this can go on for only about 1/1000 of a second. If it continues, then the unit will mute the output (a dropout). With this kind of operation, there is no way you would characterize the resulting sound as not having enough air, or losing detail. Im afraid you're a ways off the mark here. You need to get caught up on the subject before debunking the bad information. What jitter does is it smears the high frequencies, and this phenomenon is readily observed with just an audio spectrum analyzer, regardless of what anyone thinks it does or doesn't sound like. However, I would say that a loss of detail is a perfectly reasonable description. The older DACs had a clock that was tied to the rate at which the data appeared on its input. If the input data appeared at irregular times (jitter), then the clock in the DAC would tick at irregular intervals (although it would try to smoothe it out as best it could). Reclockers try to smoothe the data rate before they get to the DAC unit. This extra smoothing reduced the jitter even further. Newer DACs with an asynchronous rate converter have two clocks; one to clock in the jittery input data, and a second, very stable clock, to clock the D/A chip. What you're talking about is properly called ASRC or Asynchronous sample rate conversion. In the Benchmark DAC1 it is implemented by an AD1896 chip, and prior to this chip's availability I don't think any off the shelf DACs did it. However, it is NOT _generally_ a feature of newer DACs, and it is not simply a means of having a second more stable local clock. In ASRC, the data stream is mathematically resampled to a completely different rate (eg 110KHz), not merely re-clocked. This certainly eliminates susceptibility to the conventional mechanism of s/pdif jitter, but it also completely reconstructs the data stream and the potential audible impact of resampling should not be overlooked. As long as you don't starve the unit by not feeding it data, or the opposite problem of feeding it too much data, jitter on the input data shouldn't be a problem. I'm not sure what you're getting at here. s/pdif uses only a continuous clock signal that is embedded (manchester encoded) in the data. It does not rely on the kind starving or not flow control you're imagining. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63796 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Why Reclock If Using Low Jitter DAC
JezA;427392 Wrote: -As for the clocks - within SBs they vary widely - an old SB1 can drift as much as 10s on an average length track, whilst I have seen a duet with minimal drift. The DS clock is extremely accurate, the SB clocks are obviously not as good in some cases.- True, SB1 had poor clocking, and a number of other bugs related to PCM passthrough mode, due to bugs in its black-box DSP chip. I don't know about 10s (maybe 10ms?) over the length of a track, but by modern standards not good. All products since SB2 have extremely good clocks and correct handling of raw PCM, so his statement is quite disingenuous in extrapolating that observation to current models, or the SB clocks in general. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63796 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Why Reclock If Using Low Jitter DAC
timequest;427581 Wrote: I really want to see if I can mod the Duet receiver with an I2S output. Is that doable? Not much you need to mod, the signals are there. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63796 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Calculate Attenuation
S2K;424690 Wrote: Thank you, However I think Im asking the wrong question because your answer isn't what I was expecting. You're expecting the wrong answer! Im try tot accomplish to bring the Transporters output down to a maximum of 2v on XLR and 1v on RCA. My amp delivers full power at 2 volts XLR input. For a full scale sine wave. Is that what you're going to listen to? In audio when we talk about a signal that is so many volts we could be discussing a number of different things. In this case we're talking about the RMS amplitude of a sine wave. When an amplifier says x watts output for y volts input what they're doing is stating the GAIN of the amplifier. It is NOT the limit on the input voltage (or clipping level) at a given instant, which is going to be a few times the max power at voltage. In other words, for a given maximum voltage, music has much less power than full-scale test tones. Feeding more might damage my amp, speakers or ears. Each of those things has a different kind of limit for too loud. Ultimately you have to use just use your ears. As for your speakers, you need some experience and common sense to be able to hear if you're pushing them too hard. They have a wattage rating but again this is for some test signal, probably pink noise, and is only an approximate guide. For real music you just don't know its power level (at the relevant frequencies most likely to damage the speakers) in advance. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63495 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Calculate Attenuation
You don't use a calculator for this. Just start at -30dB and work your way up until 100% on Transporter's volume control corresponds to your maximum desired listening level. Or another way to look at it: if you always have Transporter's volume control set to, say, -20db or lower, then it means you should instead be using -20dB analog attenuation. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63495 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter as a DAC for DVD S/PDIF output
This is not feasible, as Transporter is doing a simple electrical pass-through from the s/pdif receiver to the DAC. From in-to-out there is a fixed latency of less than a millisecond. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63379 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Crackle during certain songs. Radiohead sample cited. . .
Never mind, the inversion option is only on Transporter. Another thing to try is to test if it's a timing or performance issue. Try turning the spectrum visualizer on and off, and see if that affects the behavior. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63246 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Crackle during certain songs. Radiohead sample cited. . .
Try it with the analog outputs instead. Need to determine if it's an s/pdif issue or something with the decoding. Also try playing the files on a PC - make sure it's not the source material. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63246 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Bit Depth?
mswlogo;420356 Wrote: Sorry Sean the files will come out about the same. It does recognize essentially zero net new content. A huffman code scheme would do it. I did flac to flac to assure it's using the same version of flac. I did flac to 24bit wav to flac (same compression level default 5). They are nearly identical in size. 24bit (27.25MB 8 LSBs are zero) 16bit (27.19MB) Interesting... although I'm still not clear as to why it works. FLAC uses rice coding on a sample-by-sample basis, not a general byte-at-a-time huffman/dictionary/window scheme (which would be useless for audio). Makes me wonder if it's handled as a special case... ... ah yes, here it is: SUBFRAME_HEADER [...] 1+k 'Wasted bits-per-sample' flag: * 0 : no wasted bits-per-sample in source subblock, k=0 * 1 : k wasted bits-per-sample in source subblock, k-1 follows, unary coded; e.g. k=3 = 001 follows, k=7 = 001 follows. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=62874 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
