Phil Leigh Wrote:
> OK I think we all agree that the bits will be the same regardless of
> flac/wav etc...so could someone please do some comparative jitter
> measurements and then we can put this "old chestnut" to bed?
Sean did some jitter measurements for a linear PSU versus a switcher.
Switc
It's definitely true that EAC will rip discs that several CDP's refuse
to play.
The only audible "ticks" (and accompanying error reports) I ever get
with EAC are certain types of copy protection or from bronzed discs
(depends how bad they are). The bronzed discs refuse to play at all on
any CDP
Surely someone can stump up a dCS, Esoteric, Naim or whatever? Once we
know the answer we can start looking again at DAC's (yes and
cables/interconnection methods) rather than the transport element!
I can see three possible outcomes:
1) SB good as high end CDP
2) SB better than high-end CDP
3) S
OK I think we all agree that the bits will be the same regardless of
flac/wav etc...so could someone please do some comparative jitter
measurements and then we can put this "old chestnut" to bed?
--
Phil Leigh
Phil Leigh's
P Floding wrote:
> A brand new CD with uncorrectable errors?
Sure, happens due to manufacturing errors.
The RedBook spec has pretty good error correction specs, especially
given it was written in the mid 1970s.
But anything made on a production line can have errors.
--
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.
cliveb Wrote:
> My apologies for not explicitly answering your question earlier. On 26th
> June opaqueice posted something in response which sort of summed up what
> EAC does when it detects an uncorrectable error. I posted a slight
> clarification on 27th, and thought that between them those two
seanadams Wrote:
> btw if anyone has a very high-end CD player that they'd like to loan me
> for a week in exchange for a free SB3, I can do some head-to-head tests
> using the same measurement setup.
I only wish I lived closer to you, wherever that might be. (Not in the
UK, I bet.)
--
P Flod
btw if anyone has a very high-end CD player that they'd like to loan me
for a week in exchange for a free SB3, I can do some head-to-head tests
using the same measurement setup.
--
seanadams
seanadams's Profile: http://for
mauidan Wrote:
> "Of course I acknowledge that CDs do exist which cannot be read without
> error. They may be damaged, or they may have been mastered/pressed
> badly. But in my experience, playing such a CD on an audio CD player
> and recording the SPDIF output often gives a better result than le
Triode Wrote:
> People worried about the different processing being performed by the cpu
> for flac vs wav may like to consider the impact of repeating bit
> patterns in the digital stream. Surely it would all sound better if
> the data being processed exibited no repeating patterns which could
People worried about the different processing being performed by the cpu
for flac vs wav may like to consider the impact of repeating bit patters
in the digital stream. Surely it would all sound better if the data
being processed exibited no repeating patterns which could be coupled
into the powe
Unless you know exactly how they were measured, don't believe any jitter
numbers, and certainly don't try to compare them.
--
seanadams
seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3
View this threa
opaqueice Wrote:
> I'm not sure anyone can figure out what you're asking - maybe you should
> try asking a more coherent question if you want a response.
>
> EAC reads CDs, which have a form of ECC built in - is that what you're
> asking about? And cliveb was claiming (for some reason) that EAC
Robin Bowes Wrote:
> CardinalFang wrote:
> > Robin Bowes Wrote:
> >> 3. The very act of running the flac conversion routine on silicon
> >> inside
> >> the SB causes interference with other parts of the SB (EMF, change
> in
> >> current draw, voltage drops, etc.).
> >>
> >
> > Would a quick che
Ok everybody is discussing the lossless transfer and the Flac
conversion, but what about the spdif transformation when the digital
out is used. As I understand this is done by the processor in the sB2
and not using any standard chip.
I compared the SB2 to two CDPs, in both cases the perceived sou
Why EAC (or cdparanoia or a whole slew of rippers) get more accurate
readings is because though there is error correction on CD's, it is not
always able to correct every error. It is possible that enough bits are
off that there is insufficent correction code to fix them (or the ECC
bits got corru
CardinalFang Wrote:
> Would a quick check of the audio effect of varying current demand be
> achievable by listening with the display on and off? That must draw
> more current than any difference in instructions being executed or
> speed of update of the display.
>
> As far as I can see, decodi
CardinalFang wrote:
> Robin Bowes Wrote:
>> 3. The very act of running the flac conversion routine on silicon
>> inside
>> the SB causes interference with other parts of the SB (EMF, change in
>> current draw, voltage drops, etc.).
>>
>
> Would a quick check of the audio effect of varying current
mauidan Wrote:
>
> I'm still waiting for cliveb to explain what "magic" EAC is going to
> perform if you've recorded a signal with ECCs.
I'm not sure anyone can figure out what you're asking - maybe you
should try asking a more coherent question if you want a response.
EAC reads CDs, which hav
Robin Bowes Wrote:
>
> 3. The very act of running the flac conversion routine on silicon
> inside
> the SB causes interference with other parts of the SB (EMF, change in
> current draw, voltage drops, etc.).
>
Would a quick check of the audio effect of varying current demand be
achievable by l
Robin Bowes Wrote:
>
> 3. The very act of running the flac conversion routine on silicon
> inside
> the SB causes interference with other parts of the SB (EMF, change in
> current draw, voltage drops, etc.).
>
> R.
I don't believe 2 would be likely, as SD tells us they have verified
the bit-co
I simply don't agree with Clive. Given the mechanics and processes
involved, EAC will always give a more accurate (or equally accurate)
bitstream as a good/great/the best CDP...There's no evidence at all
that any CDP can CONSISTENTLY retrieve the same accuracy as EAC ( or
whatever) and definitely
"Of course I acknowledge that CDs do exist which cannot be read without
error. They may be damaged, or they may have been mastered/pressed
badly. But in my experience, playing such a CD on an audio CD player
and recording the SPDIF output often gives a better result than letting
EAC "do its magic.
As far as I can see (but NOT hear!) only your final point may actually
have any bearing on the end result. However, I can't hear any
difference between streaming flac or wav...
--
Phil Leigh
Phil Leigh's Profile: http://fo
When I say 20 Yards I am talking about cable length. I am not sure if I
need 20 yards or not I was just trying to get an understanding of what
people would consider is acceptable for length of signal and speaker
wires?
I do not have a basement only solid concrete floors. I am currently
specifying
Robin Bowes Wrote:
>
>
> The only ways I can think of that could possibly cause any difference
> are:
>
> 1. flac decoding routine in SB firmware is not correct - unlikely, and
> I
> seem to remember that it has been confirmed that the decoding is
> accurate by recording SPDIF data from the di
325xi Wrote:
> This is about what I did.
> I liked the initially found number close to 100ps very much, until I
> found this. http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24392
Are you sure this is so bad, compared to a good CD player? You have to
be careful with these number - jitter has a
Lyonesse Wrote:
>
> Did you used to live in that beautiful old timber framed house near the
> institute (the Sylvester Horne institute i think).
>
Sylvester Horne - that's right!
No, it's called Ashford House, and it's the town house immediately left
of the SH Institute as you look at it from
Robin
You would be very welcome to drop in next time your around, drop me an
email! :)
Jack
--
Lyonesse
Lyonesse's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5496
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevice
Hi Patrick
Did you used to live in that beautiful old timber framed house near the
institute (the Sylvester Horne institute i think).
Im going to shoot over to Gary's house in telford to listen to your SB+
sometime at the beginning of August (when my new dac is burnt in)...we
will also compare o
Robin Bowes Wrote:
> 325xi wrote:
> > First I would like to mention that I use SB only as Ethernet to
> SPDIF
> > interface, and it seems to do very well as such.
> >
> > The only concern for this kind of device I can think about is
> jitter.
> > The data on jitter on coax output is fairly contr
325xi wrote:
> First I would like to mention that I use SB only as Ethernet to SPDIF
> interface, and it seems to do very well as such.
>
> The only concern for this kind of device I can think about is jitter.
> The data on jitter on coax output is fairly controversial: some say
> it's around 100p
Patrick Dixon Wrote:
> Maybe it shouldn't, but in fact it does.
The only thing you can do to it is to lower its jitter, but jitter-only
related changes are subtle (how much lower you can get it?), and I'm
doubt they will have two dramatically different "own" sounds. It will
be the same with subtl
325xi wrote:
> Although I don't
> believe in too cheap analog stuff. SB is just a transmitter (assuming
> it feeds an outboard DAC), and a good one. It doesn't, and shouldn't,
> have it's own sound.
Not so.
A digital source still transmits digital data to an external DAC
synchronously over an ana
First I would like to mention that I use SB only as Ethernet to SPDIF
interface, and it seems to do very well as such.
The only concern for this kind of device I can think about is jitter.
The data on jitter on coax output is fairly controversial: some say
it's around 100ps (I don't remember whet
325xi Wrote:
> SB is just a transmitter (assuming it feeds an outboard DAC), and a
> good one. It doesn't, and shouldn't, have it's own sound.Maybe it shouldn't,
> but in fact it does.
--
Patrick Dixon
www.at-tunes.co.uk
--
P Floding wrote:
> Yeah, well..
> Of course a lot of technical ignorants might listen for differences
> that should be impossible. On the other hand, could you explain to me
> how the FLAC gets converted to 16/44 inside the SB3 without -anything-
> different going on compared to playing WAV?
Well
325xi wrote:
>
> ajmitchell Wrote:
>> If would rather say he wants to sell the bimmer because he did not like
>> the interiorwhich to me is totally acceptable if you only realise
>> the interior isn't ideal later.
> That's fine, but here he sold bimmer because he likes civic's interior
> more
ajmitchell Wrote:
> Personally, I like the sound from the SB3 but I wouldn't say everyone
> has to like it, or that it cannot be improved. My g/f cannot hear the
> difference between a $500 setup and my $5000 setup - but I have learned
> the hard way not to point this out too often ;) [You might
As the first one to reply to this thread I would like to come in again
near the end...
325xi Wrote:
> The only reason for properly functioning SB to sound bad is owner's
> technical ignorance, no offence intended of course.
I think we should try and avoid criticism of people asking for help.
G
...you say money was no object.
Hmmm
As for the Server side - I'd be running slimserver on my own IBM AS/400
under Linux. The port for Cray ins't finished yet.
as for the Hifi side, The speakers would have to be Avantegardes
matched to Wavac Amps.
Lastly, I'd buy shares in Slim De
Lyonesse Wrote:
> Everyone is different and their listening approach is also different,I
> dont wanna get bogged down with the do's and donts of my testing. The
> squeezebook is another innovative but ultimately unmusical creation...
> Ive gone over to laptop as pc server with a hagerman usb / sp
Phil Leigh Wrote:
> This month a letter enquired as to the best lossless codec for sound
> quality on an SB3...at least they got the answer right (ie it doesn't
> matter so long as the SS/SB supports it).
>
> Expect next months letter to be which Ethernet cable sounds best, then
> which disk, PC
Be simple: try Leffe Blonde - just a couple of bottles applied on your
CDs improves music transparency for 76%.
--
325xi
325xi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5661
View this thread: http://forums
44 matches
Mail list logo
