drewe181;184194 Wrote:
i love the look of the westminsters. unfortunately i'll never be able to
justify spending all that money on them. Anyone been able to roadtest
them??
I can name any number of speakers at under a fifth the price that I'd
take over them (including cheaper Tannoys!).
agentsmith;184237 Wrote:
Dear HDTT,
May I ask the reason for taking down the sampler? I would imagine the
sampler will help with sales.
Low res would help to illustrate the performance, but it would be
really helpful if you could put up a sampler with full resolutiom, even
30 seconds
pablolie;184226 Wrote:
For what it's worth... as I ripped Fleetwood Mac's greatest Hits in as
a 320mbps MP3, song 16 no questions asked reported an error ripping
it. Pristine CD, no reason for it to happen. I told dbPoweramp to
simply rip that song again, and it passed the internal test. So
Back by popular demand the link is up, the link is on this page
http://highdeftapetransfers.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATSCategory=14[/url]
Thanks for the feedback guys here to help
Bob
--
HDTT
HDTT's Profile:
I beg to differ the burning process is huge in the making of a CD,
jitter comes into play, we use a Sonic Solutions CD.1 to burn all of
our CD's and media and burner make a very big difference, you should
run that question or thought by Steve Nugent of Empirical audio I think
he will agree with
HDTT;184261 Wrote:
I beg to differ the burning process is huge in the making of a CD,
jitter comes into play, we use a Sonic Solutions CD.1 to burn all of
our CD's and media and burner make a very big difference, you should
run that question or thought by Steve Nugent of Empirical audio I
cliveb;183882 Wrote:
2. The residual difference after subtraction may well be audible in the
context that it is not swamped by the presence of the much larger music
signal, but be inaudible when the music signal is included. In other
words, this method could produce a positive where ABX
HDTT;184259 Wrote:
Back by popular demand the link is up, the link is on this page
http://highdeftapetransfers.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATSCategory=14
Thanks for the feedback guys here to help
Bob
P.S. Most are not online to buy (the samples) but they will give you a
idea of the
pablolie;184215 Wrote:
I hear your pain given recent events around a question I asked! :-) But
if you read between the lines, I think the answer is Toslink is not
flawed. The same interface works in applications demanding high
resiliency, is all I can say. I don't think anything's flwaed
opaqueice;184279 Wrote:
If we assume that differences are more audible in isolation than with
other sounds are present, this technique is sufficient (but not
necessary) to demonstrate that some particular difference is inaudible.
That ssumption might be flawed in special circumstances - see
325xi wrote:
Eric mentioned that
consumer Toslink does have higher jitter,
[snip]
I've already said what I think about inaudibility assumptions. I'm
somewhat concerned with that massive feedbacks that people don't like
Toslink, we may define it BS, but I'm not sure those complains are
jhm731;184128 Wrote:
An Aberdeen 2150 is a highly modified TacT 2150, which is a power DAC
rated at 150w/ch @ 8 ohms.
Feeding the same DAC from two high quality sources located at the same
rack is highly unlikely to show any significant SQ difference, unless
connection in one of your chains
cliveb;184286 Wrote:
Fair point. Doing this (simpler) test and getting a negative result
saves the bother of a proper ABX. But my gut feeling is that a
genuinely silent result is likely to be the exception rather than the
norm (not that I have any evidence to back this up).
I am concerned
If you're ripping with something decent like EAC and use secure ripping
you're unlikely to get any ripping errors, or none that you can hear
anyways. If you're using something daft like Burst Mode expect errors
galore.
Use EAC and you should be fine.
--
probedb
Paul.
'last.fm'
Good! Can you guys tell me why didn't you replaced all your coax
connections with Toslink - theoretically Toslink blows coax out of the
water?
--
325xi
simaudio nova cdp simaudio moon i-5 revel performa m20 via
acoustic zen matrix reference ii and acoustic zen satori
-planned additions:...
Not to familiar with that method, my server is quite big, so it should
handle it, let me know if any of you guys get any major slowdowns on
the downloads
Bob
HDTT
--
HDTT
HDTT's Profile:
adamslim;184080 Wrote:
but don't expect miracles
Depending on what I decide after a proper listen, I was probably
suckered in by 'reviews like this'
(http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/trends/ta10.html): this $100 amp
sounds better [snip] than the $10K+ single-ended triode pre and power
amp
HDTT wrote:
I beg to differ the burning process is huge in the making of a CD,
jitter comes into play, we use a Sonic Solutions CD.1 to burn all of
our CD's and media and burner make a very big difference, you should
run that question or thought by Steve Nugent of Empirical audio I think
he
Not really following the logic of that method, I was talking of playing
it on a CDP
--
HDTT
HDTT's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10440
View this thread:
I had the opportunity last week to listen to a Moon I-7 integrated amp.
driving some Vandersteen ce2 signature speakers. Without a doubt the
balanced connections provided a much more pleasant sound, the
improvements were mostly in the higher frequency range.
I'd seen the magazines using words
325xi;184284 Wrote:
Eric mentioned that consumer Toslink does have higher jitter, but
because of his assumption we can't perceive jitter less then
ridiculously high :) +-0.5ns (that were nanoseconds, right?) he
expressed his little concern about that. I've already said what I think
about
325xi;184287 Wrote:
Feeding the same DAC from two high quality sources located at the same
rack is highly unlikely to show any significant SQ difference, unless
connection in one of your chains is flawed: bad connection or bad
cable.
Keep in mind: hearing something doesn't mean it's
As I think I mentioned before, I have a friend (who is an engineer by
profession) who owns a company that makes fibre for many of the big
telcos and ISPs...he also likes his hi-fi...
He did fall off his chair laughing...I had to buy him another drink!
Toslink over 5 metres is absolutely fine
Eric Carroll;184313 Wrote:
Please don't misquote me. I didn't say that at all.
I didn't cite you, I said that was my understanding, which well might
be erroneous.
Eric Carroll;184125 Wrote:
c) yes, it is possible some manufacturer fubared their design. If so its
not TOSLINKs fault as a
Hello guys - sorry I've been a bit busy with work!
I'd really like to get this working - I have quite few HDCD's and I
have proved that my FLAC's of these are OK...
I bought that Brian Wilson Presents... HDCD last week to check the
ripping process - but I've never heard it in HDCD. However I'm
325xi;184327 Wrote:
...I'm interested to find out the limit of jitter control of
LED-plastic toslink vs. coax - please note - regardless of its
audibility
And of course I accept scientific basis. I don't believe in listening
tests unless arranged in a proper way. The test you
Eric Carroll;184333 Wrote:
AHA!!! I think we got hung up on language here then. Thank you for the
clarification. If I misunderstood your position I think it was due to
the language getting used in this discussion and its relationship to
Audiophile beliefs - you did the post on the Wiki page
ezkcdude;184290 Wrote:
As someone who certainly believes in, if not actually practices, ABX, I
would love if this test produced a positive result. Who cares which
test you use to show differences? As long as the tests are unbiased,
any positive result (i.e. audible difference) is something
adamslim;184236 Wrote:
I can name any number of speakers at under a fifth the price that I'd
take over them (including cheaper Tannoys!). Never found them
engaging, and they don't have the linearity of, say, Quad ESLs. I
tried them with quite a few system combos, and they just never
Well that would be the ultimate irony wouldn't it - how would anyone
ever argue that total cancellation meant that there were still audible
yet unmeasurable differences?
Is this the point where the rock of logic meets the hard place of
subjectivism?
--
Phil Leigh
Phil Leigh;184337 Wrote:
Now look, you know full well that cable-induced jitter is related to the
length of the cable and this is different for coax and toslink...so how
are you going to compare apples with apples?
:0)
Lol Phil you jumped my point here and I was creeping up on it so
Olav Sunde;184126 Wrote:
Eric,
I have also done some testing on this. I've used a 1992 HDCD sampler
from Reference Recordings (RR-S3 CD) and I believe I can see the
dynamic
expansion on the exports via the Cronotron plugin. I want to check this
by recording the same track from the
Ya, the fibre is inferior by default discussion knocked me for a loop,
causing me to drop the all important HDCD investigation :-)
I am at the same place as you. To summarize.
Skunk highlighted a posting in headfi where with waveforms that looks
like it worked (but had some conversational
325xi;184284 Wrote:
Interesting, my understanding is quite opposite... Eric mentioned that
consumer Toslink does have higher jitter, but because of his assumption
we can't perceive jitter less
He stated what *really* matters: The identical framing protocol
(S/PDIF) runs on top of both
Well, don't forget that the digital signal is still in fact only an
analogue representation of a digital signal, as with any bus - and so
is susceptible to noise messing with the accuracy of the analogue
squarewave waveforms...
Now we could argue that as such a well-light shielded toslink is
Phil Leigh;184346 Wrote:
Erm...the analogue outpur of an HDCD player will have the effect of
dynamic range expansion present...what you need to do is to compare the
16 bit rip of the HDCD to the WAVOUT 24-bit (unless I am missing
something?)
I think what Olav meant was that he wanted to go
Eric Carroll;184347 Wrote:
Ya, the fibre is inferior by default discussion knocked me for a loop,
causing me to drop the all important HDCD investigation :-)
I am at the same place as you. To summarize.
Skunk highlighted a posting in headfi where with waveforms that looks
like it
Phil Leigh;184351 Wrote:
Let's pick a CD... (ideally one where we know that range expansion IS
present - how do we prove that? ... I mean I know that the ones I
mentioned earlier sound great on an HDCD player, but..)
Our postings crossed. I edited mine with another suggestion. Do you
have
Phil Leigh;184351 Wrote:
Let's pick a CD... (ideally one where we know that range expansion IS
present - how do we prove that? ... I mean I know that the ones I
mentioned earlier sound great on an HDCD player, but..)
I don't own an HDCD capable CDP. The way to prove it is play it back,
get
Phil Leigh;184350 Wrote:
Well, don't forget that the digital signal is still in fact only an
analogue representation of a digital signal, as with any bus - and so
is susceptible to noise messing with the accuracy of the analogue
squarewave waveforms...
But the thing about digital data is
pablolie;184348 Wrote:
Engineering mind in place, it's S/PDIF, at whether the cable is coax or
optical does not matter an ounce when it comes to the resulting signal.
That sounds more like a preconceived notion than engineering mind to me
:-) I do agree that arguing over consumer digital
drewe181;184339 Wrote:
wow! this is the first criticism of the WTs i've heard so far. I've
noticed from your lastfm page you listen to a hell of a lot more
classical than I so I can see where you're coming from in preferring
the Quads over the WTs as I've heard they are very good with
Skunk;184183 Wrote:
I planned to ask him about this topic on the list,
I am very interested in this. Please ask and let us know even if only
by PM. I think we need a confirmed everything enabled track and any
thoughts on using WMP.
Thanks!
--
Eric Carroll
Transporter-Bryston 3B
Skunk;184362 Wrote:
That sounds more like a preconceived notion than engineering mind to me
:-) I do agree that arguing over consumer digital formats is like
chasing one's tail, when other formats are probably superior to both
But that's the thing: the format is identical whether it's
Skunk;184362 Wrote:
That sounds more like a preconceived notion than engineering mind to me
:-) I do agree that arguing over consumer digital formats is like
chasing one's tail, when other formats are probably superior to both
(as garyB pointed out).
Remember Gestalt (the sum is greater
I'm a Mac user and as such I'm quite limited in the available encoding
software. Fortunately, OSX ships with iTunes and iTunes comes standard
with the ability to import using Apple Lossless Encoder.
The iTunes interface is nice for importing; you can set it such that it
doesn't require any user
HDTT wrote:
Not really following the logic of that method, I was talking of
playing it on a CDP
Yeah, but we're on the Slim Devices forums so I was talking about
playing it on a Transporter or Squeezebox. :p
R.
___
audiophiles mailing list
325xi;184373 Wrote:
I don't remember I ever posted anything on Wiki pages. I normally don't
consider myself knowledgeable enough...
I was refering to 'this posting of yours'
(http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=182368postcount=1)
--
Eric Carroll
Transporter-Bryston 3B SST-Paradigm
We should always remember to re-read classics from time to time...
'Is The AESEBU / SPDIF Digital Audio Interface Flawed ?'
(http://www.scalatech.co.uk/papers/aes93.pdf)
--
325xi
325xi's Profile:
Eric Carroll;184380 Wrote:
I was refering to 'this posting of yours'
(http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=182368postcount=1)
Oh, I found style of this wiki page really funny, although most of
information there is true.
--
325xi
Skunk;184377 Wrote:
I've not received a message from the list in three days, but I doubt
he'll be able to speak openly- let alone suggest wmp workarounds.
Speaking of workarounds, I was considering a cheap laptop to get winXP,
but started to wonder if hardware might be more simple,
jhm731;184315 Wrote:
The SQ difference has nothing to do with cables or connections.
If you can't hear a difference between the SB and your CDP, something
must be wrong with your chain or your hearing.
This eventually became rather pointless... Try to analyse why can two
digital sources
That is indeed my idea. I plan to include all the three versions in one
view to make it easier to see the differences. Problem is I am having a
little trouble finding a HDCD player I can use, but I am working on it..
Eric Carroll wrote:
Phil Leigh;184346 Wrote:
Erm...the analogue outpur of
The beautiful thing here is that a short run of optical or coax cable
will only cost you $20-40. Buy both and have a fun evening comparing.
How many times can you say you potentially improved your system for
under $50? And if you don't hear the difference, you have a spare cable
for your blu ray
Phil Leigh;184390 Wrote:
Well, they should output HDCD if they are bit-accurate...
So if the SB feeds the receiver 16 bit files, HDCD can be output and
recorded as 24 bit to a cd or hdd recorder, for use in SB?
I apologize if this was covered somewhere else.
--
Skunk
325xi;184393 Wrote:
This eventually became rather pointless... Try to analyse why can two
digital sources sound differently, assuming both are in working
condition, so data stream is bit-accurate?
One simple word - jitter. Applied to various parts of spectrum in
different amounts your
Skunk;184397 Wrote:
So if the SB feeds the receiver 16 bit files, HDCD can be output and
recorded as 24 bit to a cd or hdd recorder, for use in SB?
I apologize if this was covered somewhere else.
Yes - that's the theory - if the SB digital output goes through an HDCD
DAC the analogue
Phil Leigh;184403 Wrote:
Yes - that's the theory - if the SB digital output goes through an HDCD
DAC the analogue signal (from the DAC) will have the benefits of HDCD
present in it...
I guess my question is why record the analog signal, if the digital
loop isn't plugged like SACD (iirc).
Phil Leigh;184401 Wrote:
The more I think about this the more I believe that people are unable
to distinguish between better and more accurate.
Exactly. Better usually means more pleasing, not more accurate.
Pleasing is subjective and personal, but easily determined. Accurate is
indeed
Olav Sunde;184400 Wrote:
That is indeed my idea. I plan to include all the three versions in one
view to make it easier to see the differences. Problem is I am having a
little trouble finding a HDCD player I can use, but I am working on
it..
Olav,
Another option is to use the version
jdbaker;182419 Wrote:
I find myself having a hard time deciding what to listen to, so many
choices. I have 2 SB3s and have so far ripped about 500 CDs in Apple
lossless format.
I just set the Random Album function with the SlimServer Plug-In to
pick what to listen to for me, then I don't have
Just bought the Dvorak violin concerto. Downloading now but it is slow,
only 60kB/s, this is going to take a while.
Hope it is worth the wait.
--
Veggen
Veggen's Profile:
325xi;184393 Wrote:
This eventually became rather pointless... Try to analyse why can two
digital sources sound differently, assuming both are in working
condition, so data stream is bit-accurate?
One simple word - jitter. Applied to various parts of spectrum in
different amounts your
regalma1;184097 Wrote:
There is optical cable out there that is immune to bending.
There is a coaxial one too! Thanks to anne for pointing it out:
http://www.lessloss.com/cable.html (see digital tubes).
Joking aside, there is a rigid coax as well called hard line*, but like
rigid optical,
Courtesy of the wayback machine, 'here'
(http://web.archive.org/web/20020124220637/www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/AES_Paper.pdf)
is a technical paper on HDCD from the 2001 web site. It takes a while to
load.
--
Eric Carroll
Transporter-Bryston 3B SST-Paradigm Reference Studio 60 v.4
SB3-Rotel
ezkcdude;184383 Wrote:
If the difference test (DT) gives a positive and the A/B/X gives a
negative result, this doesn't mean A/B/X is flawed, obviously. It just
means it may not be as sensitive.
Yes, of course. But in the context of a human being listening to music,
the ABX test is the one
jhm731;184423 Wrote:
My Pioneer and every transport/CDP I've ever owned or tried sounds
better than the SB.
Higher jitter can never give the delusion of better sound,
unless you like glaring highs, reduced soundstage/separation
of images and reduced dynamics.
I'll bet dollars to
I am connecting the transporter to an emm labs dcc2 se. The dcc2 can
provide a word clock output via a bnc cable. When I connect the
transporter to the dcc2 using the dcc2 as the master clock I get
occasional popping noises during music playback. I have used the coax,
toslink and aes/ebu
seanadams;184436 Wrote:
I'll bet dollars to donuts you can't tell any difference in a
double-blind test.
Then I guess I couldn't hear the difference between the SB and
Transporter off their digital outputs either, right?
--
jhm731
HDTT;184170 Wrote:
High Definition Tape Transfers Download Center is now open, it features
six of our releases in true 24/96 resolution ready for download, all
files are compressed with Flac. www.highdeftapetransfers.net
Thanks
Looking at the selections you sell, I notice that they feature
During high school and part of college I spent some time listening to
the Grateful Dead. I recently read an article about their official live
recordings in Stereophile (of all places), and my curiosity was piqued.
It turns out that you can download full-res FLAC files for entire
concerts,
jhm731;184454 Wrote:
Then I guess I couldn't hear the difference between the SB and
Transporter off their digital outputs either, right?
No, I personally can't hear the effects of tiny amounts of jitter, but
I can easily measure it with great accuracy. Saying things like there
must be
Please visit our Faq's page it will describe our source, these are from
reel to reel releases from the 50's and 60's all of our releases have
been searched by a Goverment Liason Services for copyright, if you
check also none of our releases has been reissued on SACD we are not
trying to compete
Pale Blue Ego;183471 Wrote:
One way to capture SACD or DVD-A sound is not to rip it, but to
digitize the analog output using a top-quality soundcard. You are
going digital--analog--digital, but it's possible to get high-quality
(24bit) stereo wav files that would be suitable for SB3 or
This means the clocks are not in sync. You need to tell the Transporter
to use the word clock input (in the web interface, under player
settings).
Also, you need to make sure that your DAC knows it is supposed to be
clock master.
--
seanadams
Sean,
Thanks for the quick reply. I have changed the setting in the web
interface. The dcc2 has a button on the front where you select whether
it is the master or not and I have done that. Here is website for dcc2
info: http://www.emmlabs.com/html/audio/dcc2/dcc2.html
Any other possible
Eric Carroll;184427 Wrote:
Courtesy of the wayback machine, 'an AES technical paper'
(http://web.archive.org/web//20050205152857/www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/AES_Paper.pdf)
on HDCD is available. The 'overview web page'
Eric Carroll;184105 Wrote:
To paraphrase Jean Luc Picard in First Contact, The physics of the
audiophile world are somewhat different.
Here are some of the principles I have perceived since my recent
introduction to the audiophile world (and all I thought I was doing was
ripping my CDs,
TiredLegs;184412 Wrote:
I just set the Random Album function with the SlimServer Plug-In to pick
what to listen to for me, then I don't have to struggle with choosing. I
find that because it is unbiased, it pulls up albums that I might not
have chosen myself, but that I'm glad to hear. It's
gregeas;184457 Wrote:
If only more bands did this...
King Crimson concerts are at http://www.dgmlive.com/ .. recording
quality can vary quite a bit (a few are audience-donated
former-bootlegs) but you can sample them and read comments about the
quality.
--
snarlydwarf
Oops, I mis-read your question...I thought you were asking what _I_
could hear. But basically the answer is the same. If you are comparing
two devices whose output jitter differ by a few tens of picoseconds, I
would not expect you to be able to detect a difference simply by
listening to the
Hmm.. we should figure out which side the problem is on. If you switch
the DAC to slave (i.e. normal) mode, does the clicking go away? If so,
that would indicate that Transporter still thinks it is the master.
Also, what server version are you running? I will ask QA to double
check it.
--
I currently have my entire 550 cd collection ripped in MP3 format
(various bit rates) and have an rca connection to my Integra DTR 5.5
receiver. I use WMP 11 as my jukebox. I am not satisfied with the sound
quality so I am considering two options:
i) Escient Fireball with 2 Sony 400 CD/DVD
seanadams;184485 Wrote:
Oops, I mis-read your question...I thought you were asking what _I_
could hear. But basically the answer is the same. If you are comparing
two devices whose output jitter differ by a few tens of picoseconds, I
would not expect you to be able to detect a difference
I know this is probably subjective, but would i be better off connecting
the SB3 to my Arcam Alpha 10 amp via the analog outputs - thus using the
SB3 DAC - or via the digital output - using the Arcam's DAC?
I'm assuming this is what happens when i use the analog vs. digital
outputs but if i'm
85 matches
Mail list logo
