It might have been the SB3 whose CPU bogged down with the higher
compression rates. Using a compression level of 0 or 1 was the
solution.
The Transporter has a faster CPU and bigger buffer, so it should be
unaffected by the higher FLAC compression levels.
--
Pale Blue Ego
Pale Blue Ego;216409 Wrote:
What model was the CD player?
http://europe.rotel.com/products/specs/rcd1070.htm
--
mikeruss
mikeruss's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9023
View this thread:
NewBuyer;216448 Wrote:
I have seen most sources/amps falling in those actual spec ranges too.
However the usual advice (pretty sure about this) to someone assembling
their audio sytem, is to aim for load input impedance to be at least 10
times the source output impedance, for line level
Lavry DA10, PS Audio DlIII
--
ErikM
ErikM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7576
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=37014
The stock SB3's digital output is not so good. The soundstage was
congested and not 3-dimensional. It kind of had a soft feeling. I have
never modded components. But I was so upset with the SB3, that I sent
it in for mods (digital) . It was done by Bolder Cables for $200. I
also have Waynes'
SoftwireEngineer;216568 Wrote:
The stock SB3's digital output is not so good. The soundstage was
congested and not 3-dimensional. It kind of had a soft feeling. I have
never modded components. But I was so upset with the SB3, that I sent
it in for mods (digital) . It was done by Bolder
Back to the original topic: I did a comparison of a SB2 and Arcam CD33
($2500) in my main system (Arcam C31 pre, P1 monoblocks, with PMC FB1+
speakers). In the end I couldn't tell the difference between the
sources. This was not a scientific test, mind you, but I level matched
and really couldn't
Phil Leigh;216578 Wrote:
Are these mods supposed to have reduced jitter? The jitter on the SB3 is
already pretty low.
By the way there is no three-dimensional soundstage to be recovered on
99.9% of CD's, since they weren't recorded using soundfield techniques
so there is no height or
Phil Leigh wrote:
By the way there is no three-dimensional soundstage to be recovered on
99.9% of CD's, since they weren't recorded using soundfield techniques
so there is no height or depth information on them. merely left/right
panning - any 3-d effect is being created entirely in our brains
darrenyeats;216593 Wrote:
[clicking of lighter mechanism]
WHOOS [ Flames spray dramatically over bunker ]
:-)
Whoo...it's hot in hereOuch ouch ouch (reaches for cooling
six-pack)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
Phil Leigh wrote:
Whoo...it's hot in hereOuch ouch ouch (reaches for cooling
six-pack)
Except that great stereo sound better with a snifter of brandy or single
malt and a cigar.
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
Pale Blue Ego;216529 Wrote:
The Transporter has a faster CPU and bigger buffer, so it should be
unaffected by the higher FLAC compression levels.
It does have a faster CPU, 325 Mhz (?) but it's mostly to power the
second screen. I do not believe it has a bigger buffer though, or if
it does
Pat Farrell;216603 Wrote:
Phil Leigh wrote:
Whoo...it's hot in hereOuch ouch ouch (reaches for cooling
six-pack)
Except that great stereo sound better with a snifter of brandy or
single
malt and a cigar.
Oh Pat ... Pat...that is so true :o)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the
Phil Leigh;216609 Wrote:
Oh Pat ... Pat...that is so true :o)
And it enables you to do a BDT (blind drunk test).
Darren
--
darrenyeats
Monarchy CLD-M401 transport - Sony DAS-703ES DAC - Krell KAV-300i -
PMC AB-1 (home-made room treatments and supports)
I don't know if this has been suggested before (and if it has then I
humbly apologise)...but:
With all this hypothesising about clock degradation, jitter etc making
digital transports sound different - why can't we really prove this?
What would it take to progressively introduce noise or other
Phil Leigh wrote:
With all this hypothesising about clock degradation, jitter etc making
digital transports sound different - why can't we really prove this?
What, apply science and engineering to audiophollio?
I personally don't believe most of this jitter stuff. At least I don't
see that
Phil Leigh;216578 Wrote:
Are these mods supposed to have reduced jitter? The jitter on the SB3 is
already pretty low.
By the way there is no three-dimensional soundstage to be recovered on
99.9% of CD's, since they weren't recorded using soundfield techniques
so there is no height or
I apologize if this has been answered before, but I've done a few
searches in the archives and can't find the exact answer to my
particular question.
This is the current setup for my SB3:
Wireless Router - SB3 - Monarchy DIP - Monarchy NM-24 DAC - Adcom
GFP-750 Pre-Amp - Monarchy SM-70 Pro
Interface jitter on the SPDIF can be accounted for with a PLL to recover
a bit perfect digital data stream. The issue is the jitter on the
clocking which runs the buffered digital words through the DAC.
NB Why don't we demand to know about the jitter on the ADC used to
create the first digital
blakeh;216639 Wrote:
I notice on the SB3, the volume controls do affect the gain of the
signal, which means that the signal is being processed in the digital
domain before being output through the rest of the digital chain.
Is there a way to bypass this?
Yes. Player Settings for xxx
amcluesent;216644 Wrote:
Interface jitter on the SPDIF can be accounted for with a PLL to recover
a bit perfect digital data stream. The issue is the jitter on the
clocking which runs the buffered digital words through the DAC.
NB Why don't we demand to know about the jitter on the ADC
Pat Farrell;216636 Wrote:
Phil Leigh wrote:
With all this hypothesising about clock degradation, jitter etc
making
digital transports sound different - why can't we really prove
this?
What, apply science and engineering to audiophollio?
I personally don't believe most of this jitter
SoftwireEngineer;216635 Wrote:
Hi Phil,
I am just trying to share my opinion/impression of the SB3, because the
original poster felt something missing in the SB3 as a digital source. I
just used some 'vocabulary' which I thought would best convey my
impression. I have no 'vested interest'
ErikM;216564 Wrote:
Lavry DA10, PS Audio DlIII
Thanks for the info - I'll start researching.
--
mikeruss
mikeruss's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9023
View this thread:
blakeh;216639 Wrote:
This sounds like a good idea, but the signal is still being processed by
the SB3 even if it's turned up to max.
In addition to what Jim said ... if the SB volume is set to max, then
the digital out signal is NOT being processed by the SB, it just passes
the bits
Just to pick up on the mild discussion ;-)
I'm sure the MoJo I'm missing is not imagery but maybe force, or/and
depth. Like when you listen to two bands doing a cover. They both play
the same tune but one just has a certain something.
I've been listening for a couple of hours to the setup
Thanks so much for both the replies! They were very helpful.
--
blakeh
blakeh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1858
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=37047
Phil Leigh;216649 Wrote:
1) if this was the case then ALL transports would indeed sound the same
(he said, being very carefull not to commit himself on this yet!)
Isn't this the point of digital audio -- any signal degration in
digital does not affect the sound as long as bits get through
tot;216663 Wrote:
Isn't this the point of digital audio -- any signal degration in digital
does not affect the sound as long as bits get through unmodified whereas
in analog everything changes the sound at least a a little bit.
The computer guy in me (for 25 years) says that you should
mikeruss;216660 Wrote:
Just to pick up on the mild discussion ;-)
I'm sure the MoJo I'm missing is not imagery but maybe force, or/and
depth. Like when you listen to two bands doing a cover. They both play
the same tune but one just has a certain something.
I've been listening for a
tot;216663 Wrote:
Isn't this the point of digital audio -- any signal degration in digital
does not affect the sound as long as bits get through unmodified whereas
in analog everything changes the sound at least a a little bit.
...snip...
I have thought of proving this to myself (and maybe
Phil Leigh;216665 Wrote:
Oh Teemu - I'm with you all the way (I'm also a computer guy) - the
problem is not the bits but the embedded clock that carries the timing
(unlike async standards like TCP/IP). Everything now hinges on the
clock recovery. If it is not perfect we get jitter...
But
tot;216669 Wrote:
But all the problems should be rather clearly audible though. Either it
just causes bits to be interpreted wrongly giving high-frequency noise
(harshness) or in extreme case pops or clicks.
If the bit errors are rare it might be difficult or impossible to hear
them. To
Timothy Stockman;216668 Wrote:
In this regard, the performance of a device like the Transporter should
excell. It has its own, very stable clock source. The Transporter's
clock controls the rate at which data is requested from Slimserver.
When using an S/PDIF input, the Transporter has
tot;216671 Wrote:
Transporter and SB are both computers which request data in some format
from slimserver over tcp/ip and decode and buffer internally. I don't
see how the clock affects at all this stage of the computing. I have
no idea how the internal DAC or digital out is controlled in
Phil Leigh;216670 Wrote:
My only remaining window of doubt concerns the clock signal. It may be
affected. In my experience, really messed up clocks do indeed give rise
to audible clicks and other distortion. My concern is regarding clocks
that are not completely broken - but are not as good
tot;216674 Wrote:
What happens if the sending clocks varies slightly, but the DAC can
still get bits reliably. The outgoing analog pitch varies or what?
True if the USB audio streaming is a packet protocol with error
correction, but is it? I know it is a separate thing in USB world,
Phil Leigh;216673 Wrote:
...over TCP/IP NONE of what we are talking about is relevant, and anyone
who says otherwise is a liar or a fool (or a snake oil merchant) !
Hmm, come to think of it, there might be a market for gold-plated
premium $1000 ethernet dispatch cables (or premium air
Phil Leigh;21 Wrote:
Mike - do you think this might vary with time of day? (seriously)
I've had this mojo thing many times. Some days my system sounds like
the best thing ever and some days it's just OK... I have never been
able to pin down the variables in this. Could be a mains quality
tot;216681 Wrote:
Wouldn't any variance in turntable speed cause pitch to change, that
being pure analog signal speed change?
Are there any numbers about clock stability about SB vs. Transporter
(how much variance, how ofter)? It would interesting to know what kind
of differences we are
Phil Leigh;216687 Wrote:
No - the cogging effect does NOT cause audible pitch changes so that
the music appears faster or slower or with obvious wow flutter...it
is more subtle than that. More like (and words are useless at this
point) an uncertainty about the beat - it gets harder to tap
Phil Leigh;216631 Wrote:
I don't know if this has been suggested before (and if it has then I
humbly apologise)...but:
With all this hypothesising about clock degradation, jitter etc making
digital transports sound different - why can't we really prove this?
Because it's really really
Bring out the shotguns, here is a hopefully not too boring attempt at
going over jitter, interfaces, audio, USB and anything else I can think
of to throw in here. (BTW non of this is new or uniquely my own, its
based on reading a lot of stuff and my own experiments, measurements
and listening)
43 matches
Mail list logo
