I spent some time earlier testing various coax (DH labs, Apogee
Wyde-Eye, etc) and various glass-toslink cables out of the SB3, and
ultimately found the optical connection consistently sounded better in
my various system configs. However, my feeling is that any such
differences were entirely due
)p(;225459 Wrote:
Now lets hope someone hacks is it, so we can run jive on it... :)
Given a small device that could do both - jive and web interface -
which interface would be prefered? Of course we haven't really seen
the jive interface, and I'm sure I haven't visualized all the possible
uses
Phil Leigh;225269 Wrote:
Ted - when you say rolled off you don't mean lacking in high
frequencies do you? - coz it's kind of difiicult to imagine how the
digital cable can affect frequency response in that way...
Thanx everyone for the input. I certainly agree with the above
statement.
NewBuyer;225451 Wrote:
P Floding, I am trying exactly the same thing as you. What sound card(s)
do you have in mind please?
Hi there!
I'm using a modified E-MU 0404 (PCI). I bought it modified, so I bought
a couple of non-modified 0404 as well so I can compare and do my own
modifications.
Hiya,
I had a M-Audio audiophile card, but luckly enough I prefer the dac in
my Arcam AVR so the wireless SB feeds that. The pc/laptop is somewhere
else now (not with the stereo).
Are you guys happy with a pc in the music room, or are you connecting
another way?
:)
--
Deaf Cat
Deaf Cat;225483 Wrote:
Hiya,
I had a M-Audio audiophile card, but luckly enough I prefer the dac in
my Arcam AVR so the wireless SB feeds that. The pc/laptop is somewhere
else now (not with the stereo).
Are you guys happy with a pc in the music room, or are you connecting
another way?
NewBuyer;225454 Wrote:
Semi-recently, I spent some time testing various coax (DH labs, Apogee
Wyde-Eye, etc) against various glass-toslink cables out of the SB3. I
found the optical connection, consistently, sounded better in my
various system configs. However, my guess is that any such
Interesting,
I've learnt to leave pc's well alone, I seem to break them easily :(
so, tucked out the way is good for me, as I don't get so tempted to
play :o
I'll keep an eye here to see how you get on :)
--
Deaf Cat
liffy99;224661 Wrote:
Wow - why all the questions ?
I've tried the SB3 DAC and it didn't come close to my Lyngdorf
(unsurprising given the cost differential). Don't know yet how good the
one in the Kingrex is.
But whatever fidelity is on offer I just want to know if there is a
away of
Videodrome wrote:
liffy99;224661 Wrote:
Wow - why all the questions ?
I've tried the SB3 DAC and it didn't come close to my Lyngdorf
(unsurprising given the cost differential). Don't know yet how good the
one in the Kingrex is.
But whatever fidelity is on offer I just want to know if there
The other thing I'm wondering about the Touch is whether you could
actually stream music from your SlimServer database. *That would
freakin' awesome!*
--
ezkcdude
There are 10 kind of people in the world - those who understand binary
and those who don't.
SHINYMETAL
'*Site*'
the Touch is whether you could actually stream music
And, since the |touch is only 16Mb, the slimserver could refresh the
playlists from it's main library. 16Gb is about 4% of my music ;)
--
amcluesent
amcluesent's
Now i'm torn between the new ipod and the possibility of the Jive remote
from SlimdDvices. The touch has the wifi browser which is what i'm
craving for (my nokia 770 doenst cut it).
--
jclyle
jclyle's Profile:
you will find lots of stuff that i think is good.
The 24/96 FLAC of Glass' Koyaanisquatsi is quite something played on
the TP :-)
--
amcluesent
amcluesent's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10286
NewBuyer;225454 Wrote:
Semi-recently, I spent some time testing various coax (DH labs, Apogee
Wyde-Eye, etc) against various glass-toslink cables out of the SB3. I
found the optical connection, consistently, sounded better in my
various system configs. However, my guess is that any such
ezkcdude;225595 Wrote:
I don't understand why you'd want to do this SPDIF-USB connection in
the first place, unless you only have a USB DAC, that is. You want to
send the signal through as few hoops as possible. If the SB3 is your
source, then optimize your DAC for it, not the other way
I've tried now with a new nightly of 7.0 which contained FW32.
Don't know if it was the new firmware, or SS 7.0
but.
they fixed it !!!
I'm one happy camper :o]
--
Heimiko
Transporter - XLR - Electrocompaniet ECI-3 - Dynaudio Audience 122 +
BK Monolith
Analog modded SB3 -
i'm torn between the new ipod and the possibility of the Jive remote
from SlimdDvices
Jive is implemented in Lua/SDL
(http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?JiveArchitecture), both of which
have already been ported to Mac OS X. Getting Jive running on the Ipod
Touch can't be impossible for the
TiredLegs;225499 Wrote:
In what way did the optical sound better? The only difference galvanic
isolation should make would be elimination of a ground loop hum that
you may or may not have with coax.
Almost...it can also reduced induced EMI/RF...which can casue jitter
issues...which you may
Hello Everyone,
I currently use SB3 - (OPT OUT) - Arcam AVR-350 - Speaker setup.
Works pretty good and I do not need to worry about anything.
I am thinking of upgrading my 2ch setup and I am thinking to get TP
with decent power amps that can drive speakers that may deep below 4ohm
load
amcluesent;225559 Wrote:
The 24/96 FLAC of Glass' Koyaanisquatsi is quite something played on the
TP :-)
Is that derived from the original analog film score, or the 1998
rerecording?
--
TiredLegs
TiredLegs's Profile:
Heimiko;225616 Wrote:
I've tried now with a new nightly of 7.0 which contained FW32.
Don't know if it was the new firmware, or SS 7.0
but.
they fixed it !!!
Question: have they also fixed the other minor bug to do with digital
input switching: the one where there is a brief
cliveb;225633 Wrote:
Question: have they also fixed the other minor bug to do with digital
input switching: the one where there is a brief burst at max volume as
you switch?
Yes has this also been fixed yet?
--
NewBuyer
Did this just magically fix itself? I don't think I've seen any
reference to this bug even being worked on - not in the bugzilla
database, not in the forums, and not in the files and updates that have
been checked into the trunk.
It would be nice to get a comment from a developer whether some
TiredLegs;225499 Wrote:
In what way did the optical sound better? The only difference galvanic
isolation should make would be elimination of a ground loop hum that
you may or may not have with coax.
Hi TiredLegs,
Ground loops can cause sonic effects not limited to just hum, including
a
I'm not sure why Logitech seem to base all responses on the assumption
that their product is flawless? I have never heard of a body of code
that is bug-free. Also, end-users can't be expected to roll out a
full-fledged digital and EE test environment. Not even if they are
positive they can hear a
NewBuyer;225647 Wrote:
Hi TiredLegs,
Ground loops can cause sonic effects not limited to just hum, including
a decrease in clarity and definition (especially in musical transients),
and reducing the audible sense of space. Which essentially describes the
differences that I heard - but I
cliveb;225633 Wrote:
Question: have they also fixed the other minor bug to do with digital
input switching: the one where there is a brief burst at max volume as
you switch?
I have tried this one in particular, there doesn't seem to be any burst
of volume what so ever.
--
Heimiko
seanadams;225665 Wrote:
I don't. I base them on extensive knowledge of digital audio, how the
product is designed, what has been tested already, what kinds of
phenomena people often hear or think they are hearing, and what are the
most plausible explanations for them. I employ the scientific
The DT-Passthrough ability pretty well removes oddities like that from
the digital outputs. If there was such a problem, encoded material
would sound not just subtly off, but like noise.
(The SB and Transporter are both dumb: they just decode flac and put it
on the output... they don't bother
snarlydwarf;225685 Wrote:
The DT-Passthrough ability pretty well removes oddities like that from
the digital outputs. If there was such a problem, encoded material
would sound not just subtly off, but like noise.
(The SB and Transporter are both dumb: they just decode flac and put it
on
P Floding;225689 Wrote:
You can never dismiss reported bugs/problems on the basis that others
would have seen this or that. Bugs are sometimes triggered by
circumstances that may be particular to just a few users.
Bugs that are not reproducible are impossible to diagnose. This is
true of
snarlydwarf;225692 Wrote:
Can you provide a test case where this can be seen/heard/diagnosed is
essential to fixing bugs... It is hardly a sin to ask for a
demonstration.
If a bug can not be reproduced or demonstrated, then how on earth is it
to be fixed?
This actually warrants a
snarlydwarf;225718 Wrote:
I did no such thing. I said it was perfectly valid to ask for
information in order to reproduce the report.
Well you seemed very impressed by it. As I said, it was irrelevant to
the discussion.
And in the case in question, the dependencies consist of
snarlydwarf;225707 Wrote:
It does? Why?
Wow, Windows innovated '
reportbug' (http://packages.debian.org/etch/reportbug)! Debian has
done that since at least 1999. BFD.
I don't see any relevance to the rest of the post either: wtf does have
the right DLL's on your Windows box
seanadams;225708 Wrote:
You're confusing the issue by conflating not reproducible with caused
by placebo effect. I don't think that the placebo effect would be
likely to convince you that your brakes are failing even though they're
working correctly.
So you have indeed already decided what
P Floding;225697 Wrote:
My swedish made car from some years ago, who's brand shall remain
name-less, but starts with an S, had a scary brake problem that only
I experienced, and I was unable to reproduce at will.
You're confusing the issue by conflating not reproducible with
caused by
snarlydwarf;225692 Wrote:
Bugs that are not reproducible are impossible to diagnose. This is true
of computers as well as cars. My car makes a funny noise, but stops
when I take it to the shop problems go back 100 years.
It is actually more true of computers than cars: the nature of
P Floding;225711 Wrote:
So you have indeed already decided what is the issue here?
Yes. I have presented a plausible explanation which is supported by
100% of the evidence at hand, and I have explained why it is so. I have
also explained why other mysterious phenomena, such as jitter, would
P Floding;225715 Wrote:
You implied that it was the end user's responsibilty to hand info on a
plate to the manufacturer in order to be able to reproduce bugs.
I did no such thing. I said it was perfectly valid to ask for
information in order to reproduce the report.
I can't remember
P Floding;225699 Wrote:
This actually warrants a separate reply!
It does? Why?
I don't know if you have noticed, but today Windows gathers local
information about the problem on the actual computer where the problem
occurs.
Wow, Windows innovated '
reportbug'
ezkcdude;225527 Wrote:
The other thing I'm wondering about the Touch is whether you could
actually stream music from your SlimServer database. *That would
freakin' awesome!*
Well, certainly those of us using iTunes to organize their music
collections should be able to! But given Apple's
TiredLegs;225333 Wrote:
[...]I tested both Toslink (glass cable) and coax digital outputs
simultaneously hooked up to the same DAC [...]repeatedly switching
inputs back and forth on the DAC at random intervals, but I was unable
to hear any difference whatsoever between the Toslink and coax
43 matches
Mail list logo
