opaqueice;229595 Wrote:
Reviews of digital transport sound quality based on unsighted
comparisons are utterly meaningless.
The TP is measurably and quantifiably superior to many - perhaps all -
other digital sources. That's what the statement means.
But since you can't hear the
harmonic wrote:
tomjtx;229653 Wrote:
Thank you for enlightening me , harmonic. If I am understanded you
inglish
write. your don like me amplifire and teh spekr I litsen wit.
I an tinking to zell all, baseded on top to you advize.
BTW, I have many european friends who have read your
OK, I have attached three graphs:
1. Original measurement, plus Minimal TestConvolution,
2. Minimal TestConvolution plus Minimal measured,
3. Original measurement, plus 17 band low frequency equalisation
measured.
First of all, the Minimal RC predicted and measured are almost exactly
the same.
DCtoDaylight;229625 Wrote:
I'm surprised that this mis-conception continues to be voiced...
The point of the higher sampling rate IS NOT any belief that humans can
hear beyond 20kHz, and I know for a fact that I can't even hear that
high (16.5kHz left, 17.2kHz right when last measured).
I've never considered myself an audiophile but, as a hobbyist musician,
I appreciate the subtleties of the music that I simply cannot hear on
lesser-quality equipment.
Anyhoo, I usually have my SB3 plugged into an old Pioneer A300 amp and
out to Grado SR-80 headphones. It's enough for my needs
David,
First of all, I'm sorry your first experience of this forum is so
gruelling. There are a lot of hard-nosed people on this forum, and a
lot of skeptics.
I used to be a raving subjectivist, but since some blind-test
experiences I have become a firm believer in blind-tests or, rather,
the
tyler_durden;229468 Wrote:
The human mind is simply astounding!
TD
I am not quite sure how to interpret this remark.
--
jeffmeh
jeffmeh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3986
View this
Patrick Dixon;229671 Wrote:
But since you can't hear the difference between a TP and an SB3 - that
would appear to make the measurable and quantifiable superiorities
utterly meaningless too.
You make it sound like it was just me. None of us could hear it, at
least not when we couldn't see
Hello,
Patrick Dixon;229671 Wrote:
But since you can't hear the difference between a TP and an SB3 - that
would appear to make the measurable and quantifiable superiorities
utterly meaningless too.
I did it! I performed a Fisher like a to b comparison of the sb3
against the tp only using
earthbased;229698 Wrote:
One does not need a perfect filter. I agree that analysis equipment
may be able to distinguish signal differences, but I would bet my money
that no listener can tell the difference between 96 vs 44 given a
quality recording and a double-blind test.
You'd be
jaysung;229724 Wrote:
I was listening repeatedly to VERY WELL known peaces of music I own and
had heard on both devices prior to testing.
I did a sequential test until I reached signfficant recognition rates
at a .0531% chance for errors of the first kint.
Could you be more specific?
Interesting, would you have a source or link to that blindtest?
--
Veggen
Veggen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7035
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38596
Chinanico, your curves look great, even accounting for the high
frequency reflections and that dip in the left channel. It looks like
you and mortod both checked the real response by doing a Sweep w/EQ and
regenerating the Impulse Response. mortod, are using using the flat
profile in the
Veggen;229730 Wrote:
Interesting, would you have a source or link to that blindtest?
Audibility of a CD-Standard A/D/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution
Audio Playback, E. BRAD MEYER AND DAVID R. MORAN, J. Audio Eng. Soc.,
Vol. 55, No. 9, 2007 (that's the September edition).
Just thinking about a cheap mod
Anybody tried to replace these JRC 5534s with lets say Philips NE5534A?
--
Wombat
Transporter - monoblocks - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile:
Not much you can do without spending money. It's not a software setting
problem, it's the little amplifier that's built in which isn't up to
the job. You'll need a better amplifier, a small headphone amp would
do. Or, in case you have several headphones, look and find some less
demanding phones.
haunyack;229631 Wrote:
Anything else on the switch?
.
Yes, but nothing new since the 6.5.4 upgrade. That's really the only
thing that changed
--
CraigStevenson
CraigStevenson's Profile:
My Transporter sometimes hangs completely after feeding it with my
CD-Transport.
When switching back from S/Pdif to Slimserver i sometimes need to pull
the plug.
Did you play around with external sources?
--
Wombat
Transporter - monoblocks - self-made speakers
I have also experienced freezing of my transporter a couple of times.
Needed to unplug the power cable to reset it,.
I am using fw 31 with ss 6.5.5.
--
Veggen
Veggen's Profile:
I was expecting something now that we are officially into fall.
--
Kiwi
Kiwi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2169
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34870
Hi Opaqueice,
I am a psychologist or (student of such subject) ;) so I am prity into
statistics and signifficance as layed out by Ronald Fisher. Based on
the works of Bernuille he developed a test methodology to determine if
a certain finding is more than accident i.e has a systematic cause.
jaysung;229757 Wrote:
PS.: Enjoy your tea. Which one came first? Milk or tea?
PPS.: The english say that there is truly a difference caused by
already resident milk slowly warmed up by flooding tea compared to a
hot cup of tea which drastically warms up the milk which is being
added.
jaysung;229757 Wrote:
PPS.: The english say that there is truly a difference caused by
already resident milk slowly warmed up by flooding tea compared to a
hot cup of tea which drastically warms up the milk which is being
added.
I would say tea leaves taste better than tea bags. And above
pugwonk;229069 Wrote:
The noise completely stops if I remove the audio cable from the back of
the speakers (perhaps that's entirely expected, but just in case it
isn't).
Could he need some kind of shielded cable if it goes away when he
unplugs the cable?
I'm not so versed on when to use
Righty... the SB is indeed wireless, but the speakers aren't. I've no
idea how my electrical system is grounded (I live in an appartment).
There are some very large transmitters of some sort nearby, but I've a
feeling they're mobile phone rather than radio. Not exactly sure,
though.
I've a
I can confirm these work - but the drive does get hotter than usual
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some
very expensive cables ;o)
Darren, whist generally agreeing, I think one needs to be careful not to
take this argument to extremes. After all, that isn't how the music is
actually made...(nobody in the studio is doing DBT every time they
change something in the mix! - and try telling any musician that they
can't tell
I have never heard of TACT (for example) cautioning against RC with
certain speaker designs. The idea is counter intertuitive. The RC is
correcting what is arriving at the listening position. It really
shouldn't matter exactly how it got there...
I've heard TACT with Quad Electro's and Linn
Phil Leigh wrote:
I can confirm these work - but the drive does get hotter than usual
and hot disk drives tend to fail faster.
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Since I really want to give FLAC TO WAV streaming a chance and this
never worked with slimserver version 6.5.1 (lock-ups), I installed
6.5.5 today (also new firmware for transporter) and tried it again.
same problem as with the old version.
with some FLAC tracks, the transporter freezes (also
Dr. AIX;198303 Wrote:
My only hope is that Slim Devices will expand their offering to include
5.1 surround boxes in the near future.
Many of us do use the current SB3 to wireless stream DD or DTS to a
decoder. It's not automatic, but it's not too hard to setup. Of
course it would be even
simbo;229704 Wrote:
We're in the process of moving house and as the amp was packed up I was
left with no choice but to plug the headphones directly into the SB3.
It's been noted before that the sound quality of the headphone socket
isn't up to much; for myself, I can only describe it as
Pat Farrell;229804 Wrote:
Phil Leigh wrote:
I can confirm these work - but the drive does get hotter than usual
and hot disk drives tend to fail faster.
Exactly...which is why I don't use it anymore (although it did not
fail).
My old IBM Deskstar was hot but happy for the 3 years it lived
Phil Leigh;229795 Wrote:
Sounds like your replacement supply developed a fault to me.
Indeed, that may be the case. However, since I spent all of $25 on the
linear supply, and I am satisfied with the stock switching supply, I
guess that I will just stick with the stock one.
--
jeffmeh
Wombat;229743 Wrote:
My Transporter sometimes hangs completely after feeding it with my
CD-Transport.
When switching back from S/Pdif to Slimserver i sometimes need to pull
the plug.
Did you play around with external sources?
No, I don't use the external sources at all.
--
Dr. AIX;198561 Wrote:
Got to run...more later.
Is it later yet?
.
--
haunyack
Transporter - BK R200.2 - Vandersteen 3A Signature. (Listening room)
SB3 (RWA analog) - Rotel RB1070 - BW Matrix 805. (Bedroom)
Fridgidare - Mirror Pond pale ale - easy chair w/remote - irritated
neighbors.
[EMAIL PROTECTED];229839 Wrote:
Yes i might upgrade my speakers to some panasonics
Good idea, I got some recently and my Ricky Martin collection sounds so
much better.
--
simbo
simbo's Profile:
Granted, the Isobariks were interesting (I remember hearing them at
Innovative Audio when they were in Brooklyn), but I guess it's not so
much that maybe an RC shouldn't be used in certain cases, but whether
there's enough information for omni (just to use an efficient term)
speakers in a
I'm not sure if I'm going crazy here, but I just made some changes to my
computer and network, and I swear that the sound of my system has taken
a big leap
Previously, I was running Slimserver on a 5-year-old eMac G4
(educational version of an iMac) which was connected to my network via
a
PhilNYC;229846 Wrote:
- Slimserver running on a computer attached via Ethernet instead of by a
wireless connection.
Many audiphiles in other forums have claimed that wifi adversely
affects the sound of a system. More than a few even claim that just
having a wifi network in the home can have
JJZolx;229848 Wrote:
Many audiphiles in other forums have claimed that wifi adversely affects
the sound of a system. More than a few even claim that just having a
wifi network in the home can have a negative effect, so having a
wireless radio sitting unshielded in the very guts of an audio
PhilNYC wrote:
So the things that changed in the system are:
- Slimserver running on a much faster computer
- Slimserver running on a computer attached via Ethernet instead of by
a wireless connection.
Does this make sense to anyone?
I believe, IMHO, YMMV, etc. that one must connect
when the wired ethernet connection is used, the wireless card shuts down
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some
very expensive cables ;o)
darrenyeats;229705 Wrote:
For example, the fact I've done blind tests doesn't mean my sighted
listening is reliable from now on.
Not at all. But no one I know who's done blind hasn't done sighted ones
also - they're formative.
Scepticism is fine with me, but let me tell you something: among
Phil Leigh;229793 Wrote:
Darren, whist generally agreeing, I think one needs to be careful not to
take this argument to extremes. After all, that isn't how the music is
actually made...(nobody in the studio is doing DBT every time they
change something in the mix! - and try telling any
I just ripped Dire Straits Brother's in Arms 20th Anniversary Addition
SACD into flac and my DAC detects it as a HDCD.
Bit of a surprise as there is no HDCD logo on the case and I assumed
the CD layer was just an ordinary CD.
It sounds blooming marvellous. Better than it did with my crappy old
acousticsguru;229860 Wrote:
1) Electrical engineers (more rarely acousticians or physicists) who
stubbornly deny an audible difference something non-measurable and/or
(seemingly) unscientic makes to frowned-upon audiophiles, until some
years later, papers, tests and diagrams, i.e. scientic
I occassionally get freezing, but if you leave it a couple of minutes it
catches up with any button presses you have made during the freeze. The
knob on the front resists against any turing like you described.
Using SS7 with FW32.
Also as my library has grown i notice it a lot more as I select
darrenyeats;229859 Wrote:
Not to say I don't believe David when he says there are
differences...anything is possible. But this is one of those statements
which deserves a DBT, IMHO.
Would like to add something: I feel DBT really makes sense only if the
minimum number of variables (preferably
Assuming fixed DAC/analog components,Im only aware of 2 parameters that
can affect the sound of a a digital playback system :
a) data accuracy
b) jitter
Since a is not an issue a sanely constructed system, then it must be b:
jitter
This is where Digital meets the realms of the real world same
MikeFish;229875 Wrote:
I occassionally get freezing, but if you leave it a couple of minutes it
catches up with any button presses you have made during the freeze. The
knob on the front resists against any turing like you described.
Using SS7 with FW32.
Also as my library has grown i notice
ezkcdude;229865 Wrote:
Of course, I presented some evidence above that only very large amounts
of jitter were audible to people, and you seemed to dismiss those
results.
Huh? Did I say that? Wasn't what I said we can't be sure it's the only
cause for an audible difference? Also, didn't we
betto;229880 Wrote:
A guaranteed a solution to the deficiencies of SPDIF is to design the
DAC as the #8220;Master#8221; clock device
How good of you to go into somewhat more detail, but why would the
above apply to S/PDIF only, and not AES/EBU as well (up to that point,
you took care to
seanadams;229606 Wrote:
Transporter incorporates IMHO the best power/DAC/clock/analog design
that money can buy, even including standalone DACs. This is supported
by unsurpassed SNR, THD, etc.
The problem with things like that is that it's making it hard for me to
not want one...and I really
jaysung;229757 Wrote:
snip
By saying that I reached signifficant recognition rates of .0531% I
mean that there is only 1024*0.0531 56 approx. (had calculated with 55)
possibilities of have 8 out of 10.
Hi Jay, thanks for the explanation. I teach physics and am also
pretty familiar with
mortod;229692 Wrote:
I suspect that playing the sweep 'with EQ' ignores the equaliser
settings, and only allows testing of RC... could you confirm?
No, sweep with EQ runs the whole processing pipeline. I think you
may be hitting up against the inaccuracy of EQ bands at low frequencies
acousticsguru;229890 Wrote:
You meant to say sighted as well as blind and double blind, correct?
I'll assume you overread that part and are not trying to get smart on
me trying to put your words into my mouth, all right? It appears to be
getting late again, long day ;^)
Greetings from
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 02:22:03 -0700, simbo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes they do exist...
http://www.quietpc.com/gb-en-gbp/products/harddrivesolutions
I've been using a few of those Smart Drive 2002c enclosures for
several years and they work great. At one time I ran a couple sata
cables out
haunyack;229350 Wrote:
Did you read the interview?.
Yes I did, twice in fact, once when the article was new, and just
recently at your suggestion!
The fact remains that the Vandersteens are not dipoles like the
Linkwitz designs. Their design approach is quite different. The fact
that Richard
SuperQ;229889 Wrote:
I really have a feeling that there is a packet loss problem, or the
slimserver is being starved for resources.
All remote commands are sent to the server and processed. The
Transporter does not support gige, so it could be a duplex negotiation
problem between the
earthbased;229698 Wrote:
One does not need a perfect filter. I agree that analysis equipment may
be able to distinguish signal differences, but I would bet my money that
no listener can tell the difference between 96 vs 44 given a quality
recording and a double-blind test.
One does desire a
I shortly heard the ExMotion from Intertechnik that most likely has
borrowed some ideas and even similar chassis from this design.
I have to admit that on some recordings i was pretty amazed how the
room in front of you builds up! Otherwise some kind of music confused
me. Playing an
inguz;229908 Wrote:
No, sweep with EQ runs the whole processing pipeline.
Interesting. mortod, without having this info cloud your judgement,
what did you hear when you implemented the 11 band equalization?
--
tonyptony
opaqueice;229036 Wrote:
www.linkwitzlab.com
One characteristic of dipoles is that the power in the radiation falls
off faster with distance than for monopoles. As a result I expect
that they excite room modes less than standard box speakers (which are
close to monopoles at low
jdm56 wrote:
Pardon me, but I believe it is the dipole radiator whose output
diminishes less with distance compared to the monopole.
So the inverse square law has been repealed?
Actually, in 3D, its usually the inverse cubed law.
___
audiophiles
Please see:
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/tweaks/messages/14/149384.html
I believe the people in AA not as closed minded as this group.
I hear solid improvements with the application of the CF.
Tin foil will not work as well it only changes the RF - CF absorbs the
RF and turns them into
jdm56;229928 Wrote:
Pardon me, but I believe it is the dipole radiator whose output
diminishes less with distance compared to the monopole.
Nope. Just as Pat says, dipole fields fall off like 1/r^3, monopoles
like 1/r^2.
Also, standard box speakers are not close to monopoles at low
Just to echo Tom, and because I didn't pick up on a particular point
this earlier, these posts are almost certainly a bad joke. Two close
friends of ours are Danish and I've been to Copenhagen and beyond at
least a dozen times. I have never heard someone, and especially a
Dane, as Dane's tend
opaqueice;229907 Wrote:
Could you describe the DBT you mentioned earlier in which you heard the
difference between S/PDIF and AES/EBU? What was the source, and what
was the DAC? How well did you score?
Can't possibly enumerate all the systems in which I was shown
differences between
ezkcdude;229913 Wrote:
The galvanic isolation could provide a reduction in noise - which could
affect things, at least, in theory. These differences could be even
greater if the cable length is very long (10 meters, let's say).
Ironically, the only time I got to compare an otherwise
Not only do we need to worry about filtering. 44.1 kHz is not enough by
physics standards, simple as that. That is the main reason why SACD
sounds so much better than regular redbook.
Take, for example, a cymbal splash generating a fundamental frequency
of 16 kHz, modulated by a 5kHz harmonic.
acousticsguru;229955 Wrote:
I probably will. Let me ask you this, though: you're with Slim
Devices/Logitech in some indirect or direct way (likely a staff
member/on their payroll), correct?
Why would you assume that?
Sorry, but ezkcdude is not a Logitech/Slim Devices employee or
I just made my first measurements with Audiolense, and wanted to share
my findings.
The 2 graphs below read as follow: first is the frequency response
curves (right= blue / left=red) made with audacity/inguz/REWQ, second
is frequency response made with Audiolense.
They don't really look
73 matches
Mail list logo
