Julf wrote:
> Yes and no. Had you simply stated "I know there is no audible
> difference, but I have other reasons", it probably would not have caused
> any reactions. But instead you argued for the audibility of the
> differences, just like below:
Why I'd have to say samething that I dont'd
flac creates this nice random jitter because of steady changes in
decoding while constant wav feed causes ugly constant jitter that sounds
bad.
Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
SBGK wrote:
> so borrowing from Pippin
>
> Packetized network traffic->NIC->Network driver->flac -> sox ->decode
> buffer->play buffer->aplay -> pcm -> kernel -> drivers -> device
>
> There is code to fill a decode buffer and then copy that to a play
> buffer, perhaps the efficiency of that is
Alas my Transporter has died and I am looking for a replacement, I
mostly stream Pandora. Does anyone know how the Marantz NA6005
compares?
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_642NA6005/Marantz-NA6005.html?tp=7046=142840895305=pla=g=76251799345=c
While most speculations about audibility is fluff there is flac always
using more CPU power as i understand it for decoding but the overall
consumption of CPU+i/o may be smaller.
Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
marcoc1712 wrote:
> I really don't think so, actually very poor 'measuring systems' could
> reach -140 db and more, actually -90 db is not a so good S/N ratio for a
> decent DAC.
Did you actually read archimago's conclusions?
> I've posted mine, if you don't believe they are true, is not up
Julf wrote:
> Did you actually read archimago's conclusions?
>
>
>
> How about answering the follow-up questions?
>
>
>
> Please scroll up.
You posted here something regarding Jitter, are we talking about this?
I'm not, so any conclusion is irrrilevant here.
The other Article by
marcoc1712 wrote:
> You posted here something regarding Jitter, are we talking about this?
> I'm not, so any conclusion is irrrilevant here.
>
Now I'm confused. What ARE we talking about??? This whole thread is
about jitter, isn't it?
The _only_ reason I've ever heard of why WAV/PCM would
pippin wrote:
> Now I'm confused. What ARE we talking about??? This whole thread is
> about jitter, isn't it?
> The _only_ reason I've ever heard of why WAV/PCM would sound better than
> FLAC is due to increased jitter due to higher or more uneven processor
> load.
>
> Now you are saying you
pippin wrote:
> a) This is not about you, believe it or not.
>
>
> Sorry, just so that I understand what you are talking about: this is
> about analog out on an SB+?
> This is a general thread so I'm quite sure others are talking about
> other setups.
>
The first sentence of this THD is
pippin wrote:
> a) This is not about you, believe it or not.
> b) and c) But that's not what's happening. What's happening is that
> people are screwing up their systems because they believe they are
> improving their sound.
>
> Still no problem. The problem for me starts where they start to
marcoc1712 wrote:
> a. I'm not asking support for any of your products here.
> b. If a system could be easily broken by fancy settings, people will
> easily find the way. (Murphy law).
> c. If a system could be broken, people will find the way. (a variant to
> the Murphy law).
>
a) This is not
Are tags in wav supported by LMS? This crap creates problems for so many
things over all the years i read in audio fora. It should be Verboten.
Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
pippin wrote:
> And I am missing a proof that Nessie doesn't exist.
> It's not possible to prove that something doesn't exist.
> And this fact is being used by a huge "audiophile" business sector to
> sell expensive snake oil to people. Which is exactly where all the hate
> is coming from.
>
>
Sorry, just so that I understand what you are talking about: this is
about analog out on an SB+?
This is a general thread so I'm quite sure others are talking about
other setups.
---
learn more about iPeng, the iPhone and iPad remote for the Squeezebox
and
Logitech UE Smart Radio as well as
Julf wrote:
> Exactly - that is precisely the issue. Even if you managed to empty Loch
> Ness, there would be someone that would claim Nessie was out for a
> walk...
If, If, If...
Talking with me imply consider only what I'm actyualy sayng, not what
'Audipophile' are suppose to do... I'm I the
rrgmrg wrote:
> Alas my Transporter has died and I am looking for a replacement, I
> mostly stream Pandora. Does anyone know how the Marantz NA6005
> compares?
>
> http://www.crutchfield.com/p_642NA6005/Marantz-NA6005.html?tp=7046=142840895305=pla=g=76251799345=c
Way too costly for streaming
marcoc1712 wrote:
> measuring Jitter and measurinng THD or others at the analog out is
> different.
How do you think jitter is usually measured?
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge
SBGK wrote:
> what's the chain ?
>
> flac -> sox -> aplay -> pcm -> kernel -> drivers -> device
>
> wav -> aplay -> pcm -> kernel -> drivers -> device
>
> so kernel and drivers see the same amount of data unless the sample
> rates and/or bit depth are different, but then you're comparing
pippin wrote:
> And I am missing a proof that Nessie doesn't exist.
>
that's easy, just empty Loch Ness of water and if there's not a monster
at the bottom then it doesn't exist. Though it could have gone to the
pub that evening, I suppose.
Touch optimisations
Julf wrote:
> User marcoc1712 started 'this thread'
> (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?104198-Disk-and-folder-browsing=828137=1#post828137)
> in the developer forum. The tread is primarily about possible bugs
> associated with trying to stream pure pcm or wav format files. In order
SBGK wrote:
> what's the chain ?
>
> flac -> sox -> aplay -> pcm -> kernel -> drivers -> device
>
> wav -> aplay -> pcm -> kernel -> drivers -> device
>
> so kernel and drivers see the same amount of data unless the sample
> rates and/or bit depth are different, but then you're comparing
marcoc1712 wrote:
>
>
> I'm still missing the one that prouf the opposite and - in any case- I
> think they are not 'the answer' to the question.
And I am missing a proof that Nessie doesn't exist.
It's not possible to prove that something doesn't exist.
And this fact is being used by a huge
pippin wrote:
> Are you sure you ever talked to real customers?.
Pippin,
For what it's worth I am one of your "customers" and I love the iPeng
app and know that you provide excellent customer support. It's also good
to know that you personally don't believe a lot of the audiophile myths
about
rrgmrg wrote:
> Alas my Transporter has died and I am looking for a replacement, I
> mostly stream Pandora. Does anyone know how the Marantz NA6005
> compares?
>
> http://www.crutchfield.com/p_642NA6005/Marantz-NA6005.html?tp=7046=142840895305=pla=g=76251799345=c
wortgefecht wrote:
>
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Nothing strange in this, they will always do like that. But You know
> they ar esometime rigth just because you don't clearly stated BEFORE it
> was not faseable...
>
> If you did, You could even charge them when you discover they did. But
> if You have asetting in the
ralphpnj wrote:
> Way too costly for streaming Pandora - use a smart phone with Blue Tooth
> receiver:
> http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8=best+bluetooth+audio+receiver=googhydr-20=aps=89293940489=1t1==g=2330741130384712936===b=c=pd_sl_8jrepzdm7e_b
Bluetooth streams in lossy compression, so it's
marcoc1712 wrote:
> You posted here something regarding Jitter, are we talking about this?
> I'm not, so any conclusion is irrrilevant here.
You are talking about audible differences. As we all agree there is no
change in the actual bits, the differences have to be either jitter or
noise.
>
What are the environmental costs of solar panel production. Take a look
at this article about China a leading producer of
panelshttps://www.adbusters.org/magazine/121/revolution-or-collapse.html
Logitech Media Server Version: 7.9.0 - 1436858598 @ Thu Jul 16 12:58:13
UTC 2015
Operating system:
pippin wrote:
> You still don't get it. It's not my App that breaks, it's their
> Squeezebox system.
> My App can do nothing about the fact that they have no artwork in their
> WAV files. My App can do nothing about the fact that with uncompressed
> HD streams all of a sudden they can't sync
marcoc1712 wrote:
> I was the first asking not to open this can of worm , again...
Yes and no. Had you simply stated "I know there is no audible
difference, but I have other reasons", it probably would not have caused
any reactions. But instead you argued for the audibility of the
differences,
SBGK wrote:
> that's easy, just empty Loch Ness of water and if there's not a monster
> at the bottom then it doesn't exist. Though it could have gone to the
> pub that evening, I suppose.
Exactly - that is precisely the issue. Even if you managed to empty Loch
Ness, there would be someone that
cliveb wrote:
> Here in the UK it seems to be getting windier with each passing year. If
> a wind farm would indeed reduce the wind as you suggest, then I'd be
> very happy to have a big one built upwind of my local golf course :-)
marcoc1712 wrote:
>
> a. cut users hands, fight against Audiophiles, teach users they are
> evil...
>
I don't want to "fight" audiophiles. They can do what they want, it's a
free world out here.
I just ask you for the same things you are asking me for:
1. I will say my opinion. I will call
34 matches
Mail list logo
