markiii wrote:
there is an argument that sending PCM already decoded is less work on
the player CPU
though it is more work for the server and burns more network bandwidth
There is an option to send FLAC as PCM so why not AIFF?
Possibly but that does not necessarily affect its audio
markiii wrote:
shame there is no option to convert AIFF to PCM
What's the piont ? If transcoding is needed why not flac , lossles is
lossles, any lossles format will give you the same output on the
squeezebox .
Main hifi:
In the Case of the Dragonfly wonder what's really going on that DAC a is
actually driven from the 5v at the USB port ?
Or with other DAC's driven from the USB be port ?
In a general case a normal DAC a would only be feed by the USB signal .
What gives then ? I tend to think application specific
Julf wrote:
No need to. The important criteria is audible.
No. Good engineering means optimizing what is relevant, not what is
irrelevant. You can spend an endless amount of time and money reducing
noise - where would you stop, if all you went by was the lower, the
better?
As I
Julf wrote:
But what AudioQuest is claiming is that their filter will bring benefits
even when used on unused USB connectors (not just the one you connect
your DAC to).
Well ofcourse:) any pc like thingy have plenty of outputs .
Yeas some tweaks have some actual physics involved , next
Is not the whole topic a bit sidetracked , there is not much of a
mechanism by with properly designer USB cables could affekt the sound
anyway ,so why not worry about abx testing artefacts for another case .
The product outputs the same signal regardless off cable so worry about
listening for
Well why not move entirely into the magical domain :)
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Sugest a Xilinx reset not only a factory reset .
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Special_IR_Keys_on_Reboot_for_Factory_Reset_and_Last_FW
These instruction are for sb3 but are valid for the transporter too .
If that does not do some more details would be needed to help you .
A very well measured response with measurments to back it up
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office:
Another bias a certain cable brand gets mentioned a lot .
Looks very similar to this article by the computer audiophool.
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/605-network-audio-refresher/
It is alone reason enough to never ever trust anything done at CA :)
Somehing is wrong with the tread start what dispute ? :)
It's usually the anti science crowd creationist flat eart believers etc
that have these disputes .
Elvis is definetely riding an UFO with Jesus , not fighting the ants ;)
No digital output on the Sony HAP-Z1ES !? That's a very limited design ,
they practically exclude everyone with a modern surround sound system
.AV amplifiers and HT recievers are best served with a digital source
for the obvious reason that most of them have no pure analog signal
path , the
JJZolx wrote:
Do people with $2000 source components typically run them into AV
systems? That probably wasn't a big concern of theirs.
It also,excludes an another choice in DAC .
I just expect digital source components to have digital outputs . Wonder
if it's not a casualty of its DSD
Mike69 wrote:
My understanding they are not folding and will be going for some time
yet
OK wrong choice of words, thanks for clarification .
Oh so it's a quite natural event very small company a couple of old lads
running it, wanting tio do something else . Happens to many small
businesses
snoogly wrote:
Thanks for your insight Mnyb.
It does seem AVI is winding down, with 500-ish of the new DM10 to be
built. After that ?
But I do agree with you ~ their marketing and general web presence isn't
very slick, and often downright confusing.
Odroid Lms / Raspberry pi
pablolie wrote:
If they didn't have a built-in DAC I would totally get these. I like the
flexibility of an stand-alone Dac+preAmp, with active speakers or a
power amp and speakers attached. I *like* to fiddle a little :p
Well they have analog inputs too, you don't have to use the DAC .
AVi
snoogly wrote:
The DM5 might interest you, but get in quick because I think there are
only a few left.
http://www.avihifi.co.uk/products.html
Are you sure AVi is folding and that they will stop producing speakers ?
Any source on that , I've googled a bit but failed to find anything
about
His analysis of the high end is essentially correct . But he simplifies
a bit to get his message trough .
And builds active speakers and promotes that as the way to do stuff ,
which is also esentially correct .
But his brand is not the only good speakers ( which can be the message
sometimes ),
Julf wrote:
Because it is more analog and doesn't have the nasty digital-sounding
stair-steps of PCM.
Star steps that does not even exist ! :) see ( monthy's video on
xiph.org about that btw ) . They are used in visualisatiosn and is an
intemediate in some dac designs..
matka wrote:
Since nobody can seriously give you a definitive answer, I would suggest
this - stop buying, start streaming.
Luckilly, you already have a server running that can stream from qobuz
(flac, mp3, good classical and jazz catalogue) and spotify (highest ogg)
and google play (320
On topic again it is not a stupid question at all thankyou !
But easy answers may not be avaible .
The best answer yet is go for rhe oldest cd master of anything not very
precise may not always be true , but works often enough .
Next problem downloads .
It can be iTunes, Amazon or whatever .
darrenyeats wrote:
I recommend -5db (90% on the Touch IIRC) for a fixed attenuation out of
paranoia - but I use digital VC and I very rarely need even 80% and
mostly much less.
Archimago found music with a 12-13db over, but that is simply a
freakish recording. It was DR0! The good thing
Julf wrote:
It is of course not really an issue if you use floating point.
No but what happens when it scales down to an integer again . The
processors DSP dimension is probaly just fine as you say . In my
amaterish way i can see two boitlenecks in the processor the integer
input and src
Wombat wrote:
I once thought about a way to losslessly create a 6dB headroom but only
got critics :)
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?98706-Idea-to-increase-quot-Headroom-quot-with-lossless-volume-change
I also have the feeling attenuating helps in a way. I could swear my old
Julf wrote:
Yes.
Have you come across a single recording actually using more than 16 bits
of dynamic range? Or a DAC capable of more than 20 bits?
Yes, yes, and no. It is actually very simple. Instead of imagining one
sample that hits 0dBFS, imagine two consecutive ones. It is
JJZolx wrote:
Why not just pull the one screw that you do have and have someone size
it a hardware store? Even if you can't buy it there, they must be able
to tell you what it is.
Yes and a decent hardware store in a fairly big city should have even
imperial nuts bolts and screws . Or at
Is it not a lot of music oriented and master oriented forums arround .
But even there opininons may vary .
The record companies does make it easier either , back in the day they
where out to make a quick buck . Now its a revered classic and where did
the master go .
A lot of master have been
I actually used soft feets tuned to the speakers weigth but they are
rather thick not only a felt piece , sort of floating suspension . The
resonance frequency should be realy low with the rigth feets . The
speaker is actually more still at audio frequencies this way .
Another positive side
Julf wrote:
Not sure about the violates nyquist part - it is, as you say, a
well-known issue, and the simple solution is to have sufficient headroom
in analog stages or in any DSP operations where the wave data is
recalculated.
One of the actual benefits of the Mastered for iTunes
Gandhi wrote:
Ah yes, I actually found this site a few years ago. The audio society
Ljudtekniska Sällskapet, which is mentioned, is honourable enough, but I
didn't dare purchasing anything. Both 'audiophile' and 'standard'
damping feet, both for speakers and CD players. A web site that
darrenyeats wrote:
Mynb, see this thread for more discussion.
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98661
Oh yeah there it was ! the old tread with archimagos measurements ,
thanks :)
They concur very well with the other results I've found ,including the
papers I linked to .
So in
pablolie wrote:
isnt that why many DACs allow you to invert polarity, because the source
material may be indistinct about it, and they let you find out if it
makes a difference? I have never heard one, btw.
In the really old days you get that button on some analog preamps for
the same
Julf wrote:
That is indeed an interesting result. What I would do is to try to
reproduce the results under even stricter conditions - have your friend
put together a playlist with a random combination of the FLAC and WAV
versions, and preferably try with a file that has been compressed with
probedb wrote:
Indeed and easy enough to check by recording the output on PC, making
sure they're aligned and then doing a bit compare. If they're not
identical then something is wrong.
Thats actually not contested , people in this tread claim that the
diffrences are for other reasons the
Fizbin wrote:
My guess is there is a problem with the software/hardware somewhere. The
fact that FLAC's suddenly sounded normal to me when I switched Native
to Disabled is odd. Particularly when my mind wasn't expecting to be any
different. The funny thing is I've had WAV's set up all wrong
pablolie wrote:
this topic made me go check my own settings in LMS, and has me wondering
about them.
if a SB3 or Duet or Touch support FLACs natively (which it does), then
why the settings for stream format and decoder? why would i want to
decode at all? it seems -for example- the FLAC
darrenyeats wrote:
I'm saying all models are wrong, some models are useful. And models
develop over time as evidence is gathered.
Here's a thought experiment. If it was shown that people could
distinguish distortion of certain types at X db lower than the currently
accepted levels, when
probedb wrote:
Really? Do you want to tell that to every manufacturer of audio
equipment? Every developer who has created or involved in development of
audio codecs? Experts, professors etc around the world that study this
that they're all wrong?
People don't seem to be able to
Julf wrote:
I still think it would be fair for us to try to see if there is a
rational explanation for why there might be an actual difference in this
particular case. Fizbin, could you post your convert.conf file
(preferably both versions)?
Aha missed that fizzbin has an edited version ?
You have all the rigths to prefer anything that's not really the
audiophile problem .
There are confusiongood sound is not alway equvavilent to faithfull
reproduction ok are we in agreement you have your preference , you
migth even want tube amps with less than ideal output impedance because
This may be very old news to the mastering engineers at this forum .
More about intersample peaks .
The company TC electronics have some of their AES papers freely aviable
. I'm not affiliated with them similar research may be aviable elsewhere
. Please provide me with more reading in the tread
darrenyeats wrote:
Ralph,
I was suggesting a mix rather than lurching from one extreme to the
other!
Well my perspective is that in some areas you can't do compromises
sometimes the subjectivist ( bad word IMO we ar all subjective when
we enjoy our music ) are simply wrong .
It s more
darrenyeats wrote:
In my recent experience, this forum tends to be skeptics agreeing with
each other and mocking backward individuals. It's all far too
self-congratulatory and repetitive for my taste, which is why I'm not
here that often.
I think you guys need to be challenged a bit.
The result should be that wav and flac sound identical for the obvius
reason that the electrical signal coming out of the Touch is exactly the
same .
It's not weird to -hear- a difference it's rather inevitable when using
some testing methods with humans involved . So your quite normal not
weird
ralphpnj wrote:
Correct - this nonsense was written by these two quacks.
We only hope that the inclusion of numbers and 'technical' stuff in
the high end audio rags will lead to a more scientific approach but I
strongly believe that it is a false hope. Stereophile has included
Astell and kern is basically iriver . stereophile has measured thier
older ak100 for 700$ for this you get 22ohm output impedance for
headphones ?? In that perspective even mentioning 16 vs 24 bit 48k vs
192k is just plain silly.
Archimago wrote:
For $2500 this new AK model is supposed to be 1-ohm output impedance.
Since it's a Michael Lavorgna review in his column, no measurements.
That would be the real benefit of the design :) would be nice if some
measurment surfaced...
Julf wrote:
And if both the input and the output are truly balanced/differential, it
doesn't matter. Neither pin is connected to ground/earth, and both pins
are just as hot (as in carrying a signal). The only difference is
absolute polarity, and the source material doesn't seem to be
Julf wrote:
Well, in that thread, Sean states rather clearly: That's right. The
XLRs are proper differential, balanced outputs.
So both pin 2 and pin 3 are hot, as in carry the signal, and are not
referenced to ground. Only difference is that one is inverting, and the
other isn't. Do you
Julf wrote:
The standard way is a truncated sawtooth wave, and yes, that requires a
scope. But a good first test is the 'Absolute Polarity Blind Listening
Test' (http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_abspolarity.php). If you
don't hear the difference, it doesn't matter :)
yep aware of this
It would greatly benefit our hobby if equipment where designed with more
science and less woo .
Ity would not cost so much probaly 1/10 , most ultra high end stuff
would be obsolote , once reasonable build quality is reached the
deciding factors will be features and conectivity integration
I'm not surprised that another hifi rag tries to debunk ABX or blind
testing TAS have written some confused pseudo science about it decades
ago , to justify thier existence.
The fact is that beyond very large and obvius differences the only game
in town -is- blind testing ! That's the worlds of
probedb wrote:
It's why I left avforums, they were reviewing the Chord Electronics Hugo
DAC which is over £1000the review said it had it's own sound. If
you're paying £1000 for a DAC and it's colouring the sound then it's a
pretty bad product if you ask me!
+1 But how else to make
probedb wrote:
Holy poop! Why would anyone embed an image that large!?!?
It can be worse it can be a *.BMP or *.png instead of *.jpg , then LMS
would certainly croak on scanning it on some platforms
Main hifi: Touch + CIA
Archimago wrote:
Thanks for that link. Indeed I see what you mean about getting tongue
tied. Interesting response and quote from Scorpio69er regarding that
review. Of course anyone daring to bring out DBT is prone to get spanked
by those folks. Good for J. Gordon Holt for saying the truth
Nice work as usual .The iPhone 6 seems to crossed the line into hifi .
Wonder where the choice of Minimum phase filters come from ? I'm a bit
sceptical about that in general . but is popular .
I get the 48k limit its a phone ! but it forces transcoding of some
sources . Which begs the question
Hmm saw that the crosstalk spec is not ideal -85dB it could be better
,but i guess its typical for such a small device .
Also its probably not audible on music as its far more channel mix in
the recordings themselfs
Main
pippin wrote:
The iPhones, even the older ones, have absolutely no issue with
transcoding. They have powerful floating point processors and vector
units for media processing. In the past, they used to run codecs on a
DSP but they no longer do this because they found that it performs
better
Archimago wrote:
Mnyb: Indeed the iPhone 4 is like tar compared to the iPhone 6 with
even simple web browsing!
I wonder if there's a conspiracy :confused: :rolleyes: to slow down the
old phones so everyone upgrades! I certainly don't recall web browsing
being so slow with my wife's old
maybe convert them to 16744.1 2ch before making mp3 of them ? is there
such a thing as a 24bit mp3 ?
24/192 6ch would be very big :)
Another thing to notice is that 24bit does not compress very well. 144dB
sn ratio lets assume a good recording with about 90dB sn/ratio (would
expect something
I do have Meridian speakers but this is a part of complete digital home
theater which is another beast, that they are the only provider off .
This requires some controll of the speaker not only to send audio .
That's another missed opurtunity , it would be nice if there where a
standardised
Well Bryston migth seems expensive at 2k$ for a streamer + high quality
DAC .
They are still 5-10 times cheaper than then typical boutique brands they
outperform , we have posters recommending 30k$ DAC's :P and states that
it is healthy with a good disregard for cost ( in reality price ) .
IMO
Bryston normally makes quite good amps not designed with woo woo but
actual science ( no tubes or quantum purifiers etc ).
what makes their bdp series bad ? If you can run without upnp and use
LMS instead the major obstacle is removed .
Transporter have very low noise and thd a bit better than Touch , so it
has better DAC performance . And if you use the unbalanced output you
can tune the output level with built in attenuators .
The age of the design is not such a disadvantage as some might believe ,
the development of digital
jimmypowder wrote:
An excellent question.
Should we track and comunity buy the last one thus granting all off some
more years of mysb.com :)
On topic on the latest 7200$ urgh steamer , reading thier blurb they
recommend minimserver which is rumoured to be a reasonable dlna server
and they
castalla wrote:
Price: $7,200.00
Yea you can have complete meridian souround sound processor for that +
wand board rassPI cubie or whatever .
Seems nicely done and well built but why output transformers in 2014 ,
seem like voodoo to me ? Can you really have Transporter class linearity
But the original Q is also a bit futile as the transporter only supports
24/96 so 24/192 downsampled by the server anyway ?
To 24/96 .
So the choice is to buy 24/96 downsample 192 k files yourself or let LMS
do it for you .
Sonically the end result will be the same .
Personally i opted for
In that case just make a 16/44.1 version . The intrisinic sq of such an
old recording is most likely fully resolved by 16/44.1 .
But you may enjouy the better mastering of this version , if that is the
case :)
Main hifi:
*cough* is it not so the ethernet is already isolated current loops :)
so just dont use shielded cat cable
I only want one if it comes with a quantum isolator of some kind ...
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J
That is actually a UI bug it always says 705 kbps when dowsampling or
just plain converting to flac whatever the real rate is .
The see what you really get , you enable some of the transcoding
debugging a look in the server.log on what it really used for settings
to SoX or whatnot.
Bit doing
I whish they fixed this , the number is just a placeholder and is
roughly correct for redbook material , so not many notice .
I think the thing is that LMS or Touch may not actually now ( or have
any means to find out ) what the final rate comming out the transcoding
process is .
A better fix
netchord wrote:
something you cannot possibly say w/ any certainty since you have not
heard my system either before or after the config change, and with my
ears, and my own mental processing.
all you can say is that some theoretical system, with a theoretical
listener, might sound the
Just try the player buffer if you just remove the cable while playing
you have 30 second off music in the player and now you hear it without
any server at all ;)
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621
Btw how does the itunes intregration handle sondcheck tags apples
varinat of replaygain tags ?
Did you also changed some other settings ?
The genius idea behind squeezeboxes is that they are truly server
agnostic if everything is properly configured as long as the server can
fill the player
Nothing really new .
Meridian realised in the early 90's that the way forward was digital
active DSP controlled speakers ( other realised that active speakers was
needed in the 60-70's ormpossiblynearlier for pa ) .
The Meridian speakers are not perfect I'm not saying that what I have is
Pippin was it not you that used Adam active speakers ?
I have one of the small models as computer speakers
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2
cliveb wrote:
I've just seen this and don't understand what you're trying to get at.
You seem to be under the impression that an ABX test involves three
files?
An ABX test involves just two files - A and B. The test subject is
allowed to listen to A and B (knowing which is which) as often
P Nelson wrote:
I was surprised that you did not include an ABx for each sound track so
you could actually test if people accurately could test the difference
between the two tracks. Then you could test the does 24 bit or 16 bit
sound better. Regardless, I think the data shows that people
Exellent work , the number of downöoads suggest that more people tried
than actually did the survey :)
You may have inspered some to test thier assumptions .
The missunderstandings about digital audio are truly limitless , just
the other day some one asked for 352kHz support on USB for. Touch ?
lrossouw wrote:
Great effort. I was wondering how you were limiting cheats.
There could possibly be other ways to cheat anyway like totally
unnatural listening conditions , repeat the last very very faint tail
ends of a track (- 90dB stuff ) on incredible volume in headphones or
put your ear
Archimago wrote:
Indeed. There will always be a way to cheat since the files have to
reflect a true 24-bit vs. 16-bit resolution ultimately... There were
ideas like putting 24-bit decay trails on 16-bit files to thwart efforts
but ultimately, I didn't want to end up confused with too many
Your bloggpost there is to many A in the description , so you have to
edit it some more .
BTW i've missplaced my notes on what I voted so I have not the slightest
idea :D
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621
Gandhi wrote:
Good stuff.
While I admit to suffering from all of these problems, it's not
immediate clear to me how the following pertains to audiophilism: Affect
heuristic, Duration neglect, Galatea effect, Hard-Easy bias, Omission
bias.
Some maybe ? we do get ourselfs motivated to do
Gandhi wrote:
I don't quite follow. Which one(s) are you refering to?
I think even bias is biased.
Yes my argument is weak (and biased) and i dont get all of the
explanations i googled up Galatea effect is a kind of self fullfilling
prophecy , you succeed as audiophile if you believe as
Gandhi wrote:
Ah, yes. I misread the definition of the Galatea effect. I thought it
just was about underperforming (which I thought was odd), but I see now
that it also is about succeeding.
And I must confess I often equate cynisism with realism.
An objective component review would
Gandhi wrote:
Seem reasonable. Perhaps even not too extremely costly, as at least
Geddes says that sub quality and power is not important. (Which is one
of the questions that I have.)
As I was thinking about floor space, I suddenly had a spark of genius!
(Or perhaps not so much...) Is
Gandhi wrote:
What kind of acoustic material are you using behind you on the back
wall? How thick? Is it the entire wall, or mostly around the sofa, a bit
over ear height? Or...?
PS
If my house were burned to the ground, I'd start over again with all
Meridian gear. It's a very good
Very interesting , my aproach for what iit's worth , it probably has
some flaws.
Damping the room enough to,get rid of flutter echo ( the garage / cave
sound ) using some odd bits of acoustic material , mostly behind me I'm
sitting close to the back wall .
Use digital room correction for the
andy_c wrote:
Just ran across the '_My_Time_At_Hovland_'
(http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/tubes-valves/227913-my-time-hovland-hp-100-lore.html)
thread at diyaudio.com. Funny stuff!
when you heard it all ,we get tube dowsing :D
Sometimes I try to will the next big asteroid down..
TheLastMan wrote:
Ah, but it makes all those ones so much more, er.. onesie and the
zeros are Quantum Tunnelled, which makes them so much more zerotic.
These guys are truly deluded and need to get a life. A heavy metal
concert, front row, next to the *really* big boxes and with the
ralphpnj wrote:
Another top notch fruitlooper also on par with Mr. Belt is Geoff Kait of
Machina Dynamica (http://www.machinadynamica.com/). The Brilliant
Pebbles are truly a classic.
By the way, the Stereophile forum (or rather what remains of the forum)
is filled with posts by this
Ah the chief fruit looper is still around/alive
http://pwbelectronics.co.uk Peter W Belt :)
The products are hard to describe it have ranged from tweezers to pinch
your CDs with and magic paper clips to hang in your curtains and
specialy treated spiratube to wrap around your cables and the
Sorry there is actually the quantum clip
http://pwbelectronics.co.uk/product/quantum/quantum.html :) :)
Another candidate is his red x pen
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
vinhattieu wrote:
I happened to have the Sbooster PSU included when I purchased a
Lindemann DAC. I mailed the manufacturer and they were kind enough to
send me an interchangeable DC tip that fits my Squeezebox Touch. However
I noticed that the official power source for the Touch is 5VDC-3A,
probedb wrote:
I'm not sure if this one has been posted yet:
http://www.cyrusaudio.com/faq-what-is-servo-evolution
I asked them how they did their testing etc etc and oddly enough, no
response ;)
But why not just do as My Meridian disc spinner actually use a Rom drive
speed up the disc
Julf wrote:
... goes to Helmut Brinkmann of Brinkmann Audio GmbH, manufacturer of
the Balance 2 vinyl player and RöNt II power supply.
I happened to read the review in Hi-Fi News (the only non-pro audio mag
I still subscribe to - they used to be pretty good, with decent
measurements for
Audiotic wrote:
Maybe. But upsampled isn't doing them justice in many cases. These
really are remasteredfrom(very good) analog tapes. And boy that can
clear the air. Certainly versus the often very bad digital masters made
for the CD.
In any case, I hear the difference between a well
lrossouw wrote:
I hope I do not stir with this New Yorker article but the thoughts seem
very relevant. I do not want to have a debate about something else(
e.g. whether the earth rotates the sun or not) but this is very good
explanation why people do this kind of thing.
What is
ralphpnj wrote:
Sometime around 1980 the high end audio discovered that the once lowly
cable could be magically transformed in a glorious cash cow, a cash cow
that never stopped giving. Of course even back then there were many
people who pointed out the so called science behind expensive
Audiotic wrote:
Oh and on the topic of DSD availability... I have about 300 SACD's
ripped to ISO (actually a good friend did on a PS3). And you can also
buy them. Should be thousands in the near future.
But most SACD ( and DVDA ) are old analog stuff upsampled redbook
etc ?
The SACD
501 - 600 of 1831 matches
Mail list logo
