RonM wrote:
Shouldn't that be OUR misguided beliefs?
Sure, if you consider belief in evidence a misguided belief. :)
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 that will fool many people
Deaf Cat wrote:
Hi,
Seems to get rather good results reading about it on various forums, but
not come across anyone using it with a slimdevices set up, just
wondered?
http://www.highend-audiopc.com/optimizer.html
cheers
DC
Hi Deaf Cat
IMHO it is well worth a try. My vanilla LMS is
Hi Quad,
I have actually been experimenting with disabling different services
etc, on win8, the most recent was to disable the paging file :-o pc
is still going and sounding better than before :-) fingers crossed it
keeps going as I rather like it.
From these experiments I can only assume
And if you are using wi-fi to stream to your Squeezeboxes then don't
forget to pick up some Audiophile Air in Can:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?101032-Audiophile-Buzzwords-Fads-Crazes-Hypes-and-other-Quantum-Mattersp=772814viewfull=1#post772814
You will thank me.
Living Rm:
ralphpnj wrote:
And if you are using wi-fi to stream to your Squeezeboxes then don't
forget to pick up some Audiophile Air in Can:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?101032-Audiophile-Buzzwords-Fads-Crazes-Hypes-and-other-Quantum-Mattersp=772814viewfull=1#post772814
You will
Quad wrote:
To me it sounds clearly better than Windows 8 without any adjustments.
And your auditory memory is long enough to be able to make a reliable
comparision?
What aspect of the audio data that the computer sends out to the network
do you think can be affected by any OS tuning as long
Quad wrote:
IMHO it is well worth a try. My vanilla LMS is running on a Synology
NAS. For playback I recently turned an older notebook into a dedicated
music player. Just install Windows Server 2012 R2 Evaluation in core
mode, run AudiophileOptimizer and launch Squeezeplay with your
Julf wrote:
And your auditory memory is long enough to be able to make a reliable
comparision?
What aspect of the audio data that the computer sends out to the network
do you think can be affected by any OS tuning as long as you don't get
dropouts from buffer underflow?
He using
Mnyb wrote:
He using Squeezeplay ON that computer ...
Ah! Thanks!
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 that will fool many people - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
Mnyb wrote:
Deaf Cat is probably using a Squeezebox ?
There is a conceptual difference using a player on the PC/Server and
using a real hardware squeezebox or wandboard or other network client .
So Deaf Cat and Quad are comparing Apples and Oranges , probably
imaginary ones .
Indeed.
bonze wrote:
And both seemingly misunderstanding how a Squeezebox setup actually
works.
Or even grokked the more general difference between a network music
_server_ (eg, LMS) and a network music _player_ (eg, Squeezeplay on a
laptop)
aubuti wrote:
Or even grokked the more general difference between a network music
_server_ (eg, LMS) and a network music _player_ (eg, Squeezeplay on a
laptop)
The initial post asked about any experience with that tool in a
slimdevices setup. That's what I answered to by giving some
Quad wrote:
But of course fair reactions were beyond hope. :-)
I believe that you have that just a little wrong. The statement should
read:
But of course reactions based on a solid understanding of the basics of
how digital audio works instead of magic audiophile pixie dust were to
be
Guys, you are coming across like some vigilantes patrolling the forum
with burning torches, ready to beat up anyone who says anything
foo-like.
It doesn't mean I am into foo - I'm not. But let's drink some decaf and
live and let live a bit. Otherwise you'll all end up just agreeing with
each
darrenyeats wrote:
Guys, you are coming across like some vigilantes patrolling the forum
with burning torches, ready to beat up anyone who says anything
foo-like.
It doesn't mean I am into foo - I'm not. But let's drink some decaf and
live and let live a bit. Otherwise the people left
Quad wrote:
The initial post asked about any experience with that tool in a
slimdevices setup. That's what I answered to by giving some details in
which context my experience took place. What's wrong with that?
But of course fair reactions were beyond hope. :-)
Nothing's wrong with that,
ralphpnj wrote:
...2+2=5
Close enough for me ;)
kidstypike
1xSB3 - 1xBoom - 1x(Squeezebox) Radio - 2xTouch
kidstypike's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10436
View this thread:
kidstypike wrote:
close enough for me ;)
lol!
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign.
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop
aubuti wrote:
Nothing's wrong with that, just not particularly germane when it's
obvious from subsequent posts that Deaf Cat was talking about using
Audiophile Optimizer to tweak a server computer that is streaming to
physical Squeezeboxes (SB2 and a Touch). I suppose you should get credit
darrenyeats wrote:
Guys, you are coming across like some vigilantes patrolling the forum
with burning torches, ready to beat up anyone who says anything
foo-like.
Luckily here are several very Close-Minded people :)
I may recomend you Computeraudiophile.com when you feel more comfortable
with
ralphpnj wrote:
The great thing about online forums about audio, as opposed to
publications about audio, is that other forum members get to call BS on
all your misguided beliefs . . .
Shouldn't that be OUR misguided beliefs?
Glass houses, stones, and all that.
R
LMS on a dedicated
RonM wrote:
Shouldn't that be OUR misguided beliefs?
Glass houses, stones, and all that.
R
Quite right. I'm often told that I'm completely full of BS, even when it
comes to audio :)
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign.
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz
SBGK wrote:
people with a bits are bits agenda.
Don't you mean bits are coins agenda?
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign.
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas
Deaf Cat wrote:
My query was if an optimization program written for JPlay users, would
work for SB users?
Jplay and SB setups work in quite a different way I am guessing.
I upgraded from win7 to win8 as it was £25, and was not expecting the
change in sound! Quite pleasantly surprised :-)
bonze wrote:
Odd, all the useful advice above and the only post you reply to is the
one crayoned by the forum troll
Whenever the J magic comes into the game it becomes odd. This software
must be that good even just downloading the installer to your HD gives
better sound before you install
bonze wrote:
Odd, all the useful advice above and the only post you reply to is the
one crayoned by the forum troll
+1
Also avoiding Archimagos very definitive experiment where he can show
that typically a -DAC has has identical analog output- regardless of OS
feeding it and not even the
Mnyb wrote:
...I think the Audio hobby could be great again if some sanity was
restored to it . For every woo woo person the audio press or cult
manufacturers attract they probably scare away 100 times more people
There actually is some sanity in the audio hobby world: the members over
The thing I just can't get over is how some folks refuse to learn *how*
a squeezebox works. I can at least agree that there is a *possibility*
that something weird can be going on inside a computer/OS that can
affect the sound output IF SUCH OUTPUT IF FED VIA THE COMPUTER'S SOUND
CARD. But we
Mnyb wrote:
Good !
But for the sake of discussion , if you tested this program and got the
usuall null result . There would be next program and the one after that
and so forth.
That test with completely different OS and computers still outputting
the exact same thing is a good indicator
Deaf Cat wrote:
Hi,
Seems to get rather good results reading about it on various forums, but
not come across anyone using it with a slimdevices set up, just
wondered?
http://www.highend-audiopc.com/optimizer.html
cheers
DC
of course it makes a difference, does win 7 sound the same as
SBGK wrote:
of course it makes a difference
Looking forward to some evidence.
does win 7 sound the same as win 8?
Probably. Do you have evidence to the countrary?
You can try altering the priority of the logitech server program on your
pc eg high to low, if you can't hear any difference
SBGK wrote:
of course it makes a difference, does win 7 sound the same as win 8 ?
You can try altering the priority of the logitech server program on your
pc eg high to low, if you can't hear any difference then optimisations
may not help, otherwise learn to think for yourself and try things
Mnyb wrote:
I would,suggests that Archimago has the equipment and the vervital to
test this , but I doubt he will .
He has done similar products, so one more ?.
And by the reason I jut gave that there are endless flawed ideas for
every correct one it would be endless work to follow every
Archimago wrote:
Yeah... As per this post back in April:
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/04/measurements-laptop-audio-survey-apple.html
Using a decent DAC with an asynchronous USB interface device (CM6631A -
same interface as the newer Schiit DAC's) , I was unable to measure a
The believers can test this concept themselves by booting up in Safe
mode and killing any remaining unnecessary running services.
Just need them to report back. :)
toby10's Profile:
toby10 wrote:
The believers can test this concept themselves by booting up in Safe
mode and killing any remaining unnecessary running services.
Just need them to report back. :)
Happened just recently. :) see here
reinholdk wrote:
Happened just recently. :) see here
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?100366-LMS-and-win-8-1-safe-modep=762442viewfull=1#post762442
Yup, read it when it was posted. Same hocus pocus voodoo applies. :)
Mnyb wrote:
For some reason none of the aviable magic audiophile software vendors
will do this , they fill there websites with anecdotes instead . Despite
that it is possible to prove their products they somehow always avoid
this very powerfull product verification ?
So true. Double
I guess from all the arguments against tweeking the source pc, all of
your answers are 'no you have not tried any tweeking'...
or if you have it had made no difference.
Many thanks for you time and explanations.
Cheers
DC
As folks have explained, given the way squeezeboxes work, there is no
possibility that these tweaks can affect the sound quality from a SB
player. It is not a matter of trial and error or empirical testing or
magic. The engineering of the SB player and server makes any effect of
the tweaks you
Just for grins and giggles, even though I would hope you all know which
camp I'm in from other posts regarding whether these type tweaks can
have a effect on the music...
The test of disconnecting the SB player from the server doesn't really
prove that tweaking the server can't affect the sound.
garym wrote:
So true. Double blind tests could solve a lot of issues and answer a lot
of questions regarding differences (as they do every day in the worlds
of medicine, science, and engineering). But they'd be out of business if
they did this. To paraphrase P.T. Barnum (??), There's a
Deaf Cat wrote:
Seems to get rather good results reading about it on various forums
So do the CD marker pens, magic crystals and $5000 ethernet cables. :)
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
For me I always think if it takes a good 5 minutes of reading to even
work out what the product is (it is some sort of software isn't it?)
then that's a pretty good indication to call B.S.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
Wow, looks like you need to also buy a copy of Windows Server 2012 to
get this to work (assuming you're not running it already).
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Mnyb wrote:
Do you still have your squeezebox ?
Yes SB2 kitchen and a Touch lounge.
I found Soundcheck's TT improved things, (reducing workload of the
touch).
I don't see why reducing the actual work load of the pc running SS,
shouldn't also make a difference in sound repro.
Just
Here's one way of describing why reducing tasks on the PC won't have any
effect on the music. The way Squeeze works is in effect copying a file
from one computer to another either over Ethernet or wifi. If the number
of tasks running at either end had a effect on the file our copies of
Deaf Cat wrote:
I don't see why reducing the actual work load of the pc running SS,
shouldn't also make a difference in sound repro.
But this is not how the feeding of a SB player from a server actually
works. The suggestion that reducing the workload of a PC running as LMS
server is
garym wrote:
But this is not how the feeding of a SB player from a server actually
works. The suggestion that reducing the workload of a PC running as LMS
server can affect the SB player is equivalent to saying the following:
If I can increase the efficiency of a fueling station on the
Hi,
Seems to get rather good results reading about it on various forums, but
not come across anyone using it with a slimdevices set up, just
wondered?
http://www.highend-audiopc.com/optimizer.html
cheers
DC
Deaf Cat's
I didn't wade through the whole advert, but in my opinion there is no
reason to use this with a SB system. The boogeyman jitter is not going
to insert itself between the server running LMS and the Squeezebox that
is connected to the audio setup. That trip from the server to the SB is
made
Dont bother , one of the main reasons for having a squeezebox is (as
abuti explained ) that it is completely server agnostic , whatever audio
goes on on the server does not matter .
It does not use it no soundcard drivers are in use kernel streaming etc
would only concern sound-cards connected
52 matches
Mail list logo
