Jacky, Toolbox 2.0 can be downloaded in section 3.3 of Soundcheck's
installation instructions for 3.0.
--
cymbop
cymbop's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=50761
View this thread:
Does anyone recall the 2.0 command to turn the screen on after it's been
killed? A summary of the commands I know is below:
-unpack tar file: tar xvf touchtoolbox2.0.tar
-Initialize the Toolbox: ttinit
-status tool: ttstat
-buffer setting: ttbuffer
-output tuning:
1. for activating
cymbop;673439 Wrote:
Does anyone recall the 2.0 command to turn the screen on after it's been
killed? A summary of the commands I know is below:
Just do a reboot (One to three seconds push on the power button; longer
push will restore factory settings)
Guido F.
--
guidof
MUSIC ROOM:
Hi all:
I did not read the whole story here- anyway, as many of you enjoy more
toolbox 2.0 I would like to test it by myself: Where can I download
it?
Second question: I already implemented Dynobot´s new touch mods- so
would be there any possible interference with TB 2.0?
Thanks in advance
Hi Caad,
i am doing the mods you wrote here :
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=645223postcount=791
I have some troubles with :
- U15 et U33 (clock switch). On which pin do i have to put the caps ?
- U34 (buffer output). Where i have to put the caps ?
Regards,
Olivier
--
Huge thanks Klaus!
Installed and donation made.
What is the recommended version of server to use?
I use the latest official 7.6.1 (and I am using all Flac so no
disappearing files), but is there any other benefit using the latest
nightly 7.6.2 build?
--
HumanMedia
Hi guys, I tired on two computers and have the same difficulty, the
imbedded pictures doesnt display at all. A lot of settings are shown
on those pictures. Does anyone have the same problem?
BTW I think that TT 3.0 deserves it own tread
Chris
--
krzys
Assuming you have tt 3.0 installed, try changing the priority of the
spdif process to 51.
chrt -f -p 51 367
Is it just me and my setup, or does this improve things further?
(softer more natural highs)
--
HumanMedia
Is it me or does the bass seem reduced a little with 3.0?
I'm just wondering if this new definition and clarity we are are all
hearing is coming at a price of losing some bottom end and fullness.
--
Jeff Flowerday
Jeff
First off, I want to thank Klaus for his efforts and for sharing them
with the world. I've been delighted with the 2.0 toolbox and feel it's
brought by system to a level that I have never heard before. A donation
is on the way.
I did all the 3.0 installs except screen off, and sat down to a
Jeff Flowerday;667148 Wrote:
Is it me or does the bass seem reduced a little with 3.0?
I'm just wondering if this new definition and clarity we are are all
hearing is coming at a price of losing some bottom end and fullness.
I've found that bass seems better, or at least fuller, with tt3
I'll fork into a new thread from here, if that is OK with you.
Of course a lot of interesting stuff discussed over here will get
lost over time.
Anyhow. Sometimes it's good to start over.
One hint.
Instead of rolling back certain features you should try to find certain
other bottlenecks. I
Just done the fork.
Thx to all your valuable contributions over here. To be continued over
there:
'soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0'
(http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322)
--
soundcheck
::: ' Touch Toolbox 3.0 and more' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com)
::: by soundcheck
Quote:
I'm in the process of rewriting the blog. That's why it is not
available for the time being.
Tomorrow at 1500 Zulu you'll find TT30 and the new documentation.
Cheers
__
::: Squeezebox Touch Toolbox 2.0 and more ::: by soundcheck
--
mjock3
Quote: posted 11/1/11
I'm in the process of rewriting the blog. That's why it is not
available for the time being.
Tomorrow at 1500 Zulu you'll find TT30 and the new documentation.
Cheers
__
::: Squeezebox Touch Toolbox 2.0 and more ::: by soundcheck
--
mjock3
Have fun tonight. ;)
--
soundcheck
::: ' Touch Toolbox 3.0 and more' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com)
::: by soundcheck
soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383
View this thread:
Klaus,
I had a look at your blog. Maybe I'm thick, but I didn't find the
TT3.0.
Just put my system up again after moving.
Am using a Welborne Labs PS which made a great difference.
hope hearing from you
best regards and thanks in advance
André
--
reverendo
reverendo;666902 Wrote:
Klaus,
I had a look at your blog. Maybe I'm thick, but I didn't find the
TT3.0.
Just put my system up again after moving.
Am using a Welborne Labs PS which made a great difference.
hope hearing from you
best regards and thanks in advance
André
You can see it
thanks a lot
I use the digital out and it DEFINITELY made a differece. The
difference was such that my wife heard the difference. No placebo
effect here.
best regards
André
--
reverendo
reverendo's Profile:
Hi Soundcheck...
I implemented both the LMS 7.7.0 upgrades, re-did dynaudiorules' alsa
threading/interupt mods, and put in TT 3.0 all this morning.
Everything seems to be working fine, though I will see if any bugs bite
over the next few days.
One question I had, though: why do you recommend
rgro;666920 Wrote:
Hi Soundcheck...
I implemented both the LMS 7.7.0 upgrades, re-did dynaudiorules' alsa
threading/interupt mods, and put in TT 3.0 all this morning.
Everything seems to be working fine, though I will see if any bugs bite
over the next few days.
One question I had,
soundcheck;666924 Wrote:
I'm not sure if these dynaudio-rules mods are still required.
I'm running my own optimizations in that area.
They might even interfere. For now I wouldn't use those different
approaches in parallel. You end up not knowing of what is doing what.
At a later
yep. just a reboot.
--
soundcheck
::: ' Touch Toolbox 3.0 and more' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com)
::: by soundcheck
soundcheck's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34383
View this thread:
soundcheck;666934 Wrote:
yep. just a reboot.
Yep...just tried it, now I understand how it works, thanks.
I just commented out the dynaudiorules' mods. I can then re-implement
them very quickly if need be
I'll give things a good long listen over the next few days and see how
it all
Hi Klaus-
Just installed 3.0, it works great. The help screen is a great new
feature, as is the screen on-off command. Overall a more friendly, more
convenient package.
And I must say, I do think the SQ is improved over V 2.0. My system
sounds cleaner and clearer to me. It's not a huge
Many Thanks Klaus,worked liked a charm on 7.5.5,no problems on
24/96,windows 7/64,tutorial was great even for a newbie like me :)
--
c-eling
c-eling's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=48050
View
After downloading Soundcheck's new modification toolkit 3.0 and
installing it without any problems thanks to the very clear
step-by-step documentation provided on the blog, I am totally blown
away with the very obvious improvements to my listening experience.
I have no hesitancy to recommend
Many thanks to you Klaus
V3 is clear step up from V2, congratulations I (and I hope a lot of
fellow members) will be making a donation towards the development fund.
Only issue I have seen is probably specific to my set up in that i use
Spotify premium and need the screen display. There is a
Just had the chance to listen to a few of my fave tracks again and
everything is more alive and musical - compared to V2, V3 is different
league.
Now, what Logitech should do is hardwire these software mods, and blow
the Sonos / Linn DS brigade away.
But only after employing Klaus and paying
just installed everything and listened to my test files in order to
evaluate.
the word that keeps popping up in my mind is 'clearer'. Everything is
more transparent, low-level details show up more easily. Seems like I
have a blacker background.
I spent the whole afternoon experimenting with power
reverendo;667010 Wrote:
PPS: I work semi-professionaly with music production so chance of
placebo effect is definitely lower than normal.
Why?
I'd say quite the opposite is true.
Due to cognitive dissonance
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance) you are even more
eager to
What's everyone's thoughts on the tt -k mod?
--
Jeff Flowerday
Jeff Flowerday's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15883
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742
bluegaspode;667014 Wrote:
Why?
I'd say quite the opposite is true.
Due to cognitive dissonance
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance) you are even more
eager to hear _something_ when so many more people claim they can hear
something (or indeed do hear improvements).
Really really good, it sounds better than freaking ever, Thank You
Klaus!
--
sckramer
CiAudio vdc-Sb - Touch (TT 3.0 mods)
PSaudio DL3 DAC (Cullen 4 mods) - PSaudio Trio C-100 Amp (Cullen 3
mods)
Energy Veritas 2.2i speakers (mundorf silver oil capacitor, inductor,
and resistor mods)
Martin
+1 and my donation was sent to Klaus this evening. Hopefully, many more
will take the time to donate in thanks for his efforts that benefit us
Touch users.
--
rgro
Rg
System information
Main: PS Audio Quintet Vortexbox Touch (wired) via optical Rega
DAC LFD LE
Hmmm - Klaus must be getting very close to releasing TT 3.0...
Clicking on the TT 2.0 page gets the following result:
Page not found
Sorry, the page you were looking for in the blog soundcheck's -
audio@vise does not exist.
Go to blog homepage
Just guessing :-) Perhaps it is just The Halloween
.??
--
cvj
cvj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2979
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742
___
audiophiles mailing
cvj;666149 Wrote:
.??
As of this morning:
Folks.
Status Update
My norwegian beta-test branch , reported slight instabilities of
TT3.0 last night.
I hoped that I got the reporeted issue under control.
I need to look into it. Sorry.
As soon as I get it fixed TT3.0 will be released.
Will the 3.0 mods include also the 2.0s?
Sorry if I've lost something in the route!
--
Fukinagashi
Fukinagashi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42922
View this thread:
soundcheck;665140 Wrote:
Hi folks.
TT 3.0 - the tool - is ready for release now.
I got all the little issues fixed.
I now need to do the documentation stuff.
It'll take me a day or two.
Over the weekend I re-introduced
* the 100% volume lock mod,
which some of you might have
Eagerly awaiting the release of TT 3.0
Perhaps Klaus has gotten a case of Writer's Block :-)
--
cvj
cvj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2979
View this thread:
Hi Klaus:
Last night my SBT froze (happens every few months). Had to do a factory
reset to bring it back, and as a result had to listen without TT 2.0 for
a little while. A bit bland sound, by comparison . . .
I was again reminded of the improvement in SQ that your mods have
made!
Looking
Hi folks.
TT 3.0 - the tool - is ready for release now.
I got all the little issues fixed.
I now need to do the documentation stuff.
It'll take me a day or two.
Over the weekend I re-introduced
* the 100% volume lock mod,
which some of you might have tried earlier (TT beta-blog).
I thought
waiting for TT 3.0, waiting for TT 3.0, waiting for TT 3.0, waiting for
TT 3.0, waiting for TT 3.0, waiting for TT 3.0, waiting for TT 3.0,
waiting for TT 3.0, waiting for TT 3.0, waiting for TT 3.0, waiting for
TT 3.0, waiting for TT 3.0 ...
;) ;) :)
--
praganj
I'm in the final phase of testing. Just relax.
Just stepped over a little problem, which I need to get fixed first.
If you start doing happy-testing usually some odd things happen.
And that just happened to me.
Then I need to prepare also the new instructions.
I'm not sure if I manage to
Hi Klaus,
Just take Your time :)
Great thanks for all Your great work for the SBT community !
--
praganj
praganj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41091
View this thread:
Great to hear the update from Klaus.
BTW, will 3.0 include the thread priority changes. Should the existing
rCS file changes be rolled back?.
--
lake_eleven
lake_eleven's Profile:
lake_eleven;664700 Wrote:
Great to hear the update from Klaus.
BTW, will 3.0 include the thread priority changes. Should the existing
rCS file changes be rolled back?.
Yep and more
priority reshuffling,
TCP/IP and networking adjustments,
kernel parameter adjustments
screen on/off
SoftwireEngineer;664286 Wrote:
I agree with most of what Soundcheck wrote. Jitter happens at source as
well as during transmission. If you have bits in memory and you clock
it out at a certain frequency, say 44.1kHz, the clock's instability is
the source of jitter. If these bits are
Thanks Soundcheck, looking forward to the new TT 3.0. Bring it!
--
RadioClash
RadioClash's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2839
View this thread:
adamdea;664035 Wrote:
It is worth noting that it is now possible to buy cheap dacs with
virtually no jitter (as measured by the conventional j test)ie
jitter-rejection and intrinsic jitter to a level below anything that
mainstream theory would consider to be significant. An example would be
Hi guys.
There are also endless discussions about jitter and other distortions
at Audio Asyslum.
Fact is that there is NO device at any price out which has proven to
manage
to decouple 100% from source induced jitter/timing variations,
common-mode-noise, power variations, mains polution,
Stilly77;664118 Wrote:
agree
good jitter read:
http://amorgignitamorem.nl/Audio/Jitter/Detection%20threshold%20for%20distortions%20due%20to%20jitter%20on%20digital%20audio%2026_50.pdf
Except that that test, just like many such tests, doesn't account for
the listener and his abilities.
firedog;664215 Wrote:
Except that that test, just like many such tests, doesn't truly account
for the listener and his abilities. The article itself notes that
listeners abilties may be critical. And just because audio
professionals were used, it doesn't mean they understand what jitter
firedog;664215 Wrote:
Except that that test, just like many such tests, doesn't truly account
for the listener and his abilities. The article itself notes that
listeners abilties may be critical. And just because audio
professionals were used, it doesn't mean they understand what jitter
adamdea;664230 Wrote:
AFAIK You would not expect a decently designed dac to show jitter levels
on the j test over maybe 200pS (ie 100 times lower than 20ns) on 16 bit
data and considerably less on 24 bit data . Many are now much lower
(the MF VDAC2 was measured at 10pS for 24/48 by Paul
I agree with most of what Soundcheck wrote. Jitter happens at source as
well as during transmission. If you have bits in memory and you clock
it out at a certain frequency, say 44.1kHz, the clock's instability is
the source of jitter. If these bits are transmitted over a cable to a
separate DAC,
I use Soundcheck's mods and believe they give a noticeable improvement.
Don't know how or why and would prefer to keep it that way. Looking
forward to trying 3.0 when Klaus releases it.
All this talk about jitter etc is over my head, surely life is too
short? Why not just enjoy the Squeezebox
SoftwireEngineer;663976 Wrote:
Good links. Jitter is real and you can hear it if you are system is
transparent and has reasonable quality. There are some good technical
articles on this subject on stereophile.com as well. The simplest
technique they have to measure is to feed a specific
adamdea;664035 Wrote:
It is worth noting that it is now possible to buy cheap dacs with
virtually no jitter (as measured by the conventional j test)ie
jitter-rejection and intrinsic jitter to a level below anything that
mainstream theory would consider to be significant. An example would be
Thanks! Interesting read!
--
Gadgety1
Gadgety1's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=33223
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742
Jitter is playback of the bits in a wavering output frequency..eg
44.1kHz+- few khz. The frequency of changes in the root/base frequency
of 44.1Khz is in the Khz range as well (unlike a few hertz in the rpm
of a turntable). Why is the playback not happening at a rock steady
44.1Khz ? This is
SoftwireEngineer;663777 Wrote:
Jitter is playback of the bits in a wavering output frequency..eg
44.1kHz+- few khz. The frequency of changes in the root/base frequency
of 44.1Khz is in the Khz range as well (unlike a few hertz in the rpm
of a turntable). Why is the playback not happening at
soundcheck;663288 Wrote:
Hi folks.
FYI.
I'll release TT3.0 next week on the 22nd. On the 20th I'll release a
Beta,
just to get some feedback from the early adopters .
Sorry for the delay.
You can expect lots of changes an improvements.
I guess many of you will like it. ;)
adamdea;663864 Wrote:
I'm not an expert on this area (or engineering of any sort) but an
interested reader might wish to consider the links I have provided in
my post linked below to articles written by people who are.
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=657572postcount=13
soundcheck;663288 Wrote:
Hi folks.
FYI.
I'll release TT3.0 next week on the 22nd. On the 20th I'll release a
Beta,
just to get some feedback from the early adopters .
Cheers
Is 7.7 going to be required? I've been avoiding it like the plague.
--
Jeff Flowerday
pippin;656569 Wrote:
The real fun starts when you do double-blind tests (yes, I know, never
do double-blind tests with audiophiles. Scientific methodology is evil
by definition) with low-bitrate mp3s. Yes, people will be able to tell
the difference. The fun is what they find to sound better.
soundcheck;663288 Wrote:
Hi folks.
FYI.
I'll release TT3.0 next week on the 22nd. On the 20th I'll release a
Beta,
just to get some feedback from the early adopters .
Sorry for the delay.
You can expect lots of changes an improvements.
I guess many of you will like it. ;)
Mnyb;663310 Wrote:
be carefull with Wellborne labs , they are a known fraud ( google ),
they does not always deliver a product sometimes they just take your
money, it's a lottery .
for details just ask me.
Technically it migth not be anything wrong with the PS enjoy your
product .
just had a rather long look at this thread. very interesting. I have
used Klaus' mods in the past, but due to changing residence didn't get
back to using it. At that time it made a difference, though not huge.
Still, a difference (for the better) only with SW is a HUGE thing in an
audiophile
Hi folks.
FYI.
I'll release TT3.0 next week on the 22nd. On the 20th I'll release a
Beta,
just to get some feedback from the early adopters .
Sorry for the delay.
You can expect lots of changes an improvements.
I guess many of you will like it. ;)
USB DAC support is still not supported (I
soundcheck;663288 Wrote:
Hi folks.
FYI.
I'll release TT3.0 next week on the 22nd. On the 20th I'll release a
Beta,
just to get some feedback from the early adopters .
Sorry for the delay.
You can expect lots of changes an improvements.
I guess many of you will like it. ;)
be carefull with Wellborne labs , they are a known fraud ( google ),
they does not always deliver a product sometimes they just take your
money, it's a lottery .
for details just ask me.
Technically it migth not be anything wrong with the PS enjoy your
product .
With that kind of bussines
Zorglub;661398 Wrote:
Vaporware...
Great first post, it's people like you who probably make Klaus not want
to release it at all.
Personally, I've been patiently waiting/hoping for 3.0 to be released.
It's worth money to me.
--
Jeff Flowerday
Klaus is doing it for free, but if you like his software why not make a
small contribution? I did.
There's a link on his page.
--
firedog
GIK Acoustics Room Treatments. Tranquil PC fanless server running
Vortexbox OS; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-DAC-V3,
classDaudio
Zorglub;661398 Wrote:
Vaporware...
Sadly typical these days. Why contribute when you can criticize? I
guess knowledge redistribution is now added to the *me* list.
What is the color of the sky in your world?
--
toby10
Vaporware...
--
Zorglub
Zorglub's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=50248
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742
___
Zorglub;661398 Wrote:
Vaporware...
Can I suggest that you try to be more considerate?
Some people, such as soundcheck, have spent a great deal of time
developing stuff and then sharing it to the benefit of a lot of people.
They don't have to release anything at all, at any time. If people do
PasTim;661433 Wrote:
Can I suggest that you try to be more considerate?
Some people, such as soundcheck, have spent a great deal of time
developing stuff and then sharing it to the benefit of a lot of people.
They don't have to release anything at all, at any time. If people do
not
Zorglub;661398 Wrote:
Vaporware...
The expectation should be set correctly. We are getting someone's RD
for free. He has no reason to publish it out. So stop trashing
people for non-delivery
--
kiat
kiat's Profile:
Today is October 1st... Any news?
--
cvj
cvj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2979
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742
adamdea;656532 Wrote:
I am with you on this Tim. Not having a profession background in
electronics nor an academic qualification, I have had to spend a lot of
time catching up to a basic level. Now there are no incontestable
statements in subjective hifi forumland, but there is I think
The real fun starts when you do double-blind tests (yes, I know, never
do double-blind tests with audiophiles. Scientific methodology is evil
by definition) with low-bitrate mp3s. Yes, people will be able to tell
the difference. The fun is what they find to sound better.
So much for trust your
pippin;656569 Wrote:
The real fun starts when you do double-blind tests (yes, I know, never
do double-blind tests with audiophiles. Scientific methodology is evil
by definition) with low-bitrate mp3s. Yes, people will be able to tell
the difference. The fun is what they find to sound better.
Yes, of course, but I would not be too hopeful. The way mp3 works
(unless you optimize for encoding speed, not quality) will not even out
characteristics but do just the opposite and exaggerate them by
compressing away stuff the exaggerations tend to hide. This is getting
more obvious the lower
JohnSwenson;656501 Wrote:
The issue of ground plane noise can cause problems even with an optical
connection.
It has to do with the transmitter, either electrical (coax) or optical,
the input to the transmitter has a threshold, a voltage at which it
sees the input as changing from a one
The jitter discussion is not about lost bits.
The way SPDIF works (or better: as it was originally supposed to work)
the source (here usually the Squeezebox) drives the clock for the DAC,
NOT the device which does the actual conversion. Since the DAC is
essentially a low-pass filter (OK, I'm
pippin;656591 Wrote:
The jitter discussion is not about lost bits.
The way SPDIF works (or better: as it was originally supposed to work)
the source (here usually the Squeezebox) drives the clock for the DAC,
NOT the device which does the actual conversion. Since the DAC is
essentially a
adamdea;656596 Wrote:
I mean for heaven's sake we know the data is sampled at a sample rate
of 44.1kHz, so why can't the data simply be decoded with a clock at
that rate? Only becasue of a possible over-underrun of data: does that
sound like an insurmountable problem?
Basically as you
89 pages of otherwise intelligent people tossing around hogwash...go
figure :D
--
audiomuze
*'Linux finally gets a great audio tagger'
(http://www.ubuntugeek.com/linux-finally-gets-a-great-audio-tagger.html):
'puddletag' (http://puddletag.sourceforge.net/)*
audiomuze;656622 Wrote:
89 pages of otherwise intelligent people tossing around hogwash...go
figure :D
And your point is?
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF
pippin;656602 Wrote:
No, it's not that simple and this is also why SPDIF was originally
designed as it is.
The problem is that there is no such thing as a 44.1 kHz clock. You
have a clocking device in your source and your DAC and both will have a
frequency of 44.1 kHz +/- some deviation and
Phil Leigh;656291 Wrote:
A mixture... All sorts... S/pdif, TOSLINK, adat light pipe, aes/ebu
etc...
and
Indeed... Given the large number of optical connections used in pro
studios...
I foolishly assumed you meant that opticals were preferred.
I am now (as usual) none the wiser, baffled and
PasTim;656460 Wrote:
and
I foolishly assumed you meant that opticals were preferred.
I am now (as usual) none the wiser, baffled and confused.
I think Phil's point was simply that they are widely used and that if
they were obviously inferior to coax they would not be.
--
adamdea
adamdea;656476 Wrote:
I think Phil's point was simply that they are widely used and that if
they were obviously inferior to coax they would not be.
Correct. I don't usually have this much trouble communicating... :-)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a
The issue of ground plane noise can cause problems even with an optical
connection.
It has to do with the transmitter, either electrical (coax) or optical,
the input to the transmitter has a threshold, a voltage at which it
sees the input as changing from a one to a zero, noise on the ground
pin
That's a completely different issue that gives rise to jitter which
various dacs handle differently. Ground plane -borne noise is
eliminated by galvanic isolation.
Modern TOSLINK interfaces that work extremely reliably at 24/96 are
clearly superior to the 1983 variety...
--
Phil Leigh
You
Phil Leigh;656481 Wrote:
Correct. I don't usually have this much trouble communicating... :-)
I'm sure it's my fault for being a bit thick or ignorant, or both :)
I will say, however, that the whole topic of digital audio transmission
is massively confusing, with so many contradictory
PasTim;656522 Wrote:
I'm sure it's my fault for being a bit thick or ignorant, or both :)
I will say, however, that the whole topic of digital audio transmission
is massively confusing, with so many contradictory statements being made
(often extremely forcefully, to put it mildly), that it
Phil Leigh;656527 Wrote:
The noise we are talking about doesn't change the bits, which is just as
well or computers would be uselessly unpredictable!
But unlike a computer, spdif has a clock mixed in with the bits and the
noise CAN interfere with the certainty of the start/end of the clock
1 - 100 of 683 matches
Mail list logo
