Are you decoding flac at the server and not at the device (file settings
in SBS)? If so, the files won't play on the duet, as the decoding is
done at the native level, which is too high for the Duet.
If you have a Duet and a Touch on your network and want the files to
play on both, you need to
Phil Leigh;622059 Wrote:
SOX is already installed when SBS is installed. SOX is used to playback
192 or 176.4 files by resampling them to 96 or 88.2.
SOX does VERY high quality resampling and can convert between
non-multiples with no quality problems.
When I play 96-24 files on the touch
I believe from your original post, you indicated that Squeezeboxserver
is running on a NAS. If that's the case, transcoding may not be setup,
as most NAS boxes do not have the processing power to support
transcoding - therefore SOX may not even be installed in your
application. It may be
Sox is installed and supported on ReadyNAS devices which the OP
mentions. All the x86 based ReadyNAS are capable of transcoding.
--
snottmonster
snottmonster's Profile:
According to the 'wiki Hardware comparison'
(http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Hardware_comparison), all
Squeezeboxen after the SLIMP3 have two clocks.
--
Soulkeeper
-that is not dead which can eternal lie. and with strange aeons even
death may die.-
touch + duet + boom + radio /
Soulkeeper;622502 Wrote:
According to the 'wiki Hardware comparison'
(http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Hardware_comparison), all
Squeezeboxen after the SLIMP3 have two clocks. (Except the Transporter
and Touch with three clocks).
The touch has two oscillators used for determining the
dhinesh;621992 Wrote:
2) Transporter: Will not use the DAC on the transporter as the Audio
Research Dac 8 is far superior. *It has two oscillators: one for
multiples of 44.1 KHZ and one for multiples of 48 KHZ so we avoid
fractional sampling and the music is played at the native frequency.*
adamdea;621745 Wrote:
Only playing. Mind you the record now states that you have always had
them.
Seriously though- bearing in mind the enormous amount of money you have
apparently spent on your system, if you do want to go down the music
server /squeezebox route you might as well do it
2) Transporter: Will not use the DAC on the transporter as the Audio
Research Dac 8 is far superior. It has two oscillators: one for
multiples of 44.1 KHZ and one for multiples of 48 KHZ so we avoid
fractional sampling and the music is played at the native frequency.
Have some 88.2 khz
dhinesh;621992 Wrote:
Speakers: yup! have always had them and seem to have erased it from the
signature when updating :)
Thanks for all the input. Let me share my thoughts with y
2) Transporter: Will not use the DAC on the transporter as the Audio
Research Dac 8 is far superior. It has
adamdea;622011 Wrote:
...The touch has 2 different oscillators actually. I know this because i
replaced at Audio upgrades (maybe now called Fidelity audio or
something).
Some dacs do automatically convert sample rates- but I didn't know that
all of them (apart from AR) did. I am not sure
adamdea;622011 Wrote:
Anyway maybe you can use the Touch usb out with the Audio Research DAC.
Is there a MOD for this? Do you know the link? Noted all your points
with thanks. Will see if I can demo the transporter and compare.
--
dhinesh
Squeezebox Touch, Duet and Classic, Ayre C 5 XE MP
Phil Leigh;622025 Wrote:
Most DAC's do not resample. The Touch does not resample.
Some DAC's use an ASRC chip to resample. Native rate playback is
irrelevant when using ASRC or SOX on the SBS. This is an enduring myth
that needs busting :-)
(NB do not confuse with oversampling which is
dhinesh;622054 Wrote:
Hi. Heard of SOX but not sure what it is? is it a plugin? Read about it
somewhere but do not know how to install it? What does it do and how do
you install it? benefits?
Please advise. Thanks
SOX is already installed when SBS is installed. SOX is used to playback
192
JezA;619070 Wrote:
Add up all the money you propose to spend on fancy power supplies,
cables, NAS's and other voodoo.
Spend it on a Transporter.
Job done, right.
I agree on this one. The transporter has much better DAC's. I have
both in similar setups and have moved each of them back
dhinesh;622052 Wrote:
Is there a MOD for this? Do you know the link? Noted all your points
with thanks. Will see if I can demo the transporter and compare.
On the touch forum (apparently works with ayre dac but not all others)
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82110highlight=USB
garym;621267 Wrote:
Dhinesh, You realize this post was a joke right? If not, you might be a
customer for these products.;-)
http://www.coconut-audio.com/
Ha Ha! I missed that! Just saw the shunyata misspelt and replied. ha
Ha! I am cracking up! loved coconut audio as well. on the
dhinesh;621655 Wrote:
on the serious side, can any one of you give me input to help improve my
set up?
Am a very serious audiophile and need good sound. The convenience of
the touch and the other squeezebox gizmos is amazing: better than
picking up a CD everytime I want to listen to
adamdea;621719 Wrote:
Having analysed out your system quite carefully, I reckon your problem
is that you don't have any speakers.
speakers are NHT 3.3
tks for the note.
--
dhinesh
Squeezebox Touch, Duet and Classic, Ayre C 5 XE MP CD Player, Audio
Research Ref 5 Preamp, Audio Research
adamdea;621719 Wrote:
Having analysed out your system quite carefully, I reckon your problem
is that you don't have any speakers.
Some audiophiles end up overdoing the transparency and blacker
blacks thing
--
aubuti
dhinesh;621724 Wrote:
speakers are NHT 3.3
tks for the note.
Only playing. Mind you the record now states that you have always had
them.
Seriously though- bearing in mind the enormous amount of money you have
apparently spent on your system, if you do want to go down the music
server
adamdea;621745 Wrote:
Only playing. Mind you the record now states that you have always had
them.
Seriously though- bearing in mind the enormous amount of money you have
apparently spent on your system, if you do want to go down the music
server /squeezebox route you might as well do it
garym;621759 Wrote:
or consider picking up either a used Transporter or new Transporter SE
to use as your SB player.
Router ethernet Computer Server running SbS Transporter
(connected with either WIFI or ethernet) either (a) XLR outputs to
preamp/amp (i.e., use internal Transporter
adamdea;621766 Wrote:
Agreed, see my point 2
oops. Sorry. Reading about Soundcheck's mods always gives me a
temporary memory loss. Something to do with the 100% volume mod.;-)
--
garym
garym's Profile:
garym;621768 Wrote:
oops. Sorry. Reading about Soundcheck's mods always gives me a temporary
memory loss. Something to do with the 100% volume mod.;-)
HAHHAHAH!
I´m getting the popcorns. :)
--
johann
johann's
Genius satire. The guys at Hydrogen Audio would probably give you a
medal if you posted there.
I will say however, that wired works much better on my system, in terms
of almost no blips, drop outs, rebuffering etc. Especially with hi-res.
But I'm not making any claims about SQ.
--
firedog
firedog;621182 Wrote:
I will say however, that wired works much better on my system, in terms
of almost no blips, drop outs, rebuffering etc. Especially with hi-res.
But I'm not making any claims about SQ.
Yes, this is the strength of WIRED. One is not subject to weak WIFI
signals,
satkinsn;621029 Wrote:
The Linux server with Shinyota power cable is something else again; all
the above is true, but a sense of *detail* joins the fray. It's as if I
could drill down through endless layers of detail and there would
always be more to find. Yet I don't feel as if any
dhinesh;621260 Wrote:
Do you mean Shunyata Power Cable? Which one?
Dhinesh, You realize this post was a joke right? If not, you might be a
customer for these products.;-)
http://www.coconut-audio.com/
--
garym
dhinesh;621260 Wrote:
Do you mean Shunyata Power Cable? Which one?
I must be in the bizzaro world. :rolleyes:
--
ghostrider
ghostrider's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18959
View this thread:
dhinesh;621260 Wrote:
Do you mean Shunyata Power Cable? Which one?
Apologies. I was writing quickly and managed to misstate name. It is a
Shin-ola power cable, which I assume is Americanized.
s.
--
satkinsn
satkinsn's
satkinsn;621280 Wrote:
Apologies. I was writing quickly and managed to misstate name. It is a
Shin-ola power cable, which I assume is Americanized.
s.
I just spit out my coffee. ;-p
--
garym
garym's Profile:
satkinsn;621280 Wrote:
Apologies. I was writing quickly and managed to misstate name. It is a
Shin-ola power cable, which I assume is Americanized.
s.
For those unfamiliar with American idioms and movies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinola
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsyS0oHLNFA
earwaxer9;620958 Wrote:
Yes to wired. The Transporter sounds better over ethernet. Case closed.
Cat5 or Cat7. No difference. Length of cable - no difference.
Even -if- wifi really does sound different to wired, it is nothing to
do with jitter. There is no jitter at all, zero, involved in
satkinsn;621029 Wrote:
Not necessarily. I have extensively tested spreadsheets and can find
subtle but real differences.
Of course, you have to have a system capable of resolving those
differences in the first place - you're simply not going to see the
difference in two Excel spreadsheets
garym;621034 Wrote:
you made my day.
+1 lmfao!!!
--
Eriko
Eriko's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=38520
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=86419
That was incredible! +1
--
Curt962
Transporter...TouchBoom..
Curt962's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=31949
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=86419
andynormancx;619225 Wrote:
There is no jitter involved in the networking between your NAS and the
player, zero. That article you linked to is complete nonsense.
Yes to wired. The Transporter sounds better over ethernet. Case closed.
Cat5 or Cat7. No difference. Length of cable - no
Phil Leigh;619274 Wrote:
OP: Back to ethernet... there are supposed to be isolating transformers
at each end of an ethernet connection...
Yep.
* And a big fad polluted ground feeding all kind of mess into your
device.
No, there is nothing like an ITU-T (Telecommunications standards)
Computer Audiophile in its review of the touch claims that the SPDIF
output of the touch is bit perfect but I have my doubts as my ears are
not HAPPY!
Of course the SBT is bit perfect, but that doesn't necessarily have
anything to do with what you hear. From bit perfect to the analogue
you
soundcheck;619567 Wrote:
* And a big fad polluted ground feeding all kind of mess into your
device.
The Touch ground becomes the tip of your antenna.
Do you mean this happens with shielded, unshielded or both type of
cables?
Cheers
Johan
--
johann
I can't recall if the OP was ever asked to check the SbS settings
(SETTINGS PLAYERS Audio (dropdown menu), to make sure that BITRATE
LIMITING is not turned on. If it is on, the OP may be listening to mp3
at LAME -V9 level. This would explain an unhappiness with the sound.
--
garym
soundcheck;619567 Wrote:
Yep.
* And a big fad polluted ground feeding all kind of mess into your
device.
No, there is nothing like an ITU-T (Telecommunications standards)
conform grounding in place in 99.999% of all households.
The Touch ground becomes the tip of your antenna.
*
soundcheck;619567 Wrote:
* though wired is still better than WLAN, which causes other problems
inside
the Touch.
My DAC rejects jitter and I connect to it with an optical cable. Where
is the problem?
Darren
--
darrenyeats
firedog;619570 Wrote:
Of course the SBT is bit perfect, but that doesn't necessarily have
anything to do with what you hear. From bit perfect to the analogue
you hear lots of things happen: Jitter, RF interference, filtering etc.
Noted. Taken care to ensure the rest of the equipment is good
dhinesh;619620 Wrote:
If you take a look at hiface (m2 tech) and the modified hi face, Pure
music, amarra, etc their whole selling point is to give you a bit
perfect signal at the USB output and feed it to your dac via a digital
cable.
That's not correct.
Amarra. Pure Music and so
dhinesh;619620 Wrote:
However, nothing REPEAT nothing can beat the convenience of a NAS with
all your music. Imagine using a hiface off your laptop. How much can
you fit it? NOT MUCH as they recommend using Solid state drives. The
bigger sizes are very expensive. I need 2 TB to fit my
magiccarpetride;619097 Wrote:
EVERYTHING pretty much vanishes under the double blind ABX test
circumstances. That's the fact that invalidates such a clever test.
You can read up on it all over the web -- people. experienced
audiophiles, have reportedly never been able to pass ANY ABX tests
magiccarpetride;619097 Wrote:
EVERYTHING pretty much vanishes under the double blind ABX test
circumstances. That's the fact that invalidates such a clever test.
You can read up on it all over the web -- people. experienced
audiophiles, have reportedly never been able to pass ANY ABX tests
jeza;619070 Wrote:
add up all the money you propose to spend on fancy power supplies,
cables, nas's and other voodoo.
Spend it on a transporter.
Job done, right.
--
michael123
Please fix http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=16814
dhinesh;619107 Wrote:
1) Check out:
http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/p/squeezebox-touch-great-base-for-network.html
Dac is very good. Was using a benchmark dac1 and changed it for the
audio research dac 8. It sounds great when the digital out from the CD
player is plugged into it.
michael123;619164 Wrote:
Get the transporter, man. Your system deserves it.
Transporter has completely different digital section
are you using the transporter wired or wireless (WLAN). I want to stick
with WLAN as I prefer it, and am wondering if the transporter sounds
good using WLAN. There
dhinesh;619175 Wrote:
are you using the transporter wired or wireless (WLAN). I want to stick
with WLAN as I prefer it, and am wondering if the transporter sounds
good using WLAN. There are two issues here that we are discussing: 1)
Mods on the touch (2) getting good sound using wlan.
dhinesh;619175 Wrote:
are you using the transporter wired or wireless (WLAN). I want to stick
with WLAN as I prefer it, and am wondering if the transporter sounds
good using WLAN. There are two issues here that we are discussing: 1)
Mods on the touch (2) getting good sound using wlan.
dhinesh;618995 Wrote:
After researching a bit and reading up on the forum, I would like to set
up my squeezebox touch as follows and any input, criticism, guidance,
etc to help all of us get on the right path would help. I will post
back my experience so others can learn as well:
Current
darrenyeats;619207 Wrote:
Well, here's my opinion.
What about wired LAN? This is what I don't get. It seems to me overkill
to worry about WLAN. But paradoxically, wired LAN introduces an
electrical connection between the computer server and the player and it
is precisely that which
dhinesh;619224 Wrote:
Now it seems that to keep the worms to a minimum you need to use 2
routers. One at the NAS and one at the TOUCH and ensure the cables are
CAT 5 or CAT 6 and that they are short as long cables introduce JITTER.
There is no jitter involved in the networking between your
andynormancx;619225 Wrote:
There is no jitter involved in the networking between your NAS and the
player, zero. That article you linked to is complete nonsense.
Yep - that article is complete cr@p... and has no relevance at all to
this forum or topic.
OP: Back to ethernet... there are
After perusing this thread, I thought I would post a breakdown of what I
have spent on my audiophile setup. These items are the money I have
spent specifically to get good sound. Other costs, like my PC, network
switches, remote control devices, etc. are not included because they
are
After researching a bit and reading up on the forum, I would like to set
up my squeezebox touch as follows and any input, criticism, guidance,
etc to help all of us get on the right path would help. I will post
back my experience so others can learn as well:
Current Setup:
1) Do not have an
You can do all the clever stuff you like to the power for the NAS, but
it won't make any changes to the data it delivers to the player.
The Touch output is 100% bit perfect, as is are digital outputs on any
other Squeezebox players when set to 100% volume with replaygain and
fade in/out
I have no Touch and love my Transporter but from reading all kinds of
things making the Touch sounding better it must be a real broken design
;)
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
The weak link in all this is the ReadyNas NV\+. It is way underpowered
for running SbS. The readynas Pro will be ok in this regard. The rest
of your suggestions are mostly snake oil as the TOUCH will already have
bit perfect data via the S/PDIF input.
--
garym
Wombat;619014 Wrote:
I have no Touch and love my Transporter but from reading all kinds of
things making the Touch sounding better it must be a real broken design
;)
You gotta love your Transporter. You paid a lot if money for it. ;)
I guess not very many people have considered to tweak
soundcheck;619028 Wrote:
Again. The Touch, a little tweaked, must be considered a door opener
into audiophile spheres, especially if used as Transport. By no means
I'd consider it a broken device.
I still want to see any measurement at the digital out that prooves any
of these tweaks do
dhinesh;618995 Wrote:
Planned Setup:
1)Perform Soundcheck mods as posted on his tutorial
2)Plug the NAS and the router into a conditioner / filter. Thinking of
Shunyata Hydra 2. If I use a UPS, the hydra will go into the APC 1000 on
line UPS. Use an audiophile cable from the
Add up all the money you propose to spend on fancy power supplies,
cables, NAS's and other voodoo.
Spend it on a Transporter.
Job done, right.
--
JezA
JezA's Profile:
JezA;619070 Wrote:
Add up all the money you propose to spend on fancy power supplies,
cables, NAS's and other voodoo.
Spend it on a Transporter.
Job done, right.
+1 to this
Also on my top list of audio improvements: http://www.gooseisland.com
--
SuperQ
About tweaking in general i have learned my lessons. I was hunting after
so much things bettering the sound of everything in my sound-chain.
You can read some of my findings on diyaudio.com When i was at it i
believed in everything i heard and was comfortable with it so i posted
about.
While
If the people who design and make products design and make them properly
they shouldn't need tweaking. If they do need tweaking, why throw good
money after bad? Why not just buy something that works right in the
first place?
--
JezA
On 18/03/11 23:10, JezA wrote:
If the people who design and make products design and make them properly
they shouldn't need tweaking. If they do need tweaking, why throw good
money after bad? Why not just buy something that works right in the
first place?
I don't disagree with your
On 03/18/2011 07:10 PM, JezA wrote:
If the people who design and make products design and make them properly
they shouldn't need tweaking. If they do need tweaking, why throw good
money after bad? Why not just buy something that works right in the
first place?
I don't agree with this as a
I agree that many designs have trade-offs. But in the context of this
thread, where the o/p was trying to improve a Touch by (among other
things) changing the power cable on his NAS, I am trying to suggest
that, in the first instance, the best people to improve a Touch are
Logitech themselves;
I shouldn´t have joined that thread maybe but how people find the Touch
reacting on so many magic tweaks only to sound much better at the
digital out is just insane.
People describe differences sometimes that even some totaly different
speaker models will have problems to archive :)
I bet 90% of
Wombat;619035 Wrote:
I wonder how many claims about bettering tweaks will vanish under such
circumstances.
EVERYTHING pretty much vanishes under the double blind ABX test
circumstances. That's the fact that invalidates such a clever test.
You can read up on it all over the web -- people.
magiccarpetride;619097 Wrote:
Does this mean that we're just a bunch of jerks who are imagining that,
upon paying lots of money, we get our money's worth? Draw the
conclusions for yourself...
I did abx tests 10 years back mcr and i passed several, so your
assumption here may hit the nail
JezA;619084 Wrote:
If the people who design and make products design and make them properly
they shouldn't need tweaking. If they do need tweaking, why throw good
money after bad? Why not just buy something that works right in the
first place?
This is wrong. Touch was designed to attract
Wombat;619098 Wrote:
I did abx tests 10 years back mcr and i passed several, so your
assumption here may hit the nail on the head.
I'm sure you have the gold trophy that you proudly display on your
mantelpiece. Also, I'm sure there is a wikipedia entry that celebrates
your ABX
magiccarpetride;619100 Wrote:
I'm sure you have the gold trophy that you proudly display on your
mantelpiece. Also, I'm sure there is a wikipedia entry that celebrates
your ABX accomplishments. Can you send us the link?
What you talk about? I have delivered several samples for tuning mp3
and
SuperQ;619050 Wrote:
1) not sure what these are
2) Worthless from an audio perspective. Good idea to plug into an APC
SmartUPS or Liebert PSA UPS.
3) Worthless, not how bits work
4) Worthless, not how bits work
5) Worthless
You seem to be introducing a ton of completely useless and
magiccarpetride;619099 Wrote:
This is wrong. Touch was designed to attract mainstream market, not
audiophiles. Hence they threw in a cheap-ass touch screen, as candy
coating on a product. But, from the audio quality perspective, that
touch screen is criminally bad, as it degrades the sound
magiccarpetride;619097 Wrote:
EVERYTHING pretty much vanishes under the double blind ABX test
circumstances. That's the fact that invalidates such a clever test.
That's just... not true at all.
First of all, I personally have taken a fair number of ABX tests. Some
I passed, some I failed.
82 matches
Mail list logo
