pingpong;152150 Wrote:
Hi,
Looking for used DAC To partner with the SB3 to improve the sound. Over
at my place, I could get the NorthStar 192 or Meridian 563 or Musical
Fidelity A324 at about the same price.
May I know which is most compatible with the SB3. Looking for warm,
lush and
tomjtx;152134 Wrote:
I was thinking the theta was a dac only.
But I think you should try the TP dac and run its analog using the
theta as a line level preamp.
You can also run the TP straight to the amp, but use the attenuation
inside the TP that works through the RCA outs.
There is a
pingpong;152150 Wrote:
Hi,
Looking for used DAC To partner with the SB3 to improve the sound. Over
at my place, I could get the NorthStar 192 or Meridian 563 or Musical
Fidelity A324 at about the same price.
May I know which is most compatible with the SB3. Looking for warm,
lush and
I am not hoping for or expecting anyone to believe in burn in - the
issue is not a religious one. But I hope there is enough here to
caution about making hasty judgements about the sound of any component
- regardless of what it is that burns in. That's all...
--
Jenks
DirectViewer;152165 Wrote:
Thanks, Tom, I'll give it a try.
Ley us know what you end up liking the best.
--
tomjtx
tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449
View this thread:
I have the NorthStar and like it alot, very detailed without being hard
to listen to, it pairs well to the Squeezebox. Unfortunately I have
them hooked up to all tube equipment. I listened to the Meridian and
Northstar on solid state and went with the Northstar.
The Musical fidelity equipment is
I use a eoku soundbridge with an A324 in a secondary system and have
never really enjoyed the sound. I find it cold and lifeless. This may
be because of the upsampling.
By comparison, in my other system I use an SB3 integrated with a RAKK
DAC and the sound is much warmer and more detailed.
I
Jenks;152190 Wrote:
I am not hoping for or expecting anyone to believe in burn in - the
issue is not a religious one. But I hope there is enough here to
caution about making hasty judgements about the sound of any component
- regardless of what it is that burns in. That's all...
I don't
Jitterbug;152248 Wrote:
...never really enjoyed the sound. I find it cold and lifeless. This may
be because of the upsampling.
I turn the upsampling off in my Shanling. I find that it seems to
throw detail forwards, rather than leaving it in place. Superficially
it sounds better, but it's
adamslim;152268 Wrote:
I did hear an upsampling dcS full monty system some time ago and it
sounded astonishing, though. It was a £20k CD system in a full system
worth well north of £100k all-in, so I suppose it should...
Adam
Ummm...You don't think that other gear might have made the
(Can someone tell me how to quote a previous message?)
'ezkcdude': you mentioned doing a DBT to confirm if the differences are
real. I notice that you list MIT cables as part of your equipment. Have
you done DBT tests with the MIT cables and confirm that they indeed
give you a different sound?
Coffee;152296 Wrote:
(Can someone tell me how to quote a previous message?)
'ezkcdude': you mentioned doing a DBT to confirm if the differences are
real. I notice that you list MIT cables as part of your equipment. Have
you done DBT tests with the MIT cables and confirm that they indeed
I recently changed my SB1 setup to go through my BelCanto II DAC. This
has one coax and one optical input, and as my Pioneer Elite DV-59Avi
universal player uses the coax for Redbook output, I had to go optical.
I took the opportunity to trial cables and was surprised at the
difference they made.
ezkcdude;152283 Wrote:
Ummm...You don't think that other gear might have made the Shanling
sound nice, too? Comparing DAC's in completely different systems is
completely worthless. What you need to do is spend $100K and surround
your A/B comparison with really nice gear, volume match, do
Did you in any way blind this test? How can you be sure your
expectation of better sound from the high-dollar cable didn't color
your perception of sound quality?
What factors could possibly affect signal transmission over a short run
in an optical cable enough to produce an actual audible
ezkcdude;152299 Wrote:
Nope, but I didn't make any claims about their superiority, did I?
Oh, and to answer your parenthetical, just hit the Quote button. You
can quote me on that.
Understood. That's why I was careful not to say 'better', but
'different'.
I'm not trying to provoke
Well, I do believe DBT are the only way to truly detect real
differences, but I would not subject myself to such torture ;). Oh, and
I highly doubt that cables make a noticeable difference. When I first
became an audiophile I bought into all that hooey, but since then
I've changed my thinking.
By supported, do you mean it works or SlimDevices will give me
official technical support for this. That could be a significant
distinction.
Since server-side transcoding is very flexible, I'd say that any format
that can be understood by the server platform can work on the client.
Since
tomjtx;152224 Wrote:
Ley us know what you end up liking the best.
Yes, I shall.
My first step will be to download and install Slim Server because I
need to have that running smoothly before the hardware can work.
--
DirectViewer
jeffluckett;152305 Wrote:
Did you in any way blind this test? How can you be sure your
expectation of better sound from the high-dollar cable didn't color
your perception of sound quality?
What factors could possibly affect signal transmission over a short run
in an optical cable enough
I can't understand how there can be differences in digital cables.
As I understand it, in an optical cable, the S/PDIF reciever is looking
for a change in state between bright and dim, not bright and dim
themselves, but the transition. I suppose a sub-par cable would make
this job difficult and
Hi
sorry to hijack your thread but having a similar dilemma. Also using
MusicInfoScr and don't seem to be able to get what I'm looking for...
The issue seems to be that its not possible to set up the right hand
display so that it can be used for Analog VU meters (which look really
good on the
I was also thinking the Transporter screens aren't fully utilized to
their advantage yet. There's twice as much real estate now, more VFD
pixels than nearly any other device you can think of.
One cosmetic thing: when both screens are in spectrum analyzer mode and
the now playing text comes
Mark Lanctot;152320 Wrote:
I can't understand how there can be differences in digital cables.
As I understand it, in an optical cable, the S/PDIF reciever is looking
for a change in state between bright and dim, not bright and dim
themselves, but the transition. I suppose a sub-par cable
P Floding;152326 Wrote:
You are probably posting in the wrong forum.
Jitter is well known to cause nasty digititis.
OK, post edited, but I stand by the rest of it.
The Squeezebox/Transporter are very low-jitter devices and they sound
better than most other audio sources, so there must be
Hey guys,
Update... I got the 7db high-gain antennas from Linksys for my WAP54G
(I know its an old school AP but it works great) and then installed the
3.04 Hyperwap firmware to boost my TX power a little. I'm getting an
89% avg signal strength at the Transporter which is 2 rooms away with a
P Floding;152328 Wrote:
That could possibly be because they are identical, and the Monster label
costs the additional $40.
I recently purchased an HDTV, and was agape at the cost of HDMI cables
that were readily available, so I started reading reviews of the
various cables to see if the cost
Mark Lanctot;152331 Wrote:
OK, post edited, but I stand by the rest of it.
The Squeezebox/Transporter are very low-jitter devices and they sound
better than most other audio sources, so there must be something to it.
I guess I don't know enough about it to comment. However I'd think the
jeffluckett;152334 Wrote:
I recently purchased an HDTV, and was agape at the cost of HDMI cables
that were readily available, so I started reading reviews of the
various cables to see if the cost could at all be justified.
I found a review that tested a range of cables from a $10.00
P Floding;152337 Wrote:
Obviously!
There is no need to test HDMI cables. Either they work or they don't.
The whole business of testing them is stupidity.
There are no timing issues with HDMI that can affect picture quality.
Well, my point here was that HDMI is a digital cable ... as are
jeffluckett;152340 Wrote:
Well, my point here was that HDMI is a digital cable ... as are toslink
and coax.
As long as it's capable of transparently delivering the bits from one
end to the other, there should be no effect on the delivered sound.
I'd be surprised if a cable could
P Floding;152335 Wrote:
Almost everyone with just a little experience of hifi thinks speakers
are the most important component. In my experience the source
components are usually the real bandits when sound is bad. That and
bad connectors (even internally in the speakers). Surprisingly good
Mark Lanctot;152343 Wrote:
Yes but it's likely been many, many years since you had/heard
entry-level speakers. I would imagine you're going from $5000/pr
speakers to $6000/pr speakers now, surely the gains are smaller than
going from $100/pr Cerwin Vegas to $1000/pr Energy Cs like I
Ah, with that I'm afraid I can't help you. You could always experiment
yourself to find out, but that's certainly not as easy as a simple
chart.
--
CatBus
CatBus's Profile:
ctbarker32;152314 Wrote:
Hi,
I am a very happy three SB3 household.
As I convert my couple thousand CD collection to my SB3 network, I
often find my self asking if SB3 supports this or that.
For example, I would like to have in one place on the web site a table
listing all the
SuperQ;152368 Wrote:
Have you looked at this page:
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?HardwareComparison
That should be the definitive guide to the hardware.
Yes, I have looked at this but it illustrates my point in that it is
less than definitive in in its information. For example
You could always ask these guys:
http://www.world-designs.co.uk/forum/index.php
--
shane
shane's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5723
View this thread:
jeffluckett;152340 Wrote:
Anyway, you could more easily sell me on there being problems from
induced currents in a coax than you ever could on an optical cable.
Either the bits arrive at thier destination or they don't.
Not all digital standards are created equal - S/PDIF is synchronous,
Why not make a page in the wiki? That's what it's for.
--
Mark Lanctot
Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=29354
I noticed that many users are using a PSU with an SB3 and an external
DAC. If the DAC is a good one (that resamples the input digital
signal), why would a PSU to the SB3 make any difference? It's all
digital. I've never heard of anyone adding a PSU to a computer to make
it more 'accurate'!
--
First, let me agree that there's way too much emphasis on cables. I am
every bit the skeptic.
I did not do a blind fold test, but what I did do was observe the
ability to hear low-level details that are right on the edge of
resolution. I used A Case of You from Diana Krall's Live in Paris and
If
ceejay;152321 Wrote:
Hi, sorry to hijack your thread
I'm very relieved someone did!
MC
--
ModelCitizen
Now what?
Transporter Naim NAP 250 PMC OB1s.
Music catalog: http://modelcitizen.mine.nu/music.txt
ModelCitizen's
mschlack;152393 Wrote:
First, let me agree that there's way too much emphasis on cables. I am
every bit the skeptic.
I did not do a blind fold test, but what I did do was observe the
ability to hear low-level details that are right on the edge of
resolution. I used A Case of You from
Coffee;152395 Wrote:
I noticed that many users are using a PSU with an SB3 and an external
DAC. If the DAC is a good one (that resamples the input digital
signal), why would a PSU to the SB3 make any difference? It's all
digital. I've never heard of anyone adding a PSU to a computer to make
Part of the benefit of using Toslink or other fiber connections
is electrical isolation.
To properly evaluate Toslink vs Coax cables, you should disconnect the
Coax cable when listening to the Toslink.
All Toslink transceivers are not created equal, and like any
electronic devise, they benefit
I went through the same thing a few weeks ago and in the end went back
to the standard settings. Confused, you bet ya.
--
Greg Erskine
Greg Erskine's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7403
View this
This media server looks good. Is half the price of transporter and
support video as well
http://www.neodigits.com/new/body/products/Xline/x5000.asp
--
ackcheng
ackcheng's Profile:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28615
It's really intended for a separate market. BTW it's 1/4 the price of
the Transporter.
Personally I have no idea why the whole world is fascinated with video.
You have 100 000 devices to choose from in that field. Why does Slim
P Floding;152401 Wrote:
Read here:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/jitter1_e.html
According to the reference [10] quoted by the 'tnt' article:
http://www.epanorama.net/documents/audio/spdif.html
Small jitter D/A conversion is implemented by using separate PLL
clocks for data recover and
A good stable quiet supply reduces the jitter in digital circuits as
well. Delay times and transition times of digital circuits are
dependant on the supply voltage, so more tightly controlling the
voltage can improve the amount of jitter. Do some web searching on
over clocking the cpu in your
DCtoDaylight;152418 Wrote:
The clock and data are combined in the SPDIF signal, so any jitter in
the clock on the digital sending side has the potential to influence
the clock in the receiving DAC.
Hope this make sense!
Dave
Well, if asynchronous resampling is used in the DAC, then the
Mark
Personally I have no idea why the whole world is fascinated with video.[/QUOTE
Wrote:
Me neither. And, somehow video has become a requirement on new
portable music players.
--
fathom39
fathom39's Profile:
Mark Lanctot;152411 Wrote:
It's really intended for a separate market.
What market would that be?
BTW it's 1/4 the price of the Transporter.
It is, isn't it?
--
JJZolx
Jim
JJZolx's Profile:
I've found that turning off the (as yet) useless 2nd display to be the
best of all worlds. Until someone thinks up a good use for the thing.
--
JJZolx
Jim
JJZolx's Profile:
54 matches
Mail list logo
