hmmm ... there is no c-o-r-r-e-l-a-t-i-o-n between the sampling process
(analog-to digital and vice-versa) and the storing process: none, nada,
rien, nichts, niente. Sampling process has it clock reference sources
and power supply and these can effect jitter of *sampling*, but once it
is digital,
Eric Seaberg wrote:
> I've been in the recording biz since 1971 ... In the 'pro industry',
> there is now talk of hard-drives actually changing the sound of
> digitally recorded audio ... It effects those of us that create what
> you're buying... MUSIC!
garym, you are being way too kind. I call
Eric Seaberg wrote:
> I've been in the recording biz since 1971, having worked in all areas of
> it in Hollywood, Burbank, etc. In the 'pro industry', there is now talk
> of hard-drives actually changing the sound of digitally recorded audio,
> and it has to do with jitter that is acquired becau
garym wrote:
> My position is that unless something is wrong with one's system, there
> should be NO audible difference between the two methods. (yes, I've
> tried it both ways back when this sort of discussion began)
I've been in the recording biz since 1971, having worked in all areas of
it in
well I see you've now edited your post, but that certainly was the way I
read it
Transporter (Lounge)
Touch (Office)
Touch (Kitchen)
Radio (Bedroom)
Radio (Garage)
SqueezePlay 7.8 on 2 x Windows 7 PCs
LMS 7.7.3 on DIY UnRaid NAS now upgraded to 7.8 (06/01/2015)
Squeeze user since the SB1
and yet you accept that the reverse is true?
bizzare
Transporter (Lounge)
Touch (Office)
Touch (Kitchen)
Radio (Bedroom)
Radio (Garage)
SqueezePlay 7.8 on 2 x Windows 7 PCs
LMS 7.7.3 on DIY UnRaid NAS now upgraded to 7.8 (06/01/2015)
Squeeze user since the SB1
---
markiii wrote:
> and yet you accept that the reverse is true?
>
> bizzare
if you're responding to me, I don't accept that the reverse is true. My
position is that unless something is wrong with one's system, there
should be NO audible difference between the two methods. (yes, I've
tried it both
lake_eleven wrote:
> Any reasons for this as Touch is supposed to sound better with server
> decoding as per what I have read all these years!
No, it is not supposed to sound better with server decoding. This is the
fantasy pushed by a handful of folks that for some reason is taken as
gospel by
Had been using the setting to decode FLAC and WAV files on the server
ever since I bought SBT. Out of curiosity, changed the setting to decode
FLAC files on touch. The sound is more detailed now with lesser digital
harsh. There is a overall improvement in the presentation. I am using
LMS 7.9 with
