inguz Wrote: > I think you nailed it. > > There are lots of reasons I like SqueezeBox. Of course the hardware, > which has a really excellent engineering & attention to detail, while > still being built to an affordable price-point. But the system > architecture overall is so nice, and this separation of a medium-power > network-connected audio device from the server has a huge amount of > flexibility. Then there's been some really smart business thinking > from SlimDevices about extending this (the SqueezeNetwork, the Pandora > hook-up, etc -- with all their rough edges -- are really great > beginnings). > > Eventually, high-power DSP (powerful enough to process long filters) > will be everywhere. I totally expect to see mid-market "home stereo" > amorphous-line-array systems with dozens of loudspeakers per system, > each containing wicked powerful processors, coordinating with each > other to recreate the sound experience (and doing a better job of it > than two channels usually does today). But for now, in a two-channel > SB system, the PC is [a] basically free, and [b] easily fast enough to > run lots of fancy DSP algorithms. (Powerful enough to run room > correction on several squeezeboxes simultaneously). > > Talking of price-points, I've always been a cheapskate audiophile, and > SB lets me play that game. My main system for a long time was a > Linn/Basik/K9, to a homebrew triode pre with dumpster-salvaged Naim > phono boards, to a salvaged-and-rebuilt Quad 405, to some quite nice > hand-me-down Monitor Audio speakers. That all set me back a few > hundred quid, back in the day. Now, a SB-based system can give better > price/performance below $1000 than anything else on the market. (OK, > $1500 or $2000 if you include the computer). And, whatever quality > your analog stages, there's a whole lot of value-add in the digital > domain too. > > > > Progress: slow but promising. Not yet downloadable. Of course I'll > announce here when there's a generally usable version. > > > > The 9-band plugin only stops there because the UI is the "INPUT.Bar" > control (same as the SB volume control, but with a center-zero) for > each band. It would be possible to build a vertical-slider-control > thingy, but that's beyond my leet perl skillz right now. > > But the aim of this EQ is just to tailor for personal taste *after* > correction filtering has run the early-reflection compensation, the > room booms & peaks, and so on. Like the old Quad "tilt" tone control, > a gentle touch goes a long way. For most situations (e.g. adjusting > for a particular album's balance) I think bass/mid/treb is enough. And > although I don't have a shippable "quietness" control yet, early > experiments in that area look likely to solve 90% of my tone-control > wants. > > - Hugh yclept inguz
The possibilities are exciting. Thanks for all of your work in this area, Hugh. -- azinck3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ azinck3's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3967 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24519 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
