[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: Stick with SB1 or get SB2?
no problem. -- julian2002 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: Stick with SB1 or get SB2?
Guys I have double booked myself Sunday, so will have to delay it Sorry for the confusion -- lilolee Cheers Lee ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: FLAC onboard decoding v. server side in SB2
please back up these claims. You are saying that based on a non-blind subjective listen, our FLAC implementation is *broken*. The correctness of our FLAC decoder is empirical and all you need to do is save the bits at the output to test it. Please note that our implementation: 1) is based on the official FLAC sources - it is the exact same code base as the one that's running on your computer. 2) has been tested by us for bit-perfect output, by recording PCM output back into a computer 3) has also been confirmed by us and others to pass through non-PCM bitstreams correctly 4) has also be tested by the author of FLAC, Josh Coalson, for compatibility with the included test suite There are a couple known bugs and feature requests but none concerning accuracy, which is the entire point of using FLAC! http://tinyurl.com/ak3vc -- seanadams ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: FLAC onboard decoding v. server side in SB2
Timbo wrote: Hi there folks - I wonder if anyone can comment on my findings here as I think my brain has seized (well it is 1:30am and I shouldn’t be playing with my Squeezebox at this time of night...;-) Anyway after reading all the advice on the forum I eventually settled (after much trial and error!) on EAC for ripping and FLAC for compression (I would prefer to use totally uncompressed WAV or AIFF as I have loads of space and a wired connection to the SB2 - but obviously no tags for WAV show through in SlimServer and as far as I can make out there is no native support in EAC for making AIFF files (unless I missed something?) Anyway, just to check that FLAC really is no different to streaming the uncompressed WAV/AIFF file, I made a FLAC copy of an album (using external compression option in EAC) and a WAV copy (just clicking the WAV button in EAC) so I could compare the audio quality of each. I cued the tracks in FLAC/WAV alternate order in SlimServer and went to have a listen. Instantly I played the first track and then it’s WAV counterpart it was obvious the WAV copy was better! Now I have made sure SlimServer Player Settings/Audio/Bitrate Limiting is on ‘Unlimited’ (see I do read all the posts :-) - but I can tell the difference easily, no lengthy comparison required (although I did plenty of backwards and forwards testing on each track to make sure!) - the WAV file sounds more detailed within the first few seconds of listening. Now as I see here posted (and on Hydrogenaudio) lots of times that ‘lossless’ means ‘lossless and no messing’ so I thought I better look into this a bit further. Obviously one of SB2’s new features is built-in hardware decoding of FLAC on the fly, so looking in Server Settings/File Types I came across lots of ‘convert this to that’ type tick box options - so - I un-ticked FLAC -> FLAC (built-in) and made sure FLAC -> WAV (flac) was ticked (WAV -> WAV ticked also of course). Another set of listening tests later and now I really am confused, there might be a tiny difference, my ears are getting tired now, but it would appear to all intents and purposes that FLAC sounds pretty much the same as WAV...which of course it should really. My conclusion is this (bearing in mind it is late and I might be hearing strange things!) - server side decoding of FLAC and then SlimServer sending the WAV down the line sounds better than SB2 decoding of FLAC on the fly. Anyone else care to try this and let me know what they think? PS. This SB2 is an amazing piece of kit - I have SB2/Chord 64 DAC feeding Meridian 502/557 into Ruark speakers and I am hearing things in the mix I didn’t with my Meridian 508.24 - missing a little subtlety and airiness perhaps but that could be the DAC being a bit forward - Meridian 566.24 DAC on it’s way to check this out :-) Timbo, I discovered this as well a while back and have since used PCM rather than FLAC streaming with my unit. I find that at times the differences are quite apparent, and at others not so much so. Its hard to draw distinct conclusions from less than reproducible results. A more definitive test might be to capture and record the PCM output of the Squeezebox using both types of streaming and then compare the results. I believe that there are PC sound cards that can do this (MAudio is one I believe), but I unfortunately don't own one with such capabilities. At the time I discovered this difference, I posted this result to the newsgroup but was unable to provide anything but a subjective evaluation so the thread quietly died out. However, it's good to know that others can hear the same differences. - Ken ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: Wired vs. Wireless audio differences
Well, either you believe in science, or you don't! Since high-end audio is all about how it "sounds"... I can't fathom why somebody would nix blind listening tests. Actually, I'd luv to see Reviewers audiograms posted as a sidebar next to all their reviews! Now, THAT would be interesting! -- sleepysurf aerius i, nht sub two, yamaha rx-v1000 (pre/pro), sunfire cinema grand 200 ~five (vertically bi-amped), squeezebox2 (streaming cd-quality audio), 300gb buffalo linkstation (remote flac audio file storage), blue jeans cables. 'Click to see pix of my system' (http://www.martinloganowners.com/~tdacquis/forum/showthread.php?t=732) ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: FLAC onboard decoding v. server side in SB2
Well, I felt exactly the same way about audio quality comparing Wired vs. Wireless SB2. Finally conducted a BLIND listening test, which showed NO difference. See thread... http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=14811 Now, if you can score 70+% correct on a BLIND test, that would be significant. -- sleepysurf aerius i, nht sub two, yamaha rx-v1000 (pre/pro), sunfire cinema grand 200 ~five (vertically bi-amped), squeezebox2 (streaming cd-quality audio), 300gb buffalo linkstation (remote flac audio file storage), blue jeans cables. 'Click to see pix of my system' (http://www.martinloganowners.com/~tdacquis/forum/showthread.php?t=732) ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] FLAC onboard decoding v. server side in SB2
Hi there folks - I wonder if anyone can comment on my findings here as I think my brain has seized (well it is 1:30am and I shouldnt be playing with my Squeezebox at this time of night...;-) Anyway after reading all the advice on the forum I eventually settled (after much trial and error!) on EAC for ripping and FLAC for compression (I would prefer to use totally uncompressed WAV or AIFF as I have loads of space and a wired connection to the SB2 - but obviously no tags for WAV show through in SlimServer and as far as I can make out there is no native support in EAC for making AIFF files (unless I missed something?) Anyway, just to check that FLAC really is no different to streaming the uncompressed WAV/AIFF file, I made a FLAC copy of an album (using external compression option in EAC) and a WAV copy (just clicking the WAV button in EAC) so I could compare the audio quality of each. I cued the tracks in FLAC/WAV alternate order in SlimServer and went to have a listen. Instantly I played the first track and then its WAV counterpart it was obvious the WAV copy was better! Now I have made sure SlimServer Player Settings/Audio/Bitrate Limiting is on Unlimited (see I do read all the posts :-) - but I can tell the difference easily, no lengthy comparison required (although I did plenty of backwards and forwards testing on each track to make sure!) - the WAV file sounds more detailed within the first few seconds of listening. Now as I see here posted (and on Hydrogenaudio) lots of times that lossless means lossless and no messing so I thought I better look into this a bit further. Obviously one of SB2s new features is built-in hardware decoding of FLAC on the fly, so looking in Server Settings/File Types I came across lots of convert this to that type tick box options - so - I un-ticked FLAC -> FLAC (built-in) and made sure FLAC -> WAV (flac) was ticked (WAV -> WAV ticked also of course). Another set of listening tests later and now I really am confused, there might be a tiny difference, my ears are getting tired now, but it would appear to all intents and purposes that FLAC sounds pretty much the same as WAV...which of course it should really. My conclusion is this (bearing in mind it is late and I might be hearing strange things!) - server side decoding of FLAC and then SlimServer sending the WAV down the line sounds better than SB2 decoding of FLAC on the fly. Anyone else care to try this and let me know what they think? PS. This SB2 is an amazing piece of kit - I have SB2/Chord 64 DAC feeding Meridian 502/557 into Ruark speakers and I am hearing things in the mix I didnt with my Meridian 508.24 - missing a little subtlety and airiness perhaps but that could be the DAC being a bit forward - Meridian 566.24 DAC on its way to check this out :-) -- Timbo ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Blind tests considered harmful
On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 13:15 -0700, Andrew L.Weekes wrote: > In the interests of science, would you do another test comparing your CD > player (assuming you have one) to the SB2 in a blind test. The current issue of Stereophile, August 2005 has an editorial on page 3 that talks about how bad, useless and harmful blind tests are. Their website does not yet have the August issue. The do have a 15+ year old article http://www.stereophile.com/features/113/ on "Blind Listening" This is a probably a followup of the July 2005 issue, where the editor wrote in his As We See It section: "Fresh back from the "Great Debate" at HE2005, John Atkinson ponders the problems of "scientific" listening tests." In the old article, it says: " But when you have taken part in a number of these blind tests and experienced how two amplifiers you know from personal experience to sound extremely different can still fail to be identified under blind conditions, then perhaps an alternative hypothesis is called for: that the very procedure of a blind listening test can conceal small but real subjective differences. Having taken part in quite a number of such blind tests, I have become convinced of the truth in this hypothesis." -- Pat http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: Wired vs. Wireless audio differences
Andrew L. Weekes Wrote: > In the interests of science, would you do another test comparing your CD > player (assuming you have one) to the SB2 in a blind test. That is much more difficult, as the sound levels need to be perfectly matched, and you're really comparing the DAC of the CD player (or outboard DAC) with the DAC of the SB2 (assuming both deliver bit-perfect digital streams, which the SB2 may actually excel at). -- sleepysurf aerius i, nht sub two, yamaha rx-v1000 (pre/pro), sunfire cinema grand 200 ~five (vertically bi-amped), squeezebox2 (streaming cd-quality audio), 300gb buffalo linkstation (remote flac audio file storage), blue jeans cables. 'Click to see pix of my system' (http://www.martinloganowners.com/~tdacquis/forum/showthread.php?t=732) ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: Wired vs. Wireless audio differences
In the interests of science, would you do another test comparing your CD player (assuming you have one) to the SB2 in a blind test. The results may be interesting! Andy. -- Andrew L. Weekes ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: Wired vs. Wireless audio differences
Being housebound with Hurricane Dennis (fortunately little effect in the Tampa area)... I had my wife help me conduct a blinded test. This was done with S/PDIF out to my Yamaha RX-1000, feeding a Sunfire Cinema Grand, and ML Aerius speakers. I also turned off our 2.4 GHz wireless phones. Picked three "revealing" test tracks, conducted total of 10 trials, randomly switched between Wired vs. Wireless B (five each). I was the only one listening... was correct only 40% of the time!! From my perspective, this proves a) NO significant difference between Wired vs. Wireless, and b) it's easy to be BIASED and believe what you WANT to believe! I appreciate everybody's input on this thread, and respectfully retract my statement that the difference was like "night and day". (Hmmm, maybe the UV light during daytime listening has an audible effect... ). -- sleepysurf aerius i, nht sub two, yamaha rx-v1000 (pre/pro), sunfire cinema grand 200 ~five (vertically bi-amped), squeezebox2 (streaming cd-quality audio), 300gb buffalo linkstation (remote flac audio file storage), blue jeans cables. 'Click to see pix of my system' (http://www.martinloganowners.com/~tdacquis/forum/showthread.php?t=732) ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: SB2 vs. Naim CDS+CDPS...
try a dac with beefy analogue output stages. i use an audio synthesis dax decade and prefer it to a cdx2. as ever though it always comes down to personal preference. -- julian2002 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
