Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AccurateRip not working with EAC
benthos;253323 Wrote: First of all, I don't know how to correct the problem with Accuraterip. But I would recommend that you simply stop using it. You don't need Accuraterip to make bit-perfect copies. Instead, go into EAC's drive settings and burn a test cd to determine your drive's offset, and make sure that the accurate stream feature is selected (your Plextor is compatible). I know this is probably not the answer you're looking for, but you don't really need Accuraterip. I'd let it go. Thanks for the info. Does it matter that I can not select 'use accuraterip with this drive'? Cheers -- Mark Scanlan MarkS Mark Scanlan's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10365 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41638 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital downloads and Red Book CDs
I've just been exploring non-DRM downloads from Linn Records and Gimell Records (which are splendid BTW). However, I have a question concerning Red Book Cds. The spec gives a CD a frequency response of 20Hz to 22.05KHz. A CD quality download is presumably a file that's been nowhere near a CD and can be expected to have a wider frequency range. If I produce a CDR audio version of the CD quality downloads, (for car use, say), am I right in thinking I'll be losing the frequency extremes? Does the 20Hz-22.05Khz limit get applied to the data when burning/making the disc, or is it a function of the playback device? [This question would also apply to computer recordings of vinyl - my Era V phono stage spec quotes 5Hz - 2.7MHz (nice for bats and whales:o)] Or have I got this all totally wrong, and 44.1KHz/16bit recordings are limited to the Red Book frequency range by definition? Some enlightenment from those who know would be most welcome! Thanks, Bob -- morris_minor morris_minor's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13950 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41668 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital downloads and Red Book CDs
The highest frequency that can be represented is half the sampling rate. (Look up the Shannon/Nyquist sampling theorem for more on that). So for the red book standard (44.1kHz sampling rate) the highest frequency is 22.05kHz. -- inguz inguz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1139 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41668 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] FLAC decode - server or SB?
Is it just me or does anyone else think the file types page could do with some labels indicating which player you are working on? Craig -- Craig MC2Slim - Windows Shell and J River Media Center Integration for Squeezebox. http://www.duff-zapp.co.uk Craig's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=96 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39867 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 1 CD - 1 FLAC problem
Hi, In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], MarioL[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this tagging scheme supported by audio players? I only use it for my Squeezebox, playing from the SlimServer software. To play on my iPod (running Rockbox) I have a script that converts these whole album FLACs into individual .ogg files, and tags them appropriately. I don't see much point in using lossless audio on my portable player, as I only listen to it in the car, so absolute quality isn't really an issue. Andy ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
GuyDebord;253086 Wrote: As I posted in the other topic, I only miss it when I buy a new cd, because I have to wait for cd paranoia to rip it before I can listen to it... but apart form that, regarding sound, I am happier with the Transporter, and you cannot really beat the convenience of its interface, so I would recommend you to go for it, but I am sure it will force you to also upgrade your setup, the Transporter's limit will be your other equipment Now, saying this I dont mean that your rega setup is bad, but that the Transporter can play in a much higher league, up there with the best... Regarding your current equipment, I dont think your cursa has balanced inputs, (my saturn didnt have balanced outputs) so when I bought the transporter I was using the rca's I had (van den hul integration) and I liked it a lot, but when I bought balanced cables the transporter became a sonic revelation. Having the transporter will for sure make you think about upgrading, good luck Hi Guy, The Rega Saturn, that you replaced for the Transporter is very well regarded as a CD player. From your comments, it reads that you feel the Transporter is better than the Saturn sonically. I am about to buy a Transporter and I would love to hear any comments you have sonically, regarding the Saturn and Transporter. Thanks, Bill -- mr_bill mr_bill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6737 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
The transporter was reviewed in a norwigen magazin a couple of months back, and the compared it to the rega saturn. Basicly the where pretty close but the saturn was simply more envolving and there for the liked it best. I have had the transporter while its very good it where also very analytical and found myself getting having hard time connecting to the music. I would personaly go with the sb3 and a good dac ' the Transporters is slims very first atempt on a higend player , -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
Gee, it must be right if it's a norwigen magazine. At the level of Transporter and other top DACs the differences are usually going to be quite subtle and , if detectable, which differences one prefers are going to be a matter of taste. -- tomjtx tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
tomjtx;253529 Wrote: Gee, it must be right if it's a norwigen magazine. At the level of Transporter and other top DACs the differences are usually going to be quite subtle and , if detectable, which differences one prefers are going to be a matter of taste. Tom, Your comments are very relevant as I know you've had comparison time and experience with other top sources. How are you using your Transporter? Direct to amp? xlr out? What is your system comprised of for amps, preamp (if used) and speakers? Thanks, Bill -- mr_bill mr_bill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6737 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
harmonic;253525 Wrote: I have had the transporter while its very good it where also very analytical , hard to describe but i finded it hard connecting to the music. What exactly does it mean for something to sound analytical? What would you like Transporter do that would make it sound less analytical to you? -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
What exactly does it mean for something to sound analytical? IMHO the TP ruthlessly exposes all issues with source material, so rips of 'loudness war' afflicted CD sound grim, whereas MFSL CD are great. It really sings with true 24/96 material from Linn etc. -- amcluesent amcluesent's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10286 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
seanadams;253534 Wrote: What exactly does it mean for something to sound analytical? What would you like Transporter do that would make it sound less analytical to you? :o) Analytical = accurate = not to everyone's taste = strap some valves across its output = sounds more like the vinyl we grew up with = happiness = you will never win... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... ...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some very expensive cables ;o) Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
seanadams;253534 Wrote: What exactly does it mean for something to sound analytical? What would you like Transporter do that would make it sound less analytical to you? Analytical sound means that the sound fouses on the detaljs so it becomes harder to focus on the music itself. Try listen to a linn source and you will know better what i mean. -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
seanadams;253534 Wrote: What exactly does it mean for something to sound analytical? What would you like Transporter do that would make it sound less analytical to you? Analytical sound means that the sound is fouses in the detaljs so it becomes harder to focus on the music itself. Try listen to a linn source and you will know better what i mean. The fenomonen is very commen in hifi and to some desireble , its mostly commen in speaker designs , but amps like the digital tact/lyngdorf amps suffer from the same thing. -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Setting Transporter to Slave for World Clock Input
mofuv;251835 Wrote: I have only tried out 44,1 kHz so far, will check others in the near fuutre. I think there is a serious flaw in the Transporter clocking system - so I assume you don't succeed. My system is a dCS Paganini DAC and clock. When I try to syncronize the Transporter I am not able to lock the Transporter to 48kHz. 44.1kHz works. Rgds -- achri-d achri-d's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39770 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital downloads and Red Book CDs
In theory an 44.1 KHz file, whether it came from a CD or a digital download, can contain audio from 0 Hz (DC) 22.05 KHz (to one half the sample rate). For the low limit: At one point, the usual policy when mastering CDs was to feed everything through a digital high-pass filter to remove any DC component, because it could cause mistracking with certain players. I don't think they worry about it anymore. I've certainly seen (looking at CD rips with Cool Edit 2000) several with substantial DC offsets, so the capabilities of CDs certainly go all the way down to 0 Hz. These days, a substantial DC offset is generally viewed as bad, and most good AtoD converters have fairly low DC offsets. Back at the beginning of digital audio, the AtoD's DC offset may have actually made an improvement, because it eliminated low level crossover distortion, offsetting it to a bit higher audio level, but today's converters have much lower crossover distortotion, so DC offset is currently frowned upon. Certainly it's a problem for hard digital edits; no matter where one puts the edit, there will be a slight click due to the change in DC offset. Just about all modern editing programs do a fast crossfade to eliminate this problem. The high frequency limit is the result of the anti-alias filters in the recorder and playback device. Since a practical filter doesn't have an infinitely steep cut-off, the maximum high frequency will be somewhat less than 22.05 KHz, depending on the steepness of the filter's skirt. CD players and other devices which play 44.1 KHz audio files usually use brickwall filters with a very steep slope so that the passband can extend up over 20 KHa. These days, such filters are almost always implemented by a mathematical function that resamples the audio to a much higher sampling rate where an analog filter with a much shallower skirt can be used. The point to realize is that the CD is just a data carrier, so it's largely unimportant whether the audio data has seen a CD or not; it should still be the same data, bit-for-bit, and will produce exactly the same audio. I say largely unimportant; uncorrected read errors from the CD may cause audible differences. That is why a sophisticated program such as Exact Audio Copy is needed so that the data is read correctly from the disc. But programs such as AccurateRip can attest to the fact that, in most cases, Exact Audio Copy is able to extract bit-accurate data from an audio CD. Bottom line, a file properly extracted from a CD will be identical, bit-for-bit, with the original file that was used to make that CD, so merely recording audio on a CD makes no difference in the audio. -- Timothy Stockman Timothy Stockman's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8867 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41668 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
harmonic;253583 Wrote: The interresting part is that somone asked if enyone had compared the two and i simply pointed out that a norwegin magazin compared them. I simply quoted what the said thats all. Besides that i trust european hifi magazines a hell lot more then the american counterparts. Ever read a bad review in stereotimes ? Stereophile is not much better in that regard. If you read other reviews of the transporter you will see that the word analytical pops up over and over. Im not saying that it is wrong , and for some its actualy a good thing . You are extremly easy to figure out , you would simply rather eat horse shit then admit that just maybe not every one loves the transporter as much as you would like. Have uttterly pathetic That kind of rudeness is uncalled for, harmonic, and doesn't reflect well on you. Please try to be civil. -- tomjtx tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital downloads and Red Book CDs
Another comment regarding CD vs digital download: With a CD, the problem of reading the data accurately can be a big problem. With digital downloads, this problem is eliminated. CDs were designed to operate in the enviroment of digital audio, where occasional data errors can be fairly well conceiled. Digital downloads are a technology built upon computer data, where even a single erroneous bit can cause disaster, so one can be confident that the downloading process will not introduce any data errors. When CD technology was extended to produce CDROM technology, additional error correction and block addressing were added to bring the CD's data reliability and repeatability up to the much higher level required for computer data. Redbook CDs do not have this additional error correction information, and thus it's harder to get a correct read from a CD than a CDROM. -- Timothy Stockman Timothy Stockman's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8867 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41668 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
Bill, you have a PM. -- tomjtx tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
It is interesting to note that I hear some similarities between my LingoLP12 and Transporter. The Linn has wonderful slam just like the TP. The Linn is also wonderful at detail and prat just like the TP. There still are some times when I think vinyl is more involving, but those times are rarer now since I got a TP. The TP is certainly the most enjoyable digital source I have had in my system. Of course that doesn't mean everyone will prefer it. -- tomjtx tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Setting Transporter to Slave for World Clock Input
achri-d;253579 Wrote: I think there is a serious flaw in the Transporter clocking system - so I assume you don't succeed. My system is a dCS Paganini DAC and clock. When I try to syncronize the Transporter I am not able to lock the Transporter to 48kHz. 44.1kHz works. Rgds I think a more likely explanation is that you are not syncing in either case - perhaps they are both trying to be master, and it only _appears_ to work at 44.1 because the nominal clock speeds are the same. What happens if you disconnect the word clock during 44.1 playback? What _should_ happen is that the Transporter and the external DAC will immediately go out of sync and the DAC should go silent. That would be a good test to do to make absolutely sure that the word clock is in fact functioning at 44.1. Incidentally, do you know how your DAC knows to output a 48KHz clock? Is that a manual setting, or is it supposed to get it from the s/pdif channel status information? -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39770 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
tomjtx;253589 Wrote: That kind of rudeness is uncalled for, harmonic, and doesn't reflect well on you. Please try to be civil. No offense , i never seem to understand the way some comnuicate in here and pick right up on it. but one advice if you scream loundly into the woods it will shout back. peace -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
mr_bill;253505 Wrote: Hi Guy, The Rega Saturn, that you replaced for the Transporter is very well regarded as a CD player. From your comments, it reads that you feel the Transporter is better than the Saturn sonically. I am about to buy a Transporter and I would love to hear any comments you have - sound wise, regarding the Saturn vs Transporter for your CD's. I had an SB3 so I know all about the convenience and internet radio. Thanks, Bill First of all, I want to clarify that the best sound in my system comes from vinyl and the setup I have with the Michell Gyro, the liquidity, warmth, liveliness, sound floor, rhythm and sparkle I get every-time I lower the arm is still unequalled by any digital source Ive ever had. That said, the transporter is the closest (in my budget) a digital device has come to the reference sound of vinyl. Before, the Saturn had similar qualities, it was a very vinyl like player more analogue than digital, perhaps a bit more than the transporter, but still, what I look for in a digital source is the rendering of a back stage, of depth, of deepness and darkness of what is behind the music, its canvas, or better said the sense of the space where the music is being reproduced, and the transporter presents it blacker, more profound and dense than the Saturn. Unless you move to a DCS or Wadia, you will rarely find a digital source with this rendering capacity. If you decide for the transporter, be sure to use the balanced output and buy the best cables you can, including the power cable. On top of this I also use a power conditioner (probably the best investment ive done) so it might be the setting that is making the transporter sound so good, but apart from the XLR's the Saturn was using the same system good luck -- GuyDebord Reference 3A Royal Master monitors biwired with van den Hul Inspiration cables, REL Strata 5 sub. AMP: Pathos Classic One MKIII. ANALOGUE: Michell Gyro SE, Technoarm Lyra Helikon SL cartridge, ASR Mini Basis SQ phono preamp linked with Audioquest Colorados. DIGITAL: Mac Mini, SlimDevices Transporter linked with van den Hul The Second XLRs. POWER: Isotek Mini-sub GII, Isotek Elite cables (Mini-Sub, Rel Transporter) van den Hul Mainstream cable (Pathos) van den Hul Mainserver cable (ASR). GuyDebord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14587 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Digital downloads and Red Book CDs
Timothy - thank you for your detailed reply! Bob -- morris_minor morris_minor's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13950 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41668 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AccurateRip not working with EAC
Hi there, I'm wondering if maybe there was simply a problem with the Accurate Rip server at the time you tried to connect to it? I notice that on their web site, there's a mention of a new server being installed earlier in December I'm assuming you understand what Accurate Rip is, but just in case... When you rip a track, it's check sum value is compared to the value others have ripped and reported to the Accurate Rip database. The idea is that if everybody's check sums are the same, then everyone has read the track properly. This can help speed up extraction, while ensuring bit perfect copies. Cheers, Dave -- DCtoDaylight DCtoDaylight's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7284 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41638 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Setting Transporter to Slave for World Clock Input
seanadams;253597 Wrote: I think a more likely explanation is that you are not syncing in either case - perhaps they are both trying to be master, and it only _appears_ to work at 44.1 because the nominal clock speeds are the same. No. seanadams;253597 Wrote: What happens if you disconnect the word clock during 44.1 playback? What _should_ happen is that the Transporter and the external DAC will immediately go out of sync and the DAC should go silent. That would be a good test to do to make absolutely sure that the word clock is in fact functioning at 44.1. It goes silent. seanadams;253597 Wrote: Incidentally, do you know how your DAC knows to output a 48KHz clock? Is that a manual setting, or is it supposed to get it from the s/pdif channel status information? Yes it is a manual setting. Please, notice that I use a DAC and en external clock, i.e. two units. The clock (square waves) is fed to the Transporter using a standard 75 Ohms cable with BNC connectors. No- not S/PDIF format. That is, one cable feed the clock TO the Transporter, and another (S/PDIF) sends the signal FROM the TRansporter to the DAC. Rgds. -- achri-d achri-d's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39770 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Setting Transporter to Slave for World Clock Input
achri-d;253632 Wrote: It goes silent. OK good... next thing to test is to try listening to Transporter's _analog_ outputs while it is being fed by the 48KHz word clock. They should operate both in 44.1 and in 48KHz mode. Then if you disconnect the word clock while playing, the analog outputs should either go silent or speed way up or down. Also, try playing both 44.1 and 48 KHz tracks while in 48KHz mode. The 44.1 tracks should sound sped-up. Yes it is a manual setting. Please, notice that I use a DAC and en external clock, i.e. two units. ?!? Why? Such a configuration should only be used if you have some requirement to synchronize multiple _source_ components, perhaps for editing purposes. It is the MCLK (eg 11.2896MHZ) signal that actually drives the internal operation of a modern DAC chip, and the whole point of word clocking (for the purpose of reducing jitter) is to put that clock as close as possible to the DAC chip itself. A PLL is absolutely _terrible_ at generating a master clock from a word clock, compared to generating it directly with a crystal. But that is not even the only source of jitter - you are also accumulating it in all the connections between this equipment, and in the clock source device itself, as it has to divide a crystal-generated clock internally to produce that low word clock frequency. I am not aware of any situation where a word clock would be advisable for driving a DAC. You will get jitter much worse than anything you'd get even from traditional s/pdif master-slave clocking i.e. this is not only defeating the jitter eliminating mechanism of the word clock interface, but is actually making the jitter far worse even than plain s/pdif. You are probably running your DAC on a few hundred picoseconds of jitter, as opposed to the 30ps or less that would come from a good quality internal oscillator. The clock (square waves) is fed to the Transporter using a standard 75 Ohms cable with BNC connectors. No- not S/PDIF format. That is, one cable feed the clock TO the Transporter, and another (S/PDIF) sends the data FROM the TRansporter to the DAC. Rgds. That's fine... but driving the DAC from a word clock signal is not OK. The problem could in fact be that the jitter is so high that the system is on the borderline of being able to operate at all. Have you tried hooking things up in the usual word clock configuration where the DAC (not a separate box) is the clock master? Also, have you talked to dcs about this issue? I'm not just trying to point fingers here, but without having the equipment on-hand this is very hard for me to diagnose. They may be able to provide some additional insight here. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39770 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Setting Transporter to Slave for World Clock Input
seanadams;253647 Wrote: OK good... next thing to test is to try listening to Transporter's _analog_ outputs while it is being fed by the 48KHz word clock. They should operate both in 44.1 and in 48KHz mode. Then if you disconnect the word clock while playing, the analog outputs should either go silent or speed way up or down. The Transporter, when using the internal DAC, works just fine. It produces analogue output for 44.1, 48 and 96 (which I have tried) and sounds good. seanadams;253647 Wrote: Also, try playing both 44.1 and 48 KHz tracks while in 48KHz mode. The 44.1 tracks should sound sped-up. Yes, when I used a dCS Delius as external clock to Transporter this works as well. Indeed, the 44.1 sounds speed up. I also tried to run 96 like this. And then of course slows down. Notice, I still use the analogue outputs. seanadams;253647 Wrote: ?!? Why? Such a configuration should only be used if you have some requirement to synchronize multiple _source_ components, perhaps for editing purposes. It is the MCLK (eg 11.2896MHZ) signal that actually drives the internal operation of a modern DAC chip, and the whole point of word clocking (for the purpose of reducing jitter) is to put that clock as close as possible to the DAC chip itself. A PLL is absolutely _terrible_ at generating a master clock from a word clock, compared to generating it directly with a crystal. But that is not even the only source of jitter - you are also accumulating it in all the connections between this equipment, and in the clock source device itself, as it has to divide a crystal-generated clock internally to produce that low word clock frequency. Well, I use a system where the dCS Paginini clock is used to syncronize the Transporter and a dCS Paganini DAC. The DAC receives S/PDIF data from the Transporter and does not need to decode the clock from the data - as is also the situation in master mode. seanadams;253647 Wrote: I am not aware of any situation where a word clock would be advisable for driving a DAC. You will get jitter much worse than anything you'd get even from traditional s/pdif master-slave clocking i.e. this is not only defeating the jitter eliminating mechanism of the word clock interface, but is actually making the jitter far worse even than plain s/pdif. You are probably running your DAC on a few hundred picoseconds of jitter, as opposed to the 30ps or less that would come from a good quality internal oscillator. 1) You may use a DAC in master mode to feed clock to the Transporter. I used to do this with a dCS Delius, and have tried the same with the dCS Paganini DAC. 2) Even better is to syncronize both the DAC and the Transporter to an external clock - if this clock is of higher precision than the one in the DAC. seanadams;253647 Wrote: That's fine... but driving the DAC from a word clock signal is not OK. The problem could in fact be that the jitter is so high that the system is on the borderline of being able to operate at all. Sorry, your statement is wrong - at least as I see this issue and as I understand your statement. I use a dCS Paganini clock that syncronizes a dCS Paganini DAC and the Transporter. seanadams;253647 Wrote: Have you tried hooking things up in the usual word clock configuration where the DAC (not a separate box) is the clock master? Yes, with a dCS Delius - 44.1 works but 48kHz does not work. The dCS Paganini works well at 44.1 but does not output 48 so this I can not try (that's why I have the Paganini clock - which outputs also 48). seanadams;253647 Wrote: Also, have you talked to dcs about this issue? I'm not just trying to point fingers here, but without having the equipment on-hand this is very hard for me to diagnose. They may be able to provide some additional insight here. I have the user's manual of my dCS units and they explain the issue in details. Further, I have tried to contact the support at slimdevices - may be I did not succeed to post it properly(?) - and they haven't provided any technical answer yet. Rgds. -- achri-d achri-d's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39770 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter or SB question
tomjtx;253529 Wrote: ...At the level of Transporter and other top DACs the differences are usually going to be quite subtle and , if detectable, which differences one prefers are going to be a matter of taste. harmonic;253583 Wrote: ...i trust european hifi magazines a hell lot more then the american counterparts... You are extremly easy to figure out , you would simply rather eat horse shit then admit that just maybe not every one loves the transporter as much as you would like...Have uttterly pathetic harmonic I'm just wondering please, why are you posting this kind of stuff here? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41469 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Setting Transporter to Slave for World Clock Input
achri-d;253654 Wrote: Yes, when I used a dCS Delius as external clock to Transporter this works as well. Indeed, the 44.1 sounds speed up. I also tried to run 96 like this. And then of course slows down. Notice, in this case I used the analogue outputs. If I turn off the clock the Transporter goes silent (in my system). If that is the case then it means your transporter is definitely recovering the 48KHz signal from the word clock input correctly. A further test you could do would be to put the DAC into slave (normal s/pdif clock) mode, and verify that it is able to play the s/pdif signal coming from the Transporter while the Transporter is being fed by the 48KHz external clock. If this works, then you have now verified all of the following: 1. The external clock is generating an acceptable 48KHz word clock 2. Transporter's word clock input circuitry is able to electrically receive this clock 3. Transporter's s/pdif output is indeed being derived from the word clock input, and not it's internal clock. 4. All of Transporter's internal clcok paths are functioning correctly (otherwise the DAC and/or s/pdif would not work). 5. The s/pdif connection (which is being used here only as a data connection) is working correctly, and there is sufficient signal integrity for the DAC's s/pdif receiver to be able to recover a data stream from it. This means the only possible explanation, given all the information at hand, is that your DAC does not function when given a 48KHz word clock input and a s/pdif signal synchronized to that clock. (A bizarre configuration anyway, as I've noted). Well, I use a system where the dCS Paginini clock is used to syncronize the Transporter and a dCS Paganini DAC. The DAC receives S/PDIF data from the Transporter and does not need to decode the clock from the data - as is also the situation in master mode. Yes I am aware that the clock is coming from the word clock input and not the s/pdif. The point is that doing the former is definitely far worse than using an internal oscillator directly, and probably even worse than recovering the clock from s/pdif. 1) You may use a DAC in master mode to feed clock to the Transporter. I used to do this with a dCS Delius, and have tried the same with the dCS Paganini DAC. And this also works at 48KHz, right? 2) Even better is to syncronize both the DAC and the Transporter to an external clock - if this clock is of higher precision than the one in the DAC. No, this is where you are very wrong. I have already explained why from a theoretical standpoint, but to put it another way, which do you expect will have more jitter: - A crystal oscillator running at 12.2880 MH, directly driving the DAC Or - A crystal oscillator running at 12.2880 MHz - driving either a synchronous counter or a series of flip-flops, to divide that signal down to 48 KHz - then feeding this signal through some transmission circuit to a BNC connector - coupling that signal into a cable - feeding it down the cable - getting it into another connector at the other end of that cable - driving that signal into a PLL circuit which multiplies the word clock signal back up to 12.2880 Mhz - feeding the output of that PLL into the DAC chip. Sorry, your statement is wrong - at least as I see this issue and as I understand your statement. I use a dCS Paganini clock that syncronizes a dCS Paganini DAC and the Transporter. Well, one of us clearly is wrong. I have explained why I am right. Could you point out the flaw in my reasoning? Otherwise if you will not accept the theory, we would have to settle the question empirically. That would require us to meet up in my lab and you will need to bring all your equipment. :) Also, again, have you contacted dcs? They have a technical paper about jitter on their site so it is clear that someone there has an understanding of these issues. I have no doubt that the author of that paper would agree with me on this point. Their marketing person, on the other hand, might tell you that you additionally need the external $$$ clock in order to get the best sound. Yes, with a dCS Delius - 44.1 works but 48kHz does not work. The dCS Paganini works well at 44.1 but does not output 48 so this I can not try (that's why I have the Paganini clock - which outputs also 48). Well, that is odd but given that the Transporter clearly is being clocked by the 48KHz word clock (because the analog outputs are working) it still points to an issue with the dcs. I have the user's manual of my dCS units and they explain the issue in details. OK... so is there anything I'm missing? I looked on their web site and they do not have the manuals posted for current products. Further, I have tried to contact the support at slimdevices - may be I did not succeed to post it properly(?) - and they haven't provided any technical answer yet. They would just forward the question to me. -- seanadams
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Lite Audio DAC-60 thinking about getting one..
I was also interested in DAC-68 before I bought DAC-60. As its specification available in English, I think that it has digital volume control (remote is not mentioned). It also uses different D/A chip (AD1853). Moreover, it has Balance I/P and O/P. I try to discuss with some one in HK who tested this model, but it was written in Chinese. He kindly answered me some questions, and he recommended that it was a good DAC if you need Balance O/P. If unbalance O/P was used, he said about 70% quality acheived(his comments). It price is about 100 USD more than DAC-60. For me, I do not have Balance I/P pre-amplifier. So, I bought DAC-60, then I changed O/P cap. to Moundoff Supreme and tube to NOS PCC88 Telefunken. Addition cost was around 170 USD. I think that it is better to use money to upgrade DAC-60 than buy DAC-68. Anyway, if you go for DAC-68, I recommend you to change tube to NOS tube. You will be happier with NOS tube than Sovek. -- Tum Tum's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13878 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=20789 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Setting Transporter to Slave for World Clock Input
achri-d, I have been doing some testing just now with version 33 firmware and I am able to sync with any word clock frequency from 1KHz to 100KHz. I can also vary the frequency, unplug and re-plug the cable, or even set it to rapidly sweep a wide range of frequencies (that sounds really weird!) but it always stays synced. There are a number of documented bugs that I am currently working on related to the audio logic, but I don't think any of them are related to the symptoms you are describing. I really think you have some issue on the DAC side, because Transporter doesn't know or care what frequency is coming into its word clock input... it will just run at whatever rate it is fed and doesn't do anything different for 44.1 vs 48. Of course it is possible for a bug to manifest at one clock frequency and not another, but I am not seeing that behavior on our end. Where to go next depends on the result of the test I mentioned in the previous post: A further test you could do would be to put the DAC into slave (normal s/pdif clock) mode, and verify that it is able to play the s/pdif signal coming from the Transporter while the Transporter is being fed by the 48KHz external clock. But I am running out of ideas... -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39770 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
