Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
seanadams;288401 Wrote: > You keep saying "by definition". By definition of what? > Of a properly functioning DAC. > Audibility is a separate argument we could have... but your statements > about DACs here are wrong. I don't agree at all - audibility is -not- a separate argument. We're talking about audio DACs intended to be connected to a stereo system and listened to. A change in the output at -140dB, while it might be measurable, is not relevant. In any case there are (relatively inexpensive) DACs out there which - at least as far as I can tell from published measurements - are totally immune to jitter. Given that that's possible, there is no excuse for a high-end DAC not to reduce the effects of jitter to the point where they are inaudible. A DAC which doesn't do that is not designed properly. So I stand by what I said. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Been listening to some bookshelf speakers
I don't know about the Audience 52, but they seems similar to the Dynaudio BM 5A. (active studio monitor) I've listened to the BM 5A, they're amazingly nice. I've been thinking about trying to find a dynaudio dealer in San Francisco area to listen to their home audio stuff. -- SuperQ SuperQ's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2139 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Been listening to some bookshelf speakers
I'm in the market for new speakers so on friday I listened to the following: Elac BS123 Quad 11L (they didn't have the 12L in stock) Dynaudio Audience 52 Energy RC-10 I didn't like the Energys much, the Elacs were good, the Quads better, but the Dynaudios were the clear winner, with a very smmoth, natural midrange and top end. I'm interested in hearing the Quad 12L when they arrive, to see if they are significantly better than the 11L. Has anyone heard or owned any of these speakers? Shane -- swhite58 Clark Connect Linux file server->Various boxes with flashing lights->SB3->Zhaolu D3 DAC->NAD C320BEE->Polk Monitor 4.5/Sennheiser headphones swhite58's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5038 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Klimax DS - Network Music Player
Everyone owes it to themself to read this: http://www.linn.co.uk/files/eaccc978/Linn%20Klimax.pdf No DAC with a SPDIF interface like your Transporter will touch the DS :) -- Kris Kris's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15915 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38815 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
rhizomaticon;288213 Wrote: > FLAC is great, but is actually noticeably inferior to WAV/CD -- the > tonality of instruments is quite good to my ear, but the soundstage > shrinks and flattens out. I think you're loosing too much of the > higher harmonics/overtones that are nearly imperceptible but still give > us our spacial cues (think of how you can actually hear objects/space > when you close your eyes or have the lights out even though they aren't > emitting sound). This is wrong. FLAC is lossless. You're not losing anything from the original WAV. Steve. -- SteveEast SteveEast's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4193 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45839 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
opaqueice;288377 Wrote: > If it's functioning as it's supposed to, yes - by definition. And there > are plenty of DACs that do that, according to all evidence. You keep saying "by definition". By definition of what? Alls DAC which get their timing from the s/pdif signal are susceptible to jitter, and it is easily detected at the analog outputs using a spectrum analyzer. And it it easy to show that different transports can have different jitter content. This does not mean these DACs are not functioning as they're supposed to. If a DAC which implemented word clocking or ASRC were susceptible, then yes I'd agree they're not functioning as specified. But that's a small subset of DACs. Audibility is a separate argument we could have... but your statements about DACs here are wrong. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Klimax DS - Network Music Player
Andrew B.;287936 Wrote: > Unfortunately you listened in two different systems, one of which was > probably not in your normal listening room. So your review is pretty > meaningless, sorry > > You can be very very sure that the difference between rooms and > speakers and amps is greater than the difference between digital source > components of this level. > > Andrew What are you talking about Andrew? -- Kris Kris's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15915 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38815 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
rhizomaticon wrote: > The important thing to remember about SACD is that it is not a PCM > format like CD or DVD-A or MP3 but completely different. >[snip] > SACD's approach is called Direct Stream Digital (DSD), > which samples 1 bit at 2.8 MHz, allowing a far greater approximation of > an analogue waveform which one could conceptualize as a 0 bit with an > infinite sample rate (?). At least that's how I understand it so it > may very well be wrong. You are wrong. DSD is only slightly different than PCM, it too samples the waveform, it just does one bit samples at a higher rate. your 2.something mHz rate is not much different than 24 bit PCM at 96kHz the arithmetic is simple, 24 * 96,000 == 2304000 or with commas 2,304,000 Sony did nothing outside of what Shannon and Nyquist predicted. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
rhizomaticon;288213 Wrote: > SACD is that it is not a PCM format like CD or DVD-A or MP3 but > completely different. All PCM formats I would argue are fundamentally > flawed in the way they sample the analogue waveform - they literally > chop it up, and regardless of the bitsize or rate, you are always going > to get that digital edge and grain with PCM. SACD's approach is called > Direct Stream Digital (DSD), which samples 1 bit at 2.8 MHz, allowing a > far greater approximation of an analogue waveform which one could > conceptualize as a 0 bit with an infinite sample rate (?). Ummm Sorry, but you're wrong. DCD chops up the analog waveform, just like PCM, only faster and with far less precision. With the correct software, it's possible to convert back and forth between the two formats. In fact, most SACD's are mixed in the PCM format, and then converted to DSD in the final mastering stages. -- DCtoDaylight DCtoDaylight's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7284 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45839 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
Manelus;288366 Wrote: > So any transport feeding same DAC would sound the same? > Come on! If it's functioning as it's supposed to, yes - by definition. And there are plenty of DACs that do that, according to all evidence. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
Manelus wrote: > So any transport feeding same DAC would sound the same? > Come on! Pretty much. I've never understood why the audiophile magazines drool over transports. All they are required to do is deliver a bit stream. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
So any transport feeding same DAC would sound the same? Come on! -- Manelus Manelus's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8289 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
morris_minor wrote: > rhizomaticon;288213 Wrote: >> With this in mind, when it comes to my CD collection I've decided to >> rip all rock/electrically amplified music as FLAC, with a few >> exceptions. Typically, unremastered rock CDs that I've had for years >> are fine in FLAC. All jazz and classical goes in as full WAV. >> > Doesn't a decoded FLAC give a perfect bit-for-bit copy of the original? > What's the advantage of streaming a WAV file over a FLAC file? I'm not 'rhizomaticon' but yes, FLAC generates bit perfect output. All that a WAV/PCM file has is twice the size flying over the network. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
rhizomaticon;288213 Wrote: > > With this in mind, when it comes to my CD collection I've decided to > rip all rock/electrically amplified music as FLAC, with a few > exceptions. Typically, unremastered rock CDs that I've had for years > are fine in FLAC. All jazz and classical goes in as full WAV. > Doesn't a decoded FLAC give a perfect bit-for-bit copy of the original? What's the advantage of streaming a WAV file over a FLAC file? -- morris_minor morris_minor's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13950 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45839 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
pfarrell;288261 Wrote: > > Back when SACD and DVD-A were alive, Stereophile did a spectral > analysis > of the music, and most (all?) of the 'high res' recordings had no > content above 22kHz or 24 kHz, which implies that they were recorded > initially at 44.1 or 48 kHz. > > In practice, all of the steps in the recording chain, from mic to > preamp, to 2" tape machines are not designed to deliver much about > 20-20kHz. > > I too am convinced that Sony's push for SACD was purely for DRM, all > the > claims about DSD being superior just marketing spin. > That's in accord with the results of that recent study Meyers/Moran. IIRC there was only a single SACD that had a noise floor below the redbook threshold, and that was the only one which could be distinguished from a ADC->DAC processed version at 44.1/16 (and that one only by cranking the volume on a silent passage and listening to the noise floor). -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45839 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
As Opaqueice indicated, if a DAC is working (I'd use the phrase "really good"), it should sort out jitter, and so should be independent of transport. In principle, the SB3 should sound the same as the TP. In practice, I don't quite hold with the 'perfect DAC' position, but certainly I have struggled to hear much difference between transports into decent DACs. The other thing to try is to spend longer listening than just an A/B swap. I have often found myself listening much later with better digital sources, despite not being able to readily pick them apart in quick A/B tests. -- adamslim Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others SB+, EAR V20, Living Voice OBX-R2s plus some other stuff SB3, Charlize, Harbeth HL-P3ES adamslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7355 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
darrenyeats wrote: > In terms of published evidence I've not read a shred of evidence that > hi-rez is audibly better than red book as a format, and there is at > least one study I know of that suggests there is no audible difference. > That's why I believe hi-rez formats are all about DRM and I don't worry > about red book when I sit down to play some tunes. Back when SACD and DVD-A were alive, Stereophile did a spectral analysis of the music, and most (all?) of the 'high res' recordings had no content above 22kHz or 24 kHz, which implies that they were recorded initially at 44.1 or 48 kHz. In practice, all of the steps in the recording chain, from mic to preamp, to 2" tape machines are not designed to deliver much about 20-20kHz. I too am convinced that Sony's push for SACD was purely for DRM, all the claims about DSD being superior just marketing spin. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
The format discussion is always muddied by the mastering angle, as Pat said. Unless you are comparing exactly the same recording in the different formats, comparisons are not valid. Some SACDs are not encoded from the same master as their CD equivalents. In other words you can't assume that, because an SACD sounds better than its CD equivalent, SACD is a better format. Whether or not the differences in mastering are intentional (conspiracy theorists can jump in at this point) Sony and other hi-rez vendors are rubbing their hands every time mastering differences are assumed to be format differences. In terms of published evidence I've not read a shred of evidence that hi-rez is audibly better than red book as a format, and there is at least one study I know of that suggests there is no audible difference. That's why I believe hi-rez formats are all about DRM and I don't worry about red book when I sit down to play some tunes. Darren -- darrenyeats SB3 / Inguz -> Krell KAV-300i (pre bypass) -> PMC AB-1 Dell laptop -> JVC UX-C30 mini system darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45839 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Jvc Xrcd
> > > You mean loss of high frequency content and compression that is > unavoidable with any tape machine? Even a 2" machine running at 30IPS? > Most likely. At least the Yim-Hok Man i tried does suffer this way. As said before i don´t know the Brothers In Arms XRCD and only read some impressions. Thats why i didn´t buy it. I say "suffer" cause i don´t like the sound of the processed Yim-Hok. -- Wombat Transporter -> Avantgarde based monoblocks -> self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45659 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
My meridians have 2 digital inputs, I just took SPDIF from a SB and from a TP using the EXACT same cables and synched both players and did both sighted and blind AB tests on each , no matching required. There was no discernable difference at all tween either the SB and TP. To further the test , I used a Theta transport and a Jolida CDP's spdif out and tried my best to synch a cd and either the SB's or the TP's spdif output and did the same testing (neither were truly double blind ABX) and did not notice any difference between em, well nothing I could swear blind to so to speak. Right now Im using my Z-sys's digital pre (seamless input switching) to do the same thing to an audio alchemy dac (yeh its a little dated) and into my headphone amp and a set of top notch senns. Im trying my best to see if there is any difference tween the SB and the TP and so far , granted wth ME switching tween the 2, there is nada into another offboard dac.??? So what does this mean , the only 2 conclusions are that A) there is no discerbable difference or B) my ears are flucked and I cant hear well. -- Rodney_Gold Sb3/Z-sys RDP1/meridian DSP5500's TP/X-cans v3/Senns 650's TP/TACT 2.0/SCM 50a's TP/Meridian DSP5000's "The nicest thing about smacking your head against the wall is...the feeling you get when you stop" Rodney_Gold's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14618 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Q: 'Alternative' CD formats..SACD, HDCD, XRCD
IMHO SACD is the best sounding format for digital. I love analog sound but came late to the game and never accumulated the equipment and LPs to make it worthwhile. SACD gets closer than anything to analog as far as my ears are concerned. It has incredible detail, tonal accuracy, and soundstaging combined with utterly liquid effortlessnees that allows you to listen for hours very carefully without fatigue. I have a few Mahler symphonies on SACD if you know what I mean. The important thing to remember about SACD is that it is not a PCM format like CD or DVD-A or MP3 but completely different. All PCM formats I would argue are fundamentally flawed in the way they sample the analogue waveform - they literally chop it up, and regardless of the bitsize or rate, you are always going to get that digital edge and grain with PCM. SACD's approach is called Direct Stream Digital (DSD), which samples 1 bit at 2.8 MHz, allowing a far greater approximation of an analogue waveform which one could conceptualize as a 0 bit with an infinite sample rate (?). At least that's how I understand it so it may very well be wrong. Also, most SACDs to have 5.1 mixes so I agree as someone else said that you are getting an engineer's interpretation with the mix, but all have 2 channel mixes as well (my preference) that are usually direct remasterings of original analog masters (in the case of older recordings). Love it. I have done ABCDE... testing with my squeezebox and my Sony SACD player. There is some music (Kind of Blue, Dark Side of the Moon, Sketches of Spain) which I have on both CD and SACD, so I've ripped it in low bit rate MP3, FLAC, full WAV. I can then compare those formats with CD and SACD on the Sony. MP3 is appallingly bad, completely uninvolving and just wrong. I also have some music in WMA when I was using WM Player, and it's not really much better. I can't believe people tolerate it, but I'm sure those little white earbuds have a lot to do with it. FLAC is great, but is actually noticeably inferior to WAV/CD -- the tonality of instruments is quite good to my ear, but the soundstage shrinks and flattens out. I think you're loosing too much of the higher harmonics/overtones that are nearly imperceptible but still give us our spacial cues (think of how you can actually hear objects/space when you close your eyes or have the lights out even though they aren't emitting sound). WAV/CD is fine but inevitably has that sheen or edge in the higher frequencies that to my ear is a little grating and leads to fatigue. Nevertheless, a very cool thing is that I cannot hear the difference between the SB3 and the Sony-- or rather, I can hear a little difference, but each is equally satisfying, like say a Bordeaux and a Rioja, or perhaps a left vs. right bank Bordeaux. SACD is, as I said before, utterly liquid, effortless, and the closest thing to the real thing I've ever heard (but I've never heard a really outstanding analog system). With this in mind, when it comes to my CD collection I've decided to rip all rock/electrically amplified music as FLAC, with a few exceptions. Typically, unremastered rock CDs that I've had for years are fine in FLAC. All jazz and classical goes in as full WAV. The only discs I have out for playing in the Sony now are SACDs, again with some exceptions or if I have something new I want to check out. I love the SB3/SqueezeCenter for everyday listening or parties etc., but ultimately SACD is the most satisfying for sheer listening pleasure. Any music I am really serious about I buy on SACD if possible, and if it's a hybrid CD/SACD disc then I rip it as full WAV too. I think we've all had the experience of hearing something so good that you can't go back. That's what SACD is for me. Anyhow, long post, but that's my experience. Cheers, B -- rhizomaticon SB3 + DIY FreeNAS server w/SlimNAS + SqueezeCenter 7.0 Sony C555ES CD/SACD Creek 0BH-12 Musical Fidelity A3CR Hafler 500 4-way DIY transmission line towers with Scan-Speak Tweets, rest Peerless (Bi-Amped) rhizomaticon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15312 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45839 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Jvc Xrcd
Wombat wrote: > In the end it only was 16bit at the time it was recorded. So JVC most > likely did record it to tape and back with some "magic" and gave it a > different sound. You mean loss of high frequency content and compression that is unavoidable with any tape machine? Even a 2" machine running at 30IPS? Some folks love the sound that tapes make, but its a distortion. Humans like some distortion. op cit: all the tube lovers -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Jvc Xrcd
PhilNYC;288111 Wrote: > I agree. Also, Doug McLeod's "Come to Find" is excellent. Others I > highly recommend (purely based on sound quality improvements over > original CD releases) are: > > Eagles - Hell Freezes Over > Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms > Sonny Rollins - Saxophone Collosus > Sonny Rollins - Way Out West > Wes Montgomery - Full House > Jazz at the Pawn Shop (also far superior than the SACD version) > > I don't know if their technical claims hold merit, but the sound > quality on all of these versions are superb. Yes, indeed. seems like on older material were a more carefull transfer to CD can lead to superior quality XRCD has advantages just like MFSL for example. It is still debatable if new recordings from the last time are better the way they are treated by JVC. I don´t have the Brothers In Arms but many seem to like the original most. In the end it only was 16bit at the time it was recorded. So JVC most likely did record it to tape and back with some "magic" and gave it a different sound. -- Wombat Transporter -> Avantgarde based monoblocks -> self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45659 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Jvc Xrcd
Interesting, I hadn't realized that Doug Mcleods discs were also available on XRCD. Those would be some that could be used for comparisons, as they are also available (or at least were available) in both standard and HDCD releases as well. In fact there was a small release of 2 disc sets, one standard and one HDCD specifically so you could compare the difference (although the cynic in me always wondered if they didn't doctor one version or the other). -- DCtoDaylight DCtoDaylight's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7284 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45659 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
Manelus;287972 Wrote: > TP and Audio Note DAC can't be broken, since they sound great. If two different digital sources going into the same DAC sound different, the DAC is broken - by definition. The function of a DAC is to convert a digital stream into analogue. If you feed it the same digital stream and get a different analogue output, it isn't working. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
So my stuff is low end junk and yours is high , so thats why the differences in my case werent huge? -- Rodney_Gold Sb3/Z-sys RDP1/meridian DSP5500's TP/X-cans v3/Senns 650's TP/TACT 2.0/SCM 50a's TP/Meridian DSP5000's "The nicest thing about smacking your head against the wall is...the feeling you get when you stop" Rodney_Gold's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14618 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Jvc Xrcd
Gomez;288110 Wrote: > You should give Doug Mcloed / You Can't take my Blues (& a few others) a > spin on Jvc xrcd the sound is simply stunning Through my Tag McLaren > power Amps & B&w Speakers Amazing just shows what the cd format is > capable of given a little effort. Sounds a lot better to me than the so > called super audio cds. I agree. Also, Doug McLeod's "Come to Find" is excellent. Others I highly recommend (purely based on sound quality improvements over original CD releases) are: Eagles - Hell Freezes Over Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms Sonny Rollins - Saxophone Collosus Sonny Rollins - Way Out West Wes Montgomery - Full House Jazz at the Pawn Shop (also far supperior than the SACD version) I don't know if their technical claims hold merit, but the sound quality on all of these versions are superb. -- PhilNYC Sonic Spirits Inc. http://www.sonicspirits.com PhilNYC's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=837 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45659 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Jvc Xrcd
You should give Doug Mcloed / You Can't take my Blues (& a few others) a spin on Jvc xrcd the sound is simply stunning Through my Tag McLaren power Amps & B&w Speakers Amazing just shows what the cd format is capable of given a little effort. Sounds a lot better to me than the so called super audio cds. -- Gomez Gomez's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12739 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45659 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] BBC - higher bit rate
They have only recently upgraded to 64kbits from 40kbits/sec. The worldwide remit is to provide services accessible to all - so this used to be interpreted as audio had to be available via dialup. The BBC have been doing private trials of multicast and higher rate streams. However hints are that any better quality services such as TV and better quality audio will only be available to BBC license payers - i.e. UK only. -- bpa bpa's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1806 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45881 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] BBC - higher bit rate
Shame, and a little out of date. Do you knnow if they have any plans for a higher bit rate? 64Kbit/s is pretty lousy quality! -- rbl rbl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4517 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45881 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
>The difference is HUGE.< Have you tried using Linux rather than Windows to host SqueezeCentre? A veil may be lifted. -- amcluesent amcluesent's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10286 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] BBC - higher bit rate
No - the BBC have only 64kbit/sec streams on public access. -- bpa bpa's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1806 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45881 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] BBC - higher bit rate
Hi - to get BBC radio 3, 4 I believe you have to use ALienBBC. But this has a very low bit rate. Is there a way of getting a decent bit rate on BBC 3, 4? -- rbl rbl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4517 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45881 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Klimax DS - Network Music Player
tomjtx;288021 Wrote: > That's quite a feat moving speakers blind. Hope you didn't stub your > toes. After the test i moved the speakers ; ) -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38815 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Klimax DS - Network Music Player
harmonic;288015 Wrote: > A long way down the road i actually have the same oppinion as opp. > > I dont hear major difference between different transports and to > some degree alos well designed sources. > > Havever there issent a rule without and exception and the exception > is Linn sources. > > Blind or not blind linn sources are kinda special, the are extremly > tunefull and musical above all. > Blind the are easy picked out because the play the tune so its easy > to folow wich make the sonics standout compared to other sources. > > I did the dbt level matched with a unidisk sc against the sb3 and the > main thing i wrote down was that it was extremly easy to follow the > diferent tunes in the music with the linn unidisk. > Also the unidisk had so much more bass deepth and bass articulation > that i had to move the speakers 20 cm father from the back walls. That's quite a feat moving speakers blind. Hope you didn't stub your toes. -- tomjtx tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38815 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
