Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter suddenly dead and not responding to anything
Aurumer;485303 Wrote: ... Logitech will not replace the transporter. They just sold the money back to the shop. The shop said they could not pay the money out, I will get a voucher. ... I think Siduhe is right: Logitech gave the money to the shop. If you want another transporter and the shop can't give you that, they must give you the money back (after all, they've got it back also and as far as I know, that's the law in the EU). If you can convince them to do so, you could order a new one elsewhere in Germany, in the UK, or here: http://www.wifimedia.eu/catalog/logitechtransporter-p-90.html?language=EN. They have the transorter in stock (they're just over the German border in Arnhem. To my surprise, the price has gone up 200 euros in the last week; it was 1699 euros for months, including a controller, now it is 1899 euros without controller -- there -is- something weird going on with the transporter). Teus -- Teus de Jong Teus de Jong's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15415 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70283 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter suddenly dead and not responding to anything
I was very surprised too, that Logitech did not replace the unit. I am located at Germany and the unit was just a half year old and within warranty. Because I had troubles with the transporter for two times, I am not really sure if I really want another one. And this experience with the Logitech warranty behaviour did the rest. I am not sure if I will complain about getting my money back. I like this shop very much, it is a small hifi dealer near my hometown. I think I will take the money for some nice new speakers. -- Aurumer Aurumer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=31601 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70283 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] CD red book de-emphasis?
mrthreeplates;485502 Wrote: Hi, Would someone post the commandline and example output of icedax when run on one of these disks with inconsistent TOC/subchannel flags? I'd love to do this, but I don't know of any discs in my collection that are inconsistent. I've noticed 2 in my collection with inconsistencies, but in both cases icedax corrects twice for no change from the TOC! This one is Musica Sveciae MSCD 531 (Salonen conducts Berwald Symphonies 3 4). Code: $ icedax -J -D/dev/cdrom Type: ROM, Vendor 'LITE-ON ' Model 'DVDRW LH-20A1H ' Revision 'LL06' MMC+CDDA 569344 bytes buffer memory requested, 4 buffers, 55 sectors #icedax version 1.1.9, real time sched., soundcard, libparanoia support AUDIOtrack pre-emphasis copy-permitted tracktype channels 1- 4 no no audio2 AUDIOtrack pre-emphasis copy-permitted tracktype channels 5- 7 yes no audio2 Table of Contents: total tracks:7, (total time 57:12.72) 1.( 8:58.32), 2.( 7:52.43), 3.( 5:26.40), 4.( 6:49.30), 5.(10:56.57), 6.( 9:15.43), 7.( 7:53.52) Table of Contents: starting sectors 1.( 0), 2.( 40382), 3.( 75825), 4.( 100315), 5.( 131020), 6.( 180277), 7.( 221945), lead-out( 257472) CDINDEX discid: NoqqViyiz9ojAEWSUV9SdgCLUGo- CDDB discid: 0x510d6807 CD-Text: not detected CD-Extra: not detected Media catalog number: 0601000320004 scanning for ISRCs: 7 ... index scan: 4...difference: TOC:without, subchannel:with preemphasis correcting TOC... difference: TOC:with, subchannel:without preemphasis correcting TOC... difference: TOC:without, subchannel:with preemphasis correcting TOC... index scan: 7... Very odd. It corrects twice, so the end result is no difference! One symphony is on tracks 1-4, and the other is on 5-7, so it would be very odd if track 4 had no pre-emphasis while tracks 1-3 did. This other one is Supraphon 10 3471 (Cunning Little Vixen with Be#328;a#269;ková, disc 2), and it's also a mixed pre-emphasis/no pre-emphasis CD. Track 1 shows as having no pre-emphasis and icedax corrects twice just as above. BTW: Is icedax the same as cdda2wav (part of cdrtools)? Yes, I should have mentioned, it's from a split off of the cdrtools distribution called cdrkit: http://www.cdrkit.org/ Here's their rationale for the cdrtools/cdrkit split: Why cdrkit? Why wodim? Why genisoimage? Because: - it won't tell you that you have no /dev/pg* device file thing foo, that you have never seen and you will never need - it won't require to be executed as root, fail with obscure messages without such permissions - it won't force you to wait 3 seconds every time you want to start, no matter what you specify as gracetime= - it won't kill another burning process when you do -scanbus in another shell - it will let you specify your device directly in the way you know it, rather than forcing some weird TARGET,BUS,LUN syntax with weird numbers - it will not wreak random havoc if you used spaces and not tabs in the config file - genisoimage won't stop accepting the well known option -L in the near future - genisoimage will stop on 2.1GiB large files rather than just forgetting them and let you burn crap - users are respected and not used as pinballs between us and the OS kernel developers -- Daverz Daverz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32335 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34336 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] CD red book de-emphasis?
Daverz;485232 Wrote: BTW, pre-emphasis was used by some labels well into the 90s. It occured to me later that I've run into recent re-issues that just reuse the old CD master and have pre-emphasis just like the old issue. So I want to emphasize *pre-emphasis is not just on old CDs*. An example would be the Alfvén Symphonies box on Brilliant Classics, a *2008* release. All but the last disc in the set use pre-emphasis. -- Daverz Daverz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32335 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34336 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Any audiophiles got a SB Touch to beta test?
JohnSwenson;485563 Wrote: The Touch uses a voltage output DAC whose outputs go directly to the jacks, no active devices or caps in the path, its about as simple as you can get. I don't remember what the SB3 output looks like, but I did find a schematic for the SB2 which is supposed to be similar. This has 2 electrolytic caps in series with the signal and an inexpensive opamp with active filter. Its a much more complex circuit that the Touch. John S. Thank you! -- Roger66 SB classic SB Boom Win XP Pro SP3 Thinkpad X60s Roger66's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29812 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70167 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter factory reset on power off???
I have a remote controlled outlet, which powers all my equipment off when I got to bed. Does this reset The Transporter. Because my settings regarding effect loop is disabled every day at startup, eventhough I have changed settings to active and saved them in the settings menu in Squeezebox server ??? -- callesoroe Callesoroe SB-duet, Transporter, Tact RCS 2.2X digital preamp, Martin Logan Vista speakers, Acoustic Reality Ear Enigma AMPs(2 pieces BIAMP) callesoroe's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=22693 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71415 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
cliveb;483331 Wrote: Naim's ring-buffer approach just averages out the jitter over a longer time base. In principle it does the same thing as a low frequency PLL. As long as the DAC receives data from a transport with its own free-running clock, surely it is in principle impossible to completely eliminate the incoming jitter. Doesn't matter how you try to average it out (ring buffer, PLL, ASRC) - ultimately the DAC is a slave to the transport's clock. Thats what I thought too, but its not true. Naim uses the ring-buffer to find an average for the incoming data rate and then chooses among 10 internal clocks for clocking the data out of the buffer. If none of the 10 match closely enough, they fallback to ASRC. I assume that within reasonable systems it is possible to obtain an average incoming data rate stable enough for one of the internal clocks to match. Given this assumption the total jitter at the chip in the dac is totally independent of jitter added by the source. How well the assumption holds up in practise I dont know. I guess we'll see when it comes out (which it does these very days). In conclusion, its basically an asynchronous implementation over s/pdif, if you will. Bjørn -- bhaagensen bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
bhaagensen;485610 Wrote: Thats what I thought too, but its not true. Naim uses the ring-buffer to find an average for the incoming data rate and then chooses among 10 internal clocks for clocking the data out of the buffer. If none of the 10 match closely enough, they fallback to ASRC. Thanks for the additional info. It's a cunning strategy, but of course the chances that any one of their 10 internal clock rates is an exact match for the incoming average rate seems vanishingly small. And the consequence of this is that the ring buffer needs to be large enough that it doesn't overflow or underflow within some defined time period based on the clock rate mismatch. Since you don't want to hang around waiting for the buffer to half-fill before starting playback, presumably Naim always choose an internal clock which is slower than the incoming one - that would guarantee underflow cannot happen and you can start clocking out from the buffer straight away. You just need a big enough buffer to avoid overflow. In the bad old days of CDs, you could confidently set the time limit within which overflow must not happen to about 80-90 mins. But with streaming sources like Squeezeboxes, the time is potentially unlimited. Clearly they can't include an infinitely large buffer, so the device will *have* to resort to sample-dropping in order to resync in extreme cases. -- cliveb Transporter - ATC SCM100A cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
bhaagensen;485610 Wrote: Thats what I thought too, but its not true. Naim uses the ring-buffer to find an average for the incoming data rate and then chooses among 10 internal clocks for clocking the data out of the buffer. If none of the 10 match closely enough, they fallback to ASRC. If Naim's internal clock runs a little slower than the source clock, then this should work fine, with the buffer slowly filling as the CD plays. Memory is cheap these day's, you can easily buffer an entire CD in ram! Ten years ago, when I first saw this approach used in a jitter reduction box, the cost of the ram dominated the product price, but not so anymore -- DCtoDaylight Audiophile wish list: Zero Distortion, Infinite Signal to Noise Ratio, and a Bandwidth from DC to Daylight DCtoDaylight's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7284 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
DCtoDaylight;485651 Wrote: Memory is cheap these day's You still wouldnt need a huge buffer - just switch to the next slowest clock when the buffer gets slightly full, after waiting for those two clocks to be in phase. -- htrd Toby Dickenson Your last.fm profile mashed with eBay; www.exitahead.co.uk htrd's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3710 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
cliveb;485650 Wrote: Since you don't want to hang around waiting for the buffer to half-fill before starting playback, presumably Naim always choose an internal clock which is slower than the incoming one - that would guarantee underflow cannot happen and you can start clocking out from the buffer straight away. You just need a big enough buffer to avoid overflow. Exactly, but I don't know how they would (or maybe they don't) avoid that the DAC keeps on playing after stopping the transport. I think I'll post at Naim's forum asking some of the beta-testers to try. How likely a match is of course depends on many setup-specific factors, but I think I read that there is an indicator on the front-panel which lights up when its running ASRC. Again a post for the Naim-forum perhaps. I would say though, that if it works as advertised, I'm surprised it isn't implemented in all newer DAC's??? -- bhaagensen bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
htrd;485655 Wrote: You still wouldnt need a huge buffer - just switch to the next slowest clock when the buffer gets slightly full, after waiting for those two clocks to be in phase. But as I see it you cant just do this, due to the nature of s/pdif, even if memory was free, as per my previous post. -- bhaagensen bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
kphinney;485396 Wrote: Stay on topic and there wouldn't be any issue. I think it's more likely that CliveB, who was correcting the nomenclature I used to described my observations, was actually trying to get to the route of the issue and that is much appreciated. Unlike CliveB, your post, Audiomuze, began with off-topic hypotheticals insinuating that the listening environment would be a likely cause of _everyone's_ issue with the TP not stacking up to the Linn gear, then went on to insult by saying we were chasing rainbows. I agree and stand corrected; perhaps it would be better to describe the TP sound thru the tube system as a more warm, less analytical, analogue sound which I prefer with my listening style. Yet, this sound is really only produced with the TP when it is used with both an external DAC and the tube system. This is the route of my questions regarding the Majik or Akurate: Has anyone who tried the Linn gear feel it is of a higher caliber? By this I mean which gear do you feel has both a preferred listen-ability and a feel of longevity. To bring it fully around to my original question: My Rotel and Linn gear from the 70's are still supported by the manufacturer and still sound great. In You Opinion will the TP sound and support live a full 40 years into the future? He was on topic. There are many who don't agree with you about the Linn or other gear sounding better. The TP certainly doesn't reduce the soundstageyou must have a defect somewhere in your system, room or brain. -- tomjtx tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
kphinney wrote: To bring it fully around to my original question: My Rotel and Linn gear from the 70's are still supported by the manufacturer and still sound great. In You Opinion will the TP sound and support live a full 40 years into the future? Not a prayer of a chance. My Nikon F camera, bought in 1970 still works great, and I have a great collection of lenses. But no one uses film anymore. In the early 1970s, I was a professional software developer using a machine that had 192 k of ram, was 40 feet long, and cost millions. We supported fifty or so people simultaneously on that machine. 40 years later, dumb cell phones are more powerful. Audio was mature in the late 60s and early 70s, other than source decks, nothing fundamental has changed. The Transporter is a computer, it may work, but no one will care about it in 40 years. As to the subject question, I have no clue what a Linn Magik DS sounds like, and really don't care. I will use my Transporter until something much better comes along at a time when I have the cash to buy it. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
kphinney;485396 Wrote: Stay on topic and there wouldn't be any issue. I think you may have accidentally logged-on to the wrong forum. Given that Linn has been going since 1972, I know which way I'd bet my money. The Linn Klimax DS is the best DS I've heard yet by a country mile IMO. It's just very, very expensive... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
I have to say that all this ducking diving by the likes of Naim to try and immunise their DACs from SPDIF shortcomings seems like a heck of a lot of effort when it would just be simpler to add a clock output on all DACs and a clock input on all transports. I wonder if Logitech might consider adding a word clock input to the SB Touch's successor? If (as seems likely) the Transporter drops from the product range, there will be no Squeezebox class device with a state-of-the-art DAC, and the need to fully support external DACs becomes more important. -- cliveb Transporter - ATC SCM100A cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
Phil Leigh;485685 Wrote: I think you may have accidentally logged-on to the wrong forum. Given that Linn has been going since 1972, I know which way I'd bet my money. The Linn Klimax DS is the best DS I've heard yet by a country mile IMO. It's just very, very expensive... Apparently you are right. Maybe we should have an insult forum also. Thanks for the input Phil. I'm going to see if I can arrange an in-home for the Klimax and Akurate DSs. In the show room I agree the Klimax DS is superior, but I'm not sure if my system has a weak link that would prevent me from hearing the difference for the extra money. As of last night I can safely say the Majik and TP + Berkeley DAC are close enough to warrant another listen, but price-wise the DAC alone cost twice that of the Majik and three times that of the TP. If I could sell my Berkeley TP I could afford the Klimax but that would leave my CD Transport with out a DAC. -- kphinney -I like it, you may not. I understand and respect that.- kphinney's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10409 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
It has been argued that S/PDIF is ultimately a flawed protocol, and engineering effort expended to fix it is just papering over the cracks. Word clock from the DAC is one solution, but its uptake is not universal. Is can be argued that async USB support for external dacs is the solution going forward. It appears that the touch will/may support this. The 'Aha' moment is that jitter free (or low jitter) playback requires a pull clocked data feed from the DAC, but until recently only push clock and data has been available from the transport. In the absence of a standard that separated clock from data, we could expect little else. Conventional CD transports by their nature are inherently push based. Computer based transports can be pull based given the right implementation. Raw S/PDIF, by its nature, is push based. -- Grahame Grahame's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1200 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter factory reset on power off???
callesoroe;485609 Wrote: I have a remote controlled outlet, which powers all my equipment off when I got to bed. Does this reset The Transporter. Because my settings regarding effect loop is disabled every day at startup, eventhough I have changed settings to active and saved them in the settings menu in Squeezebox server ??? Power cycling will NOT affect any settings saved internally in Transporter - those are only the network settings anyway. All the interesting settings that affect audio playback are maintained by the server/. You may have found a bug in SqueezeCenter where it is not properly reinitializing the player when it connects. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71415 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
All this talk about transmission problems with S/PDIF and USB . can the Ethernet protocol (TCP/IP) not be used for the transmission of these digital files in place of the current problematic ones? -- Kellen Kellen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16569 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Kellen;485819 Wrote: All this talk about transmission problems with S/PDIF and USB . can the Ethernet protocol (TCP/IP) not be used for the transmission of these digital files in place of the current problematic ones? I think there are products that do that -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
Well I've just agreed to buy a Linn Akurate DS, my first ever Linn product. I'm hoping to do a comparison of the Linn, Transporter, SB+ and possibly the Modwright Transporter too, which would be fun. -- adamslim You can't have too much music, but I do have too much hifi SB+, Audion Pre, 6B4G death traps, Lowther Big Fun Horns, REL Stentor SB+, Audio Innovations L1, Chi-Fi OTL monoblocks, Heybrook Sextets Boom x 2 adamslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7355 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
seanadams;485825 Wrote: I think there are products that do that I mean connecting an external DAC to a transport. Is this not feasible to do with TCP/IP? If so, is it not better than SPDIF and USB? -- Kellen Kellen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16569 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Kellen;485831 Wrote: I mean connecting an external DAC to a transport. The hard drive is the transport, Squeezebox/TP is the DAC. Is this not feasible to do with TCP/IP? If so, is it not better than SPDIF and USB? Yes of course it's better, but I'm not sure what you're suggesting that is different than what these products do. When you say transport do you mean a CD player or what? -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Sorry for the confusion, Sean. I'll try and re-word this better. At the moment I use a TCP/IP protocol cable to connect a hard drive to my Squeezebox in order that I can transmit a digital signal between them. From what I understand there is no jitter issue resultant with this type of connection. Now, if I wish to then send this digital signal to an external DAC I have use a SPDIF cable to connect the Squeezebox to the external DAC. Doing this causes unwanted jitter related issues as talked about. Is it not possible to design a TCP/IP connection between Squeezbox and external DAC instead of using SPDIF? -- Kellen Kellen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16569 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Kellen wrote: seanadams;485825 Wrote: I think there are products that do that I mean connecting an external DAC to a transport. Is this not feasible to do with TCP/IP? If so, is it not better than SPDIF and USB? Why would you want to do that? All the Transporter is in essence is a TCP/IP collector and a nice DAC. If you want to use some other DAC, start with an SB3. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
pfarrell;485840 Wrote: Kellen wrote: seanadams;485825 Wrote: I think there are products that do that I mean connecting an external DAC to a transport. Is this not feasible to do with TCP/IP? If so, is it not better than SPDIF and USB? Why would you want to do that? All the Transporter is in essence is a TCP/IP collector and a nice DAC. If you want to use some other DAC, start with an SB3. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ I don't have a Transporter. I already have a SB3 which I am using as a transport to feed an EAD DAC via SPDIF. With all of the talk about how poor SPDIF is wrt jitter, I was curious if it is possible to use TCP/IP (which doesn't seem to be as prone to jitter) in its place. So, hypothetically, instead of using a SPDIF cable to connect my SB3 to my EAD, use TCP/IP cable instead. -- Kellen Kellen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16569 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Kellen wrote: I don't have a Transporter. I already have a SB3 which I am using as a transport to feed an EAD DAC via SPDIF. With all of the talk about how poor SPDIF is wrt jitter, I was curious if it is possible to use TCP/IP (which doesn't seem to be as prone to jitter) in its place. So, hypothetically, instead of using a SPDIF cable to connect my SB3 to my EAD, use TCP/IP cable instead. The SB3 does exactly that already. Its what it, and the SB2 and the SB1 and even the Slimp3 do. They talk TCP/IP and output audio or SPDIF All this talk about Jitter is just a way to separate audiophiles from their money. You are confusing what SPDIF/AES aim to do, and what TCP/IP does -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
pfarrell;485860 Wrote: Kellen wrote: I don't have a Transporter. I already have a SB3 which I am using as a transport to feed an EAD DAC via SPDIF. With all of the talk about how poor SPDIF is wrt jitter, I was curious if it is possible to use TCP/IP (which doesn't seem to be as prone to jitter) in its place. So, hypothetically, instead of using a SPDIF cable to connect my SB3 to my EAD, use TCP/IP cable instead. The SB3 does exactly that already. Its what it, and the SB2 and the SB1 and even the Slimp3 do. They talk TCP/IP and output audio or SPDIF All this talk about Jitter is just a way to separate audiophiles from their money. You are confusing what SPDIF/AES aim to do, and what TCP/IP does -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ I must be confusing things then because, as things stand at the moment, I am unable to use TCP/IP to connect the digi out of my SB3 to the digi in on my EAD. I can only make such a connection with either SPDIF or optical. Is this because it's not possible to have TCP/IP handle such a connection? -- Kellen Kellen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16569 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter wish list...
1) Retain clock input 2) 192/24 capable That's all I want For now the TP does fine being able to downconvert 192/24 to 96/24. -- wayne325 wayne325's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29916 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69447 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
We really, really need to start a separate thread, this is not at all about a simple question for the guy who is now retired from SlimDevices/Logitech Kellen wrote: pfarrell;485860 Wrote: The SB3 does exactly that already. I must be confusing things then because, as things stand at the moment, I am unable to use TCP/IP to connect the digi out of my SB3 to the digi in on my EAD. I can only make such a connection with either SPDIF or optical. Is this because it's not possible to have TCP/IP handle such a connection? It is not possible. You are confusing the types of things that the connection can do. SPDIF is a direct device connection, it sends out square waves and the receiving device converts them to analogue music. it goes from one device to a single target. TCP/IP is a network connection protocol, it handles retransmission, error correction, routing, etc. When Sean said there are devices that use TCP/IP he meant that things like the SB1/SB2/SB3/Receiver/Boom/Radio use TCP/IP to send music over the ether. You can't do what you are asking, and you do not want to do what you are asking. If you worry about jitter over 3 feet of SPDIF cable, you should not even think about TCP/IP, it has no jitter because its not real time. All of this talk about jitter is BS in my opinion. Just don't worry about it. There are zero scientific studies, experiments, etc. that show that any level of jitter is bad, or any is good. Without science, you can't engineer. People are entitled to have opinions that this or that component doesn't sound right, and they can claim its due to jitter being too high or too low. But its just opinion. No one will make a device that uses TCP/IP in place of SPDIF. Never will. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Thanks for the explanation, Pat. As far as jitter goes, I'm just along for the ride of what others say since I don't even know what to listen for or what jitter sounds like. -- Kellen Kellen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16569 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Kellen wrote: As far as jitter goes, I'm just along for the ride of what others say since I don't even know what to listen for or what jitter sounds like. you and the rest of the audiophile world. One thing that the thread subject did say/write long ago was that the jitter tests that Stereophile magazine prints are worthless. He didn't go into much depth on why they were worthless, or what would be more useful. But I found that interesting, because Stereophile is one of the few audiophile magazines that even attempts to measure and graph jitter and the susceptibility of a given DAC or CD player to jitter errors. What Stereophile does not attempt to do is indicate what the audible meaning of the measurements are. Its about the music. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
kphinney;485735 Wrote: Apparently you are right. Maybe we should have an insult forum also. Thanks for the input Phil. I'm going to see if I can arrange an in-home for the Klimax and Akurate DSs. In the show room I agree the Klimax DS is superior, but I'm not sure if my system has a weak link that would prevent me from hearing the difference for the extra money. As of last night I can safely say the Majik and TP + Berkeley DAC are close enough to warrant another listen, but price-wise the DAC alone cost twice that of the Majik and three times that of the TP. If I could sell my Berkeley TP I could afford the Klimax but that would leave my CD Transport with out a DAC. If you don't level match with an SPL you can't make a valid judgement. If you don't do some blind listening you can't rule out expectation bias. Of course, if you subscribe to that PRAT nonsense concocted by Linn engineers who are so musically illiterate they made up an incomplete and inferior vocabulary to describe expression in music then you are beyond hope anyway :=) -- tomjtx tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Sound quality between wav and flac
I tried to do some AudioDiffMaker tests this weekend on a Touch and was not very successful. I could not get a decent null on even the same track played with identical settings. I did this many times with several different ADCs and could not get a decent null (26dB!) when using the adaptive gain. When I turned that off I could get a 70dB null but that was it, I could still hear the music in the diff track so I don't think it was just due to noise. At this point I don't know why I'm having so much trouble with this. The software is supposed to be able to get a BETTER null with the adaptive gain than without, but that does not seem to be happening, so there seems to be something wrong either with the software (or more likely) my use of it. BTW you can read my listening impressions of these tests in the Touch forum in the TinySC audibility thread. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71321 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Sound quality between wav and flac
JohnSwenson;485929 Wrote: I tried to do some AudioDiffMaker tests this weekend on a Touch and was not very successful. I could not get a decent null on even the same track played with identical settings. I did this many times with several different ADCs and could not get a decent null (26dB!) when using the adaptive gain. When I turned that off I could get a 70dB null but that was it, I could still hear the music in the diff track so I don't think it was just due to noise. At this point I don't know why I'm having so much trouble with this. The software is supposed to be able to get a BETTER null with the adaptive gain than without, but that does not seem to be happening, so there seems to be something wrong either with the software (or more likely) my use of it. BTW you can read my listening impressions of these tests in the Touch forum in the TinySC audibility thread. John S. John - are you using version 3.2? You will need to have Gain Alignment and Time Alignment checked on the settings page. As a test, what happens if you rund the SAME file as the reference and compared tracks? -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71321 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
