Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] question on DAC roll off filter
thanks wombat! -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87009 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] question on DAC roll off filter
earwaxer9;625655 Wrote: > Why does the Transporter with the AK4286 not accept 192khz sample rate? The cumputing power inside the Transporter just isn´t up to it and it is for sure hard to always guarantee the datastream. Mr Sean Adams himself somewhere explained that somewhere in detail afaik. earwaxer9;625655 Wrote: > > Looking at the filter characteristics on pgs 11 on. It appears there is > a significant difference in filter effects (as expected) with 44.1, 96, > and 192khz. The frequencies are shifted much higher with the higher > sample rates. With resultant improved frequency response and accuracy. > Especially with the "slow" filter. Should this not be audible? One thing to my understanding is for sure, using the slow roll-off with 44.1 gives the HF part that much of a hit the chances are high you hear the missing highs not some theoretical better phase responses. Of cause some will hear that for better. To me some fine sounding recordings sound dead with it. Bad sounding recordings may sound better YMMV For the other effects of these filterings especially for 96kHz all this is at a very theoretical level brought up by some marketing in the last years. Set the filter what you think sounds best and enjoy. Some 96kHz music you buy is already hard lowpassed and you can´t hear things up there at all. If you argue now that some bad stuff creeps in from the higher to the lower frequencys someone even should filter everything hard above his hearing capabilities and never wonder about bad sounds creeping down. I think i even have read some eastern high-end studio argueing that way. They filter their 96kHz material at 22kHz! You see this is all at a very esotheric level and i doubt many claims in this direction. -- Wombat Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87009 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hearing the differences
Audio reproduction is a multi-dimensional problem. The two groups Audiophiles (Art of sound) and non-Audiophile (Science of sound) are unable to answer many unanswered questions. Our tendency as humans is to come to a conclusion because our minds cannot deal with infinitum comfortably. We know that speakers and space are the weakest link in the audio chain so majority believes that suddle changes are irrelevant heck even the temperature and pressure can change the sound. But all things being equal suddle changes can be noticeable. I am not sure if they are desirable. I think every body should take a middle ground, if someone can hear a difference power to them and if majority of folks cannot, good for them. On the other hand we have many religions and countries so we'll always argue! Just grow up and ignore what you don't agree with. Cheers! -- MediaCenter Source Device: Transporter Amplifiers: Tri-Amped NAD C272 x 3 Speakers: x-Statik Passive Crossover Removed Crossover: Active MiniDSP x 2 (3 Way) Pre-amplifier: NAD C162 Room Correction applied using REW MediaCenter's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32623 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87051 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hearing the differences
Soulkeeper;625648 Wrote: > Ok, you've disclosed the conspiracy, I admit it. Audio forums exist so > people can reassure themselves there are no differences between > equipment, just like car forums exist so people can reassure themselves > that all cars are exactly the same. ;) In car forums they are not debating who has the best smelling rubber after a smoky burnout, or if in fact you can tell the difference between a smoking Bridgestone and a Michelin in a double blind test. If someone states they like the smell of a good old fashioned bias ply belt, his word would probably be taken as that! -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87051 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] question on DAC roll off filter
michael123;625283 Wrote: > http://www.asahi-kasei.co.jp/akm/en/product/ak4396/ak4396.html Why does the Transporter with the AK4286 not accept 192khz sample rate? Looking at the filter characteristics on pgs 11 on. It appears there is a significant difference in filter effects (as expected) with 44.1, 96, and 192khz. The frequencies are shifted much higher with the higher sample rates. With resultant improved frequency response and accuracy. Especially with the "slow" filter. Should this not be audible? -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87009 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hearing the differences
Ok, you've disclosed the conspiracy, I admit it. Audio forums exist so people can reassure themselves there are no differences between equipment, just like car forums exist so people can reassure themselves that all cars are exactly the same. ;) -- Soulkeeper -that is not dead which can eternal lie. and with strange aeons even death may die.- touch + duet + boom + radio / wrt160n/dd-wrt / sbs 7.5.1 or higher/win7(32b)/avira free Soulkeeper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35297 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87051 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hearing the differences
magiccarpetride;625616 Wrote: > It would appear that in order to pass the rite of passage and be > decorated with the "you're now one of us, one of the in-crowd" gold > medal on this (and on many other audiophile forums), one need to put on > the most cynical, skeptical face and ridicule and deride anyone who > claims to be able to hear any differences between any components. > I agree that there is a very high level of snob-ism and hostility on audio forums, with a selective disregard for "simple minded" objective observations. Occasionally one of the "chosen ones" will break rank and admit to noticing said difference. Pretty rare though. Its not socially acceptable. I would venture to say that those differences are real. Read any reputable audio review and you will read of many observations. For some reason, when a common mortal makes such an observation it is immediately in question. -- earwaxer9 System: modified Winsome Labs Mouse, modified Maggie MMG's, Transporter, HSU sub 12, MSB DAC to 500 watt sub slave amp, JPS labs power cords, Silver audio interconnect, Audioquest Granite speaker cable. earwaxer9's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39527 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87051 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hearing the differences
In my view, sometimes there is a discernible difference, sometimes there is not. It depends on what has been substituted for what. Yes, the people who always claim there's no difference at all, regardless of what modification has been made, are deluded. Just like the people who always claim that the differences are earth-shattering and paradigm-shifting, regardless of what modification has been made. And the difference between these two groups of people? Well, the biggest difference is probably that the first one doesn't exist. ;P -- Soulkeeper -that is not dead which can eternal lie. and with strange aeons even death may die.- touch + duet + boom + radio / wrt160n/dd-wrt / sbs 7.5.1 or higher/win7(32b)/avira free Soulkeeper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35297 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87051 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hearing the differences
Having just read 'the post(s) that seem to have inspired this thread' (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=625617), let's fix that statement to reflect the alternate point of view: > It would appear that in order to pass the rite of passage and be > decorated with the "you're now one of us, one of the in-crowd" gold > medal on this (and on many other audiophile forums), one need to put on > the most cynical, skeptical face and ridicule and deride anyone who > *does not claim* to be able to hear any differences *due to specific > modifications*. > > Still, many people *cannot* hear differences in the sound quality *due > to those modifications*. My question: if you *cannot* hear a > *spectacular* difference, does it, according to the First Audiophile > Asshole Law, always mean that something about that *person's hearing* > is broken? > > ... > > How can people afford to always act in such an asshole-ish knee-jerk > manner all the time? > -- snottmonster snottmonster's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=45063 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87051 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hearing the differences
magiccarpetride;625616 Wrote: > It would appear that in order to pass the rite of passage and be > decorated with the "you're now one of us, one of the in-crowd" gold > medal on this (and on many other audiophile forums), one need to put on > the most cynical, skeptical face and ridicule and deride anyone who > claims to be able to hear any differences between any components. > > Still, many people (myself included) can clearly hear the differences > in the sound quality when replacing/modifying the system components. My > question: if you can hear a difference, does it, according to the First > Audiophile Asshole Law, always mean that something about that component > is broken? > > I ask this because any time I report that I'm hearing a difference, for > example by switching to a different DAC, all the audiophile assholes > hasten to jump on my case and explain to me that the DAC in question > most be seriously broken. In other words, in their exalted opinion, no > two DACs should ever sound different, providing, of course, that > they're not somehow broken. > > Same goes for speaker cables, amplifiers, digital transports, speakers, > rooms, you name it. > > How can people afford to always act in such an asshole-ish knee-jerk > manner all the time? > > Trolling over and out! MCR, I enjoy many of the threads you start with philosophical questions and I think of you as a very high quality troll (and I don't know how to best convey this, but I actually mean this in a nice way). Where some folks around here have problems are when (1) all changes produce "staggering improvements", (2) ABX or blind tests are lambasted, based on incorrect assumptions about how such tests can be done, and (3) the negativity when someone dares to say that they can't hear any differences (or that mathematically, the difference suggested is impossible, e.g., the 100% volume mod). And then Phil finds very small measurement differences under very limited circumstances, and some use this to declare soundcheck's mods to be a gift from the audio gods. I'm happy that Soundcheck tinkers with this stuff and some folks really like his mods. I actually assume that some (maybe all) of them certainly can't hurt (but again, there's the "staggering difference" part). And I have to admit I often get a kick out of some of these threads, even though they lead nowhere. I picture you getting the same kind of chuckles, as you certainly don't take all this too seriously (of course none of us should...it's just fun stuff related to our music interests). But hey, this is a public forum, not someone's private blog. And people are free to express their opinions, even if clearly wrong. I frankly would be embarrassed to call myself an audiophile. The term has been hijacked by wackos to the extent that it is embarrassing to be lumped into that group. But again, that's my personal opinion. I started hanging out here because I wanted to learn about SB stuff. I've learned a lot and very much enjoy my SB products and my setup. I rarely have any problems, but continue to hang out here to try to answer questions of newbies that are confused about how the dang things work. I'm not an engineer or a technical person by trade, so I'm only useful for explaining a few basics and suggesting a few tried and true cures for problems. And sometimes I post to provide a counter opinion (e.g., posts that suggest that everything is broken for everyone because MINE doesn't work). But I'm not trying to change the world, audiophiles or otherwise. On the one hand your posts indicate that you have thick skin, are a thinking adult well versed in the ways of internet forums, and like to have a bit of fun. But then posts like this one seem odd as you are essentially complaining that you don't like how other people respond. That's your right of course, but it seems the opposite of your primary persona around here. This said, you seem like the kind of guy I'd enjoy having a few (staggeringly good) beers with and solving the problems of the world. Cheers. -- garym garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87051 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
magiccarpetride;625617 Wrote: > OK, let me ask you this: are you, or have you ever been able, to hear > ANY differences in the sound quality when comparing two systems? Most definitely. Again: what's your point? -- aubuti aubuti's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2074 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
aubuti;625615 Wrote: > I _can_ say with certainty that I did not hear the '\"staggering > improvements in the sound quality\"' > (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=602233#post602233) that > you and others report hearing (and you hadn't even disabled wifi yet). Which brand of audiophile cotton swabs is everybody using to clean their ears? -- Tom186 Tom186's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=43852 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
aubuti;625615 Wrote: > Sure. Your point? > Obviously I heard 'something', i.e., the music. But in my case I cannot > say with any degree of certainty that I heard a difference in sound > before and after soundcheck's mods. I _can_ say with certainty that I > did not hear the '\"staggering improvements in the sound quality\"' > (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=602233#post602233) that > you and others report hearing (and you hadn't even disabled wifi yet). OK, let me ask you this: are you, or have you ever been able, to hear ANY differences in the sound quality when comparing two systems? -- magiccarpetride magiccarpetride's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37863 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hearing the differences
It would appear that in order to pass the rite of passage and be decorated with the "you're now one of us, one of the in-crowd" gold medal on this (and on many other audiophile forums), one need to put on the most cynical, skeptical face and ridicule and deride anyone who claims to be able to hear any differences between any components. Still, many people (myself included) can clearly hear the differences in the sound quality when replacing/modifying the system components. My question: if you can hear a difference, does it, according to the Fist Audiophile Asshole Law, always mean that something about that component is broken? I ask this because any time I report that I'm hearing a difference, for example by switching to a different DAC, all the audiophile assholes hasten to jump on my case and explain to me that the DAC in question most be seriously broken. In other words, in their exalted opinion, no two DACs should ever sound different, providing, of course, that they're not somehow broken. Same goes for speaker cables, amplifiers, digital transports, speakers, room, you name it. How can people afford to always act in such an asshole-ish knee-jerk manner all the time? Trolling over and out! -- magiccarpetride magiccarpetride's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37863 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=87051 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
magiccarpetride;625607 Wrote: > Can you supply us with definitive measurements proving that you're > actually alive? Sure. Your point? Obviously I heard 'something', i.e., the music. But in my case I cannot say with any degree of certainty that I heard a difference in sound before and after soundcheck's mods. I _can_ say with certainty that I did not hear the '\"staggering improvements in the sound quality\"' (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=602233#post602233) that you and others report hearing (and you hadn't even disabled wifi yet). -- aubuti aubuti's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2074 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
aubuti;625547 Wrote: > And as for 'Gazjam's question' > (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=625418#post625418), > yes, I did try the mods. I didn't do extensive comparisons, but I'm not > even sure I heard 'something'. Can you supply us with definitive measurements proving that you're actually alive? -- magiccarpetride magiccarpetride's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37863 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
adamdea;625575 Wrote: > Err no. The original advice from Soundcheck was that it was not worth > applying the mods unless you are going wired. This is not in fact a > cost-free exercise if you do not have ethernet cabling installed. > If I have misunderstood I am quite happy to be corrected. Incidentally > I did try converting flac to wav at the server end and can assure you > that i detected no difference. (on the other hand it is predicted that > doing this on wifi will not improve things and may make them worse due > to the heavier traffic load.)I may turn off the analog out though. not trying to be funny, but your stating opinion when you say you did not hear any difference. Others have tried it and find it worthwhile. Its ok to disagree :) I upsample via SOX in my setup, so all my conversion is done at the server end anyway... -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Tom186;625569 Wrote: > It's so easy (and cost free) to try these mods ... is it not a waste of > breath to speculate about them without giving them a whirl? Err no. The original advice from Soundcheck was that it was not worth applying the mods unless you are going wired. This is not in fact a cost-free exercise if you do not have ethernet cabling installed. If I have misunderstood I am quite happy to be corrected. Incidentally I did try converting flac to wav at the server end and can assure you that i detected no difference. (on the other hand it is predicted that doing this on wifi will not improve things and may make them worse due to the heavier traffic load.)I may turn off the analog out though. -- adamdea adamdea's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37603 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
It's so easy (and cost free) to try these mods ... is it not a waste of breath to speculate about them without giving them a whirl? -- Tom186 Tom186's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=43852 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Whatver the merits of other mods, the really extraordinary claim is that the volume =100% mod makes a difference when it seems to have been estabolished that there is abolutely no difference from just having the volume at 100% in any value of any processs running on the cpu. I probably will give the mods a go one day but since i use wifi, it doesn;t seem to be worth it at the moment unless I get a wireless bridge. -- adamdea adamdea's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37603 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
snottmonster;625542 Wrote: > Urghh... Thanks (I think). I got as far as the new claim that "A Windows > based server sounds better then a Linux based server on the same HW" (ie > about 10 pages) and felt the will to live slowly draining from my > body... No, no -- have another beverage (espresso, ale, wine, whiskey, whatever) and keep reading. You have to get to the part about shielded vs unshielded ethernet cable. ;o) And as for 'Gazjam's question' (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=625418#post625418), yes, I did try the mods. I didn't do extensive comparisons, but I'm not even sure I heard 'something'. So far the best I can give the mods is a 'maybe' for audible improvement under my current conditions (system, room, ears, etc). The one definite plus is that it finally pushed me to run cat5e cable to that part of the house. -- aubuti aubuti's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2074 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
snottmonster;625542 Wrote: > Urghh... Thanks (I think). I got as far as the new claim that "A Windows > based server sounds better then a Linux based server on the same HW" (ie > about 10 pages) and felt the will to live slowly draining from my > body... > > Anyway, based on those results I revise my position: > - Definitive measurements? Yes! > - Definitive evidence of the modifications improving SQ? Hardly... > > And given that is for the analogue out which would have most potential > to see improvement, it doesn't bode well for anyone who claims to hear > an improvement via the digital out. +1 (and the scary part to me is that people report hearing "amazing" differences (always improvement of course) from the digital outs.) But suggest an ABX test and you'll be met with lots of resistance! -- garym garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
aubuti;625527 Wrote: > Start around post #329 in this thread. Note that those are Phil's > measurements on the analog outputs. Urghh... Thanks (I think). I got as far as the new claim that "A Windows based server sounds better then a Linux based server on the same HW" (ie about 10 pages) and felt the will to live slowly draining from my body... Anyway, based on those results I revise my position: - Definitive measurements? Yes! - Definitive evidence of the modifications improving SQ? Hardly... And given that is for the analogue out which would have most potential to see improvement, it doesn't bode well for anyone who claims to hear an improvement via the digital out. -- snottmonster snottmonster's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=45063 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
snottmonster;625526 Wrote: > So in all seriousness, please point me to any such measurements - I'd be > very interested to see them and the conclusions drawn. Start around post #329 in this thread. Note that those are Phil's measurements on the analog outputs. -- aubuti aubuti's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2074 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
firedog;625489 Wrote: > They've at least taken measurements that show that the mods do have some > measurable effect on the output of the Touch. Really? I haven't seen any such definitive measurements, though as a new guy around here I could quite easily have missed something. I did recently see some info that showed the buffer modification changed the noise induced on the processor power supply (maybe even earlier in this thread), but nothing that showed the change in noise profile made any difference to the analogue output. That said, I'm 100% convinced there are modifications that could improve SQ as yes - the unit will always be a compromise when designed to a budget - but I've yet to see any supporting evidence that these particular sofware modifications make any difference or even credible theories that could explain the claimed improvements, and so ridicule is an entirely natural and, IMO, appropriate response So in all seriousness, please point me to any such measurements - I'd be very interested to see them and the conclusions drawn. -- snottmonster snottmonster's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=45063 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
mervin_b;625251 Wrote: > Right now I use 12897 (no kidding..). Compared to the default 2, it > does seem to sound smoother, yet remain clear and detailed. > Hi, I don't have much time for the non-empirical part of this thread, but here is my observation regarding the suggested 12897 buffer setting, if it was ever meant to be a serious suggestion at all: It does not work over here. In my system, the pattern is pretty clear: the smaller the buffer setting, the better. "Better" = in the sense that I explained earlier. Cheers, Thomas -- Tom186 Tom186's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=43852 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] S/PDIF cables should be (a) - >=1.5m or (b) as short as possible?
darrenyeats;625481 Wrote: > At the risk of getting a reputation for being deaf (!) I've now tried my > coax versus my optical and I couldn't detect any difference, using a > Benchmark DAC1 HDR. > > I am using optical for convenience - shorter! > > Regards, Darren Understand that if you actually could detect a difference it would more likely mean that something is broken in your DAC or one of the cables! -- garym garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84751 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Guys- I know it's fun to snipe and sound superior, but both Phil and John have taken measurements that MIGHT explain a positive effect on sound of Soundcheck's mods. They've at least taken measurements that show that the mods do have some measurable effect on the output of the Touch. So the mods can't be dismissed out of hand, even by objectivists. Those measurable results might improve SQ. As far as the oft repeated claim in this forum that mods are by nature silly b/c "obviously Logitech engineers designed the optimum sounding device", or something to that effect: such an assumption has no basis in fact or in the reality of how products are designed and marketed. Virtually all products are designed so that their cost meets a price point. By definition, this will force some compromises to be made that could negatively effect SQ of the device. In addition, I don't think that designers are even trying to "make the best sounding" device they can. Especially with the Touch, they are trying to make a device which has lots of features, and will attract a broad audience. SQ is important, but not the only design goal. One could say that Logitech is trying to make the best sounding device it can that has a specific feature set and meets a certain price point. Example: let's assume that running the screen of the Touch does slightly degrade SQ, but the difference is only audible on a relatively high-end system. Is Logitech then going to change the fundamental nature of the product to function without a touch screen? NO! They are going to slightly compromise the SQ in order to build the product that they think will be successful. It will have a screen and the SQ will reach a level that will satisfy most users, especially considering the price of the Touch. There are potentially dozens of decisions like this that have to be made when bringing such a product to market. So there are also potentially dozens of hardware or software mods that could possibly improve SQ. Whether the improvement in SQ these mods bring - if any - is worth the possible loss of features or convenience is something those using the mods have to decide. -- firedog GIK Acoustics Room Treatments. Tranquil PC fanless WHS server running SqueezeServer; SB Touch slaved to Empirical Audio Pace Car; MF X-DACV3, MF X-150 amp, Devore Gibbon Super 8 Speakers; Dual 506 + Ortofon 20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in second room. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] S/PDIF cables should be (a) - >=1.5m or (b) as short as possible?
If the length of an s/pdif cable makes a difference to your DAC, don't buy more s/pdif cables, sell your DAC and buy one that works properly. Why throw good money after bad? -- JezA JezA's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21219 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84751 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] S/PDIF cables should be (a) - >=1.5m or (b) as short as possible?
At the risk of getting a reputation for being deaf (!) I've now tried my coax versus my optical and I couldn't detect any difference, using a Benchmark DAC1 HDR. I am using optical for convenience - shorter and I can skip all discussion of cable-borne noise! Regards, Darren -- darrenyeats http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/richpub/listmania/byauthor/A3H57URKQB8AQO/ref=cm_pdp_content_listmania/203-7606506-5721503. SB3, SB Touch SqueezeControl for Android darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84751 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
