Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Optical (toslink) connection
Here's an interesting post from Sean Adams, back in 2005, on the subject: seanadams;39192 Wrote: > ...Personally I find it unfortunate that S/PDIF was ever specified to > run over coax copper in the first place. There are some who claim it's > better than fiber for various reasons, but all empirical data says that > optical S/PDIF is FAR more reliable, works over longer distances, and > delivers measurably lower jitter at the receiver. It also inherently > isolates ground offset, low frequency and EMI noise between devices. > The only good reason to use coax is if you don't have an optical cable > or an optical input available, which is primarily why we have the > connector there... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=90211 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Why is there differences between the players?
Harryup;640615 Wrote: > We compared optical SP/Dif out from all the players. They sounded > differently and even different in volume level. > We used a Benchmark DAC-1 with the same optical fibre. > > /Harry Well that is interesting - since theoretically there should be no difference between sources when using the Benchmark... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88766 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Popping noises with Transporter firmware 81 and 85
Wombat;597117 Wrote: > Since Logitech took over Slimdevices i wondered how long it takes that > no one takes care about it anymore. > Logitech should produce mice, that´s what i belief they are good at. > If anyone told me to buy a 1599 product of Logitech back then i´d > asked him what the hell he is smoking. > > Hard words in such a peasefull time, sorry. Enjoy your holidays :) I think (hope) they still care about it - after all, the Logitech site now shows a new "Transporter SE" item... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84133 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter vs Cambridge DacMagic
ralphpnj;588909 Wrote: > ...convert redbook to 24/96 - complete rubbish. all this accomplishes is > requiring more storage for the larger 24/96 files and greater network > bandwidth required for the larger 24/96 files... I've often wondered if such upsampling would, or could, make a difference with a Transporter. I've heard the argument that some DAC components perform at their very best only when receiving higher sampling frequencies - for instance the case for asychronous upsampling 'as made by Benchmark Media.' (http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/discuss/feedback/newsletter/2010/07/1/asynchronous-upsampling-110-khz) However, I do not know how that argument may (if at all) relate to the Transporter... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=83162 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Best < 300 US$ DAC for Squeezebox???
OGS;584506 Wrote: > The DAC in the Touch does not output a DC voltage on the audio outputs. > The caps are not needed. This is, as far as I understand it - and as > John Swensson has explained, how AKM has designed the DAC. So no, there > is no downside that I can see. There is always a risk in performing mods > to a product and the warranty is gone of course. It would seem very strange that Logitech would spend to put any superfluous parts in, that literally serve no function whatsoever, and further actually reduce performance(?) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82539 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Most bang for buck? Add DAC to SB or buy Touch?
Hi Dave, I -very- strongly recommend going the separate DAC route. Good luck! -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82067 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 + Power amp problem
Wombat;574730 Wrote: > I second that. The SB3 alone has an output that should have not the > slightest problem to drive a pre-amp input. The Op-Amp in the exit has > enough current juice even for low impedance power-amps. > If a pre-amp betters the sound the power-amp has some broken or badly > engineered inputs or the pre-amp just adds his own "sweet" sound. I also agree - the SB3 works great with passive attenuation directly into the amplifier. I'm not really sure what accounts for it, but different passive attenuators can produce rather different sonic results - even though they are just a voltage dividers / resistor networks. I tried several passive attenuators, and the 'Scott Endler's Shotgun Attenuators' (http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4c5pt/id2.html) easily sounded the best. For some reason, I found the Rothwells sounded the poorest out of all the passives - I tried several of them and they all sounded really bad in comparison to the others. The Endlers though, are consistently fantastic and more flexible in application as well - they receive my own strong recommendation. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=81664 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Sound quality between wav and flac
JohnSwenson;572357 Wrote: > Where did this come from?... I (and others) say we can hear the > difference between PCM and FLAC decoding on the Touch. Others > emphatically state this is theoretically impossible... What I was after > was ... test if it is even possible to hear a difference... How wide > spread the capability is and if its applicable to a wide range of music > was not the emphasis ... I think it complicates what I was trying to get > at, can a difference really be heard at all. I have stated before that > its much easier to hear the difference on some songs than on others, so > I don't think I was trying to say that its equally applicable to all > music... at least me it seems that running the test with someone who > says they can hear it, using a song they say shows it well, is a > worthwhile initial test. > ... > Good questions John - You're right that it can indeed quickly get complicated. It completely depends upon the population about which you are trying to make your "theoretically possible to hear a difference" conclusion. Are you trying to establish non-scientific evidence for something that is *only* applicable to simply yourself and a few others highly nonrepresentative of the general user base? Or, do you wish to find evidence that could reasonably describe the general population of users? If the former, your conclusions statistically speaking will of course be extremely biased and thus not of much use to anybody outside of the "special" group, since for example that group's perceptive abilities may be extraordinarily different from most others, or somehow merely connected to sloppy experiment design/lack of a control group and resulting placebo affect complications. What's more, any number of potential lurking variables can then also have much more than chance likelihood to in reality influence any apparent correlation, instead of the particular connection you are wishing to find evidence for via such a test. If the latter (i.e. you wish the test results to be generalizable to the greater population of users), then all sources of reasonably imaginable bias - e.g. self-selected subjects, special songs, specified listening equipment, etc - must certainly be controlled and minimized to the greatest possible degree, in order for the results to have validity in any statistical sense. You can still perform a test in the absence of these considerations and get collections of numbers/results/etc, but their validity and usefulness can of course be thus compromised. That said, if these concerns don't matter to you or anybody else, then great! But otherwise, I still felt obligated to make these statements regardless, in case anybody else reading this thread might relate to these observations and the associated potential issues with the actual statistical validity of any conclusions drawn. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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
lrossouw;572171 Wrote: > Thanks, agree generally, but specifically: > - Different songs are not required, but may be preferred. Independence > is provided by random pairs of songs that are the same format or > different formats, even if all the pairs are the same song. > - It should be one tailed as to prove he hears a difference he has to > correctly identify difference or sameness in enough cases. If he often > states the opposite of what the reality it will certainly be strange but > it would mean that he couldn't hear the difference in pairs that were in > fact different. > - I think the H0 should be expanded that nobody can hear the difference > on any song. H1 in this case (assuming John as subject) is that John can > hear the difference on songs he chose. It would of course be better to > do this on more subjects though, but it does have to be on people who > claim they can hear a difference. If I don't think I hear the > differences I cannot take these tests. > ... > I do appreciate what you're saying and I think your ideas are good - Just for the record I for some reason feel compelled to reiterate the following, (hopefully) for further consideration and clarity: - Independence would definitely require different songs on different trials, since we aren't trying only to identify the properties of, or limit our test results to, only certain specifically pre-chosen (and thus perhaps non-generally-representative) songs. - It would ideally require two tails as well, since any differences in either direction could potentially be statistically significant, and we definitely don't want to deliberately ignore either of these directions. Remember we aren't trying to measure "better" any more, only "distinguishable". Equally important is the point that it's not only about the counts of "distinguishable" or not here either, but about -how far from expected- the evidence may fall - and this could presumably occur in either tail-direction from the expected result under the null hypothesis. - The tests would theoretically require many randomly selected test subjects and should most definitely not be restricted to any kind of self-selected audience of subjects that already believe they can hear a difference - nor should it use only pre-screened or subject-selected songs. Otherwise any test results would definitely be limited at best and horribly biased at worst, and thus could not at all support the research hypothesis stating that the -general- audience can distinguish a difference on -general- songs. _Any_ selection bias, whether self-selection or otherwise, should definitely and always be avoided. Significance tests by their design absolutely require randomization for their legitimacy, and ideally will also proceed from a _simple_ random sample (not just a random sample). Any deviation from this requirement will always, at the theoretical level, undermine and invalidate the results of any statistical significance test. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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
lrossouw;571916 Wrote: > ... > FORMAT 3 > > N pairs of songs. Each is a pair of the same track. But different > pairs can be different tracks. Here we simply randomly flip pairs such > that they are the same (both pcm or both flac) or different (1 pcm and 1 > flac). You just identify which pairs are different and which are the > same. > > H0: You cannot reliably tell which pairs are different and which not. > H1: You can. > > Again identify enough of the pairs correctly as different or the same > then we can reject H0. > > This is the best one in my mind. This specifically looks just at > whether you can correctly identify when they are different . You don't > need to identify them as flac or pcm or to pronounce one as better. Also > we could use different tracks for each pair. > ... I think you are certainly doing better now, with this last proposal. No longer is there a subjective "better" involved in the research hypothesis, but rather a more realistic test of a detected "difference". Also using different songs for different trial pairs will in fact allow a more realistic approximation to the independence-of-trials requirement. I believe you could still benefit the test structure further by doing a two-sided test here - otherwise your P-values will likely be too artificially low. Also, if you are trying to establish that detection success is generally more likely than merely random selection, you absolutely would need to utilize more test subjects than just one (even if that one is John!) :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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
lrossouw;571645 Wrote: > We are trying to get whether the two processes result in different sound > to a user. This test would allow us to reject the hypotheis that method > 1 (stream pcm) is not better than method 2 (stream flac) with a > probability of error of x%. The smaller you want x% to be the more > tests you need to do. > > I reckon I'd be more than happy with <1% chance of error. If you were > just randomly chosing between the two, the chances of chosing the pcm > version 16 times (or more) is just 0.59%. If you pick the right > stream as better 16 out 20 times the chance of us being wrong to say > that pcm is better is only 0.59%. > > With 30 tests the magic number is 22 giving 0.81%. > > Note it says nothing about the the reason for the difference (i.e. the > streaming format or the processing in the touch). > > 1) To me, each test should have A = randomly one of pcm or flac and B > the other. I think it should be fine to switch between these and > listen for some time (I think everyone agrees the differences would be > small). At the end of the test a call should be made which is better > quality and this should be recorded along with which method were used > for A and B. This is one iteration. > > 2) For the next iteration A again should be randomly one method and B > the other. This should be on the same song. > > 3) Repeat N times. N=20? 30? 40? > > Note that A shouldn't be always flac or always pcm as we want the tests > to be independent of each other. Otherwise you can use information from > one test to the the next which would invalidate our distribution we use > for the probability calculations. > > EDIT1: To summarise in layman's terms this design will tell us a) > whether they sound different and b) whether pcm can be considered > better in the ears of the listener of course over the music included in > the test. This would still leave healthy gaps for debate :). Assuming > the cut-off is made most would concede at least part a). > > EDIT2: Also thinking about it more each repetition of the test should > be done on the same song or same sample of music (perhaps 2 or 3 > songs/pieces) as in theory pcm could sound better on some pieces and > flac better on others. To reduce the chances of this messing up our > results we should limit it to the same music in each iteration. Some (possibly incorrect) observations here: If you wish to use the binomial sign test, then you should probably not use the same piece of music for separate trial iterations (as this could possibly violate the independence of trials requirement). If your research hypothesis is that the sound samples are sonically distinguishable, then you should perhaps also conduct a two-sided test (currently your test appears to be only one-sided), since this would not ignore either preference direction. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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] One for the gullible ?
pski;567935 Wrote: > Bwa?... Please - what does "Bwa" mean? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80786 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Touch V Classic Digital Output
JohnSwenson;564361 Wrote: > ...Some of these techniques are fairly sophisticated... it just can't be > described in a couple paragraphs... The ultimate performance is > listening, but ..."effective jitter", which is two pages in the above > dissertation, and really takes several graphs to understand... Not > understanding this has been the downfall of quite a few designs. (they > think they have low jitter, but they really don't because they are > measuring the wrong thing)... I then do a bunch of measurements and > listening tests, bypass the circuit in question (usually very easy to > do, mostly cutting a trace or two and adding a wire)... A few people > have not heard much of a difference, but nobody has wanted it back the > way it was. > > I know that doesn't really answer your question, but the details are > going to have to wait for a while. > > John S. That's ok John! You don't need to answer these questions of course. If you do in the future choose to do so, perhaps even providing just a single example for each of your above-referenced statements, would be nice - but again, this is not necessary. :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80557 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Touch V Classic Digital Output
JohnSwenson;564328 Wrote: > ...There are a number of techniques that can be used to decrease > sensitivity to different sources which also negatively impact sound > quality... I personally have modified several DACs using these > techniques and sure enough, when the special techniques are turned off, > it becomes much more sensitive to source, BUT the best sources sound > better than before the modification... For many commercial enterprises > it seems uniformity of performance is more important than ultimate best > performance... Hi John, Just wondering please, for any examples regarding your statements: - What are some sensitivity-decreasing techniques that also negatively impact sound quality? - What are some DACs have you modified to "turn off" such techniques, and what was the full extent of your modifications? - What are some commercial enterprises that are sacrificing best performance for uniform performance? This would be helpful info - thanks! -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80557 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Touch V Classic Digital Output
Phil Leigh;563967 Wrote: > Interesting - do you have any examples? Sure thing Phil - I've found that older DACs of the OS/PLL-only version tend to be the most source-sensitive - but perhaps the _most_ source-sensitive designs of all, seem to be the NOS-version DACs - e.g. most MHDT Labs DACS will exhibit this. I don't know the reason(s) - perhaps it's interface-jitter sensitivity, or better source isolation, or perhaps something else - but it's there. The best case of a non-source-sensitive DAC that I've found, and that in particular doesn't seem to sound different when paired with the Touch vs. SB3, is the Benchmark (I still own the DAC1 PRE version) - which sounds identical and excellent to me with both these sources. Ultralock seems to be a great solution in my opinion. :) I'm personally very interested in hearing your feedback on the new Musical Fidelity DAC (including on this issue), if/when you have such feedback to share... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80557 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Touch V Classic Digital Output
goopie;562929 Wrote: > Does the Touch sound better than the Classic from the digital output? Only with some DACs, which I personally consider a weakness in those DACs. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80557 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] What outboard DAC do you use with Squeezebox?
Themis;562310 Wrote: > Thanks Phil, very kind of you. :) I agree - thanks in advance Phil! :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72018 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Which Squeezebox combo as a decent primary source?
Nomis;562511 Wrote: > Hi, > > ...is the Transporter *really* a better digital source than the Duet or > Touch?... If you want the best among these products, then yes the Transporter is a better digital source - although I really think you should consider using the Transporter analog outputs, as these sound fantastic and would also directly support your 96/24 material. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80517 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] What's next or is this it?
Well here's some info from the grapevine... I recently had a personal conversation with a reputable and popular Logitech dealer, who himself claimed to have recently spoken to Logitech about this exact subject (i.e. a "Transporter-II"). He was directly advised that a next-generation Transporter project was in fact being discussed at Logitech - and not just in a purely hypothetical way, but rather in a "what could we do to make this happen" style way. So, I hope it follows that we do have some hope here! I would certainly be looking with great interest at such a product. :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80282 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Yet another Touch vs. Transporter thread
I am usually in the minority regarding the SB3 sound quality, as I personally think the SB3 analog-out sounds very good indeed (when it is used properly). However, the analog-out sound quality between any other slim-device and the Transporter is, as Michael implied earlier, like comparing apples to oranges. The Transporter sounds so much better - it is just strikingly apparent. Comparing digital outs, I actually cannot really hear any differences when feeding into a Benchmark DAC1 PRE. Some other DACs do I think seem sensitive to interface issues, sounding better from certain sources - but the Benchmark sounds fantastic (better than the other separate DACs) whether using an SB3, Touch, or a Transporter. So if you have a good DAC that isn't overly source-sensitive, than any slim-device is equivalent as a digital source in my opinion. The VFD screens on the SB3/Transporter are clearly superior to the Touch LCD screen in my opinion also. It also seems that most (perhaps all?) of the Transporter bugs have been worked out now as well. My personal favorite configuration is to just use the Transporter analog balanced outputs, period. Sound quality is simply amazing. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=79914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Help fix my vague ignorance
See Ron, you can always get a good variety of opinions on the forum. :) I recently did some comparisons between SB3/Touch/Transporter analog outs, and the Transporter genuinely does sound noticeably better than the other units in a variety of system configurations. This was also evident on speakers in the "less than $5000" category. The OP (Ron) already said he would: - "never be running an external DAC"; - be currently using an Onkyo/Paradigm combo (Ron is right, these are actualy decent mid-range pieces); - possibly be upgrading amp/speakers; - be actively considering the Transporter (i.e. wasn't priced-out by it). So if you simply want the best possible sound via analog outputs from among these units, the Transporter is your choice IMO and does noticeably outpace the others (Touch included). If you are going to eventually upgrade your amp/speakers/both, the Transporter's improvement will then become even more noticeable (assuming Transporters rarely break after warranty expiration - cross your fingers clibeb). [Note: Very high-quality active speakers are also a nice proposition here!] If you eventually do upgrade your amp, I must agree that getting a good amp with balanced inputs will bring out even still further improvement from the Transporter's analog outputs (balanced XLR). I also concur that better speakers will nearly always give the biggest bang-for-buck upgrade, but once again, most especially with upgraded source/amp components. If you do buy a Transporter, I most definitely agree with those suggesting $2000 may be too much - given that it is a niche EOL product and Logitech is now concerned with its new generation products. Prices at/around $1400 (new) are available for Transporters, $1300 during intermittent sales, and less of course for used units. I personally would not recommend just simply forking out the top retail price of $2000. :) Also, since Transporters may not be available too much longer, then it does make sense to obtain one while they are available. If you do buy a Transporter and want to sell it later, resale value on Transporters seems to remain healthy on eBay/Audiogon/etc. I have no illusions of convincing everybody - I just wanted to share my reasons, that's all. :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=79496 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Help fix my vague ignorance
Based on what you've just said here Ron - using only analog outs and appreciating a more spacious volume - I recommend you get a Transporter. I think it would produce a noticeable difference on the equipment you mention, and I also think you would enjoy this difference. :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=79496 ___ 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?
iPhone;496794 Wrote: > ...It is just my opinion from listening to both of them for over 6 > months and testing them that the win still goes to the Transporter. I > firmly believe this is especially true if both are being used for their > analog outputs. The Transporter has superior analog outs... IMO if one > is using analog outs and has to have the best, the Transporter wins > hands down... After some recent A/B comparisons, I simply have to fully agree with iPhone on this one - the Transporter is *much* better sounding than the Touch, each compared via analog outs. I wasn't really expecting a big difference, but wow! I don't know exactly why the older Transporter components "under the hood" can produce such a difference, but it's definitely there... but so is the price difference! :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Toslink vs Coax SB3 vs Reference [bits are bits (+ Jitter)]
Thank you again George - very much - for continuing to conduct and post these interesting tests. :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=79245 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The sound of jitter
That paper is interesting, but nearly 20 years old. I wonder how the various analyses it presents, would now play out using modern digital receivers and DAC design/circuitry... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78790 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Volume controlS questions???
Mnyb;549774 Wrote: > ...every amp amplifies whats presented at the input including the noise > from the previous component and the noise in it's own input circuits, > so an attenuator also dampens the source noise. > Therefore I think it's best to damp to hot sources with attenuators ( > could be the pre-amp or the source) and amps should not have ridiculous > amounts of gain. So for best performance every step in the audio chain > should have sensible gain and levels ... +1 on this. I might add that too-hot sources can also produce distortion by overloading the subsequent input stage. I especially agree with the part about amps not having such ridiculous amounts of gain. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=79033 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] How good is the Transporter anyway?
iPhone;549682 Wrote: > ...there is no difference whatsoever between using Ethernet and Wireless > for the transfer of Data... as long as one has a strong wireless network > without interference, there isn't any difference in audio quality. > > ...there is no difference between USB and Ethernet for transporting > digital data of ones and zeros... Of course, _many_ people - both here and elsewhere - have claimed to hear an apparent sonic quality improvement with the slimdevices units, when using a wired connection instead of wireless. Sure, they possibly might all be wrong; but if there is a difference, it would not need to be due to the data transmission accuracy (I don't know if anybody had suggested that), but would be due to some other mechanism. Some have suggested or suspected possible interactions with subsequent analog circuitry / AC interaction / etc - but I don't think anybody has ever been able to show or demonstrate such a mechanism (please correct me if I'm mistaken). I think earwaxer is also absolutely correct that ethernet can traverse much longer distances than USB without any need for signal boosters etc. Thanks earwaxer for posting your comments. :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78950 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The sound of jitter
Themis;549925 Wrote: > I believe jitter in itself has no sound. > > Imho, it simply makes other distortions (approximations in the D/A > process) sound different, become more apparent. ;) > > This is probably the reason why reclocking was introduced in the first > place. I guess that I don't quite see the difference. ;) Reclocking I believe was introduced for this reason, but also in order to allow D/A chips/filters to perform more optimally as I recall... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78790 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] How to fight clipping due to high (recorded) volume?
michael123;549086 Wrote: > Still, the question is why some DACs (such as Audio Logic XL) do > reproduce better recordings with clipping,... Hi Michael123, Have you read the good article by Chris Tham on this subject? 'Here's a link if you are interested' (http://www.audioholics.com/education/audio-formats-technology/issues-with-0dbfs-levels-on-digital-audio-playback-systems) - I thought it was interesting... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78964 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The sound of jitter
I like your question, assuming I'm understanding it correctly. ;) For those that claim an ability to hear jitter, this would of course presume jitter is audible. If so, then it would seem possible that a before-and-after difference of the audio waveforms would, in principle, be able to identify the audible difference component - and thus be reproducible in theory as a DSP "effect" (although it would be strange to call it that!). Of course, different jitter spectrum are claimed to sound very different as well - some claim that certain jitter patterns are even euphonic - so there would be several variables to play with in the simulation. I think that most people find, that they have to just settle with your nicely-put summary of the situation: "It is not quantifiable, nor even generally agreed upon, how the small variations [in jitter] present in modern devices relates to differences in perceived pracitcal sound-quality." Well said! :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78790 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SqueezeBox 3 Analog Out added to RMAA Tests
Thank you very much for conducting and posting these tests. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78917 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hard facts supporting the quality of Touch digital out.
bhaagensen;547680 Wrote: > NewBuyer: thanks for the comments and in particular pointing out one > source of the 'long-cable'-argument. Another source that I see quoted > from time to time, is this: > > http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue14/spdif.htm > > Along with your comment I also note, in this particular context, that > Naim's own (recommended) digital coax cable is 1.25m... You're welcome. :) A source for the opposing short-length digital coax cable argument is Dan Lavry - here's an extract of one comment from him, on this subject: Dan Lavry Wrote: > ...In fact, the shorter the cable, the better you are. I am not > suggesting to use 3 inches cables, but a 3 foot is better then 10 foot, > and at over 30 feet you are certainly asking for trouble. > > You said the reason for keeping the length at least 2 feet had to do > with reflections. Reflections have to do with MORE LENGTH, not with > less length! Reflection becomes an issue when the cable becomes LONG, > making the signal propagation delay longer (the signal travel time from > the driver end of the cable to the destination end). What does > longer time mean? Longer with respect to the digital signal rise (and > fall) time. > > A typical cable delay is around 1.5 nano second (nsec) per foot. The > velocity is slower then the speed of light, in the range of 1/3 to 2/3 > of the speed of light, and it depends almost entirely on one factor - > the cable inner material isolation (the dielectric). > > The rise time for the digital signal is between 5nsec and 30 nsec. > 30nsec is slow but still within the specifications. 5-15 nsec is nice, > and the reason that faster is not allowed has to do with setting a > limit on the electromagnetic radiation (transmission of interference). > > At say 10 feet, the cable delay is around 15 nsec, and a 5nsec rise > time is 3 times faster then the delay, so one DOES NEED to terminate > the cable and do so properly. > > But at say 8 inches length, the delay is around 1nsec and even a fast > 5nsec rise is 5 times slower then the cable delay, and the signal will > have virtually no reflections at all. The shorter the cable, the better > it is from reflections stand point as well as from many other > standpoints. > > I am not suggesting 8 inch cables. I am not suggesting not terminating. > In fact, as a rule the termination is built into the receiver side. The > issue here is cable length, and the notion that there is a minimal > cable length one should keep is just plain wrong. > > Regards > Dan Lavry > Lavry Engineering -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter: No more bug fixes in firmware
For the casual visitor to this thread, here is the relevant quote from Sean Adams from the bug-vote link above: Sean Adams Wrote: > People are still seeing those spurious overvoltage errors on > transporter. It is > understandably very disconcerting to them and they will think there > must be > something wrong either with their AC or with the TP hardware. > > The error is caused by spurious readings from an internal ADC which > measures > one of the internal DC power rails. I was never able to figure out > exactly why > it gets these spurious readings but I think it has something to do with > how the > ADC's control pins are multiplexed (shared) with some other on-board > peripheral. > > I would suggest removing this failsafe feature entirely. I originally > put it in > there as a debugging feature, like an assert()... not because I thought > that > sustained overvoltages would actually be present on people's power > supplies. In > reality the feature does not provide any protection from common power > surges. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78453 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hard facts supporting the quality of Touch digital out.
bhaagensen;547021 Wrote: > I assume > ~1.5meter run of Blue Jeans Cable would be as good as it > gets? > > What about connectors? Again I assume BNC would be preffereable over > RCA, and that even a RCA-BNC prefferable over RCA-RCA (seeing the Touch > only has RCA)? It kind of depends on whom you ask... Earlier and for a while, 1.5m was suggested as an optimum coax S/PDIF cable length, and very many people jumped on this bandwagon and repeated that advice. Some still argue for "the shorter the better". Then there are those such as Pat from AR-T, who strongly recommends using longer cables (I think he recommends up to 12-feet or longer) with BNC connections, as this is most appropriate for taming any signal reflections. With his U-Byte cable, I believe he also states that although using a BNC-to-RCA adapter will negatively affect signal loss and reflections, however it should still perform acceptably well. If it were me, I'd keep using your Transporter as a transport to your Naim DAC... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hard facts supporting the quality of Touch digital out.
bhaagensen;546929 Wrote: > Hi, > > by now these forums are swamped with claims that the digital output of > the Touch is better than the SB3/Receiver and almost on par with the > Transporter. > > As I understand, the claims are actually supported by real measurements > as well as technical knowledge on the design of the circuitry. > > I have without luck been trying to track down these 'mother'-posts for > hours now. I'm guessing John S and Phil L are involved, but even this > haven't been of any help. > > If anyone could provide me with links to the posts containing technical > background on the quality of the Touch digital output, I would really > appreciate that. > > TIA 'Here's a thread with posts by John Swenson' (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=485477) containing some of the details you are interested in... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] With current SPDIF receivers ......
Hi Wesley - terrific to see you here, and welcome. :) You've mentioned elsewhere that the SB3 is a great transport to use with your D100 DAC. I recently learned the following about the SB3 (from JohnSwenson-thanks John!), regarding the SB3's S/PDIF output: JohnSwenson Wrote: > -..."In the SB3 the S/PDIF comes out of the FPGA and goes to a CMOS > chip, cap, resistors etc and a EMI suppression network. The jitter on > the signal coming out of the FPGA is greater than the raw clocks due to > electrical noise inside. The EMI suppression network causes an impedance > change with frequency which increases reflections on the connection to > the DAC, this can lead to increased jitter in the DAC receiver... The > SB3 contains a filter on the S/PDIF output designed to reduce EMI which > unfortunately messes up the waveform which prevents the PLL in the > receiver from extracting a low jitter clock. This has a couple of > interesting ramifications: the jitter of the recovered clock is going > to be very sensitive to the receiver used, different digital cables > make a big difference here, and significantly decreasing the actual > jitter (by using better regulators, better oscillators etc) won't make > all that big a difference...- Wesley, would you please comment on how the Wolfson receiver in the D100 "should" handle this situation, and whether or not any of this may degrade the D100 performance when using an SB3 as transport? Also please, are these potential concerns perhaps avoided, by just using optical output from an SB3 instead of the coax output? Many thanks in advance! -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
ar-t;491667 Wrote: > Well, sort of. 16' is a number that we chose to agree on. It could have > just as easily been...oh, I dunno..12'. Or 22'. The > whole point was to make something that was long enough to do the job. A > few extra feet thrown in for good measure. You can go a lot further, and > not degrade the signal significantly. > > Pat Hi Pat, If using such a long S/PDIF coax cable for a short distance: Is it appropriate to just coil-up the extra coax cable? I've previously been advised that coiling the unused cable-length within audio setups can cause problems & should be avoided - but perhaps this doesn't apply to S/PDIF coax connections? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AC Power Overload Error on Transporter
Well Logitech has stated they will no longer be releasing any firmware updates to these units, so I guess all existing bugs (including this one) will _not_ be resolved/fixed. Oh well - what a bummer (and an understatement!). -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71526 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter: No more bug fixes in firmware
Robin Bowes;544635 Wrote: > ...Personally, I think this sucks, and would never have happened (so > soon) if Sean & Dean were still in charge. > > R. I agree - this shouldn't be happening so soon. Very disappointing. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78453 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Transporter that will not power up...
ntang;544148 Wrote: > Hi... > > No...Bought mine "new in box" from ebay. What difference would it > make? Depends on the seller. Some "NIB" units sold at discount are actually refurbs - which (who knows) may be more prone to certain issues than other units. If the majority of these AC power issues with Transporters are occurring through discount sellers, that could be worth identifying... Hope you get a fix - please let us know! :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78170 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Transporter that will not power up...
ntang;542451 Wrote: > I have yet another Transporter bought NIB that will not power up (no > clicking sound). It was playing and powered up fine for about a week or > so, then I powered down the mains so I could move the other equipment > around on the rack. > > Now it simply wont start! Country runs 230v and is quite stable. I cant > reset it by pressing "add button" and power it own as per the manual > cause there simply does not seem to be any power to the unit. > > Any idea? I am about to send it back to the seller but this is costing > me a lot in shipping (overseas). Hi ntang, I've been following these several 'Transporters with AC Power Problems' incidents with much interest lately - did you buy your unit from Logitech directly? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78170 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox Duet and Beresford Caiman DAC
I think that when used as digital transports, any audible differences between the Touch and SB3 must certainly reflect the jitter-sensitivity & noise-susceptibility etc of the DAC(?) For instance, I recently had a chance to play with a Touch alongside an SB3 and a separate transport - all into a Benchmark PRE. Result: Absolutely no difference that any of us could hear, within the several systems tried. However, the Benchmark is an Ultralock design (not a PLL-design): It is noted for its highly-isolated conversion clock and for showing no measurable jitter-induced artifacts resulting from normal use of any of its digital interfaces. Keep in mind that I am most admittedly NOT an expert - so if there is somehow more to the story, I'd like to hear it as much as anybody else! :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78036 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] DAC Resolution Test and Don't EVER use Digital Volume Control
mswlogo;543330 Wrote: > ...At 80 (on the new Transporter scale) you are not attenuating a > "normal" range for volume control... Dropping down to 80 is not really > a legit range to test... with that test you probably only lose a little > over .5 bits... If you only drop 10dB it would be difficult to hear on a > good DAC... 80 to 100 (that's only +/- 5dB) is way too narrow a range as > a realistic Volume control... Hi mswlogo, I'm just curious here please: So are you now saying, that when digital attenuation is used -as a supplement- (i.e. as an additional 10db or so) good analog attenuation, the "never" in your post title can be dropped? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77725 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AC Power Overload Error on Transporter
seanadams;541524 Wrote: > Again, **it's NOT an electrical problem** and the +/-5% error has > absolutely nothing to do with the glitches - it's not meant to be more > precise than that, nor does it need to be. The only purpose of the > voltage measurement is to select the correct primary winding > configuration for the transformers. It is a rough estimate based on the > voltage seen on the secondary side. Sean! Great to see you posting again. :) In your opinion, is this particular Transporter issue, one that is even possible to fix (at all, i.e. even in principle)? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71526 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] DAC Resolution Test and Don't EVER use Digital Volume Control
rgro;540238 Wrote: > ...in a normal living circumstance, us humans really cannot hear "all" > of what the highest quality audio has to offer without likely damaging > our hearing?... But what a glorious listening experience it would be, before your hearing was quickly and permanently damaged! ;) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77725 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AC Power Overload Error on Transporter
mswlogo;540026 Wrote: > Mine does it too. Happens once a month or so. Drives me insane. > > It most often happens when I'm issuing a Command (both IR or Duet > Wifi), which is most often Next-Song. This is very troubling, as I was about to re-purchase a Transporter very soon in hopes that most of any bugs had been worked out by now. I wonder if the possible common thread here, as mswlogo notes, is that the problem is occurring most often with 'next-song' commands, and with tracks greater than the normal CD 44.1kHz/16-bit variety. Can the members here with this Transporter problem please check/confirm, if this is the correct triggering pattern? I wonder if a bug has ever been filed on this, and if Logitech is still actively supporting the Transporter user base... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71526 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] DAC Resolution Test and Don't EVER use Digital Volume Control
michael123;539824 Wrote: > The bottom line is that when you attenuate digitally more than 10db (as > said here and elsewhere as well), you should better use quality analog > preamp. > > using the original test, > I got 96db using Transporter -> Amp, > and 108db with Transporter->Preamp->Amp Hi michael123, Forgive me please as I'm just trying to learn here: If you & cliveb are not in agreement, what part of cliveb's argument please do you feel is in error? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77725 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] DAC Resolution Test and Don't EVER use Digital Volume Control
Phil Leigh;539688 Wrote: > Sure, so if you don't like that, an alternative is to use fixed or > adjustable attenuators (resistor network) to pad down the gain into the > power amp. This will add far less noise/distortion etc than a typical > full-blown pre-amp. Yes that's my experience as well :) - my favorite attenuators are the Endler Shotgun Attenuators, which somehow sound significantly better than all others I've tried. I'm now wondering: -If- within reasonable ranges it's kind of a wash between active-analog vs. digital attenuation (as to which "harms" the signal purity more), then mswlogo's point must be most relevant to those who only use passive attenuation? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77725 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] DAC Resolution Test and Don't EVER use Digital Volume Control
Phil Leigh;539680 Wrote: > analogue attenuation (in a preamp) lowers the noise from all components > prior to the pre-amp, along with the signal. This maintains the SNR as > constant (ignoring any noise from the power amp itself - and they are > usally -100dB these days) > digital attenuation ahead of the DAC lowers the signal but the noise > from the DAC output stage, preamp etc is untouched so the SNR > deteriorates. I agree totally - however don't most (all?) active analog preamps, contribute their own "character" and some noise/distortion to the output signal as well? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77725 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] DAC Resolution Test and Don't EVER use Digital Volume Control
cliveb;538777 Wrote: > ...And when you use analogue attenuation you are sliding the music out > of that range. Isn't cliveb right about this - aren't there similar SNR/dynamic-range/distortion etc issues regarding the effect of analog attenuation as well? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77725 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] AC Power Overload Error on Transporter
I'm wondering: Does this problem seem to occur only for users with 220-volt mains, or is it also happening for those with 110-volt mains? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71526 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] New Transporter Went Dead Temporarily
Is it correct here to assume, that these units were *not* purchased new direct from Logitech? Just curious, as I might personally try another Transporter again in the future (with hope that all the bugs are likely worked out by now)... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter Set up questions...
Steve, that would be very cool if you can accomplish this. Good luck and please let us know how it turns out! -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77427 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Memristance in interconnect cables
pski;533553 Wrote: > bwa? Hey pski - what are you asking here? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77107 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Disabling Transporter wireless
> It's very easy, the wireless card is in a edge socket, you just lift and > pull and it pops out... Has anybody done this, and experienced any type of resulting software errors or issues etc? I'm wondering if it's possible the server software (or the device firmware) might act up or produce any problems even during wired operation, if the executing code assumes a (removed) wifi card is present?... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76793 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Memristance in interconnect cables
pski;533542 Wrote: > ...I'd just like to know if there is a best way to do rca to balanced. I > suspect there is... Personally I recommend using a transformer for this - for example see 'this link' (http://www.jensentransformers.com/faqs.html#faq5) for a really nice solution... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77107 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Disabling Transporter wireless
tingtong5;530347 Wrote: > Simply remove the wireless mini pci card from the transporter, thats > what I did ;-) I'm wondering - was this very difficult to do? Does it involve any solder removal, etc? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76793 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter volume-control digital input
To suggest the obvious: If you're listening at around half-volume level on the Transporter, you might also consider getting an amp with much less gain/power than your current 200W/ch one. More power isn't always better! :) Or even as a compromise, consider trying an amp like the Parasound A23 - you still probably won't need much of its power, but the A23 has XLR inputs with level controls on the back of the amp to let you get the right amount of attenuation. It also has an auto-on (signal sense) feature that would work great with the Transporter... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76659 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] How "good" is your DAC? - Really Interesting test results!
Phil Leigh;515454 Wrote: > I'll look into it at the weekend... > > SB3 not faulty. Will retest with Touch and SB3. Hey Phil, just wondering/nagging: Any progress? :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Small form factor Amp/receiver
'Parasound Zamp v.3' (http://parasound.com/ParasoundZ/zampv3.php) is excellent in this application. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75439 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC - does it make a difference?
Hi Jörg, Personally, I am one of those people who thinks the SB3 is a great device and actually sounds really good (gasp). If your system is already nicely compatible with the SB3 and you have your gain structure and other aspects properly configured, you should be able to enjoy very nice resulting sound quality. External DACs can make a difference - but as you've found from careful direct experience, this difference isn't necessarily all that significant in practice, and/or worth losing your money to get. In your case, I would definitely recommend you instead spend your money on getting more music. The quality of your speakers and of the recordings (and music rip), and even your specific speaker positioning etc, make much more worthwhile differences in my opinion. :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75447 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] How "good" is your DAC? - Really Interesting test results!
Hey there Phil, Did you ever fully get to the bottom of those repeating-interval LF artifacts you measured on your SB3 analog outs, and on the difference between your measurements and JA's measurements? Is your SB3 unit possibly faulty, or is it possibly resulting from a ground loop through the interconnect shield between your SB3 and computer/soundcard etc? Just curious... It would also be interesting to see if your results change, if you might happen to have a line-level input transformer (EBTech unit, etc) to place between SB3 and soundcard... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter or wait for Touch?
I think I'm hearing here, that the beta-Touch is thought to perform great but the Transporter -still- has a bit of an advantage, both in analog and digital output, over the beta-Touch... is that correct? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74471 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] why is increasing the power supply amp rating
ar-t;510459 Wrote: > I can show the difference in noise sidebands on the SPDIF output... It might be difficult to answer this with certainty - but Pat, do you suspect these particular noise sidebands can/do make a (measurable) audible difference with at least some DACs? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=74250 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] My Transporter makes strange noises
johnM;509415 Wrote: > What about ground loops? Wireless eliminates any chance of a ground loop > issue. In my case, the server is plugged into a different breaker in a > different room and I'd think that a potential ground loop could be an > issue for a lot of arrangements. Do you mean a ground loop through the ethernet cable? Please explain. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73247 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone use the Squeezepak PSU?
ismarketing;503006 Wrote: > Just got this last night. Connected with a Shunyata Research > Diamondback AC cable, my SB3 sounds more open, with better placement of > things in the soundstage, and far tighter bass... How is this even possible? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73149 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Sound quality between wav and flac
DCtoDaylight;502701 Wrote: > I think the big problem is that the term jitter has been miss-used so > much, that it has lost much credibility. I've seen -speaker cables- > marketed as being low jitter! Well we should all probably be using those instead then, for S/PDIF... :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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] Which DAC to Use?
ezkcdude;78141 Wrote: > Either way the signal is going to go through the receiver, so isn't this > point kind of moot? Not necessarily, since digital and analog signals are each vulnerable to these effects in different ways... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=14599 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is my logic correct here? Arcam DAC vs. CI AUDIO
Which digital device is receiving optical, and which is receiving coaxial? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=73099 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] New Amp for Transporter
I would consider the Parasound balanced amps, and Bryston amps. How loud do you listen? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72565 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Sound quality between wav and flac
garym;494377 Wrote: > Good luck with narrowing down the issue. And if you do track this down, > I'd be very interested in what you find. I too would be very interested in whatever you find is producing differences - good luck Marco, and please keep us posted... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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] How "good" is your DAC? - Really Interesting test results!
Could there possibly be a ground loop between your SB3 and your computer via these unbalanced analog connections? Perhaps the analog outputs of the SB3 and Touch have different potentials for ground loops(?) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=72147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
ar-t;490868 Wrote: > ...What is too long? And why?... Hi Pat, Just checking my memory here please - did you previously mention somewhere, that about sixteen feet of good coaxial cable with BNC terminations, was your own recommendation for S/PDIF delivery? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Amplifier with auto power on ?
fabads;490351 Wrote: > Hello, > > I am looking for an amplifier able to switch on automatically as soon > as a signal is sent by my SB. Have som > Is anybody has experience on this subject? > > Thx. I have been trying the 'Parasound Zamp v.3' (http://www.parasound.com/ParasoundZ/zampv3.php) lately, and find it to be a very nice sounding compact stereo amp. Thankfully it has signal-sensing auto-on, which is really convenient and works well with the SB3... just make sure to set SlimServer to turn-off the analog outputs when powering-off the SB3. I also had to reboot the server before this setting would persist in the software (not sure why), and it's worked great ever since! :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71971 ___ 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?
Excellent info and summary - thanks John! I also found your Audio Asylum post below, which I believe helped me further understand the situation - especially (as you also stated above) that the S/PDIF performance of the Touch is likely performing better than that of the Squeezebox Classic due to the lack of a S/PDIF output filter, and thus better resulting compatibility with the digital receivers in certain external DACs... JohnSwenson Wrote: > I have actually measured an SB3 (not a Duet) and the jitter in the SB3 > itself is in the 50-60ps range, very different from the cited > measurement. The 320ps number was not actually measuring the jitter of > the S/PDIF signal, but rather looking at the distortions of the analog > signal coming out of a DAC attached to the SB3 and infering the jitter > from those distortions. > > Its a subtle distinction, its not the jitter of the SB3, but the jitter > of the recovered clock in the receiver. It includes jitter added by the > receiver and any problems in the connection between boxes. This is > actually the problem here. > > The SB3 contains a filter on the S/PDIF output designed to reduce EMI > which unfortunately messes up the waveform which prevents the PLL in the > receiver from extracting a low jitter clock. > > This has a couple of interesting ramifications: the jitter of the > recovered clock is going to be very sensitive to the receiver used, > different digital cables make a big difference here, and significantly > decreasing the actual jitter (by using better regulators, better > oscillators etc) won't make all that big a difference. > > BTW getting rid of that filter radically improves things. > > This sensitivity to external factors I think explains a lot of the > disparity in reports about using the SB digital out. > > John S. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Any audiophiles got a SB Touch to beta test?
JohnSwenson;476773 Wrote: > Remember this is all just conjecture... Finding precise mechanisms for > this sort of thing is very difficult to do, especially because there is > no definitive mechanism or measurement... So for now its all just > guesswork and loose correlations. > > John S. Thanks John - like you, I wish there were ways to measure and verify such things, versus just attributing to opinion and chance. On a different aspect though, I keep hearing that the Touch apparently has "much better" digital output than the SB3. Is there any measurable truth to that? And if so, is there any actual hardware difference that must definitely account for it? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Help: Best new device for audiophile with DAC?
Hi MortyEU, With a good DAC like yours, I think you would probably also be just as happy, with the S/PDIF output from a Squeezebox Classic as well... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71262 ___ 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;476752 Wrote: > ...I upgraded the firmware and was floored to find it sounded quite a > bit better over the analog outs. I don't know why, the developers say > the didn't do anything to the audio code. They did say that an over > speedup of the code had been implemented, this might be the cause of the > better analog SQ... Can anybody comment on if this is plausible, or how a software update not touching audio code, could possibly affect the analog output quality? (Not doubting you John, as I've previously heard such things myself from the SB3 - just wondering how such an affect can even be remotely possible...) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
cmarin;473375 Wrote: > ...I believe the concern of most audiophiles, is simply to have a more > enjoyable musical listening experience; not to brag that their > experience is better than yours or to engage in endless arguments about > why a listener's subjective listening experience is fraudalent because > it doesn't fit a particular view of the universe... Unfortunately, many "audiophiles" can be described, as exactly what you've just said they're not! :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Direct setup possible with low input impedance on power amp
vantagesc;472025 Wrote: > I hate fumbling with remotes, so I typically use the digital volume > control anyway, once I have set the upper limit on my preamp. I also > understand the "risks" regarding volume, so was thinking of something > like this: > http://store.nhthifi.com/NHT-PVC-PC?sc=12&category=1213 > > Some people really worry about the impedance stuff and say it "sucks > the life out of the music", whatever that means. There are also posts > on this forum from people believing that their systems sounded far worse > without a preamp. Wonder why, thus the question. I would think that > not having a preamp is as transparent as it gets, but maybe their amps > are too difficult to drive via a Transporter alone. That NHT-PVC attenuator is really cool - it also contains very high quality Jensen line-level input transformers, thus breaking any ground loops and balancing the pos/neg signal line impedances. I put them directly on an amp with a very short interconnect between the NHT attenuator output and the amp input - works great! Also regarding passive preamps: I've recently learned that the advice of Benchmark Media's Elias Gwinn helps here too - i.e. don't use an amp that is significantly more powerful than your usual listening level needs. Otherwise, you have to attenuate your line-level signal too much, which will result in a worse source signal to noise ratio (and worse overall sound quality after amplification). I think this amplifier mis-match scenario may be another reason, why some have bad luck with passive preamps - they attenuate the signal too significantly with the passive preamp, in order to then feed it into an overpowered amp for their needs... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69340 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] any expereinces using the jumper?
earwaxer;459731 Wrote: > ...Something new that I tried that has been very satisfying is I now use > my MSB dac for the sub amp. I run the digital coax from the Transporter > to the dac and run the RCA's off the dac to the sub amp... So are you thus using two DACs simultaneously (Transporter, and another 2nd DAC via S/PDIF link)? If so, I wonder if this could possibly introduce a sync discrepancy (which further may, or may not, be audible)... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=68090 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audio quality of very long RCA cables...
Andy8421;461093 Wrote: > Pat, > > You only require 2 connections for balanced. The overall screen (your > third connector) on a xlr style balanced connector plays no part in > transferring the signal, it just acts as a screen... The whole point of > balanced is that it is the difference between the two signal conductors > that carry the audio information, irrespective of any common mode signal > relative to earth. The earth (or screen) is irrelevant to this, and > really only provides additional shielding... Hey there Andy! Please advise if I'm wrong - but I think that conventionally the 3rd (ground) wire also ties the chassis ground together between separate equipment. This is important because it prevents ground voltage from otherwise riding on the signal wires, and enables both pos and neg signal to share a common (balanced) impedance... is that not correct? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=68131 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] transporter - wired ethernet vs. wifi?
Phil Leigh;453452 Wrote: > Yeah - I was ripped-off. I've now stuck a directionality label on it and > sold it on eBay for $10. I've reverted to the freebie that came with my > digital camera. Oddly, it seems to work fine... That's because your "better" cable must have already done a much better job, of properly breaking-in the cable connections on your equipment... :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=66445 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Music Fidelity v-dac and SB3
earwaxer;451082 Wrote: > ...If the rest of your system tends to be a little "loosey goosey" then > the v-dac could firm things up a bit. The transporter is tight and deep! > I think I'm getting a woody! Good God man! Audiophiles are quite a wacky bunch... :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=66820 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Subwoofers from a high-end perspective?
Interesting discussion. What do members here think please, regarding stereo (not home-theater) use, and using a separate active crossover unit? I.e. actively crossing over highs to monitors, and lows to sub(s) through a separate device placed between source and amp/subs...(?) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67022 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Biamp?
ashmore;449632 Wrote: > ...My wife refuses to discuss it with me. Any takers? > > Simon Summarily giving her away seems a little harsh. I'd recommend allowing her to have another chance - she probably just didn't realize how serious you are about your stereo. :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=66796 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Superiority of Toslink?
I remembered reading 'this previous 1993 article' (http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/toslink-interconnect-history-basics) about how toslink has changed over the years. Note it mentions why multiple fibers are superior, as well as the improvement brought by the newer high quality quartz (glass) medium... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=65893 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better DAC, Transporter, or High End Pre Amp, Help!
John_Dumke;449376 Wrote: > Any suggestions on 2 channel amps with good power? I'd stick with either Musical Fidelity or Bryston. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=66754 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Ref: What Should I Buy ?
morris_minor;449081 Wrote: > Transporter owners will always tell you "go for a Transporter" ;-) How > about getting a SB Classic as "proof of concept" which you can always > re-use elsewhere in the house if you upgrade to a Transporter? And if > Wi-fi performance is an issue, how about Homeplug/Powerline devices? I > use these to great effect connecting server to router to switches to TP > etc. > > Bob I too agree with Bob on all of the above. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=66594 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Better DAC, Transporter, or High End Pre Amp, Help!
Welcome to the unforgiving pinball machine of system-sound improvement. :) Out of all your suggestions, I recommend you focus on the preamp idea. If your budget allows it, consider a Bryston preamp with built-in DAC. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=66754 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter to pre- or poweramp
A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=64028 Question: To what is your Transporter connected - Preamp - Poweramp vantagesc;443481 Wrote: > Has anyone tried the NHT passive volume control between the Transporter > and their amp? Yes I have both types of the NHT passive controllers (balanced and unbalanced versions), and have tried each with a Transporter and also with an SB3 (SB Classic). These NHT passive volume controls are easily the best passives I've ever tried to date, and I think this might also be partly due to the excellent Jensen line-level input transformers contained in them. I wish that I had discovered these little NHT devices a long time ago, I find them to be *the* ideal match for the SB and Transporter. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=64028 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] just got new transporter, very disappointed with sound
earwaxer;446765 Wrote: > I tend to think that the programmers put a "defeat" button in because it > offered something more than what you would get at %100. Being a > programmer myself - I would not code something that did nothing! The > only other logical use for the defeat selection is to "idiot proof" the > volume control, so that it is not accidentally decreased. That doesn't > sound very flattering for a device aimed at the "audiophile"! I'm curious what you mean by "something more": Are you suggesting some type of unknown/hidden DSP? Personally I appreciate having the volume control bypass option for these devices, and I don't find it "unflattering" whatsoever to have this option. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=66347 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter Versions?
agentsmith;444701 Wrote: > ...trust me, SqueezeCenter is the best platform out there for computer > based audio... Completely agree with you there. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=65745 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Superiority of Toslink?
Same experience here - using glass toslink with an SB3 makes a very obvious improvement versus using the coaxial digital out. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=65893 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 + Cambridge DacMagic ($400) Review
Personally I think the SB3 analog output is very good. I've tried MANY external DAC's now, and ultimately returned to the SB3 analog output with no regrets at all. This will not be a popular view among enthusiasts that want/enjoy the external DAC approach! But keep in mind that not -everyone- thinks an external DAC is "better". Some simply prefer the "different" sound of an external DAC, which does not mean it has "better" sound quality. Others find (to their surprise and irritation) that they often can't even distinguish between such things, when level-matched and they can't see what they are listening to! :) -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=53985 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB versus PC player and SB jitter
Phil Leigh;439692 Wrote: > ...perhaps we should concentrate more on galvanic isolation, shielding > etc? I personally think that is correct, especially regarding the galvanic isolation. For instance, different sound cards may seem quite audibly distinguishable in their digital outputs, due to one card having pulse-transformer isolation but not so with the other card. Although some frown upon using glass optical connections for digital, I consistently find it to be preferable for digital audio transmission - I suspect it must be due to the genuinely perfect galvanic isolation this method provides. Best of all in my view, the SlimDevice approach - send the digital data via (galvanically isolated) ethernet protocol - which eliminates recovered clock issues - and interface everything using a remote-controlled server transport. I tried putting a Jensen line input transformer between this analog out and the amp, with excellent results as well. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=65422 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB2 and PS Audio Digital Link DL III DAC or Transporter?
pryamomimo;437584 Wrote: > ...all have observed the effects of cable "break-in", but none of them > so far is able to provide a comprehensive explanation as to the > causes... I wonder if they "observed" these effects through actual measurements, or just with ears-alone listening tests (like I usually do)... -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=65035 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB2 and PS Audio Digital Link DL III DAC or Transporter?
In my opinion: If you do get a Transporter, than like occam says, you would be best served by just using its built-in DAC. If you are going to use an external DAC regardless, then like Rodney says, you should just use your un-modded SB to supply the digital signal. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=65035 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter v Linn Squeeky DS
Rodney_Gold;434571 Wrote: > ...unless you use "loudness" compensation..it really doesnt matter what > your amp is as long as it has enough welly to drive the speaker , it's > not going to sound linear. I wonder if an amp may generally have less distortion at its higher watt-output levels, versus at its lower watt-output levels. Could that perhaps be the reasoning behind advice like Elias Gwinn's (quoted in my last post below)? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=64680 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter v Linn Squeeky DS
Phil Leigh;434022 Wrote: > No they don't!. > ...I agree that 200w is preferable to 20w in all cases... I've been confused about that principle lately. For instance, Elias Gwinn at Benchmark Media Systems Inc. says -"Avoid using amplifiers that are too powerful for your system! You'll get best results when using 75-95% of the amps total power."- So for generally low-level listeners having speakers/systems where 20w would nearly always cover the transient peaks - perhaps 20w would sometimes be preferable to 200w? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=64680 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
