Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
Some people can quote latin, but have no manners. Being rude is not clever. It seems to me that many naysayers are more strident than those saying 'give this a try'. I can't understand why people feel so strongly about it. Personally I think it quite unlikely that any of these tweaks can have a noticeable effect. However, since no one has proved any of this one way or the other by proper scientific experiment, beyond any doubt, I'm content to let people play around and report on it as they see fit. Others are free to criticise, but why get so personal about it? I'm getting off this thread (not for the first time). Enjoy. -- PasTim VortexBox Midi, FLACs 16 or 24 bit. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. Old wireless laptop controls the server using Chrome. Squeezeplay on PCs in other rooms. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
magiccarpetride;697585 Wrote: > There is nothing false or true here. It's like saying Beethoven is > better than Mozart -- false or true? > > When are people going to realize that this is strictly about personal > taste? Attacking others because they happen to have different taste is > uncivilized. I entirely agree (I probably should have put quote marks around 'true' and 'false' to better express what I was trying to say). A briefer version of my post is: +1 -- PasTim VortexBox Midi, FLACs 16 or 24 bit. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. Old wireless laptop controls the server using Chrome. Squeezeplay on PCs in other rooms. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
Calm down dears! Someone believes he has done something which improves sound quality, and says so. The claims may appear to be somewhat grandiose, but in themselves they are harmless. People can no more prove them false than he can prove them true, unless a randomised double-blind test is performed with a reasonably large sample of people, and then duplicated by others. Saying they cannot make a difference may seem 'logical' by working out what they might be able to change, but it isn't proof. It is entirely up to the reader whether they want to try it or not. The only qualifier I would add is that tinkering with stuff has risks and can have unintended and unexpected consequences, as I have found far too often to my cost, but all my fault. However, I'd like to suggest that if people are going to make proposals for changes they are explicit about their environment (this may well have been stated in an earlier post but I'm not going to read all of them to try and find out). So, for instance, I use the analogue out, not having a decent DAC to hand. I have no idea whatsoever whether the suggested priority changes are thought to apply to digital out, or to analogue, or both. Naysayers may well say neither, since they believe none of it can change anything anyway. None of this matters. It's a hobby. People tinker (or not) for fun. I do not, for a moment, expect to get 100% accurate advice & information from these forums (or should that be fora? :) ). I get ideas and solutions which I try or not at my own risk. On occasions I make suggestions which may or may not help others. As others keep saying - listen to the music. -- PasTim VortexBox Midi, FLACs 16 or 24 bit. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. Old wireless laptop controls the server using Chrome. Squeezeplay on PCs in other rooms. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
jomal;694103 Wrote: > I never ever had to turn off the sound effects and don't know how to do > it. May you help me? > > I'm using the SBT with a few tweaks proposed by Dynobot and the things > are ok till this very moment. > > But I'd rather to use TT 3.0 again... It's something like: Settings, Audio Settings, Sound Effects, None When you do a factory reset they get turned on again, and you have to turn them off. See http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/11/touch-toolbox-30.html for the standard settings required. I know that there is mention that with sound effects on you can get blasted by high volume effects, but I believe others have reported crackling sounds over the digital output. -- PasTim VortexBox Midi, FLACs 16 or 24 bit. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. Old wireless laptop controls the server using Chrome. Squeezeplay on PCs in other rooms. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
jomal;694045 Wrote: > Hi! > > I have a SB Touch (firmware 7.7.1-r9558) with a NAS (SBS 7.7.1-r33735). > I was using TT 3.0-WLAN but now I've connected it to my 10/100/1000 > router, so I've moved to TT 3.0-LAN. > > Since then I'm experiencing a crackling sound. I've followed your > suggestions and changed buffers to the normal value (2 us) but the > problem remains. I've even disabled almost all the TT tweaks (display, > ir, etc) and nothing solves the problem but a reset to fabric values. > > Do you know of any incompatibility between TT 3.0-LAN and the last SBS? > Do you know how to fix this issue? > > Thanks in advance! Have you (re)checked the Touch sound effects are turned off? They can cause this problem. -- PasTim VortexBox Midi, FLACs 16 or 24 bit. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. Old wireless laptop controls the server using Chrome. Squeezeplay on PCs in other rooms. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
zoldar;693299 Wrote: > hi > > did a foctory reset twice and a firmware upgrade too. no such luck. Two thoughts: - are you at the top level directory? looks like you are at root user level - you need to be at "/" - might there be some permission problems? I've never had a problem provided I've followed the instructions very carefully. -- PasTim Server on PC, 2 64-bit 2Ghz CPUs, 4GB memory (1 Million times as many as the first computer I ever programmed). Variously running Windows 7 Ultimate, Ubuntu 11.10 and Vortexbox 2 on VirtualBox. All FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
PasTim;691469 Wrote: > Apologies if this has been addressed before, but I have been looking at > the Touch CPU load (using 'top') with PCM vs FLAC on 24/96 tracks. > > . > > With PCM, process sirq-net-rx/0 is running at well over 50% CPU. > That's a lot. With FLAC, it's down to around 10-15%. Total CPU is > around 70-90% with PCM, and 40-60% with FLAC. I have to admit I am > astonished at how high the CPU load is with PCM. > > As I understand it, the theory is that the CPU load needs to be as low > as possible. Doesn't that imply FLAC is better than PCM, at least at > high bit rates? > One for linux experts out there The reason I was initially suspicious of the cpu loads was that the screen scrolling (once only) on the Touch seemed slow and jerky when using my linux set-up. I wondered whether there was some problem with my PC's network card set-up under linux. So, 1) I ran LMS on my Windows 7 setup and the cpu loads were considerably, and consistently, lower, for the same tracks - still higher for PCM than FLAC, but around 50% for PCM and 30% for FLAC. 2) I ran my Ubuntu setup (same PC, dual boot) and the cpu loads shot up again. 3) I found out how to use 'ethtool' on Ubuntu to see what my network card was set up to do. It seem to be set up the same as my W7, ie no flow control, 1000Mbs, full duplex, autonegotiation on 4) I reduced the speed to 100Mbs and turned off autonegotiation 5) CPU loads much better, as per Windows 7 6) I raised the network speed back again, back to 1000Mbs, autonegotiation on 7) CPU loads still much better. You don't believe me. Who would? I didn't believe it either. I ran it several times, with the same result, then created a start-up script on Ubuntu to make this switch to lower and then faster speeds at boot, and it worked! Anyone got any idea what is happening here? After all that I still find FLAC transmission gives lower CPU loads than PCM which must be good, No? -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
Phil Leigh;691635 Wrote: > You should never see any tcp retransmits (packet errors) if your network > is working correctly. My router tells me I haven't had a packet > retransmit for nearly 78 days... The Touch network test diagnostic has green, amber and red warnings on the network test. I used to get a small amount of amber warnings, which I assume (but without checking) were retransmits. I don't get any now. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
TheOctavist;691473 Wrote: > it was established long ago that the SBT passes a bit perfect signal. > > measures excellently too > > http://www.stereophile.com/content/logitech-squeezebox-touch-network-music-player I know. Maybe I used slightly the wrong words. What I meant was that that when I run the Touch Network Diagnostic I am not seeing any retries or network errors of any sort that might explain such high CPU loads. I have, in the past, seen some network errors and took steps to make my wired network a little more robust. I know the Touch corrects errors without loss (unless it gets to rebuffering), but that takes CPU power. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0
Apologies if this has been addressed before, but I have been looking at the Touch CPU load (using 'top') with PCM vs FLAC on 24/96 tracks. I searched the forum for the name of the process I'm concerned about and found nothing, so am posting here. My Touch is set up with most TT3.0 mods, although not all (vol control and screen left on but vol at max). I use analogue out. With PCM, process sirq-net-rx/0 is running at well over 50% CPU. That's a lot. With FLAC, it's down to around 10-15%. Total CPU is around 70-90% with PCM, and 40-60% with FLAC. I have to admit I am astonished at how high the CPU load is with PCM. As I understand it, the theory is that the CPU load needs to be as low as possible. Doesn't that imply FLAC is better than PCM, at least at high bit rates? If I perform a network diagnostic test on the Touch at 1kbps, it seems to be bit perfect. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91322 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Zorglub;661398 Wrote: > Vaporware... Can I suggest that you try to be more considerate? Some people, such as soundcheck, have spent a great deal of time developing stuff and then sharing it to the benefit of a lot of people. They don't have to release anything at all, at any time. If people do not appreciate their efforts they may just stop altogether, and who can blame them, but we would be the losers, not them. I hope soundcheck will release a new version, when he is good and ready to do so. Most of us will appreciate the effort he has gone to do so. If he is unable or unwilling to make or publicise a new version, that's his right, and we should respect it. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;656527 Wrote: > The noise we are talking about doesn't change the bits, which is just as > well or computers would be uselessly unpredictable! > But unlike a computer, spdif has a clock mixed in with the bits and the > noise CAN interfere with the certainty of the start/end of the clock > pulses -hence jitter. This translates to distortion in th DAC if not > handled well by the DAC. The problem with trying to explain things to people like me is that I may never stop asking 'why'? So in this case, 'why' on earth would someone add a clock to what should, and could, surely be a perfectly good stream of bits? Surely that's an absurd design? I will never understand. Let's leave it there, with me remaining baffled. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;656481 Wrote: > Correct. I don't usually have this much trouble communicating... :-) I'm sure it's my fault for being a bit thick or ignorant, or both :) I will say, however, that the whole topic of digital audio transmission is massively confusing, with so many contradictory statements being made (often extremely forcefully, to put it mildly), that it can be no real surprise that a rank amateur like myself gets totally baffled. I suspect that part of my problem is that I am remain completely astonished that the reliable transfer of bits from one place to another appears to cause so much dispute in the audio world. The idea that some noise may be carried at the same time ought to be irrelevant provided the bits are all present and correct, but that's clearly not so. I'm not asking for an explanation, since I almost certainly wouldn't understand it. I'm just hinting that some of us are interested in trying to get the best from our systems, without really grasping the underlying technical issues, and it's all too easy to misunderstand what people are saying. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;656291 Wrote: > A mixture... All sorts... S/pdif, TOSLINK, adat light pipe, aes/ebu > etc... and > Indeed... Given the large number of optical connections used in pro > studios... I foolishly assumed you meant that opticals were preferred. I am now (as usual) none the wiser, baffled and confused. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;656198 Wrote: > Hard to have ground plane effects when there is no ground plane... :-) I seem to fail to ask the right questions. I thought it was clear, but it seems not so. Whilst it's clear there is no electrical connection with toslink, what do pro studios actually use? -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;656192 Wrote: > Indeed... Given the large number of optical connections used in pro > studios... By the 's the answer is presumably < 1% or > 99%, but which? -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
alec_cat;656117 Wrote: > Hi guys, I just upgraded to 7.6.1 tonight and had to reinstall the > toolbox. > > I've managed to get everything working EXCEPT ttbuffer. It reboots but > always comes back as 20,000 now, which is the default value. > > I didn't do a factory reset in between, which might explain. > > Can anyone confirm their ttbuffer is sticking with 7.6.1? Mine is fine, but I did do a factory reset before re-installing the toolbox. I have found that with all firmware updates I had to do the factory reset first to get the toolbox to work. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
magicj1;652843 Wrote: > OK, thanks Phil. > > The error messages I have encountered, are these usual? The error messages when logging on with WinSCP are normal. The error on the tar is not. If you typed in exactly what you say, I think you have an extra quotation mark. Your should also make sure you are in the top level directory (not root - go up one level from where you are when you log on) and then type: tar xvf touchtoolbox2.0.tar with no quotes in the middle. And by the way I trust you now understand why you still get RCA out with PCM? All you have done is shift the decoding of flac files into PCM from the Touch to the PC. Nothing else has changed. The theory is that you have thus lightened the load on the Touch processor leaving it better able to accurately process the data stream either to the digital output or into the DAC and from there out via the RCAs. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
magicj1;652821 Wrote: > I have been changing the server based decoding to get an idea of what I > may achieve in HiRes material. If I disable 'Flac' and leave PCM set to > Flac, when I play a flac file now that the decoding is done by my > processor should I still be able to output via the analog RCA as well > as the digital output? > > I ask this as I can not detect any change when I apply these settings > whilst listening to music, there is no momentarily audio drop which I > thought may have happened. I also would have thought the RCA's would > have not outputed any audio? I only use the analogue out, and it works fine with PCMs. If you change the decoding on the fly I'm pretty sure it won't take effect until you stop playing and start again. If you use the Windows 'Task Manager' you should see the 'flac.exe' process running when using PCM, but not when using native flac. -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
magicj1;652176 Wrote: > Strange, this is what I am doing. > > My PC is showing the server is running. I go into Web based interface, > click Adcanced, it opens another browser yet the page is blank. > > Could this be firewall? > > The web remote control is working?? Do you know which Web Interface you are using - Classic or Default? On the 'Default' Web Interface, 'Settings' is at bottom right. That opens a window that should show a number of tabs, including 'Advanced'. There should then be a drop-down list at top left which include a 'File Types' option. Select that and scroll down to find the entry for FLAC. That should have 3 options to the right hand side - FLAC, MP3 and PCM. To disable sending FLAC to the Touch, disable the first two options and enable PCM. If using the Classic interface, find 'Server Settings', which should show 'File Types' as an option. Follow the same procedure. If you haven't got any of those, can you describe what you have got, or if a blank screen, can you reload or start again? -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out over 'a bit of wire' to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Angusy;649995 Wrote: > I did enable SSH in the "Advanced" Touch menu. I've gone through those > preliminary steps many times. The touch actually states the username > and password login on the screen after enabling the SSH. I'll try it > all again tonight. I'm using WinSCP version 4.3.4. I get the 2 error messages you mention but then WinSCP starts the connection and works fine. If it still won't work you might want to see if there are firewall issues (assuming you have one)? Has anything else changed? -- PasTim Server on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 2 CPU, 2GHz, 4GB, FLAC files. Touch on Ethernet (in another room). Analogue out to ageing Quad Hi-Fi. An old (wireless) laptop controls the server using Chrome. PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;642625 Wrote: > I'm afraid the creative card isn't up to the job. At a minimum you need > to use a card that doesn't internally resample. Also, sample rate > correction is essential. Without that, your results look about right to > me. When comparing different CD players, their respective clocks will be > drifting all over the place (relative to each other) and without sample > rate correction you just won't get meaningful results. > > I've been able to get comparisons of cd (rip) playback against the > original CD PCM file in the 30-40 range which is not too bad. At the > end of the day the absolute values aren't critical; If you get one > comparison at 30 and another at 40, the 40 one IS closer to the > original sound... I got a cheapish m-audio card (24/96) which does seem much better than my Creative one (not as good as the 24/192 I'm sure, but enough for me to try a few things). It certainly rips LPs much better. I thought I'd do a few rather rough and ready checks with the Touch and ADM. With the Toolbar installed and all mods enabled, Digital out only, using the external clock for SPDIF and sending PCM over my network, I get around 90db compared to the original rip, which seems good to me. If I send FLAC I get around 70Db, which I think tells me something. No sample rate compensation is needed. Both of these are for a full 2 minute track. With Analogue out only, I have to cut the track length back to about 20 seconds otherwise it crashes with sample rate compensation (which is needed). I then get only 20-25 db results with either PCM or FLAC over the network. I probably should get a separate DAC, but that will have to wait. I'm not sure what you meant by internally resampling, since for an analogue test I assume it has to resample doesn't it? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
toby10;649223 Wrote: > Several ways, but I don't think you want to connect to MySB with your > firmware issues. ;) > > 1. turn off SBS or the computer hosting SBS, select My Apps or Internet > Radio, a switch to MySB should be offered > 2. Touch > Settings > Advanced > Networking > switch to MySB > 3. Same as #2, press & hold "switch to MySB", select "add to Home > menu", this places that switch on the Home menu if you plan on > switching between SBS and MySB regularly Thanks. I've listened to Internet Radio, BBC Iplayer etc. quite often, but was not aware that implied connection to MySB. Anyway, doing any of the above does not cause the Touch to request a firmware update. I assume that's because I'm on a 7.6.1 (and hence Beta) version (since 7.6.0 behaves more like an Alpha). -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
toby10;649184 Wrote: > Only if you connect the player directly to MySB.com, which you do not > do. I'm sure I am being seriously thick here, but how would I do that? There's no obvious menu item for it that I can find on the Touch? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;649163 Wrote: > Yep. Though you can't prevent mysqueezebox.com from kicking in. > > > > Logitech !!! Are you listening? > > We would like to get an selectable option to avoid updates through > mysqueezebox.com. > > Cheers I'm a bit puzzled. In what way & when does mysqueezebox.com kick in? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;649135 Wrote: > TT3.0 will come with quite some improvements beside its audio related > improvements. > > For now some items on the list are > > 1. All single tools migrated into one tool > 2. Complete installation done in 20 seconds (one command + reboot) > 3. USB DAC configuration (Different from what is known today) > 4. Screen on/off (inspired by a hint of another inmate) > 5. Help function > > I'm pretty sure you'll like it. ;) > > Cheers I look forward to it! I have found that by turning off the software update option (Don't check for software updates) on the server, this also stops requests to update the firmware on the Touch. Stability restored :) -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Sligolad;648981 Wrote: > Such a pleasant and informative thread to keep coming back to lately > after all the negative stuff in the early days, keep up the excellent > work guys. > > Looking forward to TT3.0. > > All i can say is that my listening pleasure has been much improved this > past 6 months as a result of all the work and discussions that have > taken place here. And so say all of us. Now I'll have to find a better way of stopping my Touch from asking if it can update itself every other day (7.6.1 firmware is coming thick and fast for some reason). I'm getting quite good at factory resets and TT 2.0 applications :) -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Caad;643977 Wrote: > > This inspired me not to use FLAC at all. > In the matter of fact. Why do Audiophiles use FLAC or other compressed > standards? > The only reason is to save space on the Harddisk. As I see it, it > must only have been a problem a couple years ago when the hard disks > had less memory. Todays hard disks have a lot of memory and I don't see > why not using uncompressed standards as WAW instead? > CAAD I don't know if this is a language issue, but what's a WAW? WAV I know, but WAW? Assuming WAW=WAV, the main reason for not using only WAVs for me is that the tagging for WAVs is problematic to say the least. FLACs can be tagged with many different tools, and the tags can be extended to include one's own variations, which you can use in Squeezebox, Foobar or other such tools. Having said this, that's no reason not to transcode FLAC to PCM/WAV for transmission to the Touch, and I do so. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;642625 Wrote: > ... sample rate correction is essential. > I've been able to get comparisons of cd (rip) playback against the > original CD PCM file in the 30-40 range which is not too bad. At the > end of the day the absolute values aren't critical; If you get one > comparison at 30 and another at 40, the 40 one IS closer to the > original sound... I figured that by shortening the sample from 2 minutes to 20 seconds I might persuade the software to work for rate correction, and the card not to drift so much. Without sample rate correction the correlation of two recordings of the same CD (analogue out) on the exact same kit was of the order of 30db. Sample rate correction does work on this shorter track, and improves the correlation to around 35db. Comparing the CD to a CD rip, with correction, for the same short section I now get correlations around 27db. I guess I could get some useful comparison data at this level of correlation, so may try a bit more. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;642625 Wrote: > I'm afraid the creative card isn't up to the job. At a minimum you need > to use a card that doesn't internally resample. Also, sample rate > correction is essential. Without that, your results look about right to > me. When comparing different CD players, their respective clocks will be > drifting all over the place (relative to each other) and without sample > rate correction you just won't get meaningful results. That must be right. Mine is an Xfi XtremeMusic 7.1 SB0460 from 2005. It claims to support 24/96 recording (and better playing) but I guess that doesn't mean it is any good. I don't normally use it to play or record much music, so it doesn't matter much. I tried a comparison of the same CD track recorded twice, and even that only got a correlation of 20db. Never mind. I'll leave it to those with decent cards. What cards are good? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
PasTim;642123 Wrote: > All attempts to get ADM to record a track from an external CD player > hooked up to my PC via the Linein on my Soundblaster have failed so > far. I can record using my Creative software, but not with ADM. > > Has anyone got ADM to work on Windows 7 64 bit? Tinkering some more with the various Windows vs Creative vs ADM sound recording settings I finally found a combination that worked (except when Sample Rate Compensation was used which always caused ADM to crash). Having run a few tests I think ADM is so sensitive that it can only be used to make fine changes to essentially the same system. This means it's great for comparing the Touch with itself plus or minus a tweak or two. However, all attempts thus far to compare any two different analogue sources (eg 2 CD players), or an analogue recording with an original rip, have met with results that imply the recordings are almost completely different (correlations running between 13 and 15). I have tried using the Equalisation facility (without Sample Rate Compensation) but that didn't help. How much this is due to limitations of my soundcard's ADC I don't know, but I'm not going to pursue this line of comparison unless anyone has any ideas of ways to get more meaningful results. Suffice to say that at this level of correlation the difference tracks contain perfectly recognisable music. I may have a go comparing digital outputs from the Touch and CD players at some point. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
All attempts to get ADM to record a track from an external CD player hooked up to my PC via the Linein on my Soundblaster have failed so far. I can record using my Creative software, but not with ADM. Has anyone got ADM to work on Windows 7 64 bit? I have had difficulties in the past with my sound card with Windows 7, but previously always found a set of settings that worked. Thus far this one has me beat. (I do have the latest set of software from Creative). -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;642102 Wrote: > The process will work fine with CD players too. I gathered so, but getting the Desktop PC physically near enough to my CD players (or more likely vice versa) will entail a fair bit of 'discussion' with my better half :-) I will definitely try playing a reference CD through: . a far-too-expensive MF CD player . an ancient Quad 67 player . a much-better-than-it-has-any-right-to-be Oppo DVD/CD/SACD player and compare with a rip (using EAC to wav and then flac) played via my Touch. I'll also tinker with a few different analogue cables that I have acquired over the years. I know which I think sounds better (which is all that matters). What the technical comparison will show is anyone's guess. I have a 2005 creative sound card which claims to support 24/96 ADC. If I get a digital cable I guess I should check the digital outputs as well. I shall get a cheap-and-cheerful one and try it sometime. I also have ripped a few LPs. My set-up is less than ideal for this (PC and my best LP player and phono amp are in different rooms), but they sound good even though recorded via a mediocre deck and amp, and a cheap cable that's far too long. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
zzzap;642087 Wrote: > This idea first got me exited as I want to get my feet wet with ADM. > Then I realized the ADC will have they're own signature and therefore > make it difficult to share reference data as easily as I first thought > as most of us doesn't have the same sound card. And if you believe what some people say then even the analogue cables may make a difference, so no two people would really be comparing like with like. You should, however, be able to test your own bits of kit and make changes to see if any effects can be measured, which might be illuminating. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;642081 Wrote: > No problem - happy to help! > > HOWEVER, what has become starkly apparent is that DAC's have their own > sonic signature - they certainly don't all sound or measure the same! > > What I really need is access to a wider set of equipment (DAC's), but > I'm not a magazine reviewer...and I'm not sure my conclusions would be > very popular... > > I also need another Touch... > > More to come on this topic when I get more time. Not sure how I'm going > to finance this :-) > > Alternatively, anyone with a decent soundcard and a Windows PC can test > their own DAC with ADM against a wav rip. > > Of course we'd need to agree on a commonly available reference > recording to use as the benchmark :-) Good luck with this. You may need to go and hide somewhere for a good long while if the results are anything like one imagines they might be. I'll download ADM and have a play (if it will run at all on Windows 7, possibly in some form of compatibility mode). However I've not got any separate DACs, just the Touch and sundry CD players of varying ages, quality and cost (none of those factors seemingly being related to eachother!). -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;641986 Wrote: > yes :-) > > You are completely misinterpreting the results. The tests show that as > mods are stacked up, the numbers get smaller ie the differences get > bigger. IF the mods were having no effect the numbers would not get > smaller. You can see that some mods have very little effect... others > have a bigger impact. > > > In the first test (96.6) the unmodded Touch COMPARED AGAINST ITSELF > establishes the baseline - obviously one would expect virtually no > difference and that's what you get. As mods are made the numbers get > smaller because the differences get bigger. Conclusion: (some of) the > mods impact the sound. > > I really can't put it any more clearly :-) Ah Ha! The bit that was missing was 'Compared against Itself'. I had understood, and got fixed in my mind, that you were comparing the Touch output with the source, not with itself, and hence my confusion. Looking again at the test result it still doesn't hit me in the face that that was what you were doing. I had wondered how you were comparing the analogue out of the Touch with the digital source, but that was going to be my next question once I understood the data. So I definitely had the wrong end of the stick, was barking up the wrong tree, etc. It all makes sense now. Thanks for taking the time to make it clear. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;641972 Wrote: > It's like this; ADM measures differences. The scale of measurement is in > dB and is inverted (what it is showing you is actually an inverse > correlation), so 0dB = massive difference and -144dB (24-bit signal) = > identical/no difference. > > So as I said, bigger number = smaller difference (or greater > similarity). > > This won't make any sense unless you are familiar with working in dB's > and/or have actually used ADM. > > I don't think I'd like to speculate on the cause of the change beyond > saying that the analogue circuits of the Touch (and SB3) are inevitably > susceptible to low-level interference from the other digital/control > circuitry. Sorry. Head bashed against wall. No clearer. I see from your results that 96.96, unmodified, is greater than 84.49 modified. So a Touch with no changes has a greater similarity with the original. Which is not what I understand from your description. I know roughly what a dB is, and can fully understand that 0dB similarity is a disaster and -144 is great. The question must be "how does dB similarity relate to the scores quoted"? I can't find an answer on the ADM site or in their main document on the topic. Am I really being that daft? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
First, forgive my inability to understand one aspect of your measurements back in February. I have read many of the surrounding posts but haven't found an answer I understand. I also couldn't find it in the ADM documents I browsed. You say 'Remember: bigger number = smaller difference'. To me that means that the mods introduce greater differences, since the numbers after they are introduced are smaller. Is this what you mean? I'm sure I'm being really thick, but can you clarify this for me? Also, did you postulate any reason for a reduction in 'broadband noise'. More work for the electronics means more noise on the analogue side? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] New 24bit/192kHz Squeezebox Product
ralphpnj;635465 Wrote: > And of course Macs only understand iNuance. iLOL -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88056 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;633549 Wrote: > The standard advice should be to set your NIC to PLAIN "autonegotiate" > (this will be the default setting - leave it alone!). Do not try and > force it to any other setting. Any NIC which does not function > correctly on that setting is BROKEN. Being an Englishman I will just say "I would not disagree". -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;633530 Wrote: > @PasTim > > Since I run my new network setup I don't face any hickups on a > server-side 100MBIT/s speed. I'm running a Linux server. I tested it > with > and without tweaked TCP/IP parameters. I never tested it on XP. Just > W7. > > Setting the interface to 100MBIT/s doesn't mean that you turn off auto > negotiation. > > You can try autoneg on/off by setting another parameter. You can also > leave it if it doesn't work. > > You can also dig deeper into TCP Optimizer. > > As I wrote on the blog. Not much is written about network optimzations > on streaming networks. The online gamers do have some interesting stuff > about it online. It seems I'm not explaining myself well enough. On my system, with my NIC, and XP, setting the interface to 100Mbps FD as suggested is the wrong thing to do. On my XP/Nvidia system this definitely turns off Autonegotiation. This caused me tens of hours of time investigating what was wrong. It's not your fault I followed your suggestion, and you were not the only one to propose that option (I had come across it some time previously). No one can know everything about every bit of kit. It is also not impossible that using different switches in the network could change the behaviour. I would be very interested to know what your system does without Autoneg when the Touch is directly connected to your server. I have taken some illustrations of the change in network traffic behaviour. The first is at 100 Mbps FD, the second is with Autoneg for 100FD. Same track, PCM 24/96. You can see, and hear, the difference. I do think you should warn people in your TT 2.0 instructions that this MIGHT cause rebuffering problems for them, as it did for me. It is a simple change for people to make, and could (not will, but could) save them hours of time. +---+ |Filename: network traffic autoneg 2.JPG| |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11912| +---+ -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Hi Soundcheck, I'm hoping you are either too busy to respond to my earlier request about your advice on setting the speed of the NIC, or not convinced by what I say happened to me. Could you let me know either way? I am aware I am repeating myself, which may be tedious to others on this thread, but having seen several other people on other threads having not dissimilar problems I have been tempted to put a general item on the Touch part of this forum advising people to at least check your advice on this as one of the possible issues they might have, since they may be creating problems for themselves. However, I really don't want to do that without your agreement. Your advice is: "b. Run you PC or NAS ethernet interfaces at 100MBit/s full duplex. That would be the same rate as the Touch. on a Windows system you open: 1. Device Manager/Network Adapter 2. Right click on your network adaptor 3. Properties/Advanced 4. Select Speed & Duplex 5. Value: 100MBIT Full Duplex. 6. OK -Reboot" If you do exactly this on a PC running XP, with an Nvidia NIC, and transmit all FLACs, especially 24/96 ones, as PCM, you will almost certainly get rebuffering on the Touch. My understanding is that this is because the Touch is trying to negotiate a speed and failing. Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonegotiation , which states that one should not use fixed speeds unless you really have to. My NIC had another option which was to autonegotiate up to 100FD (but not fix at that speed) and this works fine. Another thing people can do on windows is use Task Manager to look at the network traffic when playing music. The traffic should be fairly smooth. At 24/96 PCM it's about 4-5% of a 100MB ethernet. At 16/44 it is more like 1%. On the straight 100MB FD setting the traffic was visibly more variable (it might even have been running half duplex). This is worth checking when all else is idle, since it may well indicate some sort of negotiation problem or other network weakness. I also installed Windows Network Monitor from Microsoft. This is quite simple to install and run. Although I don't understand much of the TCP/IP traffic, it was plain that my traffic included many retransmissions. Once I allowed negotiation the retransmissions disappeared. This has to be a good thing. I'd also point out that this network setting also improves flac transmission, removing retransmissions from those as well. These may not have cause audible problems on the Touch, but it is surely as well not to create more traffic and work for both PC and Touch than is strictly necessary. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;633222 Wrote: > If people would read and follow my blog properly they would have turned > off internal sounds prior to installing the toolbox. Whilst I agree that people can be too cynical about such things and their comments are unhelpful to those of us that do want to try things out, I do hope you will take note of the problem I had that was at least partly created by your own recommendations. This isn't a criticism, it's just that we should all be prepared to learn from our shared experiences. Please keep going. As I'm sure you know, others do value your efforts. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
snottmonster;632861 Wrote: > AS you yourself commented earlier - there are so many variables, and I > would add so many varieties of equipment, that it is hard to always > know what to suggest and debugging can become a daunting task. > > But - this is why the direct connection step was so important. You > problem was clearly network related, but the direct connect ruled out a > problem with your network equipment, and isolated it to be either your > Touch or your PC. Agree entirely. The nagging me to do the test was the right thing to do, even though I was rather grumpy about it. However, Soundcheck please note, the advice in the TT 2.0 documentation to set the NIC to "100MBIT Full Duplex" . I think that for some NICs at least, that's absolutely the wrong thing to do. I suggest you at least qualify your advice. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;632852 Wrote: > The article is pretty clear and correct - autonegotiation is a good > thing and should always be ON. If autonegotiation is off on the NIC you > can get a mismatch between the Touch (which will always autonegotiate) > and the NIC. When we were talking before I'd assumed (doh! - never > assume) we were talking about autoneg 100mbps. > > Anyway - great that you have it working now. Great indeed. Thanks for confirming my conclusion. Quite a lot of time used, but never wasted. I am a little concerned that I may not be the only one to have wandered down this path, and that others may have given up, or spent money on switches, cables, even PCs. I think it would be as well to ensure any future advice to people about 'fixing' NIC speeds is very precise, and given with caveats where there is no clear option or indication about the chosen option. Maybe it should be included in the TT 2.0 information sheet and/or blog? On my laptop the NIC does not appear to have an autoneg 100mb option - it just says 100mb fd. My desktop NIC has both options (with and without autoneg), which is what led me to look at wikipedia (for more than just the name of a footballer) and then wonder if there would be a detectable difference. There was. I am also trying unqualified Autonegotiate without any hiccups thus far. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;632824 Wrote: > Hi guys. > > I've just thrown out my D-Link router and my D-Link Hub. > > I'm now running a Fritzbox router, which was today supplied by > my cable company and a Cisco Hub in front of the Touch. > > Guess what - No more 24/96 PCM hickups since 2 hours. > > > I knew if Phil states there are no hickups on 24/96 PCM > and 7.6. it should be possible to get there too. ;) > > I'll keep an eye on it. > > It seems that we're getting things under control. > Though it still makes me wonder why such a rather low network load is > causing those hickups. > > Cheers As a matter of interest have you fixed the speed of your server NIC or allowed it to negotiate? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Apologies - I've been rambling (as usual). Yes, I can now stream full 24/96 PCM as PCM rather than native FLAC. I tried using Autonegotiate with any speed limit, and that works fine as well. Previously I could not stream 24/96 PCM as PCM, although everything else worked, so it was only at the highest quality that I had audible problems. Using Microsoft Network Monitor I can see that now I am not getting frequent retransmits, which I was before (even using FLAC and at lower bit rates). This is good. So for my PC and Touch, setting a fixed speed on the NIC wasn't a good idea (even using a direct connection without any network involved). I had previously been advised to do this for other reasons unrelated to SB, but SB users also recommended it. I'm sure it works for some people, but one size does not seem to fit all (presumably since most PCs are different from other PCs in some way or another!). Thanks to all who have helped and cajoled me into finding a solution. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
I know Wikipedia is not always correct, but the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonegotiation states that one should not use fixed speeds unless you really have to. The "Autoneg for 100FD" option on my NIC that I have chosen certainly looks as if it has stabilised the traffic. It's as if whatever the Touch and the PC NIC were doing previously it wasn't 100Mb FD. I may also try going to straight Autonegation and see what happens later. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
PasTim;632779 Wrote: > I really did set it to 100Mbps Full Duplex about 4 months ago - honest! > Everything has been off and on many times since. Ah Ha! There are 2 ways of setting the NIC to 100FD. One is straight "100 Mb Full Duplex". The other is "AutoNeg for 100FD". I have been using the former. I have just tried the latter. In both cases the network claims to be running at 100Mb (using Task Manager). When playing PCMs I had noticed that the network traffic was quite unstable, varing up and down around the 4% to 8% mark (using Task Manager to view the traffic). My network monitoring has also included a quantity of retransmits, as others have noticed. Using "AutoNeg for 100FD" the network traffic looks much more stable at around 4-5%, with no retransmits I have been able to find using the network diagnostics I have also reset all the other variables back to their defaults (no flow control and enabling checksum offloading). So, tentatively, it looks as if setting the NIC to fixed 100 Mb FD was precisely the wrong thing to do in my case. Either the Touch or the PC wants to be able to Auto Negotiate to reach the same conclusion (i.e. 100Mb). Does that make any sense? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;632777 Wrote: > nVidia inbuilt NIC's are known to have issues with their 1000mbps > setting. You need to make sure (as Klaus said) that the NIC is set to > 100mbps. Once you have rebooted the PC, you need to run everything on > and off in sequence; router/switch/Touch. Everything should now be > running at 100mbps (ASSUMING you have no 10mbps devices connected). I really did set it to 100Mbps Full Duplex about 4 months ago - honest! Everything has been off and on many times since. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;632771 Wrote: > You should not need to enable flow control on the NIC - it will usually > only slow things down. The Touch is a 100mbps device and the NIC should > auonegotiate to that level. > > What type of NIC do you have? Realtek? - you need to make sure you have > the latest Windows device drivers installed for you network card. > > If you want to disable something, start by disabling TCP checksum > offload in the NIC properties. It's an Nvidia nForce 10/100/1000 Mbps port, built-in. Whilst it may be that one should not have to enable flow control, if it helps, which this does although still imperfectly, it helps. Something is not right between the two devices, and we know I'm not entirely alone in this. All device drivers are up to date with the latest from Nvidia. I'll try the checksum offloads when I have time. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Enabling Flow Control worked for a while. Switching tracks quickly didn't cause any problems , which it always did before However, after listening for an hour or so without any problems it started to rebuffer again, and then got worse and worse. There's no other network traffic. I'm persuaded it's a TCP/IP issue between the Touch and my PC running XP SP3 (and possibly the PC's network card). I know it's not the physical network. I thought I'd finally cracked it, but sadly not. So it's back to trusty native flac again. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;632686 Wrote: > You might want to try setting your card to 100MBIT under device > settings. Thanks. I did that some time ago, and also used TCP Optimiser as per suggestions for TT 2.0. None of that made any difference I could detect. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Whilst listening to music my mind wandered into why my last test may have shown the situation being even worse when directly connected than when through a network with 3 switches and various bits of cable of various ages. I also wondered by the CPU usage went lower when the Touch was rebuffering. So I looked at the network card options on the PC. 1st option - Flow Control. It's disabled. I've never touched this since I bought the PC. A quick Google and some people say leave it off, but some say it's needed if video becomes 'choppy'. H. Turn both Rx and TX flow control on. Do my usual test. Seems OK. Check I'm on PCM - I am. Turn flow control off. Test again. Rebuffering as per usual when changing tracks. Turn it back on. Same test. Seems OK. I'm no TCP/IP expert, but I can imagine the PC flooding the Touch with too much data when there's no flow control and the whole process getting out of step. It's not unreasonable to suppose introducing flow control might help. Now I haven't run this enough times to be confident, but I'll see how it goes. If anyone else has similar problems maybe they could try this and post back here? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;632656 Wrote: > To make sure that the network (router, serveral cables, other clients, > etc.) is not the root cause for potential network related issues, you > can connect the server directly via cable to the client: > > 1. assign static IP address to your server > 2. Powerdown both devices > 3. Hook up the cable > 4. Power up both devices > 5. assign static IP to your Touch in the settings menu > > Remark: Remote control via WLAN will be a challenge with this setup. ;) To satisfy my and other people's curiosity I have tried using one (new late last year) gigabit switch, and also direct connection, both with new Cat 6 patch cables (none of which were used last time I tried connecting the touch more directly to my PC). If anything the rebuffering on PCM 24/96 is worse tahn with my normal full network. The PC CPU is hardly ticking over, and when the Touch starts rebuffering the CPU load goes down close to zero. Now I'm not saying it's definitely the Touch or definitely the PC, but it ain't the network that is causing the problem (which, I have to say, which what I thought after my previous tests, but I guess it's good to prove it). The PC is running 7.5.4 (I have tried 7.5.3 as well). The Touch is now on 7.6.0 r9441 (I have also tried 7.5.3 and 7.5.4). I have tried without TT2.0, with 2.0, with small ALSA (down to 3600) and up to 2. If it is the PC it's far to hard for me to dig through Microc**p to find the problem. Suffice to say I don't notice any other problems using the network and this PC, even when streaming video to my Humax box. Must reconnect my network as it should be, and go back and play more music (by flac) :-) -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
There are too many variables involved in this, and I don't have sufficient diagnostic tools or knowledge to take it further with a reasonable expectation of tracking down a solution. I still wonder if my using Analogue out is making a difference. I see most others use an external DAC. I could do more cable / switch swapping and get no further (I was already down to only one cable and one switch in common). I might then have to try and change the ethernet port on the PC, and so on. For all I know it's some other hardware device on my PC interrupting too often at critical times, or some piece of software on the PC, or .. The puzzle to me is that flac is 100% reliable for all my files, but PCM at 24/96 is guaranteed to rebuffer when I change tracks more than a few times (if I leave the tracks playing it only occasionally rebuffers). It will remain a puzzle for now. Maybe it will go away when 7.6 is formally released and I can use it on the server). So I'll carry on listening to flacs. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;632562 Wrote: > The ALSA code manages the audio hardware interface in a linux > environment. It has nothing to do with networking. The TTBuffer mod > alters the amount/rate of data passed to the audio hardware within the > Touch itself. > > I have no idea why you have problems streaming PCM to the Touch except > that it will be a problem with the network or PC that SBS is running > on. > > I suggest you stick with streaming flac (ie the way the designers > intended) and enjoy the music! Mystery, mystery. And why can't the problem be in the Touch? And why do some people say the having a smaller Alsa buffer improves sound, but one may need a bigger one if you get rebuffering problems? Isn't that a network issue? In fact, what does 'Audio' have to do with anything if one is using Digital in and out (which I'm not). I guess you can tell I'm a 'bits is bits' person. Is there an online tome that explains the Linux architecture to me? Ah well. As you say, carry on listening... -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
I suspect I should give in on this topic. I did work on Unix a few decades ago, but know little about Linux. I've lived with many PC flavours but they become more impenetrable by the year (and yes, I have written interrupt handlers in assembler for many bits of kit, but all a long time ago). I think I know enough about science to avoid being fooled by witchcraft (after far too many years in IT), but without appropriate analysis tools to identify bottlenecks or other such problems, and without any rational explanations as to why problems might be here, rather than there, this is all guesswork. I've done enough measurements and trials to be reasonably sure it ain't the network, but Masters Gates or Torvalds probably have me fooled. Every time one tinkers more time goes by when one could be listening to something (in my case right now, more recordings of Shostakovich's Preludes and Fugues). -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;632553 Wrote: > no it has nothing to do with the network at all. I thought it was obvious I was ignorant and was asking for an explanation or hint where I might find one, but clearly not. What is Alsa? I see hints on t'web that it's a Linux whatchamacallit. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
I tried to look up Alsa, but failed to find anything I could understand. I thought the ttbuffer was changing network buffering. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
aubuti;632539 Wrote: > I know you believe it's not your network, but that's still where the > symptoms are pointing. Did you ever try a different switch or cables, > as suggested in post #643? I wouldn't be at all surprised if a standard > consumer-grade switch started gagging on that much data. > > Btw, it sounds like the buffers you are changing from 3600 to 2 are > the Alsa playback buffers on the Touch, not the network transmission > buffers associated with the Touch's rebuffering. So it's not surprising > if changing them doesn't help with the Touch's rebuffering. > > As for EQ, a lot of people find it helpful in sub-optimal listening > rooms. And sub-optimal listening rooms are often critical for > maintaining domestic harmony :-) I did connect the Touch via just one switch and short cables. Nothing changed at all (from my long network with 3 switches which is my standard set-up). I can exchange gigabyte files between PCs on my home network with no hiccups. I can download big files from the interweb at 6Mbs without blinking. PCM for 24/96 loads the network at between 5 and 10%. Flac runs at 2-3% or maybe a bit less for the same files. I did look at the network traffic, but I don't know enough to be sure I understand what I'm seeing, and am not quite enthusiastic enough to dig into it. I am using Analogue out on the Touch. Maybe that's a factor? I'm also listening to Dylan's 'Hard Rain' on R4 (FM) at this instant - this may be a distraction! -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Soulkeeper;632530 Wrote: > Wikipedia: 'PCM' > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_pulse-code_modulation) > Wikipedia: 'FIR' > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_impulse_response) > Wikipedia: 'EQ' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equalization) > Squeezebox wiki: 'BruteFIR' > (http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Brutefir_Filter) PCM I understand enough of to be confused as to why a compressed version (such as flac) can be transmitted and processed OK but PCM isn't. I can't figure out whether it's the PC or the Touch. Having looked at my network I'm convinced it isn't the issue in my system. The PC is hardly working at all as shown by CPU utilisation, but it's not impossible that it is creating delays from time to time (for instance due to poor interrupt handling) that cause the Touch to rebuffer. I've tried buffers from 3600 to 2 with no change. As to the filters, I'm none the wiser. I never understood why people use equalisation, unless the original was really badly recorded. I couldn't find anything that said why one would want to filter the sound, so that went over my head as well. Never mind. All that matters is whether each of is happy with the resulting sound, and I am (even if there's a niggle in the back of my mind wondering why something doesn't work). -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
mervin_b;632504 Wrote: > > The PCM is FIR EQ'd with brutefirdrc on > Apologies for my ignorance, but what does that mean? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;632476 Wrote: > You're too late. ;) > "many times" !?!?? Hmmh. I tried 96khz PCM streaming. Still a disaster > on my setup. 96khz flacs do work. > I havn't seee a Logitech product limitation "96khz/24 PCM streams not > supported". On a 100MBIT interface in a GBit network, that task should > be a piece of cake. > > Since I can't use 7.6 on my server as yet due to incompatibilities with plugins, I thought I would try using 7.6 on my Touch, with 7.5.4 on the server. The result? The 96/24 PCM problem remains, so I went back to flac. The Touch seems otherwise fine on 7.6 so I'll leave that in place for now. The only trivial issue is that I'm hoping the Touch will eventually stop asking me whether I want to 'upgrade' to 7.5.4. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;630452 Wrote: > This raises a very important issue that you may wish to consider (I > certainly spent a long time pondering on this): > > I decided 2 years ago that I would never become totally dependent on > any plugin that I couldn't maintain myself if I HAD to. Plugins are > supported on a best efforts basis and the very complex ones such as > Custom Browse/Scan need expert support. They can and will break and > there are no guarantees for future support. I do NOT want to be locked > into an old version of SBS. > > The only 2 plugins I rely on are MusicIP integration and Inguz, both of > which have latent issues. I have a (radical) backout plan for Inguz - > which I only use on 1 player anyway. I don't have a suitable fallback > for MIP. > > I stopped using Custom Browse/Scan for this reason - although I believe > Erland will remediate them at some point. I think you should formulate a > plan for the future. > > > Going back to your immediate issue; you have eliminated your network as > a problem, but not the server. Your reported problem with the wavin > plugin makes me very suspicious of your server...especially as the > common thread appears to be PCM streaming... > > Seem you are down to 2 possibilities: > 1) Something wrong with your server > 2) a problem with 7.5.x (on either the server or Touch or both. > > Just as a TEST - try installing 7.6, disable the custom browse/scan > plugins and see if the rebuffering goes away. I appreciate this isn't a > fix for your problem - you need Erland for that. I can't think of > anything else to try at the moment. Thanks for your ongoing advice. I did try 7.6 briefly, but the time required to do it again to check that a problem is fixed is not worth it for me. It's a potentially unstable beta, changes all the time, needs yet another rescan of my library, requires disabling plugins I use all the time, and so on. 7.5.3 (and indeed 7.5.4) works fine, except I can't transmit PCM at 24/96. So I'll use FLAC. I entirely take your point about plugins and the future. I'm aware I am relying on them, but SB itself doesn't have the tools I really want. It's usable, but less than ideal. If those plugins become defunct (more than likely in a few years time) I can do one of two things. A) I can stay on 7.5.3, which works (except PCM 24/96 transmissions - why upgrade for just that?). I have a copy of the server, and of the plugins, so I think I'm safe in that respect (for a while). B)I can use foobar, UpNp, and control the Touch from there using my SB library including the special tags I have on my FLACs and foobar filters No doubt foobar will also disappear, and future windows versions will become an issue. Hopefully another solution (that I can afford) will arrive, and FLACS will be supported by something. I won't be throwing my CD collection away! The issue with wavin was, oddly, resolved by using PCM rather than using FLAC, so the issue is reversed on that topic. Assuming that the Task Manager was not telling porkies, the data was leaving my PC on time, but being buffered in the Touch for a very long time. However, without tools to check this on the Touch I cannot be 100% sure. I can't see what else I can check on my PC. It's also fascinating what people use. I can't imagine why I would ever want to use MusicIP. Indeed I only dimly understand what it is for. No doubt others would fail to understand why I need extra tags on my FLACs to include 'work', 'movement', 'work artist' and others. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
snottmonster;630369 Wrote: > PCM will be more demanding on the network link between the Touch and the > server (more data being sent), but the Touch is perfectly capable of > handling that data stream. While there could be a fault with the Touch > or even the Server, the symptoms (ie dropouts) would strongly suggest a > networking problem. > > The only way to rule out the network completely is to not use the > network of course - ie establish a direct connection between Touch and > server over a single ethernet cable. Tricky to setup, but possible. > > Or just enjoy the Touch decoding your FLAC library... (unless you're > pedantic like me an refuse to live with things not working as they > should) I tried the Touch connected via one switch to the PC, with short (2m) cables. The problem was unchanged, so I do not believe it's the network. Given the visible load on the PC CPU(s) is below 5%, disc utilisation is very low, and I turned off all security software, I think it's the Touch rather than the server, but I can't prove it. Any ideas as to how I might do so? If anyone looked at my network traffic files did they reveal anything? I wish I could use 7.6. However, I use Custom Browse and Custom Scan plugins all the time. One issue with 7.6 is that every time SB starts, the CPU load goes to 50% for an hour or three at a time and is unusable. I need these plugins. With them SB is a joy to use. Without them it's a pain. I don't usually play 'albums', so much as 'works', and want to choose between several versions of each. These plugins make it really easy to do. I often can't recall which 'album' a 'work' is on, so the plugins really suit my needs. Unfortunately the change in database means the plugins work less than perfectly at present. The designer is well aware of this but is not willing to commit his time and energy to modifying them until 7.6 is a non-beta reality, and who can blame him. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;630286 Wrote: > Yes you have gone up the wrong garden path. There are no clocks or > glitches in the transmission path either case. > The only conceivable mechanism by which FLAC files streamed as PCM > might result in a different sound from the Touch compared to the same > files streamed as FLAC is electrical noise within the Touch which > increases (VERY SLIGHTLY) when decoding FLAC and which might have an > impact on the DAC clock - i.e. it might increase jitter slightly. > > Attempts to prove this theory by measurement have so far failed to be > conclusive. There is equivocal anecdotal evidence. Thanks. In that case I shall refrain from referring to any discussions elsewhere about how the quality of an ethernet cable, or network switches, or their power supplies, could affect sound quality, as suggested by several people. I had been under the impression that with PCM one could get subtle timing problems in the sequence of bits, and that could result in potentially audible degradation. I know people argue about this, but I'm not going to (either way). So let's assume we have reliable transmission which does not, of itself, create any changes to the bits or their timing. As you say, the only difference remaining can be in the reliability of the FLAC decoding and transformation process or in the PCM handling process, due to noise or whatever. In my case, the Touch does not appear to be able to handle 24/96 PCM, but happily handles FLAC. I can't use 7.6 because it mucks up other SBS plugins and causes several other issues, so I'll stay on 7.5.x and use FLAC. I actually got into this whole topic via a quite different route to do with the 'wavin' plugin which relays PC sound to the Touch. I was getting delays of 2 minutes (yes - you read that right 2 minutes) in the Touch. I verified that the data was leaving the PC on time. The Touch was just not playing it. No, I don't believe it either, but I could see the data leaving the PC and not coming out the other end. Anyhow, that was using wavin to FLAC on the PC. I tried changing wavin to transmit PCM instead, and the problem disappeared. So I thought there must be something in this PCM transmission business. Then I found the toolbar, and got to where I am now. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
I don't want to open old arguments, but I am interested in FLAC versus PCM. As I understand it, PCM is a string of bits which must be sent, received and processed according to strict clocks. Anything that gets in the way might cause a problem, although I'm not sure what effect buffering in the Touch has. In contrast, FLAC is more like a series of records, with error correction logic, a checksum and so forth, isn't it?. Because the data is encoded, and sent as data to be processed rather than as a series of bits whose timing must be maintained accurately, minor glitches in transmission should be easily recoverable and nothing in that transmission should be able to affect the sound quality. Of course, once FLAC has been received and is being decoded all sorts of problems can occur which will affect the analogue quality or the precision of onward digital transmission. Have I gone up a garden path here? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
I attach 2 files, the first is a network capture for PCM, the 2nd for flac. I was stopping and restarting tracks during both. The PCM one exhibits problems on the Touch, flac doesn't. I have fuller '.cap' files if anyone is interested. The Touch is connected to the same switch as the PC running SBS. I don't know much about TCP/IP. There are duplicate ACKs around, retransmits, and fast retransmits. What it all means I'm not sure. Any views? +---+ |Filename: sb extract 2 flac.doc| |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11836| +---+ -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;630189 Wrote: > Typically file transfers across the network won't show up the same > problems as the Touch rebuffering. AS others have said, the first thing > to do is to temporarily attach the Touch directly to the Router that the > SBS is attached to. That will hopefully eliminate the SBS server as a > cause. Then work your way back (switch by switch) to your normal > connection topology, noting when the problem recurrs. > > There have been various reports of rebuffering with 7.5.x. I haven't > seen any with 7.6 (doesn't mean there aren't any of course). Thanks to all for the advice. I connected my Touch directly to the switch to which my PC is connected. There was no other network traffic. I listened with headphones (having nearly forgotten to turn the volume down!), and kept the Touch screen display on (as I often do for convenience). The problems remain, exactly the same. The display shows 'rebuffering' particularly when changing tracks, or 24/96 tracks using PCM. No problems with native flac. I've previously tried completely disabling all security software on the server, so I'm pretty sure it isn't that (and anyway I'd expect that to have some occasional problems with flac). If it is a PC problem (rather than a Touch problem) I'll doubt I'll find it. Master Gates's devices are rather complex. I'm not that bad with PCs, but this sort of problem would defeat me quite easily. The event log is clean. I do have an MS network monitor which I'll try, but not for long... -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;630166 Wrote: > Thanks - I looked back through the posts but missed that! > > Wonder what PasTim means by less than ideal? I did mention I have a wired network, back in post 600, but there's a lot of stuff to plough through to find it. How do people suggest I should test my network? I'm willing to if I have some tools that tell me what's going on. I've not detected problems on data (big files exchanged between PCs and so on with my 100Mbit network running at 50% and more), but of course errors on such transfers can be recovered without one noticing anything much. The network is less than ideal because I am running through 3 switches. One close to the Touch (and connected to other media streaming devices which are not in use when testing), one on my ADSL router near the telephone for broadband, and one in my study at the other end of the house where my music files are stored, plus printer etc. It isn't always possible to engineer a network and house to fit the ideal, especially when I have to consider my better half using the network as well. Given there's an alternative, i.e. flac, which has seemingly perfect stability, and the benefit in sound quality is not certain (for me anyway), there's a limit to how much work one will do to get to the ideal. Having seen my network loaded and 8% overall using flac whilst doing other things as well, and not having any problems, I suspect the Touch is the culprit, but there's no way I can prove that. And finally, I should confirm I only have problems at 24/96, and it's often worst when I change tracks. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;630152 Wrote: > I played quite intensive with 24/96 over the weekend. (I downloaded > 24/96 Oscar Peterson - Night Train from HD Tracks - I love it.) > I experience that random rebuffering on 24/96 "PCM" streams too. > This rebuffering also happens if I quickly switch several tracks. > Everything becomes kind of instable. > I do have a note about it on the blog since the very beginning of my > project. > Probably I ran into that problem earlier. > I think it's time to address the issue. > I'm well aware about the standard Logitech answer: "Stream flacs!!" > Looks like a compromise/workaround to hide certain shortcomings or > flaws. > > On a first glance this problem shouldn't have anything to do with > the toolbox itself. > If the buffer is running at 2 there shouldn't be any mod > impacting the actual throughput. The toolbox actually should > improve the throughput. > From a networking and processor load perspective there is plenty > of headroom left - that you confirm too. > The Touch input-streaming-buffer ( which has nothing to do with my > buffer mod) is affected most when running 24/96 PCM streams instead of > flac streams. There must be a problem in that area. > Afaik Logitech realized some streaming related inefficiencies, which > are supposed to be improved in 7.6.. > I'm not sure though if above issue would be affected with those 7.6. > improvements. > > If 7.6 wouldn't be that unstable (see beta forum) I'd give it a try by > myself. Does anybody have a clue if 7.6. will ever come to live? > Nothing seems to be moving since a year or so. > > If anybody is streaming 24/96 as PCM without any problems, please let > us know > about your config. It sometimes comes as a great relief to hear one is not the only person who has a specific problem and are therefore not doing something totally stupid or missing a simple error. So thanks! This morning I tried disabling my security software, thinking it might be getting in the way of the flac.exe process which handles pcm, or with the Touch itself. It didn't make any difference. I also have noticed that changing tracks seems to make matters worse. I've not seen anything about a pukka release date for 7.6.0 yet. I will stay on 7.5.3 & flac for a while, and start listening to my music again (instead of rushing between rooms like a madman tinkering with software settings). Thanks again for being so helpful and responsive to my queries. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
Phil Leigh;630095 Wrote: > What do you mean by "at startup"? > - and why would that be unacceptable? > A basic scan takes several minutes for my ~14,000 tracks. Custom scan takes a further 1 to 2 hours to load non-standard tags. If SB server scans every time it starts up I'll miss my own funeral waiting for the music to start. I am one of those strange people who turns their PC off at night, and doesn't run SB all the time. > Rebuffering indicates a network or server bandwidth problem. Well I thought that. I tested the network effect by downloading some large files (more music) over the internet at the same time as playing 24/96 flacs via flac native format. Total network utilisation was steady at around 8-9% and I had no problems (although much of the traffic was in the opposite direction from the PC's perspective - I may try some other way of stressing the network). When I use PCM, network utilisation varies quite a bit, from 1-2% to 8 or 9%. I can sometimes play 24/96 for several minutes with no issue, and then it stops for rebuffering. The PC CPU is hardly running at more than 3%. A major difficulty I have is that I don't have the knowledge to really work out what's going on, and I have a very workable method of playing music (i.e. via flac). PCM may be better - I'm not really sure since I've spent too much time worrying that it's going to stop any minute. So I've run 7.5.3, 7.5.4 and 7.6 (the latter only briefly - it may have been better but the other issues rule it out). I guess I'll stay on 7.5.3 for a while. I still cannot work out why a smaller buffer would improve quality. I would, naively, have though a large buffer would allow the system a chance to run more smoothly and reliably. Have you determined a reason? Do you think the buffer size will have an impact when using flac format over the network? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;629996 Wrote: > There's really nothing to admire. ;) > > If I compare the number of support requests per 1000 toolbox downloads, > > I'd say the number of support requests are neglectable - roughly > 1/1000. > And meanwhile more often the community jumps in first. > > "None too bright people" : it's all relative, isn't it. > > You can't expect everybody to come up with the same level of knowledge > about everything. That has nothing to do with "brightness" that has > something to do with "focus". And experience, knowing where and how to look, time, etc Anyhow. I tried 7.6.0. I can't use it on Windows XP with Erland's excellent plugins such as Custom Browse. I believe the change in database is the issue. The CPU went to 50% (of a 2 CPU system) and stayed there. I believe this SB also insists on a scan at startup, which is unacceptable to me. So back to 7.5.3. Did factory reset. Did not accept offer to update software to 7.5.4. Made toolbar 2.0 changes, but left buffer at 2. As I write it is re-buffering again on a 24/96 track. Bother. Being a primitive soul I am running analogue out to 1970s QUAD amps and later ESLs. Is it likely that the PCM and buffer recommendations works for digital out but not analogue? -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
soundcheck;629981 Wrote: > As I wrote on the blog. The message is related to a kernel bug. It's not > an issue. Logitech would have to patch the (old) Linux kernel to get rid > of it. This probably will never happen. > > > If you run 7.5.4. you might run into performance problems. > That has been reported some posts earlier. > Upgrading to 7.6-beta did the trick for those people. > I do recommend to stay with 7.5.3. - if possible. I'm well aware that > due to Logitech update mechanisms this is not an easy undertaking. ;) > > If you won't manage leave the buffer size at default. OK - thanks very much for the advice. I'll think about 7.6 (I have several plugins that may need more work in 7.6, so I'm not sure about it yet). I did try looking for the info on 7.5.4, but there are a lot of posts by people wasting everyone else's time saying "none of this can work", and it's hard to find posts which are actually relevant to people wanting to solve problems (even using the forum search tool). I admire your patience, both with none too bright people like me, and with the argumentative ones ... -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
firedog;629974 Wrote: > "Unknown HZ value! (94). Assume 100." > > Run ttstat for the Toolbox and see what the reported buffer size is. > That's the actual set buffer size, in spite of your "error message". I > understood that we all get that message. I did - that's where the "error message" comes from. I've tried several buffer sizes. Can I ask why the buffer size would make a difference? Keeping the load on the cpu down makes a lot of sense, but I can' see why the buffer size would, unless it indirectly causes more cpu thrashing. I may have to revert to (native) flac. Even at the default buffer size I get some cut-outs. It may be my network can't handle PCM. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0
I've had a Touch for a while, and recently tried out the Toolbar 2.0. I have done most of the software mods, but one is causing me grief. I've currently ramped ttbuffer up to 1, and about to go higher, but I get an odd error message on ttstat, viz: "Unknown HZ value! (94). Assume 100." What does this mean? Have I screwed something up? I started at 3600 as suggested and got bad stutter. I still get stutter at 1. When I play a 24/96 flac (Perahia Brahms as it happens) the network utilisation from my PC is around 8% (of 100) but quite variable. The PC itself is decoding and running fine, CPU at around 5%. I'm using PCM, as recommended. My ethernet (wired) network is less than ideal, but others live here with their own PCs and needs, and I can't easily arrange a simple more direct connection than I have. -- PasTim PasTim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=41642 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
