Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Sound quality between wav and flac
Robin Bowes;501812 Wrote: Yes, it is well-documented that the level of jitter that is audible is orders of magnitude *above* the measurable jitter level produced by most digital devices. Maybe that's true for 'random' jitter, but in the real world jitter is seldom random and it's spectral content is likely to have an effect on its audibility, just as much as its absolute amplitude. Jitter is just another form of distortion, and as with distortion, the character of the jitter is an important element in its audible effect. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71321 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
pfarrell;480376 Wrote: Seriously, just saying that its important and telling me to listen more carefully is not engineering. No, but pyschoacoustics is where you need to look. Engineering will tell you how it makes a difference and what (numerical) levels that might be at, but engineering can't tell you whether that's significant when listening to music. Unfortunately spending 10 minutes doing AB testing probably won't either. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Themis;480374 Wrote: do you insinuate that the technical specification given by Slimdevices for the TP are intentionally false, incomplete or misleading ? :) No I'm just saying the number on it's own is completely meaningless as you have to understand the complete context for where it came to make any kind of sense of it. These sort of raw numbers are for marketing purposes only, and they're why you can't make meaningful comparisons of audio kit on the internet. PS. Yes of course you're right - the real answer is 42. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Themis;479827 Wrote: It means 17 picoseconds. The consensus is declaring the total jitter : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jitter I am pretty sure 27 is the answer to everything. Pat, if you don't think jitter is relevant, then you haven't been listening hard enough. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Query for Sean Adams
Themis;479741 Wrote: A TP has very (very) carefully designed digital outputs. It is specified 17ps at DAC output and 35ps at S/PDIF receiver. If you find much better (or even a little bit better), please let me know what it is. ;) Yes, but what does 17ps mean? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=70626 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
Phil, you have super tweeters and you don't think transports can make any difference? ;-) -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
chitunes;410835 Wrote: Thanks for the reply SuperQ. I appreciate the information. This leads me back to my other question as to why the displayed number is always a greater reduction than is tagged by MP3/iGain. This difference is audible in the actual volume, sound quality and dynamic range. Any ideas? There's 'track gain' and 'album gain', are you comparing like with like? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] A/B SB3 vs Transporter
El Duderino;409630 Wrote: I did find that the SB3 was somewhat fatiguing to listen to due to unrefined/harsh highs. That seems to have resolved with the Transporter. That's a good point and something that's maybe not that obvious when listening to short samples and switching between sources. I don't think you'll hear huge differences on short samples between the two (depending on the material, and the rest of the system etc), but I think you'll find a more significant difference over a long period. What about listening to a programme of music over a couple of nights on one, and then the same programme over the next couple of nights on the other? Just choose the volume you feel comfortable with, which might be different with a different source as well as with different music, and see which gives you the most pleasure. It seems to me that test more closely replicates your real use of the products, and is therefore more likely to give significant results. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61686 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
darrenyeats;410453 Wrote: But even if you play a tune with just the 24th bit (with silence otherwise) you won't hear it. No masking is required to make it inaudible. It's just inaudible if you've set up your gain structure correctly. It's inaudible in the presence of no other signal, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's inaudible when combined with another signal. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 16-44 vs 24-96
opaqueice;404219 Wrote: Let me make my position clear. First off, I'm quite convinced that hi-res is audibly different from redbook only under totally unrealistic conditions. For 2-channel music, redbook is simply good enough. That said, there's nothing wrong with overkill - particularly if it's easy to do. And for mastering and recording 16/44 does -not- suffice. So there's clearly a need for hi-res standards and gear, and it's fine with me if there's a consumer market for it. It makes people happy, secure knowing they're listening to the best money can buy and technology can do - and I have absolutely no problem with that. I'd even do the same myself if it wasn't too much hastle. But I object strongly whenever anyone tells anyone else that hi-res is better for home stereo, and/or that they need to spend lots of money upgrading their system and buying hi-res versions of music they probably already own. It's BS. The correct advice is it's almost certainly not going to make an audible difference, but you can never be sure, and if you want the absolute best and can afford it, go for it. And often when music is in a hi-res formats more attention is payed to sound quality during mastering, so you might end up with better sounding recordings. 44.1KHz/16-bits can produce some stunning recordings - if they're done properly. IMV there's more to be gained from engineering current CDs better/properly than by just upping all the sampling rates and bit lengths. 96KHz/24-bits (or whatever) might make the engineering process easier, but it's not going to help if engineers insist on compressing all the music into a few levels at the top end of the bit range. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60973 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Slaving Transporter to dCS Delius/Purcell Wordclock
On the other hand -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60838 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Slaving Transporter to dCS Delius/Purcell Wordclock
Blackstone;402336 Wrote: The specs for the Transporter include the following: Jitter (standard deviation): 11ps at oscillator (intrinsic jitter) 17ps at DAC 35ps at S/PDIF receiver I am wondering how slaving the Transporter to the dCS combo would theoretically affect those numbers? The point about slaving the Transport(er) clock to the DAC, is not to improve the clock at the transport, but to least effect the clock at the DAC. And it's the clock at the DAC that's important, because you don't want to introduce any timing distortion when you convert between digital and analogue levels. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60838 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] digital is digital OR NOT
Archimago;401824 Wrote: Curious why BNC is the best solution. Because it's a properly designed RF connector with a 75 Ohm characteristic impedance to correctly match the 75 Ohm characteristic impedance of the link. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
Phil Leigh;403420 Wrote: Patrick do you mean you don't like RG as opposed to just reducing the digital volume? (the mechanism is basically the same)- I can't hear anything bad going on...Yes. I'm not sure if the mechanism is precisely the same, but I didn't like the effect - at least in conjunction with the 'normal' digital volume control. As ever YMMV ... -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
opaqueice;400034 Wrote: What about it? The complex frequency response is precisely equivalent to the impulse responseIn theory yes, but in practice they're measured in quite different ways and can give different results. opaqueice;400034 Wrote: Where did I say I measured them? My mistake. I assumed that when talking with such authority, you would at least have had some facts to base your opinions on. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
opaqueice;399548 Wrote: Because any high-end digital source will have a flat frequency response down to below the threshold of audibility.So what about the impulse response? And how exactly did you measure the frequency response of the Linn DS kit and the Transporter? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
DaveWr;399740 Wrote: Well here is John Atkinson Measurements (Copyright Stereophile) I agree with Patrick, I think that a lot of variation in audio presentation is due to transient / phase effects. Dave Hmm, well difficult to compare since one is to a different scale and one seems to have two variants ... Load might make a difference too. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will a transporter sound as good as the Linn Majik DS
opaqueice;398750 Wrote: The idea that the Linn could have more bass than the Transporter is absurd. Why? [padding ...] -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60169 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
opaqueice;373029 Wrote: They're usually done that way for two reasons: 1) Some research has shown that subtle differences are much -easier- to hear when the clips are short, and 2) It takes less time that way. There is no reason in the world why it can't be done with longer clips - the ABX format is perfectly compatible with that. Personally, I've done a number of ABX tests using a computer program (for example, to hear the difference between MP3 and WAV). In my experience it's much easier to hear the differences when you first identify a section where it's potentially audible and then switch back and forth rapidly on that section. It's possible other types of effects are easier to hear over a long term, but I'm not aware of any reason to think so other than the (more or less worthless) word of audio manufacturers hawking their wares. That's another old canard, which is not only obviously false (these tests have been used for decades in research to establish hearing thresholds, and if what you said were true those thresholds would all be zero, an obvious absurdity), but disposed of in 30 seconds of googling (many DBTs just in high-end audio falsify what you said). Of course we've had this discussion before and you're still repeating the same falsehood, so I can only assume you have an agenda. Why is it that you always stoop to personal abuse? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
opaqueice;373147 Wrote: Are you not an audio manufacturer/modder hawking your wares (on another manufacturer's forum, of all places)? Not that I actually even said you were...No. opaqueice;373147 Wrote: Do you not have an agenda and a profit motive for people to believe these things? On many fora manufacturers are required to identify themselves as such in every post, precisely for these reasons. Feel free to correct me on either of those.No - so you're corrected. Now please apologise and stick to the facts rather than the personal sniping. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
The problem I have with DBT in audio, is not that it's DB at all - it's that the tests are normally conducted using repeated short music clips. One the one hand we don't have a great long-term memory for audio quality, so the clips have to be short to give us any chance of comparison, yet on the other, listening to music is a much longer term emotional experience, and there may only be short passages in any piece of music where the difference that we seek to identify is significant. Add to that the pressure that people feel when they're being tested, and as ar-t says, we generally end up with the result that everything sounds the same. So the tests are flawed. It should be possible to do better tests using longer term measurements - as you would in drug trials for example, but no one would fund those tests in a hobby industry. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
cliveb;372009 Wrote: Meanwhile, Benjamin and Gannon demonstrated back in 1998, *using blind listening tests*, that jitter less than 20nS was inaudible on music material. And in 2004, Ashihara et al demonstrated, *using blind listening tests*, that not one single listener in their panel of 23 people could discriminate jitter of less than 250nS. Granted their test used random (ie. uncorrelated) jitter, and this can be expected to be less audible than correlated. But some people here seem to be claiming that jitter around the 200pS region is audible. That's 3 orders of magnitude smaller. It frankly stretches the bounds of credulity. And yet this paper http://www.iet.ntnu.no/courses/fe8114/files/Report_audiodac.pdf claims that jitter of 20ps can be audible - depending of the frequency of the jitter. Robert Adams of Analog Devices also claims that the jitter sensitivity is of the order of 20ps rms for 16-bit performance, for some types of converter. http://www.theaudiocritic.com/back_issues/The_Audio_Critic_21_r.pdf -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Pete Fowler;372123 Wrote: He's demanding other people toe the line and conform to his belief in science as the ultimate arbiter of what is valid and what is snake oil. For me the problem is that it's a very narrow view of science, based on the current academic system where someone puts up a piece of research and everyone else tries to knock it down or reproduce it. That's fine if there's lots of people willing to invest time and money to conduct ever more complex experiments to eliminate errors in the previous experiments (which there always are), but that just isn't going to happen in a hobby field. In the pioneering days of science, people tried out experiments on/for themselves and observed the results, and human knowledge progressed as a result. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Michael Amster;372140 Wrote: It would be helpful if Pat (ar-t) could name a few names of designs that have good low jitter implementations where it counts. A handfuly of single clock CD players so that people could verify would be very helpful. I understand our beloved Slim boxes have multiple oscillators, so they are already not optimal for that reason even if the rest of the design is good. Since people on this list will not have the means to measure the jiter and characterize it to conclude, the next best thing might be some reference points of widely available equipment: Try this CD player through this DAC and then the Slim through the same DAC. Then the CD player alone (no SPDIF issues) and the Slim alone. One would characterize the SPDIF capabilities of both platforms as things the subjectivists could then attempt to describe in language terms. The other would provide a well measured reference point against our Slim platforms and let people draw subjective solutions from there. I think one of the issues is that there are too many variables between CDPs, streaming devices and DACs to know that you're listening to effects of jitter alone. But if you want to do this, get hold of an SB3 and a Transporter (or better still an SB+ since it uses exactly the same streaming side as an SB3), and compare the same music file through each device, into the same DAC, and the same audio system, using the same digital cable. Then any differences you can hear, can only be down to effects of jitter in the conversion process. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Well yes, but it's the same analogue circuitry in each case - in the external DAC and the rest of the audio system. You can have the same file playing at the same time on both players, and simply move the digital cable from one source to another. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
NewBuyer;371306 Wrote: Also, I've read forum posts from certain DAC engineers saying that some types of jitter might actually be euphonic. This has always seemed strange to me, that noise in a digital interface could ever result in such an effect. So has anybody ever actually identified any types at all, of pleasant/euphonic jitter? Do you think such a phenomenon is really even possible? Well it's not really noise in a digital interface, it's noise in the conversion process, which translates to analogue noise - so I guess it might be possible for it to be euphonic ... although IME it isn't. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
pfarrell;371175 Wrote: Patrick Dixon wrote: You completely missing the point - to say that one amp is better because it has a SNR of 103dB rather than 100dB is nonsensical because it depends not only on the level of noise but it's character too. The same goes for jitter. No, if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around, does it make a sound? is a question for philosophers. Not engineers. If two amps measure differently but the difference can't be heard, they are the same. Or you are not measuring the right thing. But you can't make a claim that the measurements are different and that is important, when no one can hear it. A classic example: frequency response of a speaker over 40kHz. It may be good, but humans can't hear it. It is therefor not accepted to engineers that it matters. I think you have to be careful not to be too definitive about what can and can't make a difference. I definitely can't hear 20KHz or 22KHz, but if you combine the two you get a beat of 2KHz - and I can hear 2KHz. pfarrell;371175 Wrote: I don't think it's science to stand around demanding that someone else provides proof for you. Again you miss the point. If you are saying I believe this is true but I can't show any science to back it up, then I have zero problem. But if you say this is engineering, its real then you have to back it up. It no longer beliefs. While I've been hearing about jitter for over a decade, every time I look into it, I see only theology, not science. Until I see science, preferably from several sources, then its just part of a belief system. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/I'm not sure which bit of the 'science' is missing for you. Jitter is clearly a real phenomenon, and the mechanism of how converter clock jitter affects the output signal is clearly understood, so the only dispute can be in what level of jitter is audible in a digital audio system ... and I just don't think the research to define that has been properly done. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
pfarrell;370695 Wrote: What metric of jitter is important? What devices that we are likely to have are examples, good and bad, of this measured thing? http://www.pfarrell.com/ As art said earlier, jitter is like noise, so the amount of jitter (ps) and the type of jitter (spectral content) are both important. I've demonstrated to many people a standard SB3 into an external DAC, and our SB+ into exactly the same external DAC. Since both devices use exactly the same data, and transport that data through exactly the same 'engine', the only difference is in the clock signal at the DAC, which is affected both by the inherent jitter in the SB3/SB+ clock and any distortion in the S/PDIF link ... and you can hear a difference. You could do the same test with an SB3 and a Transporter. But 'good' and 'bad' are subjective things ... there is only really 'better' or 'worse'. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
pfarrell;370893 Wrote: I expect those claiming that there is an issue to back it up with links and citations to engineering and scientific data. I think life is too short for most people - with what is basically a hobby. If you don't want to believe the claims or investigate them for yourself, and you're happy with what you have, why worry? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
pfarrell;371071 Wrote: Patrick Dixon wrote: pfarrell;370695 Wrote: What metric of jitter is important? What devices that we are likely to have are examples, good and bad, of this measured thing? http://www.pfarrell.com/ As art said earlier, jitter is like noise, so the amount of jitter (ps) and the type of jitter (spectral content) are both important. Amount in picoseconds absolute? or relative to the clock of the signal? What amounts are important? Noise is a classic example. while noise is bad, if its 100 dB down, it doesn't matter because humans can't hear it. I keep hearing that jitter is bad, but what jitter is bad, or how much of what is bad? What can be ignored, because its below the sensitivity of human ears? But 'good' and 'bad' are subjective things ... there is only really 'better' or 'worse'. Then its not science. See Lord Kelvin's quote. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ 'Good' and 'Bad' is not science ... and neither is not being curious enough to try stuff for yourself :-) I'm not sure what you mean by absolute amount in ps ... time is continuously moving and so it's only ever relative isn't it? You have to determine what amounts are important to you - it's like noise, what amount of noise is important? It depends on the type of noise because some types and frequencies are less audible and distracting than others. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3. Audio or Digital device?
Digital is Analogue really. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56471 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3. Audio or Digital device?
Sorry it was a bit flippant really, but a digital signal is really an analogue signal that has two basic levels - a one and a nought. A device like a DAC should definitely be treated like an analogue component IMV. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56471 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Any clock recovery circuit, is likely to introduce 'jitter' to the recovered clock, because that's the nature of synchronising one clock to another. The recovered clock has to 'follow' the S/PDIF signal, and so it will have to periodically adjust itself to keep sysnchronised. You can hear the negative effects of jitter, but they can be down to a better or worse clock source in the 'transport', as well as the S/PDIF signal path and clock recovery circuit. You'll probably only know that you're hearing the effects of jitter though, once you hear something with less. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] High bit rates causing confusion.
You can install a recent sox build and convert to 'proper' 48KHz/24bit flac on the fly. It needs an edit to convert.conf and there's a thread or two about it in the General forum. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56343 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] digital is digital OR NOT
It's not just the magnitude of the jitter that's important, it's also the spectral content and its correlation with the audio signal. I agree with opaqueice though, the re-clocker just seems like it's adding extra complexity where you'd be better off tackling the 'problem' at source. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] NAP250 direct from Transporter
Naim power amps have a low pass filter at the input stage, so I doubt they can be driven into instability. The output stage can become unstable if the 'wrong' speaker cables are used. Naim insist that you use a minimum of 3.5m and their NACA5 cable, but there are many other cables that are equally suitable IME. Naim and Linn like to cultivate these kind of 'myths' so that customers are drawn to buy more of their equipment. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50893 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] NAP250 direct from Transporter
I think you're being given poor advice. If you only have a single source, connecting the TP directly to the NAP250 will give a better result. Knock the TP attenuators down by -10db or more to give you a sensible volume range. When I had Naim kit here, I tried an SB+ directly to the power amps and via a NAP82 + 2 PSUs, and direct was at least as good. If you really must have a NAC202, then check out alternative PSUs from the likes of Avondale etc, any of which will be much better VFM than a Flatcap. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50893 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] digital is digital OR NOT
DCtoDaylight;325080 Wrote: Ok, you got me on a technicality! You are 100% correct, jitter in the Analog to Digital converter does imprint itself on the data. And in the same context, you could say jitter in the Digital to Analog converter is also imprinting itself on the audio stream. But in the context of digital to digital communication, jitter has no effect on the data. Yes that's correct. However, if the jitter is the data stream, and that data stream is being used to recover the clock that's used in the D to A Conversion process, then the jitter becomes an issue. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] digital is digital OR NOT
DCtoDaylight;325102 Wrote: A problem -can- arise, if the two clocks are not at exactly the same frequency. As you might guess, if the buffer in the interface isn't large enough, you could overflow or underflow it. As a result you either need a large buffer (which has been done, memory is cheap!) or you end up skipping or adding samples as required. There are potentially audible consequences if the latter technique is used. Solving the problem with a buffer is not straightforward. The read and write clocks will never be at exactly the same frequency (and won't be constant either), but they are at the same nominal frequency. The problem is akin to having a bucket half-full of water, with a tap filling it from the top, and then trying to adjust a tap at the bottom such that the bucket neither overflows or runs dry. In a practical sense you will never be able to achieve it without regular intervention. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] digital is digital OR NOT
opaqueice;325172 Wrote: Consider the following scenario: suppose you have a local clock in your DAC with an adjustable frequency (such clocks exist and are used in some DACs). For simplicity we'll ignore jitter in that clock (and any other local jitter source) and worry only about jitter in the incoming S/PDIF stream. Now you record the incoming data stream in a buffer for (say) 1 second. Then you start to play out the buffer using your local clock. The analogue signal coming out is jitter-artifact free given the above assumption. But now we will run into a problem - our buffer will start to either fill or empty depending on the mismatch in average timing between the local and source clocks. But since our local clock is adjustable, we can monitor the buffer state and make a (tiny) adjustment. We'd need to do that at most every second, but in reality much less often (since the clock mismatch will be smallish). As far as I can see this scheme removes all jitter with a frequency higher than some very low cutoff (which in this example will be around 1 Hz times the fractional clock mismatch). Yes, you're right. But I suspect that making the small frequency adjustments to the read clock in such a way as not to compromise it's overall performance is not all that easy. You might like to try and build one and see how it works! My own take on these things is that life is complicated enough as it is, and using complicated solutions to solve problems that you don't need to have in the first place, is generally a bad idea. As ever, YMMV! -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] digital is digital OR NOT
DCtoDaylight;324918 Wrote: [jitter] has no effect on the data (unless it's so grossly large that it causes read errors, not the case here). It does if the data is a PCM representation of an analogue signal and you are in the process of converting it between the analogue and digital domains. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50147 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter word-clock function
The music plays faster! -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50273 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Open Question to Audiophiles
opaqueice;323320 Wrote: None that I'm aware of have a dispersion pattern remotely like a box speaker Except for electric/electronic instruments which typically use a box speaker to make the sound! -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=49757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Open Question to Audiophiles
Judging whether audio reproduction is accurate based on comparison with a live instrument isn't really valid. The process of recording adds some inaccuracy and the best the replay system can ever do is to reproduce that faithfully. Modern studio recordings are usually pretty far from being a live performance anyway, and variations in recording and mastering are often more significant than the difference between one good 'reproducing' system and another. So I don't think it's straightforward to tell which (of two systems) is more accurate than the other, and in the end I think the only thing that really matters is which sounds more enjoyable. If you want 'accurate', then get out and see/hear more live music. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=49757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox plus, does it still exist?
If we'd have taken a leaf out of the Naim book, we'd have charged at least 3x the price and an extra £250 for the 'Burndy' power lead between the two boxes :-) -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=49942 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Open Question to Audiophiles
The only goal for me is to maximise my enjoyment of the music I already have, and to make me want to explore new music. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=49757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Volume control question-Does it threw out bits?
kbuzz;307450 Wrote: Newbie here with a basic question. Does the internal volume control on the SB3 affect the quality of music? In other words, is it better to max out the SB internal digital volume control and use the volume on a pre amp? I think i recall somewhere that the transporter at the high end of the vol range only throws away minimum bits, but not sure about the SB3 or a levels say 70-95 percent No, it doesn't throw away any information providing you have the volume in the 30-100 range. Any reduction in the signal level in the digital domain, will affect the signal to noise level at the DAC, but then so will any subsequent signal reduction in the analogue domain, so it's a question of compromises, and which is the least worst. And yes, it does make a difference if you round and throw away the information. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48368 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289810 Wrote: ... the whole thing was a waste of time. There is only one way ... one true way ... the -opaqueice- way. If the lord -opaqueice- cannot hear ... or cannot understand ... it cannot exist. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] I want it bit-perfect
opaqueice;292935 Wrote: My argument proved that 24 bit rounding errors cannot possibly be audible You obviously have a very low standard of 'proof'! Dodgy assumptions, a misunderstanding of noise, and no inconvenient actual experiments. I'm just glad we don't have to rely on you to understand how the universe works. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46229 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Bi- and vertical-amping
But if you read on just a little bit further, you'll see that he's modifying the crossover rather than disconnecting it. He is also talking about active bi amplification rather than passive bi-amping which is what the OP wanted to know about. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46354 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Bi- and vertical-amping
pski;292249 Wrote: The benefit of bi-amping is derived from the fact that each amplifier has a fixed range to reproduce. Not so. Each amplifier produces the full range, and the (passive) crossover and driver do the filtering. pski;292249 Wrote: ... you might want to check the local tech school for a theory of welding class.. each of them will drive into each other. (Of course if you can deal with bridged mode and cross the phase on the outputs.)Bridged mode is a different thing completely: when you bi-amp (passively), each amplifier drives a separate circuit because the crossover is split. They don't drive into each other. pski;292249 Wrote: Active speakers are a different issue entirely. Another whole point of bi-amping is the ELIMINATION of passive crossovers. Active is a different thing completely: eliminating the passive crossover usually means replacing it with an active one, and is not generally referred to as bi-amping. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46354 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Bi- and vertical-amping
opaqueice;292470 Wrote: active means you have to plug it in That is, plug it into a power source. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46354 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Bi- and vertical-amping
You are in danger of confusing the OP IMO: Bi-amping is using a pair of amps to drive a conventional passive loudspeaker. Using a (line level) crossover before the amplifiers, is generally known as 'active' and is a quite different approach. Bi-amping usually works because the passive loudspeaker has two sets of binding posts, which allow the crossover to be split into HF and LF parts. Each part of the crossover is then driven by a separate amplifier. The HF and LF parts of the speaker's crossover may further split the signal to multiple speaker drive units. At the very least, bi-amping allows each amplifier to 'see' a reduced crossover/drive unit load, and doubles the potential power into the speaker. You can argue whether it's better to use two amps of 'n' watts bi-amped or a single amp of '2n' watts, but bi-amping can definitely make a big difference to the sound - depending on the actual components used of course. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46354 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] I want it bit-perfect
opaqueice;290921 Wrote: Second, the discussion of digital volume reduction here is wrong. Nothing special happens at 1/256 volume. Best practice is to set the analog volume so that max digital volume is as loud as you will want; then using the SB volume will result only in a slight reduction of signal/noise. Hmm, I'm not quite sure which bit you think is 'wrong'. This isn't gong to be another of your 'can't hear -144dB' faux pas is it? Best practice IMO, is to use the combination of analogue and digital volume control that sounds best to you. Both will affect the sound in slightly different ways depending on your system and your ears. sleepysurf;290954 Wrote: I presume you've checked to ensure replaygain or smartgain are not inadvertantly turned on Good point. It's possible that if you have replay gain tags in your FLAC files they would sound different to a WAV file (with no tags), converted to FLAC on the fly. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46229 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter - Is it worth it?
Dick Sternum;290105 Wrote: TAnd considering it's a digital pre-amp, it's DACs will be used however I choose to connect.Doesn't it have an analogue bypass? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46111 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289227 Wrote: If you have a point, make it. You're just making yourself look foolish saying the same empty things over and over again. Is that what your students say to you? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
OK Clive (and anyone who's still interested). The LSB in a 24-bit PCM signal does indeed represent approximately -144dB wrt to full scale. However, in the real world, you have to allow some headroom in the recording to prevent (excessive) clipping, so the actual music you are listing to may well be (say) -20dB wrt full scale too. The LSB however, stays exactly where it is at -144dB wrt full scale, but only (say) -144dB minus -20dB down from the actual music volume - ie -124dB wrt the music In addition, you are implementing a digital volume control, so you are reducing the music volume still further within the available PCM range, maybe by (say) 20-30dB. Once again the LSB stays where it is at -144dB wrt full scale, but now your actual music level is also (say) -40dB or -50dB below full scale. The difference between the actual music volume and the LSB rounding error is now -104dB or -94dB which is considerably less than the -144dB claimed elsewhere in this thread. Obviously the actual level of the rounding error wrt to the real music level will vary depending on the recording and the amount of volume control reduction used, but in the right circumstances - with a decent system and a decent recording, it is possible to hear the effect. It's not large, it's not 'night day', but IME it does have an impact on the enjoyment of the music. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
You can't use SPLs as they depend completely on the replay system, amplifier, volume level setting etc. This is an entirely digital artefact, and since PCM audio is only a representation of the 'real' analogue signal, you need to get your head round the problem in the digital domain. The point is that an 24th LSB rounding error is not -144dB from what you normally listen at, and when you take the effect of the volume control into account it's more significant. I'll leave you and others to argue about what it actually is, but since it will 'depend', there is no actual answer. It's much more significant than claimed, and therefore it's entirely possible that people can hear the effect - which indeed they did. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
Yawn. You should be in the Sonos forum with your dunce's cap on. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;288722 Wrote: I think you're missing the point here, Patrick. Take a typical home stereo system and crank the volume to max. According to my estimate, the effects on SPL of a distortion component at -144db are smaller than the effects on SPL due to random Brownian motion of air molecules. Which means (unless I made a mistake) -144db distortion is not even measurable (acoustically), let alone audible - it's really an operationally meaningless concept, at least as far as acoustics go. Actually it you that is completely missing the point. You believe that -144dB is not audible. You believe that the rounding error in a SB volume control is -144dBs. You believe in blind testing. Several people heard the effect of the rounding error in the SB3 volume control when it was changed. They heard this blind: they had no idea that anything had changed. Therefore at least one of you assumptions is wrong. If you are a real scientist you would be interested in giving the subject some though, and trying to ascertain where you are wrong, and you would be open minded about it. That's what science is about - it seeks to explain that which we observe. Even great minds (much greater than yours or mine) have been wrong. So is the effect of the error -really- -144dB, or can people actually hear a -144dB error in music? I'll leave you to think about it for yourself, but if you care to put up $1M I will be happy to accept your challenge and your money. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289000 Wrote: I notice you haven't responded substantively even once. You've never challenged anything specific in my analysis, just made vague assertions and did your best to sow audio FUD. Why don't you tell us why you think 24-bit rounding errors aren't 144db down? Or why an effect at -144db can be audible? You put up the $1M and I'll show you. Until then do your own work. PS. Yes, I agree, the LSB in a 24-bit PCM signal is approx 144dB down on full scale -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289017 Wrote: Translation: You're right, but I make money off people I convince otherwise and so I have nothing to say. OK. I just hope you don't make any of the ridiculous claims you made in this thread in your advertising literature. You might find this link interesting: http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_44177.htm Ah right, I guess you are too lazy or too closed minded to apply yourself to the problem then? I don't think I've made any claims here - it was you that made all the claims! I think you are probably the one who takes money under false pretences - you claim to be a scientist, yet you seem incapable of solving a simple problem. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289055 Wrote: What problem? The problem that your 'theories' don't agree with the reality. Come on, keep up! opaqueice;289055 Wrote: How about this one: That's not a claim, that's an observation! Observations of what actually happens are quite useful in most areas of science. When they don't agree with your theory you have a problem. A good scientist tries to understand why: a bad scientist dismisses all contrary evidence in order to stick with his original paradigm. Which are you? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289078 Wrote: Well, since I've eliminated acoustics as an explanation, that leaves psychology. Without data on what you had for breakfast that morning I can't comment further. Bad science. You have dismissed the observation that doesn't agree with your theory and stuck to your original paradigm. Very poor. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289120 Wrote: I already did: you didn't enjoy your breakfast that morning. It's very, very simple - if you take a 24 bit binary number and divide it by some factor, the error you make will be in the 25th bit (if you round properly). If you truncate rather than rounding, the error may be in the 24th bit, but that's as bad as it can possibly be. So the error - I'm talking about the absolute error, *NOT* the error as a percentage of the signal - is never larger than 0001. So all we have to ask is whether 0001 is ever audible on a stereo system. It has the best chance with the analogue gain maxed and with a frequency in the good part of the human hearing range, but as I've shown it remains way below the threshold of audibility even then. We might also want to ask whether (say) 01110001 is audibly different from 01110001 + 0001. It's not - it's -harder- to hear small changes in level than it is to hear the change alone (because of masking), and in any case my argument proves that it would be *physically impossible* to hear that change either in isolation OR added to another signal. You are probably confusing S/N - which will be much lower than 144dB in these cases, since the original data was 16 bit - with audibility of the distortion caused by rounding. Let me try to clarify that for you. Here are two ways in which distortion can be *inaudible*: 1) The S/N is sufficiently high that you do not hear the noise/distortion no matter how loud the volume is, because the signal always masks the distortion. That is one case where we don't have to worry about distortion. A good example of that is the noise floor of a decent digital audio system while playing music. 2) The maximum possible level of the noise/distortion is too low to be audible *even when it's played without the signal*! In this case it will *never* be audible - even when the S/N ratio is *0*. There are *no exceptions*, and that's what I've shown is the case of a rounding error in 24 bit audio. Of course if you had -infinite analogue gain- available to you, you could always turn it up to the point that it would be audible - but you don't. You are still thinking in your own paradigm. I'm sure they must have taught you at Professor-school, to always question your own assumptions? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289168 Wrote: Therefore they are not audible, and if you think otherwise, you're wrong. Either that or you have missed something. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;289168 Wrote: You can make all the vague pronouncements you like, but -144db distortion is not audible, and the errors introduced by attenuating a 24 bit signal are always -144db down from max level. Therefore they are not audible, and if you think otherwise, you're wrong. Hmm, lets see, if -144dB is not audible (but yet we can hear it) so maybe it's not actually -144dB. Hang on a minute ... it's a volume control isn't it? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
opaqueice;288436 Wrote: I don't agree at all - audibility is -not- a separate argument. We're talking about audio DACs intended to be connected to a stereo system and listened to. A change in the output at -140dB, while it might be measurable, is not relevant. Actually it is. When SD changed the SB3 firmware volume control, a number of people heard a reduction is sound quality - including me. We weren't aware of what had been done (or even that something had been done) and so this was effectively a blind test. You seem not to appreciate the difference in inaudibility between truly random noise, and other low-level distortions - if dithering is applied to the rounding process, you should be able to make the noise random, and therefore I'd expect it to be inaudible. However, non-random distortions even at very low levels can definitely be audible. opaqueice;288436 Wrote: In any case there are (relatively inexpensive) DACs out there which - at least as far as I can tell from published measurements - are totally immune to jitter. Given that that's possible, there is no excuse for a high-end DAC not to reduce the effects of jitter to the point where they are inaudible. A DAC which doesn't do that is not designed properly. Published measurements do not tell the whole story. As a scientist (assuming you are) you should know that there are very few absolutes, and so 'totally immune to jitter' is a meaningless phrase anyway. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
pfarrell;288375 Wrote: I've never understood why the audiophile magazines drool over transports. All they are required to do is deliver a bit stream. ... and a highly accurate timing reference. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;287920 Wrote: Digital rounding errors from attenuation can only ever affect the last bit. But the last bit contributes at a level 144dB down from max output, and the noise level of the SB (or any component you might hook it to) is far higher than that. End of story. Well no it's not. The noise won't be truly random unless you dither, and the audibility of noise depends on its character as well as it's amplitude. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;288559 Wrote: First, please provide evidence that -anything- at -144dB is audible at anywhere near ordinary listening volumes. Hmm, I think the onus is on you to prove that it's not. I could hear the SB3 firmware rounding blind, as could others here. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
opaqueice;288563 Wrote: Nearly every time SD changed the firmware lots of people heard the difference. Quite remarkable, considering most of the revisions didn't affect the audio chain. That was after that particular revision, which sowed the seed in people's minds that fw changes might affect audio performance. FWIW, I can't hear any difference between fw revisions other than that particular one, despite careful comparative listening. opaqueice;288563 Wrote: As the manufacturer and marketer of a SB modification you would say so, wouldn't you?Actually as a highly skilled and trained engineer, very familiar with the technologies and techniques involved, I would say so. OTOH, you as a professional skeptic would trot out the same FUD nonsense wouldn't you? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter of SB3
darrenyeats;288532 Wrote: However, some DAC manufacturers e.g. Benchmark have published measurements which show that output distortion doesn't increase with increased input jitter (up to a silly maximum of input jitter). To me this is strong evidence of isolation from the S/PDIF-borne clock. In other words, immunity from input jitter in real world situations. That's assuming that their measurements and measurement techniques are -really - applicable to 'real world situations'. However, since I (and others) can hear the difference between bit-identical transports through their DAC, I don't believe they are. YMMV. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45561 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
I was assuming that you meant audible in the context of listening to music, since that would seem to be the relevant thing. You should read less and do more - you might learn something! -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;288618 Wrote: That is what I meant. Adding a loud sound on top of the -144dB component makes it much, much harder to hear (which is obvious - and yes, that's been studied). I was just being as generous as possible to your totally absurd claim. What was that? Oh, sorry, nothing, I thought you said something - it must have been an air molecule hitting my left eardrum. Nitrogen, I think, from the sound. So, when are you going to apply for that $1,000,000? TBH, I've given up listening to tones. I find it boring and unfulfilling emotionally. I've decided that I prefer real music. YMMV. (I haven't followed the Randi thing very closely, but FWIU, someone wanted to take up his challenge, but it was specifically aimed at one particular manufacturer and one particular set of cables, and the rules were very tightly drawn to that purpose. Mr Randi is not about to give up his $1M in the interests of science, he is really just interested in the publicity.) -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] naim volume control with squeezebox controller
opaqueice;288612 Wrote: A sound 144dB above 2E-5 pascal is well above the limit of short-term hearing damage, and according to wiki is louder than a rifle being fired 1m from your ear: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_pressure_level#Examples_of_sound_pressure_and_sound_pressure_levels No home stereo I know of is capable of playing a sound that loud. Therefore signal components at -144dB will never be audible from 1m away from a speaker even at max volume, and I doubt they are audible even with your ear over the tweeter. Don't forget that 1 LSB in 24 bits is 144dB down from the -maximum- level. Most well recorded music isn't at anything like this level. Which particular rifle are we talking about btw? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45736 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Dead Transporter
The Xilinix FPGA chip lost its programme. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43612 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
CardinalFang;270295 Wrote: when I'm only hearing a fraction of what's on the CD. I'd rather hear a fraction, than a fraction of a fraction. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43269 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
It's a good point. I guess it indicates that 48KHz, 96KHz and up audio is more about how good or bad the pre-ADC filters in the recording process are, rather than anything in the replay chain. After all, if we can't even hear 17KHz, there's not much point in worrying about reproducing 24KHz - we just need to stop it from aliasing with the 'audible' range lower down. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43269 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] PS Audio Digital Link III VS Benchmark DAC1
ChiefVoodooMan;269936 Wrote: Oh my dear friends where is the science (let alone the romance of the music) in any of this. I would be willing to bet the farm that given a chance to a/b/c test the SB3 with No DAC = A, SB3 with DACx = B, SB3 with DACy = C that no person in a test group of normal human subjects ( not Hallucinating Crypto-Schizophrenic self proclaimed golden ear audiophiles) would ever to be able make a statistically significant choice between the 3 options. How big is your farm, and how easily can it be translated into cash? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34436 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] PS Audio Digital Link III VS Benchmark DAC1
I think you should put-up or shut-up. Tell us more about this farm ... -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34436 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
I can't see that Logitech would mind much about the Modwright TP. They get to sell a TP anyway, so from a business PTV, they make the same profit. I suppose Sean might mind that someone thinks they can improve on his design, but I reckon he's pretty pragmatic about these things. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43269 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences in sound quality between SB3/Duet when using seperate DAC
opaqueice;266236 Wrote: Again, let me stress that I doubt very much these issues are important or audible, particularly into a decent DAC, but they are possible. You seem to have moved to a world full of possibilities ;-) -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43087 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences in sound quality between SB3/Duet when using seperate DAC
opaqueice;266406 Wrote: I don't think making absolute statements is very productive - they either come across as polemical or simply confuse people. Well indeed, I agree. opaqueice;266406 Wrote: In my opinion what should be said is something like this: the differences in jitter are at most X, and since Y is the threshold for human perception, we do or do not have to worry about it. Yes, but the world is rarely black white, especially where humans are involved. It's the kind of thing we get over here all the time, say when the government tells us that this or that food type contains X amount of whatever substance, and Y amount is the threshold for what we need or can tolerate ... then a few years later it turns out that the scientists were wrong and Y isn't the correct amount after all. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43087 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter Volume questions
Tim-Ann;265837 Wrote: Ive also noticed that the volume control on the Transporter is not seamless it seems to go louder after every 5 or 6 clicks of the volume button on the remote is this normal? I think this is a bug with the QNAP - search the 3rd party hardware forum for a user supplied fix. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43106 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Turn Me Up!
http://turnmeup.org/index.shtml Sign up and show your support. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43045 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC - what are the specific advantages?
bopyanker;264841 Wrote: Thanks for the warning. I thought I better check before doing so. I guess the DAC1 is my least expensive upgrade. The least expensive option is usually the one that gets you to where you need to be, to not need to spend any more money to enjoy you music. This is not always the cheapest thing that you can buy in one go ... -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=42961 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Klimax DS - Network Music Player
I've got an LP12 that I bought new. Over the years its had an upgraded bearing, inner platter, subchassis, springs, motor, PSU, armboard, baseboard, and two new hinges 'cos the other ones broke. So the only original things left are the plinth, outer platter, top plate and the lid ... and there are improved plinths and top plates available that I never bothered with. It's good that Linn keep developing things, but IMO the upgrades thing is really just a marketing exercise. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38815 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] More specifications and photos of your audiofool setup please!
Here's my version which we showed at the Heathrow Hi-Fi show in 2006 - total cost less than £3K excluding the rack (Isoblue) and the Power Conditioner (James). It's our SB+ and SB Amp with Neat Motive 1s. Cables are Mogami 2972 for speakers, and Mogami 2549/Eichmann bullet plugs for the I/C. I also have a pair of Oak Motive 1s and a Silver Transporter for sale should you be interested ... +---+ |Filename: SB+ System.JPG | |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4145| +---+ -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=42532 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 mediocre sound quality
opaqueice;260163 Wrote: What's the break-in time for the human ears/brain when it's introduced to a new device? Is there a manufacturer recommendation? IME the ears/brain do need time to adjust to a new sound. I think that's one of the problems in evaluating things after a short demo (I don't mean just spotting a difference here, but rather expressing a preference). On a short listen, people often seem to pick the thing that sounds louder and/or more exciting, but after a longer listen, the same thing can become rather tiring. I'm not a huge believer in long burn-ins, but I have noticed that (linear) PSUs can take a while to settle down. Electrolytic capacitors may be responsible - I'm not sure what effect an ageing mains transformer might have. One audio manufacturer I know, contends that burn-in is entirely down to the human getting used to the new equipment. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=42388 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Doh! Now we need 24-bit/176.4kHz on the Transporter!
opaqueice;255188 Wrote: The White Stripes: ElephantWhite Stripes/Elephant is generally regarded as a well produced album. IIRC it was produced using analogue recording and mastering equipment and much song and dance was made about that on its release (in the UK at least). It sounds pretty good on my system - quite live because there's less overdubbing I guess, and definitely not over analytical. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41824 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Doh! Now we need 24-bit/176.4kHz on the Transporter!
opaqueice;255584 Wrote: Interesting. It's one of the few albums I have in 128 MP3, so I'll buy the CD and see if that helps. Do you listen to any noisy rock - say heavy metal or grunge? I think the CD's worth having. Some - although I tend to prefer the gentler tracks! I've liked Elephant more as my system has got better - 'noisy rock' can easily switch between too quite to be interesting and too loud to be bearable for me! -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41824 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone around Manchester/Stockport with a good low-noise power supply?
opaqueice;247236 Wrote: They are not discrete. A pure tone is a discrete frequency - you say tone, I say discrete frequency. opaqueice;247236 Wrote: The measurement technique is not the same, that's true. And if the measurement techniques are not the same, then the results are not directly comparable. Basic measurement science. opaqueice;247236 Wrote: Sure, if you (or your equipment) is in error or if one measurement technique reveals something that the other doesn't for example. opaqueice;247236 Wrote: That would be a good question if the premise were correct, which of course it isn't.Interpretation: it all sounds the same. opaqueice;247236 Wrote: As you ought to know very well, sounding different to you or me doesn't mean that the audio signal was in any way different.Interpretation: you're all kidding yourselves. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=40737 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] A photo of your Squeezebox setup (please)
A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=19817 Question: Should there be a new forum for photos? - yes - no - maybe morris_minor;247090 Wrote: Nice! But you forgot to mention the Morphy Richards SureFlow-Steam room conditioner . . . It's for ironing out the wrinkles in the SB+ frequency response ;-) -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=19817 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone around Manchester/Stockport with a good low-noise power supply?
For the record I understand Fourier quite well: I've been designing digital filters for many years. The ultimate customers of products I've designed include all the major broadcasting companies in the world. I said that music is made up of many discrete frequencies which occur at the same time, which is perfectly consistent with Fourier. Most audio equipment is measured by applying a frequency sweep to the input, and the plotting the output response. This is not quite the same as a typical RC measuring technique, which often involves feeding the -system- with an impulse and measuring the response, and then using a fourier transform to derive the frequency response. The reason it's not quite the same, is that with one technique, you are applying a discrete frequency at any instant in time, whereas with the other, you apply a range of frequencies simultaneously. Because the measurement techniques are different, it's perfectly possible to come up with different results for seemingly the same parameter. This is a common feature of measurement: the technique influences the result, and unless you are careful to use a measurement technique that properly represents how the equipment is intended to be used, the measurement is probably meaningless. For those of you reading that have not come across Mr Opaqueice (whoever he may be), he is my SD forum Stalker. He has no serious interest in helping anyone here or contributing in a positive sense - he is here solely to save you from enjoying your music -because to him it all sounds the same-. I do make the SB+; I don't make the Transporter; both of which I recommended the OP check out - before spending lots of money on fancy PSUs or DACs (which incidentally Mr Opaqueice doesn't think make any difference anyway). The OP should also know, that Mr Opaqueice would think him completely delusional in his experience of difference mains leads and blocks! I'll conclude with a question to those who are really interested in music reproduction. How is it, that two pieces of equipment that both measure flat (as near as damnit), reproduce an musical impulse (say a drum sound) quite differently? Fourier says that an impulse contains a whole spectrum of frequencies, so if the frequency responses are really the same, then the drum should sound the same too ... but it doesn't. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=40737 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone around Manchester/Stockport with a good low-noise power supply?
Phil Leigh;246777 Wrote: The SB certainly goes down as deep as any CD player as far as bass extension goes. I definitely don't agree with this. However flat the SB3 measures, it sounds bass light on real music to me. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=40737 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone around Manchester/Stockport with a good low-noise power supply?
I think you should consider the Transporter or SB+ rather than spending fairly large sums on external DACs and PSUs. IMV, you are quite likely to end up spending a grand, without actually achieving what's possible for that amount of money. I've heard the SB+ against a fairly inexpensive Creek CDP, and IMO, the SB+ was much better. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=40737 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone around Manchester/Stockport with a good low-noise power supply?
darrenyeats;246867 Wrote: The biggest factors in bass response are the speaker response and room-modes. It doesn't make sense to try to correct these by using a source with a different bass response. What we want is sources which are accurate, including a flat FR, and then we can deal with the problems of each speaker and room on a case-by-case basis (change speaker, move rooms, improve room treatment and finally EQ). Otherwise you end up with a source tailored to one speaker / room and that is a small market. Sure - but that's not my point. Music is a combination of many frequencies all occurring at the same time, whereas a frequency sweep just does one frequency at a time. Hence you can have equipment that measures flat with a frequency sweep, but actually isn't with real music. This seems to be more obvious at the bass end, where the power supply simply runs out of steam, and the effect is not unlike putting a bigger/smaller power amplifier in the system. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=40737 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone around Manchester/Stockport with a good low-noise power supply?
opaqueice;246876 Wrote: In fact, as most of us learned in high school, any sound can be decomposed into a sum of pure tones, which add *linearly*, period, end of story. Hmm, I think that's what I said ... opaqueice;246876 Wrote: If the frequency response of an amp and speakers is flat, so is the response to music. But measuring equipment using single frequencies, doesn't actually measure the frequency response as it applies to music. A (bandlimited if you like) impulse response would be more appropriate. opaqueice;246876 Wrote: But when you go around spreading false information in order to hawk your products, that kind of gets under my skin. I think you need to stop misrepresenting what other people say. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=40737 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Will Linn high resolution recordings play on an SB3?
Mr_Sukebe;244729 Wrote: Doesn't downsampling them reduce absolute audio quality and kind of defeat the point of them? One reason for recording at 96 or 88.2KHz is to make the anti-alias filters on the ADCs easier. You can design filters with a slower roll-off without risking aliasing of the sampled information. Subsequently downsampling to 48 or 44.1KHz using a well designed digital filter, won't then loose any information or reduce audio quality. The question is how much relevant audio information is really there - above 20KHz? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=40484 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
