Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
JohnSwenson wrote: This got me thinking about how computers can affect things. I started running tests in my system, and other peoples systems. We did find that there was significant difference in sensitivities, some systems more than others. At this point I was not interested in a more rigorous testing to try and figure out correlations (what was it about a system that made it more sensitive). I often practice with my electric guitar in front of a laptop, so I can have scores/lyrics/whatnot available on the screen. My guitar used to pick up harddisk activity and screen scrolling. The guitar amp emitted a constant hiss/whine from the computer, with disk and graphics card activity sounding like an old modem on top of that. When I tried to move away from the computer, towards my fish tanks, I could hear the fluorescent tubes from the fish tank lights instead. All this noise was so annoying it impaired my playing (and it also made it impossible to record anything, of course). Then I bought $20 worth of copper tape off ebay, and lined the guitar cavities containing wires, pots and switches with it. The pickups cannot be shielded, though. Anyway, now I'm hard pressed to detect any PC (or fluorescent tube) activity through my guitar amp, no matter where I'm playing. The guitar is a Telecaster with single coil pickups, a 1950s design infamous for its ability to pick up electromagnetic noise. There was probably less EMI floating around in the 1950s, so Leo Fender didn't bother with shielding when he designed the first electric guitar. And the Fender company never upgraded the design with shielding since. Anyway, the point of this anecdote is that shielding for audio frequency EMI seems to be a really, really easy, inexpensive and effective thing to do, but despite that, it is not always done. For reasons that elude me. JohnSwenson wrote: Since this has little to do with the thread topic I'll shut up now. Ok, me too. Soulkeeper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35297 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
mlsstl wrote: A couple of thoughts... First, my system has to share a room with lots of other stuff from modern life. Besides the Squeezebox Touch with an amp speakers, there is a TV, Roku, laptop, switch, Kindle Fire, cell phones, a cordless phone, my daughter's iPad and occasionally her laptop. I control the volume with the Touch's volume control so the amp is set fairly wide open. Even with my ear to the speaker, I've never heard the slightest hint of EMI breakthrough on the stereo speakers. I've also never heard a change in sound quality in the system that I can attribute to which of the devices are present in the room or which ones are on or off. (The only breakthrough problem I ever had was when I had a turntable in the system and the guy a couple of houses away would broadcast on his shortwave radio through the antenna on the outdoor tower. The neighbor and his tower are still there but the Touch seems completely immune.) Second, radio wave strength follows the inverse square rule, so even a foot or two is a lot of distance compared to having gear immediately adjacent to each other. Third, I don't think it is a particularly unusual complaint that some high-end electronic devices willingly sacrifice some of the traditional signal isolation methods commonly used in the communications industry and scientific equipment. Some pieces of fancy equipment may indeed be more susceptible to interference than even middle market gear. Finally, the effects that people claim to hear are often at the edge of perception and rarely are subject to any repeatable test criteria. I know that I'm the biggest variable there is in my system. Perhaps it is just my aged hearing, decrepit mind or inferior system, but when I have to strain to decide if what I'm hearing is real or imagined, I've ceased to worry much about it. That makes it a lot easier to just enjoy the music. ;-) Yeh John is on the weird edge here ?? these are corner cases, normally you don't have system wide interference from several rooms away or such on perceivable levels Cell phones can make it in if your close enough a feet as you say. But something must be technically wrong if the rf from a wireless mouse find it's way in , are we talking tube hif here or ? But a factor is weird audiophile grade equipment as you say , there was some fetish in having things with very high slewrate and thus ultra wide bandwith especially in power amps vs a more level headed company as Quad always have bandwith limited inputs to not get exactly those problerms we where discussing . And even more daft stuff like no shielded casing is it not dnm that thinks metal cases sounds bad :) There is another factor improper equipment setup especially grounding ,not all outlets have a ground prong (maybe in GB ) but some hifi is designed to be grounded some people don't install a grounded outlet to the hifi (but indulge in voodo power cables instead, eh). I had an power amp that did receive FM radio I could not get why untill I've found out that the seller gave me the wrong power cable it did not have ground . Another case of wrong grounding can be shielded cat6 cables, that is used in way that gives you ground loops, simply at home do not use shielded Ethernet it has an application in very harsh industrial settings To be practical I dont hear a difference pulling the plug SBGK did not hear a difference and many more forum members do not I think it is a valid enough test , there might be rare weird exceptions , but it is so audiophile to always seek the fringe explanation . In most cases folks hifi equipment are not subject to subtle sq changes due to interference . I have not upgraded hifi in years I also enjoy the music . And lets not forget some basics that must be disproved before any subtle source mod is to be taken seriously . There is not even a case for that we can hear a difference between *any* source component if the source is reasonably well designed and the DAC is reasonably well designed , if ie nothing is technically wrong all source components sound the same into a DAC . This is usually the case in scientifically conducted tests , but this is a reasonable provisional fact imo . So why not just use a suitable digital cable (BJ or similar not boutique stuff ) connect the unmodified Touch to your dac or processor and enjoy the music :) it works just try . Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
The typical squeezebox installation is surely a server in another room from the SB. I find it difficult to accept that a change to processes running on the server could perceptibly affect the sound of the stereo in anyoher roon either from changes in the amount of EMI from the computer, or from some mains borne interference. Any such emissions from the computer would be pretty minute compared with all the rubbish generated by all the other devices (including those of your neighbours.) IMHO one might as well postulate that the changes on the server processes affect the stereo by some hitherto unknown effect, which be about as plausible. adamdea's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37603 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
The fact that this discussion is still being rehashed on this forum, is kind of disheartening. SuperQ wrote: The answer is: Expectation Bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimenter's_bias) Considering how Squeezeboxes actually work, this is the obvious conclusion. And in a reasonable world, the thread whould have died a natural death right there. Yes rly. Soulkeeper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35297 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
Note that I specifically said that the tests I had run were done in the same room as the stereo system, usually 6-8 feet away, NOT several rooms away. These tests happened about 5 years ago when I took my SB3 over to a friends house to show it off, how nice it was to use and how good the sound was from such an inexpensive box, and that it could work well with his expensive DAC. I was running this off my laptop with the server on the laptop and using the web interface to control things. After listening for a while he said that he could hear a change in the sound when I was actively doing things with the computer (searching for the next song to play etc). Well that surprised me I had never heard that before. We then started doing some tests to see if it was related to the fact that it was the computer with the server or if it was just the laptop in general. We loaded the server on his Mac mini and sure enough, working with my laptop caused a change in the sound, even if it had nothing to do with the sound flow (server on another computer, playback from SB3). We tried this with one of his laptops and got similar results. Doing things with the Mac mini didn't cause any change, but it was not in the room with the stereo. This got me thinking about how computers can affect things. I started running tests in my system, and other peoples systems. We did find that there was significant difference in sensitivities, some systems more than others. At this point I was not interested in a more rigorous testing to try and figure out correlations (what was it about a system that made it more sensitive). The thing about the mouse was not a wireless mouse, just the increase in activity in the computer when moving the mouse. Interestingly the couple places I have heard this have NOT been on audiophile systems, but at peoples houses with normal systems. I was at one ladies house, she had the stereo on but the song had stopped playing, she was working at her laptop, we could definitely hear a grinding sound coming from the speakers, changing in concert with the movements of the mouse. I have heard something similar to this at another friend's house, again not an audiophile system. Since this has little to do with the thread topic I'll shut up now. John S. JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
That will usually not have been the computer's activity itself but the screen's. Old LCD displays used to still be line driven and could even be scanned from another room (you could make visible what they are showing in another room). They even developed special fonts to get around the effect for security relevant text. It's not as dramatic as with old tube monitors (where, given a somewhat radiation free environment you could even reproduce their picture over hundreds of feet) but they are still radiating quite significantly. Got much better with higher-resolution displays (due to the shift to higher frequencies) and LVDS but it's still probably more EMI then what comes out of the rest of your computer. pippin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13777 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
chill wrote: John I can't tell if you're just being mischievous, but if not, are you seriously suggesting that the mere presence of a powered-up computer in the same house as the hifi will have an audible effect? That's a bit of a blow for the whole computer-based audio industry. But moreover, and returning to the OPs point I suppose, are you suggesting that the changes in EMI and mains noise between a computer that's running Fidelizer and one that's not will be audible? I realise that your post is describing a theoretical possibility only (hence the capitalised 'COULD'), but what is the likelihood of these effects being audible in the real world? How bad would your components have to be for such minuscule things to have an impact? IMO, the plug-pull test is already convincing enough. I'm being serious. A computer sitting on the same shelf as your stereo system can have a significant affect on said stereo system from airborne EMI and noise on the power line. If it's three rooms away the effects will be much less. This thread never specified any geometrical arrangement of the components. I know several people who have tried to use their laptop to control an SB, the laptop was across the room from the stereo, they could hear noise on the stero system when they moved the mouse on the laptop. What is going on inside the computer can have an affect on the sound without changing bits. I did some tests on this quite a few years ago testing a bunch of desk tops, laptops, small things such as Mac mini's, embedded devices like FitPCs etc. I did this with my stereo system, and with a few friend's systems. In all these tests it was a computer in the listening room, but NOT right next to the stereo system, usually across the room. Note that the computers being testsed had nothing to do with the audio. The stereo was being fed by an SB conected by wire to a server a long ways away. The computers under test were just doing things like web broswsing etc. The worst by FAR were the laptops, almost everyone was audible in some way, either directly emitting sound (through the stereo) or changing audio that was playing. Desk tops fared quite a bit better, either not audible at all or not as much affect. Small general purpose computers such as Mac minis did a little better, but still could be heard under some situations, embedded devices such as a FitPC were inaudible no matter what we had them doing. The method of contamination from the laptops seemed to EMI, they did just as bad when run off batteries. We tried wrapping one in aluminum foil (kind of hard to use in that state!) and it's affect went way down. Whether the screen was up or down also had a significant affect. So yes computers CAN affect sound quality, and something which is changing the underlying behavior of said computer could very well change it's impact on sound quality. I have no knowledge about the program in question here so I'm not making any comment about it, I was primarily refering to the use of the pull the ethernet cable test as being definitive, if the server computer is still running there is the possibility that it can still be affecting the sound quality through means other than direct connection to the SB. John S. JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
John Thank you. Yes, I realise that you were referring to the 'pull the ethernet cable' test, but the underlying implication seemed rather serious. I have to say I'm amazed at your findings. I can't believe that what you've encountered is common. I once had a 'music centre' (all the rage 30 to 35 years ago) on which I made cassette tape recordings of FM broadcasts (you've guessed it - the top 40 countdown), and I used to regularly detect clicks and pops from the kitchen fluorescent lights being switched on or the fridge motor switching on. But it's been many many years since I've encountered any sort of extraneous noise through my hifi. Tell a lie - a couple of years ago I built a gutted SB2 into the same case as my home-built pre-amp, and careless routing of the wifi pigtail resulted in audible noise whenever the SB2 buffer refilled. But that was an isolated incident, and apart from that my hifi is gloriously immune to any kind of electrical noise or SQ degradation, even from my Mac Mini server running within a few feet of my amplifiers. chill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10839 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
A couple of thoughts... First, my system has to share a room with lots of other stuff from modern life. Besides the Squeezebox Touch with an amp speakers, there is a TV, Roku, laptop, switch, Kindle Fire, cell phones, a cordless phone, my daughter's iPad and occasionally her laptop. I control the volume with the Touch's volume control so the amp is set fairly wide open. Even with my ear to the speaker, I've never heard the slightest hint of EMI breakthrough on the stereo speakers. I've also never heard a change in sound quality in the system that I can attribute to which of the devices are present in the room or which ones are on or off. (The only breakthrough problem I ever had was when I had a turntable in the system and the guy a couple of houses away would broadcast on his shortwave radio through the antenna on the outdoor tower. The neighbor and his tower are still there but the Touch seems completely immune.) Second, radio wave strength follows the inverse square rule, so even a foot or two is a lot of distance compared to having gear immediately adjacent to each other. Third, I don't think it is a particularly unusual complaint that some high-end electronic devices willingly sacrifice some of the traditional signal isolation methods commonly used in the communications industry and scientific equipment. Some pieces of fancy equipment may indeed be more susceptible to interference than even middle market gear. Finally, the effects that people claim to hear are often at the edge of perception and rarely are subject to any repeatable test criteria. I know that I'm the biggest variable there is in my system. Perhaps it is just my aged hearing, decrepit mind or inferior system, but when I have to strain to decide if what I'm hearing is real or imagined, I've ceased to worry much about it. That makes it a lot easier to just enjoy the music. ;-) mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
lake_eleven wrote: Soundcheck, in his thread, suggests using TCPOptimizer's 'optimal' settings. Even this does not affect SBT playback? What is the supposed mechanism for any improvement? We know the server, even a hopelessly underpowered stressed out server, gets all the right bits to the Touch, in the right order. So assuming the supposed mechanism for TCPOptimizer to have an effect is by improving the 'way' the bits reach the Touch buffer, and hence the workload/duty cycle of the Touch, then the plug pull test will tell you if you have a problem that needs fixing in the first place. If pulling the ethernet plug out of the Touch gives you 30s of audio nirvana, then your server side setup needs fixing (Fidelizer, TCPOptimizer, different OS, galvanic isolation, etc etc), but if you can't hear a difference when you pull the plug, then don't waste your time. chill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10839 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
SBGK wrote: with my large buffer settings I can get several minutes playback of 16/44.1 stored on the touch after the music has loaded via the ethernet. So I can switch off the laptop and disconnect the ethernet while the music is still playing - the sound doesn't change when I do this, it does change if I use fidelizer, that is good enough proof for me that fidelizer works. Triode wrote: That's impressive - as you can get say 3 seconds worth of buffering from the tunable alsa buffer (usb interface), 10 seconds from the output buffer and then the main buffer (pre decoding) is 3 Mbytes in size. Several minutes would only work if you are listening to very compressed music? The practical buffer time seems to be 30s on an unmodded unit with 16/44.1 music But if one can hear a difference in already buffered data on the player side , that actually leaves two explanations . Expectation bias and that fidelizer is broken and corrupts data ? Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
JohnSwenson wrote: But that test is not necessarily defintive, it only tells you if the processing on the Touch is the issue. There are other possible paths from server to ears such as EMI radiated from server, noise injected on power mains etc. Something which is changing the whole operating environment of the server COULD be changing something which gets transfered through one of these indirect paths, even when audio data is not actively being transmitted to the Touch. Now if you unplugged the the Touch from the ethernet AND unplugged the power form the server at the same time, THEN you would have a more convincing test. John S. John I can't tell if you're just being mischievous, but if not, are you seriously suggesting that the mere presence of a powered-up computer in the same house as the hifi will have an audible effect? That's a bit of a blow for the whole computer-based audio industry. But moreover, and returning to the OPs point I suppose, are you suggesting that the changes in EMI and mains noise between a computer that's running Fidelizer and one that's not will be audible? I realise that your post is describing a theoretical possibility only (hence the capitalised 'COULD'), but what is the likelihood of these effects being audible in the real world? How bad would your components have to be for such minuscule things to have an impact? IMO, the plug-pull test is already convincing enough. chill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10839 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
chill wrote: John I can't tell if you're just being mischievous, but if not, are you seriously suggesting that the mere presence of a powered-up computer in the same house as the hifi will have an audible effect? That's a bit of a blow for the whole computer-based audio industry. But moreover, and returning to the OPs point I suppose, are you suggesting that the changes in EMI and mains noise between a computer that's running Fidelizer and one that's not will be audible? I realise that your post is describing a theoretical possibility only (hence the capitalised 'COULD'), but what is the likelihood of these effects being audible in the real world? How bad would your components have to be for such minuscule things to have an impact? IMO, the plug-pull test is already convincing enough. lol, this really is the tar pond of audiophile forums. OP, I would try somewhere else for an answer. The author of fidelizer posts in a few eg jplay forums, you can ask him directly there. SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
SBGK wrote: chill wrote: John I can't tell if you're just being mischievous, but if not, are you seriously suggesting that the mere presence of a powered-up computer in the same house as the hifi will have an audible effect? That's a bit of a blow for the whole computer-based audio industry. But moreover, and returning to the OPs point I suppose, are you suggesting that the changes in EMI and mains noise between a computer that's running Fidelizer and one that's not will be audible? I realise that your post is describing a theoretical possibility only (hence the capitalised 'COULD'), but what is the likelihood of these effects being audible in the real world? How bad would your components have to be for such minuscule things to have an impact? IMO, the plug-pull test is already convincing enough. lol, this really is the tar pit of audiophile forums. OP, I would try somewhere else for an answer. The author of fidelizer posts in a few eg jplay forums, you can ask him directly there. In what way is chill's reply worthy of this comment? It seems very polite and balanced to me. Is it because the only posts you can countenance are ones which confirm your own prejudices? In any case, the possibility of expectation bias, already mentioned, surely must be considered at least as likely as possible changes in the electrical environment, to all but the most blinkered subjectivist. The possibility that there is a difference between bits streamed to the SB buffer by a computer running Fidelizer and one not running Fidelizer, *after* the ethernet cable is pulled is mind blowing - do you understand what you are suggesting? Please consider explanations based on psychology, which are orders of magnitude more likely than explanations based on physics. As far as asking the developer of Fidelizer for the answer to this, it would be like relying on Bob Diamond to tell you whether Barclays Bank was an upright and moral organisation! darrell's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13460 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
darrell wrote: As far as asking the developer of Fidelizer for the answer to this, it would be like relying on Bob Diamond to tell you whether Barclays Bank was an upright and moral organisation! Translation for our members in the USA: ...it would be like relying on Jaime Dimon to tell you whether JP Morgan Chase was an upright and moral organization! Apesbrain's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=738 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
SBGK wrote: lol, this really is the tar pit of audiophile forums. OP, I would try somewhere else for an answer. The author of fidelizer posts in a few eg jplay forums, you can ask him directly there. SBGK The fact is that there aren't many places that an explanation of Fidelizer's effects can be hiding. You're obviously reluctant to accept expectation bias, so let's exclude that for a moment. So as I see it the possibilites are: i) It directly affects the bits that get buffered by the Touch ii) It directly affects the workload of the Touch iii) It indirectly affects all the other components in your system If i) is true, it can only be by putting the WRONG bits in the buffer - the DTS example proves that the touch is already bit perfect. If ii) is true, pulling the ethernet cable out of the Touch will demonstrate the effect. Once the Touch is no longer communicating with the server, the workload of the Touch that's related to server comms must reduce to zero, and you should be able to hear the benefit. You've now stated a couple of times that you hear no difference when you pull the cable, so the workload can't be the source of the improvement. Fidelizer may well have a positive benefit for people playing music from their PC's sound card. But we know that the Touch is NOT analogous to a PC sound card. I'm sure we'd all welcome some input from Fidelizer's author to explain it's benefits in the Squeezebox scenario. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that he/she disavows any claim to improving things in the Squeezebox world. chill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10839 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
chill wrote: what have I missed in my summary? For one, you're talking to SBGK, a poster who has demonstrated time and again a complete misunderstanding of how squeezeboxes work. garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
And he referred you to jplay forums for more info. That's like asking Bernie Madoff for investment advice. Search hydrogenaudio.org on jplay. garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
Soundcheck, in his thread, suggests using TCPOptimizer's 'optimal' settings. Even this does not affect SBT playback? lake_eleven's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=48979 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
The answer is: Expectation Bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimenter's_bias) SuperQ's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2139 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
SuperQ wrote: The answer is: Expectation Bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimenter's_bias) to quote soundcheck - 'everything affects the sound' fidelizer sets the system timer to 15 ms fidelizer adjusts non essential processes to low priority does some other things so basically it is optimising windows so there is less contention for resources when running lms and less noise the difference between non fidelizer and fidelizer extreme mode should be apparent, even to SuperQ's ears SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
SuperQ wrote: The answer is: Expectation Bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimenter's_bias) SuperQ - you're not allowed to say this. The OP has made it clear that you're only allowed to post conjecture that reinforces his expectations. I'm surprised he let you get away with this. chill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10839 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
chill wrote: SuperQ - you're not allowed to say this. The OP has made it clear that you're only allowed to post conjecture that reinforces his expectations. I'm surprised he let you get away with this. OP says . Please note: I am not interested in hearing from the LOL, you cant possibly be hearing a difference chorus. Post elsewhere if that is your (only) response.. Rather, I am interested in thoughts as to why Fidelizer (or any server OS optimisation) could help SQ on the SBT.. Of course he can hear a difference nobody doubts that ,it is just that it does not happen in the realm of data acoustic or electricity . As these server tweaks does not change anything at the Touch end it still buffers the same data the signal remains the same . You can always hear differences , SuperQ just suggested the most plausible mechanism that makes fidelizer do that for squeezeboxes ( it may very well work for some issues in pc playback on that I have no opinion ) , so it actually answered the question ? Without LoL Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
Mnyb wrote: You can always hear differences , SuperQ just suggested the most plausible mechanism that makes fidelizer do that for squeezeboxes ( it may very well work for some issues in pc playback on that I have no opinion ) , so it actually answered the question ? Without LoL You make a good point. I stand corrected. So do you think the OP is interested in the THE simple test that will demonstrate that SuperQ's suggested mechanism is the correct one? You know, the 'just pull the plug' test. chill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10839 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
chill wrote: You make a good point. I stand corrected. So do you think the OP is interested in the THE simple test that will demonstrate that SuperQ's suggested mechanism is the correct one? You know, the 'just pull the plug' test. But that test is not necessarily defintive, it only tells you if the processing on the Touch is the issue. There are other possible paths from server to ears such as EMI radiated from server, noise injected on power mains etc. Something which is changing the whole operating environment of the server COULD be changing something which gets transfered through one of these indirect paths, even when audio data is not actively being transmitted to the Touch. Now if you unplugged the the Touch from the ethernet AND unplugged the power form the server at the same time, THEN you would have a more convincing test. John S. JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
JohnSwenson wrote: But that test is not necessarily defintive, it only tells you if the processing on the Touch is the issue. There are other possible paths from server to ears such as EMI radiated from server, noise injected on power mains etc. Something which is changing the whole operating environment of the server COULD be changing something which gets transfered through one of these indirect paths, even when audio data is not actively being transmitted to the Touch. Now if you unplugged the the Touch from the ethernet AND unplugged the power form the server at the same time, THEN you would have a more convincing test. John S. with my large buffer settings I can get several minutes playback of 16/44.1 stored on the touch after the music has loaded via the ethernet. So I can switch off the laptop and disconnect the ethernet while the music is still playing - the sound doesn't change when I do this, it does change if I use fidelizer, that is good enough proof for me that fidelizer works. SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
SBGK wrote: with my large buffer settings I can get several minutes playback of 16/44.1 stored on the touch after the music has loaded via the ethernet. So I can switch off the laptop and disconnect the ethernet while the music is still playing - the sound doesn't change when I do this, it does change if I use fidelizer, that is good enough proof for me that fidelizer works. That's impressive - as you can get say 3 seconds worth of buffering from the tunable alsa buffer (usb interface), 10 seconds from the output buffer and then the main buffer (pre decoding) is 3 Mbytes in size. Several minutes would only work if you are listening to very compressed music? Triode's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Fidelizer SBT.. Why should it work?
I recently installed Fidelizer on my Win7 server PC (LMS installed) and I hear a definite improvement in SQ. I am thinking that this should not be the case as the SBT buffers incoming data. One assumes that the data itself is not affected by Fidelizer. So what's going on? Please note: I am not interested in hearing from the LOL, you cant possibly be hearing a difference chorus. Post elsewhere if that is your (only) response.. Rather, I am interested in thoughts as to why Fidelizer (or any server OS optimisation) could help SQ on the SBT.. Two possibilities (to start): 1. Without Fidelizer, the unoptimised server is working harder than otherwise and is generating more RFI/EMI that is being transmitted to the SBT. The SBT is an aerial that picks up RFI/EMI and this negatively effects SQ. 2. With Fidelizer, the optimised server is better able to attend to the SBTs buffer requests. It keeps the SBT in a happier state so that it is able to do its core work (audio processing) with fewer / more uniform CPU cycles which positively effects SQ. Note: I am not in a position to test these possibilities. I dont necessarily think they are the answer but offer them nonetheless.. I am curious to know what others may have to contribute. The idea that the LMS server is somehow able to impact the SBT runs counter to the three-box design philosophy that is considered optimal for PC music playback. The idea being that the player PC (in this case the SBT) is relieved of as much heavy lifting as possible and merely attends to serving the DAC to which it is attached. But if the server PC has an impact on SQ (as it seems to) then one may fairly ask: Whats the point; why not revert to a two-box architecture: Player PC DAC? Regards, Win7 (64bit) (ethernet) SBT DAC .. Audio Bling's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47703 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95644 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
