[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
Loftprojection Wrote: > Hey, an audiophile Squeezebox forum without and audiophile version of > the SB, what's this! Let's tell SlimDevices what we would like and how > much we'd be willing to pay for it. > > I would be willing to pay $100 to $200 more then the current price for > an audiophile version of the SB if the digital path would be improved > as much as this money allows. The analog section could stay the same > since as a "would be audiophile", I would connect the SB to an external > DAC. Also the headphone out could be eliminated since an audiophile > will have his own headphone amp anyway. > > So what are your wishes and how much are you willing to spend on it. > > Hopefully this thread will encourage SlimDevices management to consider > making a audiophile version of the SB... Agree 100%. I'll be using it with outboard DAC anyways, so I'd go with up to $600 for SE or Mk.II :) version concentrated on significant improvements in digital section. Digital AES/EBU, word clock input, better shielding, better clock, etc. Better PSU for digital section BTW! Don't forget, Behringer DEQ2496 managed to squeeze many of well implemented PRO features into $295 retail price. I hardly believe Slim Devices can't ;) -- 325xi 325xi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5661 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
ScottMayo Wrote: > And yes, a bigger display would be nifty. Imagine a wall-mounted > SuperBox, with a display, say, 18"x18", capable of being read across a > room, putting up titles, lyrics, and medium resolution album art. And, > of course, the browse menus. (Yes, I know - expensive.) A composite video output of the scroll or rendered video still from SS would be fine to send to a TV, using cheap parts. Plugin that lets SS play CDs from a shared CD-ROM bay without ripping first. Adding linear power supply and using good interconnects on analog outs is enough to make my stock SB sound as good as any high end CDP or external DAC I have tried so far. Speakers and amplification are still the major influence on audio quality. If you think improving SB by 1% (i2s, or better internal DAC) will give you a big effect, you are wrong, it can only be very slight because the SB is already close to any other high end digital source that is reasonably priced. Improving amplification and speakers will give you a lot more benefit, as will room external correction. But those aren't cheap. -- richidoo richidoo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3097 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
seanadams Wrote: > > I've done a great deal of experimentation with clock jitter recently > using more advanced tools, and I suspect (thought I haven't tested this > particular case yet) that the clock embdedding/recovery mechanism of > s/pdif is a red herring, at least for a well designed system with good > cables and clean power. I suspect the biggest issue is the noise in the > transceivers and on the cable itself, not some inherent sloppiness in > the manchester encoding/recovery process. If this is true, then > separating clock and data would not address this at all in EITHER case. > Only reversing the direction of the clock (by a word clock line, for > example) would address this, by confining the "important" clock to a > small domain very close to the DAC. Interesting. My understanding was that a primary concern is avoiding jitter correlated with the data signal, since uncorrelated jitter (due to thermal noise for example) is pretty white and typically just adds a bit to the noise floor. It certainly seems that isolating the clock and data lines should help with avoiding such correlations. I've seen examples, such as figure 9 here http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1093jitter/index2.html, where you can clearly see a spike in the jitter spectrum due to correlations with the digital signal. It would be interesting to see if an I2S implementation would get rid of that or not. How is the I2S connection to the internal DAC in the SB3 implemented? -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
cbemoore Wrote: > Read what Sean (Slim Devices CEO) has to say about I2S: > > http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=113777&highlight=i2s#post113777 To be clear, there is nothing wrong with i2s (or its variants: left jusified etc) when talking about a small closed chassis where noise is controlled and you have a solid ground plane etc. It is just a synchonous serial signal, nothing special. I've done a great deal of experimentation with clock jitter recently using more advanced tools, and I suspect (thought I haven't tested this particular case yet) that the clock embdedding/recovery mechanism of s/pdif is a red herring, at least for a well designed system with good cables and clean power. I suspect the biggest issue is the noise in the transceivers and on the cable itself, not some inherent sloppiness in the manchester encoding/recovery process. If this is true, then separating clock and data would not address this at all in EITHER case. Only reversing the direction of the clock (by a word clock line, for example) would address this, by confining the "important" clock to a small domain very close to the DAC. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
cbemoore Wrote: > Read what Sean (Slim Devices CEO) has to say about I2S: > > http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=113777&highlight=i2s#post113777 In the I2S standard there are two options (they might be called level 1 and 2 - I forget). The easier option is to have the clock in the source, and that (plus some other stuff obviously) suffices to satisfy the standard, so you can say you have an I2S implementation. However, as Sean is saying, it's better to put the clock in the receiver, which is the higher level of I2S. In any case it's clearly a good idea to separate the clock from the data, as it avoids many potential problems. Whether any particular implementation will actually work well is another matter. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
I take the optical out of my SB3 into a Bryston preamp/processor, which has quite a decent DAC in it already. I never use the other outs. Most audiophiles who care about DACs already have bought their favorite in one form or another, for use with other audio sources; why put an exotic one in the SB3 that ONLY the SB3 would be able to use? I've have been overjoyed to go the other way: $100 less for no analog outputs, only digital ones. Or $100 more for only digital out and guaranteed, extremely low jitter, to rival the very best reclocked sources. And yes, a bigger display would be nifty. Imagine a wall-mounted SuperBox, with a display, say, 18"x18", capable of being read across a room, putting up titles, lyrics, and medium resolution album art. And, of course, the browse menus. (Yes, I know - expensive.) -- ScottMayo ScottMayo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3605 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
opaqueice Wrote: > Yeah, I agree. If I were SD, at this point I would concentrate on > software, interface and advertising rather than hardware. The hardware > is already good enough to get positive reviews from hard-core > audiophiles - so it's more than good enough for most people. On the > other hand the SS interface is pretty clunky, and set-up etc. are not > very streamlined. If they want to turn this into a mainstream consumer > product, that's what they need to improve. Hum, I don't agree either! haha On the contrary, SlimDevices currently has only one version of it's hardware platform. They already have two modding companies that I know of (BolderCables and RedWineAudio) making money by taking that hardware platform to another level and there are certainly plenty of buyers of the SB that would have paid more for a audiophile version but do not send the one they bought to the modders for various reasons. So, in my opinion, there is a market and in my opinion, it would not cost much for SlimDevices to offer an audiophile version and they could increase their profit margin significantly on that version versus the regural version. Hey, I might be wrong! -- Loftprojection Loftprojection's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5525 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
Read what Sean (Slim Devices CEO) has to say about I2S: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=113777&highlight=i2s#post113777 -- cbemoore cbemoore's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=163 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
Personally, I'm quite happy running my SB2 into a Benchmark 1. Anything capable of beating it would probably be pretty expensive, and I seriously doubt I'd drop the $$ on those kinds of diminishing returns. -- Mike Anderson 'FREE RADICAL RADIO!' (http://nvo.com/cd) Hours of free radical MP3s. Mike Anderson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1705 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
Full-sized, heavy case with a wider display to reduce scrolling, heavy-duty linear power supply, socket for heavy-duty AC cord of choice. Improved analog and digital sections. Larger memory buffer. $800-$1000 -- Pale Blue Ego Pale Blue Ego's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=110 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
opaqueice Wrote: > All that said, I suspect the differences in sound quality are pretty > minimal, and what I'd really like to see first is a computer-based > room-correction plugin for SS. Cheers for the explanation, makes sence, did a little reading on the special cable, I guess its the same theory as RGB for the telly picture keeping the bits seperate. Then came across this review which I thought was interesting as I'm looking into dacs at the mo: http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue17/benchmarkdac1.htm I get the impression the guy found it a it tricky telling the difference between the different connection methods. So changing my mind once again.. I think my SB is lovely as it is, and maybe just needs a dac to feed. Off to learn about this room correction gear! Sorry for the waffle, but have learnt a few interesting bits today Cheers! :) -- Deaf Cat Deaf Cat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=515 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
cliveb Wrote: > Slim Devices are obviously a committed group of audio/music enthusiasts > and no doubt might be personally interested in some of these ideas. But > they are also running a business, and their primary focus has to be on > the majority market. That's not us. Getting sidetracked by lots of > different configuration desires from fringe users like us is not in > their best interests. The mere fact that there are so many diverse > preferred options within this one short thread is proof that there is > no single "audiophile" version that they could rationally produce. Yeah, I agree. If I were SD, at this point I would concentrate on software, interface and advertising rather than hardware. The hardware is already good enough to get positive reviews from hard-core audiophiles - so it's more than good enough for most people. On the other hand the SS interface is pretty clunky, and set-up etc. are not very streamlined. If they want to turn this into a mainstream consumer product, that's what they need to improve. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
Loftprojection Wrote: > I'm just trying to generate a number of ideas that SlimDevices > management can use to better "position" a potential future product. Slim Devices are obviously a committed group of audio/music enthusiasts and no doubt might be personally interested in some of these ideas. But they are also running a business, and their primary focus has to be on the majority market. That's not us. Getting sidetracked by lots of different configuration desires from fringe users like us is not in their best interests. The mere fact that there are so many diverse preferred options within this one short thread is proof that there is no single "audiophile" version that they could rationally produce. It strikes me that what they could possibly do is offer the mainboard on an OEM basis to various small-scale "cottage industry" operators who would be interested in chasing the low-volume/high-margin audiophile market. Much like how Philips/Sony/etc supply CD mechanisms to the likes of Aura/Creek/etc who build "tweaked" CD players. -- cliveb cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
Deaf Cat Wrote: > OK thinking about it, maybe just a transport would be best, in a small > heavy box, then we can choose our own DAC to suit our particular > tastes. > > Mind you in saying that, I'm afraid I don't quite understand the hi end > transport side of things with jitter and stuff like that. The DAC1 does > this not sort the jittering? And I thought the SB was pretty low on > jitter anyway.sorry don't really know what I'm talking about so > will be silent for a while now:) The problem is not exactly the SB output, it's the digital audio connection from the SB to the external DAC. A better solution is to have a DAC very close to the SB, connected with an I2S or similar connection. This is better because I2S has a dedicated clock line. In plain language, it has several wires running running from the source to the receiver, and one of those carries a clock signal, while the others carry data. In contrast, standard SPDIF (like the SB digital out going to an external DAC) has only one wire which carries both the clock and the data. While clever and economical, this has the unfortunate effect of allowing the data to interfere with the clock and cause timing errors (that's jitter). The SB internal DAC is connected in this better way (it uses the I2S connection), but clearly the components such as the DAC chip and analogue stage could be upgraded, and so that's what I would want in an audiophile version. All that said, I suspect the differences in sound quality are pretty minimal, and what I'd really like to see first is a computer-based room-correction plugin for SS. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
OK thinking about it, maybe just a transport would be best, in a small heavy box, then we can choose our own DAC to suit our particular tastes. Mind you in saying that, I'm afraid I don't quite understand the hi end transport side of things with jitter and stuff like that. The DAC1 does this not sort the jittering? And I thought the SB was pretty low on jitter anyway.sorry don't really know what I'm talking about so will be silent for a while now:) -- Deaf Cat Deaf Cat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=515 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
I think than before SD or some other modifier give us a STOA digital transport, a lot of us technical geeks will migrate to fully computer based system with integrated room correction and some high grade multi channel sound card. I'm expecting this happened within one or 2 years. Some people are already there but the software and the setup are still to unfriendly for an average user. In this case the SB will serve only as a handy remote control (for choosing the music played) and display. The actual SB is perfect for this function! Chris -- krzys krzys's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2256 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
krzys Wrote: > For me only the transport is needed. I hope your are not taking the > AES/EBU output as an analogue one. > I understand the need for analogue version but that was not my point. > Chris That's OK. The fact that everytime this discussion comes up, eveybody wants something different. I would like one unit which looks like a typical "stereo" unit, has an inproved analog output circuits and beefier powersupply. Price range $600-$800. But, other people, like you, that is completly uninteresting! -- tomsi42 SB3, Rotel RC-1070/RB-1070, dynaBel Exact. tomsi42's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2477 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
tomsi42 Wrote: > What you are saying is that we need 2 versions! One pure transport and > one integrated unit with an even better D/A converter. At least three versions as we'd need two versions with internal DAC, one oversampling and one not. Somehow, I don't hold out too much hope for this discussion being that successfull. MC -- ModelCitizen Squeezebox2 > Benchmark Dac1 > Naim NAC 82 > Naim NAP 250 > Shahinian Arcs. Music catalog: http://modelcitizen.mine.nu/music.txt ModelCitizen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=446 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
tomsi42 Wrote: > What you are saying is that we need 2 versions! One pure transport and > one integrated unit with an even better D/A converter. > > Fine with me. For me only the transport is needed. I hope your are not taking the AES/EBU output as an analogue one. I understand the need for analogue version but that was not my point. Chris -- krzys krzys's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2256 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
krzys Wrote: > My vote goes for the best possible digital transport version since I > also can not live without the digital room correction. Beside that I'm > triamplified so a stereo DAC is useless for me. This pure digital > transport version should be around 500-600$ and this will kill any CDP > transport on the earth! > Nice features would be an AES/EBU output, SPDIF and maybe another > format out and a wordclock connection. Ok, this full version should > cost 800$ ! > Chris What you are saying is that we need 2 versions! One pure transport and one integrated unit with an even better D/A converter. Fine with me. -- tomsi42 SB3, Rotel RC-1070/RB-1070, dynaBel Exact. tomsi42's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2477 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
My vote goes for the best possible digital transport version since I also can not live without the digital room correction. Beside that I'm triamplified so a stereo DAC is useless for me. This pure digital transport version should be around 500-600$ and this will kill any CDP transport on the earth! Nice features would be an AES/EBU output, SPDIF and maybe another format out and a wordclock connection. Ok, this full version should cost 800$ ! Chris -- krzys krzys's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2256 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
By the way, I'm not trying to reach an agreement on what "we" want for a audiophile SB. I'm just trying to generate a number of ideas that SlimDevices management can use to better "position" a potential future product. Also trying to show SlimDevices that there is an interest for a "high end" Squeezebox! Anyway, sorry that it has been covered before but I guess the more we talk about it the more SlimDevices is going to realize there is a potential... Thanks for contributing. -- Loftprojection Loftprojection's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5525 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
OK, two versions: a player with a high-end DAC and a transport without the DAC. I'd go for the latter as I could't do without the room correction on my pre-amp. MS -- MadScientist MadScientist's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
Yep, put me down for a hi end internal DAC, just started researching them, and have been ponderig how on earth I would compare a RWA or Bolder modSB to say a DAC1, in London Ooo and in a nice heavy little box too, so my IC's don't hold it in mid air. :) -- Deaf Cat Deaf Cat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=515 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
You may also find near total disagreement on what people would want. Personally, I would want the exact opposite of what you asked - I think a high-quality internal DAC in the SB is much preferable to an external DAC (for reasons under discussion in the other thread), and so I'd like to see upgrades to that end of things, and don't care about the digital outs. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Re: An audiophile forum without an Audiophile SB!!! Let's define our needs!
There's been (many) other threads covering this very topic. My thoughts, briefly, are that an "audiophile" SB3 would cost well over $1000. Anything less, and it won't be considered "high-end" enough. Anyone not already satisfied with the SB3 and using an external DAC is probably not going to be satisfied by a $500 SB. Maybe that's just my opinion, though. -- ezkcdude SB3->Derek Shek TDA1543/CS8412 NOS DAC->MIT Terminator 2 interconnects->Endler Audio 24-step Attenuators (RCA-direct)->Parasound Halo A23 125W/ch amplifier->Speltz anti-cables->DIY 2-ways + Dayton Titanic 10" subwoofer He's not hi-fi, he's my stereo. ezkcdude's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2545 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24732 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
