Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Waldo Pepper wrote: > Then you learned alot but understood nothing. They are represented down > a piece of wire as zero volts and probably 5v. It would have to be a > pretty long and noisy wire for there to be any discrepency. At bit rates > encountered in baseband digital audio, characteristic impedance. group > delay, reflections and phase issues don't even come into it over > practical lengths encountered in home audio systems. If you think signal reflections have no effect over short lengths where there is no proper termination at either end then it sounds to me like you are the one who understands nothing. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
> > > The "loudness wars" (look on youtube if you are not aware of it) also > ruins music. > > I got hold of a dvd audio copy of suedes eponymous album and it was > heavily > compressed with a lower dynamic range rating than the original CD > release (dr9). > > stupid! > > Martin N > > Running MorphOS v3.1 (July 2012) on a PowerPC Powerbook, Moderator of > MiniDisc,amithlonopen,bwfc Yahoogroups I tend to avoid the vast majority of stuff that carries the word 'remastered' as it seems to be an excuse just to make everything LOUD and completely sap the life and dynamics out of a recording - the only exception to this I can think of has been the Nick Drake albums which were lovingly restored from the master tapes with little tweaking. Last years re-issue of Nirvana's Nevermind was a good case in point. The original never had a problem so why remaster it anyway - Loudness wars, that's why! It's crazy, and these remasters are so completely fatiguing to listen to as there is never any let up in the volume pinning you against the wall. The last Foo Fighters album was another bad example on CD. It's actually a good reason for buying vinyl these days as the mastering tends to be more sympathetic. The Foos album on vinyl is a different beast altogether and can be enjoyed all the way through without feeling like someone is hitting you over the head with a hammer. It has been pretty well documented but I keep mentioning the Red Hot Chilli Peppers output. Take the CD and vinyl of Stadium Arcadium. Absolutely sublime on vinyl having received a sympathetic mastering from Steve Hoffman, but the CD is right up against the ceiling all the way through having been mastered by Vlado Meller, and if I see this guys name on anything I now refuse to buy it. He did even worse with the latest Chilli Peppers CD and it's not only up against the ceiling but there's digital clipping in there too. It's horrible, and it completely destroys the work that a band have done in creating an album. There was a white paper done a little while back that concluded 'LOUDNESS does NOT equal more sales', and for me that's most definitely true, so you wonder why the message hasn't sunk in with so many people yet. Thankfully it's not everyone. There's the odd album appearing here and there which bears the words 'This recording may be a bit quieter than some of your other new CDs, to enjoy it at it's best, just turn the volume up and enjoy the full dynamic range this recording has to offer'. Amen to that. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Viventis wrote: > I asked a question in the Triode, Digital Enhancement App thread as to > whether the app would allow the transmission of 24bit/192kHz through > toslink or spdif cables. The response I received is that it would, so > long as my receiver's DAC could handle it. Fortunately, my Onkyo 809 > has a DAC that does handle 24bit/192kHz. Will it do 24/192 over USB? My Audiolab will only do up to 24/96 over USB as it's a class 1 USB device, but will do 24/192 over coax. The main problem at the moment is having anything meaningful to listen to at 24/192 - The only recording I currently have at this rate is Fleetwood Mac's Tusk - Great album, but comparing the waveform with the standard Red Book rip shows it to be pretty much identical. Turns out that Tusk was an early digital recording, so there's nothing above 22KHz anyway, so whoever's clever decision it was to release this was either being deliberately misleading or just didn't know what they were doing. Kind of puts you off even bothering with high res content. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
ralphpnj wrote: > > > On my other Squeezebox to external DAC setups I've simply learned to > live with these less than perfect means of digital data transmission. Same here, I love my Squeezebox and for a good session discovering new music via Spotify or some internet radio, nothing comes close. I keep all of my music ripped losslessly on a NAS drive connected via Cat6 to the SBT, but if I'm in the mood to listen to my CD collection with the best possible audio quality, then the CD goes in the Audiolab's draw every time and the SBT gets switched off. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
saeyedoc wrote: > It's reasonable to assume that there may be measurable differences, but > are they audible? That's the real question. It's different in a pro > setting where you don't want to propagate those small errors, they could > add up to something audible eventually. Is it audible in the pro environment, that's the $64,000,000 question. Difficult to hear in the environment that I work in, but when the opportunity arises, I'll do my best to get a good listening session done. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
ralphpnj wrote: > Oh my what an awful burden it must be to be born with a pair of golden > ears. Just thinking about it makes me want to weep. It's a curse. Oh to be able to enjoy music as much from a tinny micro system ;-). > Look I consider myself somewhat of an audiophile but that does not mean > that I am willing to swallow each and every audiophile myth hook, line > and sinker. What audiophiles seems to have forgotten is that the digital > storage method, whether it is used for music, video, words or pictures, > was developed as a means to overcome many of the limitations of the > analog storage method. Sure digital introduces some limitations of its > own but those limitations are not the same as the old analog > limitations. And one of the old analog limitations that digital DOES NOT > share is that digital is NOT dependent on the storage media and the > method of data transmission. By this I mean that it makes no difference > how the digital data is stored, be it on a hard drive, a tape, a flash > drive or optical disc, nor does it make any difference how it is > transmitted, be it via toslink, usb or coax. This feature was "built > into" digital from the very beginning and is very well understood > (outside of the audiophile world) and is the reason why a youtube video > uploaded from China will play back perfectly on a computer located in > Texas even though the digital data will passed through countless wires > and relays along the way - because ones are ones and zeros are zeros. > > Now don't get me completely wrong since I do believe in many of the > basic ideas of high end audio, such as vibration control in > loudspeakers, proper speaker placement, proper power amp and speaker > matching, etc. But all of these ideas have one important thing in > common: they are all based on good scientific reasoning and can easily > be tested and measured. In addition, the previous paragraph does not > mean that there is no room for improvement in digital audio, rather it > means the areas for improvement lie somewhere other than the means and > method of digital data storage and transmission. I agree with the vast majority of what you say except for the transmission method. This is where the *BIG* differences happen. SPDIF/TOSLINK are both a massive fudge - always have been and all the manufacturers know this. The problem, before all of the transmission line reflections and impedance mismatches are that data and clock are interleaved down the same cable. Interleaving will always cause jitter issues, so this alone makes these formats less than desirable. No-one outside of a domestic environment uses TOSLINK/SPDIF, using balanced 110Ohm AES. I work every day with 110Ohm balanced and 75Ohm unbalanced digital audio connections and you can quite easily measure errors in going from one to the other without using balancing transformers. Shielded cables certainly make a difference if you're trying to get away with it, so it's not unreasonale to think that the same thing is happening with different grades of SPDIF/COAX cable - I'm not saying you have to spend silly money on esoteric cables. In fact, I'm positively against it, especially when you know that most of this stuff is just marketing and can be made up at home given some soldering skills and the knowledge of the right cables and plugs to use. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
ralphpnj wrote: > Double WOW - you are making way too much sense and common sense and > science are most definitely NOT welcome in any modern audio forum. Plus > my post should be number 8 and so far no one has told the OP that the > USB modification is the ONLY way to go, after all with this mod one can > stream 24bit/192kHz and there are just so many reasonably priced (as in > less than the price of a new car) 24bit/192kHz recordings available that > going with coax or toslink makes absolutely no sense at all. Agreed, except that you need a newer Class 2 device if you want to stream 24/192. Most (especially cheaper) USB equipped DACs are USB class 1 and so 24/96 is the highest rate you can stream at. The USB mod is most definitely worth a try though. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
As I said at the bottom of my message, just posting my *EXPERIENCE* based upon many hours of listening and enjoying or not enjoying music. If you can't hear any difference then all the best to you, you've achieved the best sound for your system and I'm jealous and wish you all the best. But don't think that you know everything when you're just spouting all the stuff we've already read and either see the logic in (which I do) or disagree with and know that there must be something more to it (a something which as yet, has not been measured or documented, which I also do). Humans are not measuring devices, so why should a piece of electrical measuring equipment or a law on sampling theory or transmission lines provide all of the answers. I suggest you think about that one! lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] coax vs toslink
Viventis wrote: > There should be no difference at all. Digital is digital. Your > receiver's DAC will decode each the same. The big difference is in the > Touch's analog output. The DAC in the Touch is excellent, even better > than that found in many receivers. I beg to differ. Getting the 1s and 0s from your Touch to your DAC is quite a challenge (there is no such thing as a digital *SIGNAL*, it is an analogue carrier modulating small changes in voltages representing binary information), especially over the poorly designed interfaces that are TOSLINK and SPDIF. One will be better than the other depending on the implementation and your cabling. TOSLINK optical cables come in two flavours, plastic and glass. The outer sheath will also make a difference, the light path is affected by the reflective and refractive indicies of the cable - take a glass and a plastic cable and listen - easily demonstrable difference in audio quality. No need to spend silly money on a glass cable though - Stan Beresford sells a very good one for example. In my system TOSLINK comes a poor second to a coax connection. I am using a Touch connected to an Audiolab 8200CDQ and the optical connection sounds flat, dull and lifeless. The SPDIF path is crippled by the fact that it SHOULD be a 75Ohm impedance connection, but considering that RCA plugs are not 75ohms and neither is the circuit up to the RCAs, there's not much chance of avoiding signal reflections between one end and the other. Using different lengths of cable will go some way to alleviating the problems this causes - A lot of people report 1.5m as being the optimum length of coax cable, but again, the cable you use will make a difference. I've tried various coax cables from the likes of Chord, Kontak Link and QED, but so far, my home brewed cable using Belden satellite coax at 0.5 metres has worked best for me. It's not something I could pick up quickly in an A/B test, but certainly, over the course of an evenings listening, the Belden has had me enjoying my music louder and for longer. Just my experiences - YMMV of course, but keep your ears and mind open. lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95872 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] Async USB Dac Experiments - testers wanted...
A note to anyone buying a USB2.0 hub to plug into the back of the Touch. It seems that they are not all created equal. I ordered a cheap one from Ebay last week and when it arrived it turned the clicking I had every second or so with Kernel #2 into a completely unlistenable noise. The music was still there (just) but it was buried under a sea of clicking and hissing. Believing that I may have been sold a USB 1 hub badged as a USB 2 hub I tried it in my PC, though surely enough it registered as USB 2.0 and had the transfer speeds to prove it, so I was a little perplexed at this. Spending a little more on a branded USB 2.0 hub did the trick so now I have kernel #2 running without a hitch. I've not god TT3.0 running as well and this brings about the same improvements in clarity and definition as it does with the SPDIF output, so a very worthwhile tweak. I noticed that while I couldn't run the buffer any lower than 4000 using kernel #1 (without the USB hub) without getting gaps in the audio, I can set it right the way down to 3200 with kernel #2 without a glitch, even at 24/96. Now to work out whether there is any audible difference between kernel #1 and kernel #2! -- lovejoy lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93310 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] Async USB Dac Experiments - testers wanted...
I'm running USB audio 0.3 with kernel #1 into my Audiolab 8200CDQ and it is faultless. In fact, it's the most enjoyment I've ever got from my Squeezebox Touch and that's including having used the TT3.0 mods. I've not tried putting the mods back in place yet as I'm enjoying it very much as it is. Using kernel #2 is giving me clicks and pops every couple of seconds, so I've stuck with kernel 1 for the time being until the USB2.0 hub I've ordered arrives. Many thanks to all involved on getting this working. It's also a major benefit to be able to use the CDQ's remote to control track skipping, play and pause. Nice work. -- lovejoy lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93310 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
Re: [SlimDevices: Touch] What's Random?
Random playback is one of those things that is incredibly difficult to do in software. Computers by their nature are not random, have no concept of random and the question of how to program a good random algorithm is one that has been going on for years and there's still not a good answer to this. I've had the exact same problem you describe with just about every piece of digital equipment I have ever owned. I believe that most programmers, particularly when using high level languages for programming do not bother themselves with such trivialities and simply use the 'random number generator' command that comes with the language development kit. This is fine for most purposes but as you've found when it comes to music and once you've used it a few times, you begin to establish patterns because the random generator itself isn't truly random. A lot of random algorithms are based on the current system time, which, if you tend to play music during the same time every day isn't very random at all. This is just an example but you can see where this comes from. Manufacturers have realised the need for a proper random algorithm and one in particular (or maybe there are more around now) came up with an ingenious solution. They put two ANALOGUE oscillators inside thier chipset which both run at different frequencies and were intentionally made with poor tolerance to provide drift. The two oscillators are then sampled at the time a random number is needed and summed together. Being low accuracy analogue oscillators which are sampled at indeterminate periods this gives you as close to random as you're ever going to get in a computer based system. But of course Logitech are unlikely to be using this solution anytime. -- lovejoy lovejoy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=47846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=91009 ___ Touch mailing list Touch@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
