SoftwireEngineer;152988 Wrote:
I have used Mapleshade Silclear silver paste. Even though inital effect
is very good, the sound seems to deteriorate over time. So I have now
just cleaned my contacts with Caig DeOxit and lightly treated with
ProGold. The Extreme Gold silver paste looks like
JJZolx;152427 Wrote:
I've found that turning off the (as yet) useless 2nd display to be the
best of all worlds. Until someone thinks up a good use for the thing.
I'd like to use the second display to show the comment field as all my
rips include bios and reviews in this tag, but getting it
ModelCitizen;153104 Wrote:
Using browse I can brwse through albums (for instance) but when I hit
the right button, instead of getting the track listing I receive the
comment (which is useless as it's the same for all the tracks). I can't
seem to figure out how to get back to listing the
Ok, I've reassessed my funds. My limit is bumped to $7000 for amps.
I was reading about class D amps in a recent audio magazine and they
recommended the Kharma MP150's, but in general nobody seemed to like
class D due to the low pass filter cutting out some of the high freq
sounds. Humming
If you want to visit a good hi-fi show, no plasma screens, no surround,
just good ol' 2 channel, try the Heathrow High-Fidelity show, Park inn,
next March31/April 1 weekend
--
OYEGRAL
Consonance 845 single-ended monoblocks, Cyber222 pre-amp, Theta Data
Basic CD transport, Custom built dac
kbelinski;153096 Wrote:
Yes. It could be use as a digital source selector. But more importantly,
many audio enthusiasts prefer outboard DAC. I think digital-out only
transporter will have its market.
O.k., so why not just use a SqueezeBox?
--
ezkcdude
DIY projects page:
Your speakers retailed for $2200 new, and your going to spend 3X that
amount on an amp? Speakers are by far the most important part of a
system, and by far, have the most impact on sound. I would recommend
sticking to your original amp budget ($2500 or less), and see how that
works for you. If
ezkcdude;153157 Wrote:
O.k., so why not just use a SqueezeBox?
Because squeezebox is not good enough.
--
95bcwh
95bcwh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4358
View this thread:
OK, I finally got it all set up, with some help from Inguz. The
difference in sound could be characterized as night and day, with no
exaggeration.
I made a few stupid mistakes, which I think others probably have, as
well. I'll list them here. If you don't make these mistakes, setting
everything
I would be interesting in knowing how well the slimdevice does a
uncompressed internet stream. www.kexp.org offers it, just not sure if
a slimdevice or your internet connection can handle it.
--
audiot
audiot's Profile:
It's not good enough to serve as a transport? Is your opinion based on
listening experience or technical expertise?
--
ezkcdude
DIY projects page:
http://www.ezdiyaudio.com
System:
SB3-EZDAC-MIT Terminator 2 interconnects-Endler Audio 24-step
Attenuators (RCA-direct)-Parasound Halo A23
sam500;153106 Wrote:
A class A or B amp refers to whether the amp switches direction of
something (the current???) for more efficient power usage.
Class A/B/AB sound better than D because they allow a gradual switch
and do not produce Pulse modulation.
Class A/B/AB/D can us solid state
95bcwh;153165 Wrote:
Because squeezebox is not good enough.
A SB with mods and a good linear power supply is a superb transport. I
have a stock unit with an inexpensive power supply and it easily
surpasses the SQ of my CDP. I have read review after review by people
with high end systems that
ackcheng;153192 Wrote:
welcome to the world of digital room correction!
Very happy to be here!
--
totoro
_
squeezebox 3 - mccormack dna .5 - audio physic tempo 4
totoro's
OYEGRAL;153144 Wrote:
If you want to visit a good hi-fi show, no plasma screens, no surround,
just good ol' 2 channel, try the Heathrow High-Fidelity show, Park inn,
next March31/April 1 weekend
Seconded - and I'd be delighted to see Slim Devices there :)
--
adamslim
SB3 and Shanling
Clive - thanks for coming by the show and I think you can attest to the
sheer volume of interest which was great.
As for future shows, I'd love to do more if we can muster the money and
personnel. What Hifi was definitely better for Squeezebox than
Transporter, but there was some real interest
I use a Meridian G68 so really don't want to shell out for the analogue
stages. Although I'm sure they are excellent, going from D-A-D-A is
bound to have some influence on the sound.
I really like the idea of the Transporter, but I'd like to buy it
without the analougue stage. Even better if I
I'd like one too
--
SoftwireEngineer
SoftwireEngineer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7000
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=29494
Patrick Dixon;153203 Wrote:
Please explain (using the laws of physics and engineering) how a 'jitter
rejecting' DAC does actually, in reality, remove jitter!
It's explained quite clearly in the Lavry white paper, which was posted
here a while back. I can dig it up if you can't find it.
The
And what exactly is wrong with using a SqueezeBox as a digital
front-end? And please don't tell me it's because someone on the forum
said it's not good enough. I can sense that is the answer.
--
ezkcdude
DIY projects page:
http://www.ezdiyaudio.com
System:
SB3-EZDAC-MIT Terminator 2
timmorris;153216 Wrote:
I use a Meridian G68 so really don't want to shell out for the analogue
stages. Although I'm sure they are excellent, going from D-A-D-A is
bound to have some influence on the sound.
I really like the idea of the Transporter, but I'd like to buy it
without the
krochat;153236 Wrote:
1. It sounds worse with some systems (i.e., TacT gear) than a better
digital source - be it a SB3 with modified digital out, SB3 with a
separate processor (like the Apogee Big Ben), or a digital-only
Transporter.
2. Maybe I want the Transporter knob.
3. Maybe I
Coffee;153234 Wrote:
If the DAC is designed properly, it should use its own clock to resample
the input. In that case the SB3 would be a perfect (as in cannot be
better) source. Why would a Transporter be better in that case? Better
buttons?
To answer this question - as far as I can tell
opaqueice;153222 Wrote:
The concept is simple - you just record the incoming stream of bits in a
buffer, and then play it out through the DAC using your own clock.There have
been other DACs that use this approach, the problem is that
they do seem to sound different with different transports,
Patrick Dixon;153248 Wrote:
There have been other DACs that use this approach, the problem is that
they do seem to sound different with different transports, which
implies that the frequency adjustments of the read clock are audiable.
It's also possible to design PLLs with fairly long time
krochat;153236 Wrote:
2. Maybe I want the Transporter knob.
3. Maybe I want the dual displays.
4. Maybe I don't want a separate linear power supply.
5. Maybe I find the Transporter form factor more attractive.
For my personal wish list, I'd like a digital-only Transporter without
Patrick Dixon;153248 Wrote:
There have been other DACs that use this approach, the problem is that
they do seem to sound different with different transports, which
implies that the frequency adjustments of the read clock are audiable.
It's also possible to design PLLs with fairly long time
opaqueice;153260 Wrote:
The adjustments in the Lavry clock can not be audible if what they say
in the white paper is true. They only ajust the clock (by a tiny
amount) once every couple of *seconds* - so that induces a distortion
in sounds of frequency less than 1 Hz. If you can hear that
totoro
Nice write up on Inguz room correction system. I just got some new
speakers so I haven't run new sweeps just yet but I know that the
system will benefit. Setting levels when doing the sweeps can be a
little tricky.
Also for those who want more info see: http://www.inguzaudio.com/
Stevo
opaqueice wrote:
The adjustments in the Lavry clock can not be audible if what they say
in the white paper is true. They only ajust the clock (by a tiny
amount) once every couple of *seconds* - so that induces a distortion
in sounds of frequency less than 1 Hz. If you can hear that I'd be
I must be blind..I just cannot see where you are turning off the
analogue o/p of your SB3. Player setting ? Server setting ?
TIA
--
ncpl
ncpl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6305
View
Nick
The SB+ with the standard DAC rather than the upgraded DAC (which is
redundant for your purpose) is £800, quite a saving on the UK price of
the Transporter.
Regards
Gary
--
GaryG
GaryG's Profile:
P Floding;153270 Wrote:
I believe most people stay away from Toslink due to it's measured jitter
performance. Doing so, of course, may be a mistake.
You seem to have entirely missed the point - these DACs are independent
of the transport jitter.
Robin Bowes Wrote:
Adjusting the clocking
ncpl;153288 Wrote:
I must be blind..I just cannot see where you are turning off the
analogue o/p of your SB3. Player setting ? Server setting ?
TIA
Player settings - Audio - Preamp volume control - 63
--
P Floding
I like the idea of trying this, but have two questions:
- Is it worth doing if I have poor speaker placement? At present I
have monitor speakers spread 17' apart, and my listening position is
much closer to one speaker than the other. My amp doesn't have a
balance control, so I am stuck with a
My statement refers to stock SB only. I have done quite an extensive
comparison between modified squeezebox vs traditional audiophile CD
player, see this thread:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=25988highlight=modified
rajacat;153190 Wrote:
A SB with mods and a good linear power
95bcwh;153309 Wrote:
My statement refers to stock SB only. I have done quite an extensive
comparison between modified squeezebox vs traditional audiophile CD
player, see this thread:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=25988highlight=modified
Ah, that was you.My complements on a
37 matches
Mail list logo
