highdudgeon;157318 Wrote:
Generalissimo Floding,
Your lack of humor, poor come-backs, and inability to take a joke are a
marvel. Again, go have a drink, get a girlfriend, or just relax. Since
the second and third options are remote, I recommend steady drinking.
Thank goodness for
sleepysurf;157322 Wrote:
Congrats to Sean, and the Slim (er, Logitech) team on the Squeezebox
getting not just one, but TWO, Stereophile Products of the Year awards
in the Dec issue... 1) Editors Choice Award 2) Co-winner as Budget
Product of the Year 3) One of nine Runners-Up as Digital
It was the SB3 in all three categories. The transporter has not yet been
reviewed by Stereophile.
--
Jeff52
Jeff52's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=103
View this thread:
Directered at you, after 8 pages of defensive silliness, why, yes, I
think they're a knee slapper.
Thank goodness for Sacajawea.
P Floding;157358 Wrote:
Ehh.. Are jokes only funny when they are directed at certain people?
You are a freakin marvel yourself.
--
highdudgeon
Relax. It's
Apologies for not responding - away for Thanksgiving and all.
Just wanted to thanknyou all for the great info. I'll set up my HK
receiver again one day and see of I can tell a difference. If I can
I'll llok into more of the suggested options.
Many thanks again
Larry
richidoo;156258 Wrote:
Well, I have finally acquired the appropriate measuring equipment and am
doing my sweeps today. The question I have is regarding differences in R
and L channel sweeps.
Is it better to leave all settings alone (pre-amp output level, SB
output level) and only adjust the interface levels?
My
You do NOT want to be doing this at a volume level where you might be
clipping! Turn it down with your preamp (or squeeze box, it doesn't
matter). It really doesn't have to be all that loud -- somewhere in
the 75-80db range is more than adequate, according to most sources.
I've taken
+1. The absolute volume level of sweep measurements doesn't matter very
much, as long as the signal doesn't get lost in background noise. The
relative levels don't matter much either, since each channel is
equalized separately later whatever the absolute level of the measured
sweep.
The
Absolutely and well-said. Now, would you kindly sit down at at a Mac
and get this thing going for some of us?! : )
inguz;157458 Wrote:
+1. The absolute volume level of sweep measurements doesn't matter very
much, as long as the signal doesn't get lost in background noise. The
relative
I have been playing a lot with my speaker setup in accordance to the
advice on the forums. When I say clipping I refer to the one
frequency in the low end (it rattles the china cabinet), but other than
that, have been pretty careful not to have the volume overly loud. (The
dog didn't even leave
I'm not familiar with Audacity. However, this looks like a time window
impulse response and not a frequency measurement. I could be wrong,
but, well, that's what it looks like. I think you need to be in
another window of your program.
Rattling the china cabinet is not the same thing as
You are probably correct about what that graph represents as well as my
misuse of the term clipping. I was looking at the Inguz website where
it says:
Start recording, and play Stereo Sweep. Watch the peak level in
Audacity as the recording progresses; if the loudest levels are hitting
the top
highdudgeon;157456 Wrote:
You do NOT want to be doing this at a volume level where you might be
clipping! Turn it down with your preamp (or squeeze box, it doesn't
matter). It really doesn't have to be all that loud -- somewhere in
the 75-80db range is more than adequate, according to most
Totoro - The cabinet is in the other room, and I don't think the mic
will pick it up strongly. It is a very slight resonation that I can
feel in my chest as well as vaguely sense/hear from the cabinet. WAF
will prevent jettisoning that!
I am trying to run the ImpulsePrep with what I have just to
ob_kook;157483 Wrote:
Totoro - The cabinet is in the other room, and I don't think the mic
will pick it up strongly. It is a very slight resonation that I can
feel in my chest as well as vaguely sense/hear from the cabinet. WAF
will prevent jettisoning that!
I am trying to run the
Yeah, stupid question - thanks for the patient answer though!
I've been looking at the PC more today than listening to music - not
good! I did indeed have the older version of .Net and so will upgrade
to 2.0 and see if that is it. Unfortunately I am also going to be
pushing the limits of my PC.
ob_kook;157494 Wrote:
Yeah, stupid question - thanks for the patient answer though!
I've been looking at the PC more today than listening to music - not
good! I did indeed have the older version of .Net and so will upgrade
to 2.0 and see if that is it. Unfortunately I am also going to be
PF,
If you want a good laugh, go back and read highdudgeon's thread:
The modifying crowd and the Transporter
Thank goodness for GD.
--
jhm731
jhm731's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7685
View
totoro;157498 Wrote:
I should definitely edit my post about easy mistakes to make to include
this one.
It's a little painful at first, admittedly, but after that it gets a
lot easier to generate new sweeps and filters.
Here is some advice for your guide:
Now, you probably have some
I recently got a Derek Shek d2 DAC, direct from the seller via ebay,
total cost £184. Having run it for about a week, I have now settled
down to some critical listening.
Background: my main system is a Shanling CDT100 (Chinese valve CD
player about £1,500, UK version), EAR 859 (13WPC
ob_kook;157501 Wrote:
Here is some advice for your guide:
Now, you probably have some shiny new toys just begging to be plugged
in wired up and turned on, but before you do so, and before you go
making posts in the forum - RTFM!
A lot of smart people contributed to this and most of the
I'm certainly not the one to be asking, but rather the one reading the
link. That said, the one you found seems excellent.
After reading all the posts about DRC, speaker placement, and room
treatments, I spent a lot of time googling around the internet looking
for advice and solutions. It seems
This is a general joke about a condition called marriage. Not IN ANY
WAY a nasty comment on tomjtx's sexual abilities.
No offense taken P.
Re: Marriage:
Some opine that there are 3 stages of sex in life.
1) Anywhere sex: meet a girl have sex in the car, at the movies,
restaurant,
Those graphs look great. They're not hitting digital-clipping. (For a
more realistic look, try click the drop-down arrow beside the
filename, and select Waveform (dB) instead of Waveform; the default
scale is linear)
Some interesting asymmetry, with the mid-region nulls in the right
channel
highdudgeon;157509 Wrote:
Ouch, boy, that really got me. My feelings are hurt. Owie.
Thank goodness for jackasses who keep me entertained.
GD-
There you go with that silly name calling again.
You're a real class guy.
--
jhm731
Uh, I think you started this, Senor Asno. And, man, are you hurting my
feelings. You're just so tricky! Whatever. I'm signing off this
thread. As in, I will not post here again. Do feel free to continue
with your banter. It will fall on deaf ears.
jhm731;157520 Wrote:
GD-
There you
A while ago, P.Floding started a thread called something like Moderator
where are you?. In it, he makes the following point:
The biggest problem is the SNR (signal-noise ratio). It is really easy
to do wisecracking and post the 50th variation on the same old joke and
get a number of your buddies
atkinsonrr;157526 Wrote:
A while ago, P.Floding started a thread called something like Moderator
where are you?. In it, he makes the following point:
The biggest problem is the SNR (signal-noise ratio). It is really easy
to do wisecracking and post the 50th variation on the same old joke
atkinsonrr wrote:
I cannot say what the answer is, and I am not proposing censoring
points of view.
It is really simple. Folks interested in the topic have to make it
a good place to discuss the topic.
This is true of all open forums, mailing lists, usenet groups, etc.
it seems that
A, I just have to respond to this.
I dont think there was a 10 to 1 ratio PRIOR to P's thread. A lot of
the humor was a reaction to his apparent lack of humor and what
seemed to me to be a call for censoreship.
I think many people dished out more humor in response which I
personally feel was
Pat Farrell;157529 Wrote:
atkinsonrr wrote:
I cannot say what the answer is, and I am not proposing censoring
points of view.
It is really simple. Folks interested in the topic have to make it
a good place to discuss the topic.
This is true of all open forums, mailing lists, usenet
Great post, Pat.
But, can I still make jokes and tell of my visits to the 3rd brane?
Sean Madman is planning some really cool stuff over there at
PhatDevices:-)
--
tomjtx
tomjtx's Profile:
atkinsonrr;157526 Wrote:
I cannot say what the answer is, and I am not proposing censoring
points of view.
Yeah right. You just want everyone who disagrees with your point of
view to STFU. What a bunch of disingenuous crap.
--
andy_c
I go away for a few days and come back to see... people starting whiny
threads on an audiophile forum to complain about off-topic threads??
And then another thread to complain that the first off-topic thread
went off-topic??? Has everyone gone crazy? Too much turkey?
If you don't like the
opaqueice;157536 Wrote:
I
Let's just get back to talking about audio.
But that would be so boring:-)
--
tomjtx
tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449
View this thread:
35 matches
Mail list logo
