RioTubes;190474 Wrote:
Ronald, the pic is to small to tell if you connected the clock input
cable's ground to a handy clock reference point on the SB3 board?
Well that might have been my big mistake.. I used a wire to connect
ground from one of the rca output ground to the other end of the
gregeas;190399 Wrote:
Transporter--Arcam C31 pre--Arcam P1 monoblocks--PMC FB1+ speakers.
[snip]
I'm thinking of removing the pre-amp at some point, but not sure.
You'll never find out until you try. Removing the preamp from my system
was one of the biggest upgrades I've made for years. (And
Do I need to rip all my music again to flac to get the best quality,
and use a dac to get as good results as a dedicated cdp?
In theory yes, but you may not observe a sufficient benefit of FLAC
over 320 to make it necessary. Plus you could buy try a Transporter if
you find the SB3 lacking.
--
seanadams;190475 Wrote:
Where exactly? I see only heat shrink tubing around the sleeve of that
coax where it connects to the pcb.
Have you got a scope?
The shrink tubing is there to isolate the shield from the SB3's smd
component. I connected a ground wire to the other end of the coax which
So I guess I need to try again and do it the right way this time :P
Now I have to find a good ground reference point on the circuit board
somewhere near the pad which serves as the external clock input..
--
tingtong5
One of us is missing something here... you need to connect the screen of
the coax cable to ground at BOTH ends.
edit: I see you noticed that 2 minutes ago... ;)
--
AndyC_772
AndyC_772's Profile:
AndyC_772;190497 Wrote:
One of us is missing something here... you need to connect the screen of
the coax cable to ground at BOTH ends.
edit: I see you noticed that 2 minutes ago... ;)
Yes I am aware of this now :P
The ground of the external clockboard was connected to the ground of
the
Just for the record, I have an Honours degree in Electronic, Computer
Systems Engineering from Loughborough University of Technology, and
over 25 years research and product development experience in the
Broadcast TV, CCTV and related industries.
If you watched any TV in the last two decades of
AndyC_772;190482 Wrote:
What matters with SPDIF is the jitter between successive clock edgesActually
what really matters is how any artifacts in the SPDIF signal
affect the jitter of the regenerated clock in the external DAC - but
since all external DACs are slightly different, and we don't
totoro;190465 Wrote:
It'd be really interesting to see a shootout style review of the sb3,
transporter, and sb+, with a panel blindly choosing which they like
(seems like you occasionally find these sorts of reviews online these
days-- I think the audiocircle people did one on switching amps
Patrick Dixon;190500 Wrote:
Equally if you have been caught on CCTV (particularly, but not
exclusively, in the UK), it's very probable that you've been monitored
and recorded by equipment which was designed by me, and manufactured
and sold by the company I founded.
Brace yourself for the
cliveb;190516 Wrote:
Brace yourself for the hate mail, Patrick!
You haven't been shoplifting in MS or counting cards in Las Vegas, have
you? ;-)
cliveb;190516 Wrote:
On a more serious note, can we conclude from this potted history that
you've already made your fortune, and the SB+ business
Patrick Dixon;190527 Wrote:
I guess you mean in the same way that Richard Branson flies us all on
holiday for free, or James Dyson gave us all a free vacuum cleaner?
Touche. I'm sure you didn't really think I meant it that way. Of course
you're not running your business as a charity.
What I
Just to add.
I recently took delivery of an SB+, never heard a Transporter so can't
comment about a potential comparison. I'm using the SB+ purely as a
transport, outputting the digital signal to an external Bel Canto
DAC2.
What I can comment on is the difference between my existing Meridian
500
Antipodes;190405 Wrote:
Let's give it a try.
Audiophile: One who is continuously searching for the reproduction of
musical truth in her environment, is open-minded about what might push
the envelope, and is prepared to challenge the prevailing paradigms.
This may lead to some side-tracks
Patrick Dixon;190503 Wrote:
The review was originally intended to include a comparison of the SB+
and a Boulder modified SB2, but when the Boulder unit was returned, it
had apparently developed a fault and was therefore withdrawn.
Oh, well. Maybe this will lead to more reviews.
--
totoro
I'm using the SB+ purely as a transport
Thought the only point of the SB+ was it replaced the SB's DAC.
Surely an SB3 with linear PSU would do what you wanted?
--
amcluesent
amcluesent's Profile:
adamslim wrote:
Oh and I suspect my bonus this month is going to go on an SB+ not a TP,
not least because it's the only one I can do my own listening tests on
and return if it's not good enough.
Whereabouts are you? I'd be interested in hearing a Transporter vs. SB+.
I have a Transporter.
R.
Antipodes;190405 Wrote:
Let's give it a try.
Audiophile: One who is continuously searching for the reproduction of
musical truth in her environment, is open-minded about what might push
the envelope, and is prepared to challenge the prevailing paradigms.
This may lead to some side-tracks
amcluesent;190547 Wrote:
I'm using the SB+ purely as a transport
Thought the only point of the SB+ was it replaced the SB's DAC.
Surely an SB3 with linear PSU would do what you wanted?
Two versions of the SB+ exist, one with a built in DAC, one without.
As can be seen on my sig, I
Hmm, not sure about this.
Personally I think the issue here is about plausibility. Lets say I
make two claims about modding an SB:
(1) it sounds better if I put a spot of green paint on top
(2) it sounds better if I change the DAC to a different design.
Of these, I think (2) is plausible but
I've done some searching of the forum and not found complete and recent
answers to this question.
I'm planning my music library and I've purchased a Mac Mini, a big HD
and SB3 which will all be delivered tomorrow. I'm in the planning stage
to convert my 800 or so CDs to HD file versions. I don't
What about the sonic differences between firmware versions mentioned in
the review, was this ever proved, and if so what was so special about
v15 and can we have what ever it contained it back in the new versions?
--
Simon
But, please can we at least avoid the pejorative?
You have my vote. I enjoy reading about 'dramatic' improvements in
sound quality due to changing cable direction, polishing fuses etc. But
I realise that while these could have an affect, they must be marginal
to the other uncontrolled factors.
tingtong5;190496 Wrote:
So I guess I need to try again and do it the right way this time :P
Now I have to find a good ground reference point on the circuit board
somewhere near the pad which serves as the external clock input..
The small caps on either side of the crystal are connected to
In another thread, amcluesent wrote:
The only 'tweak' I have ever
*personally* noticed making an improvement was putting a ferrite-core
around the mains lead going to the TV.
Seems to me that this is a good excuse to start a fresh thread.
My favorite tweak, which is free, is to move your
and again, it's free! If you haven't tried it, you are not getting your
speaker money worth.
SB3MF A3.24DACAlps pot2 Nakamichi PA7sBW N802Nice!
--
empty99
empty99's Profile:
Robin Bowes;190551 Wrote:
adamslim wrote:
Oh and I suspect my bonus this month is going to go on an SB+ not a
TP,
not least because it's the only one I can do my own listening tests
on
and return if it's not good enough.
Whereabouts are you? I'd be interested in hearing a
adamslim;190539 Wrote:
Real science is admitting that you may not know everything, proposing
hypotheses to enhance the knowledge base, and testing them. You should
remain open to most things - chocolate teapots aside, but possibly
including bybee filters - while retaining suitable
I second (or third?) the suggestion - everyone should try that. The
differences are often quite dramatic (especially when compared to zero,
which is the difference many other tweaks result in!).
--
opaqueice
opaqueice's
Ronald,
I'm thinking of doing the same...synchronous reclocking using the mclk
in the Dac...following John S's lead.
Are you buffering the mclk output out of the dac? I'm trying to assess
how critical this is. I'm thinking of placing an SB3 board inside my
dac to keep the cable as short as
opaqueice;190573 Wrote:
Actually, real science is about knowing which questions to study.
Keeping an open mind is easy... and totally useless, unless you develop
your scientific judgement on which issues are important. Otherwise you
simply waste your time.
That's correct, but only for
Patrick Dixon;190500 Wrote:
If you watched any TV in the last two decades of the 20th Century
(particularly global events like the Olympics and World Cup, or if you
were in the USA and watched anything transferred from film to TV) you
were almost certainly watching courtesy of equipment I
opaqueice;190573 Wrote:
Actually, real science is about knowing which questions to study.
Well if you want to do real science you don't worry about audio at all.
The real science in audio was done early in the 20th century.
But since we're on this board because we like talking about audio or
325xi;190577 Wrote:
That's correct, but only for ideal world. In the real world with all the
politics etc. this position is exactly the reason why our science is so
antagonistic and counteractive to researches in new directions.
I think you've got this rather backwards... in an ideal world,
GaryB;190581 Wrote:
Well if you want to do real science you don't worry about audio at all.
The real science in audio was done early in the 20th century.
snip
Over time various boards develop a culture for lack of a better word
and this board seems to be developing a culture that is
opaqueice;190579 Wrote:
If you've watched any HDTV, ever, you watched courtesy of equipment I
had a hand in designing.I was watching HD stuff at Broadcast shows and in
development labs back
in the mid/late 80's. Is that what you did? Never seen any US HD
broadcasting though - is it any
GaryB;190581 Wrote:
Over time various boards develop a culture for lack of a better word
and this board seems to be developing a culture that is dominated by
the objectivists who feel that most tweaks are a waste of time.
While the bits are bits crowd is well represented here, I don't
Patrick Dixon;190588 Wrote:
I was watching HD stuff at Broadcast shows and in development labs back
in the mid/late 80's. Is that what you did? Never seen any US HD
broadcasting though - is it any good?
Well, this was in the 90s, around when the standard was formalized by
the FCC in the
opaqueice;190591 Wrote:
So I take it the answer is no?No ;-)
(some padding because the message is too short ...)
--
Patrick Dixon
www.at-tunes.co.uk
Patrick Dixon's Profile:
Patrick Dixon;190588 Wrote:
Never seen any US HD broadcasting though - is it any good?
PBS (public broadcasting) is the best over the air station in my area.
One of the better [looking] shows is Austin City Limits, a live music
showcase of too-often alt country bands. The sound should be CD
How about digging those plugs of wax out of one's ears every now and
then? Disgusting, but beneficial.
--
jonheal
Jon Heal says:
Have a nice day!
http://www.theheals.org/
~~~
SB3 (wired - 6.3.1) | Home-brew PC running XP Pro | DENON DRA-395 | PSB
Stratus Bronze (2) | Outlaw Audio LFM-2 (1) |
jonheal;190595 Wrote:
How about digging those plugs of wax out of one's ears every now and
then? Disgusting, but beneficial.
Good one. I thought of this last night after using a Q-tip(R). Seems
some small cut-hairs got in there when I was using clippers on my head.
Anyway. I wanted to point
GaryB;190581 Wrote:
Well if you want to do real science you don't worry about audio at all.
The real science in audio was done early in the 20th century.
But since we're on this board because we like talking about audio or at
least about SB3s and Transporters, the question becomes how to
opaqueice;190579 Wrote:
As an engineer, you must be aware of the importance of doing controlled
measurements. Have you (or anyone else) ever done a blind listening
test comparing the SB+ playing music to the stock SB?
Just a thought on this question.
As Patrick builds the SB+ by starting
Robin Bowes;190551 Wrote:
adamslim wrote:
Oh and I suspect my bonus this month is going to go on an SB+ not a
TP,
not least because it's the only one I can do my own listening tests
on
and return if it's not good enough.
Whereabouts are you? I'd be interested in hearing a
opaqueice;190583 Wrote:
...all of which conspire to select for those best able to find fruitful
questions to study.
When a new and innovative idea comes along *and is actually correct*,
it immediately ...
They aren't necessarily the best, they're quick-or-easy-to-pay-off.
There are so
Skunk;190599 Wrote:
Also, remember to eat a balanced breakfast on the day of any serious
listening.
The signal-to-noise ratio of one's digestive tract the day after chili
or corndogs probably adds more ambient racket to the listening
environment than a the hiss and grunge from a POS mini-hifi
One can try that green lacquer - if it works for CD, it'll definitely
work on ears.
BTW, how comes no one suggested sitting on anti-vibration platform
while listening? I was also considered coupling a while ago, but I'm
not enlightened enough to sit on spikes...
--
325xi
Cheepish:
Linear psu for SB, naturally,
Isolation feet for power amp £10,
Almost free:
Cooking foil around stock mains cable to power amp, hehehe, I'm under
the impression the soundstage expanded forward slightly :D
Not too sure if this may be detrimental (heat wise)to the cable though?
--
Mr_Sukebe;190600 Wrote:
Just a thought on this question.
As Patrick builds the SB+ by starting with a standard SB, don't you
think that it would be fairly reasonable to assume that he's done a
comparison between the two. Furthermore, lets assume he has, and has
then gone on to market the
totoro;190548 Wrote:
As far as science goes, opaqueice in particular has gone over this one
numerous times. You choose the simplest explanation. If you do an
uncontrolled listening test which shows you that something that
shouldn't make a difference does, you can choose the well-established
325xi;190602 Wrote:
They aren't necessarily the best, they're quick-or-easy-to-pay-off.
There are so many fields where paying off isn't as imminent, and when
someone comes with an idea going somewhat against the accepted theories
the researcher often gets eaten by the crowd.
So, when you
hirsch;190611 Wrote:
The placebo effect in audio has become is a fallback position for
people who want to invalidate what others report hearing without going
through the work of measuring and listening themselves. In other words,
it means absolutely nothing. There are real placebo effects
opaqueice;190610 Wrote:
PD has just confirmed that none have been done, so your assumption is
incorrect.Err no. I answered no to your question.
Honestly, I'm not that good a salesman that I can walk into peoples'
homes, plug in a SB+ next to their SB2 or SB3, and walk away with a
cheque for
opaqueice;190610 Wrote:
It's not as simple as that. It's very easy to fool yourself into
hearing a difference in uncontrolled tests when one isn't there -
that's why I asked about blind tests. PD has just confirmed that none
have been done, so your assumption is incorrect.
It's
opaqueice;190612 Wrote:
Can you give a single example of that?
Einstein is a good example - working at a patent office, young, totally
unknown, comes up with a brilliant, shocking, and totally innovative set
of ideas which challenged people's most fundamental assumptions about
the world.
Simon wrote:
What about the sonic differences between firmware versions mentioned in
the review, was this ever proved, and if so what was so special about
v15 and can we have what ever it contained it back in the new versions?
I believe that versions from v16 reversed the left and right
opaqueice wrote:
I suspect the Transporter was designed like that - SD tried to
produce something with the least possible jitter at the digital out,
the lowest distortion, etc. - all defined by theory and measured with
scopes. My guess is listening tests played a very small role,
because we
I use Max to burn my CDs to FLAC on my Macbook. Works great, and it's
freeware.
FLAC and Apple Lossless should sound the same, since they're both
lossless formats. I've gone with FLAC for several reasons. The most
immediate is that I store my FLAC files and run Slimserver on an NAS
server,
Patrick Dixon;190616 Wrote:
Err no. I answered no to your question.
I assumed you were responding to the original question. OK, so you
have conducted blind testing - would you mind sharing your methodology
and results?
On salesmanship, that argument just doesn't hold water - there are
Jitterbug;190619 Wrote:
Actually, it took some several years for Einstein's (1905) ideas to be
accepted within the physics world, largely because he was an unknown.
His fame came 14 to 15 years later when solar eclipse gave scientists
an opprtunity to test his theory of general relativity.
Thanks Bob, that helps explain some.
I'm curious, does iTunes put DRM around ALAC files that were burned
from my CDs? If it does, then will it be impossible to change ALAC
files into something else in the future?
Also, does Max (which I just heard of early today) apply all the usual
tags, album
Patrick Dixon;190616 Wrote:
Err no. I answered no to your question.
Honestly, I'm not that good a salesman that I can walk into peoples'
homes, plug in a SB+ next to their SB2 or SB3, and walk away with a
cheque for a grand - without them hearing an improvement. If I was,
I'd be wasted
Jitterbug;190619 Wrote:
Actually, it took some several years for Einstein's (1905) ideas to be
accepted within the physics world, largely because he was an unknown.
His fame came 14 to 15 years later when solar eclipse gave scientists
an opprtunity to test his theory of general relativity.
hmm... expanding to 24 / 96 CAN make sense, but it mustn´t. the reason
for recording with this data rate is simple: more information can be
stored at the same time.
remember: CD does take one sample with an information depth of 16 bit
44,100 times a second. if you have more you´ll get nearer to
opaqueice;190626 Wrote:
I assumed you were responding to the original question. OK, so you have
conducted blind testing - would you mind sharing your methodology and
results?
On salesmanship, that argument just doesn't hold water - there are
hundreds, if not thousands, of overpriced
creativepart;190629 Wrote:
Thanks Bob, that helps explain some.
I'm curious, does iTunes put DRM around ALAC files that were burned
from my CDs? If it does, then will it be impossible to change ALAC
files into something else in the future?
Also, does Max (which I just heard of early
creativepart;190560 Wrote:
It seems that you can add the Lame encoder to iTunes and make FLAC
files on iTunes but it looks like a hack job that may not hold up. I
read that the new version of iTunes broke iTunes_Lame. Folks think it
will be fixed pretty quickly.
Lame is an MP3 codec, so
Thanks for the info. This helps clear some things up. I've been reading
up on this stuff for only a couple of weeks. So, it can get confusing.
I haven't even received the Mac Mini yet (everything is delivered
tomorrow) but I want to soak in as much info as I can get before I get
too deep in the
Patrick Dixon;190636 Wrote:
Nothing I 'share' with you is ever going to convince you of anything!
Exactly. Don't waste your time with idiots.
This forum software has a great feature for avoiding stupid arguments
like this one. Click on the name 'opaqueice' and select 'View Public
Profile'.
Just more experiences...
I use iTunes and ALAC to organize my music library. My collection is
made up of ripped CD while my kids buy alot of stuff from iTunes. They
listen to their music on their ipods or using my newly acquire apple tv
that runs into our home theater setup. I listen to mine
creativepart;190644 Wrote:
I do know that in most things, you learn a great deal in the beginning
of a new process and decisions that are made up front are often made in
ignorance of the real world situation.
The most importance decision is to rip to a lossless format. Any
lossless
Patrick Dixon;190650 Wrote:
The most importance decision is to rip to a lossless format. Any
lossless format can be converted to any other format (lossless or
otherwise) at a later date.
IMO the other importance thing is to use a ripping program which will
give you bit perfect copies, or
I heard such a large diff between the SB3 and the TP over 2 weeks of
comparison that I would not need to DBX to make a decision.
However, I respect O's position to not take my word for it.
I don't need a test when the diff is so large and it is my purchase,
but I wouldn't be offended if O
opaqueice;190613 Wrote:
I studied cognitive psych for a while, and in the process read many
papers on these effects. I've never heard of this genetic marker idea
- it sounds vastly oversimplified and rather naive to attribute such a
complex phenomenon to a single gene, and it goes against
Not yet mentioned, another completely free tweak is to try different
positions for your listening chair. In terms of effectiveness, it is
right up there with speaker placement.
--
mlsstl
mlsstl's Profile:
hirsch;190671 Wrote:
If you've never heard of a genetic marker, it's fairly safe to say that
you're not currently in the biological sciences.
snip
It is rather naive to hold onto conclusions from old cognitive psych
studies in the face of new evidence. Do go back and look at the
hirsch;190671 Wrote:
If you've never heard of a genetic marker, it's fairly safe to say that
you're not currently in the biological sciences.
I hope that you know that a biomarker says nothing about causality. It
simply allows prediction. Correlation as opposed to causality. If the
I have always heard and read that Apple Lossless is bit perfect. Make
sure that on your iTunes settings, under the Import tab, you turn Error
Correction on, and of course select the Lossless format. iTunes does not
put DRM on files you rip from your own CDs. I think that you also can
rip
Jitterbug;190619 Wrote:
Actually, it took some several years for Einstein's (1905) ideas to be
accepted within the physics world, largely because he was an unknown.
His fame came 14 to 15 years later when solar eclipse gave scientists
an opprtunity to test his theory of general relativity.
tomjtx;190660 Wrote:
I think O has been polite in his posts and I hope we could all do the
same.
Thanks Tom. I really do my best not to be rude or offend anyone when I
disagree with them. I apologize if anything I said here was out of
line, and if anything was I would appreciate having
Album art can be a hassle -- I have a LOT of Beatles material and iTunes
won't find that at all (nor George Harrison, John Lennon, Ringo Starr
and Paul McCartney solo work either).
It also wouldn't find Allman Brothers Band art work for some reason.
Which is odd, since iTunes sells ABB music.
creativepart;190657 Wrote:
OK. I know that iTunes does a lossless rip and I know that it properly
tags and organizes my albums, songs and library. Is it bit perfect?
That's the question.
It's not EAC, I know that. But I've had some not so pleasant surprises
from EAC due to it's
adamslim;190617 Wrote:
While I appreciate that all design should be driven by intelligence
(evolution excepted!), to me this is no way to design an audio product.
It makes perfect sense if we can measure everything that can possibly
be heard, but I suspect this is not the case. I'd much
opaqueice;190587 Wrote:
I agree with most of what you said here, but I think it's going too far
to say that the objectivists here believe that most tweaks are a waste
- personally I believe that many of them are, but certainly not all,
and I don't know about most. What's frustrating is how
Here's a good one - cup your hands behind your ears. It's amazing how
much more detail you can hear, but your hands get tired after a while.
:-)
OK, so it's not entirely serious, but I do remember seeing cardboard
ear amplifiers at a HiFi show once in the UK!
--
CardinalFang
opaqueice;190258 Wrote:
Another clueless reviewer.
That depends on what he means doesn't it? What if he means that WiFi
bandwidth for some devices is generally insufficient for lossless
formats, like FLAC, so typically lossy formats are used, whereas with
wired connection higher quality
CardinalFang;190706 Wrote:
Here's a good one - cup your hands behind your ears. It's amazing how
much more detail you can hear, but your hands get tired after a while.
:-)
OK, so it's not entirely serious, but I do remember seeing cardboard
ear amplifiers at a HiFi show once in the UK!
opaqueice wrote:
Robin Bowes]
Are you seriously questioning whether the Transporter sounds any
better than the stock Squeezebox (2 or 3) ?
Yes. Questioning, not stating.
It sounds like another one of your little thought experiments. I mean,
are you serious:
I suspect the Transporter
occam;190702 Wrote:
Given the brevity of aural memeory, (borrowing the phrase from Sean)
I'll bet dollars to donuts, that few of you have conducted a valid
hardware DBT audio test. 30+ yrs ago, I did nothing but set up the
switching mechanisms for (admittedly non audio) tests at Hopkins
occam;190702 Wrote:
Given the brevity of aural memeory, (borrowing the phrase from Sean)
I'll bet dollars to donuts, that few of you have conducted a valid
hardware DBT audio test. 30+ yrs ago, I did nothing but set up the
switching mechanisms for (admittedly non audio) tests at Hopkins
Well...
The Paradigms always have a sort of forward sound, if that makes
sense. They tend to jump out a little more, but without really being
aggressive. They create more of a wide stage, and disappear a little
more? Also more prominent in the bottom end. In general I don't have a
lot of
mlsstl;190676 Wrote:
Not yet mentioned, another completely free tweak is to try different
positions for your listening chair. In terms of effectiveness, it is
right up there with speaker placement.
at least with some speakers, the chair is probably easier to move.
--
Bob Bressler
Bob
Sure wish this post was about Inexpensive Linear Power Supplies as the
title suggests.
Now that would be worth reading.
--
creativepart
-
Great Guitar Websites:
www.telecaster.com | www.strat-talk.com | www.gibson-talk.com
creativepart;190740 Wrote:
Sure wish this post was about Inexpensive Linear Power Supplies as the
title suggests.
Now that would be worth reading.
Some post's do not lend themselves well to discussion of the OT in
these forum.
Not necessarily a bad thing but sometimes frustrates interest.
A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the
results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=19817
Question:
My main issue with using the Transporter as a digital pre-pro is its
user friendliness for the family -- ideally the digital inputs could be
custom labeled DVD and Cable, etc. I don't have a problem using it
as is, but my wife would.
--
gregeas
opaqueice;190717 Wrote:
We're not talking about scientifically acceptable results here - just a
minimal, good-faith attempt to verify there really is an audible
difference. As some people never tire of pointing out, a negative
result on such a test doesn't prove it isn't audible - but a
I wonder if the same biomarker for placebo effect also marks a
propensity for religious zeal. THAT would explain a lot of things...
TD
--
tyler_durden
tyler_durden's Profile:
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
