I've built several sets of xlr's for various people all with great
results you should be able to build a set that will see off all but
the most exotic for about $100[£50]
you need the following to build a 1m set [any longer just increase the
length as appropriate]
2 x male xlr
2x female
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:
I'd like to add my thanks to Sean Adams for taking the time to perform
these tests. As a recent SB3 purchaser I have been searching and
reading up on the whole linear power supply debate with interest.
However as a Bachelor of Engineering in Electronic Engineering (and
general sceptic) I wasn't
milesr3;219646 Wrote:
However as a Bachelor of Engineering in Electronic Engineering (and
general sceptic) I wasn't convinced there were gains to be had when
using the SPDIF out with an external DAC.
Were you taking into account the Sb3 circuit, or using this as general
proof that 'bits
What type of jitter measurement was this? Cycle to cycle or cumulative?
Can you get a plot of the cumulative jitter over a long period?
Sometimes it's informative to do a spectrum analysis on the cumulative
jitter to get an idea of the source of the jitter.
--
kgoulet
milesr3;219646 Wrote:
It's also very decent of you to post these numbers as they do show that
the SPDIF output does not meet the specced 50pS jitter (assuming that is
also RMS). And Stereophile measured the jitter at 321pS peak-peak
Skunk;219652 Wrote:
Were you taking into account the Sb3 circuit, or using this as general
proof that 'bits are bits' -even over SPDIF?
Just as general proof (that a linear PSU does not reduce jitter
compared to the stock SMPS).
--
milesr3
P Floding;124865 Wrote:
Would you care to elaborate on that? (Or was it just a joke?)
Anyway, I don't quite see what bit errors have to do with jitter
analysis?
I believe he is referring to Clinton's question to his questioner
regarding his adventure with Monitor Levinsky.
--
agentsmith
From the Stereophile article, it seemed they used a spectrum plot to
estimate the jitter value and this would roughly be the cumulative
jitter over some unspecified interval. Estimating this from the analog
output could add the DACs errors into the jitter value. Actually
measuring the
haunyack;219603 Wrote:
You might reconsider using a sub with your HT application as some of
todays movie scores and especially added sound effects can be hard
(even to the point of damage) on speakers designed for 2 channel
listening.
I understand that, but it wasn't an option. It died and
occam;219429 Wrote:
Indeed, if we could just keep that pesky AC from our power transformer's
primary...
Keeping out pesky AC is the main objective of Red Wine Audio's battery
powered amps (http://www.redwineaudio.com/Products.html).
--
TiredLegs
Cables all sound the same, so I'd go with radio shack
--
ErikM
ErikM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7576
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=37428
Can anyone here chime in on just what kind of difference/similarity in
sound one might experience listening to FLAC's on a STOCK squeezebox 3,
versus say a mid-level cd player such as the Cambridge 640c? That cd
player costs $600, whereas the SB3 in stock form is only $300. Of
course then there
I like the AudioQuest King Cobra.
List is $225 for 1m pair XLR.
You can get them on Ebay for $75 - $85 brand new!
And yes, balanced cables with the Transporter sound remarkably better
than regular RCA.
HTH
ET
--
EvilTed
Pinball Wizard;219714 Wrote:
Would there be a world of difference between the two?
Definitely not. If two digital sources are a world of difference
apart, one is broken. There might be subtle differences, but at best
they're going to be quite difficult to hear - and quite likely simply
Ooops, sorry
He he :)
--
EvilTed
EvilTed's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11696
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=35068
I agree that the mechanical aspect of a CD player puts it at a
disadvantage against the SB3, but what about the quality of the DAC and
other hardware inside?
And to clarify, I'm interested in the performance of the SB3 versus the
CD player - no DAC's involved, just plugged straight from the
Pinball Wizard;219714 Wrote:
Can anyone here chime in on just what kind of difference/similarity in
sound one might experience listening to FLAC's on a STOCK squeezebox 3,
versus say a mid-level cd player such as the Cambridge 640c? That cd
player costs $600, whereas the SB3 in stock form
Pinball Wizard;219724 Wrote:
I agree that the mechanical aspect of a CD player puts it at a
disadvantage against the SB3, but what about the quality of the DAC and
other hardware inside?
And to clarify, I'm interested in the performance of the SB3 versus the
CD player - no external DAC's
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:
Pinball Wizard;219724 Wrote:
Wouldn't the analog path on the cd player like the Cambridge 640c blow
the SB3 out of the water?
Quite possibly. The closest thing we have to consensus here would say
that the DAC in the SB3 is great value for the money, but discerning
listeners may look to an
My money would be on the Cambridge CDP.
--
JJZolx
Jim
JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=37447
Thanks for all the replies. I would strongly suspect that to an
audiophile's ear there would definitely be noticeable difference, but
am just trying to come to terms with whether there would be any
difference to MY ears. I know there are cd players out there for $2000
and higher, so $600 is
Pinball Wizard;219745 Wrote:
Maybe I'll buy both and audition them against each other assuming they
are returnable.
Just make sure you match the levels. If you do that, I doubt you'll
hear any difference. See here for example:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=35068
--
I tried out the auido diffmaker, and it seems to be a pretty good
program. If you check the help in one of the final chapters it makes
mention that it best works if the DAC and ADC have the same clock. It
does not account for dynamic variations of the sample frequency.
Provided you look data
Hey,
I'm looking to by an SB3 for my living room and was sure that someone
here would have a good recommendation. I don't have space for a
stereo or the traditional stereo entertainment center cabinet. I do
have a set of built-in bookshelfs to the left and right of my fireplace
that I would
If you're comfortable with a soldering iron, you could build your own:
http://www.41hz.com/main.aspx?pageID=105 . The Amp3s are tiny and the
transformer would probably take up more space than the amp circuit
itself.
From personal experience of building three different Tripath-based
amps, the
...or get a premade Tripath like the Sonic Impact T amp or Super-T
--
vdonovan
vdonovan's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11536
View this thread:
I made a CD with the pink noise cited that came with the prog, had to
pad it out 1s either side and convert to 44k1 using Audition to get it
on the CD. The active part is very short. I then ran this through an
Iriver portable CD player and recorded the signal using the Sound
Devices 702. I've
lofty;219753 Wrote:
Hey,
I'm looking to by an SB3 for my living room and was sure that someone
here would have a good recommendation. I don't have space for a
stereo or the traditional stereo entertainment center cabinet. I do
have a set of built-in bookshelfs to the left and right of my
Videodrome;219774 Wrote:
You may want to take a gander at the parasound Z-Amp:
http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=1PAZAMPV3
I have a set of the Parasound Z-Pre, Z-Tuner, and Z-Amp in one of my
rooms, chosen for the same reason, that it needed to fit into an
existing bookshelf. The
Nice.
I'd never seen the Sonic Impact T or Super-T amps, they seem
fascinating from what I've read so far, and they could certainly power
my Bose speakers. And it doesn't seem like you could get any more
classy and simple than a squeezebox next to a Super-T.
The parasound looks awesome too.
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:
Let's just say that the SB3 stock is fantastic value for money. The
analogue output is very very good indeed. But that is said in the
context of what it costs. My bet would be that the Cambridge would be
better in terms of sound quality, but that is forgetting the
convenience of teh SB3 - and its
I also recommend the Z-amp. Two great features are gain control, so you
can use the top range of the Squeezebox digital volume control, and the
input trigger that automatically switches on the amp when it receives a
signal. I have mine high up on a cabinet, so this is critical...
--
gregeas
lofty;219793 Wrote:
Nice.
I'd never seen the Sonic Impact T or Super-T amps, they seem
fascinating from what I've read so far, and they could certainly power
my Bose speakers. And it doesn't seem like you could get any more
classy and simple than a squeezebox next to a Super-T.
Heh,
lofty;219753 Wrote:
Hey,
set of Bose bookshelf speakers I have...
but I already have speakers that I like.
Thanks!
Don't let the Bose bashers convince you that you need new speakers to
go with that amp.
Use the money for the amp.
.
--
haunyack
Transporter - BK Reference 200.2 -
JJZolx;219742 Wrote:
My money would be on the Cambridge CDP.
That's a good bet.
--
jhm731
jhm731's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7685
View this thread:
38 matches
Mail list logo
