bossanova808;316194 Wrote:
I think you're being harsh on the Beresford - I have one and it made a
substantial improvement in the Sb3's sound. Hard to go wrong for the
price and if you ask me there's no reason per se a good DAC can't be
built for that sort of price. Most of the price with
mvalera;316160 Wrote:
OMG! Stay the hell away from the Moodlabs dice DAC as well... get better
speakers.
I see: so according to you there's no dac under 500$ that is better
than SB3 internal dac...
Pretty funny :)
--
Themis
SB3 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus
mvalera;316159 Wrote:
I would not waste the money on the Bereford. It's specs don't look any
better than the Classic.
You'd be better off spending the 165 British Pounds on speakers.
mvalera;316160 Wrote:
OMG! Stay the hell away from the Moodlabs dice DAC as well... get better
speakers.
I think mine is V or VI
--
bossanova808
bossanova808's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=619
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=49316
Themis wrote:
mvalera;316160 Wrote:
OMG! Stay the hell away from the Moodlabs dice DAC as well... get better
speakers.
I see: so according to you there's no dac under 500$ that is better
than SB3 internal dac...
Pretty funny :)
Er, no. He's advising that, in his humble opinion, the
I had a Benchmark DAC1 Pre on loan for a couple of weeks recently to
compare with my Naim CDX/Hicap/82 preamp.
Suffice to say, after 3 days, I sold my $5K (used values) worth of Naim
gear and run the DAC1 Pre directly into my remaining Naim 180 power amp
and Shahinian Arc speakers.
The DAC1 has
Why do you think in brand new DAC? Forget specs and believe your ears.
Old DACS are pretty cheap (my Audio Alchemy was 400 USD but i think
available lower prices too) 16 bit 48khz max, below 100db sn ratio, but
sounds damn good.
--
Saughassy
Robin Bowes;316236 Wrote:
Themis wrote:
mvalera;316160 Wrote:
OMG! Stay the hell away from the Moodlabs dice DAC as well... get
better
speakers.
I see: so according to you there's no dac under 500$ that is better
than SB3 internal dac...
Pretty funny :)
Er, no. He's advising
Saughassy;316260 Wrote:
Why do you think in brand new DAC? Forget specs and believe your ears.
Old DACS are pretty cheap (my Audio Alchemy was 400 USD but i think
available lower prices too) 16 bit 48khz max, below 100db sn ratio, but
sounds damn good.
I second that. I used an old Audiolab
bhaagensen;316287 Wrote:
I second that. I used an old Audiolab 8000DAC with my SB3 for years. The
8000DAC was cheap and old with specs to laugh at even back when I got
it. Still it sounded quite good (i.e. better than the SB3 to my ears).I
second that, too (if you can listen to the dac
Themis;316268 Wrote:
- The dac part of all that is about -let's say- 50-70 bucks.
We get a -pretty- good 70$ dac. Did I get it all wrong ? :p
I think you'll find that the actual DAC in the SB2/3 cost something
closer to a couple of dollars, not seventy dollars.
--
andynormancx
Yes,
mvalera;316321 Wrote:
The cost of the actual DAC chip (or the cost of the aluminum box in
which it sits) has very little to do with the quality of it's output.
Much more important is the design in which it sits, and how the signal
is treated from end to end. Qualified engineers spent a lot
Themis;316331 Wrote:
I'm trying to understand.
Well, marketing price sums up all that. Does a device sold 70$ has the
same design and signal treatement as a -say- 1000$ dac ? I bet no.
So, each Device has a sonic signature in accordance to its price. And
the relative price of the SB3
Totally off topic ...
Seldom mentioned but critically important -- tune the room! If you're
on a budget, this is one of the best and least expensive upgrades to
your sound you can make -- there's plenty of options in terms of
acoustic reinforcing material and a whole range of prices.
A good
Worth noting - if you happen to be using a multi-room synched
configuration, adding an external DAC in one room also adds latency
which causes weird phase differences and echo-ee psycho acoustic
effects...
Then again... you could add the same DAC in every room if you had the
budget and trust the
So, I used Adobe Audition 3 to perform a frequency analysis of a
24-bit/96Khz 'Studio Master' file from Linn Records (it's the 'Amen'
from the Mozart Requiem). The FLAC was converted to WAV by foobar2000
before loading into Audition BTW.
I'm wondering why there's a bunch of high frequency
That's interesting... This is what SND said about B.Britten: Simple
Symphony, Op. 4, downloaded from http://www.2l.no/hires/index.html
(Stereo WAV 24/96):
' [image:
http://s263.photobucket.com/albums/ii158/alekz-net/audio/samples/th_2L50SACD_tr1_96k_stereowav.png]
'
vincentyan;316197 Wrote:
Here is what I did: convert a song of Apple Lossless in iTunes to AIFF,
WAV, and MP3 (iTunes doesn't support FLAC so I can't test FLAC). The
resulting 3 files are .aif, .wav, and .mp3. Play them with
SqueezeCenter. I can only FF/RW the MP3 song, not the AIFF nor
sebp wrote:
Ever thought about it?
Doesn't it make (good) sense?
Its a very naive idea.
Just adding a different version of the product is insanely expensive. In
the early days SlimDevices offered the wireless SB and a wired-only
version that was slightly cheaper. Its not clear that it ever made
pfarrell;316377 Wrote:
Its a very naive idea.
Just adding a different version of the product ...
... I would be stunned if SD/Logi would decide to make a Receiver++
with a better DAC.
Read me again, Pat.
I'm not asking for a different version of the product, but for an
add-on product most
jgs;316382 Wrote:
FYI, I went ahead and opened bug 8620
(http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8620) analogous to bug
571, to request FF/RW support for Apple Lossless.
... and it got dup'd and bug 571 updated to encompass Apple Lossless,
which is fine. I also noticed another relevant
In the bug report I submitted, after discovering SqueezeCenter had
clicks on 24/96, while the old SlimServer didnt have this problem it
was concluded that the compression chosen when doing the flac rip was
the cause of it.
Keeping this at 5 should avoid the problem, but you can look up the bug
Just want to say Bryston has a new separate D/A converter out. The BDA-1
is one sleek unit.
--
Anne
Squeezebox 3 Stereovox XV2 Bryston B100-DA SST Martin Logan Aeon I
Anne's Profile:
Phil Leigh;311580 Wrote:
Actually there's an old studio trick. Sometime when you've sat listening
to a mix next to the nearfields for hours you get a bit...jaded - and
you kind of lose the plot in terms of eq, balance etc etc. However,
leaving the studio for a break and then returning a
I think that I must be one of the very few people who actually LIKE the
sound of the SB3 analog output. :)
Just keep your signal cables short and use proper amp/speaker combos
(go for system synergy), and I think it sounds great. Plus you
thankfully get to avoid the jitter penalty of an S/PDIF
With high datarate FLACs (24-bit or DTS), it's usually a good idea to
use a milder compression level than normal, to give the Squeezebox CPU
a little more leeway.
I use compression level 1 for high datarate tracks and level 7 for
everything else and that seems to work fine.
--
Pale Blue Ego
For example, here is the Neumann site's spec sheet on the U87 mic, a
classic go to mic for vocals
http://www.neumann.com/zoom.php?zoomimg=./assets/diagrams/u87ai_diagrams.htmzoomlabel=Diagramw=878h=278
The classic Neumann M50 is spec'd at Frequency response: 40 - 16 000
cps
meaning 40 hZ to
The energy _must_ go to zero before reaching 48KHz because that is the
nyquist frequency. Note the log scale - that is exactly what happens,
although it may not look it at first glance.
But that is a very sharp drop indeed, and it's hard to say why it rises
so quickly after 22KHz before hitting
seanadams wrote:
The energy _must_ go to zero before reaching 48KHz because that is the
nyquist frequency. Note the log scale - that is exactly what happens,
although it may not look it at first glance.
True, that doesn't explain the relative peak from 30kHz to 40k or so.
Note, its down 35+
alekz;316365 Wrote:
This is the link to the picture:
http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii158/alekz-net/audio/samples/2L50SACD_tr1_96k_stereowav.png
This shows all the over 20kHz stuff down 90 to 100 dB.
That means it is realistically non-existent.
Typically, down 70 dB means cut out
mvalera;316337 Wrote:
Again we have qualified engineers that know how to treat a signal from
end to end in our designs... I think you can draw a conclusion about
what I am saying about some of the other less expensive DAC boxes that
were recommended earlier in this thread.
You're
31 matches
Mail list logo
