I have a Nova and a Touch but not the speakers mentioned.
I think very highly of the Nova. The DAC is very good (not as good as
my own DIY ones, but very good). The preamp section is actually quite
good. The tube is not just window dressing, it actually sounds quite a
bit better with it running.
On the main subject of this thread there IS a reason that 176/192 might
sound better, but the explanation is somewhat involved and I don't have
time right now to put it all down. Maybe tomorrow I'll take a couple
hours off from DAC design and give it a try.
John S.
--
JohnSwenson
Phil Leigh;527990 Wrote:
> John - what's your view on after-market power supplies for the
> SB3/Touch?
> I'm pretty much convinced that there MIGHT be a very small benefit for
> the SB3 s/pdif but I'm darned if I can find any benefit for the Touch
> using its digital outputs...
I've measured big
Michael, perhaps you should change your ID to "Don Quixote".
But you do get a gold star for persistency
;-)
--
mlsstl
mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598
View this thread: http://fo
Pat,
1) Downsampling introduces artifacts, right?
2) Of course, Wave sounds same as flac. The purpose was to save CPU
cycles on Transporter by doing the decompression on the server.
What would be the CPU load on the Transporter for 192/24 raw wav file?
--
michael123
michael123 wrote:
> regarding silly sampling rates, tell it to Linn, Lindberg, Classic
> Records and others, ok?
As P T Barnum said, no one has ever gone broke underestimating the
intellegence of the American public.
I have no problem with 88.2/24 or 96/24. I can't hear it, but I can
believe it c
Pat,
regarding silly sampling rates, tell it to Linn, Lindberg, Classic
Records and others, ok?
Working with Wave files on the server reduces the load on the
Transporter.
By which degree?
is it enough to lift the limitation of higher bitrates?
--
michael123
---
michael123 wrote:
>> What is the point of your continual posting in this thread? You are not
>> going to change any facts. The firmware is not open source, the CPU is
>> too slow.
>>
>> Accept it and move on with your life
> If that's a pure software issue, it can be profiled and optimized.
Its
If that's a pure software issue, it can be profiled and optimized.
There was a post by Sean Adams, saying that different Flac compression
ratio's generate different CPU load (make sense..)
so, if the limitation would be to use pure wav files, while
SqueezeCenter will decode?
--
michael123
If that's a pure software issue, it can be profiled and optimized.
There was a post by Sean Adams, saying that different Flac compression
ratio's generate different CPU load (make sense..)
so, if the limitation would be to use pure wav files, while
SqueezeCenter will decode?
--
michael123
It is a bit warm, not hot, even after 4-5 hours of continuous use.
A21's first 10W are in pure Class A, then in Class AB
--
michael123
michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745
View this t
Aha. this makes sense. For my purposes I don't need the $10k+ amplifier.
Running some older B&W speakers, but will likely change those as well.
Speakers will be a much more extensive search/test. Thanks again. very
useful info and nice to hear directly from a user of the parasound
product.
By th
michael123 wrote:
> My choice was greatly based on the fact that Transporter is an open
> platform.
There is a good chance that your choice was based on incorrect
understanding of the open license. The hardware has never been open
source in any sense. None of the firmware has been open source, alt
In A21, the signal from XLR input (balanced) got converted internally to
unbalanced. It is not dual mono as well..
Some stereo amplifiers (but I am afraid not below 10,000$) actually
contains symmetric halves for left and right signals, while each, in
turn, contains identical circuits for + and -
andyg;528229 Wrote:
> No, it's already been said that it's not possible, I was just stating
> that if it were, it probably still doesn't make a lot of sense, other
> than for marketing purposes.
I agree about "marketing purposes"!
I know few people that do not buy it just because it does not sup
No, it's already been said that it's not possible, I was just stating
that if it were, it probably still doesn't make a lot of sense, other
than for marketing purposes.
--
andyg
andyg's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.c
andyg;528143 Wrote:
> Of course it's not abandoned. But even if it were possible to support
> 24/192 I'm not sure there's a real reason to do so. Can anyone
> actually ABX accurately between 24/96 and higher sample rates?
I have few HDAD albums by Classic Records with both 96/24 and 192/24
lay
Thanks. Interesting about the not fully balanced. I read something about
that but I'm afraid I don't fully understand the implications. I
understand (I think) balanced vs unbalanced in general.
--
garym
garym's Profile: ht
I have A21 and love it!
When bought my speakers (MSRP 22K US$), I checked Octave and VAC,
costing few times more. A21 was the one that sounded most balanced,
details, punchy bass, etc.
Note though that while Transporter is fully balanced, A21 is not.
It is still very clean and very dynamic.
I t
Seeking comments (or alternatives) to the possible purchase of these two
items. Looking for mid-fi (meaning price) stereo and drawn to these
units as I like the balanced inputs (at a relatively low price) and I
actually do run a turntable, so the builtin phono inputs on the preamp
are useful. Most
paulduggan;528201 Wrote:
> There are consumer benefits to owning a powerful sports car that are not
> psychological.
> What are the consumer benefits of >96Khz sampling? (I'm not convinced
> there are any benefits >44.1Khz given good mastering but 96Khz seems to
> give some headroom for sloppines
Robin Bowes;528198 Wrote:
> On 26/03/10 14:43, DaveWr wrote:
> >
> > And Ferrari's exceed the UK speed limit.
>
> and are generally driven by dickheads, with more money than sense.
>
> :)
>
> R.
OK Ford Focus - same issue.
--
DaveWr
There are consumer benefits to owning a powerful sports car that are not
psychological.
What are the consumer benefits of >96Khz sampling? (I'm not convinced
there are any benefits >44.1Khz given good mastering but 96Khz seems to
give some headroom for sloppiness). So why -should- you make the TP
On 26/03/10 14:43, DaveWr wrote:
>
> And Ferrari's exceed the UK speed limit.
...and are generally driven by dickheads, with more money than sense.
:)
R.
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/m
And Ferrari's exceed the UK speed limit.
Dave
--
DaveWr
DaveWr's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9331
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76496
__
iPhone;528169 Wrote:
> ...24/96 basically already exceeds most peoples listening range.
Read: '-far- exceeds -everyone's- hearing range'. Unless you are a
young dog (some breeds) or a dolphin. But hairy ears and water as a
medium bring their own problems.
--
paulduggan
---
michael123;528097 Wrote:
> 192/24 is not the top goal for me, merely a (frustrating) limitation.
> Is it completely abandoned product in Logitech?
> What about few bugs promised to fix? (like pseudo over-voltage,
> updating flac library so the device will not stuck on certain bitrates,
> ..)
> It
Finally, the elephant in the thread gets outed!
--
paulduggan
paulduggan's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=30396
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76496
Of course it's not abandoned. But even if it were possible to support
24/192 I'm not sure there's a real reason to do so. Can anyone
actually ABX accurately between 24/96 and higher sample rates?
--
andyg
andyg's Profile
29 matches
Mail list logo
