Phil Leigh;603389 Wrote:
Clive - I'm talking about the track Hello Goodbye...
RG track peak is 0.791992 for the 88 master and 0.958282 for the 2009
master...
album peak of 1988 version is 0.958282
OK, understood. Track peak of Hello Goodbye on my MMT matches yours -
0.791992. However, I
Phil Leigh;603346 Wrote:
I have finally retrieved the 88 version of MMT from the garage.
A quick listen confirms a couple of things:
1) this isn't a simple remaster, mix levels have been changed too
Phil, all the pub for the remasters from the engineers said that there
was no remix
cliveb;603542 Wrote:
OK, understood. Track peak of Hello Goodbye on my MMT matches yours -
0.791992. However, I think you've misinterpreted these figures when you
speak of 80dB and 95dB. Those replaygain peak levels are linear -
respectively 79.1992% (which is about -2dB) and 95.8282% (which
firedog;603544 Wrote:
Phil, all the pub for the remasters from the engineers said that there
was no remix (they worked only from the stereo masters, and not
individual tracks). They did do selective limiting, EQ, editing,
filtering, etc on the tracks. Especially noted that they compressed
audiomuze;603525 Wrote:
How does the following:
constitute referring to his customer's opinion as FUD?
@Phil Leigh
Yes I got that. The thing that causes the whole misunderstanding is,
that the Server and the squeezebox touch's display say, when playing a
flac file that is converted to PCM at
diego;603551 Wrote:
Yes. He refers to people owning a squeezebox device. Some of those
people wrote, based on their personal observations, that converting
files to PCM at the server side sounds better than streaming a FLAC to
the player. Well, they own at least one Squeezebox device, so
Upgraded to whatever was current on the Logitech site, 7.5.2 I think.
No unusual characters that I can tell. These files displayed and
played just fine before the server change, Does the new server support
hi-res files?
The server is running on a Mac Mini with OSX Leopard.
Thanks
--
transporter handles 24/96 files natively. If they are not showing up in
your database, something else is going wrong.
--
garym
garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325
View this thread:
I've finally decided to stop using a CD Player and move across to music
server convenience.
Without modding, can I get really high quality sound from using a
Squeezebox Duet fed to a good quality DAC?
Theoretically - spinning a CD as a transport is poor compared to a hard
disk (or solid state)
The digital out of the Touch is considered to be better than that of the
Receiver.
But there are audiophiles who are satisfied with using the Receiver (or
SB3)'s digital out. I think it depends the most on the quality of the
DAC. A good DAC should be able to extract a bit perfect signal from
any
Soulkeeper;603612 Wrote:
The digital out of the Touch is considered to be better than that of the
Receiver.
But there are audiophiles who are satisfied with using the Receiver (or
SB3)'s digital out. I think it depends the most on the quality of the
DAC. A good DAC should be able to
I have the opportunity of getting a good second-hand Squeezebox Duet -
are you saying that the Touch - 'sonically speaking via digital outs'
is significantly superior to the Duet? Should I save up for the Touch
instead?
Also I notice that the Squeezebox does not use wireless N technology -
will
stop-spinning;603634 Wrote:
I have the opportunity of getting a good second-hand Squeezebox Duet -
are you saying that the Touch - 'sonically speaking via digital outs'
is significantly superior to the Duet? Should I save up for the Touch
instead?
Also I notice that the Squeezebox does
OK that's useful and reassuring information.
I am looking to get superb quality sound from the SB (I notice that
Consonance now do something similar). My plans are to use the SB into a
NOS DAC using something like the TDA1543 chips (which I have heard and
liked).
I might play safe and opt for
No. The network connection is asynchroneous, and therefore does not
matter. Only the SPDIF is synchroneous.
Some people claim LAN sounds better than WLAN - probably because the
WLAN module creates more RF noise or something. As the WLAN module
operates in the 2.4 GHz spectrum (not kHz or even
stop-spinning;603665 Wrote:
I might play safe and opt for the SB Touch. I may have been told this
wrongly but, will I compromise the sound quality if I use wireless
instead of 'hard wired' (with good quality CAT6 cable)? Or is it purely
a digital signal without the overhead of carrying a
stop-spinning;603599 Wrote:
I've finally decided to stop using a CD Player and move across to music
server convenience.
Without modding, can I get really high quality sound from using a
Squeezebox Duet fed to a good quality DAC?
Theoretically - spinning a CD as a transport is poor
Radio 1 and Radio 2 both sound appalling (particularly Radio 1). Main
reason, I believe is that the feeds are very heavily processed through
multi-band compressor/limiters. That combined with the over-processed
and maxed out nature of most recent recordings results in a most
un-listenable
magiccarpetride;603692 Wrote:
Duet will force you to stay in the mid fi territory, as its digital
transport is audibly inferior to that of a Touch.
Anything you can do on your digital transport (i.e. Touch) to minimize
the work that this mini computer has to do, will result in better sound
stop-spinning;603742 Wrote:
It's a shame that the Duet keeps me in mid-fi territory because
ergonomically I like it more - and of course there will be no worry
turning the screen off because there is no screen on the unit. If
however I need to elevate it from mid-fi can the Duet be modded to
stop-spinning;603742 Wrote:
It's a shame that the Duet keeps me in mid-fi territory because
ergonomically I like it more - and of course there will be no worry
turning the screen off because there is no screen on the unit. If
however I need to elevate it from mid-fi can the Duet be modded to
garym;603748 Wrote:
A lot of these comparisons are somewhat theoretical. At my age with the
hearing loss at certain frequencies, I doubt I'd be able to choose in a
blind test whether I'm listening to a duet, TOUCH, or my Transporter. I
ran a DUET receiver feeding via S/PIDF a Benchmark DAC I
magiccarpetride;603751 Wrote:
...significantly lowered jitter...
@Stop-spinning
Personally I'd take these differences with a pinch of salt. I replaced
an SB3 with a Touch and whilst I certainly appreciate the features of
the touch (touch screen, colour display etc), I'd be hard pressed to
You sorta need to read the forum for a while, or at least look at some
of the other posts of the posters who are giving you advice (I'm
speaking generally, not just this thread). This will help with a
baseline on their opinions. I don't mean anything good, bad, or
otherwise here, but this forum
garym;603795 Wrote:
You sorta need to read the forum for a while, or at least look at some
of the other posts of the posters who are giving you advice (I'm
speaking generally, not just this thread). This will help with a
baseline on their opinions. I don't mean anything good, bad, or
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:47 PM, opaqueice
opaqueice.4numhz1295502...@no-mx.forums.slimdevices.com wrote:
garym;603795 Wrote:
You sorta need to read the forum for a while, or at least look at some
of the other posts of the posters who are giving you advice (I'm
speaking generally, not just
26 matches
Mail list logo
