jfo;610498 Wrote:
> You really think so? I find Dr Carpetride is actually being quite
> sarcastic and disrespectful, while adding nothing to this thread.
Well he didn't swear and, in attempting to take the high road in my
interpretation, he's asking Phil, essentially, as to why someone might
tak
cliveb;610390 Wrote:
> In an objective sense, vinyl is a complete dog's dinner compared to CD
> format digital. That said, the distortions inherent in vinyl replay can
> be euphonic and some people prefer its characteristic sound. When they
> say it's "better", what they really mean is that they
Btw depending on euipment, the measures i sugested in my last post may
or may not be audible to a human, but they are real impovements
The electrical environment for your hifi would be sligthly improved.
--
Mnyb
Main hifi: To
What you can do, that would not cost you almost arm nothing is:
1. Get a a grounded outlet for your hifi ,if you are from uk this is
free as I think it,s standard there.
2. Turn the powercord contact in the rigth direction, again if in uk
this should be correct already.
If you have shucko contac
pski;610497 Wrote:
> When it comes to power, it's better to worry about the amperage limits
> of the outlet (assuming you have an amplifier that's worth a flying
> *&^$ at a rolling doughnut.)P
Hmm. That WOULD explain the enraged neighbours. Their lights dim in
time to the music!
R.
--
Ron
I won´t comment to much on a vendors chord but i did some homework with
these things.
In the days of Powerline and other things polluting the mains there is
some chance a power chord can act as lowpass filter due to the way it
is build and therefore may influence the electronics behind. BUT! A
si
mherger;608469 Wrote:
> Guys,
>
> please calm down. We only have very few rules, please respect them. The
> following are good reasons to close a subject:
>
> * Profanity: This post contains expletives or vulgar language. Please
> post in more friendly manner.
> * Personal attack: Insults or ru
duke43j;610348 Wrote:
> I agree that much of the allure of vinyl is that many people (me
> included) prefer a warmer and more musical sound to an analytical
> (and probably more accurate) sound. I believe this warm sound is
> achieved by rolling off the high end, and/or by introducing even
>
rgro;610444 Wrote:
> O.K...so this is a fair question and civilly, put, thank you.
You really think so? I find Dr Carpetride is actually being quite
sarcastic and disrespectful, while adding nothing to this thread.
--
jfo
--
RonM;610495 Wrote:
> But please, check out my bridge in New York first. Special deal, just
> for you!
>
> Seriously, I think that you'll find a consensus here to the effect that
> the so-called audiophile power cords are something close to a rip-off.
> People WILL hear what they want to hear,
In any case, the quality of vinyl depends on the production of the
product and the quality of the cartridge.
Cartridges were (and are) notorious for flavoring the sound. (From my
experience, Grado makes excellent products at reasonable prices.
AudioTechnica are good but not so cheap.)
With care
But please, check out my bridge in New York first. Special deal, just
for you!
Seriously, I think that you'll find a consensus here to the effect that
the so-called audiophile power cords are something close to a rip-off.
People WILL hear what they want to hear, especially when they know
where
pippin;609177 Wrote:
> Seriously? Then I know what my next US purchase will be. I currently
> plan to buy one and they are >$1.000 (~900) over here in Europe.
Actually, looking at froogle.com, it looks like they are around $700
from the more reputable vendors. I was remembering the price when t
magiccarpetride;610484 Wrote:
> Must admit I don't know the first thing about the importance/influence
> of power cords when it comes to the quality of reproduced sound. I
> happened to be passing by my local hi fi dealer today and saw that
> they're moving and have stuff on sale. One thing caugh
Must admit I don't know the first thing about the importance/influence
of power cords when it comes to the quality of reproduced sound. I
happened to be passing by my local hi fi dealer today and saw that
they're moving and have stuff on sale. One thing caught my eye: Nordost
Wyrewizard Magus powe
sligolad;610400 Wrote:
> i have to say an air of civility and constructive communications has
> been taking place in the last 2 pages which is refreshing.
> My thanks to phil for all his excellent work and this work has now
> convinced me to finally try the toolbox.
> Up to now i have been readin
Phil Leigh;610446 Wrote:
> thanks, Rick - that saved me a lot of typing!
>
> I'm certainly going to be the only person that decides how I "waste" my
> own time...
Cheers, Phil.
Yeah, without a baseline set of hard specs to design to, I can't
imagine how anybody could possibly design any piece
rgro;610444 Wrote:
> O.K...so this is a fair question and civilly, put, thank you. If I may
> put a few words in Phil's mouth. There is a portion of the audio folks
> that, in many cases, put empiricism ahead of the subjective. In other
> words, they measure it first and then decide if they li
magiccarpetride;610436 Wrote:
> With all due respect, I don't understand what's the purpose of these
> tests. There are four possible scenarios here:
>
> 1. You present me with the results of the test, and the results claim
> that there are differences between modded and the unmodded Touch. I,
>
magiccarpetride;610436 Wrote:
> With all due respect, I don't understand what's the purpose of these
> tests. There are four possible scenarios here:
>
> 1. You present me with the results of the test, and the results claim
> that there are differences between modded and the unmodded Touch. I,
>
Dr Carpetride
Far Fetched? Why far fetched? They seem highly believable to me. I'm
surprised you're not more pleased with Phil's initial results - they do
seem to support some of what you've been saying up to this point.
Is it because of that inconvenient little conclusion about the ttvol
mod
Phil Leigh;610116 Wrote:
> Conclusions:
>
> 1) Some people may be able to hear some changes via the analogue outs,
> as a result of some of these mods, depending on their ears and
> equipment.
>
> 2) the vol100 mod does precisely nothing (but only IF you already have
> volume set to maximum)
paulster;610426 Wrote:
> @Phil
>
> If you get a chance in all the tests you're running I'd love to see the
> differences between server-side and client-side FLAC decoding captured
> too, to start from a usual-case scenario and work through the mods from
> that point.
I did server vs flac playba
@Phil
If you get a chance in all the tests you're running I'd love to see the
differences between server-side and client-side FLAC decoding captured
too, to start from a usual-case scenario and work through the mods from
that point.
--
paulster
-
Taylormade;610410 Wrote:
> If been using a Rega DAC now for two days fed by the squeezebox touch
> via coax. The difference was immediate. The fact that the Touch
> outputs run in parallel allows for an easy A/B comparison. As mentioned
> before, the muffled sound from the Touch is now gone. I
magiccarpetride;610388 Wrote:
> I don't need no guts to support you, Klaus. What most people here don't
> know is that I hold a PhD in Bullshit
No kidding
magiccarpetride;610388 Wrote:
> So why don't all of you passive-aggressive bullies gracefully bow out
> and leave us alone to continue wor
Taylormade;610410 Wrote:
> As mentioned before, the muffled sound from the Touch is now gone.
Interesting the wide variance in responses. I was just reading another
user's reaction to the Touch yesterday (on a different forum) and his
comment was that his external DAC removed the harsh brightne
If been using a Rega DAC now for two days fed by the squeezebox touch
via coax. The difference was immediate. The fact that the Touch
outputs run in parallel allows for an easy A/B comparison. As mentioned
before, the muffled sound from the Touch is now gone. I had never
noticed this shortcomin
garym;610393 Wrote:
> wow $73,750.
> http://www.stereophile.com/turntables/258/
I see that stuff and I just shake my head. I'm nowhere near that
fanatical (or that rich).
But the question remains. Is anyone out there with a good digital front
end that thinks their analog system sounds bett
I have to say an air of civility and constructive communications has
been taking place in the last 2 pages which is refreshing.
My thanks to Phil for all his excellent work and this work has now
convinced me to finally try the toolbox.
Up to now i have been reading with great interest all the feed
On 11/02/11 17:58, magiccarpetride wrote:
> (the usual load of emotive, paranoid rubbish)
Once again, do you really think that someone else expressing an opposing
opinion, or doubting your own opinion constitutes an attack?
As far as I can see, *you* are the only attacking anybody.
Please calm d
First off I am not sure what thread you are reading but the only rude
comments are ones like yours. Phil is just putting testing in the mix
for the debate. I was not aware that this forum only allowed blind
faith and appraisal. Please calm down a bit because your type of post
was completely unca
wow $73,750.
http://www.stereophile.com/turntables/258/
--
garym
garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=85590
__
I've heard high-end rigs with turntable front ends. I've never heard
anything to make me think vinyl is superior. Some people hear it,
apparently. I don't hear it.
Then again, I could say the same about ultra high-end digital sources.
They have not impressed me as being superior to more reasonabl
duke43j;610326 Wrote:
> Now Im thinking Either these claims are totally bogus, or Im just
> looking in the wrong price range. The retail cost of the Rega table,
> cartridge and phono preamp was about $1500, which is comparable to the
> cost of my SB3 and Benchmark DAC 1. How high up the food
soundcheck;610255 Wrote:
> When it comes to magiccarpetride. I 100% support him.
> He is one of the very few ones over here having the guts to support me
> and my efforts.
I don't need no guts to support you, Klaus. What most people here don't
know is that I hold a PhD in Bullshit Detection (my
you can start your auditioning with this one. ;-)
http://www.needledoctor.com/Roksan-TMS3-Turntable?sc=2&category=791
--
garym
garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325
View this thread: http
duke43j;610326 Wrote:
> Lately Ive been seeing a resurgence of claims about how much better
> vinyl is compared to digital. I have an SB3 feeding a Benchmark DAC and
> I love it! The sound is wonderful. I also have about 200 LPs in my
> closet that I listen to occasionally on my somewhat mid-fi
duke43j;610348 Wrote:
>
>
> I think all of the above is a matter of personal preference. What Im
> curious about is what price range (if any) do you need to pay for a
> turntable/cartridge that sounds better than a good digital input.
Sorry, I don't have an answer to your question -- and I do
guidof;610362 Wrote:
> -Originally Posted by *rgro*
> Phil...
>
> First, sorry to hear that you've got unwanted time on your
> hands...here's to a speedy recovery.
> -
> Hi Phil:
>
> Ditto. Warmest wishes for a prompt and full recovery.
>
> With appreciation for your many and valuable contr
-Originally Posted by *rgro*
Phil...
First, sorry to hear that you've got unwanted time on your
hands...here's to a speedy recovery.
-
Hi Phil:
Ditto. Warmest wishes for a prompt and full recovery.
With appreciation for your many and valuable contributions to these
forums.
Guido F.
--
gu
soundcheck;610312 Wrote:
> Hi Phil.
>
> Referring to your potential listening tests:
>
> I'd be interested what system you're running? Is your signature
> up2date? No Tact equipment there - I thought I read somewhere that
> you're running a Tact amp. !?!?
> Are you still doing room convolution
I agree that much of the allure of vinyl is that many people (me
included) prefer a warmer and more musical sound to an analytical
(and probably more accurate) sound. I believe this warm sound is
achieved by rolling off the high end, and/or by introducing even
harmonics (i.e. distortion) to th
RonM;610336 Wrote:
> I was reading a post somewhere (not on these forums) from someone who
> had been ripping his old vinyl to digital. He was very gratified that
> the "wonderful warm sound of vinyl" was still present in the digital
> rips. Sigh. He completely failed to understand that this m
firedog;610254 Wrote:
> So basically, even if you start from scratch (no mic, etc), a decently
> powered SB server and a few hundred bucks can get you something at
> least as good as a $6000 TACT RC pre. Amazing. Of course, you may also
> have to invest in a DAC to equal the SQ.
>
> Definitely s
If you follow Steve Guttenburg on CNET he could probably give you a good
response to the question of digital vs. vinyl. He is big on vinyl.
I personally dont see any point in vinyl. I believe that vinyl had an
advantage in the early days of the CD. Now, digital is supreme. The
digital "limitation
soundcheck;610325 Wrote:
> Did you run any comparisons 7.5.3 vs. 7.6. ?
Not really. I simply decided one day to try 7.6. And your mods worked
very well with any version I tired. Therefor no reason to be afraid of
upgrading to 7.6. The mods run and the difference in sq is audible with
all versions
I was reading a post somewhere (not on these forums) from someone who
had been ripping his old vinyl to digital. He was very gratified that
the "wonderful warm sound of vinyl" was still present in the digital
rips. Sigh. He completely failed to understand that this meant the
"wonderful warm sou
I gave up on vinyl long ago. I never understood the infatuation with
clicks and pops, which are inevitable, as well as the effort involved
in maintenance.
--
ghostrider
ghostrider's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/m
duke43j;610326 Wrote:
> How high up the food chain do you have to go to get this better than
> digital sound that people are claiming?
Not very high according to many who prefer vinyl. Usually, it's the
other way around. Many claim you need to spend far more on a digital
front end to come cl
Lately Ive been seeing a resurgence of claims about how much better
vinyl is compared to digital. I have an SB3 feeding a Benchmark DAC and
I love it! The sound is wonderful. I also have about 200 LPs in my
closet that I listen to occasionally on my somewhat mid-fi B&O
turntable with an MMC2 cart
Soundman;610322 Wrote:
> Hi
> I also run 7.6 since a pretty long time, though I only update once a
> week instead of daily. So far all of Soundcheck's mods worked with
> every 7.6-version I installed, but only if one does a reset to the
> factory defaults before installing the mods.
Did you run
Phil Leigh;610289 Wrote:
> Hi!
>
> the latest 7.6 nightly from yesterday allows the buffer and jive2 mods
> to work... I've just tried them.
> I'll see if I can do some further tests at the weekend.
Hi
I also run 7.6 since a pretty long time, though I only update once a
week instead of daily.
To get this thread back on track.. I'm now thinking of doing away with
the storage aread and blocking up the 2nd door leading to the garden.
This would give about an extra 4 - 5 ft to length so potentially 22 -
23ft length.
Any major advantages/disadvantages to loosing the dividing stud wall ?
Phil Leigh;610289 Wrote:
> Hi!
>
> ... and yes my Touch is stock - no hardware mods at all.
>
> (my DAC is heavily modded by Audiocom... that will come into play next
> week!)
Hi Phil.
Referring to your potential listening tests:
I'd be interested what system you're running? Is your signatur
soundcheck;610280 Wrote:
> 7.6. is not supported. I won't ever support beta releases.
I think that is very wise - nightly releases mean nightly reinstalls -
and unpredictable results. Because some of these mods rely on in situ
code editing, they can be broken at any moment (accidentally or
delib
soundcheck;610277 Wrote:
> Hello Phil.
>
> 1. It's not slices in audio. It's higher energy covering lower energy
> distortions. Higher (and more dense) energy gets more prominent. Of
> course there
> is a slight difference if the type of distortions are of different
> nature
> then just "noise
kiat;610271 Wrote:
>
>
> Any comments on the 2 mods not working for 7.6 beta?
7.6. is not supported. I won't ever support beta releases.
--
soundcheck
'soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 2.0'
(http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/2011/01/soundchecks-squeezebox-touch-toolbox-20.html)
|| 'soundcheck
Hello Phil.
1. It's not slices in audio. It's higher energy covering lower energy
distortions. Higher energy gets more prominent. Of course there
is a slight difference if the type of distortions are of different
nature
then just "noise". If we talk cumulative we talk about this or
that source
Phil Leigh;610269 Wrote:
> I don't know - that's a question for Klaus!
>
> 7.6 is a big step forward for sure.
>
> I'll see what my notes said...
Hi Phil
Sorry for being too excited :)
Hi soundcheck
Any comments on the 2 mods not working for 7.6 beta?
--
kiat
kiat;610268 Wrote:
> Hi Phil
>
> Any reason why 7.6 beta is causing the jive2 and buffer mod not to
> work?
>
> I feel the new future 7.6 is quite a step forward compared to 7.5
I don't know - that's a question for Klaus!
7.6 is a big step forward for sure.
I'll see what my notes said...
-
Phil Leigh;610175 Wrote:
> SBS 7.6 beta...
Hi Phil
Any reason why 7.6 beta is causing the jive2 and buffer mod not to
work?
I feel the new future 7.6 is quite a step forward compared to 7.5
--
kiat
kiat's Profile: http
Just to clarify, ADM (indeed, any "null test for difference") relies on
the only thing changing between tests being the thing you are trying to
detect.
In particular, ADM can correct very successfully for gain and sample
timing differences. What it can't do is to correct for quasi-random
cyclical
@rgro. You brought up some good points.
I do also see quite some coloration in Phils expressed conclusions and
opinions. I am not in the position to question the tool he has been
using to run the tests. Though I'm questioning the method he is running
the tests. Of course to read Phils latest co
Phil Leigh;610078 Wrote:
> Sorry...
> the outcome is that the TACT is now in the loft.
>
> Not only does Inguz do pretty much everything that the TACT did, it
> does it with noticeably (to my ears) less artefacts. In particular, a
> nasty upper-mid resonance on some material that I've been livin
rgro;610223 Wrote:
> Phil...
>
> First, sorry to hear that you've got unwanted time on your
> hands...here's to a speedy recovery. Second, thanks for your time and
> hard work looking into this.
>
> In a way it's too bad that your results were not more
> conclusive--either way---as they've man
66 matches
Mail list logo
