adamdea;619535 Wrote:
Thanks for all your help Phil. I now have inguzdsp.exe running. I am
very grateful for your patience.
I have had some fun playing with the controls. I seem to be able to
control it from Ipeng. It took me some time to work out that I was
stuck with some old settings
Phil Leigh;619274 Wrote:
OP: Back to ethernet... there are supposed to be isolating transformers
at each end of an ethernet connection...
Yep.
* And a big fad polluted ground feeding all kind of mess into your
device.
No, there is nothing like an ITU-T (Telecommunications standards)
Hi folks.
I left the SW side for a little while and concentrated on the HW:
Below I at DIY-Audio:
I now implemented some HW mods inside.
1. SPDIF cable directly connected to mainboard.
2. Additional piggyback-style OSCON capacitor add-ons on all exisiting
ELCOs.
3. EMI/RFI protection
Computer Audiophile in its review of the touch claims that the SPDIF
output of the touch is bit perfect but I have my doubts as my ears are
not HAPPY!
Of course the SBT is bit perfect, but that doesn't necessarily have
anything to do with what you hear. From bit perfect to the analogue
you
soundcheck;619567 Wrote:
* And a big fad polluted ground feeding all kind of mess into your
device.
The Touch ground becomes the tip of your antenna.
Do you mean this happens with shielded, unshielded or both type of
cables?
Cheers
Johan
--
johann
I can't recall if the OP was ever asked to check the SbS settings
(SETTINGS PLAYERS Audio (dropdown menu), to make sure that BITRATE
LIMITING is not turned on. If it is on, the OP may be listening to mp3
at LAME -V9 level. This would explain an unhappiness with the sound.
--
garym
soundcheck;619567 Wrote:
Yep.
* And a big fad polluted ground feeding all kind of mess into your
device.
No, there is nothing like an ITU-T (Telecommunications standards)
conform grounding in place in 99.999% of all households.
The Touch ground becomes the tip of your antenna.
*
soundcheck;619568 Wrote:
Hi folks.
I left the SW side for a little while and concentrated on the HW:
Below quote I posted at DIY-Audio.
Highly recommended! (For the brave DIY enthusiasts)
I still need to figure out though how to run the Touch headless.
I still havn't
soundcheck;619567 Wrote:
* though wired is still better than WLAN, which causes other problems
inside
the Touch.
My DAC rejects jitter and I connect to it with an optical cable. Where
is the problem?
Darren
--
darrenyeats
Phil Leigh;619584 Wrote:
Klaus - what DAC are you using?
Phil
I'm running
1. a Twisted Pear Buffalo II (ESS SABRE ES 9018 DAC)
(battery powered)
(DIY module)
2. a TI TAS 5706 full digital amp
(battery powered)
(DIY prototype)
I listened to ( I just list IMO one of the top of the line
Eriko;615923 Wrote:
So .. what's your actual suggestion? Which cheap products do you think
give high-end sound? Which is, using the SB internal DAC with Inguz
and using a Radio Shack Sound Level Meter to calibrate 20-200
frequencies and if needed, adjust higher freq. sounded much better than
firedog;619570 Wrote:
Of course the SBT is bit perfect, but that doesn't necessarily have
anything to do with what you hear. From bit perfect to the analogue
you hear lots of things happen: Jitter, RF interference, filtering etc.
Noted. Taken care to ensure the rest of the equipment is good
dhinesh;619620 Wrote:
If you take a look at hiface (m2 tech) and the modified hi face, Pure
music, amarra, etc their whole selling point is to give you a bit
perfect signal at the USB output and feed it to your dac via a digital
cable.
That's not correct.
Amarra. Pure Music and so
mervin_b;619522 Wrote:
It's not easy to describe, rather like there's less happening in quieter
passages, allowing you to hear decaying acoustics and other low level
detail better.
Excellent explanation. I can easily understand the signal-to-noise
ratio, and that when you lower the noise you
maggior;619114 Wrote:
So does the hardening of paint as it dries...
Figuring out the effects of aging wires on sound quality are as
exciting and pointless as watching both phenomenona...imho.
Let me be honest with you: I've never heard the burn-in phenomenon in
electronic components. I've
magiccarpetride;619641 Wrote:
Excellent explanation. I can easily understand the signal-to-noise
ratio, and that when you lower the noise you can more easily perceive
the signal. Still, it's the very signal itself that needs some tender
loving care. Even in the absence of noise, the signal
dhinesh;619620 Wrote:
However, nothing REPEAT nothing can beat the convenience of a NAS with
all your music. Imagine using a hiface off your laptop. How much can
you fit it? NOT MUCH as they recommend using Solid state drives. The
bigger sizes are very expensive. I need 2 TB to fit my
magiccarpetride;619641 Wrote:
Or would you say that I'm full of shit at this point?
I'd say you were full of it long before this point. :-P
--
garym
garym's Profile:
What is it in our hobby that provokes such nasty behavior, as
illustrated not only on numerous audio forums, but even in some of the
reputable publications:
http://www.stereophile.com/thinkpieces/021708swiftboat/index.html
As the author nicely points out, if I spend $20,000 on a wrist watch
magiccarpetride;619708 Wrote:
What is it in our hobby that provokes such nasty behavior, as
illustrated not only on numerous audio forums, but even in some of the
reputable publications:
http://www.stereophile.com/thinkpieces/021708swiftboat/index.html
As the author nicely points out,
mlsstl;619719 Wrote:
As of late, you seem to have a flea in your fur that's demanding to be
scratched. ;-)
There are bitter people on both sides of all arguments. For every
person who belittles expensive cables, there is an equally rabid fan
who can hear the extra dose of rhythm and pace
This issue is one of veracity of the claims - not some personal vendetta
against audiophiles
As your post states, that $20,000 watch may be no more accurate than a
Swatch but is there a claim that it is? More importantly, is the choice
to buy such an item based heavily on such claimed better
snottmonster;619722 Wrote:
This issue is one of veracity of the claims - not some personal vendetta
against audiophiles
As your post states, that $20,000 watch may be no more accurate than a
Swatch but is there a claim that it is? More importantly, is the choice
to buy such an item based
magiccarpetride;619728 Wrote:
Buyer beware, that's all that needs to be said in that context. Don't
get upset if someone is gullible and falls for the snake oil. It's not
your money at the end of the day.
I think it's reasonable to provide opinions and challenge points of
view you don't agree
darrenyeats;619731 Wrote:
I think it's reasonable to provide opinions and challenge points of view
you don't agree with. All part of being neighbourly...
100% agree - and all part of contributing to forums like this.
magiccarpetride;619728 Wrote:
Don't get upset if someone is gullible and
magiccarpetride;619720 Wrote:
So what's wrong with that?
I'd only point out that you introduced this particular topic and framed
as if it were a one-sided situation. I simply pointed out that wasn't
the case. The super expensive wire cult believers get just as
ill-tempered and defensive as the
ralphpnj;619650 Wrote:
Well designed and built audio equipment should be capable of
reproducing an audio signal as close as possible to the original event
with as few compromises as possible.
I'm liking that statement a lot. :-)
--
gungrog
SB3 - Roksan DA1 - DIY passive pre -
darrenyeats;619592 Wrote:
If the SB3 isn't high end (I am silent on this point) then Inguz can't
help. The SB3 has a flat frequency response to begin with:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/slim-devices-squeezebox-wifi-da-processor-measurements
Almost as good as the SBT:
There will always be someone with an opinion on a better
solution/component etc. The key is if you are going to spend
significant $ you should test out whatever it is in as similar an
environment as you have as possible. If I could not do that I would not
spend significant $.
Now If I could only
magiccarpetride;619708 Wrote:
they have no life
I believe they have no life is the only reason I can imagine for both
paying 20k bucks on a wristwatch or several hundred bucks for a power
cable or several thousand bucks for a speaker cable.
--
pippin
---
see iPeng, the Squeezebox iPhone
This sums it up nicely.
+---+
|Filename: Shit.jpg |
|Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11560|
pippin;619790 Wrote:
I believe they have no life is the only reason I can imagine for both
paying 20k bucks on a wristwatch or several hundred bucks for a power
cable or several thousand bucks for a speaker cable.
I should have such a life.
--
Daverz
32 matches
Mail list logo
