Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Blind tests? I don't get it...

2011-06-29 Thread Phil Leigh
Daverz;638452 Wrote: This is just technical bafflegab. Having a more complete theory does not change the reality of the underlying phenomena. Masses still attract. BTW, measuring gravitational pull does not measure curvature. And you're obviously invoking the Heisenberg Uncertainty

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Blind tests? I don't get it...

2011-06-29 Thread JezA
How do you do a double-blind test of a pretty girl? -- JezA JezA's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21219 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88345

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Blind tests? I don't get it...

2011-06-29 Thread adamdea
JezA;638486 Wrote: How do you do a double-blind test of a pretty girl? There are laws against that kind of thing -- adamdea adamdea's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37603 View this thread:

[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread erland
Has anyone done any blind tests or similar comparison regarding analog audio quality of Squeezebox devices compared to streaming solutions from other companies ? I was talking to my local hifi reseller earlier today and asked about the streaming solutions they sold, we talked about: - Squeezebox

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread Mushroom_3
I could be cynical and suggest that they get a better mark-up selling Teac or Sonos. Heaven forbid. I have compared (purely subjectively) a Sonos to a SB3 and couldn't hear any discernible difference. -- Mushroom_3

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread erland
Mushroom_3;638496 Wrote: I could be cynical and suggest that they get a better mark-up selling Teac or Sonos. Heaven forbid. Yes, that's what I suspect too, but I also realized that I haven't really compared myself and I think people in this forum aren't always objective as we tend to favor

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread Steidl Guitars
erland;638489 Wrote: but the Transporter should be a lot better than Teac and Sonos, shouldn't it ? Yes. erland;638489 Wrote: Have anyone done a real blind test between Squeezebox Classic and Squeezebox Touch using analogue outputs ? In that case, what's your feeling? Is the Touch

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread Wombat
Linn products are said to have an own signature. Some like it, some not. When your seller only offers the Linn for listening and says all others sound worse i´d look for another seller. -- Wombat Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 -

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Blind tests? I don't get it...

2011-06-29 Thread Phil Leigh
JezA;638486 Wrote: How do you do a double-blind test of a pretty girl? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/XP) - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC -

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread Phil Leigh
Steidl Guitars;638523 Wrote: Yes. Yes, noticeably better through its analog outs and its digital out (as a dedicated transport). +1 - noticeably better on the Touch via either output. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread JezA
I thought my Squeezebox Duet was pretty bad through it's analogue outputs; my Touch is just about OK for background listening. Neither are remotely audiophile quality. The digital outputs of a Touch feeding a Benchmark DAC is a much more listenable proposition. -- JezA

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread magiccarpetride
JezA;638554 Wrote: I thought my Squeezebox Duet was pretty bad through it's analogue outputs; my Touch is just about OK for background listening. Neither are remotely audiophile quality. The digital outputs of a Touch feeding a Benchmark DAC is a much more listenable proposition. +1. I'm

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread ralphpnj
Wombat;638529 Wrote: Linn products are said to have an own signature. Some like it, some not. When your seller only offers the Linn for listening and says all others sound worse i´d look for another seller. I couldn't agree more. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter EAC vs. CD audio... Throwing Down the Gauntlet !!!

2011-06-29 Thread ralphpnj
Toy Maker;638339 Wrote: I will also do a little testing/listening of FLAC vs. wav files vs. CDs in the next week or so. Again, i don't expect to be able to hear a difference. But I want to cover all my bases before showing up unprepared, and look stupid and have anyone tell me see we told

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread mlsstl
I used a Squeezebox Classic for several years with a Lavry DA-10 DAC. The sound was excellent. I had auditioned a Transporter a few years back and couldn't justify the additional expense. I bought a Touch when they became available a little over a year ago. I was immediately impressed with the

Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox audio quality, really that good ?

2011-06-29 Thread earwaxer9
On the DAC end of things there can be some differences that some may prefer over others with certain systems. This is TOTALLY system and level of consciousness dependent. One has to look at the bigger picture. What sort of amp and speakers are involved? What sort of syntheses are you looking for?