Klaus,
I am after the best sound from my Touch and I think I have found it
with the TT3.0 settings and Win 7 core affinity/process priority and
MMCSS settings.
Now TT3.0 is your invention, very well done, fantastic work, except for
the priority/buffer mods not being to my taste.
The other recom
SBGK,
I am thankful for your experimentation(although you've gone way off the
deep end for my tastes, and thats ok!)
but I do find it a bit rude that Klaus asks you to start your own
thread(this is his development after all) and you keep posting here.
It is common courtesy, imo.
--
TheOcta
Ron Olsen;684831 Wrote:
> A SB Touch will not give any significant improvement in sound over a
> Duet + DacMagic.
>
> Save your money and put it into a speaker upgrade fund. Better speakers
> will give you the biggest improvement to the sound of your system.
no, acoustically treating the room w
SBGK;685145 Wrote:
> so that will be no then. shame on you.
>
> it's true, the empty pot makes the most noise.
>
> if you just listen to spotify on the SBT, why are you posting in this
> forum ?
in response to the above (in order) - irrelevent, irrelevent, incorrect
and irrelevent.
That seem
adamdea;684750 Wrote:
> Obviously a little introspection is required before making bold claims
> on any side. But that is exactly what is lacking in the subjectivist
> blather which has fogged up several threads on this forum.
>
> In reality all that has happened in response has been some more
Archimago;685191 Wrote:
>
> About the original topic of 'audio truths' or things that could make a
> positive impact, I would recommend considering a good EQ unit! Recently
> got a DEQ2496 to play with through the Transporter's digital loop. Wow!
> Made a world of difference in my audio room ta
magiccarpetride;685088 Wrote:
> Your life is indeed in a very sorry state if you feel the urge to take
> me seriously.
>
> Lighten up, dude!
Spoken like a well practised troll. Of all the urges I might have, this
is truly not one of them, so you can rest easy on the state of my life.
At some p
Nice response MCP. I like how you eloquently described your position
and I certainly respect anyone's decision around something as
insignificant as cable preference (compared to all the major decisions
we make in life).
However, I do differ from your opinion though. As a wine drinker
myself, I k
What the heck has God got to do with it? I buy the cheapest wine I can
find at Lidl, after half a bottle I really don't care anymore
--
castalla
1 Touch - Muse M50 EX TPA3123 T-Amp Mini - Acoustics Q10 speakers - 2
duff ears - purfek!
1 Logitech Radio + remote - purfek!
-
Ron Olsen;685181 Wrote:
> Interesting commentary from a moderator at head-fi.org:
> http://www.head-fi.org/t/190566/blind-cable-taste-test-results/495#post_2654121
>
> "Does anyone ever wonder why cable manufacturers and merchants don't
> ever test their own products? Or maybe they have, but don
Interesting commentary from a moderator at head-fi.org:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/190566/blind-cable-taste-test-results/495#post_2654121
"Does anyone ever wonder why cable manufacturers and merchants don't
ever test their own products? Or maybe they have, but don't tell the
public.
Think about it
magiccarpetride;685106 Wrote:
> The issue is that if you keep playing the exact same track under the
> exact same conditions, subjectively people will be prone to detect
> variations. And these variations will tend to be much more pronounced
> if the listeners are under the false impression that
TheOctavist;685108 Wrote:
> http://www.head-fi.org/t/190566/blind-cable-taste-test-results
This test is pointless... what does it aim to prove?
--
evdplancke
evdplancke's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.p
pandasharka;685134 Wrote:
> I'd donate more if you promised to start your own thread and stay in it.
> Permanently. I'd double the donation to £2 if you took your US mate with
> you.
>
> Most of this thread has been far from pleasure. It is largely no
> further forward after a 135 odd pages tha
pandasharka;685134 Wrote:
> I'd donate more if you promised to start your own thread and stay in it.
> Permanently. I'd double the donation to £2 if you took your US mate with
> you.
>
> Most of this thread has been far from pleasure. It is largely no
> further forward after a 135 odd pages tha
Mac mini -> SBT -> Dacmagic -> home-built 'RelaiXed' balanced pre-amp ->
home-built 'Hypex UcD' class-D power amp -> home-built 'IPL Acoustics
M3tlm Ribbon' transmission line speakers.
Mac mini -> SBT -> Dacmagic ->
http://www.eijndhoven.net/jos/relaixed/index.html ->
http://www.hypex.nl/ ->
http
Sadly they don't sell practical experience on amazon.
Thank you both for your assistance.
And particularly good to have you back Phil. Hope your absence has benn
due to being busy in a good way.
--
adamdea
adamdea's Pro
WHS->ethernet->SB duet->Qed performance audio->Dacmagic->Chord chameleon
silver plus->roksan kandy k2->supra ply 3.4s->monitor audio GS10
--
Blackfiction
Blackfiction's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?use
Thanks for all the advice. I will look into new speakers first!
Problem is that I have limited space for my speaker placement and I
have the gs10 on a low cabinet (otherwise they would be very close in
the corners).
--
Blackfiction
--
SBGK;685132 Wrote:
> well, he's happy to take my money, so I should expect to have some say
> in what I think of the product, the fact he won't defend the sound
> speaks loudly to me.
>
> Have you donated anything for all the free entertainment you are
> getting ?
I'd donate more if you promise
pandasharka;685126 Wrote:
> As i suspected all along, Trolling, ambulance chasing, and shoot the man
> down at any possible opportunity.
>
> And this from someone who was a few weeks back "riding on the shoulders
> of God".
>
> A legend. In your own lunchbox. Judging by where you are keeping
SBGK;685129 Wrote:
> from all the twatting about with TT3.0, win 7, MMCSS etc, I can draw
> this conclusion
>
> Any music device, software, network etc has a natural sound and it is
> nearly impossible to enhance that sound. The most that can be achieved
> is to cut out any noise from the signal
pandasharka;685126 Wrote:
> As i suspected all along, Trolling, ambulance chasing, and shoot the man
> down at any possible opportunity.
>
> And this from someone who was a few weeks back "riding on the shoulders
> of God".
>
> A legend. In your own lunchbox. Judging by where you are keeping
from all the twatting about with TT3.0, win 7, MMCSS etc, I can draw
this conclusion
Any music device, software, network etc has a natural sound and it is
nearly impossible to enhance that sound. The most that can be achieved
is to cut out any noise from the signal as it travels from source to
tr
SBGK;685122 Wrote:
> why don't you give me back the 3 weeks of my life spent tweaking your
> cock sucking priorities and buffer sizes. only to find they were a
> waste of time.
>
> and yet again your suggestions were wrong.
>
> you wanted feedback , there you go, stick to what you are good at a
soundcheck;684978 Wrote:
> SBGK:
>
> I said, just shutdown the entire audio stuff on the server. This way
> you don't have to tweak it. What's wrong with this?
>
>
> I think it's more then time for you to open your own thread. I'd
> appreciate it.
> That'll give you your own platform to announ
SBGK;685114 Wrote:
> am sticking with MMCSS as it's giving me the best sound I have got so
> far
>
> have changed the settings to pro audio with background enabled and max
> priority, also clock rate of 1 gives the most balanced sound.
>
> tried switching the MMCSS and audio services off, d
soundcheck;684978 Wrote:
> SBGK:
>
> I said, just shutdown the entire audio stuff on the server. This way
> you don't have to tweak it. What's wrong with this?
>
>
> I think it's more then time for you to open your own thread. I'd
> appreciate it.
> That'll give you your own platform to announ
am sticking with MMCSS as it's giving me the best sound I have got so
far
have changed the settings to pro audio with background enabled and max
priority, also clock rate of 1 gives the most balanced sound.
tried switching the MMCSS and audio services off, different sound, but
not an improve
Phil Leigh;685109 Wrote:
> These books - good as they are - are no substitute for practical
> experience.
> More germane to this thread, none will explain how to record "height"
> :-)
Adam was asking for books, I suggested some.
practical experience= grand
books/learning academically= grand
TheOctavist;685103 Wrote:
> adam..
>
> the first books you should get. musts.
>
> John Eargle(Sound Recording, Handbook of recording engineering, the
> microphone book)
>
> the new stereo soundbook
>
> and the alan dower blumlein bio.
These books - good as they are - are no substitute for pra
http://www.head-fi.org/t/190566/blind-cable-taste-test-results
--
TheOctavist
Vortexbox>SBT(TT 3.0)>>Forssell MDAC-2>>>Klein and Hummell 0300D
Sota Sapphire/Lyra Kleos>>Bespoke Valve Phono Stage>>Mastersound Due
Venti>>Link Audio K100
--
bluegaspode;685101 Wrote:
> I like this one.
> Magiccarpetride: as you can see, here the testers also included the
> same cable as a 'control group', much like you suggested.
The issue is that if you keep playing the exact same track under the
exact same conditions, subjectively people will be p
Aha ron made a much shorter response and better. Mabe we should
translate 12 awg to something understandable.
http://24volt.eu/awg_mm.php 3.31 mm2 maybe more for very low z
speakers.
In Eu typical loudspeaker wire sizes can be 2,5 mm2 next one is usually
4 mm2 .
sound of different metals in cable
adam..
the first books you should get. musts.
John Eargle(Sound Recording, Handbook of recording engineering, the
microphone book)
the new stereo soundbook
and the alan dower blumlein bio.
--
TheOctavist
Vortexbox>SBT(TT 3.0)>>Forssell MDAC-2>>>Klein and Hummell 0300D
Sota Sapphire/Lyra K
The ABX approach is also often misunderstood.
--
garym
*Location 1:* VB Appliance 6TB (1.10) > LMS 7.7.1 > Transporter, Touch,
Boom, Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio)
*Location 2:* VB Appliance 3TB (2.0) > LMS 7.7.1 > Touch > Benchmark
DAC I, Boom, Radio w/Battery (all ethernet excep
Ron Olsen;685030 Wrote:
> An audiophile power cable blind listening test:
> http://www.auricles.com/new_page_41.htm
>
> And the results: http://www.auricles.com/Kiang_Power_cable_test(2).xls
I like this one.
Magiccarpetride: as you can see, here the testers also included the
same cable as a 'co
magiccarpetride;685087 Wrote:
> Tally up the results at the end of the test, and enjoy a good laugh!
Um.
In a double blind test you hear the original source and then (on a
random basis) either the same source again or the system under test.
Much like in medicine there is a 'control group' (getti
soundcheck;684986 Wrote:
> As you know. There so many real smart people around here. ;)
>
> Fact is. A cable acts as an antenna and a filter due to its capacitive,
> resistive and inductive characteristics.
> And these characteristics are different for every cable.
> The plugs make things worse
magiccarpetride;685088 Wrote:
> Your life is indeed in a very sorry state if you feel the urge to take
> me seriously.
>
> Lighten up, dude!
+1
Well said. Spot on and to the point.
--
pandasharka
pandasharka's Profile:
ralphpnj;685042 Wrote:
> Man do I love the internet! Throw out a simple idea and look what comes
> in just a few hours.
Here is another audio truth: double-blind tests are not infallible. It
gets surprisingly easy to discredit the double-blind test methodology.
If you can assemble a statisticall
adamdea;685049 Wrote:
> Is that the same as ambisonics?
>
> I've tried playing some ambisonic recordings (i only have 2; and not
> exactly my favouraite music) using the decoder in Inguz. I think it was
> working and produced some quite interesting effects but since I only
> have a 2 channel hi
ralphpnj;685042 Wrote:
> Sure cables have an effect but how great is their effect? For example
> should concerns about cable outweigh concerns about component
> matching?
>
> I believe that steveinaz was onto something with this post:
> http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=684703&postcou
Only recordings that are made that preserve the phase relationships in a
live environment are capable of creating a realistic illusion of sound
stage. This involves recording techniques that work to preserve phase.
http://www.deltamedia.com/resource/stereo_microphone_techniques.html
To be sure,
When shopping for loudspeakers that image well, look for a phase
response that does not vary by more than + or - 45 degrees. Be suspect
of speakers that do not specify phase response.
When looking for amplifiers, make sure that they have enough power to
drive your speakers to the SPL you are accu
I'm cool the thing In have against for example set amps is more like how
they are selling it.
they use TAS style arguments .
The claims are that these are actually better amplifiers than modern
designs.
Better resolution and dynamics etc ? This is not the case .
A more modest and true claim woul
Mnyb;684946 Wrote:
> I think a have a piont seriusly, actually look at any hifi mag read what
> the mfg claims about the products some design considerations are clearly
> inspired of this kind of thinking for example bi-wiring or triwirng
> terminals on speakers silver speaker binding posts , you
Phil Leigh;685044 Wrote:
> In very broad terms, yes.
>
> It depends more on the replay chain being reasonably coherent (so as
> not to distort the signal) and the speaker/room interface being
> reasonably well behaved for the same reasons.
>
>
>
> Correct. The most "realistic imaging" is ach
adamdea;685036 Wrote:
> Just to clarify- am I right in thinking that
>
> -the LEDR test uses dsp to simulate the trasnfer function of sound
> through your head to create some facsimile of the sound one hears when
> a source is higher or lower than the plane of one's ears.(preumably the
> same a
Man do I love the internet! Throw out a simple idea and look what comes
in just a few hours.
Here I was innocently trying to start a thread where the members of
this forum could at least to reach some kind of agreement on a few
simple basic principles. At the time I made the original post that
di
soundcheck;684978 Wrote:
> SBGK:
>
> I said, just shutdown the entire audio stuff on the server. This way
> you don't have to tweak it. What's wrong with this?
>
>
> I think it's more then time for you to open your own thread. I'd
> appreciate it.
> That'll give you your own platform to announ
Phil Leigh;684980 Wrote:
>
> The LEDR test (fascinating as it is) proves categorically that it is
> possible to persuade the brain into perceiving height and depth where
> none really exists. It also proves that not all systems/setups+rooms
> are equal in this respect.
Just to clarify- am I righ
An article on blind listening tests of amplifiers:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/12752-blind-listening-tests-amplifiers.html
--
Ron Olsen
Ron Olsen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=92
An audiophile power cable blind listening test:
http://www.auricles.com/new_page_41.htm
And the results: http://www.auricles.com/Kiang_Power_cable_test(2).xls
--
Ron Olsen
Ron Olsen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.co
Phil Leigh;685018 Wrote:
> This is an opinion you can take with a pinch of salt, but having owned
> NVA amps in the 80's and having watched them destroy both themselves
> and a pair of Tannoys in spectacular fashion, I wouldn't touch their
> products again.
> YMMV
Read their spiel it migth not h
evdplancke;685012 Wrote:
> Without wanting to fall into controversy, I think speaker cable matters
> as well since they act as a LRC filter on the analog signal path. We
> should keep a low impedance ratio btw cable and speakers on the whole
> frequency range. For low freq that means the thicker
Here's a great article on "audio truths" about speaker wire:
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm
You can get excellent, high-performance speaker wire for about $1/ft.
No need to pay more. Good quality 12-gauge wire is all that you need.
Don't make the length any longer than necessary.
This is an opinion you can take with a pinch of salt, but having owned
NVA amps in the 80's and having watched them destroy both themselves
and a pair of Tannoys in spectacular fashion, I wouldn't touch their
products again.
YMMV
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets ont
Without wanting to fall into controversy, I think speaker cable matters
as well since they act as a LRC filter on the analog signal path. We
should keep a low impedance ratio btw cable and speakers on the whole
frequency range. For low freq that means the thicker the better. For
high freq however,
Phil Leigh;684994 Wrote:
> The best sounding rooms have non-parallel surfaces and are dimensioned
> according to the Golden Ratio. This will probably not be popular with
> the domestic authorities...
I think some audiophiles at least have slanted the back wall in
combination with some dispersion
darrenyeats;684984 Wrote:
> I agree with the rule of thumb about odd fractions of the room
> dimensions. They should be measured from the centre of the bass
> drivers.
>
> I believe the rationale is SBIR (Speaker-Boundary Interface Response)
> interacting with room modes.
> Darren
The best soun
magiccarpetride;684926 Wrote:
> There was a time back in ancient history when Newtonian physicists
> roamed the earth. Then one rainy day along came a guy named Albert
> Einstein and proceeded to kick some Newtonian ass. He continued messing
> with the feeble Newtonian minds by proposing some ung
adamdea;684985 Wrote:
> The first link in teddy ray's post ( thr stereophonic zoom by michael
> williams ) contained the following extract (p.3 section on
> localisation)
>
> The intention in this document is to describe a variable dual
> microphone system that will reproduce realistic stereopho
You make me doubt... Just one question: did you do critical blind golden
ears listening (or whatever you call it) btw tt3.0 and factory defaults
SBT for your own? If not, I suspect you are so sure there is no
difference that you might not ear any difference even if there was
some.
--
evdplancke
magiccarpetride;684821 Wrote:
> You are in a privileged position of being able to use the 'giant killer'
> T-amps, which are best driven off a standalone battery. I can't, because
> I'm in a need of tremendous power and current in order to feed my hungry
> beasts -- Maggies.
>
> 'Scientists' on
I agree with the rule of thumb about odd fractions of the room
dimensions. They should be measured from the centre of the bass
drivers.
I believe the rationale is SBIR (Speaker-Boundary Interface Response)
interacting with room modes in the bass region.
SBIR is wavefronts direct from the speaker
Phil Leigh;684918 Wrote:
> I'm still not sure you quite get that it is all an elaborate "trick" -
> just like stereoscopic photographs... There's just enough info to allow
> ones brain to fill in the blanks... You need to consider that ears and
> microphones are very different animals. microphone
The LEDR test proves my point. It uses a computer generated signal. The
signal has to be computer generated because there is no way to
physically record such a signal in the real world using real sounds and
real microphones. The computer generated signal mimics/plays upon to a
certain extent aspec
TheOctavist;684958 Wrote:
> that is exactly right, Adam..
> http://www.rycote.com/images/uploads/The_Stereophonic_Zoom.pdf
>
> http://www.serc.iisc.ernet.in/graduation-theses/akt_aug07.pdf
>
> btw, I HIGHLY reccomend the following books. John Eargle(handbook of
> recording engineering, sound re
SBGK:
I said, just shutdown the entire audio stuff on the server. This way
you don't have to tweak it. What's wrong with this?
I think it's more then time for you to open your own thread. I'd
appreciate it.
That'll give you your own platform to announce "your" "great" "new"
findings.
Good lu
have some rudimentary damping in place to kill the flutter echo and most
of it is placed behind me due to room dimensions i sit against the back
wall :-/ not optimal there should be some space (if i had a larger room
and it is to narrow/unpractial to use the other way ).
I have some real acoustic
71 matches
Mail list logo
