rgro;687479 Wrote:
> Phil...
>
> So, now I'm curiousdo you use those ferrites other places, too? On
> your (non-optical) interconnects, power cords, etc.?
>
> Someone recently mentioned taking an AM radio, tuned to static, and
> putting it near various potential sources. I did this and c
think these are my final settings
Squeezeserver on core 1,2,3 priority real time, i/o high and same with
svchost.exe (netsvcs) which is the MMCSS process
everything else on core 0, priority idle, i/o very low apart from
these windows processes which are all priority normal and i/o normal on
core
reverendo;687437 Wrote:
> Phil
> Thanks for being so patient and answering my newbie questions.
> One (hopefully) last question: does Audiolense compensate for balance
> if speaker placement is assymetrical?
Yes, Audiolense and Inguz working together compensate for asymmetric
speaker placement (
Can you name 3 today's commonly used "standard" measurements that did
not exist in the 1970s?
--
vett93
Main system:
Source: Transporter, modded by ModWright:
http://www.modwright.com/modifications/transporter-truth-mods.php
Preamp: Dude from Tube Research Labs:
http://www.tuberesearchlabs.c
Ron Olsen;687477 Wrote:
> Kodo's Lion (with a large bass drum hit with a huge club) sounds
> fantastic on my listening system with a well-integrated subwoofer.
> Unless your main speakers have good response down to 25 or 30 Hz, a
> properly integrated subwoofer can add palpable realism and intens
Archimago;687200 Wrote:
> Many times in magazines like Stereophile, you see John Atkinson measure
> something poorly yet the subjective evaluator gives it an A for sound.
>
> Have you seen cases of definite fantastic measurements of the usual
> parameters (eg. Flat freq response, low distortion,
adamdea;687462 Wrote:
> Yes this has all got a bit confused.
>
Sorry, I did not mean to be rude to you. Most digital equipment and
switching power supplies would generate RFI which can degrade analog
sound. If you have a SBT and use its analog output to the amp, you can
get a better sound q
Gazjam;687367 Wrote:
> must admit
>
> went back to Soundchecks ORIGINAL TT3 settings (have faffed about with
> all sorts recently)and its better.
>
> I'll vote with my feet...says as is until TT4.
> KISS theory: Keep it simple stupid...
>
> Thanks Klaus.
Me too :)
Fully agree
--
NoRoDa
My 2nd system is in the master bedroom which is about the same size as
the family room where the home theater and my main audio system are.
Currently, the 2nd system has BAT tube preamp and a pair of solid state
monoblocks from Tube Audio Design. They don't have the magic effect of
the 300B SET am
Interesting comment vett.
I'm wondering though from the psychoacoustic perspective, we know that
the room is a major part of the sound. Could it be that the room size,
decor, or location could be affecting your perception. I can imagine
the home theater to be a larger space, less intimate versus
Phil Leigh;687304 Wrote:
> I forgot to mention... all of my ethernet cables have clamp-on ferrites
> at both ends... might be worth trying?
Phil...
So, now I'm curiousdo you use those ferrites other places, too? On
your (non-optical) interconnects, power cords, etc.?
Someone recently men
pandasharka;687421 Wrote:
> Two things I've never been into;
> a) Subwoofers - great in a home cinema environment - but in listening
> room?
Kodo's Lion (with a large bass drum hit with a huge club) sounds
fantastic on my listening system with a well-integrated subwoofer.
Unless your main speak
If "front end" means input signal, I would vote no.
Your ears hear the speakers and the speakers need amperes and accuracy.
--
pski
real stereo doesn't just wake the neighbors, it -enrages- them.. It is
truly the Golden Age of Wireless
-
magiccarpetride;686176 Wrote:
> A definition of a being a redneck is possessing "glorious absence of
> sophistication".
>
> Aesthetic concerns seem to be topping the list of things that remain
> inscrutable for the audiophile rednecks. They only seem capable of
> listening to music if they happe
Mnyb;687002 Wrote:
> Cross posting between diffenrent forums is that not a no no of grand
> scale ?
> And copypasta trolling, you can of course quote , but it should be
> obvius to readers that you quote someone else and not writting your own
> content.
>
> Scientific bakground without understan
pandasharka;687421 Wrote:
> Two things I've never been into;
> a) Subwoofers - great in a home cinema environment - but in listening
> room? No thanks!
>
>
>
> I understand people may need both however.
This is great if your speakers go down to 20Hz, but if not then there
is a portion of the
vett93;687410 Wrote:
> I am just amazed how we read posts from others. Didn't I specify that I
> believed digital noises from CPU/DSP/RAM/PSU can degrade the sound? I
> was trying to determine if the digital noises from the bridge can be
> coupled to the Transporter.
>
> Regarding your comment
Phil Leigh;687433 Wrote:
> Any USB sound card will be fine I use a Tascam. Like this
> http://tascam.com/product/us-144mkii/
> as for microphones... I use one of these
> http://www.earthworksaudio.com/our-microphones/m-series/m23/ these are
> superb microphones in every sense.
that's a fine
Phil
Thanks for being so patient and answering my newbie questions.
One (hopefully) last question: does Audiolense compensate for balance
if speaker placement is assymetrical?
--
reverendo
SB Touch (with Welborne PSU)>Camelot Technology Uther 2.0 MkIV (with
24/192 upgrade)>Gryphon Tabu 2/100>K
vett93;687430 Wrote:
> Flat to 18Hz by what weighting method? One of my subwoofers is in my 2nd
> system. I set the cross over freq. at 40Hz and use the speaker level
> input. If I use A or C weighting method on my sound level meter to flat
> out the freq response, I find the low bass is a bit to
I am still learning human perception of good sound. My current
conclusion is that one needs to have various types of
electronics/speakers to enjoy all kinds of music. In other words, it is
hard to have one system that does it all. Alternatively, one can pick a
system based on a given preference of
reverendo;687431 Wrote:
> Phil,
> any ideas concerning which microphone and soundcard would be suitable?
Any USB sound card will be fine I use a Tascam. Like this
http://tascam.com/product/us-144mkii/
as for microphones... I use one of these
http://www.earthworksaudio.com/our-microphones/m-
Phil,
any ideas concerning which microphone and soundcard would be suitable?
--
reverendo
SB Touch (with Welborne PSU)>Camelot Technology Uther 2.0 MkIV (with
24/192 upgrade)>Gryphon Tabu 2/100>KEF Reference 201/2
Power Cables: ASI Liveline and Rega; Digital: Stereovox XV2; IC: Zu
Audio Varial
Flat to 18Hz by what weighting method? One of my subwoofers is in my 2nd
system. I set the cross over freq. at 40Hz and use the speaker level
input. If I use A or C weighting method on my sound level meter to flat
out the freq response, I find the low bass is a bit too weak for my
taste. I ended u
reverendo;687423 Wrote:
> Hi Phil,
> Thanks for your swift answer.
> I've heard of Audiolense and accourate. Is the measuring and setting up
> a rather easy process?
> I'm thinking of buying the mic and the soundcard. Which do you consider
> to be good and straightforward?
> Thanks a lot
> André
I can't think of any equipment that fits the description of "measures
beautifully but sounds bad" but I can think of a few professional
athletes who have great stats (measure beautifully) but perform badly
(sound bad).
For example, Mark Teixeira:
Lifetime regular season batting average: .281 (ve
pandasharka;687421 Wrote:
> Two things I've never been into;
> a) Subwoofers - great in a home cinema environment - but in listening
> room? No thanks!
>
> 2) headphones. Not had the need since I was at home with folks.
>
> I understand people may need both however.
Personally I like having a
Hi Phil,
Thanks for your swift answer.
I've heard of Audiolense and accourate. Is the measuring and setting up
a rather easy process?
I'm thinking of buying the mic and the soundcard. Which do you consider
to be good and straightforward?
Thanks a lot
André
--
reverendo
-
Two things I've never been into;
a) Subwoofers - great in a home cinema environment - but in listening
room? No thanks!
2) headphones. Not had the need since I was at home with folks.
I understand people may need both however.
--
pandasharka
---
Phil Leigh;687282 Wrote:
> Celestion Sl-6 - measured very nicely, sounded alternately constipated
> and psychotically metallic to me (remember this is all personal taste)
LOL - psychotically metallic.
Maybe you were just listening to a modern Top 40 song with AutoTuned
vocals. :-)
--
Archima
vett93;687414 Wrote:
> These Velodyne subwoofers have built-in room correction capability. I
> think it sweeps from 20Hz to 200Hz to caliberate itself.
Cool!
I haven't heard those.
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minima
vett93;687410 Wrote:
> I am just amazed how we read posts from others. Didn't I specify that I
> believed digital noises from CPU/DSP/RAM/PSU can degrade the sound? I
> was trying to determine if the digital noises from the bridge can be
> coupled to the Transporter.
>
> Regarding your comment
Phil Leigh;687280 Wrote:
> (at the risk of sounding like a scratched record) Subs never sound right
> to me on any music without some form of room correction. Have you tried
> any?
These Velodyne subwoofers have built-in room correction capability. I
think it sweeps from 20Hz to 200Hz to caliber
opto couplers will achieve galvanic isolation but will not block HF
noise on the signal lines. For that you need Ethernet filters
(expensive) or you can try ferrite clamps (very cheap).
The big problem is that in signal terms there is not much difference
between HF noise and the Ethernet signal, e
adamdea;687316 Wrote:
> ... but the OP did not say that he was particularly concerned about RF
> from the wireless bridge itself. In fact many people on this forum have
> argued that it is essential to get rid of the switchmode psu on the
> wireless bridge which will otherwise inject noise. maybe
reverendo;687405 Wrote:
> Hi there,
> It's been a long time I haven't had a look at this thread.
> After having to move to an apartment with more than sub-optimal space
> for music I'm seriously considering giving Inguz with RC a try.
> I would like to know if there is any software that works sim
cliveb;687363 Wrote:
>
>
> When I eventually bought a CD burner (Ricoh MP6200S), it cost over £500
> and for that princely sum provided the blazing write speed of 2x. Blank
> CDs were about £5 each in those days. (And to think some people look
> back on the past with affection!)
Ah, the 'good
Hi there,
It's been a long time I haven't had a look at this thread.
After having to move to an apartment with more than sub-optimal space
for music I'm seriously considering giving Inguz with RC a try.
I would like to know if there is any software that works similarly to
Lyngdorf, with multiple m
Hi-
The Bellari vp530 is a good unit. I don't remember their models
exactly, but they make phono preamps with USB and tube output. At least
one with both.
As far as the RIAA curve: if you are going digital, there is a lot of
software around that will apply the RIAA curve for you to your file,
an
pandasharka;687286 Wrote:
> OK so we're saying that a high end streamer from the likes of Linn will
> not give significant sound benefit compared to SBT+ decent DAC?
>
> I'm relatively new into the digital space. I did spend a lot in the old
> days on Linn with a high end Sondek front ended syst
Hi,
I'm a complete newbie to streaming audio and only recently got a Touch.
I thought I'd experiment with the Toolbox at the weekend.
I tried TT3.0, but didn't like it as the bass sounded mechanical and
tiring, so I thought I'd try TT2.0. This was more pleasant so I tried
tweaking that includin
Stilly77;686863 Wrote:
> wow...another dumb thread
>
> same old elites battling it out
>
> just a foolish game of domination here with not an iota of importance.
>
> this place is a nothing but a glorified sewer
One could not wish for a better contribution to the audiophile rednecks
thread. T
must admit
went back to Soundchecks ORIGINAL TT3 settings (have faffed about with
all sorts recently)and its better.
I'll vote with my feet...says as is until TT4.
Thanks Klaus.
--
Gazjam
Gazjam's Profile: http://fo
maggior;687338 Wrote:
> I started doing this around the same time as you. For me, it was partly
> the satisfaction of making my own CDs. That was something I never
> thought I would be able to do!
When I started doing this, decent soundcards were not really around -
with the possible exception
Wombat;687356 Wrote:
> Wasn´t there some fuzz about testing some differences with unplugging
> the cable completely and listening to the buffer? You may try this to
> rest this case for once and for all.
Yeah - I've been urging people to try this and as far as I know, those
who have tried report
Wasn´t there some fuzz about testing some differences with unplugging
the cable completely and listening to the buffer? You may try this to
rest this case for once and for all.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made s
I have just ripped out cat6 shielded and replaced it with cat5e
unshielded. The shielded stuff was causing major interference problems
with my headphone amplifier.
--
Covenant
Covenant's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.
adamdea;687345 Wrote:
> Somewhwat less than that. But i think you can buy a klimax renew for
> about £3.5k on ebay
> which i think is the same machine in a cheaper box.
>
> Anyway all this is by the by on a squeezebox forum. why not consider a
> Wriss dac 202 which is pretty much state of the
pandasharka;687334 Wrote:
> Many thanks for your detailed response - lots to take in there!
> So right at the start you suggest something like a Linn Klimax or
> similar could be reasonable value.
> At a RRP of c.15k I'd suggest it's poor value.
>
Somewhwat less than that. But i think you can bu
cliveb;687037 Wrote:
>
> c). You are some kind of weirdo (like me) who actually enjoys the vinyl
> ripping process.
>
I was once that weirdo too :-). Now I just don't have that kind of
time...plus I've transferred all the vinyl I wanted to.
I started doing this around the same time as you.
adamdea;687308 Wrote:
> Actually I think a Linn Klimax might be a fairly reasonable buy. That is
> quite a different thing from saying it is likely to be better than a SBT
> into a good dac.
>
> One real problem with audiophiles and digital is that audiophuiles have
> bult up a lot of gut instin
chill;687331 Wrote:
> Hehe - Again (!), not aimed at anyone in particular. Perhaps I should
> have said "rather than ME hijacking Pandasharka's thread.". I must
> take more care with my phrasing.
As must we all :-)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/
Phil Leigh;687329 Wrote:
> Sorry I had no intention of hijacking Pandasharka's thread - thanks for
> the new thread.
> regards
> Phil
Hehe - Again (!), not aimed at anyone in particular. Perhaps I should
have said "rather than ME hijacking Pandasharka's thread.". I must
take more care with
chill;687320 Wrote:
> This seems like a good topic for another thread. Rather than hijacking
> Pandasharka's thread here, I've started another one in the DIY
> section.
>
> http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93330
Sorry I had no intention of hijacking Pandasharka's thread - thanks
Phil Leigh;687310 Wrote:
> (agreeing wildly with Adamdea)
> Can we have a 6-channel Touch please - or a method of perfectly syncing
> 3 Touches - so I can implement a 3-way x-over alongside/within Inguz...
>
> I'd love that; DRC'd and x-overed/filtered (?) 3 streams into 3
> identical DAC's into
Would an ethernet optocoupler be the solution? Or will it be argued that
the conversion from fibre to electrical creates more noise?
--
adamdea
adamdea's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37603
View
HumanMedia;687295 Wrote:
> So this is your suggestion?
> Just bitter unhelpful sarcasm?
>
> You hadn't even read the OP where he, like me, already uses a wireless
> bridge to connect to the Squeezbox. A bridge that is designed to
> radiate RF and an ethernet cable connecting it to the Squeezebox
My experience is that the better the source fed to the DAC, the better
it will sound. For instance, a high quality USB to SPDIF converter
(Empirical, Audiophilleo, Berkeley, Wavelength) can make even a modest
DAC comparable to some of the more expensive ones. I've heard the
difference this can mak
(agreeing wildly with Adamdea)
Can we have a 6-channel Touch please - or a method of perfectly syncing
3 Touches - so I can implement a 3-way x-over alongside/within Inguz...
I'd love that; DRC'd and x-overed/filtered (?) 3 streams into 3
identical DAC's into 3 power amps... nice.
When my system
pandasharka;687286 Wrote:
> OK so we're saying that a high end streamer from the likes of Linn will
> not give significant sound benefit compared to SBT+ decent DAC?
>
> I'm relatively new into the digital space. I did spend a lot in the old
> days on Linn with a high end Sondek front ended syst
I forgot to mention... all of my ethernet cables have clamp-on ferrites
at both ends... might be worth trying?
--
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/W7)+Teddy Pardo PSU - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF
HumanMedia;687295 Wrote:
> So this is your suggestion?
> Just bitter unhelpful sarcasm?
>
> You hadn't even read the OP where he, like me, already uses a wireless
> bridge to connect to the Squeezbox. A bridge that is designed to
> radiate RF and an ethernet cable connecting it to the Squeezebox
adamdea;687290 Wrote:
>
> I suggest doing something which involves buying something new and quite
> expensive which seems like the sort of thing an audiophile might have- I
> reckon a wireless bridge plus linear psu plus some expensive audiophile
> ethernet cable . Its going to have to cost lots
It depends on your main speakers. If they go "sonically" deep to begin
with like mine then you need to add a sub carefully.
I have had a bit of a journey with my sub. In the end, reading the
manufacturer's instructions worked best for me! In my case, positioning
is the most important aspect. Unfo
It seems to me that OP is asking for a solution to a problem which
A. May not exist
B. may possibly exist but has not been identified.
Let's park A for a minute having duly noted it.
That still leaves B which is a biggy. If the problem was noise
transmitted via the shield then the answer would
On 30 Jan 2012, at 08:34, Phil Leigh wrote:
>
> vett93;687276 Wrote:
>> My theory is that the weakest link in the system will limit the sound.
>> However, good modern electronics can be had for a few $Ks. But good
>> speakers usually cost more than that. So the speakers would meed more
>> inves
Ron Olsen;687265 Wrote:
> If money is no object, buy the best-sounding, most expensive speakers
> you can afford. Include a subwoofer if your main speakers don't have
> deep bass response. Position speakers properly, do electronic and/or
> acoustic room correction. Make sure your system has a hig
Celestion Sl-6 - measured very nicely, sounded alternately constipated
and psychotically metallic to me (remember this is all personal taste)
--
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/W7)+Teddy Pardo PSU - Aud
vett93;687276 Wrote:
> My theory is that the weakest link in the system will limit the sound.
> However, good modern electronics can be had for a few $Ks. But good
> speakers usually cost more than that. So the speakers would meed more
> investment than any piece of the electronics.
>
> If you
I've also been wondering what garbage is coming in from the wireless
extender through the Ethernet cable into the SBT and possibly out to my
DAC. Not bad data but RF which may affect the jitter of the SBT and
analog performance of the DAC.
I thought that Ethernet cables of a specific type (eg CAT
cunobelinus;687271 Wrote:
> On 29 Jan 2012, at 23:35, Phil Leigh wrote:
>
> >
> > Archimago;687200 Wrote:
> >> Many times in magazines like Stereophile, you see John Atkinson
> measure
> >> something poorly yet the subjective evaluator gives it an A for
> sound.
> >>
> >> Have you seen cases
My theory is that the weakest link in the system will limit the sound.
However, good modern electronics can be had for a few $Ks. But good
speakers usually cost more than that. So the speakers would meed more
investment than any piece of the electronics.
If you listen to Classical or Jazz music,
Archimago;687272 Wrote:
> Phil, do you think this would be measurable today. For example, would
> the Quads show poor waterfall results, and the old CD players
> demonstrate accentuated high frequencies?
I haven't really thought about that - I was thinking about the
measurements used at the tim
73 matches
Mail list logo
