tpaxadpom wrote:
> Thank but I may want to hang out here for a little while, I have my
> doubts :o.
>
> BTW did you ever A/B transporter and touch with single ended cables in
> your system (volume matched or not)? Did you hear any difference?
No, I haven't AB'ed the two since I've never had th
Archimago wrote:
> Thanks for the note tpaxadpom! Hey, good luck with Monster Cables; make
> sure you pay us a visit when you've made megabux on that patent and
> installed kilobuck cables all the way through! :-)
Thank but I may want to hang out here for a little while, I have my
doubts :o.
B
tpaxadpom wrote:
> Archimago, I believe I can hear the difference between different cables
> (not just damaged toslink). I haven't blown kilobucks on cables, but I
> have quite a few expensive cables in my system, if that is what you are
> asking. I had a lot of sceptics in my house that change t
Archimago wrote:
> Thanks tpaxadpom! Will update the blog with your data tonight.
>
> Yeah, I've seen some roundish TosLink plugs which are "symmetrical" so
> you can plug them in without a specific up or down orientation.
>
> Here's the million dollar question - can you hear the degradation in
tpaxadpom wrote:
> I corrected my post with measurements for toslink connections. Measured
> values are in "ns" not "ps" as stated before. 50Hz - 100kHz bandwidth.
> I wouldn't rely on peak or average jitter measurements to make any
> conclusions. Looking at the spectrum would be more instrestin
I corrected my post with measurements for toslink connections. Measured
values are in "ns" not "ps" as stated before. 50Hz - 100kHz bandwidth.
I wouldn't rely on peak or average jitter measurements to make any
conclusions. Looking at the spectrum would be more instresting, but even
then I don't k
tpaxadpom wrote:
> Absolutely, feel free to post the data on your blog.
> I don't have identical cables in different lengths. I didn't see direct
> correlation in jitter readings between short and long toslink cables of
> different brands. Today I broght a couple of optical cables from home,
> on
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
> @Archimago - you are doing a great service in the understanding of the
> issues in high-fidelity music reproduction. We just cannot rely only on
> audiophile mag/webzines. It also encourages people (like me) to be more
> technically involved in this hobby. That said, I d
Archimago wrote:
> Thanks! Very nice... Looks like I should see an improvement switching
> over from TosLink --> AES/EBU for the digital loop!
>
> That's a huge variability in the TosLink cables - wow! Was this related
> to length? Brand name cables?
>
> Do you mind if I add your data to my bl
ralphpnj wrote:
> Why the use of past tense "but that was another interesting chapter in
> this audiophile disease"? The phase should read: "but that -*is just-*
> another interesting chapter in this audiophile disease" unless of course
> you were referring to yourself. If so then I'm glad to see
garym wrote:
> perfect.
Thanks! I thought that you and some of the other heretics who hang
around here might enjoy a little humor.
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread
ralphpnj wrote:
> I believe that with just a few slight alterations to the lyrics this
> classic song by Louis Jordan pretty much sums up how one should behave
> when faced with the latest audiophile bogeyman:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43IerkjjyWQ
perfect.
--
I believe that with just a few slight alterations to the lyrics this
classic song by Louis Jordan pretty much sums up how one should behave
when faced with the latest audiophile bogeyman:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43IerkjjyWQ
---
Archimago wrote:
> Hey, I remember those "super tweeters" about 15 years ago :-) I rigged
> up a couple for 25kHz+ playback... Didn't go anywhere of course, but
> that was another interesting chapter in this audiophile disease...
Agreed, it's a bit silly to focus on 30kHz when there's room for
i
swamitommi wrote:
> Huh. I'll sure give it a shot. This problem's mighty mysterious to me.
> Thanks.
Yeah, not sure why this does anything other than the fact that there may
be some residual memory of settings that don't actually go away with an
unplug/replug. Don't really know, but I've seen
garym wrote:
> not sure if this will help, but in some weird cases, it has actually
> helped to leave the Transporter UNPLUGGED overnight.
Huh. I'll sure give it a shot. This problem's mighty mysterious to me.
Thanks.
sw
ralphpnj wrote:
> So sure measure has much you can but listen as well and understand that
> some measurements really don't mean all that much.
This is precisely why I would like to see a comparison of the 103 vs.
105. There are a lot of people singing the praises of the "great" ESS
Sabre32 DAC.
Thanks!
It's set it to AES. I switched it to s/pdif when testing coax - but
still to no avail.
swamitommi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59191
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/sh
swamitommi wrote:
> Thanks!
>
> It's set it to AES. I switched it to s/pdif when testing coax - but
> still to no avail.
not sure if this will help, but in some weird cases, it has actually
helped to leave the Transporter UNPLUGGED overnight.
-
swamitommi wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I stumbled across this post in an attempt to troubleshoot the same issue
> as the OP. Transporter --> M2 via AES/EBU = no sound, although the M2
> displays that it is locked on the TP. However, The TP will hand off to
> my digital processor without issue. In fa
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
> A friend of mine, recently, who was using high-end Marantz receivers
> moved to PS Audio player/DAC, wyred4sound amps etc. He says, for sure
> there is an improvement in the sound.
He would, wouldn't he? :)
I have moved from a "pretty OK" system (Creek amp etc.) to a p
Archimago wrote:
> Hey, I remember those "super tweeters" about 15 years ago :-) I rigged
> up a couple for 25kHz+ playback... Didn't go anywhere of course, but
> that was another interesting chapter in this audiophile disease...
Why the use of past tense "but that was another interesting chapte
Hi all,
I stumbled across this post in an attempt to troubleshoot the same issue
as the OP. Transporter --> M2 via AES/EBU = no sound, although the M2
displays that it is locked on the TP. However, The TP will hand off to
my digital processor without issue. In fact, that processor can then
han
ralphpnj wrote:
>
> So sure measure has much you can but listen as well and understand that
> some measurements really don't mean all that much. This obsession with
> jitter kind of reminds me of the obsession with tweeters that can
> reproduce 50Khz tones - great but NO ONE can hear 50kHz tones
Archimago wrote:
> NO problems with jitter WiFi at all.
> .
> With the advent of USB (especially the "horrors" of adaptive USB), it
> provided another opportunity to drag out the jitter boogeyman. I'll have
> to look into my adaptive USB (the AUNE X1) again, but as I recall, it
> didn't look
The USB input for the DAC, power supply, headphone out and DAC are the
differences. I would guess both DACs measure pretty well which is why I
would like to see the comparison. Perhaps there is a big difference in
sound, but I would speculate it would be hard to tell in an objective
test.
--
@Archimago - you are doing a great service in the understanding of the
issues in high-fidelity music reproduction. We just cannot rely only on
audiophile mag/webzines. It also encourages people (like me) to be more
technically involved in this hobby. That said, I do think there are too
many specif
ralphpnj wrote:
> Key word the above quote: "measures"
>
> However I would be much more interested to find out how better, if any,
> the ESS Sabre32 DAC actually -*sounds.-*
Don't know about the BDP-103, but the 105 sounds great to my ears.
If/when my Panasonic Blu-Ray dies, it'd sure be on my
Well Ralph that is precisely why I would like to see the measurements as
I believe there is a correlation as to how sources measure and their
sound. The Sabre has a "reputation" as a good DAC but I have no idea how
the two DAC circuits compare to each other and to something like a Touch
and Transp
ralphpnj wrote:
> Last night was I thinking (I know I shouldn't think because it only
> causes trouble) about the above jitter measurements and I was wondering
> what, if any, jitter is present when streaming audio, either via WiFi or
> Ethernet, and using the Touch's or the Transporter's interna
Jeff52 wrote:
> It would interesting to see a comparison between the OPPO BDP-105 and
> BDP-103. The 103 uses a Cirrus Logic CS4382A DAC and supposedly has a
> different analog buffer and filter stage following the DAC output than
> the BDP-93. It would be interesting to see how much better, if a
It would interesting to see a comparison between the OPPO BDP-105 and
BDP-103. The 103 uses a Cirrus Logic CS4382A DAC and supposedly has a
different analog buffer and filter stage following the DAC output than
the BDP-93. It would be interesting to see how much better, if any, the
ESS Sabre32 DAC
Julf wrote:
> See, maybe, but hear? I doubt it :)
>
> The big benefit of toslink is of course the galvanic isolation. Hard to
> have ground loops over fibre :)
Agree. I AB listened +/-2ns jitter in place with the DEQ2496 and did not
hear a problem at all. However, it should be interesting to se
tpaxadpom wrote:
> Ok I have measured transporter and touch on AP2722. I've only looked at
> digital out as promised.
>
> Here is the run down:
> Transporter:
> AES/EBU 377.3-424.5 ps
> SPDIF RCA 566 ps
> SPDIF BNC 283-330.2 ps (rca cable with 2 bnc adapters yielded the same
> results)
> Toslin
Archimago wrote:
> Thanks! Very nice... Looks like I should see an improvement switching
> over from TosLink --> AES/EBU for the digital loop!
See, maybe, but hear? I doubt it :)
The big benefit of toslink is of course the galvanic isolation. Hard to
have ground loops over fibre :)
-
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
> Great..the jitter graph looks really nice. Thanks Archimago. So does
> better measurements correlate with better sound subjectively ?
> Otherwise, it might be just a waste of engineering effort. Maybe the
> companies are building over-speced pieces just to justify the hi
ralphpnj wrote:
> Must be that el-cheap Ethernet cable that you're using that changed the
> "ps" to an "ns", you know the same kind of cable that induces jitter.
Dammit... You're right! I better call the local dealer tomorrow and get
myself some AudioQuest Diamond Ethernet cables. While I do tha
37 matches
Mail list logo
