garym wrote:
> But this is not how the feeding of a SB player from a server actually
> works. The suggestion that reducing the workload of a PC running as LMS
> server can affect the SB player is equivalent to saying the following:
> If I can increase the efficiency of a fueling station on the
Deaf Cat wrote:
>
> I don't see why reducing the actual work load of the pc running SS,
> shouldn't also make a difference in sound repro.
>
But this is not how the feeding of a SB player from a server actually
works. The suggestion that reducing the workload of a PC running as LMS
server is e
Here's one way of describing why reducing tasks on the PC won't have any
effect on the music. The way Squeeze works is in effect copying a file
from one computer to another either over Ethernet or wifi. If the number
of tasks running at either end had a effect on the file our copies of
spreadsheet
Mnyb wrote:
>
> Do you still have your squeezebox ?
>
Yes SB2 kitchen and a Touch lounge.
I found Soundcheck's TT improved things, (reducing workload of the
touch).
I don't see why reducing the actual work load of the pc running SS,
shouldn't also make a difference in sound repro.
Just wond
Wow, looks like you need to also buy a copy of Windows Server 2012 to
get this to work (assuming you're not running it already).
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Archimago's
For me I always think if it takes a good 5 minutes of reading to even
work out what the product is (it is some sort of software isn't it?)
then that's a pretty good indication to call B.S.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
-
Deaf Cat wrote:
> Seems to get rather good results reading about it on various forums
So do the CD marker pens, magic crystals and $5000 ethernet cables. :)
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid
