Deaf Cat wrote:
Hi,
Seems to get rather good results reading about it on various forums, but
not come across anyone using it with a slimdevices set up, just
wondered?
http://www.highend-audiopc.com/optimizer.html
cheers
DC
Hi Deaf Cat
IMHO it is well worth a try. My vanilla LMS is
Hi Quad,
I have actually been experimenting with disabling different services
etc, on win8, the most recent was to disable the paging file :-o pc
is still going and sounding better than before :-) fingers crossed it
keeps going as I rather like it.
From these experiments I can only assume
And if you are using wi-fi to stream to your Squeezeboxes then don't
forget to pick up some Audiophile Air in Can:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?101032-Audiophile-Buzzwords-Fads-Crazes-Hypes-and-other-Quantum-Mattersp=772814viewfull=1#post772814
You will thank me.
Living Rm:
ralphpnj wrote:
And if you are using wi-fi to stream to your Squeezeboxes then don't
forget to pick up some Audiophile Air in Can:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?101032-Audiophile-Buzzwords-Fads-Crazes-Hypes-and-other-Quantum-Mattersp=772814viewfull=1#post772814
You will
Quad wrote:
To me it sounds clearly better than Windows 8 without any adjustments.
And your auditory memory is long enough to be able to make a reliable
comparision?
What aspect of the audio data that the computer sends out to the network
do you think can be affected by any OS tuning as long
Quad wrote:
IMHO it is well worth a try. My vanilla LMS is running on a Synology
NAS. For playback I recently turned an older notebook into a dedicated
music player. Just install Windows Server 2012 R2 Evaluation in core
mode, run AudiophileOptimizer and launch Squeezeplay with your
Julf wrote:
And your auditory memory is long enough to be able to make a reliable
comparision?
What aspect of the audio data that the computer sends out to the network
do you think can be affected by any OS tuning as long as you don't get
dropouts from buffer underflow?
He using
Mnyb wrote:
He using Squeezeplay ON that computer ...
Ah! Thanks!
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 gilt
edge that will fool many people - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
Mnyb wrote:
Deaf Cat is probably using a Squeezebox ?
There is a conceptual difference using a player on the PC/Server and
using a real hardware squeezebox or wandboard or other network client .
So Deaf Cat and Quad are comparing Apples and Oranges , probably
imaginary ones .
Indeed.
bonze wrote:
And both seemingly misunderstanding how a Squeezebox setup actually
works.
Or even grokked the more general difference between a network music
_server_ (eg, LMS) and a network music _player_ (eg, Squeezeplay on a
laptop)
aubuti wrote:
Or even grokked the more general difference between a network music
_server_ (eg, LMS) and a network music _player_ (eg, Squeezeplay on a
laptop)
The initial post asked about any experience with that tool in a
slimdevices setup. That's what I answered to by giving some
Quad wrote:
But of course fair reactions were beyond hope. :-)
I believe that you have that just a little wrong. The statement should
read:
But of course reactions based on a solid understanding of the basics of
how digital audio works instead of magic audiophile pixie dust were to
be
Guys, you are coming across like some vigilantes patrolling the forum
with burning torches, ready to beat up anyone who says anything
foo-like.
It doesn't mean I am into foo - I'm not. But let's drink some decaf and
live and let live a bit. Otherwise you'll all end up just agreeing with
each
darrenyeats wrote:
Guys, you are coming across like some vigilantes patrolling the forum
with burning torches, ready to beat up anyone who says anything
foo-like.
It doesn't mean I am into foo - I'm not. But let's drink some decaf and
live and let live a bit. Otherwise the people left
Quad wrote:
The initial post asked about any experience with that tool in a
slimdevices setup. That's what I answered to by giving some details in
which context my experience took place. What's wrong with that?
But of course fair reactions were beyond hope. :-)
Nothing's wrong with that,
ralphpnj wrote:
...2+2=5
Close enough for me ;)
kidstypike
1xSB3 - 1xBoom - 1x(Squeezebox) Radio - 2xTouch
kidstypike's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10436
View this thread:
kidstypike wrote:
close enough for me ;)
lol!
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign.
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop
Maybe I should see a doctor. I always try to be loved by everyone. :-)
I think it is time to say thank you to some of the forum members who
constantly point out scientific arguments against audiophile myths. This
saved me money and energy. Here is what I stopped doing because of you:
- Buying
aubuti wrote:
Nothing's wrong with that, just not particularly germane when it's
obvious from subsequent posts that Deaf Cat was talking about using
Audiophile Optimizer to tweak a server computer that is streaming to
physical Squeezeboxes (SB2 and a Touch). I suppose you should get credit
darrenyeats wrote:
Guys, you are coming across like some vigilantes patrolling the forum
with burning torches, ready to beat up anyone who says anything
foo-like.
Luckily here are several very Close-Minded people :)
I may recomend you Computeraudiophile.com when you feel more comfortable
with
ralphpnj wrote:
The great thing about online forums about audio, as opposed to
publications about audio, is that other forum members get to call BS on
all your misguided beliefs . . .
Shouldn't that be OUR misguided beliefs?
Glass houses, stones, and all that.
R
LMS on a dedicated
Quad wrote:
PS: But remember, I passed a properly designed ABX test for MP3@320kbs
vs. FLAC with a recording I own physically, ripped and converted by
myself. I would be more than happy to reproduce the result for you at
any time. Sorry couldn't resist. :-)
Sting in the tail ... I like it!
RonM wrote:
Shouldn't that be OUR misguided beliefs?
Glass houses, stones, and all that.
R
Quite right. I'm often told that I'm completely full of BS, even when it
comes to audio :)
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign.
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz
good stuff! :cool:
*Location 1:* VortexBox 4TB (2.2) LMS 7.8 Transporter, Touch, Boom,
Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio)
*Location 2:* VBA 3TB (2.2) LMS 7.8 Touch Benchmark DAC I, Boom,
Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio)
*Office:* Win7(64) LMS 7.8 SqueezePlay
I have some other view meanwhile. I doubt it is bad what happened here.
Beck may have collected this music over a while and gave it for
mastering.
I have no doubt this material is mixed at 24/96 and so this is a valid
Studio Master - people ask for it, people get it.
I think there are much
the ability to differentiate between MP3 and FLAC is merely a function
of the recording quality - c'mon that's baiting for the oldest flame war
:) good ole 80-20 rule... only 20% of your music collection *rightfully*
deserves to be FLAC'd for sound quality. but you may FLAC it all for
i was extremely tempted to get a Transporter. sweet sounding design.
but when the time came to make changes i used one of my Touch and use a
Benchmark DAC2 HGC as the DA. truly a very revealing and yet not
fatiguing little unit, and very flexible because of all the input
(including analog) and
27 matches
Mail list logo
