ralphpnj wrote:
> Question: does it sound better or does it just perform better, i.e. less
> buffering, or both?
And how was the "better" determined?
"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
ralphpnj wrote:
> Question: does it sound better or does it just perform better, i.e. less
> buffering, or both?
sound.
there's no performance difference on my network. most of my collection
is 16/44, with a bit of 24/88 or 24/96. no higher bitrates.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac
