An interesting mixture of comments.
I have ditched my exotic hi-fi, a mix of pre/power amplification two
box cd setup, expensive cables and ridiculously expensive speakers. Ok
it sounded outstanding but for a £3k outlay it ought to have. I was
won over by accessability of digital and now all
pablolie Wrote:
I'll see you later, CD replacement! Not yet, though, at least not around
my environment. Of course, as I write this, Sting's Brand New Day has
been playing in the background without any dropouts, sometimes I hate
technology and the random %$#@ around it. But while I can
pablolie Wrote:
Obviously the discussion did not pass me by. Today I converted 2
favorites to flac, and also to 320Mbps MP3, for comparison.
The quality of FLAC is undeniable, running it through the DA input on
the Accuphase CD it sounds just like the original CD. With the MP3 at
256, I
I have even encoded 48 kHz DVD sourced audio to FLAC with no
problems. I also have a signal in the 80% range.
I believe you, ebough people report equal luck.
I don't know why, but I am experiencing some random instabilities:
vanishing playlists, incomplete library information - I have tried
Have you been playing back your FLAC's shortly after rescanning your
library?
You may be able to operate the SB while SlimServer is still updating
your library. I always check via the web interface to make sure the
scanning has completed, if not I'll get dropouts.
Whew, 100 posts, I'm a senior
pablolie Wrote:
I want to focus my effort on digitizing my collection and enjoying
the convenience.
That's a good reason for not working hard on debugging your environment
(although it's not a choice I would make).
I would suggest that it might be worth your while ripping your
I started all this, and it went somewhere I couldn't follow anymore.
It's har for me to understand that the powersupply could make any
difference but in this room it seems to be so many intelligent people
so I go for it.
So I sum it up:
1) New power supply. Stabilized, around $25 in Sweden.
2)
Zacko Wrote:
I started all this, and it went somewhere I couldn't follow anymore.
It's har for me to understand that the powersupply could make any
difference but in this room it seems to be so many intelligent people
so I go for it.
So I sum it up:
1) New power supply. Stabilized,
Zacko Wrote:
I started all this, and it went somewhere I couldn't follow anymore.
It's har for me to understand that the powersupply could make any
difference but in this room it seems to be so many intelligent people
so I go for it.
So I sum it up:
1) New power supply. Stabilized,
jonheal Wrote:
How about giving up and going back to iTunes.
It seems that you are looking for a sound that is emphasized at certain
points across the spectrum. Sorry, but unequalized, the SqueezeBox just
ain't gonna do it for you. It's built to be flat. If you're not willing
to add an
Exactly the point of my earlier post. Even if you want to use mp3 for playback, it's worth your time to rip and encode to flac, so you never have to rip again. Once you have your collection in flac you can transcode to mp3, or maintain a parallel library in mp3, or debug your dropout problems when
Zacko Wrote:
4) Go Flac. Don't think so. What about Apples lossless?
Just want to make sure you are aware: You will not be able to fast
forward or rewind within Apple Lossless tracks. If it hasn't already
been referenced before, this Wiki page may be useful:
pablolie Wrote:
Buying 5,000 compact discs and having 250 *good* ones is
either poor selection or incredibly bad luck.
That's an ignorant thing to say. Listen to jazz recording until the
early 70s. A 256kbps MP3 is not going to be the *gating factor* in the
vast majority of cases.
pablolie Wrote:
The results are a lack of ACCUracy compared to the source.
OK, so let's see - what is the ultimate benefit of phase accuracy? What
does it help reproduce in a stereo recording?
It goes back to a point I made before: since most phasing is introduced
utterly artificially
pablolie wrote:
Like the OS I use now will be around in 5 years... right. Good luck
running that application then.
two thoughts:
1) store the source code, not the binary executable
(better yet: store the format spec and re-implement if needed)
2) emulators already exist for current
I can't tell the difference between high bitrate mp3 and FLAC. Of course, my system is far from audiophile quality. Maybe someday I'll have equipment which reveals the difference to me. Maybe not.Despite this, my entire CD collection (500+? 700+? I don't even know anymore) is encoded in FLAC. It
Mitch Harding said the following on 02/22/2006 03:40 PM:
My next project may involve keeping a parallel library in mp3 format,
generated automatically from my FLAC library. I can use the mp3s for
players which don't speak FLAC.
http://projects.robinbowes.com/trac/flac2mp3
R.
I have experienced no dropouts whatsoever. I have even encoded 48 kHz
DVD sourced audio to FLAC with no problems. I also have a signal in the
80% range.
Given the kind of performance I am getting, I truly believe this is the
time to embrace FLAC lossless coding. The thing is even gapless.
pfarrell Wrote:
Is the audiophile world that old? I think The Absolute Sound is
only about 15 years old. Maybe a little older.
I think the Audiophile world is MUCH older than that. Perhaps not the
term itself, and of course the technologies being fussed about are
changing all the
pfarrell Wrote:
Is the audiophile world that old? I think The Absolute Sound is
only about 15 years old. Maybe a little older.
The idea of high end was pretty much defined by TAS.
In the 70s and 80s, stereo was more of a mass market, or
at least widespread, everyone in college aimed for
P Floding wrote:
pfarrell Wrote:
Is the audiophile world that old? I think The Absolute Sound is
only about 15 years old. Maybe a little older.
Why should TAS define audiophile,
They were the first to use the term high end
Which is where mortals start to think of the term 'audiophile'
The
pfarrell Wrote:
P Floding wrote:
pfarrell Wrote:
Is the audiophile world that old? I think The Absolute Sound is
only about 15 years old. Maybe a little older.
Why should TAS define audiophile,
They were the first to use the term high end
Which is where mortals start to think of
pablolie Wrote:
You'll just hear a mediocre recording with higher resolution, but it'll
remain mediocre. I thikn the average hifi system is superior to the
average recording the music industry produces.
Hmm. Upgrading my system made cd's I yearned to 'crank up' much more
apt for doing
pablolie Wrote:
OK, so we can all crank up the passive-aggressive stanza here.
There are a couple things in that post I wish I could take back, but
that wasn't one of them. I didn't mean anything by it, sorry you took
offense. Buying 5,000 compact discs and having 250 *good* ones is
either
Weren't you arguing the merits of disk space and future support of the
format? It doesn't matter to me that you get off on particular rituals
and I think it's great that you realize that the point is to enjoy the
music, but what does that have to do with choosing between MP3 and
FLAC? The act
Buying 5,000 compact discs and having 250 *good* ones is
either poor selection or incredibly bad luck.
That's an ignorant thing to say. Listen to jazz recording until the
early 70s. A 256kbps MP3 is not going to be the gating factor in the
vast majority of cases.
It does beg the question,
tyler_durden Wrote:
In another year or so, mp3 players will disappear because the cost of
storage will be so low everyone will go lossless, first with lossless
compression like flac. aac or wma, then in another couple years, you'll
just be storing .wav files (for CDs, until you need to store
... keep a copy of the encoder/decoder software on a CDROM ..
Like the OS I use now will be around in 5 years... right. Good luck
running that application then.
In another year or so, mp3 players will disappear ...
You're going a tad overboard. Out of all the encodings around, MP3 is
still
pablolie Wrote:
I don't. I own Accuphase gear, and fantastic speakers. C
Why then limit yourself to inferior compressed lossy material (MP3)?
As for not wanting to expose defects in recordings. Well in this life
nothing is perfect. I much rather live with those small recording
imperfections
I must add I still have MP3 encoded material from years ago. I don't
plan to get rid of it, since I have some rare material.
For new rips though, I am totally FLAC. I have even ripped to FLAC some
older 1940's Sinatra recordings. I could have used MP3 since most are
low in fidelity. But HD
pablolie Wrote:
Like the OS I use now will be around in 5 years... right. Good luck
running that application then.
5 years? I think you underestimate. Win 98 still has a very large user
base and it's 8 years old now. I can still run DOS apps from the early
80's on my XP machine. Likewise,
pablolie Wrote:
That's an ignorant thing to say. Listen to jazz recording until the
early 70s. A 256kbps MP3 is not going to be the gating factor in the
vast majority of cases.
It is if you rip it from vinyl. Ignorance is ripping vinyl to mp3. FLAC
is bliss. Sorry to be obnoxious :)
Why then limit yourself to inferior compressed lossy material
(MP3)?
Great gear is about musicality even -or especially- when the source
isn't perfect. Audiophile 101, really.
I much rather live with those small recording imperfections
an knowing some algorhythm software butchered the
pablolie Wrote:
I'll take my FLAC on SB's DAC over your mp3 on accuphase's
dac though, thanks.
As you said, ignorance is bliss.
I'll add: 'you can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her
think'.
--
Skunk
I'll add: 'you can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make
her think'
The company you frequent is your business, I don't judge. :-)
--
pablolie
pablolie's Profile:
pablolie Wrote:
I'll add: 'you can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make
her think'
The company you frequent is your business, I don't judge. :-)
I don't ride horses or whores, just return trifling cliches.
All in good fun though. We're both here because music is important to
Funny, Accuphase stands for accuracy and phase.
MP3 is not accurate since it relies on destroying supposedly inaudible
phase characteristics!
--
crooner
Squeezebox 3
Lite Audio DAC60 tube DAC
Pioneer SX-1980
Vandersteen 2Ce Signature
Vandersteen 2W
All in good fun though. We're both here because music is
important to us, but getting 'the best sound from your
squeezebox' is not the most important thing in the world.
Agree with you on all counts.
As I have stated before: I am very likely to re-digitize those
recording that are
pablolie Wrote:
OK, so let's see - what is the ultimate benefit of phase accuracy?
What does it help reproduce in a stereo recording?
Phase accuracy plays a key role in soundstaging and imaging. It allows
you to properly identify each instrument and it's relative position in
the
Try it. Once you go FLAC there's no going back to MP3s. Everything
that's on the CD is encoded even the warts on not so perfect
recordings!
Besides, hard drive storage is pretty cheap nowadays. I bought a 300
gig drive and I haven't even used a third of it.
The main reason MP3 was adopted was
That aside, why not choose an open source format, i.e. flac?
Without a doubt, when (it's not even an if) I go lossless I'd have a
very strong preference for FLAC. But the fact it's open doesn't mean
that the big guys with vested interest can't hijack it in the end if it
suits their purpose -
pablolie Wrote:
That aside, why not choose an open source format, i.e. flac?
Without a doubt, when (it's not even an if) I go lossless I'd have a
very strong preference for FLAC. But the fact it's open doesn't mean
that the big guys with vested interest can't hijack it in the end if it
tyler_durden wrote:
pablolie Wrote:
Without a doubt, when (it's not even an if) I go lossless I'd have a
very strong preference for FLAC. But the fact it's open doesn't mean
that the big guys with vested interest can't hijack it in the end if it
suits their purpose - it's happened before in the
pablolie wrote:
I don't understand. I was in the local CompuSA store yesterday
Seagate 200GB disks for $35 each ...
Cost is not the issue. The biggest mirrored drive I could get when I
bought my Netgear SC101 was 400GB, I got 2 of them - now the largest
one is 500GB. It simply is not large
I'm interested in this research, but couldn't find it on their
website. Do you have any links?
I used to be subscribed to German Stereo magazine, they ran 2 articles on
the matter about 3 years ago that influenced me quite a bit. Online
references exist for almost everything, though, including
pablolie Wrote:
Cost is not the issue. The biggest mirrored drive I could get when I
bought my Netgear SC101 was 400GB, I got 2 of them - now the largest
one is 500GB. It simply is not large enough to house my collection
-losslessly- and allow for headroom for growth.
Then why not
I'm not following how you jump from audio quality to
redundancy to reliability at once. They are different
issues that one can decide to implement or not
as your strokes require.
But there are some trade-offs, like in every engineering project, given
the amount of resources one is willing to
pablolie wrote:
I'm not following how you jump from audio quality to
redundancy to reliability at once. They are different
issues that one can decide to implement or not
as your strokes require.
Yes, the Netgear solution has limitations (I can't recall ever claiming
the limitations are the
TAS started as an underground mag in the late 1970s. It didn't come of
age until a decade later.
I do believe good cables make a difference but I would not pay more
than $100 for a set of interconnects. Good thing the local dealer has a
lot of demo and used cables to choose from. Like XLO's for
Hi,
and thansk for all replies. About being an audiophile: I've been there,
done that. In the attic I have a pair of IMF TLS80-speakers, big ass
fridges, icredible sound but impossible to place in my livingroom.
My relation to good sound is like it is to music. A good tune is a good
tune, I don't
Zacko wrote:
SB3 is a really nice machine, but if it's as great as many says why do
I have to mod it?
I haven't mod'd any of mine.
Lots of people talk about mods because many of them are easy and cheap.
Buying a $10 power supply and plugging it in counts as a 'mod' to
some folks, it is so
Why don't you just buy a hardware EQ?
--
konut
konut's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1596
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=21173
konut Wrote:
Why don't you just buy a hardware EQ?
A friend of mine with a pretty decent system has been happy with this
model:
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?DID=7Partnumber=245-882
--
jonheal
Jon Heal says:
Have a nice day!
http://www.theheals.org/
Thanks for your comments, Pat.
It isn't the bass that is usually different, it is usually
the reverb tails at the mid frequencies, and the decay of
a snare hit.
The acoustic bass has that range, especially when recorded as well as
in that Kevin Mahogany album. t's in the echo, when you hear
pablolie wrote:
Indeed, why not? I may give it a try. The main reason is inertia - I
had started digitizing my music collection a while ago,
I can understand that. I have 750 CDs in my library
and I never want to touch them again.
--
Pat
Zacko Wrote:
I myself use 192 and I'm quite sure that it close to impossible to tell
the difference between 192 and higher.
From my system 192kbps MP3 is unaccceptable, with very noticable
sibilence especially with piano music.
--
agentsmith
320 kbps is the minimum for acceptable sound in my experience. Might as
well go all the way and use FLAC in such a case.
I have also found that audible MP3 artifacts are more noticeable with
certain kinds of music. It also depends on the quality of the encoding
process.
--
crooner
Squeezebox
320 kbps is the minimum for acceptable sound in my experience.
Fraunhofer institute has repeatedly lined up audiophile experts, and
they've never been able to reliably tell the difference between 320k
and 256k MP3 encoding. It's all due to psychoacoustics. The algorithms
are tricky, and the
I have been listening to quite a bit of music with the SQB3.
I tested:
(1) Original CD on Accuphase DP65v
(2) SQB3 connected via Kimber Optical to DP65v's DA
(2a) Uncompressed
(2b) 256kbps MP3
(1) Always loved the sound. Crisp, high resolution, yet extremely
musical.
(2b) In the vast
pablolie wrote:
(1) Original CD on Accuphase DP65v
(2) SQB3 connected via Kimber Optical to DP65v's DA
(2a) Uncompressed
(2b) 256kbps MP3
(2b) In the vast majority of instances, equally stunning sound. But
upon listening closely to My world is empty on a Kevin Mahogany
album, I finally
Upgrade the server to version 6.2.2. That made a huge difference for me
in terms of analogue output. Upgrading PS to regulated Linear supply,
using decent interconnects all helps to improving the sound as well.
--
dwsomers
dwsommers, can you explain what it is about Slimserver 6.2.2 that
results in a sound improvement? Is the improvement specific to a
particular kind of encoding, or does it work accross the board?
--
MartinP
MartinP's
Zacko Wrote:
iTunes/Airport Express sounds much better thanks to that simple
equalizer.
My amp doesn't even have bass or treble, let alone equalization, and
sounds pretty clean and crispy with the squeezebox.
Were you planning to lower the high frequencys with the eq?
Also, FLAC encoded
Zacko Wrote:
I read the tests, I liked the cool look of the Squeezebox 3 and there it
was, shiny and bright, rather easy setup.
But where were the true clean crispy sound?
Not in my speakers.
iTunes/Airport Express sounds much better thanks to that simple
equalizer.
It's an old
You could use foobar to preprocess all your audio.
Alternatively, if you can find command line util to process audio that
can stream data in and out, you can use that within slimserver - I
havn't tried this, but I'm sure it must be possible...
As you're in the audiophile forum I should say don't
I've checked my SB3 on my amp (Sony w/ Jamo speakers) like this:
- Original CD from one line
- Lame APS rip from an other line in
- Synchronized playing (both started at the same time)
- Doing blind compare by switching several times between them (~15
times)
Result: very hard to distinguish the
joncourage Wrote:
Lots of information in this article, provides a good summary of what to
expect. Sort of a reader's digest version of going through many of the
threads on this forum.
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/1205/slimdevices_squeezebox.htm
Short version: the SB
67 matches
Mail list logo
