twheatley;574809 Wrote:
> so I've been thinking further about the effects of 24/96 conversion at
> the server level.
>
> Could it be that the improvement in sound could be due to the volume
> adjustment being turned on.
>
> Just thinking that if the SBS upsampled to 24/96 THEN performed the
> v
so I've been thinking further about the effects of 24/96 conversion at
the server level.
Could it be that the improvement in sound could be due to the volume
adjustment being turned on.
Just thinking that if the SBS upsampled to 24/96 THEN performed the
volume adjustment, any gain reduction woul
callesoroe;531558 Wrote:
> It is now safe to use the digital loop function on The Transporter. The
> bug regarding settings not stored, has been fixed in the new official
> 7.5 :)
This is true (and good news for people using the loop) but attenuation
after the loop is still mandatory for safety
callesoroe;527272 Wrote:
> That's right. But before you use the digital loop, you should beware of
> the bug I have reportet. When you change the settings regarding digital
> loop, THEY ARE NOT STORED. That means that if you have vol=100% on
> Transporter, and THINK you are controlling it with Th
twheatley;527878 Wrote:
> OK getting my balanced inline attenuators today - quick question: better
> to plug them into the amp or the TP?
you want them at the amp end - that way they also attenuate any tiny
bit of noise picked up by the cable, maximising your signal/noise ratio
--
Phil Leigh
OK getting my balanced inline attenuators today - quick question: better
to plug them into the amp or the TP?
--
twheatley
twheatley's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5167
View this thread: http://
twheatley;527508 Wrote:
> thanks - will try the Rothwells for a start.
>
> I can't thank you guys enough - I have moved closer to hifi nirvana in
> the last week than I have in the last 2 years.
>
> Now - for the final tweak I really need to master the Tact. I've been
> using the beta PC softwa
callesoroe;527532 Wrote:
> I have the problem because i turn all my system off at outlet when
> I am going to bed. And by power off it does not store settings.
Which would also happen after a power cut...
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't
twheatley;527419 Wrote:
> Not sure I understand - I don't seem to have that problem. I always
> leave the transporter out at 100 and use the tact to control the volume
> that's fed back into the transporter.
>
> For what you suggest to happen the transporter would have to control
> the volume di
thanks - will try the Rothwells for a start.
I can't thank you guys enough - I have moved closer to hifi nirvana in
the last week than I have in the last 2 years.
Now - for the final tweak I really need to master the Tact. I've been
using the beta PC software for the last year (using the "quick
twheatley;527451 Wrote:
> Phil - Many thanks for this advice. I completely agree that I'm running
> a huge risk with this - I just assumed that the Transporter (having been
> around for a couple of years now) was stable enough to warrant direct
> connection. I used to run a SB3 to Benchmark DAC1
Phil - Many thanks for this advice. I completely agree that I'm running
a huge risk with this - I just assumed that the Transporter (having been
around for a couple of years now) was stable enough to warrant direct
connection. I used to run a SB3 to Benchmark DAC1 to Simaudio P5 preamp,
bt found t
twheatley;527419 Wrote:
> Not sure I understand - I don't seem to have that problem. I always
> leave the transporter out at 100 and use the tact to control the volume
> that's fed back into the transporter.
>
> For what you suggest to happen the transporter would have to control
> the volume di
Not sure I understand - I don't seem to have that problem. I always
leave the transporter out at 100 and use the tact to control the volume
that's fed back into the transporter.
For what you suggest to happen the transporter would have to control
the volume digital output of the tact.
My setup i
twheatley;527254 Wrote:
> Thanks all - well, a fascinating weekend.
>
> This thread was what really pushed me over the edge to order a
> transporter - and I can highly recommend it.
>
> All in all, a superb piece of kit and I feel I can now get the most out
> of it thanks to your advice.
>
> I
Thanks all - well, a fascinating weekend.
This thread was what really pushed me over the edge to order a
transporter - and I can highly recommend it.
All in all, a superb piece of kit and I feel I can now get the most out
of it thanks to your advice.
I also confirm that whether the upsampling i
seanadams;527121 Wrote:
> As discussed at the top of this thread, the Tact will ALWAYS be doing
> ASRC even if the same rates are nominally matched. As such I would think
> that you're best off letting it do all the resampling in one pass.
Having spent a lengthy time doing listening tests I have
callesoroe;527027 Wrote:
> Regarding upsampling.
>
> Is there any difference between doing the upsamling on SBS server or
> let the Tact do the upsampling itself??
As discussed at the top of this thread, the Tact will ALWAYS be doing
ASRC even if the same rates are nominally matched. As such I
callesoroe;527027 Wrote:
> Regarding upsampling.
>
> Is there any difference between doing the upsamling on SBS server or
> let the Tact do the upsampling itself??
Yes, all sample-rate conversion involves compromises, especially if
done in real time. Some converters are measureably superior to
twheatley;526597 Wrote:
> Getting my Transporter tomorrow - currently using a Tact Mini as my
> pre-amp (driven digitally by an SB3), but it would seem that the
> internal layout is suboptimal when compared to the RCS 2.2XP.
>
> Looking forward to seeing how it sounds when I use it purely for
>
Getting my Transporter tomorrow - currently using a Tact Mini as my
pre-amp (driven digitally by an SB3), but it would seem that the
internal layout is suboptimal when compared to the RCS 2.2XP.
Looking forward to seeing how it sounds when I use it purely for
digital room correction and use the T
Silber;520863 Wrote:
> Hello,
> what is the best way to drive a full digital System with transporter,
> Tact RCS 2.2.xp and 2 x Tact digital amps 2150x ?
> Is this the way to do it :
> force Squeezeserver to upsample the 16/44.1 flac content to 24/96 by
> sox and connect one digital SPDIF out of
Hello,
what is the best way to drive a full digital System with transporter,
Tact RCS 2.2.xp and 2 x Tact digital amps 2150x ?
Is this the way to do it :
force Squeezeserver to upsample the 16/44.1 flac content to 24/96 by
sox and connect one digital SPDIF out of the 2.2xp to the SPDIF-Input of
th
Interestingthanks guys
This gives me another ideea : did you try to force the TP to upsample
the 16/44.1 content to 24/96 ? Does it sound better ? Or ar least
different ?
I am referring to the context where you don't have an external
processor.
--
loserica
--
GuyDebord;488292 Wrote:
> Thanks Phil! I searched and I couldnt find a file with such name in mac
> osx Does anyone know where it is??
In your Library/PrefernecePanes folder in Finder, you should find the
file Squeezebox.prefPane. Right click on it and select "show package
contents". This
Phil Leigh;485958 Wrote:
> Guy, I know nothing about Macs, on XP the file is called
> "custom-convert.conf" and is in the c:\program
> files\Squeezecenter\server folder.
> regards,
> Phil
Thanks Phil! I searched and I couldnt find a file with such name in mac
osx Does anyone know where it is
GuyDebord;485953 Wrote:
> Hello Guys,
>
> I wanted to try Phil's custom-config file but I couldnt find out how to
> replace it, as I didnt find any file with the same name could you
> please let me know how? I use mac os.
>
> cheers!
Guy, I know nothing about Macs, on XP the file is ca
Hello Phil,
I wanted to try your custom-config file but I couldnt find out how to
replace it, as I didnt find any file with the same name could you
please let me know how? I use mac os.
cheers!
--
GuyDebord
'*LAST.FM*' (http://www.last.fm/user/bloodyrosa)
- SPEAKERS: Kharma CRM
On 12/11/09 22:54, seanadams wrote:
>
> Rodney_Gold;484794 Wrote:
>> So if im using a DEQ2496 (I use either a Z-sys RDP-1 or a DEQ in the
>> efects loop) I should be using Asynchronous- external processor is
>> master in the effects loop clock mode?
>>
>> I have been using the synchronous setting
Rodney_Gold;484794 Wrote:
> So if im using a DEQ2496 (I use either a Z-sys RDP-1 or a DEQ in the
> efects loop) I should be using Asynchronous- external processor is
> master in the effects loop clock mode?
>
> I have been using the synchronous setting and have noticed a distorted
> effect in th
So if im using a DEQ2496 (I use either a Z-sys RDP-1 or a DEQ in the
efects loop) I should be using Asynchronous- external processor is
master in the effects loop clock mode?
I have been using the synchronous setting and have noticed a distorted
effect in the DEQ - I thought it may be digital clip
callesoroe;484748 Wrote:
>
> Wordclock on S/PDIF-out : Wordclock-out signal activated - Transporter
> is Master
You should disable this one. It's only usable when Transporter is being
used as a DAC, AND is connected to a source that accepts a word clock
input.
Apparently the firmware is doing
callesoroe;484748 Wrote:
>
> Sean was right about the clock settings. You always have to let the
> Tact be master to effect loop. I tried selecting Transporter, but that
> resulted in distorted sound. Why is the possibillity there???
There might exist other DSP products which maintain a synchro
Phil Leigh;479604 Wrote:
> Yes. The TACT volume control and the TP volume control work in the same
> way, and one of them should be set on max. You'll need to experiment to
> see which works best for you.
I have now been doing a little experimenting. I just have one balanced
digital cable, so I
callesoroe;479603 Wrote:
> Can you in this setup still use the volume control on the Tact??
Yes. The TACT volume control and the TP volume control work in the same
way, and one of them should be set on max. You'll need to experiment to
see which works best for you.
--
Phil Leigh
You want to
Phil Leigh;479494 Wrote:
> Yes you can do this. You will need 2 cables: tp-tact + tact-tp (connect
> the tact in the effect loop of the TP). In this case you are not using
> the Tact DAC at all, just the DRC and the upsampling (if you set the dfs
> out of the TACT to 96)
Can you in this setup st
callesoroe;479493 Wrote:
> OK but I think this is not possible for me. I read somewhere that the
> ReadyNas Duo is not powerfull enough to run SOX. I will go on with my
> current setup Transporter -> balanced digital out > Tact RCS 2.2X
>
> I hoped there was a way to send from Transporter to Ta
Phil Leigh;479457 Wrote:
> so you have Transporter-TACT (with internal DAC card fitted) connected
> by aes/ebu cable?
>
> In this setup, you should set the dout-fs to 96kHz.
> To force the Transporter to upsample evrything to 96/24 on the way in
> to the TACT, you need to edit the custom-convert
so you have Transporter-TACT (with internal DAC card fitted) connected
by aes/ebu cable?
In this setup, you should set the dout-fs to 96kHz.
To force the Transporter to upsample evrything to 96/24 on the way in
to the TACT, you need to edit the custom-convert.conf file - I've
attached mine.
You
Phil Leigh;476008 Wrote:
> Ah, that will be a shame... never mind, it is "the icing on the cake"
Hi again!
Just got my Transporter today, and I must say it sounds awsome right of
the box with option 2(balanced digital out to Tact). I don't know if the
Transporter have any "burn in" time, but it
Phil Leigh;475873 Wrote:
> One thing I urge you to try (for either option) is to set the SB Server
> to upsample EVERYTHING to 24/96 before sending it to the TP. This will
> force the TACT to do no ASRC internally which IMO improves the audio
> performance.
>
> We can explain how to do this when
I use the Lyngdorf DPA-1, after comparisons with the tact I thought it
was a superior component, anyway they share the same origins, but the
"Room Perfect" plus the magnificent D/A conversion simply sold it.
I have the transporter feeding a digital signal via the AES/EBU out and
into the DPA-1. T
seanadams;476044 Wrote:
> No I really meant what I said. The conversion is _asynchronous_, meaning
> if you compare the signal in to the signal out on a scope, the output
> trace will not be synchronized to the incoming*. _even if the nominal
> rates are the same, let alone an integer multiple_.
Phil Leigh;476028 Wrote:
> Sean - it goes through the ASRC chip for sure, but if it is 24/96
> inbound it is doubled to 192 for internal dsp processing.
No I really meant what I said. The conversion is _asynchronous_,
meaning if you compare the signal in to the signal out on a scope, the
output
seanadams;476021 Wrote:
> I don't think that's true... the Tact passes everything through ASRC
> processing even if the sample rates are nominally matched. I remember
> testing this when developing the TP effects loop feature - you always
> have to let the Tact become the master clock.
Sean - it
seanadams;476021 Wrote:
> I don't think that's true... the Tact passes everything through ASRC
> processing even if the sample rates are nominally matched. I remember
> testing this when developing the TP effects loop feature - you always
> have to let the Tact become the master clock.
Sean - it
Phil Leigh;475873 Wrote:
>
> One thing I urge you to try (for either option) is to set the SB Server
> to upsample EVERYTHING to 24/96 before sending it to the TP. This will
> force the TACT to do no ASRC internally which IMO improves the audio
> performance.
>
I don't think that's true... the
callesoroe;475888 Wrote:
> OK interessting. I have just one doubt regarding the upsampling. I
> am running my Squeezebox server on a ReadyNas Duo, and I don't think it
> has got the power to upsample to 24/96 on the fly :(
Ah, that will be a shame... never mind, it is "the icing on the c
Phil Leigh;475873 Wrote:
> In theory you have two choices:
> 1) use the digital loop in the Transporter to send/return to the TACT
> and use the TP DAC
> 2) use the TACT as DRC+DAC
>
> Probably worth trying both to see which you prefer. With option 1 you
> are not using the TACT DAC.
>
> One th
callesoroe;475865 Wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am the comming owner of a new Transporter. Just ordered one from
> Audiogon yesterday. Smooth handling and it was shipped in a few hours..
> :). I am now waiting for it to arrive to Denmark..
>
> In the meantime I am considering my future setup. I use a T
Hi
I am the comming owner of a new Transporter. Just ordered one from
Audiogon yesterday. Smooth handling and it was shipped in a few hours..
:). I am now waiting for it to arrive to Denmark..
In the meantime I am considering my future setup. I use a Tact RCS 2.2
X as preamplifier because ro
51 matches
Mail list logo
