Phil Leigh;351534 Wrote:
> I sense you use Toslink to connect the Sb to the GW? presumably you find
> this improves things? - do you use the stock SB PSU or something
> different?
>
I use a Welborne Labs linear supply for my SB3. I use toslink from the
sb3 to the GW Labs to eliminate any electi
krochat;351296 Wrote:
> Phil,
>
> I have no insight into the square wave problem. I do have a scope but
> haven't put it on the output of the TacT.
>
> The RCS 2.2x upsamples internally to 96kHz (not 192kHz) using an Analog
> Devices AD1896 ASRC. If you look back in the TacT forums, you'll find
I can't speak for the AD1896, but I spent a bit of time looking at the
results of using the CS8420 last night. I've got an Assemblage (aka
Sonic Frontiers) D2D-1 converter, which uses the CS8420 for up
conversion to 24/96, so I decided to see if it were doing something
funny, like the TACT seems
Phil Leigh;351277 Wrote:
> Kim - I notice you are using the GW labs upsampler... The TACT will
> upsample to 192 anyway. What's your reason - and more importantly, what
> are the sonic benefits - of upsampling to 96Khz before the TACT? Are you
> trying to negotiate around the ASRC of the TACT?
>
krochat;351266 Wrote:
> I did this a few years ago - the stock power supply in my TacT (a
> Meanwell) showed about 80mv peak-to-peak noise at the switching
> frequency on the 5 volt output.
>
> The linear Condor power supply that replaced it had 5-10mv peak-to-peak
> noise primarily at 60Hz.
>
krochat;351266 Wrote:
> I did this a few years ago - the stock power supply in my TacT (a
> Meanwell) showed about 80mv peak-to-peak noise at the switching
> frequency on the 5 volt output.
>
> The linear Condor power supply that replaced it had 5-10mv peak-to-peak
> noise primarily at 60Hz.
>
Phil Leigh;351133 Wrote:
> When I get the scope out, I'll have a look at the noise spectra of the 2
> PSU's. No idea what I'll find - probably the opposite of my
> expectations, since that seems to be a recurring theme at the moment
> :o)
I did this a few years ago - the stock power supply in my
opaqueice;351209 Wrote:
> I agree with you. But most of the sub/ob debate comes from
> subjectivists claiming that they are perceiving physical changes in the
> sound, and that their experiences are therefore applicable to others.Haven't
> seen in these forums, yet. :)
Except me and my cat, of
I'm currently hearing AND seeing things I can't explain :o(
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...SB3+Stontronics PSU - Altmann
JISCO/UPCI - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF
Triplethreat(Audiocom full
pablolie;351204 Wrote:
>
> If someone enjoys their music collection more because they placed a
> chunk of platinum on top of their system, hey, who am I to argue with
> them.
>
I agree with you. But most of the sub/ob debate comes from
subjectivists claiming that they are perceiving physical
iPhone;351045 Wrote:
> ... All the more reason to doubt what you -Hear-.
> ...
That I disagree with. I am all for trying to back everything we know
with scientific, measurable facts. Which means to make things fit into
the still imperfect *models* we use to quantify our observations.
But when
Phil Leigh;351172 Wrote:
>
> Going to try a 100Hz and 10Khz wave...
> Hmmm. The 100Hz wave has less ringing but the tops/bottoms are quite
> steeply sloped
> The 10Khz squarewave looks like a sine wave!
>
You might compare them to the SB3 to see if they're normal. A 10kHz
squarewave -should-
opaqueice;350961 Wrote:
> Does it make that square wave look any better?
The squarewave looks identical to my previous pictures. The mystery
continues. Nothing on the TACT forum yet either. Tried changing the
spdif cables but nothing happened. Tried a 48kHz/24 squarewave - no
difference.
Going
Yes, sorry I apologise. Let me re-qualify:
I can perceive a definite advantage in my system with a good Linear PSU
driving the TACT compared with the stock PSU.
The two most easy to describe phenomena are improved timbre on voices
and strings and the ability to more clearly discern tiny details
I think that it's better to say that we can use the scope to "explain"
the difference heard, rather than saying that "you can't trust your
ears".
For a lot of people that have the habit of listening to music, "hearing
a difference" is a fact as valid as a scope measure, and should not be
necessari
Phil Leigh;351012 Wrote:
> Jim - erm...
> I'm not sure I follow. I can hear the improvement.
> But I will put it on the scope tomorrow. At this stage I don't think
> the two are connected which is why I started a new thread...
>
> Or is your advice tongue-in-cheek :o)
Maybe what Jim is saying i
JJZolx;351009 Wrote:
> Don't trust your ears. It's all about what you see on a scope.
Jim - erm...
I'm not sure I follow. I can hear the improvement.
But I will put it on the scope tomorrow. At this stage I don't think
the two are connected which is why I started a new thread...
Or is your adv
Don't trust your ears. It's all about what you see on a scope.
--
JJZolx
Jim
JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=53907
__
opaqueice;350961 Wrote:
> Does it make that square wave look any better?
:o) - I knew you would ask that...and I don't know yet. I rather
foolishly took the scope upstairs before fitting the supply. I'll test
it again tomorrow. My gut feel is that the square wave will look just
the same.
I've s
Phil Leigh;350936 Wrote:
>
> If you have a stock TACT, try a (good) replacement PSU. It works.
Does it make that square wave look any better?
--
opaqueice
opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?us
As you know, I have a stock digital-only TACT RCS 2.2x behind my SB3.
I've been poking around inside it (see looking at spdif on scope
thread) and in desperation I wondered if the stock SMPS supply in it is
really as "bad" as many other users claim. I can't afford $600 for the
Aberdeen supply at t
21 matches
Mail list logo
