steve781;603607 Wrote:
> I am currently using a Duet but I'm thinking of getting a Touch. I
> currently use the digital output (Coax) from the Receiver and I'm happy
> with the audio quality. I also use a SBS to stream my music catalog as
> well as AAC Internet streams.
>
> Are there any advanta
steve781;603694 Wrote:
> So since we are on the topic of audio quality, is it my imagination that
> the Coax output sounds noticeably better than the Optical output of the
> Receiver? I suppose it could also be my Onkyo receiver.
It will always depend on the combo of equipment at either end - To
steve781;603694 Wrote:
> So since we are on the topic of audio quality, is it my imagination that
> the Coax output sounds noticeably better than the Optical output of the
> Receiver? I suppose it could also be my Onkyo receiver.
could be receiver, could be the cable for optical. These "can" hav
So since we are on the topic of audio quality, is it my imagination that
the Coax output sounds noticeably better than the Optical output of the
Receiver? I suppose it could also be my Onkyo receiver.
--
steve781
steve781'
WAD62;603675 Wrote:
> Indeed, I'm using a BNC/SPDIF adapter at the moment...
>
> I was under the impression that AES/EBU was better, but parhaps that's
> for longer runs.
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=564882&postcount=25
--
garym
---
Phil Leigh;603672 Wrote:
> Actually, AES/EBU is not better than s/pdif... it has its own issues.
> s/pdif with 75 ohm BNC connectors would be better.
Indeed, I'm using a BNC/SPDIF adapter at the moment...
I was under the impression that AES/EBU was better, but parhaps that's
for longer runs.
WAD62;603657 Wrote:
> Mmm very interesting...damn it the touch is the wrong shape for my rack,
> the receiver just slots in nicely! (I've plonked some photos on the
> gallery section there's not much room left).
>
> Now if they could just come out with an updated receiver!!! AES/EBU
> would be n
Phil Leigh;603637 Wrote:
> It's a better s/pdif driver circuit design - I can't remember the tech
> details at the moment, but it was discussed/dissected in detail some
> while ago. The result is that the s/pdif signal is cleaner and easier
> to resolve properly within the DAC (ie less jitter).
WAD62;603630 Wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> I run my receiver (playing FLAC level 5)into an Audiolab DAX, along
> with my CDM transport (which is a pretty good transport), both via
> SPDIF, and have found little or no difference between the two, even in
> blind testing.
>
> What aspect of the Touch impr
Phil Leigh;603625 Wrote:
> Absolutely, yes.
>
> (but we aren't talking about "huge" improvements here, since the
> Receiver is pretty good to start with...)
Hi Phil,
I run my receiver (playing FLAC level 5)into an Audiolab DAX, along
with my CDM transport (which is a pretty good transport), bo
WAD62;603621 Wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> So you're saying that a touch will provide a better SPDIF output from
> 16/44.1 FLAC than the receiver, is that correct?
Absolutely, yes.
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
Tou
Phil Leigh;603609 Wrote:
> yes, it does.
>
Hi Phil,
So you're saying that a touch will provide a better SPDIF output from
16/44.1 FLAC than the receiver, is that correct?
--
WAD62
Cheers Will
WAD62's Profile: http://f
steve781;603607 Wrote:
> Are there any advantages to the Touch over the Receiver? Does the Touch
> have better sound quality when using the digital outputs?
>
yes, it does.
steve781;603607 Wrote:
>
> Is it realistic to think that with the Touch I wouldn't need to have my
> local SBS running
I am currently using a Duet but I'm thinking of getting a Touch. I
currently use the digital output (Coax) from the Receiver and I'm happy
with the audio quality. I also use a SBS to stream my music catalog as
well as AAC Internet streams.
Are there any advantages to the Touch over the Receiver?
14 matches
Mail list logo
