PDA

View Full Version : External DAC?



dogberry
2005-08-11, 14:15
I've paired my SB2 with a Channel Islands DAC and I think it sounds amazing. The SB2 by itself sounded pretty fair, but with the external DAC it's killer.

Anyone else using an external DAC?

JJZolx
2005-08-11, 14:47
I've paired my SB2 with a Channel Islands DAC and I think it sounds amazing. The SB2 by itself sounded pretty fair, but with the external DAC it's killer.

Anyone else using an external DAC?
I'm also using the Channel Islands VDA-1 DAC and VAC-1 power supply.

Aylwin
2005-08-11, 22:54
Quite a few here use external DACs. The Benchmark DAC-1 is a popular choice and seems to mate well with the SB. Myself, I use an MSB LinkDAC III.

Robin Bowes
2005-08-12, 01:15
dogberry wrote:
> I've paired my SB2 with a Channel Islands DAC and I think it sounds
> amazing. The SB2 by itself sounded pretty fair, but with the external
> DAC it's killer.
>
> Anyone else using an external DAC?

I used a modified Art DI/O with my SB1.

I've not done extensive testing but initial listening suggests that the
SB2 analogue out is much better than the SB1 and the difference between
SB2 and SB2->Art DI/O is minimal. There's definitely a difference, but
I've not spent enough time to evalute which I prefer, if any.

R.
--
http://robinbowes.com

If a man speaks in a forest,
and his wife's not there,
is he still wrong?

CardinalFang
2005-08-12, 03:03
I've paired my SB2 with a Channel Islands DAC and I think it sounds amazing. The SB2 by itself sounded pretty fair, but with the external DAC it's killer.

Anyone else using an external DAC?

I use a Musical Fidelity XDAC-3, the sound stage opens up more than using the standard analogue outputs, but the difference isn't huge.

Paul

mikerob
2005-08-12, 05:08
I use a Musical Fidelity A324 with the SB2.

I've convinced myself that there is marginally more definition with the A324 vs. the SB2 analog output but the difference is so slight I may just be imagining it...

WK446
2005-08-12, 21:06
I run the SB2 to a Monarchy Audio DIP Classic to an Audio Mirror D1 NOS DAC, all via digital coax. I also own a Benchmark DAC-1, but I prefer the sound of the non-oversampling DAC.

I have also used (and owned) the following DACs with my setup as well:
- Museatex Melior Bitstream
- Channel Islands VDA-1 combo

julian2002
2005-08-13, 17:32
i currently use an audio synthesis dax decade, however i've also tried an audio synthesis dax-2 (with npc and pacific microsonics filters - prefered the npc) and a derek shek nos dac which was fantastic in it's own right never mind for a hundred quid.

Tom Alves
2005-08-15, 13:17
I use a Scott Nixon Chibi Saru NOS DAC with 3Xdc power supply. I did briefly toy with idea of running a Chord DAC64 or Reimyo but that would have been overkill ;)

John Stimson
2005-08-16, 14:34
I use an MSB Nelson Link III. A friend and I did some semi-sighted listening tests and found:

Musical Fidelity A3.24 > SB2 analog out
Musical Fidelity (24/96) = Musical Fidelity (24/192)

MSB (44.1kSps/16bit) > SB2 analog out
MSB (24/96 upsampling) > MSB (44/16)

MSB (24/96) > Musical Fidelity A3.24

I am currently running the MSB in the 132kSps 24 bit upsampling mode. Unfortunately switching between 96 and 132 kSps requires opening the case and pulling a jumper, so we were unable to compare the two.

GreenMan
2005-09-14, 15:44
I run the SB2 to a Monarchy Audio DIP Classic to an Audio Mirror D1 NOS DAC, all via digital coax. I also own a Benchmark DAC-1, but I prefer the sound of the non-oversampling DAC.

I have also used (and owned) the following DACs with my setup as well:
- Museatex Melior Bitstream
- Channel Islands VDA-1 combo


I'm considering the Benchmark DAC-1. Why do you prefer the Audio Mirror D1? As an owner of the D1, have you ever heard about the DAC-Ah available from Poth Audio? It's supposedly essentially the same dac, but at a much smaller price. I'd like to know if anyone has done an A/B on the Audio Mirror and the DAC-Ah.

WK446
2005-09-14, 20:51
GreenMan:

I am guessing that you are known as "Im_all_ears" on Audiogon.

Yes I have heard of the DAC-Ah. It is sold by a company in Hong Kong called DIYclub. It is the same version as that being sold by Poth Audio. The Audio Mirror DAC has a few internal and cosmetic changes. There is an entire thread on this mystery on Audiogon - the thread was removed from Audiogon after complaints by the creator of the Audio Mirror DAC.

Audio is entirely based on subjective and internal preferences. I suppose once you get a chance to listen to a number of DACs, you start to identify pleasing sonic characteristics. It's like the tubes vs. solid-state debate.

Cheers,
Dennis




I'm considering the Benchmark DAC-1. Why do you prefer the Audio Mirror D1? As an owner of the D1, have you ever heard about the DAC-Ah available from Poth Audio? It's supposedly essentially the same dac, but at a much smaller price. I'd like to know if anyone has done an A/B on the Audio Mirror and the DAC-Ah.

GreenMan
2005-09-14, 22:47
GreenMan:

I am guessing that you are known as "Im_all_ears" on Audiogon.

Yes I have heard of the DAC-Ah. It is sold by a company in Hong Kong called DIYclub. It is the same version as that being sold by Poth Audio. The Audio Mirror DAC has a few internal and cosmetic changes. There is an entire thread on this mystery on Audiogon - the thread was removed from Audiogon after complaints by the creator of the Audio Mirror DAC.

Audio is entirely based on subjective and internal preferences. I suppose once you get a chance to listen to a number of DACs, you start to identify pleasing sonic characteristics. It's like the tubes vs. solid-state debate.

Cheers,
Dennis

Yeah, I could understand the Audio Mirror guys being unhappy if what I've read elsewhere is true, namely that the technology was copied after a DAC was shipped to China.

Since you've heard both, how do they compare sonically? Do they sound comparable, or even the same, to one another? I've heard neither.

WK446
2005-09-15, 00:06
When I said "heard," I meant that in a different way, e.g., I heard that the movie was good...

Quite frankly the entire matter doesn't concern me - the Audio Mirror DAC sounds good in my ears, the price was right, and that's the bottom line. I feel bad for it's creator, Vlad...

You should try and find audiophiles in your area and attempt to demo various NOS DACs for starters. If you like the sound, perhaps go further... If you like conventional DACs, there's a ton of them out there.

I did not have a chance to audition an Audio Mirror DAC before I bought it - I purchased it on a hunch. To my surprise, the hunch was a good one... (:

Cheers,
Dennis




Yeah, I could understand the Audio Mirror guys being unhappy if what I've read elsewhere is true, namely that the technology was copied after a DAC was shipped to China.

Since you've heard both, how do they compare sonically? Do they sound comparable, or even the same, to one another? I've heard neither.

ModelCitizen
2005-09-15, 10:35
The SB2 analogue outs are a definite improvement over the SB1's and and after upgrading I thought I could probably dump my Perpetual Technologies P3-A Dac, PA-1 upsampler and Monolithic psu. However, I'm glad I waited a while because it has become obvious (with familiarity) that the PT gives me a cleaner, sharper and (much?) more detailed sound than the SB2 Dac.
On balance though I prefer the sound of my Naim CDX over both as it somehow just seems to make things sounds more likeable. (attractive?). It's hard to put my finger on what the Naim does... it's just more listenable and warm somehow (but perhaps not as detailed/intense as the PT?).

I use a Iomega Psu with my Squeezebox, but should probably try the linear one mentioned elsewhere on this forum as it's so cheap.

MC

usualsuspects
2005-09-15, 14:39
DACís are a very personal thing Ė what sounds good to one person turns another person off entirely. I have not heard a DAC that I like better than the Classe DAC1. They retailed for $4,000 and were worth that price new. They can be had for as little as $800 now. A used Classe DAC1 is a steal at $800 in my opinion.

joshk
2005-09-19, 12:44
I use the SB2 with a DEQX. Not quite a DAC per se, but it does have many DACs inside.

bimboy
2005-09-20, 12:59
I am using my squeezebox with a Musical Fidelity Trivista 21 DAC through A Musical Fidelity A308 amp and Dynaudio Special 25 speakers. My first few sessions were disappointing, as I found that the sound was veiled compared to the sound using CD and my Arcam CD72 through a Chord signature digital cable. However when I switched from optical output from the Squeezebox2 to coaxial output using the same Chord Signature cable, I now find the difference between Squeezebox and CD/Arcam hard to differentiate. I need a few more sessions and a few different recordings to confirm that I cannot differentiate.
So far I am very happy with my Squeezebox2.

Jeff

bludragon
2005-09-20, 15:32
Thought I'd add my 2c to this discussion.
Had a chance to try a Cyrus Dax-X, and found it to work very well. I couldn't distinguish between the squeezebox, and a NAD C541 as the source. This has to be at least partially due to the Cyrus's clock recovery (I beleive it uses a sample rate converter). Listened through some B&W dm601s2's and an MF X-A2.
Haven't bought the dac-x though (yet), as its damn pricey (£1150), and it didn't get on so well with my dvd, or freeview.

mac
2005-09-21, 00:07
I use the SB2 with a DEQX. Not quite a DAC per se, but it does have many DACs inside.Now that's a novel idea.

GreenMan
2005-09-24, 14:46
I'm considering the Benchmark DAC-1. Why do you prefer the Audio Mirror D1? As an owner of the D1, have you ever heard about the DAC-Ah available from Poth Audio? It's supposedly essentially the same dac, but at a much smaller price. I'd like to know if anyone has done an A/B on the Audio Mirror and the DAC-Ah.

I've narrowed my selection to the following in no particular order:

1. Dac-ah from Poth Audio.
2. Scott Nixon TubeDAC+ (I like the look of the mod w/blue backlighting on the tube.
3. Benchmark DAC1.

These are different technologies in different price groups, though all are under $1000. I like the reviews of the Benchmark, but I also wonder if that's the right choice for my system which is already pretty revealing. My system is:

Krell KAV-300i
Thiel CS2.0
Apherion 8" sub
Squeezebox2 (of course)

The dac-ah looks attractive in price, but I don't know how well the stock capacitors hold up in the system. The Benchmark may be too glaring in my system, but then again, with the Krell and the Thiels and the SB2 feeding the Benchmark, that would be real transparency all the way back to the music source.

Any thoughts/opinions?

pfarrell
2005-09-24, 16:59
On Sat, 2005-09-24 at 14:46 -0700, GreenMan wrote:
> 1. Dac-ah from Poth Audio.
> 2. Scott Nixon TubeDAC+ (I like the look of the mod w/blue backlighting
> on the tube.
> 3. Benchmark DAC1.

> Any thoughts/opinions?

Buy it from someone who will let you return it if you don't like it.
These things are personal choices.

I bought my Benchmark from MercenaryAudio and I love it.


--
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html

PhilNYC
2005-09-24, 20:45
The Benchmark may be too glaring in my system, but then again, with the Krell and the Thiels and the SB2 feeding the Benchmark, that would be real transparency all the way back to the music source.

Any thoughts/opinions?

I've demoed the Benchmark in a number of systems, and I think you are right that it may be a bit too glaring given the rest of your gear. IMHO, it works best in a tube-based system.

If you can stretch another $200, you should definitely consider the Bel Canto DAC2; IMHO, it would be great in your system...

Mike Hanson
2005-09-26, 05:49
I've narrowed my selection to the following in no particular order:

1. Dac-ah from Poth Audio.
2. Scott Nixon TubeDAC+ (I like the look of the mod w/blue backlighting on the tube.
3. Benchmark DAC1.

These are different technologies in different price groups, though all are under $1000. I like the reviews of the Benchmark, but I also wonder if that's the right choice for my system which is already pretty revealing.

...

The dac-ah looks attractive in price, but I don't know how well the stock capacitors hold up in the system. The Benchmark may be too glaring in my system, but then again, with the Krell and the Thiels and the SB2 feeding the Benchmark, that would be real transparency all the way back to the music source.
I've got the Benchmark DAC1 and the Scott Nixon Chibi Saru (with a much better power supply). The Benchmark is significantly better, and is certainly not "glaring" in any way. If anything, it is a bit too "polite" (compared to my old Naim CDS2, which was noticeable more involving). Although the Chibi Saru may not be quite as good as the TubeDAC, I would expect it's basic performance to be similar, so I would still suggest the Benchmark over it.

I should mention, though, that the Scott Nixon doesn't sound "bad". It just hides a lot of detail. The curious thing is that it's really quite an enjoyable listen, and it doesn't seem like your missing anything, until you do a direct comparison to the Benchmark.

Sorry, but I've not tried the Dac-ah.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

PhilNYC
2005-09-26, 12:45
Mike...what does the rest of your system look like? When I tried the Benchmark in my reference system, which is very transparent and fast, I found it to be very edgy and analytical; but when I tried it in a system that was more lush, I found the Benchmark to be a far better fit...

Mike Hanson
2005-09-28, 02:38
Mike...what does the rest of your system look like? When I tried the Benchmark in my reference system, which is very transparent and fast, I found it to be very edgy and analytical; but when I tried it in a system that was more lush, I found the Benchmark to be a far better fit...
There's a good chance that my system is faster than yours. <wink> It's a Naim 52 with Super-Cap power supply, two NAP135 power amps, and Royd RR3 speakers. About six years ago, during my massive speaker hunt, I listened to every speaker that I could. The Thiels that I heard (which I think included the CS2.0) weren't anywhere near as quick as Royd's offerings. As for Krell, what can I say? Krell amps usually have lots of power, yet tend to sound pretty cold and lifeless.

But hey, that's just my opinion! <grin> In general, people in the Naim world tend to accuse everyone else's systems of being slow, while everyone else accuses the Naim of being agressive and edgy. Therefore, if the Benchmark could sound "edgy", then it should sound that way in my system. As for "analytical", it's certainly very detailed, but definitely not in a bad way.

If you prefer it a bit warmer and can live without the extra detail, then a Scott Nixon DAC has a nicely balanced persona.

Ultimately, you'll never know for sure until you try it in your own system. Everyone has different expectations, and system + stand + room variations will cause everyone's setup to sound different. For example, the coldness of your Krell may make the Benchmark unlistenable (to you). Do your best to try each of the options, or you'll be second-guessing yourself forever.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

GreenMan
2005-09-29, 19:07
Ultimately, you'll never know for sure until you try it in your own system. Everyone has different expectations, and system + stand + room variations will cause everyone's setup to sound different. For example, the coldness of your Krell may make the Benchmark unlistenable (to you). Do your best to try each of the options, or you'll be second-guessing yourself forever.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Well, Scott Nixon apparently doesn't demo his models. He told me so in a reply email. I understand his situation. He's a small shop, and borrowed models tend to just go missing. It's an unfortunate reality for a small business owner I suppose.

I ran into the same issue with the local Benchmark vendor, though I've heard that Benchmark might allow a demo on a company-direct purchase. That may be my only hope.

The Dac-ah intruiges me. I've shelled out for audio this year and I'd like to economize on the next purchase. There's a big diff between $170 and $970. Eight-hundred dollars worth, to be precise ;-)

pfarrell
2005-09-29, 19:42
On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 19:07 -0700, GreenMan wrote:
> I ran into the same issue with the local Benchmark vendor, though I've
> heard that Benchmark might allow a demo on a company-direct purchase.

Mercenary has a money back guarentee. http://www.mercenary.com/
They don't demo, but you can buy something and send it back. They of
course, want you to buy something else from them. They have many
different DACs, but they start at about $900 for stereo.

You have to trust your ears, but I don't hold a lot of confidence in
DACs that are priced about the same as the SB2 being a lot better.
Sean has put a lot of good engineering into the SB2.

Keep looking for a better vendor. Or depending on where you are,
you might find someone who has what you want and you can audition
it privately.


--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com

PhilNYC
2005-09-30, 06:59
There's a good chance that my system is faster than yours. <wink> It's a Naim 52 with Super-Cap power supply, two NAP135 power amps, and Royd RR3 speakers. About six years ago, during my massive speaker hunt, I listened to every speaker that I could. The Thiels that I heard (which I think included the CS2.0) weren't anywhere near as quick as Royd's offerings. As for Krell, what can I say? Krell amps usually have lots of power, yet tend to sound pretty cold and lifeless.

[deleted]

Ultimately, you'll never know for sure until you try it in your own system. Everyone has different expectations, and system + stand + room variations will cause everyone's setup to sound different. For example, the coldness of your Krell may make the Benchmark unlistenable (to you). Do your best to try each of the options, or you'll be second-guessing yourself forever.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

FWIW, my system is not the Krell/Thiel...that was from the original poster. I use Blue Circle hybrid gear driving Focus Audio speakers. Yes, not quite as fast as your Naim setup (I've never thought Naim to be edgy), and hardly a system that would be considered analytical.

And yes, I have tried the Benchmark in my system. My reference DAC is the Dodson DA-218, and I also have a Resolution Audio Opus 21 cd player. Relative to both of these, the Benchmark left me cold (as did the Scott Nixon for completely different reasons). I still feel that the Bel Canto DAC2 is a better alternative in systems that might be fast and analytical (eg. Krell/Thiel).

FWIW, I have a friend who owns a Naim/Neat Acoustics system who felt that the Bel Canto was a better match in his system than the Benchmark, so yes, it is very much a personal taste thing...

joshk
2005-09-30, 12:49
Now that's a novel idea.

And who do I have to thank for the idea? hehe...

Mike Hanson
2005-09-30, 14:01
I use Blue Circle hybrid gear driving Focus Audio speakers. Yes, not quite as fast as your Naim setup (I've never thought Naim to be edgy), and hardly a system that would be considered analytical.

And yes, I have tried the Benchmark in my system. My reference DAC is the Dodson DA-218, and I also have a Resolution Audio Opus 21 cd player. Relative to both of these, the Benchmark left me cold (as did the Scott Nixon for completely different reasons). I still feel that the Bel Canto DAC2 is a better alternative in systems that might be fast and analytical (eg. Krell/Thiel).

FWIW, I have a friend who owns a Naim/Neat Acoustics system who felt that the Bel Canto was a better match in his system than the Benchmark, so yes, it is very much a personal taste thing...
I actually like Blue Circle quite a bit, and I would strongly consider it, if I was in the market again. I've not heard the Bel Canto, so I'll keep an eye out for it.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

GreenMan
2005-10-04, 18:30
I actually like Blue Circle quite a bit, and I would strongly consider it, if I was in the market again. I've not heard the Bel Canto, so I'll keep an eye out for it.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-


I took home a Sonic Frontiers SFD-1 MKII over the weekend and I swear I couldn't hear any difference between it and the SB2's native dac. This disappoints me. Either my ears aren't golden enough, there's a severe weakness in my system, or a 1997 $2500 tube dac sounds the same as a 2005 solid state one. Aaaargh!

I'm leaning toward the Scott Nixon. My room is fairly 'live' already with wood floors, glass and wood coffee tables, leather furniture, and some large ceiling-to-floor windows. So I think a tube dac makes sense IF it can be counted on to warm up the sound a little. Again, I'm the Krell guy and the Krell and Thiels don't bother me in this environment, but a Benchmark Dac1 may be overdoing it a bit.

pfarrell
2005-10-04, 19:57
On Tue, 2005-10-04 at 18:30 -0700, GreenMan wrote:
> I took home a Sonic Frontiers SFD-1 MKII over the weekend and I swear I
> couldn't hear any difference between it and the SB2's native dac. This
> disappoints me. Either my ears aren't golden enough, there's a severe
> weakness in my system, or a 1997 $2500 tube dac sounds the same as a
> 2005 solid state one. Aaaargh!

Other than the tubes, isn't that to be expected?
All the DACs are just integrated circuits, so they are at least
subject to Moore's law. The DAC in an SB2 is current and a solid design.
You are talking about 8 years, which is at least 4 generations of chips,
and perhaps as many as 5 & 1/3 (if you use the 18 month cycle for
Moore's law).

Four generations is 16 times faster or cheaper. 5 1/3 is 40 times.
When you have 40 times, you can have 8 times cooler and 5 times cheaper.

What about just adding a tube preamp stage out of the SB2?


--
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html

seanadams
2005-10-04, 21:16
What about just adding a tube preamp stage out of the SB2?



How about doing it in software?

pfarrell
2005-10-04, 21:45
On Tue, 2005-10-04 at 21:16 -0700, seanadams wrote:
> pfarrell Wrote:
> > What about just adding a tube preamp stage out of the SB2?
> How about doing it in software?


Would software make the proper glow?


Of course, there is a lot of voodoo and wacko stuff about tubes and tube sound.
Not only in audiophile stuff, but also in low-end recording gear. A fair
number of companies have solid state mic preamps or EQs or compressors
with a single 12AX7 in it, and claim "tube warmth" as a result.
Many of these are phantom powered, which is DC @ 48V max, and I don't
know how you can properly power tubes with that little power.

Most real tube gear uses 400 or 500V supplies, because tubes are great
voltage amplifiers, but not so hot at current. So you modulate the
voltage and then use transformers to convert high voltage at low current
to low voltage at high current driving.

I know that there are models of tube amps. For example, I have a Line6
guitar preamp/modeler, and it does a pretty decent job of emulating the
sound of a Marshall 50 watt system or an old Fender Bandmaster. But I
have no idea what makes it sound that way. I expect they have a clipping
model that adds second and fourth order harmonics. I'd love to know
more.


--
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html

seanadams
2005-10-04, 22:02
Would software make the proper glow?


the HACF instruction?




I know that there are models of tube amps.



I talked to a company years ago that specializes in modeling tube sound in software, letting you apply it during editing with a PC / sound card. Unfortunately I can't remember who it was... I think a lot of work has already been done on this, which we might be able to plug in to slimserver.

pfarrell
2005-10-04, 22:43
On Tue, 2005-10-04 at 22:02 -0700, seanadams wrote:
> pfarrell Wrote:
> I talked to a company years ago that specializes in modeling tube sound
> in software, letting you apply it during editing with a PC / sound card.
> Unfortunately I can't remember who it was... I think a lot of work has
> already been done on this, which we might be able to plug in to
> slimserver.

Well, if you remember, or stumble accross it, let us or at least me,
know. Might be fun to hack some DSP code.

Once we get it into a plugin for the server, then we need to figure out
how to download a patched firmware when desired. Of course, we'll also
have to change the green display to orange.


--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com

Patrick Dixon
2005-10-05, 00:27
... and put a bloody great transformer on the top.

PhilNYC
2005-10-05, 07:41
Would software make the proper glow?


More importantly, can you spend a ton of money on NOS software? :-)

Jeff Moore
2005-10-05, 08:16
2005-10-04-22:57:26 Pat Farrell:
> What about just adding a tube preamp stage out of the SB2?

Yeah, if Sean doesn't manage to implement tube-ness in software :-),
it'd be interesting to see what one of the modified
post-DAC-opamp-removed SB2s feeding one of these

http://www.musicalfidelity.com/mf/en/Products/SmallX/SX10V3

would sound like. Pretty swell, I betcha. Better? Who knows.

hifiresource
2005-10-12, 14:50
I've paired my SB2 with a Channel Islands DAC and I think it sounds amazing. The SB2 by itself sounded pretty fair, but with the external DAC it's killer.

Anyone else using an external DAC?

I've got my Squeezebox connected via optical to a Wadia 301 with digital volumen control to a BAT VK60 tube amp and am sometimes amazed at the level of quality from some of the 128K streams.

Bob
www.hificlassifieds.com

Mr Perceptive
2005-10-13, 00:22
I have 4 SBs , 3 of which are used with external DACs:-

SB2->Meridian 568.2 (Living Room)
SB2->Meridian 566.20 (Office)
SB1->Meridian D600 (Dining Room)
SB1->No DAC (Kitchen)

I'm a bit of a fan of Meridian DACs having tried a few others including a NOS DAC.

Just about to play around with the PSU's on one of the SB2's to see if I can make it even better

Mr Perceptive

kenyonbm
2005-10-14, 10:12
I have my Squeezebox2 connected through a Mark Levinson 39 CDP, which has both RCA and Toslink aux. inputs and a variable analog output. I use no preamp.

I tried both digital outputs and had no problem with either.

Sorry if this is off topic, but could someone clear something up for me?

In the Help section of slimsever, under Remote Streaming it is stated that "The SlimServer was designed to stream mp3 files to a Squeezebox Network Music Player," and under Sever Settings / File Types that " SlimServer can convert audio file formats on-the-fly for playback on your player."

Does Slimserver convert, say, a WAV file to a MP3, or does it send the WAV file directly?

Ken

PhilNYC
2005-10-14, 10:20
In the Help section of slimsever, under Remote Streaming it is stated that "The SlimServer was designed to stream mp3 files to a Squeezebox Network Music Player," and under Sever Settings / File Types that " SlimServer can convert audio file formats on-the-fly for playback on your player."

Does Slimserver convert, say, a WAV file to a MP3, or does it send the WAV file directly?

Ken

In that "File Types" section, you can select what kind of file type you want to send. I believe the options are WAV, FLAC, and MP3 (these are the file types that the SB can decode natively). If you don't want it to send it in MP3 format, unselect the WAV-->MP3 option.

FWIW, I store my music using Apple Lossless and use File Types to convert it to FLAC when sending to the SB2. Have found this to be pretty much identical sonically to sending WAV files directly...

kenyonbm
2005-10-14, 15:27
Thank you for clearing that up, PhilNYC.

Several of the file formats are listed as (built in), AIFF, FLAC, MP3, WAV and Windows Media. I take it that those formats are transmitted by SlimServer natively.

Do you know what happens when more than one "Stream Format Decoder" is checked for a given "File Type", as they are by default?

I got the SqueeseBox2 to implement Internet Radio, which I have decided is not quite HI-FI enough for my main system. I am now using it on a second system via the analog out, and I find that a 128k MP3 connection sounds at least as good as my (rather poor) FM reception.

Is there a way to play a CD without first loading it to a hard drive?

Ken

pfarrell
2005-10-14, 15:49
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 15:27 -0700, kenyonbm wrote:
> Thank you for clearing that up, PhilNYC.
>
> Several of the file formats are listed as (built in), AIFF, FLAC, MP3,
> WAV and Windows Media. I take it that those formats are transmitted by
> SlimServer natively.

In the FAQ on your slimserver it should say:

Does Squeezebox2 support AIFF or WAV?
Yes, Squeezebox2 support playback of AIFF and WAV files in their native
digital PCM format.


Does Squeezebox2 support FLAC?
Yes, Squeezebox2 includes built-in support for FLAC audio in firmware.



> I got the SqueeseBox2 to implement Internet Radio, which I have decided
> is not quite HI-FI enough for my main system. I am now using it on a
> second system via the analog out, and I find that a 128k MP3
> connection sounds at least as good as my (rather poor) FM reception.

That is usually more of a problem on the streaming side.
Unless you are a hardcore audiophile, and then external DACs
are the way to happyness.



> Is there a way to play a CD without first loading it to a hard drive?

No.
Some folks have setup their computers to automatically rip tunes and
convert them when the CD is placed in the computer drive. But the
step is essential.

--
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html

kenyonbm
2005-10-14, 17:29
Thanks to you, Pfarrell, for your reply.

When you say that the problem with Interent Radio sound is on the streaming side, do you mean at the source or our end.

I have 15mbps on a fiber optic line, and don't mind using it.

I really like listening to overseas classical feeds. A lot of them are 128k. Most of the 320k/mp3 feeds I have found are Shoutcast, and go dead when they change addresses on me.

I checked out you website, but it seems a little advanced for me! I am more of a punch card and sliderule type.

Thanks again,

Ken

pfarrell
2005-10-14, 18:05
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 17:29 -0700, kenyonbm wrote:
> Thanks to you, Pfarrell, for your reply.

You're welcome.


> When you say that the problem with Interent Radio sound is on the
> streaming side, do you mean at the source or our end.

Well, I meant from where your line goes out of your house to
all the pieces to the source.

> I have 15mbps on a fiber optic line, and don't mind using it.
> I really like listening to overseas classical feeds. A lot of them are
> 128k. Most of the 320k/mp3 feeds I have found are Shoutcast, and go
> dead when they change addresses on me.

The first thing to do is to isolate and simplify.
Seems like you might have enough downlink speed :-)

Problem isolation means get it working solid without
the SlimServer or SqueezeBox on a single PC.
Once that is perfect, then add one piece at
a time.

Post a shoutcast that you like and I'll try it and see
if I get the same results.


> I checked out you website, but it seems a little advanced for me! I am
> more of a punch card and sliderule type.

Then do this link
http://www.pfarrell.com/misc/sliderule.html

--
Pat
http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html

JohnnyLightOn
2005-10-14, 22:37
My SB1 ("SB-Graphics"?) is connected to a battery-powered Ack! dAck! 2.0 via the Ack digital cable that came with it. This DAC supposedly needs a good, low-jitter transport to sound its best, and I hope to upgrade to the SB2 for this reason, but it already sounds *great* to me.

The battery requires remembering to turn it off at the end of each listening session, and you can't listen more than, say, 10 hours max before recharging, but it's oh-so-listenable. If you haven't bought your DAC yet, you owe it to yourself to research the Ack! dAck! 2.0. Note that it's biased more towards long-term listening, such that you sink into the music as with a good turntable, than to short-term, super-detailed, WOW-type sound like the Benchmark that over time may be slightly fatiguing for some people.

dwc
2005-10-21, 20:20
SB2 -> Behringer DEQ 2496 -> MHDT Labs Digital Renaissance DAC -> JVC RX-D202 -> Meadowlark Audio Kestrel 2

The DEQ provides e.q. in the digital domain to correct some of my living room's faults, resuting in a flatter fequency response at my listening position.

-Dan

Mark_H
2005-10-22, 01:29
SB2 -> Apogee Big Ben -> TacT 2.2X -> Mark Levinson DAC 30.6

The Big Ben is used to reclock the output of the SB2 prior to going to the room correction system.

The SB2 has replaced my Mark Levinson Reference CD 31.0

Mark

ezkcdude
2005-12-31, 08:27
I just learned about the new DAC from Channel Islands, VDA-2, replacing the VDA-1. Has anyone tried this new DAC, yet? At $600, it seems like it may be a better value than the venerable Benchmark DAC-1, which I know so many people here love.

prz
2006-01-02, 11:21
SB3 -> Tact 2.0 -> Odyssey MonoBlocks -> Axioms 80

highly recommended, throwing out my CD transport out now except for some HDCD listening (which does not sound significantly better than normal CDs unfortunately). SB3 with linear supply is more musical.

I use also a good NAD tuner for radio, that comes across very nicely late @ nite when the ether is clean.

Highly recommened, Tact is tad more expensive (the old 2.0 ones, 2.2 is still very expensive) than a good DAC but you're getting an oversampler, a DAC, a ADC and room correction in one package.

next I'll go to 2.2X and probably some B&W monitors/subs setup

Markhh2
2006-01-02, 14:05
w/ a Accoustic Zen MC2 digital cable. Sounds very nice.

PhilNYC
2006-01-02, 18:55
w/ a Accoustic Zen MC2 digital cable. Sounds very nice.

It would sound even better with an Acoustic Zen Silver Byte digital cable. :-) The MC2 is a 110ohm cable designed for an AES/EBU digital interface, whereas the Silver Byte is 75ohms designed for use with SPDIF, which is what the SB has. The better news is that the Silver Byte is less expensive... :-)

(Note: I'm an Acoustic Zen dealer)

cvj
2006-01-04, 11:47
I really like listening to overseas classical feeds. A lot of them are 128k. Most of the 320k/mp3 feeds I have found are Shoutcast, and go dead when they change addresses on me.

Ken
Ken,

I know this is a bit off subject, but I have difficulties playing most of the classical broadcsts listed on http://classicalwebcast.com/onepage.html

I get error messages regarding the file format from the SB3.

Could you list some of the best quality 128 kbps links that you have found to work with the SquuezeBox - or point me in the right direction.

Thanks,
cvj

katabasis
2007-07-22, 15:52
On Tue, 2005-10-04 at 22:02 -0700, seanadams wrote:
> pfarrell Wrote:
> I talked to a company years ago that specializes in modeling tube sound
> in software, letting you apply it during editing with a PC / sound card.
> Unfortunately I can't remember who it was... I think a lot of work has
> already been done on this, which we might be able to plug in to
> slimserver.

Well, if you remember, or stumble accross it, let us or at least me,
know. Might be fun to hack some DSP code.

Once we get it into a plugin for the server, then we need to figure out
how to download a patched firmware when desired. Of course, we'll also
have to change the green display to orange.


--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com

i am also playing with toys to make the sound more analogue (margules ade 24, mf x10d, etc), but reading these lines i remembered a dsp plugin for foobar200 which can be used to produce tube effects, it is Eric Laarson's stereo convolution plugin, can be found here with sources --> http://people.bu.edu/edlarson/stereoconv.html
and some impulse responses for tube effects can be found here --> http://sjeng.org/foobar2000.html



regards

L.B.
2007-07-25, 05:48
I just learned about the new DAC from Channel Islands, VDA-2, replacing the VDA-1. Has anyone tried this new DAC, yet? At $600, it seems like it may be a better value than the venerable Benchmark DAC-1, which I know so many people here love.

I am also looking for a new DACís under the Euro 1.000 mark. I can find these options:

Lavry Engineering Lavry Black DA 10
http://www.lavryengineering.com/productspage_da_10.html

Benchmark DAC1
http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/dac1/

Musical Fidelity X-DACv3
http://www.musicalfidelity.com/products/smlx/xdacv3.html

CI Audio VDAē2
http://www.ciaudio.com/

Otherwise there are a lot of used alternatives, but I would prefer a new one. Used I can mention Theta, Mark Levinson, Audio Alchemy, MSB, dCS, Wadia, Proceed, Denon, Parasound, dpa, Meridian, Krell. But most of these are more expensive and I doubt that they are as good 10 years after production as the new ones are, with exceptions ofcause.

If you have any other alternatives please say so!

zanash
2007-07-25, 11:00
a modded behringer src2496 will easily out perform both the xdacv3,and the dac1....I've had my src up against both. the dac 1 owner sold his unit to get an src [modded by me] and pocketed the remaining £500 ! The xdacv3 in standard form is rather nasal and shut in ...but once modded can sound very good with the big psu.

mlsstl
2007-07-27, 19:33
I've used a Lavry DA-10 the past six months or so and have been extremely pleased with it. Very smooth and natural with excellent low level detail. They have a very solid following.

Dan Lavry is also very accessible through the forum hosted at his web site, http://lavryengineering.com/lavry_forum/

jlmatrat
2007-07-28, 15:05
I've used a Lavry DA-10 the past six months or so and have been extremely pleased with it. Very smooth and natural with excellent low level detail.

Same for me. Highly recommended.

JLM

325xi
2007-07-31, 06:48
a modded behringer src2496 will easily out perform both the xdacv3,and the dac1....I've had my src up against both. the dac 1 owner sold his unit to get an src [modded by me] and pocketed the remaining £500 ! The xdacv3 in standard form is rather nasal and shut in ...but once modded can sound very good with the big psu.

That one must be quite heavily modified... src2496 is overall low quality device with some serious intrinsic jitter, so to make it much better one had to replace most of the stuff inside...

Videodrome
2007-07-31, 13:47
That one must be quite heavily modified... src2496 is overall low quality device with some serious intrinsic jitter, so to make it much better one had to replace most of the stuff inside...

I own one, so I admit I may be a bit biased, but in fairness to the Behringer, it was originally a $500 unit that has since gone down in price via competition from online retailers. I understand it uses the same Crystal upsampling device that's in several of the upscale/expensive DACs. Regarding the "serious intrinsic jitter," that's a new one on me. I recall a head-to-head where the Behringer performed as well as a Monarchy DIP.

Lastly, the unit has a loyal following among jaded audiophiles --especially when used in conjuction with the DEQ2496 -- who typically would not blink an eye spending gobs of money on gear. Is it dirt cheap? Yes. Does it look cheap? Definitely. But I don't think I would go so far as to say it's "low quality."

jwcurtin
2007-07-31, 23:41
a modded behringer src2496 will easily out perform both the xdacv3,and the dac1.....

Can you detail the mods you made to the SRC2496 in more detail please?

Cheers,
John

zanash
2007-07-31, 23:56
of course.....

the case was damped using bitumen sheet
rectifier diodes swapped for 11dq10's
all psu smothing caps changed for pannasonic fc's and doubled the capacitancy of each [the voltage rating was upped to 63v]
All small signal decoupling caps were swapped for elna starget
the output was routed via paper in oil caps to a set of good quality rca sockets before the balanced section.
the mains cable swapped for a three core pure silver [of my own design]
the digital cable was swapped for a pure silver twisted pair buffered to 75ohm [of my own design]
the fues was swapped for a xintac 2amp silver.
three large felt [1" dia]feet were added to the underside.


theres more but I can't remember off the top of my head....

the biggest bang for buck were the diode swap.

be warned the tracks are very thin and you just need to wave a soldering iron over the unit for them to lift. Don't attempt to remove a component till you have all the solder removed !

jwcurtin
2007-08-01, 00:32
of course.....

snip..

theres more but I can't remember off the top of my head....


Many thanks,

I think the SRC is going on my list as interesting projects to do over the next couple of months.

John

325xi
2007-08-01, 08:18
I own one, so I admit I may be a bit biased, but in fairness to the Behringer, it was originally a $500 unit that has since gone down in price via competition from online retailers. I understand it uses the same Crystal upsampling device that's in several of the upscale/expensive DACs. Regarding the "serious intrinsic jitter," that's a new one on me. I recall a head-to-head where the Behringer performed as well as a Monarchy DIP.

Lastly, the unit has a loyal following among jaded audiophiles --especially when used in conjuction with the DEQ2496 -- who typically would not blink an eye spending gobs of money on gear. Is it dirt cheap? Yes. Does it look cheap? Definitely. But I don't think I would go so far as to say it's "low quality."

Well, most of Behringer stuff has consistently bad reviews reporting numerous failures, and its analog stage is said to be just of cheap design and bad parts quality.
Now, if you look at specs it mention jitter between 2ns to 20ns, which is HUGE from any standpoint. I'm considering getting DEQ, but I'm seriously concerned with so high jitter - to handle it I'd need very well jitter handling DAC.