PDA

View Full Version : SB3 internal pic?



Firebat
2006-01-27, 15:10
Does anyone have a picture of the inside of the SB3 (maybe taken while they were doing a mod)?

notanatheist
2006-01-29, 00:17
just search for SB2 or SB3 mods. There's a few of them. The internal hardware is the same.

Skunk
2006-01-29, 00:41
Or you could take the cover off...

If you have one that is.

Skunk
2006-01-29, 11:18
I know my hand isn't steady enough to solder that BB chip :)

JJZolx
2006-01-29, 11:34
How is the display connected? Is it with a cable, like the SB2, or is it soldered to the mainboard?

Just wondering if the SB3 would be as simple as the SB2 to transfer to a new case if someone wanted to repackage it.

Skunk
2006-01-29, 11:53
It's soldered. There are two 3 pin connections, and one 12 pin connection. The pads (double sided padded tape?) the display rests on are the only other connection.

Looks like a tossup between soldering in wires for display or in/out connections.

seanadams
2006-01-29, 12:38
The displays are extremely hard to remove without breaking them - not recommended.

Skunk
2006-01-29, 13:23
Good tip. I should also note that I only took mine out because the display went bad. I have close ups of why I believe it did, but that's not the point. The point is if I were taking apart my good one, I would have used more antistatic measures. It's not like a cd player, because it has a motherboard. FYI

Michaelwagner
2006-01-29, 15:19
Oddly enough, I took mine apart after the first post (but didn't take pictures).

What's with the Torx screws? You guys really love them, don't you? Is that to keep the riff-raff out?

I wouldn't try to disconnect the display.

I was trying to figure out if, without the case, it would fit inside a 2U rack unit (short answer - I think so).

Skunk
2006-01-29, 16:36
I wouldn't try to disconnect the display.

Well no, not after being warned ;)

I should have just said, 'it looks easier to hardwire the connectors', but I have a wired only SB so I'm not sure how the wireless card fits in..

EDIT: But a modified SB with a detached display, but the same rca jacks, would be pointless- or at least silly, which is why I titled the first post, 'think interconnects matter' [after going through those CB traces].

dean
2006-01-29, 16:56
On Jan 29, 2006, at 2:19 PM, Michaelwagner wrote:
> What's with the Torx screws? You guys really love them, don't you? Is
> that to keep the riff-raff out?
Ha! Actually we use torx because they make assembly much quicker.

seanadams
2006-01-29, 17:00
What's with the Torx screws? You guys really love them, don't you? Is that to keep the riff-raff out?

Not so much - they just go in faster and don't slip off the driver. Also we have the torque dialed in very precisely (using $700 screwdrivers!) to tap the plastic properly. With philips heads it's not as easy to control - you'd have to press harder to keep the driver in the screw head, making it less consistent. Here's the tool http://www.etorque.com/html/edriv_electric_screwdrivers.html

It's not really a concern unless you have a LOT of screws to put in. :)

JJZolx
2006-01-29, 17:28
The displays are extremely hard to remove without breaking them - not recommended.
From internal photos of the Squeezebox2 it appears the display in that model was mounted to another board by the same pins. And _that_ board was connected to the mainboard by a cable. I'm guessing that some electronics to drive the display have been moved from that display mounting board onto the SB3's mainboard. So it looks like it would be difficult or impossible to separate the display from the mainboard and mount the electronics of an SB3 into a case other than one several inches tall. Sound about right?

Skunk
2006-01-29, 17:41
Sound about right?

Not really. The board(s) just needs to stay with the display. The connectors need rewiring for audiophile performance anyway, so they can extend to the outside of as big a box as desired.

seanadams
2006-01-29, 17:55
From internal photos of the Squeezebox2 it appears the display in that model was mounted to another board by the same pins. And _that_ board was connected to the mainboard by a cable. I'm guessing that some electronics to drive the display have been moved from that display mounting board onto the SB3's mainboard. So it looks like it would be difficult or impossible to separate the display from the mainboard and mount the electronics of an SB3 into a case other than one several inches tall. Sound about right?

Actually that is about right. SB2 had a separate display module connected to the main board by a removable flex cable. In SB3 there is no separate board for the display, the glass is mounted directly to the main board. (The glass is what I was suggesting NOT to remove - SB2's flex-connected module is easy to remove).

Here's the SB2 dissection:

http://www.slimdevices.com/photos/inside_squeezebox2/

Sorry I don't have a full set of photos like this for SB3.

seanadams
2006-01-29, 17:57
Not really. The board(s) just needs to stay with the display. The connectors need rewiring for audiophile performance anyway, so they can extend to the outside of as big a box as desired.

Sure - except SB3's main board height would necessitate probably a taller face plate than you'd want for a case mod. SB2 would be better for this.

Skunk
2006-01-29, 18:04
you'd want

who'd want? he asked... [for a bigger box]

EDIT: oops. he asked for a not so tall box. so sorry.

Jetlag
2006-01-29, 18:06
Damn! I'm glad I read this thread. I was going to order a SB3 and mod it into a custom AV enclosure because I prefer the new blue screen to the older green. I guess I will have to use my old SB2 now.

Not at all interested in building a 2+ rack height mod, I want it to be *ahem* "slim".

I just replaced the ugly green and red LEDs on most of my gear with blue, and was hoping that everything that had to be lit up would be blue. Crud.

Michaelwagner
2006-01-29, 18:12
Not so much - they just go in faster and don't slip off the driver. Here's the tool http://www.etorque.com/html/edriv_electric_screwdrivers.html

It's not really a concern unless you have a LOT of screws to put in. :)
Cool! Thanks for the reference.

I'm familiar with power screwdrivers, although we don't use them. We use power tappers, which are related, but ours are air driven, not electric, and not hand actuated but machine actuated, and cycle at 1 cycle per second.

We're threading metal, not plastic, so we need a bit more power. These are just over half horsepower units.

http://irtools.com/IS/product.asp/id/45,268,303,486,471

The same company makes a power screwdriver with the same air motor, which is why I (peripherally) know about them.

Michaelwagner
2006-01-29, 18:16
Not at all interested in building a 2+ rack height mod, I want it to be *ahem* "slim".
Well, that's why I took mine apart and measured it.

You could *just* get the internal board into a 2U case if you were careful with your design. Not a chance in a 1U. Yeah, it's too bad they changed that. But such a need has to be beside their main market thrust.

seanadams
2006-01-29, 18:31
Damn! I'm glad I read this thread. I was going to order a SB3 and mod it into a custom AV enclosure because I prefer the new blue screen to the older green.

It's actually the same display -the lens determines the color. SB2 uses a neutral gray color, whereas SB3 is a little more purple giving the natively-green display an aqua color.

seanadams
2006-01-29, 18:38
The same company makes a power screwdriver with the same air motor, which is why I (peripherally) know about them.

Sorry I can't find a link to my favorite tool of all, the Pneumatic Hog Debunger.

Jetlag
2006-01-29, 18:52
-the lens determines the color-

I don't suppose there is any way to get ahold of a purple lens and replace the neutral gray one is there?

Better yet, if it is possible, what color lens would produce the "blue-est" display?

Michaelwagner
2006-01-29, 19:07
I think it's vanooshed.
http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=327098 points to it, but it's gone.

Thanks to the wayback machine I found the reference
http://web.archive.org/web/20021213135319/www.news-journalonline.com/2002/Oct/14/AREAELE1.htm

But no sign of hog debungers, pneumatic or otherwise.

But i love this quote:

"People who have any kind of heart at all will vote yes' for No. 10," said DuVal, who is campaigning to make it unconstitutional to confine pregnant pigs in Florida. "It's horrible for poor animals."

Sigh. Too much time on my hands.

Dean, Sean: I'm planning on doing a case mod to stick 2 SBs in a rack mount. I'm looking to put an SB1 and an SB2 into the same case. I want the SB1 because it does pitch and tone control, which is important during a dance lesson if the teacher wants to slow the music down. I want the SB2 because it does cross-fade, which is nice for the dance part of the evening. And each will be a backup of the other in case of hardware failure.

Any chance that pitch and tone will come to SB2s & 3s sometime soon? I'd rather put a matched pair of 2s into the case.

Second question: the only SB2s I can find on ebay these days (or your web site) are wireless ones. I don't want the wireless feature, and don't want to be radiating inside the case. Is there some way I can turn it off, soft or hard?

Or does someone has a wired SB2 they want to unload, pref. in Canada.

seanadams
2006-01-29, 21:37
I would much rather see pitch and tone controls done as a server-side function. There is *so* much more you can do beyond the primitive control on SB1. Eg it is possible to "speed up" music without changing the pitch (a frequency-domain instead of time-domain function). If you haven't heard this effect before it's pretty slick - i don't know of any easy tool to do it - last time i did this was ten years ago with SoundEdit on the Mac.

Patrick Dixon
2006-01-30, 02:24
Second question: the only SB2s I can find on ebay these days (or your web site) are wireless ones. I don't want the wireless feature, and don't want to be radiating inside the case. Is there some way I can turn it off, soft or hard?Just remove the wireless card - it's a piggy back on the CPU.

Michaelwagner
2006-01-30, 06:43
Just remove the wireless card - it's a piggy back on the CPU.
I know it's a piggy back card. But does the software handle removing it OK?

funkstar
2006-01-30, 07:23
isn't the wireless card dissabled when a wired connection is detected? i'm sure i read this before. and no, the software doesn't mind it you just remove the card.

Michaelwagner
2006-01-30, 07:32
I would much rather see pitch and tone controls done as a server-side function. There is *so* much more you can do beyond the primitive control on SB1. Eg it is possible to "speed up" music without changing the pitch (a frequency-domain instead of time-domain function). If you haven't heard this effect before it's pretty slick - i don't know of any easy tool to do it - last time i did this was ten years ago with SoundEdit on the Mac.
Yes, I know.
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2484
:-)
I even put in pointers to some of the original articles on algorithm.

Wouldn't tone be easier in the SB? The DSP is already there. I would have thought tone, even a multi-band tone control, would be *way* easier on-board. But I don't know enough about the hardware there.

How would you see pitch change happening? Like a transcoder function? If so, we'd have to re-architect transcoding so that it could be engaged or disengaged mid-stream, because you can't require that people know ahead of time that they want to change the pitch of a song. Which means we'd have to have a way of throwing away or invalidating song buffers already in the SB. But this would be good, because if we re-architect transcoding, we can perhaps get back scanning forward and reverse. Which would be a big win for a number of people.

I can tell you that pitch control (and especially phase vocoding) would open a new market. I don't know how big, but it's there.

My older CD head has pitch control (all DJ heads have had it for 10 years or more) and that's fairly easy to do with a CD head. It works like pitch control did on an SB1. Just changes the time base that the music is clocked out of buffer 1. But my second head has full phase vocoding (they call it key correction at the retail level).

I knew such algorithms existed but thought they were fairly CPU intensive, so was surprised that my (otherwise fairly boring) CD head could do it. In researching phase vocoding, I found out that lots of people use it (not just dance teachers). People who are learning guitar tracks off another recording, people who are learning lyrics, DJs of course doing pitch blending between tracks, musicians in performance, etc.

I also learned that doing it poorly is easy, doing it well is quite a complicated and not entirely straightforward procedure. :-)

Michaelwagner
2006-01-30, 07:34
isn't the wireless card dissabled when a wired connection is detected?
No, otherwise bridging wouldn't work.
Even if you don't set up bridging, that doesn't tell me that electrically the card is turned off. I don't want to be radiating inside a metal case containing 3 other processors. But if removing the card isn't upsetting to a SB, I guess that's a good way of making sure the power is off :-)

Michaelwagner
2006-01-30, 07:36
If you haven't heard this effect before it's pretty slick - i don't know of any easy tool to do it - last time i did this was ten years ago with SoundEdit on the Mac.
In case you need an incentive to do this, the software that comes with Creative's $50 USB sound "devices" can do this on their device ... If a $50 device can do it, why can't my $250 device do it (almost $300 when translated into Canadian $s)?

seanadams
2006-01-30, 07:49
isn't the wireless card dissabled when a wired connection is detected? i'm sure i read this before. and no, the software doesn't mind it you just remove the card.

Yes and yes.

The bridging option is only presented when you are connecting via wireless AND there is a link present on the ethernet port.

seanadams
2006-01-30, 07:53
No, otherwise bridging wouldn't work.
Even if you don't set up bridging, that doesn't tell me that electrically the card is turned off. I don't want to be radiating inside a metal case containing 3 other processors. But if removing the card isn't upsetting to a SB, I guess that's a good way of making sure the power is off :-)

Yes the CPU is capable of generating arbitrary output clocks instead of from the external 44.1 and 48 KHz external crystal references. Going slower would be possible, but going faster would at some point (probably about +10%) hit a limit either in the output pipeline or in the decoder. How much of a range are you hoping to have?

Michaelwagner
2006-01-30, 08:04
Yes the CPU is capable of generating arbitrary output clocks instead of from the external 44.1 and 48 KHz external crystal references. Going slower would be possible, but going faster would at some point (probably about +10%) hit a limit either in the output pipeline or in the decoder. How much of a range are you hoping to have?
Are we having thread munging problems again?

This posting on the web site
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=82210#post82210
seems like a non-sequitur w.r.t. to the quote.

In any case, to answer your question:

The SB1 logic, which varied the clock speed (somehow, I don't know how it worked internally), worked for essentially any slower speed and broke down somewhere around 10% fast (seemed to vary between 10 and 13% depending on the song chosen, which I couldn't find a logical explanation for).

For 90% of the uses I know for pitch control, that's usually enough. Mostly people want to slow the music down when they're learning (do dance more slowly to it, to take more time to hear the chords and transcribe the chord progressions, to listen to and write down the words).

Occasionally a DJ will want to speed up a song part way through to make the energy higher, or to match the next song that's coming up (beat matching). In most of those cases, 10% is plenty (at least in my experience ... but then, I'm not the sort of DJ that does beat matching much).

A different problem occurs though if you want to combine pitch bending and cross-fading ... and I think we need to come up with some more sophisticated control mechanisms if we're going to pitch bend in the server .... but we're starting to get esoteric here. Is this the right forum for it, or should this thread move to the developers forum?

seanadams
2006-01-30, 08:33
Are we having thread munging problems again?

This posting on the web site
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=82210#post82210
seems like a non-sequitur w.r.t. to the quote.


I probably just clicked "quote" on the wrong post.




In any case, to answer your question:

The SB1 logic, which varied the clock speed (somehow, I don't know how it worked internally), worked for essentially any slower speed and broke down somewhere around 10% fast (seemed to vary between 10 and 13% depending on the song chosen, which I couldn't find a logical explanation for).

For 90% of the uses I know for pitch control, that's usually enough. Mostly people want to slow the music down when they're learning (do dance more slowly to it, to take more time to hear the chords and transcribe the chord progressions, to listen to and write down the words).

Occasionally a DJ will want to speed up a song part way through to make the energy higher, or to match the next song that's coming up (beat matching). In most of those cases, 10% is plenty (at least in my experience ... but then, I'm not the sort of DJ that does beat matching much).

A different problem occurs though if you want to combine pitch bending and cross-fading ... and I think we need to come up with some more sophisticated control mechanisms if we're going to pitch bend in the server .... but we're starting to get esoteric here. Is this the right forum for it, or should this thread move to the developers forum?

Makes sense - we probably should at least start a new thread for this though...

Michaelwagner
2006-01-30, 08:52
OK. This evening. Work is interfering with my hobby again....

dean
2006-01-30, 09:00
On Jan 30, 2006, at 6:53 AM, seanadams wrote:
> Michaelwagner Wrote:
>> No, otherwise bridging wouldn't work.
>> Even if you don't set up bridging, that doesn't tell me that
>> electrically the card is turned off. I don't want to be radiating
>> inside a metal case containing 3 other processors. But if removing
>> the
>> card isn't upsetting to a SB, I guess that's a good way of making
>> sure
>> the power is off :-)
>
> Yes the CPU is capable of generating arbitrary output clocks
> instead of
> from the external 44.1 and 48 KHz external crystal references. Going
> slower would be possible, but going faster would at some point
> (probably about +10%) hit a limit either in the output pipeline or in
> the decoder. How much of a range are you hoping to have?

A simpler solution would be to create a simple "sample rate
converter" that either dropped or duplicated samples periodically to
achieve a speed up or slow down. Nearly trivial engineering, and
it's on my list.

And simple tone controls are also possible on the player, this is a
little more CPU intensive and requires a bit of filter design wisdom
that I don't have right now. Anybody have parametric IIR filter
design skillz?

Michaelwagner
2006-01-31, 18:09
Makes sense - we probably should at least start a new thread for this though...
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=20644

radish
2006-01-31, 18:41
A
Occasionally a DJ will want to speed up a song part way through to make the energy higher, or to match the next song that's coming up (beat matching). In most of those cases, 10% is plenty (at least in my experience ... but then, I'm not the sort of DJ that does beat matching much).


The industry standard is +/- 8% because that's what Technics 1210s can do. In reality more is useful, but only with pitch correction as a record played more than about 10% off real speed is very noticable. As for that pitch correction, well you're right, it's hard to do well. Even pro performance software (such as Ableton Live) can have trouble, and provides different algorithms depending on the type of music/sound being adjusted. Whilst I can go through my sample library testing each one and choosing the best, that's hardly suitable for general listening. The best I ever heard was from Pitch & Time, a protools plugin from Serato that costs around $800 on it's own. In fact, Serato are pretty damn good at the whole "realtime speed adjustment" thing as their Scratch Live product does an astonishing job of syncing digital audio to vinyl turntables. Maybe we should contract them :)

Michaelwagner
2006-01-31, 20:32
The industry standard is +/- 8%
My later decks can do 2 ranges, (I think) 8 and 16%, switchable.

[QUOTE}As for that pitch correction, well you're right, it's hard to do well. [/QUOTE}

My decks do it well. And it's all embedded software in a not very impressive processor. So it must be possible to do well with the right algorithms (and hardware).

radish
2006-01-31, 23:00
My later decks can do 2 ranges, (I think) 8 and 16%, switchable.


Sure, plenty of decks (particularly Vestax) can do wider ranges, but since 90% of clubs use 1210s, that's what DJs expect to have - hence "industry standard".



My decks do it well. And it's all embedded software in a not very impressive processor. So it must be possible to do well with the right algorithms (and hardware).

I guess it depends on what you're listening for. I've played on $4000-a-piece CD turntables and even there you get very noticable distortion with any reasonable amount of correction. For example, slow a track down a chunk and you get phasing on transients like snares, and kick drums lose all their definition. I can guarantee people like Ableton are using "the right algorithms" but even with ample processing power it's not always clean.

That's why when I play I use regular old-fashioned pitch adjustment - people don't notice that the track is half an octave down nearly as much as they notice distortion and echos.

Michaelwagner
2006-02-01, 05:01
slow a track down a chunk and you get phasing on transients like snares, and kick drums lose all their definition.
I guess this gets into what we use it for.
Swing DJs don't muck with the sound when we play for dancing. We typically leave the tips and tails alone (we don't cross-fade, we don't beat match).

So the only time we slow down is for teaching (and then the preference is still to find a song of the right speed to teach too ... but sometimes students aren't ready for the track you picked and you have to move quickly). In those circumstances, we're willing to give up a little sound quality for continuity of the class.

But on the weekend I'll pull out my desk and see how "bad" the pitch correction really is.

Now that I've read how those pitch correction algorithms work, you're right ... they should have a hard time on sharp transients ... but I don't remember that. Of course, a rarely used trick may not be well remembered ...

Robin Bowes
2006-02-01, 05:13
Michaelwagner said the following on 02/01/2006 12:01 PM:
> radish Wrote:
>
>>slow a track down a chunk and you get phasing on transients like snares,
>>and kick drums lose all their definition.
>
> I guess this gets into what we use it for.
> Swing DJs don't muck with the sound when we play for dancing. We
> typically leave the tips and tails alone (we don't cross-fade, we don't
> beat match).
>
> So the only time we slow down is for teaching (and then the preference
> is still to find a song of the right speed to teach too ... but
> sometimes students aren't ready for the track you picked and you have
> to move quickly). In those circumstances, we're willing to give up a
> little sound quality for continuity of the class.

You'd be amazed at how unperceptive the general public is.

Those of us who work with audio (I work for http://www.jssaudio.co.uk)
often make the mistake of assuming that everyone who listens to music is
as passionate and/or knowledgable about audio quality as we are. They're
not!

Case in point: I attended a 40th birthday party a couple of weeks ago at
which a live band played. They had a small FOH PA for vocals and the
kick drum (?) and another one for onstage foldback. Anyway, about
halfway through the set, the FOH amp went into thermal overload and
shutdown. So, the only vocals audible were from the on-stage monitoring.
I was the only person in the hall who noticed!

R.

Craig
2006-02-01, 05:36
Those of us who work with audio (I work for http://www.jssaudio.co.uk)
often make the mistake of assuming that everyone who listens to music is
as passionate and/or knowledgable about audio quality as we are. They're
not!



R.

I was having a discussion about mp3's in a recording studio the other day - it makes you wonder why we put so much effort into music when people are going to screw the life out of it just to save disc space.

Michaelwagner
2006-02-01, 05:38
You'd be amazed at how unperceptive the general public is.
One of my less memorable gigs (well, I'm less proud of it anyways ... I sure won't forget it in a hurry) was fill-in during the band breaks. When I got there, I found out that the promoter had fired the band at the last minute and had a replacement. They had had time to learn the songs for the first set, but hadn't learned the second set yet. So I played all the music for the second set and they lip-synched the whole thing.


And no one noticed ....


Shesh.

In one track there was a woman vocalist but no woman on stage.


And no one noticed ....


Of course, this was the same audience who asked me if I was going to play any Motown when I'd just played 3 Motown tracks in the last 5 songs (it was a theme night).

Michaelwagner
2006-02-01, 05:58
Those of us who work with audio often make the mistake of assuming that everyone who listens to music is
as passionate and/or knowledgable about audio quality as we are.
It's the same in every field.

Dancers assume everyone cares as deeply about dance as they do. It's a shock to the system to find someone who doesn't.

abdomen
2006-02-01, 06:16
I would much rather see pitch and tone controls done as a server-side function. There is *so* much more you can do beyond the primitive control on SB1. Eg it is possible to "speed up" music without changing the pitch (a frequency-domain instead of time-domain function). If you haven't heard this effect before it's pretty slick - i don't know of any easy tool to do it - last time i did this was ten years ago with SoundEdit on the Mac.
Just to throw this out there: I play guitar, and enjoy playing a song while noodling along and/or learning to play it. I therefore FF/RW within tracks, and I actually waited a year or two before buying a Slim Devices product because I was waiting for that feature to be implemented.

In the same vein, it would be a huge convenience to be able to fine-tune the pitch of a track, even with a simpler time-domain function-- I used to make frequent use of the pitch shift knob on my tape deck for this purpose. The idea is that tracks that are off from A440 don't necessitate re-tuning the guitar to play along with. If others are interested, I would file an enhancement bug. Shifting up or down in pitch by up to half a step or perhaps a full step... I smile just imagining a feature like that!

Patrick Dixon
2006-02-01, 06:27
Those of us who work with audio (I work for http://www.jssaudio.co.uk)
often make the mistake of assuming that everyone who listens to music is
as passionate and/or knowledgable about audio quality as we are. They're
not!Robin, I've just looked at the galley on your website and your credibility is blown!

Blue.....Westlife.....Busted.....Girls Aloud

.... and you say you CARE about music. ;-)

Robin Bowes
2006-02-01, 06:39
Patrick Dixon said the following on 02/01/2006 01:27 PM:
>>Those of us who work with audio (I work for http://www.jssaudio.co.uk)
>>often make the mistake of assuming that everyone who listens to music
>>is
>>as passionate and/or knowledgable about audio quality as we are.
>>They're
>>not!Robin, I've just looked at the galley on your website and your
>
> credibility is blown!
>
> Blue.....Westlife.....Busted.....Girls Aloud
>
> .... and you say you CARE about music. ;-)

??????

Where are you looking?

R.

Patrick Dixon
2006-02-01, 07:32
In the Gallery!

(I missed Status Quo too)

Michaelwagner
2006-02-01, 07:51
I therefore FF/RW within tracks, and I actually waited a year or two before buying a Slim Devices product because I was waiting for that feature to be implemented.
The feature exists now for all non-transcoded music streams. For mp3, that means back to the SB1 at least, maybe the original SLiMP3 (never had one, so I can't be sure).

Michaelwagner
2006-02-01, 07:54
I would file an enhancement bug.
Exists.
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2749
If you want more precise tone control out of it (which, if I read your posting correctly, you do), feel free to add your comments to the enhancement request.

Robin Bowes
2006-02-01, 08:05
Patrick Dixon said the following on 02/01/2006 02:32 PM:
> In the Gallery!
>
> (I missed Status Quo too)

Which Gallery?

R.

Alex Twisleton-Wykeham-Fiennes
2006-02-01, 08:23
On Wed 1 February 2006 15:05, Robin Bowes wrote:
> Patrick Dixon said the following on 02/01/2006 02:32 PM:
> > In the Gallery!
> >
> > (I missed Status Quo too)
>
> Which Gallery?

http://www.jssaudio.co.uk/JSSWeb/My_Homepage_Files/Page3.html

A

Robin Bowes
2006-02-01, 08:42
Alex Twisleton-Wykeham-Fiennes said the following on 02/01/2006 03:23 PM:
> On Wed 1 February 2006 15:05, Robin Bowes wrote:
>
>>Patrick Dixon said the following on 02/01/2006 02:32 PM:
>>
>>>In the Gallery!
>>>
>>>(I missed Status Quo too)
>>
>>Which Gallery?
>
>
> http://www.jssaudio.co.uk/JSSWeb/My_Homepage_Files/Page3.html

Aaaaahhhh, the *JSS* gallery. I see. I thought you meant my personal
gallery (http://gallery.robinbowes.com).

Well, in this business, a gig is a gig. Can't afford to be picky about
customers!

You do get the occassional gem which makes it all worthwhile, but they
are few and far between. It's mostly just either hard work or boring
waiting around.

R.

abdomen
2006-02-01, 08:47
Exists.
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2749
If you want more precise tone control out of it (which, if I read your posting correctly, you do), feel free to add your comments to the enhancement request.

Done. Thank you!


The feature exists now for all non-transcoded music streams. For mp3, that means back to the SB1 at least, maybe the original SLiMP3 (never had one, so I can't be sure).
Sorry, I didn't phrase it clearly in my post-- I do indeed use the FF/RW feature. I only meant to reference that in the early days of Slim Devices, you couldn't FF/RW within tracks.

Again, thanks for your responses!

Craig
2006-02-01, 09:18
I didn't realise you were in the PA game and only in York too, we're talking about replaceing our EV MT1 rig sometime soon. We won't be needing one of those big "bent" systems though :-)

Craig

Robin Bowes
2006-02-01, 09:44
Craig said the following on 02/01/2006 04:18 PM:
> I didn't realise you were in the PA game and only in York too, we're
> talking about replaceing our EV MT1 rig sometime soon. We won't be
> needing one of those big "bent" systems though :-)

Where are you?

Get in touch and I can sort you out a nice HK Audio system.

R.

Yahoo: robin_bowes
AIM: robinbowes
MSN: robin-.net (AT) robinbowes (DOT) com
Tel. +44 (7737) 776768

Robin Bowes
2006-02-01, 09:50
Robin Bowes said the following on 02/01/2006 04:44 PM:
>
> Yahoo: robin_bowes
> AIM: robinbowes
> MSN: robin-.net (AT) robinbowes (DOT) com

Gaaah, that's: robin-.net <at> robinbowes <dot> com

> Tel. +44 (7737) 776768

Forgot to ask, who's "we"? i.e. what are you using your MT-1 for?

R.

ModelCitizen
2006-02-01, 11:54
Get with it Robin, he doesn't mean your home pages he means the gallery of
http://www.jssaudio.co.uk.
And he's right, music lover.... :-)

Simon Turner
Barcombe UK

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
> [mailto:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com] On Behalf Of Robin
> Bowes
> Sent: 01 February 2006 15:06
> To: discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
> Subject: Re: [slim] Re: SB3 internal pic?
>
> Patrick Dixon said the following on 02/01/2006 02:32 PM:
> > In the Gallery!
> >
> > (I missed Status Quo too)
>
> Which Gallery?
>
> R.
>
>

Craig
2006-02-01, 12:31
Forgot to ask, who's "we"? i.e. what are you using your MT-1 for?

R.

We're an 8 piece soul band from Wakefield

www.the-solicitors-band.co.uk

I'll drop you an email with more details

Craig

Robin Bowes
2006-02-01, 13:09
Simon @ Home said the following on 02/01/2006 06:54 PM:
> Get with it Robin, he doesn't mean your home pages he means the gallery of
> http://www.jssaudio.co.uk.
> And he's right, music lover.... :-)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I got there in the end!

Anyway, I didn't do any of those gigs.

I do however have to hold my hand up to a couple of gigs with Kirsty
Crawford (http://kirstycrawford.com)

In my defence, I've recently done The Katia Labeque Band (with Fred
Frith) and The Yorkshire Wildlife Trust AGM!

Anyway, when it comes to musical taste, I'd keep quiet if I were you. ;)

R.