PDA

View Full Version : G4TechTV gives us a poor Sound Quality review?



The1FastCar
2004-11-02, 19:02
Seems the TechTV guys did not like the audio quality, but the liked
everything else??? Maybe they got a bad unit? I Love mine!

http://www.g4techtv.com/screensavers/features/50198/Review_Network_Music_Pla
yers.html


"Recommendation: Feature for feature, the Squeezebox holds its own in this
roundup. Tech-savvy users will appreciate the open source SlimServer that
gets regular feature updates (every couple months it seems). Audiophiles
will find nothing but disappointment with the audio quality."

Jon Danforth
2004-11-02, 20:36
Maybe they were testing with shitty MP3s? I hate how every MP3 sounds
regardless of what it comes out of but when I stream the Apple lossless
files through the SB, they're great! I have a $6k pair of speakers, a
$2k preamp, and a $4k amp that fucking rock the joint with my
squeezebox. What a pathetic review.

-Jon

The1FastCar wrote:

>Seems the TechTV guys did not like the audio quality, but the liked
>everything else??? Maybe they got a bad unit? I Love mine!
>
>http://www.g4techtv.com/screensavers/features/50198/Review_Network_Music_Pla
>yers.html
>
>
>"Recommendation: Feature for feature, the Squeezebox holds its own in this
>roundup. Tech-savvy users will appreciate the open source SlimServer that
>gets regular feature updates (every couple months it seems). Audiophiles
>will find nothing but disappointment with the audio quality."
>
>
>
>
>

Joe Craig
2004-11-02, 20:59
> What a pathetic review.

I watched the show earlier this evening. There weren't a lot of
technical details in any of the comments. Most of the favorable
comments were about which boxes could be controlled by iTunes!
--


Joe

Jonathan Miller
2004-11-02, 21:33
I noticed they didn't mention the fact that the one the reviewer liked
would need SlimServer to play anything other than iTunes. At least
that's my understanding of the Roku.


On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:59:49 -0500, Joe Craig <jncraig (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
> > What a pathetic review.
>
> I watched the show earlier this evening. There weren't a lot of
> technical details in any of the comments. Most of the favorable
> comments were about which boxes could be controlled by iTunes!
> --
>
>
> Joe
>
>
>

Enno Davids
2004-11-02, 22:28
Surely, audiophiles aren't listening to any lossy formats at all? All they
want is high bitrate uncompressed big samples.


E.


On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 10:36:59PM -0500, Jon Danforth wrote:
|Maybe they were testing with shitty MP3s? I hate how every MP3 sounds
|regardless of what it comes out of but when I stream the Apple lossless
|files through the SB, they're great! I have a $6k pair of speakers, a
|$2k preamp, and a $4k amp that fucking rock the joint with my
|squeezebox. What a pathetic review.
|
|-Jon
|
|The1FastCar wrote:
|
|>Seems the TechTV guys did not like the audio quality, but the liked
|>everything else??? Maybe they got a bad unit? I Love mine!
|>
|>http://www.g4techtv.com/screensavers/features/50198/Review_Network_Music_Pla
|>yers.html
|>
|>
|>"Recommendation: Feature for feature, the Squeezebox holds its own in this
|>roundup. Tech-savvy users will appreciate the open source SlimServer that
|>gets regular feature updates (every couple months it seems). Audiophiles
|>will find nothing but disappointment with the audio quality."
|>
|>
|>
|>
|>

Jonathan Miller
2004-11-02, 23:05
how about a link to the article

http://www.g4techtv.com/screensavers/features/50198/Review_Network_Music_Players.html




On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 16:28:11 +1100, Enno Davids <enno.davids (AT) metva (DOT) com.au> wrote:
> Surely, audiophiles aren't listening to any lossy formats at all? All they
> want is high bitrate uncompressed big samples.
>
> E.
>
> On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 10:36:59PM -0500, Jon Danforth wrote:
> |Maybe they were testing with shitty MP3s? I hate how every MP3 sounds
>
>
> |regardless of what it comes out of but when I stream the Apple lossless
> |files through the SB, they're great! I have a $6k pair of speakers, a
> |$2k preamp, and a $4k amp that fucking rock the joint with my
> |squeezebox. What a pathetic review.
> |
> |-Jon
> |
> |The1FastCar wrote:
> |
> |>Seems the TechTV guys did not like the audio quality, but the liked
> |>everything else??? Maybe they got a bad unit? I Love mine!
> |>
> |>http://www.g4techtv.com/screensavers/features/50198/Review_Network_Music_Pla
> |>yers.html
> |>
> |>
> |>"Recommendation: Feature for feature, the Squeezebox holds its own in this
> |>roundup. Tech-savvy users will appreciate the open source SlimServer that
> |>gets regular feature updates (every couple months it seems). Audiophiles
> |>will find nothing but disappointment with the audio quality."
> |>
> |>
> |>
> |>
> |>

Jonathan Miller
2004-11-02, 23:08
oh, duh, it started with a link to the article, man, must be upset
because Kerry is losing, sorry for the redundant link.


On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:05:41 -0800, Jonathan Miller <crapulent (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
> how about a link to the article
>
> http://www.g4techtv.com/screensavers/features/50198/Review_Network_Music_Players.html
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 16:28:11 +1100, Enno Davids <enno.davids (AT) metva (DOT) com.au> wrote:
> > Surely, audiophiles aren't listening to any lossy formats at all? All they
> > want is high bitrate uncompressed big samples.
> >
> > E.
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 10:36:59PM -0500, Jon Danforth wrote:
> > |Maybe they were testing with shitty MP3s? I hate how every MP3 sounds
> >
> >
> > |regardless of what it comes out of but when I stream the Apple lossless
> > |files through the SB, they're great! I have a $6k pair of speakers, a
> > |$2k preamp, and a $4k amp that fucking rock the joint with my
> > |squeezebox. What a pathetic review.
> > |
> > |-Jon
> > |
> > |The1FastCar wrote:
> > |
> > |>Seems the TechTV guys did not like the audio quality, but the liked
> > |>everything else??? Maybe they got a bad unit? I Love mine!
> > |>
> > |>http://www.g4techtv.com/screensavers/features/50198/Review_Network_Music_Pla
> > |>yers.html
> > |>
> > |>
> > |>"Recommendation: Feature for feature, the Squeezebox holds its own in this
> > |>roundup. Tech-savvy users will appreciate the open source SlimServer that
> > |>gets regular feature updates (every couple months it seems). Audiophiles
> > |>will find nothing but disappointment with the audio quality."
> > |>
> > |>
> > |>
> > |>
> > |>

Daniel Cohen
2004-11-03, 09:41
On 2/11/04 at 9:02 pm -0500, The1FastCar wrote
>Seems the TechTV guys did not like the audio quality, but the liked
>everything else??? Maybe they got a bad unit? I Love mine!
>
>http://www.g4techtv.com/screensavers/features/50198/Review_Network_Music_Pla
>yers.html
>
>
>"Recommendation: Feature for feature, the Squeezebox holds its own in this
>roundup. Tech-savvy users will appreciate the open source SlimServer that
>gets regular feature updates (every couple months it seems). Audiophiles
>will find nothing but disappointment with the audio quality."

They do say that this was a surprise, earlier versions were praised,
and they wonder if there was a bad firmware revision (rather than a
bad unit - did they only try one unit?)

--
Daniel Cohen

Daniel Cohen
2004-11-03, 09:42
On 2/11/04 at 10:36 pm -0500, Jon Danforth wrote
>Maybe they were testing with shitty MP3s?

Perhaps, but I would expect any competent reviewer to at least use
the same MP3s to test different machines.
--
Daniel Cohen

Daniel Cohen
2004-11-03, 09:44
On 2/11/04 at 8:33 pm -0800, Jonathan Miller wrote
>I noticed they didn't mention the fact that the one the reviewer liked
>would need SlimServer to play anything other than iTunes. At least
>that's my understanding of the Roku.

Either their review is wrong, or Roku have updated. Because the
review says that Musicmatch and Windows Media servers can be used on
the Roku.
--
Daniel Cohen

Jason Snell
2004-11-03, 13:04
>Either their review is wrong, or Roku have updated. Because the
>review says that Musicmatch and Windows Media servers can be used on
>the Roku.

Both features are in the SoundBridge 2 software.

-jason