Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > PC Based

PC Based Computer music servers, crossovers, and equalization

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22nd June 2010, 12:10 AM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Zealand
Yes, indeed, quick bit of searching and it appears Touch is prefered to Duet in terms of sound. I would love to understand what aspects are better/worse on the 2 models. For example if you were to pick up I2S directly does that change the comparrison?

Wonsering now if I should consider selling the Duet in favour of a Touch before I dig in and void the warentee!!

Cheers
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2010, 02:43 AM   #12
sng001 is offline sng001  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundcheck View Post
@

3. I can run whatever format (.flac etc) and do the decoding on the remote
server without compromising SQ by doing it locally.
Hi soundcheck,

I recently bought a Squeezebox Classic (SB3) from eBay. I am using the analogue out from SB3 and I was not impressed with the sound quality out of unmodded SB3.

I hooked up a simple linear (LT1084) PSU & a big SLA battery and that improved the SQ a bit.

I read this thread & your blog and let the squeezebox server to decode the FLAC and that improve the SQ a lot. I checked the Windows task manager & found that FLAC decoder can consume 4% of a 1.8Mhz CPU, so the little SB3CPU must do some hard work..

I tried to ssh to the SB3 & there is no response so I could not check the settings for SB3.

- sng001
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2010, 08:06 AM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
soundcheck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DUS
Hi folks.


The Touch is a complete different animal than the earlier products.

It is the only box which comes with an embedded Linux.
All other boxes run just "firmware" (which is not a bad thing though.)

The described SW mods apply the Touch only!

The Duet actually doesn't even have the Touch SW problems. The Duet comes with an inferior electronic setup in the audio section and powersupply.



Cheers
__________________
::: Squeezebox Touch Toolbox and more ::: by soundcheck
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2010, 08:11 AM   #14
jkeny is offline jkeny  Ireland
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundcheck View Post
Hi folks.


The Touch is a complete different animal than the earlier products.

It is the only box which comes with an embedded Linux.
All other boxes run just "firmware" (which is not a bad thing though.)

The described SW mods apply the Touch only!

The Duet actually doesn't even have the Touch SW problems. The Duet comes with an inferior electronic setup in the audio section and powersupply.



Cheers
Yes, I'm aware the Duet has sub-optimal digital & analogue audio sections & also some PS issues. Weighed against the mods which are needed to the Touch how does it balance out - is the Duet a better base platform fro mods?

Agreed the firmware may be an issue & certainly not tweakable as Linux is!
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2010, 08:19 AM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Zealand
Thanks SC, having read some more on the subject I realise it was a dumb question.

To quote "The Duet comes with an inferior electronic setup in the audio section". May I ask what specifically - the DAC?. If I use SPDIF out or I2S does this eliminate the inferior audio section?

Cheers
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2010, 08:55 AM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
soundcheck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DUS
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkeny View Post
Yes, I'm aware the Duet has sub-optimal digital & analogue audio sections & also some PS issues. Weighed against the mods which are needed to the Touch how does it balance out - is the Duet a better base platform fro mods?
Honestly I am not sure here.

You would have to apply a lot of internal and external mods to the DUET to get to the level of the Touch when externally and SW modded (easy wins!).

One of the key features is certainly the Touch reclocker.

Not to forget the 24/96 support.

I'd say the Touch has more potential. What's bugging me is the high entry price for features I don't use.

With an external quality PS you'll get close to 600$. That's IMO quite a lot.
I bought myself a Super Teddy Reg and the Touch, which ended up at 330$ - which is IMO OK - though it is partly DIY.
Buying a quality reclocker module for the DUET would get me into the same direction.
At 600$ you might manage with your modded M2Tech and a small PC solution to challenge costwise the modded Touch scenario.
At about 330$ you won't make it, except you'd take out of equation a PC which is available already.

As a matter of fact, I'd love to compare both solutions soundwise.


Still. The operation of the Touch or Squeezebox family and the networking functions are one of the most relevant buying arguments for that solution to me.


And - no more endless Linux/CPLAY/CMP/XXHIghend/JRiver/ASIO or other PC related never ending tuning discussions.
Just use what you got an start the stream. (Almost) Plug and Play.



Cheers
__________________
::: Squeezebox Touch Toolbox and more ::: by soundcheck
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2010, 09:02 AM   #17
jkeny is offline jkeny  Ireland
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin
I could send you a modified Hiface on a sale or return basis but beware you may not want to return it!
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2010, 09:03 AM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
soundcheck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DUS
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisMmm View Post
Thanks SC, having read some more on the subject I realise it was a dumb question.

To quote "The Duet comes with an inferior electronic setup in the audio section". May I ask what specifically - the DAC?. If I use SPDIF out or I2S does this eliminate the inferior audio section?

Cheers

I do not intend to go into DUET details over here. You'll find a lot of modification infos and discussions over here at DIY-A.

As I said Logitech pretty much improved the digital section on the Touch. That's you'll realize as soon as you turn that box on, without even modifying it.

John Swensson and others report that after modifying/removing the coupling caps on the DAC output, the Touch delivers pretty good sound also on the analog output. If John claims this, I think it is worth a try.

Cheers
__________________
::: Squeezebox Touch Toolbox and more ::: by soundcheck
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2010, 09:13 AM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
soundcheck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DUS
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkeny View Post
I could send you a modified Hiface on a sale or return basis but beware you may not want to return it!
Hmmh. Let see - I returned other things - even more promising - before.

I don't even have a reasonable system to try it.

These guys just don't get the Linux driver nor the OSX driver fixed.
They are still working on it I've been told a couple of weeks ago.
Priority is on OSX then Linux. ( Here we are again - the never ending stories around - drivers, OSes, applications,operations)

Cheers
__________________
::: Squeezebox Touch Toolbox and more ::: by soundcheck
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2010, 12:57 PM   #20
diyAudio Member
 
Kurt von Kubik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Viby, Denmark
Send a message via MSN to Kurt von Kubik
Lately Ive tried out some 96/24 source material for the SBT, which of course makes it sound more smooth and natural. This in spite of my DAC using up-sampling done by AD1896. Native 24/96 material seems to be pretty good, in spite of its much larger sensitivity to jitter than normal 16/44. But that might just lead to soundquality not so much better than 16/44 as the same jitter will be present regardless of sampling frequency.
But much more important seems the file format to be. FLAC simply wont work on a SBT, neither @ 16/44 or @ 24/96.
It seems as if you are playing LPs with a dirty or worn needle. It both sounds thin and the top end looses delicacy and naturalness, causing you to focus your attention on sibillance and transient edges, and that is not the way music appears to you IRL.
Wave prooves its worth also in 24/96, but as SC indicates, it might be a SBT problem only, but I doubt it. To me it seems as if all the compressed formats causes trouble no matter where you decompress on the fly.

Using the SBT internal squeezebox server with a USB HDD, there are a few things, that you should consider, and I really would like hints from experienced users also regarding this.
The SBT needs to index the disc, and that will take some time, and often re-indexing stalls of some reason. I found it to be most reliable to delete the squeezebox files from the USB disc, to make it re-index from scratch now and then. That mostly because Im in the middle of a process of ripping my CD collection, which means, that the USB is disconnected from the SBT pretty often these days.
One could also transfer the newly ripped CDs by WLAN connection, but that is a lot slower than disconnecting the USB drive, transferring and re-connecting.
@ the time being, it takes about 2 hours to re-index my USB drive, containing around a bit more than 500GB of audio files. From a PC that would take very short time, less than a minute and probably less then 15 sec.
But the SBT sounds a lot better not connected to a PC, so I think Ill just suffer until something better appears.
__________________
Just do it
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
question to Squeezebox Touch users Martin Prothero PC Based 50 13th August 2010 10:27 PM
Which PS for Squeezebox Touch upgrade? Twisted Pear Placid, or AMB σ11? orpheus PC Based 8 4th June 2010 09:52 AM
Squeezebox Receiver Modifications jkeny Digital Source 3 12th March 2010 08:22 AM
Finish of the speaker, the final touch.. thanx Multi-Way 3 20th November 2007 03:12 AM
Squeezebox 3 I_Forgot Digital Source 0 3rd January 2006 03:16 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:46 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2