Yes, I think so, at least on the experience of my own set-up.
It does make sense if you think about it, you wouldn't run a pre or power amp on a switched mode supply because of the noise - both RF and line based, so it also makes sense not to run a source on one - IMHO !
I have just dismantled a Sun external DAT tape drive and the SM supply in that was in a heavily screened box - and this isn't even an audio device. This is going be my next external DAC and I shall put the linear PSU in the screened box for overkill level RF/magnetic field suppression !
I use the digital output into an AMB Labs Gamma1 DAC - which also has a near identical encapsulated linear PSU.
Perhaps you could lash up a battery and 5v reg as a test before spending any money ?
Graham
Last edited:
It'll have an impact on all outputs.
Though keep in mind that the Touch uses internally DC/DC
converters, which will probably neutralize the effect of super expensive regulated supplies to a great extent.
I doubt that a "super expensive supply" differs a lot from a "quite good" supply.
But all those linear supplies are usually better then the stock supply.
However. I havn't tested them all side by side.
Very beneficial I consider a filter on the line - see my blog.
Last edited:
I didn't know there were internal DC/DC converters - but I expect they will work much better if the DC they are getting is as clean as possible and not modulated by SM generated noise.
There have been many threads on improving all manner of audio kit simply by improving the PSU(s), if you do a basically good job you are <almost> guaranteed to have an audible benefit.
Even better than a "super expensive supply" is one that cost nowt ! (although you can buy the encapsulated modules from RS for about £50).
Soundcheck: After applying the mod to disable the analogue output the beeps on the Touch were distorted (now disabled thanfully). Apologies if you have already answered this but is there a fix for this, should I want my beeps back ?
Graham
I'll post some pictures as soon as I find the time. For now I hope you can live with below.
The key HW tweaks I've done so far:
1. 220uf/10V Oscon piggyback style mod on all decoupling caps.
2. Soldering the SPDIF coax and its ground right to the mainboard.
Here you find pictures of the opened Touch.
Have a look at the bottom picture. There is a comb connector ( at the bottom left side - if you look at the mainboard
with the output board facing you.
I soldered the hot right to the very right soldering joint of that left comb connector and cut off the pin of that comb connector itself from the other side to avoid connection to the output board and RCA.
The coax ground went right to the fad ground point to the right beside it.
I hope you can guess by looking at the picture, where to hook up the coax, respectively what I'm talking about.
You can remove the SPDIF RCA to use its hole as output for the coax.
Here you'll find a description of how to open the box.
Soldering the Oscons is a bit tricky. There is a risk that you fry the board.
The coax/spdif mod I consider pretty easy to accomplish.
The biggest problem is opening and closing the box, without killing the cables and its connectors that connect front and backside. "Unlocking" those cables
requires some force and you might break the connectors. Then you'll be forced to run headless.
Everybody who got a bit of DIY experience can try it. At least the coax mod I consider a must do. But again. Be careful.
Cheers
Last edited:
When applying the mods (jive_2), the internal sounds are routed to the main output, respectively your main speakers.
That's why I'm saying on the blog that you please turn of your internal sounds first.
There's no free Lunch.
When applying the mods (jive_2), the internal sounds are routed to the main output, respectively your main speakers.
That's why I'm saying on the blog that you please turn of your internal sounds first.
There's no free Lunch.
Quite !
DC/DC converters are often used to generate a higher voltage - is this how they are used in the Touch ?
If so, what about a mod for removing them - do you think that would offer any improvement to the sound ?
GR
Why not using "Terminal" on OSX?
It's a no-brainer.
Most OSX users I talked to liked the "simplicity" of that approach.
Cheers
I am using Squeezebox Touch with Superteddyreg diy power supply, SBT has all software tweaks from "soundcheck", SBT and well configured Qnap 119 Nas is connected directly to a small Netgear switch with a linear ps and this Netgear switch is connected to the router to allow internet connection.
In this way only Netgear switch is beetwen SBT and NAS, and only those two devices are connected to the switch.
I am using good network cables (japanese Draka with Hiros plugs) and the NAS is decoding flacs and sending wav to SBT. The screen of the network cable from the switch to SBT is interrupted 5cm before SBT.
Network cable beetwen NAS and switch is 1m long and switch SBT 6m long. Tried a small switch just before SBT, but then the soundquality was worse.
SBT is connected with a very good spdif digital cable to my Buffalo II dac. It sounds absolutely wonderfull, as long as i am not comparing it with my old CD-Transport - DPA Enlightenment and some other good cd drives from my friends.
The same CD played from the CD-drive connected to Buffalo with the same digital cable sounds (much?) better, than the same file (flac or wav) from the Squeezebox. There is more bass, sound is fuller, has more weight, there is more depth. The difference is immediately noticable.
There is nothing wrong in my network/Nas/SBT configuration, i have checked it many times - in my daily life i have a lot to do with unix/networks etc.
Now i am thinking about checking some other network switches and instead of Qnap NAS a notebook with W7, but i am not convinced, that it will reach the performance level of a good CD-drive.
Has anybody compared good cd drive against well configured SBT connected with spdif to the same good DAC ?
In this way only Netgear switch is beetwen SBT and NAS, and only those two devices are connected to the switch.
I am using good network cables (japanese Draka with Hiros plugs) and the NAS is decoding flacs and sending wav to SBT. The screen of the network cable from the switch to SBT is interrupted 5cm before SBT.
Network cable beetwen NAS and switch is 1m long and switch SBT 6m long. Tried a small switch just before SBT, but then the soundquality was worse.
SBT is connected with a very good spdif digital cable to my Buffalo II dac. It sounds absolutely wonderfull, as long as i am not comparing it with my old CD-Transport - DPA Enlightenment and some other good cd drives from my friends.
The same CD played from the CD-drive connected to Buffalo with the same digital cable sounds (much?) better, than the same file (flac or wav) from the Squeezebox. There is more bass, sound is fuller, has more weight, there is more depth. The difference is immediately noticable.
There is nothing wrong in my network/Nas/SBT configuration, i have checked it many times - in my daily life i have a lot to do with unix/networks etc.
Now i am thinking about checking some other network switches and instead of Qnap NAS a notebook with W7, but i am not convinced, that it will reach the performance level of a good CD-drive.
Has anybody compared good cd drive against well configured SBT connected with spdif to the same good DAC ?
Hello Sinski,
I lately made the same experience.. I use SBT with all Soundcheck SW mods but screen mod., directly connected to a switch via unshielded Cat 6 cables (maybe no High End) which is connected to my QNAP TS 119 NAS.
Due to problems with my SBS (I could not play FLAC files after a reboot one day anymore) I connected my old marantz CD-62 (with legendary philips drive) to my system via SPDIF (I use an acourate mini PC with RME DIGI 9636 soundcard and ADAT connection to my Alesis AI3 DA converter). I realized a darker background (like less noise), tighter bass and smoother heights with the CD player. Since this moment I am thinking about a sonos zone player ZP90 from "aktives-hoeren"- forum modified by Gert (new clock and improved internal PSU but only playing 44,1kHz files) with a drastically reduced Jitter - did anyone here compare this player with a modified SBT? Another option could be a good stand alone HDD player - I do not need my music in every room and go via LAN only for a decoupling of different data processing which makes switch and NAS and separation of server and player SW necessary...
Jörn
I lately made the same experience.. I use SBT with all Soundcheck SW mods but screen mod., directly connected to a switch via unshielded Cat 6 cables (maybe no High End) which is connected to my QNAP TS 119 NAS.
Due to problems with my SBS (I could not play FLAC files after a reboot one day anymore) I connected my old marantz CD-62 (with legendary philips drive) to my system via SPDIF (I use an acourate mini PC with RME DIGI 9636 soundcard and ADAT connection to my Alesis AI3 DA converter). I realized a darker background (like less noise), tighter bass and smoother heights with the CD player. Since this moment I am thinking about a sonos zone player ZP90 from "aktives-hoeren"- forum modified by Gert (new clock and improved internal PSU but only playing 44,1kHz files) with a drastically reduced Jitter - did anyone here compare this player with a modified SBT? Another option could be a good stand alone HDD player - I do not need my music in every room and go via LAN only for a decoupling of different data processing which makes switch and NAS and separation of server and player SW necessary...
Jörn
Folks.
Sounds like you are surprised about your findings? I'm not.
I'm sure that a well done SPDIF interface like M2TECH stuff or a good CDP , will give
the Touch a hard time. (Altough you'd perhaps need to apply the jkenny mods to the M2Tech first )
Don't forget. By talking about a SB Touch we're talking about consumer electronics. We're talking about 200$ for a Transport+Audio interface.
I always said that the stock SB Touch must be considered an
average performer. I do consider it as a perfect tweakers playground though. ( Perhaps there are a little too many mods to apply )
With the earlier described Touch SPDIF HW mods and the SW mods which I still got in the pocket, you'd see that you hardly achieved 50% at max of
its full tweak potential by now.
Note:
I hope you run a pulsetransformer on the Sabre input.
If your CDP would have one on the output, it wouldn't be a fair comparison.
That 5$ device makes a hell of a difference. I'd say "at least" equally important as a better PS. And IMO much more important then e.g. network cables.
Though you should avoid to have two transformers in the line.
If you leave out the screen mod, you leave out a pretty important part of
that solution. You not even achieved that above mentioned 50%. Are you running a screen on your CDP btw?
Sabre
_________________
On the other hand. What do you think about the marketing message of that Sabre DAC (or Buffalo) . Wasn't that "great" device" supposed to suppress incoming jitter? On SPDIF streams in particular !?!? So - what do you think about that? Folks - that's what's bugging me most about this discussion.
Cheers
Sounds like you are surprised about your findings? I'm not.
I'm sure that a well done SPDIF interface like M2TECH stuff or a good CDP , will give
the Touch a hard time. (Altough you'd perhaps need to apply the jkenny mods to the M2Tech first )
Don't forget. By talking about a SB Touch we're talking about consumer electronics. We're talking about 200$ for a Transport+Audio interface.
I always said that the stock SB Touch must be considered an
average performer. I do consider it as a perfect tweakers playground though. ( Perhaps there are a little too many mods to apply
)With the earlier described Touch SPDIF HW mods and the SW mods which I still got in the pocket, you'd see that you hardly achieved 50% at max of
its full tweak potential by now.
Note:
I hope you run a pulsetransformer on the Sabre input.
If your CDP would have one on the output, it wouldn't be a fair comparison.
That 5$ device makes a hell of a difference. I'd say "at least" equally important as a better PS. And IMO much more important then e.g. network cables.
Though you should avoid to have two transformers in the line.
If you leave out the screen mod, you leave out a pretty important part of
that solution. You not even achieved that above mentioned 50%. Are you running a screen on your CDP btw?
Sabre
_________________
On the other hand. What do you think about the marketing message of that Sabre DAC (or Buffalo) . Wasn't that "great" device" supposed to suppress incoming jitter? On SPDIF streams in particular !?!? So - what do you think about that? Folks - that's what's bugging me most about this discussion.
Cheers
Last edited:
Hi everybody,
so finally i´m into sbt too
Did almost allot of the klaus´ mods. Remote-Server is a WinXP-Pro
based computer via Cat6a and klaus´recommended hub.
Just thinking about what to do next....maybe building better psu for sbt
(maybe superteddyreg) and hub (lt1084 based).
What attracts me allot is the recommended Sbooster filter. Is there a
way to build this kind of device on my own? Anyone´s got a schematic
for a filter like that?
Greetings Ulf
so finally i´m into sbt too
Did almost allot of the klaus´ mods. Remote-Server is a WinXP-Pro
based computer via Cat6a and klaus´recommended hub.
Just thinking about what to do next....maybe building better psu for sbt
(maybe superteddyreg) and hub (lt1084 based).
What attracts me allot is the recommended Sbooster filter. Is there a
way to build this kind of device on my own? Anyone´s got a schematic
for a filter like that?
Greetings Ulf
Hi Klaus,
Which transformer for Buffalo input exactly shoul i order ? The CDP has not transformer at the output and i am using screen mode on SBT. It not possible to turn off the screen on CDP. Thanks again for Yoout great TT !
Cheers, Tomek
Hi Klaus,
Which transformer for Buffalo input exactly shoul i order ? The CDP has not transformer at the output and i am using screen mode on SBT. It not possible to turn off the screen on CDP. Thanks again for Yoout great TT !
Cheers, Tomek
You should go some posts back. We discussed it not long ago.