Squeezebox Touch -- Modifications - Page 36 - diyAudio
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 16th February 2011, 09:54 AM   #351
phofman is offline phofman  Czech Republic
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Pilsen
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundcheck View Post
Yep I know. And my buffer mod and most of the other things I'm doing belongs in the same category.
No, you cannot quote me on that as I never said that.

Let's be specific.

Squeezebox Touch -- Modifications

I said reducing alsa buffers will lead to underruns.

Squeezebox Touch -- Modifications

Squeezebox Touch -- Modifications

Squeezebox Touch -- Modifications

Squeezebox Touch -- Modifications

All these guys experienced underruns, due to uselessly short alsa buffers, resulting in CPU not keeping up with the sound card requirements.

The plug "mod":

Squeezebox Touch -- Modifications

Of course, removing the plug plugin makes the device inoperable for some input streams.

Do you really think the engineers behind SB are so stupid?

Well, you may find telling others to deliberately cripple their devices to be more constructive than my warnings. I do not.

The sad thing is most of your followers believe you really know what all your mods actually do.

Last edited by phofman; 16th February 2011 at 09:56 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th February 2011, 02:48 PM   #352
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default FTP vs UTP

Hi Folks!

Did someone experience SQ difference between FTP vs UTP on the Touch.

I tried an FTP cable with high quality connector (Draka FTP with Hirosa connectors recommended by Soundcheck) and it sounds subtantially better that an ordinary UTP cable. The sound is rounder, with warmer medium en much less harsch.

Best guess for an explanation: probably the higher quality cable with some metallic parts around the plastic of the outer connector, plays a kind of capacitance role that rolls off high freq interferences from Ethernet datastream?!?

Anyhow, I am hesitating now to damage the outer jacket of my cable to remove the shielding like recommended by Soundcheck, since SQ is already significantly improved and this change is irreversible. Did someone try both FTP with and without removing the shielding? Does it bring any additional improvement?

Thanks for feed-back!

Regards,

Emmanuel
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th February 2011, 03:16 PM   #353
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: NJ
In general, at least in the US, networking cables are referred to as shielded twisted pairs or STP, such as the foil twisted pairs FTP. The standard has been UTP or unshielded twisted pairs as there is over a hundred years of installed experience (standard for telephone cable.)
The shielded cable offers an opportunity for groundloops which is not present w/ unshielded.
I don't doubt that you hear a difference but I personally would never use anything but UTP.














0
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2011, 11:06 AM   #354
diyAudio Member
 
DEQ+TheEnd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
"Note2: ttinit installs already a basic set of modifications!"

Are these default changes listed somewhere?
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2011, 11:31 AM   #355
diyAudio Member
 
soundcheck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: D
Quote:
Originally Posted by DEQ+TheEnd View Post
"Note2: ttinit installs already a basic set of modifications!"

Are these default changes listed somewhere?
No.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2011, 11:41 AM   #356
diyAudio Member
 
DEQ+TheEnd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundcheck View Post
No.
Short and concise there soundcheck

OK, my findings reading v2 script is that kernel log, syslog and samba are stopped. Optional we can tweak default for WLAN and screen.

But what I mostly like to know if there are any buffers tweaked default after initializing?
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2011, 01:52 PM   #357
diyAudio Member
 
soundcheck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: D
Quote:
Originally Posted by DEQ+TheEnd View Post
But what I mostly like to know if there are any buffers tweaked default after initializing?
No.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2011, 12:15 PM   #358
Kuja is offline Kuja  Yugoslavia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Belgrade, Yugoslavia
I installed (almost) all of the mods, including 100% volume mod.
I only left the screen unmodified.
Wireless, USB and analog outs are disabled, only the digital out is left on.
Buffer is set to recommended value of 4000.
Flac files are transcoded to PCM on the PC side.
PC is running last version of SBServer on Win XP.
Everything is wired through the Belkin N+ hub with Bandridge VL unshielded CAT 5e wire.


I'm using my Touch with Naim DAC, which has an unique option to play PCM wav files stored on USB memory sticks.
This is not an USB DAC.
There is no USB connection to computer - you just plug an USB memory stick in it and it starts playing.


This way, we have an option of avoiding influence of transport quality, SPDIF interface, cabling, etc, thus having the closest thing to the pure sound of the DAC as the reference sound.


My SPDIF cable is Stereovox XV2, with BNC connection on DAC side.

When I compare the sound of modded Touch / Naim DAC combination with the sound of Naim DAC alone (playing PCM wav directly from the USB memory stick),
Touch/Naim combination sounds somewhat duller.

Naim DAC alone, in memory stick mode, has greater dynamics, transients are sharper, there is more attack, bass has greater slam and kick, mids and highs are more detailed, treble is more extended, there is more air around instruments. Imaging is wider and deeper. Everything is more vivid.

Difference is not (it never is ) night and day, but it is very obvious.

Enough for me to worry about it, since I'm not using the full potential of this excellent DAC.

BUT...!!!
When I did put a SD card with the same music in the Touch, I was very surprised!

The sound became much closer to the real sound of Naim DAC.
Something I could live with.

In this scenario all the mods are still present, but the internal Tiny SBS is running and FLAC decoding is done inside the Touch.

This is supposed to be the bad thing, but the sound is better and it is very close to the "real" sound of the DAC.


So, I guess that these mods might give you a different sound.


Judging from this (still limited) experience, I'm not convinced that they will always bring sound quality improvement in absolute terms.

They only may bring you the sound you will like more, depending on your personal preferences and/or the rest of your equipment.



.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2011, 03:36 PM   #359
diyAudio Member
 
soundcheck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: D
Hi Kuja.

I just read a bit about the Naim DAC.

The Naim DAC (2600€ + 3500€ for ext. PS) is a very special animal.
It runs a Sharc processor and plenty of storage inside . The whole
stream will be stored, the sample rate analysed and then reclocked.
No PLLs are used just 10 different fixed frequencies.

Great design, as far as I can see. I'm not sure if there is another design like that out there. They really intended to get the input jitter out.

My expectations would be that the DAC should not show any difference, doesn't matter what you feed!!
Naim even recommends Toslink, which proved to be inferior to SPDIF-Coax in many other occasions, to avoid ground loops.

The only question then would be why a Touch sounds different in different configurations? And equal on local operation to the DACs internal USB operation.

I can't answer that. Assuming the DAC does a close to perfect reclocking,
the only explanation might be that after applying my Toolbox (at the grade you've done it) is not working bit-perfect anymore.

There is one more: If I understood it correctly the Naim DAC kicks in an ASRC on rather instabil inputs. That one might cause different results. The question is then what would be the instabil input.


It is really hard to tell. What I can tell is that TT2.0 is by far not the end of the story. As you can read over here tweaking the network makes a huge difference. Turning the screen off is considered by many one of the major tweaks. And of course I don't want to talk about the stuff I still got under testing.

I just had the chance too listen quickly to the Meicords ethernet cable
btw. Those cables cause again a better resolution on rather standard DACs.


I also listened quickly to a TT2.0(sw only)-Touch->BigBen->Antelope DAC setup the other day. The Big Ben reclocked the stream.
The Big Ben setup seemed to be better ( I just listened a track or two) on the first glance then the basic TT2.0-Touch->Antelope setup. But please don't nail me on that. That was my first impression.

As I always say. The key issue is to find a DAC which kills the incoming
jitter. All my mods and audiophile SW players will become obsolete if that happens. I'm more than looking forward to it.


And - if I want to go the SD-card route I go for the EC-Designs solution or similar like Bunpeis player.

My goal is to go for an iPad controlled audiophile network solution at best price/performance ratio. So far I'm more then pleased with the result.


I always said, proper reclocking or slaving the PC or transport to the DAC plus galvanic isolation will supposedly be the best solution of all.
I guess Naim did a big step into that direction. They even found a great clocking mechanism to avoid PLLs. It's time for others to follow.

Cheers

Last edited by soundcheck; 27th February 2011 at 03:46 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2011, 04:17 AM   #360
warpeon is offline warpeon  Hong Kong
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Default Squeezebox Touch + Naim DAC

Soundcheck: First, I would like to thank Soundcheck for his great work in modifying the SQT.

Kuja, I thought we could share our experience as we pretty much have the same system; my sys:
NAS: Synology 411+
SQT: modded with Soundcheck Toolbox 2.0
DAC: Naim
Digital Cable: Vitus Digital Interconnect

Most of the mods worked for me, except having the FLAC decoded at the NAS level. I found the sound I get is almost "in my face" when I had the FLAC decoded at the NAS level. However, when I had the SQT decode the FLAC, everything feels much more comfortable, a more laid back presentation. I was wondering if this had to do w/ the network setup at home (I had to go through 3 routers between my NAS and SQT).

Additionally, I found digital cable (coax or optical) makes a huge difference. I am still experimenting digital cables. Any experience you could share?

Lastly, I am thinking to get a linear power supply, anyone has any experience to share? I am thinking between the TeddyPardo and the S-booster.

Cheers!
  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 06:03 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