Hmm.. Yes, I have EDO installed.. How did you gues??
It was installed before TT v3.0,, but it doesnt show up as an app in "installed apps" so I dont know how to un-install it..??
Btw; cant TT and EDO co-exist..?? I'm using coax, but would like to use USB down the track...
Hey, nice job with TT, and also with the info on your blog pages!!
Ta
CM
It was installed before TT v3.0,, but it doesnt show up as an app in "installed apps" so I dont know how to un-install it..??
Btw; cant TT and EDO co-exist..?? I'm using coax, but would like to use USB down the track...
Hey, nice job with TT, and also with the info on your blog pages!!
Ta
CM
Lucky guess.
EDO and TT got some overlaps (touching the same files). You stepped on one of them.
Hmm,, ok.. Thanks for that!
Like I said, I cant work out how to remove EDO,, So I will need to perform a factory re-set on my SBT,, and start all over..
Firstly however, I will trawl through this thread to see if the Buffer size is one of the main beneifts.. Otherwis it may be eaiser to leave it at 20000
Ta
CM
Yep. You won't get around it.
You'll find several different opinions about its impact. I think there is no
question that it has an impact.
Some like it better small, some prefer a large BS. Large BS gets it IMO mellower (on my system) . Some call it more natural.
Small BS gets it more dynamic and IMO resolution increases.
Too small will cause XRUNS. A very small BS might sound a bit aggressive/edgy.
I find it very interesting that certain people reported not being able to get
lower then 4000 or even a little higher to avoid running into XRUNS.
Another person reported his prefered rate at 3450 ( if I recall it correctly)
after testing quite some different values.
The buffer setting might have different impact on different DACs/interfaces.
And it needs to be different for different samplerates, if you run very low buffer sizes.
The EDO guy also copied the buffer feature btw.
With EDO you can also play with buffer sizes. I think he offers 4 fixed values.
In my experience, if you experience edgy sound with low buffer sizes, you might need to look for another bottleneck.
You don't get a guitar tuned by just tuning one string.
Last edited:
You confirm what I said above.
As I said, in my opnion many of those people who prefer larger buffers, use those to potentially hide other problems in the chain.
We had examples where people reported egdy sound first.
And after following some of my network/server optimization recommendations edgyness was gone and higher resolution stayed.
Many people consider vast amounts of details tireing. If you pair those with edginess I'd agree. I for myself would never let those added details go. Even if edgy - I'd strive to get away from the edginess.
It's been and still is a very common method to hide upstream flaws by
introducing/accepting certain "filtereffects" ( jitter, noise, phaseshifts, tubes etc.) . This usually causes the "body" many people look for or better people are used to.
I do agree that sound gets "thinner" (compared to jittery/noisy environments) the better the source gets. That doesn't mean that this is wrong. To me it's more realistic.
Not every system/room/person can cope with this realisim.
Most systems are integrated or better "tuned" with a certain source at hand.
If you change your source, you should review the rest of the chain too.
If you don't want to do that, you'll lock yourself up at a certain level.
Recently I bought a nice pair of IEMs. The soundsignature I experienced
was very close to that what I hear with my main system. I think it is
a good idea to compare your main system with a good headphone
setup.
There is no technical reason why small alsa buffers should produce better sound than large ones. In fact larger buffers result in lower CPU load and lower bus load. Smaller buffer significantly raises the risk of xruns as has been experienced and reported by many users. I have yet to see a credible report of objective blind tests confirming the sonical improvement. Even though those claiming so have been asked countless times to produce one.
But the mod certainly makes happier those who need to believe and a bit of happiness can never hurt
But the mod certainly makes happier those who need to believe and a bit of happiness can never hurt
I've been using TT with good results since the beginning and later on began fiddling around with TT 3.0 + EDO also with good results.
I recently switched to a USB setup and have not been able to get EDO to work with TT 3.0 since. I tried installing them in different orders and blindly fooling around in prio settings but it just won't work.
The signal LED on my DAC is on but there's no sound. I know others seem to have been successful but nobody on the Squeezebox forum seems able or willing to walk me through the procedure. Seems to be a "hot potato" topic.
I find this rather frustrating.
I recently switched to a USB setup and have not been able to get EDO to work with TT 3.0 since. I tried installing them in different orders and blindly fooling around in prio settings but it just won't work.
The signal LED on my DAC is on but there's no sound. I know others seem to have been successful but nobody on the Squeezebox forum seems able or willing to walk me through the procedure. Seems to be a "hot potato" topic.
I find this rather frustrating.
Hi.
There are (free) toolboxes that let you run W8 in W7 mode with start menu.
I'm using one if these.
Cheers
Use flac @ compression level 0.
Flac is most widely used.
Benefit of higher compression levels can be neglected.
Look for players which do offline decoding, if you look for best SQ.