Just on its own - I don't need the toolbox and I've disabled any applets I don't need.
Printable View
Just on its own - I don't need the toolbox and I've disabled any applets I don't need.
I haven't got it loaded either, but I am coming to a conclusion here...
It pains me to say this but I think that my crappy LG DNX190UH DVD/CD player feeding my Bushmaster optically sounds better than the Squeezebox Touch,
The Squeezebox has the updated Mains Cables R Us LDP power supply for DC needs and then it is connected to the Bushmaster using one of Mike's bespoke coaxial leads (the new version).
The CD option is just a whole lot easier to listen to in my opinion, there is just something that gets on my nerves audio wise with the Touch and prevents me relaxing to the music.
Thing is...
Almost all of my music is now in FLAC format, I still have CD's but not hardly what you would call a "collection".
I will do some comparing tests and come to some conclusions on this.
Russell, it pains me reading that :lol:
Can you try throwing the bits out of the Touch optically rather than SPDif?
Edit: I have Mike Coax also, I love it, the optical is less detailed but an easier ride.
Hi RussellQuote:
Originally Posted by Russell Turner
I thought I'd test that comparison myself. I extracted a couple of WAV files from favourite CDs and compared the two via my Bushmaster. The CD was put in my Pioneer Blu-ray player used as a trasport, via optical (Kimber) to the BM. The WAV was streamed from my PC to the Touch, then to the BM via co-ax (Chord ProDAC Silver).
They both sounded good and I went back and forth between them without being able to tell any difference. Both Bushmaster and Touch are powered from Paul Hynes power supplies and the latter has the EDO applet. I would have to say, based on this experience, that there's very little in it and the BM is doing a great job of reclocking the data so that source becomes immaterial.
I did a similar exercise on Saturday...
I think what the significant difference is, is that the Touch has a more "up-front" presentation to music reproduction, possibly slightly less soundstage than a CD source in this instance and this is reflected in the eventual fatigue I get.
Put simply it's just too in your face, not in a massive way, but in my system it was notable, it wasn't a harsh sound it was just a more "here this is IT" kind of thing...
Hard to convey I know but that is what my observation was.
Yes, that's interesting. For me, there was no difference in presentation that I could detect. One thing occurs: are you using your Touch with wireless? I'm using cabled ethernet.
Russell, are you using EDO? I compared buffer sizes yesterday and found that the small buffer size sounded more "in your face" than the large buffer size, brighter but with a bit more 'air'. In comparison, the large buffer size was smoother and you could focus more easily on the structure of the music. Small buffer size is my preference, so that's what I've left it as. Worth a try. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell Turner
Chris
It's a computer really and someone once said to me computers like to be left alone, what a load of b...ox, the touch is a tweakers delight and the best mod I have ever heard was the digital output mod, the touch sounds like a 5k cd player now or better in fact! Keep tweaking guys and remember it's all about the music.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chops
Glad your liking your Touch Dave :)
Sounding good with the MDac?
I can honestly say that Muddy Waters was in my room, the combination of Canor Tube Amp and SB/M-DAC is truly stunning. When I get some spare time I will download my quota of 24 bit flac's off the B&W site as I have not been on for a while. The touch sounds better with a memory stick in the back than through my NAS drive too!Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazjam
Gaz thanks for doing the mods for me, you are a thoroughly decent chap!:)