OT question about sound cards/chip-sets and high-end music systems
Paul E Condon
system to play my CDs. It was fully transistorized. The loud speakers
are big, with woofer, mid-range and tweeter, and are driven by a
really heavy power amplifier box. Because of the solid-state
internals, it has worked without interruption or servicing of any
kind.
It still works entirely to my satisfaction except for one issue: I
have trouble with the physical handling and storage of the CDs. When
several CDs get separated from their jewel-cases, it is tedious to get
them back in the correct case and the case back in the correct place
on the storage shelf.
A decade or more ago, I was toying with the idea of getting a robotic
mechanical CD handler/player, but decided to wait a while for the
price to go down. Instead, they seem to have disappeared from the
market. And the whole napster thing happened. And the iPod with music
delivered via ear-buds...
Now, it is quite feasible to store my entire CD collection on hard
disk, even without compression, and all computers have audio
output. But what is the audio quality of the analog sound signal? I
went to the local Best Buy store on Saturday to ask questions. The
clerk, who was quite self assured, told me that it is easy to connect
one's computer to one's home sound system, and showed me a short cable
that they have for sale that has a triaxial plug on one end and two
RCA jacks on the other and assured me that this was what he used at
home and that this was all that I needed. This is very reassuring, if
I can believe it, but ... Is it true?
He was oblivious to my concern that the analog audio signal is
generated in the computer box and that it is analog audio that travels
over the special cable, and if *my* computer has an inferior
sound-card or sound-chip-set, then maybe I would not have as good
sound as he has. So I ask here - Is the analog audio signal at the
output socket of *all* consumer-grade computers equally good? If it is
not, how can I avoid wasting time and money on a computer with
inferior sound? Are there other technical issues with the quality of
'ripped' music from CDs? What are they? As I write this, I am
wondering how the analog music is actually encoded on the CD. Is is
purely digital, or are there analog timing variations in the optical
marks?
I don't want to just hook it up and listen, because the cable run from
where I have computers to where I have my hi-fi is ~100ft and that
distance precludes listening to different CD copies on HD in quick
succession. And maybe it really is a good way to go, but my test
indicates it is bad because I make mistakes in my test setup. ...
Please, help with this perplexity.
--
Paul E Condon
peco...@mesanetworks.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
> one's computer to one's home sound system, and showed me a short cable
> that they have for sale that has a triaxial plug on one end and two
> RCA jacks on the other and assured me that this was what he used at
> home and that this was all that I needed. This is very reassuring, if
> I can believe it, but ... Is it true?
That will work. Some audio cards also have support for optical audio jacks
and/or SPIDF (sp?) cables. I'm far from an expert in audio cables, but I
believe you get the best quality out of a cable technology that is both
grounded and balanced.
> Is the analog audio signal at the
> output socket of *all* consumer-grade computers equally good?
No. In particular, on-board audio processors in both laptops and desktops are
generally not (electrically) isolated enough from the rest of the system. The
analog output picks up electrical noise either at the DACs or on the way to
the plug.
You'll want something off-board. Cable technology *does* matter, so find a
audio card that has good output ports. If you do any of your own mastering,
make sure the audio card supports 24-bit sample sizes. Don't be afraid to
consider completely external solutions like USB-audio devices. They might be
less portable/manageable but they are often the better system.
> If it is
> not, how can I avoid wasting time and money on a computer with
> inferior sound?
Read reviews. Test out systems if possible. Get advice from early adopters.
> Are there other technical issues with the quality of
> 'ripped' music from CDs? What are they?
If the CD has been damaged, the rip may contain crackles and pops reminiscent
of vinyl. That's about it. CDDA is a open, DRM-free format that virtually
any device reading that media can understand. There's no compression or
encoding so things a relatively simple.
Raw wave files are rather large, but flac can shrink them by 40-60%
losslessly. It's rather easy to own 10s of TB of storage space right now, so
it might not matter at all. 1 TB ~= 2000 audio CDs, uncompressed.
> As I write this, I am
> wondering how the analog music is actually encoded on the CD. Is is
> purely digital, or are there analog timing variations in the optical
> marks?
It is purely digital. 16-bit (not sure if this is floating- or fixed-point),
stereo, 44.1 kHz samples, IIRC.
Some consumer-level audio cards are capable of handling 32-bit (floating- or
fixed-point), 8-channel, 96 kHz (or more) audio data in real-time. So
producing CD-quality output is trivial for them.
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Johannes Wiedersich
Hash: SHA1
Paul E Condon wrote:
> Now, it is quite feasible to store my entire CD collection on hard
> disk, even without compression, and all computers have audio
> output. But what is the audio quality of the analog sound signal?
It depends on the quality of the sound card, just as much as on the
quality of the amplifier, speakers or any other component you use for
your music playback.
> I
> went to the local Best Buy store on Saturday to ask questions. The
> clerk, who was quite self assured, told me that it is easy to connect
> one's computer to one's home sound system, and showed me a short cable
> that they have for sale that has a triaxial plug on one end and two
> RCA jacks on the other and assured me that this was what he used at
> home and that this was all that I needed. This is very reassuring, if
> I can believe it, but ... Is it true?
Yes. You might get better sound quality with a better sound card and/or
better cables, though. The cable, however, is a cheap solution (compared
to buying better equipment), though you might just give it a try and
find out whether it suits your needs.
> He was oblivious to my concern that the analog audio signal is
> generated in the computer box and that it is analog audio that travels
> over the special cable, and if *my* computer has an inferior
> sound-card or sound-chip-set, then maybe I would not have as good
> sound as he has. So I ask here - Is the analog audio signal at the
> output socket of *all* consumer-grade computers equally good?
Certainly not. At best it is equally bad. (On the other hand, apparently
most people don't mind listening to music at low sound quality).
YMMV.
I use *professional* grade sound cards, because I like good sound quality.
> If it is
> not, how can I avoid wasting time and money on a computer with
> inferior sound?
Buy a high quality sound card. Since I mostly use laptops for this, I
prefer external usb sound cards. Nowadays some have DA-converters
matching those of the best high end CD players at a fraction of the price.
> Are there other technical issues with the quality of
> 'ripped' music from CDs? What are they?
It depends how you rip them (what format). mp3 has some qualtiy loss,
but at the higher quality settings this won't matter on most hifi
equipment. There's the option to rip it lossless as well, ie. with
exactly the same digital quality as on CD.
> As I write this, I am
> wondering how the analog music is actually encoded on the CD. Is is
> purely digital, or are there analog timing variations in the optical
> marks?
Purely digital at constant timing.
HTH,
cheers,
Johannes
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkrKNbsACgkQC1NzPRl9qEXy4ACfa+vzKfrigEX6u4XLJGKSqEPn
g5gAn185Vplt8KSS0VLB/ux2dg1/hCX1
=w2aG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Johannes Wiedersich
Hash: SHA1
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> It is purely digital. 16-bit (not sure if this is floating- or fixed-point),
> stereo, 44.1 kHz samples, IIRC.
What's the difference between 16-bit floating-point and 16-bit
fixed-point? I always thought those are just integers.
Johannes
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkrKON4ACgkQC1NzPRl9qEU/oACff5rOaDTGeHDn3AR1EUIl0hBb
S+oAnjcpSxBEYu7UlJ9SZ6DWIEMt4sOH
=vql6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
> Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > It is purely digital. 16-bit (not sure if this is floating- or
> > fixed-point), stereo, 44.1 kHz samples, IIRC.
>
> What's the difference between 16-bit floating-point and 16-bit
> fixed-point? I always thought those are just integers.
Some audio codecs use floating-point, which is like a "float" or "double" or
"long double" in the C programing language. Some bits are the exponent
(usually with a bias) and some bits are the mantissa. Other audio codecs use
fixed-point, where the 16-bits simply a signed integer (or possibly an
unsigned integer modified by a bias).
I think CDs are fixed-point, but I'm not entirely sure on that. Both fixed-
and floating-point have advantages, and I know various audio formats and
programs use both.
8-bit fixed-point unsigned has exact values for [0,1,2,...,255]
8-bit floating point unsigned might have exact values for [0,1,2,...,63],
[64,65,66,...,127], [128,130,132,...,254], and [256,260,264,...,508].
j...@jretrading.com
>
> I don't want to just hook it up and listen, because the cable run from
> where I have computers to where I have my hi-fi is ~100ft and that
> distance precludes listening to different CD copies on HD in quick
> succession. And maybe it really is a good way to go, but my test
> indicates it is bad because I make mistakes in my test setup. ...
>
> Please, help with this perplexity.
You are certainly right to think about this carefully. Don't even think
about playing straight out of a computer card, and the motherboard sound
ports are even worse. Signal-to-noise ratio is very poor and it's a
devil of a job to keep the hum down to manageable levels. My best
results so far are from a USB 'card' with extra earthing and short audio
cables. Oddly enough, I can't tell the difference between a Creative
Live box and a very cheap VOIP USB handset with line in and out, apart
from the fact that the cheap one causes occasional USB problems on
Debian (both Etch and Lenny) which the Creative one manages to avoid.
Even the Creative one has poor PCB layout and, of course, unbalanced
inputs and outputs.
It's OK for background listening to MP3s. Being married, I'm not too
concerned about dynamic range, but it's certainly not good enough for
'real' listening. I still buy CDs, and I keep the computers off if I'm
listening 'properly'. But I listen mostly while I'm working, usually a
few feet from a couple of fans, and the computer system is good enough
for that.
And as to recording... again, the USB card has produced the best
signal-to-noise ratio I've managed so far, about 45dB, which is just
about acceptable for background listening, but a long, long way short of
the theoretical 96dB dynamic range that 16 bits should deliver.
I would assume there are professional sound cards or boxes which offer
decent quality, but I have no expectation of finding out about them.
Like you, I spent some money in the 1970s and 80s, but can't afford to
do so now. Probably a music shop would be a better place to ask than a
computer store.
But ah, the convenience... I've learned what most people probably learn,
which is that assembling my favourite tracks, even a couple of hundred,
leads to repetition and boredom, especially if I'm not paying full
attention to it.
I now generally play random selections of music by genre, varying as far
as some I don't like much at all. It makes the good ones sound better
still, and avoids the anticipation of the next track. I know it sounds
decadent, but if I'm busy I don't like to have to stop to think about
what particular music I want next, or to pick a CD off the shelf. It's
like good radio without the boring people in between...
--
Joe
David Christensen
> good sound system to play my CDs.
> and all computers have audio output.
Have you considered building a media center/ home theater PC, deploying
it next to your hi-fi, and connecting it to your LAN (wired or
wireless)? Search the fine web (STFW) for articles and sites using
keywords like "Linux", "home theater PC", "media center PC", "small form
factor", etc..
> Is the analog audio signal at the output socket of *all*
> consumer-grade computers equally good?
As others have stated, of course not. The key is to get a motherboard,
sound card, and/or USB audio codec with "good enough" audio
specifications and for which there is device driver and operating system
sound architecture support.
If you're into books -- "The Book of Linux Music and Sound" by Dave
Phillips was a good read. But, Linux multimedia technology has advanced
since 2000:
http://nostarch.com/frameset.php?startat=lms
HTH,
David
Martin J. Hillyer
> Years ago (~35y), I spent a lot of money to get a really good sound
> system to play my CDs. It was fully transistorized. The loud speakers
> are big, with woofer, mid-range and tweeter, and are driven by a
> really heavy power amplifier box. Because of the solid-state
> internals, it has worked without interruption or servicing of any
> kind.
>
[snip]
> Please, help with this perplexity.
> --
> Paul E Condon
> peco...@mesanetworks.net
I have been mulling over the same kinds of problems for some time
also. Noone in this thread has yet mentioned the Logitech Slingbox:
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/speakers_audio/wireless_music_systems/&cl=us,en
Has anyone used this, and if so, does it fit the bill for high end
audio performance, as claimed? I've no reason to think it doesn't,
I'd just like to hear from someone who has actually used it.
P.S. My apologies to Mr Condon for sending this to his return address;
I stupidly hit reply instead of group-reply.
--
Martin Hillyer
Mark
>also. Noone in this thread has yet mentioned the Logitech Slingbox:
>http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/speakers_audio/wireless_music_systems/&cl=us,en
>Has anyone used this, and if so, does it fit the bill for high end
>audio performance, as claimed? I've no reason to think it doesn't,
>I'd just like to hear from someone who has actually used it.
The only limitation using my setup comes from music files using compressed formats, but virtually all of my songs hover around the 160-192 kbps range so they are transparent when comparing to the originals. You can actually get away with lower bitrates using the most modern mp3 LAME codec, but my songs were encoded several years ago. :)
Mark
Stan Hoeppner
> Years ago (~35y), I spent a lot of money to get a really good sound
> system to play my CDs. It was fully transistorized. The loud speakers
> are big, with woofer, mid-range and tweeter, and are driven by a
> really heavy power amplifier box. Because of the solid-state
> internals, it has worked without interruption or servicing of any
> kind.
[snip]
Sounds like it's time for you to build a media center PC
http://www.linuxis.us/linux/media/howto/linux-htpc/
or (possibly better) buy one pre-built:
http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=438&sec=1
DISCLAIMER: I am not promoting this D-Link product. I have no first
hand experience with it. I mention it strictly as an example of a class
of products that would fulfill your needs.
It has wireless ethernet so you don't have to call a contractor to run
CAT5 through your house. It has both optical digital and coaxial
digital audio outputs for connecting directly to your modern A/V
receiver's digital audio inputs. This will eliminate any sound quality
issues related to cheap PC sound card problems.
This D-Link requires a host PC on the network running Vista or XP SP2.
I assume they have a software package one installs on the PC to control
the D-Link and setup shares for the media file directories, etc.
If you search around, you can probably find a similar product that would
allow you to use Linux instead of Windows (i.e. one with a web based
management interface with no software requirement on the PC). I'm
guessing all you will find is products offering support for total media
entertainment, not just CD/MP3/audio. You're a smart guy. You'll
figure out what product/solution is best for your needs.
The cheapest solution by far is to use your current PC, and have a
contractor come in and run an in wall digital optical cable from the
room your PC is in to the room your A/V receiver is in. Plug a Toslink
patch cable from the wall to the PC, and from the wall to the A/V
receiver and you're done. If you go this route you'll need a PC
hardware solution with a digital audio output (Toslink connection).
Good luck.
Regards.
--
Stan
Mark
---------
The cheapest solution by far is to use your current PC, and have a
contractor come in and run an in wall digital optical cable from the
room your PC is in to the room your A/V receiver is in. Plug a Toslink
patch cable from the wall to the PC, and from the wall to the A/V
receiver and you're done. If you go this route you'll need a PC
hardware solution with a digital audio output (Toslink connection)
If you're going to go this route and use a sound card on your PC, here' s a couple handy links:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t60819.html
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t70734.html
Note that internal sound cards are more prone to noise and distortion than external cards, in case you weren't already aware.
FWIW, reasons I went with a Squeezebox include (if you haven't considered these yet):
1) The ability to access/control my music collection remotely, i.e. not having to go to the physical computer to skip a song, etc.
2) Not being tied to one physical location; if I want to put my Squeezebox in my bedroom instead of living room for a weekend, I can unplug and move it in 2 minutes.
3) I considered buying a cheap/used netbook or laptop, along with an external sound card, to connect directly to my receiver. Compared to the price of a Squeezebox (or any wireless music player for that matter), it was about twice as much. Plus I'm not a fan of having a computer that close to so much electronic equipment.
4) Open source software and firmware. Since Logitech bought out SlimDevices they have maintained this; hopefully they will continue.
Just thought I'd share my experience in case anyone can benefit from it.
Paul E Condon
responders. The situation is, indeed, more complicated than the guy
in the electronics store claimed.
I can't say my problem is 'solved'. I now know that I have a lot of
research and deciding to do. But I now have a solid starting point.
Thanks very much to all.
Rob Owens
> >I have been mulling over the same kinds of problems for some time
> >also. Noone in this thread has yet mentioned the Logitech Slingbox:
> >Has anyone used this, and if so, does it fit the bill for high end
> >audio performance, as claimed? I've no reason to think it doesn't,
> >I'd just like to hear from someone who has actually used it.
>
> I have a Squeezebox (Classic) at my house streaming music wirelessly from an
> old HP desktop box running Lenny. 24 bit Burr Brown DAC, can run off of LAN
> or WLAN. If you have your music encoded using FLAC or Wavepack, among other
> formats, it can play it natively. Had it for 2+ years, couldn't be
> happier. There used to be a trick that required you to install the "faad"
> package in Lenny and change some code to get iTunes formats (.mp4, .m4a,
> .m4p) to play but the latest software update fixed it where those files are
> supported natively now. The only downside is Logitech bought out
> SlimDevices, so I worry about the the open source nature of the
> firmware/server software's future. I personally love the Wake On Lan
> capabilities, that boots my Lenny machine from across the house using the
> Squeezebox remote. I run an Onkyo amp with Klipsch speakers and the sound
> is phenomenal and true to the original recordings.
>
music be in sync? I'm thinking of a sort of "party mode" where I want
the same thing playing in several rooms of the house.
-Rob
Rob Owens
>
want music and access it over the network. Put the computer right next
to the stereo and use short audio cables to minimize losses.
Since you care about the sound quality, I'd recommend encoding with
flac. That's lossless, so there is no sound quality difference between
flac-encoded music and music straight from the CD. Forget about mp3.
It sounds horrible, in my opinion. High pitch sounds like cymbals sound
"swishy". Ogg vorbis is a lot better sounding than mp3, but flac is
still the best. I can here the difference and I'm using my onboard
audio and consumer-grade equipment from the late '90s.
Vorbis and mp3 are "lossy", which means that they approximate the sound
on the original recording. Kinda like zip compression that doesn't
exactly reproduce what you compressed. Flac is lossless.
Somebody mentioned wav format. As far as I know, wav doesn't hold meta
tags. Meta tags are information that gets "bundled" with the music.
Music players use this to tell the artist, album, track, year, etc.
Flac, vorbis, and mp3 can all contain meta tags.
The only reason I can think of to use mp3 format is because just about
all portable music players will play it. Many will play ogg vorbis and
flac, but not all. If you want to experiment with mp3 and ogg vorbis,
start at a bitrate of 192 or 224 kbps. I wouldn't bother, though. Just
use flac.
-Rob
H.S.
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 08:06:51PM +0200, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>> Certainly not. At best it is equally bad. (On the other hand, apparently
>> most people don't mind listening to music at low sound quality).
>> YMMV.
>> I use *professional* grade sound cards, because I like good sound quality.
>>
Not sure if this is professional grade, but I have used M-audio 2496
(http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/Audiophile2496.html). It has
worked like a charm. Used it for live music recording and also for
playback via a mixer. The system is Ubuntu based, but should have no
problem in Debian either.
Good luck.
--
Please reply to this list only. I read this list on its corresponding
newsgroup on gmane.org. Replies sent to my email address are just
filtered to a folder in my mailbox and get periodically deleted without
ever having been read.
Rob Owens
>
> most people don't mind listening to music at low sound quality).
> YMMV.
> I use *professional* grade sound cards, because I like good sound quality.
>
-Rob
H.S.
>
> Vorbis and mp3 are "lossy", which means that they approximate the sound
> on the original recording. Kinda like zip compression that doesn't
> exactly reproduce what you compressed. Flac is lossless.
>
> Somebody mentioned wav format. As far as I know, wav doesn't hold meta
Yes, flac supports meta tags. Plus, it is roughly half the size of wav.
Wonderful lossless format. I usually rip my audio CDs to flac and put
them on my home network to listen from anywhere.
--
Please reply to this list only. I read this list on its corresponding
newsgroup on gmane.org. Replies sent to my email address are just
filtered to a folder in my mailbox and get periodically deleted without
ever having been read.
Stan Hoeppner
> When streaming music, if you play it on 2 different computers will the
> music be in sync? I'm thinking of a sort of "party mode" where I want
> the same thing playing in several rooms of the house.
Depends on your distance to each loudspeaker. Sound waves travel at
approximately 1,125 ft/s depending on air temperature and humidity.
Thus, if you're not standing at an exact same distance from each
speaker, the sound will arrive at your ears at different times, creating
an echo effect or a muddying of the material, depending on the time
delay between arrivals. This doesn't take into account reflections off
things such as walls, floors, ceilings, and furniture, which all reflect
sound to a degree, causing additional 'late arrivals'.
In short, if you want decent stereo sound quality, limit the number of
speakers to two, and sit in one spot equidistant from each. In a "party
mode", who the f--k cares, you have been and wine and what not, and
you're playing it loud enough to be annoying anyway. At that point,
what does it matter?
--
Stan
Mark
----------
Since you care about the sound quality, I'd recommend encoding with
flac. That's lossless, so there is no sound quality difference between
It sounds horrible, in my opinion. High pitch sounds like cymbals sound
"swishy". Ogg vorbis is a lot better sounding than mp3, but flac is
still the best. I can here the difference and I'm using my onboard
audio and consumer-grade equipment from the late '90s.
While I agree that FLAC is the way to go if hdd space is available, I'd be careful about claims that mp3 sounds horrible without specifying which codec and bitrates were used; mp3 developers have worked hard in recent years to improve the mp3 codec substantially. In fact, recent blind listening tests here http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=67529 prove the modern mp3 codec(s) is transparent for almost all music at about 128 kbps. Using an old codec is where most people experience poor quality on their lossy encoders, because older codecs did a noticeably worse job at encoding.
People on audio websites get ripped a new one for making claims something sounds better without proving it by ABX tests. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=16295
Mark
Rob Owens
> Rob Owens put forth on 10/7/2009 8:02 PM:
>
> > When streaming music, if you play it on 2 different computers will the
> > music be in sync? I'm thinking of a sort of "party mode" where I want
> > the same thing playing in several rooms of the house.
>
> Depends on your distance to each loudspeaker. Sound waves travel at
> approximately 1,125 ft/s depending on air temperature and humidity.
> Thus, if you're not standing at an exact same distance from each
> speaker, the sound will arrive at your ears at different times, creating
> an echo effect or a muddying of the material, depending on the time
> delay between arrivals. This doesn't take into account reflections off
> things such as walls, floors, ceilings, and furniture, which all reflect
> sound to a degree, causing additional 'late arrivals'.
>
> In short, if you want decent stereo sound quality, limit the number of
> speakers to two, and sit in one spot equidistant from each. In a "party
> mode", who the f--k cares, you have been and wine and what not, and
> you're playing it loud enough to be annoying anyway. At that point,
> what does it matter?
>
about network latency. I ran a test using icecast2 to stream to a
couple of machines, and there was a pretty big time difference (maybe
half a second). I was using one old laptop, though, so I'm not sure if
the delay was due to network latency or due to slow processor and/or bus
speed of the old laptop.
-Rob
Rob Owens
> Rob wrote:
> ----------
> Since you care about the sound quality, I'd recommend encoding with
> flac. That's lossless, so there is no sound quality difference between
> flac-encoded music and music straight from the CD.Forget about mp3.
> It sounds horrible, in my opinion. High pitch sounds like cymbals sound
> "swishy". Ogg vorbis is a lot better sounding than mp3, but flac is
> still the best. I can here the difference and I'm using my onboard
> audio and consumer-grade equipment from the late '90s.
> ----------
>
> While I agree that FLAC is the way to go if hdd space is available, I'd be
> careful about claims that mp3 sounds horrible without specifying which codec
> and bitrates were used; mp3 developers have worked hard in recent years to
> improve the mp3 codec substantially. In fact, recent blind listening tests
> here http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=67529 prove the
> modern mp3 codec(s) is transparent for almost all music at about 128 kbps.
> Using an old codec is where most people experience poor quality on their
> lossy encoders, because older codecs did a noticeably worse job at encoding.
>
what version number). I used constant bitrate at 192 kbps for all my
music originally. I later tested it at 224 and found it almost
indiscernable from ogg vorbis (at 224 average bitrate), except in a few
spots. I later tested flac and found the same thing -- it sounded
better to me in a few spots.
My biggest complaint about mp3 sound quality has to do with high pitch
sounds and some hard-to-describe guitar sounds. For instance, the
guitar in Bold As Love by Jimi Hendrix, and the cymbals in just about
any song by the Ramones. Another couple of test songs I've used are
Change by Blind Melon, and Stop Breaking Down by the White Stripes.
> People on audio websites get ripped a new one for making claims something
> sounds better without proving it by ABX tests.
> http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=16295
>
Thanks for the warning. I like my old one just fine!
Stan Hoeppner
Put all 3 computers in the same room (same table if you like) connected
to the same hub/switch (if not wireless), and test the actual sound
delay, if any. You will now know with certainty how much delay is
analog from the speakers to your ears, vs how much is due to the
computers. Troubleshoot from there.
--
Stan
steef
> Rob Owens wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 08:06:51PM +0200, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>>
>>> Certainly not. At best it is equally bad. (On the other hand, apparently
>>> most people don't mind listening to music at low sound quality).
>>> YMMV.
>>> I use *professional* grade sound cards, because I like good sound quality.
>>>
>>>
>> Can you recommend a professional sound card?
>>
>
> Not sure if this is professional grade, but I have used M-audio 2496
> (http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/Audiophile2496.html). It has
> worked like a charm. Used it for live music recording and also for
> playback via a mixer. The system is Ubuntu based, but should have no
> problem in Debian either.
>
> Good luck.
>
>
>
...interesting!
do you happen to know if ALSA can initialize the chip of M-audio 2496?
and, what is the code of the chip of this card?
regards,
steef
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> On Monday 05 October 2009 13:20:14 Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> > Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > > It is purely digital. 16-bit (not sure if this is floating- or
> > > fixed-point), stereo, 44.1 kHz samples, IIRC.
> >
> > What's the difference between 16-bit floating-point and 16-bit
> > fixed-point? I always thought those are just integers.
On floating-point, you can encode a higher dynamic range, but the precison
varies. Fixed-point has the same precision on the entire range.
But you could have a function to map the integer range to a larger dynamic
range too (this is called quantization). This sort of encoding should not
be confused with regular floating-point.
CDs use PCM, which _does_ have a quantization function.
Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse-code_modulation
> Some audio codecs use floating-point, which is like a "float" or "double" or
> "long double" in the C programing language. Some bits are the exponent
> (usually with a bias) and some bits are the mantissa. Other audio codecs use
> fixed-point, where the 16-bits simply a signed integer (or possibly an
> unsigned integer modified by a bias).
No codec worth its salt will use 16 bits, be it fixed point or floating
point. Usually floating-point codecs will use standard precision or long
precision floating point (which is >80 bits, I think). And most integer
codecs will use 32-bit or 64-bit fixed-point arithmetric. They use that to
decode the PCM stream (which is 16-bit).
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
H.S.
> H.S. wrote:
>>
>> Not sure if this is professional grade, but I have used M-audio 2496
>> (http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/Audiophile2496.html). It has
>> worked like a charm. Used it for live music recording and also for
>> playback via a mixer. The system is Ubuntu based, but should have no
>> problem in Debian either.
>>
>> Good luck.
>>
>>
>>
> hi johannes (if you read this):
>
> ...interesting!
>
> do you happen to know if ALSA can initialize the chip of M-audio 2496?
> and, what is the code of the chip of this card?
er ... looks like your query was directed at me.
The M-audio 2496, as far as I recall, worked out of the box with alsa on
Ubuntu (since Gutsy, did it have 2.6.24 kernel). So I would expect it to
work out of the box on any typical Debian desktop computer with any
recent or new kernel. In fact, I would expect the card to work with
pulseaudio as well.
regards,
->HS
--
Please reply to this list only. I read this list on its corresponding
newsgroup on gmane.org. Replies sent to my email address are just
filtered to a folder in my mailbox and get periodically deleted without
ever having been read.
steef
> steef wrote:
>
> ............<>
> er ... looks like your query was directed at me.
>
> The M-audio 2496, as far as I recall, worked out of the box with alsa on
> Ubuntu (since Gutsy, did it have 2.6.24 kernel). So I would expect it to
> work out of the box on any typical Debian desktop computer with any
> recent or new kernel. In fact, I would expect the card to work with
> pulseaudio as well.
>
> regards,
> ->HS
>
>
>
>
steef
Nick Lidakis
recommendaion.
What kind of hi-fi are we talking about? Do you have a dedicated
listening space or is this for casual listening when doing other
things, i.e., are we talking JVC or Pass Labs?
How important is it that the software/hardware be GPL free? Would you
consider using something Debian based if it offered you truly hi-fi
results?
Paul E Condon
> I have a couple of questions for you before I delve into details of my
> recommendaion.
>
> What kind of hi-fi are we talking about? Do you have a dedicated
> listening space or is this for casual listening when doing other
> things, i.e., are we talking JVC or Pass Labs?
>
> How important is it that the software/hardware be GPL free? Would you
> consider using something Debian based if it offered you truly hi-fi
> results?
Equipment:
Adcom GTP-450 Tuner
Adcom GCD-700 CDcarousel/player
Adcom GFA-5000 dual audio amp
Vandersteen Model 2 woofer/mid/tweeter combo (2 ea)
I want to listen to classical music in the family room after my twin
8yr old grand-daughters have gone to bed. So dedicated listening but
not dedicated space. No interest in whole-house sound system. No
interest in 'quality' head-phones.
I have been out of touch with the high-end audio world since I bought
this system. I had never heard of Pass Labs until you mentioned them
in your email. Wikipedia puts them in the class where Adcom was when I
bought. I don't want to re-join the craziness of puriest hi-fi audio,
but I do want to investigate upgrading the way that the digital music
that I have now on CDs is stored.
I think it ought to be possible to copy data that is now on CD onto
modern hard-disk and play it with quality that is no worse than I have
now. I accept the inferiority of CD to true purist hi-fi. (CD is good
enough for me, but I can't abide earphones.)
I believe in free speach, free beer, and caveat emptor. If you have an
idea that involves Debian, please discuss it here. I may not be able
to use it myself, but it might be helpful to someone else.
So far the responses that I have gotten comfirm without a doubt that
what I was told by the sales person in Best Buy is not at all the
whole story. There is *a lot* more to the solution than just buying an
adapter cable. Mention of Burr Brown 24bit ladder DACs brought back memories
of technical problems that simply have no solution via software alone.
Even if this information doesn't fit with your expectations, please make
your recommendation.
--
Paul E Condon
peco...@mesanetworks.net
Rob Owens
> So far the responses that I have gotten comfirm without a doubt that
> what I was told by the sales person in Best Buy is not at all the
> whole story. There is *a lot* more to the solution than just buying an
> adapter cable. Mention of Burr Brown 24bit ladder DACs brought back memories
> of technical problems that simply have no solution via software alone.
>
The cables are pretty cheap (less than $20 in the US) and it'll get
you started. It would probably be beneficial for you to put together a
cheap test system to see how you like it, before you spend big bucks on
better hardware. It'll also give you time to experiment with different
music players on your computer to see which you like best.
-Rob
Paul E Condon
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 08:51:52PM -0600, Paul E Condon wrote:
> > So far the responses that I have gotten comfirm without a doubt that
> > what I was told by the sales person in Best Buy is not at all the
> > whole story. There is *a lot* more to the solution than just buying an
> > adapter cable. Mention of Burr Brown 24bit ladder DACs brought back memories
> > of technical problems that simply have no solution via software alone.
> >
> It's definitely not the whole story, but it's a good starting point.
> The cables are pretty cheap (less than $20 in the US) and it'll get
> you started. It would probably be beneficial for you to put together a
> cheap test system to see how you like it, before you spend big bucks on
> better hardware. It'll also give you time to experiment with different
> music players on your computer to see which you like best.
>
IMHO, I already have better hardware, but its a fair distance away
from where I have my computers. To do the test, I would have to buy a
rather long adapter cable (>~100ft). The cable would be carrying
analog signal. Analog signals degrade on long cable runs, particularly
the high freq. part of the signal.
I think the test would only show me something that I already know.
Thanks.
--
Paul E Condon
peco...@mesanetworks.net
ghe
On Oct 16, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Paul E Condon wrote:
> Analog signals degrade on long cable runs, particularly
> the high freq. part of the signal.
Not if it's low impedance balanced, it doesn't. Not at 100' anyway.
Use the hardware Deutsche Grammophone, etc. use -- your recordings
aren't going to sound any better than that...
--
Glenn English
g...@slsware.com
John Hasler
> Analog signals degrade on long cable runs, particularly
> the high freq. part of the signal.
> Not if it's low impedance balanced, it doesn't.
Not any impedance if it is terminated.
> Not at 100' anyway.
Right. You can't hear 1Mhz.
--
John Hasler
David Christensen
> long adapter cable (>~100ft). The cable would be carrying analog
signal.
Unbalanced signals, such as might be found on computer sound card 1/8"
TRS jacks and audio equipment RCA jacks, are susceptible to common-mode
noise and ground loops. If your computer sound card line out jack and
your pre-amplifier/ receiver line input jacks are grounded to your
electrical power distribution system, directly or indirectly (e.g.
3-prong power cable to anything connected to either), connecting your
computer to your audio gear will create a large single-turn transformer
with your equipment and house as the core. Induced currents would
result in common-mode noise; you might hear your electrical appliances
through your audio system. (I was able to hear my refrigerator
switching on and off in one apartment; I can see my garbage disposal
operating in my current house.) Electrical system ground faults, arc
welding, etc., could damage your audio gear and/or computer.
Balanced signals are designed to reject common-mode noise. I've sent
line-level public address signals from a mixer to a series of amplified
loudspeakers using ~800 ft. of XLR cables with no perceived loss in
quality.
Isolation transformers can connect balanced and/or unbalanced systems,
and break ground loops. (Good direct boxes incorporate a transformer
and include a "ground lift" switch.)
The fast, cheap answer is to buy 100+ ft. of twisted, shielded pair
(TSP) cable, run it, make up the ends, and take a listen. Adding load
resistors at the audio end might reduce common-mode noise (observe sound
card line out load impedance specifications). If it sounds okay, tape/
staple down the cable and you're done.
Two 100+ ft. cables would give you less cross talk.
Two isolation transformers/ direct boxes and two cables would be a
reasonable best effort.
That said, I still think you'd be better off with an HTPC (with wireless
networking).
HTH,
David
Paul E Condon
>
> On Oct 16, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Paul E Condon wrote:
>
>> Analog signals degrade on long cable runs, particularly
>> the high freq. part of the signal.
>
> Not if it's low impedance balanced, it doesn't. Not at 100' anyway.
>
> Use the hardware Deutsche Grammophone, etc. use -- your recordings aren't
> going to sound any better than that...
>
> --
> Glenn English
> g...@slsware.com
Impedance and balance are two different things. Impedance only becomes
an issue when the wave length of the signal on the cable becomes
comparable to the length of the cable run. Balance OTOH has only to do
with rejection of common mode environmental noise, e.g. hum pickup, not
with loss of signal amplitude.
In addition to impedance and balance, there is also hi-freq. loss due
to RC time constant of the cable. Cheap cables have small center
conductor, and thin layer of insulation. Small conductor is higher
resistance (R). Thin insulation is higher capacitance (C). Both make
hi-freq loss greater. I have never seen wire size/ insultation
thickness spec.s on the label of any audio cable in a consumer
electronics store. I have never seen balanced output of stereo audio
in a single jack on a computer. (An example of RC time constant
effects, is the difficulties CPU chip makers have with on-chip signal
timing. The wave length of the signal is vastly larger than the chip
size, but still the signal at the receiving end of a via rises
noticeable more slowly than at the sending end.)
But this is theoretical knowledge. It precludes me from believing much
of the marketing pitch of consumer grade electronics. I'm hoping to
find some practical information that is in better conformance the
established theory.
I'm older now than when I bought the hifi. Hearing declines with
age. But I can still tell the difference between the sound from my
computer and from my hifi. It may be that the age of real hifi has
passed, just as the age of the vacuum tube has passed, but I'm hoping
not (for real hifi. I don't mind the new dominance of transistors.)
Thanks for reading to the end of this rant.
--
Paul E Condon
peco...@mesanetworks.net
ghe
On Oct 16, 2009, at 1:50 PM, Paul E Condon wrote:
>>> Analog signals degrade on long cable runs, particularly
>>> the high freq. part of the signal.
>>
>> Not if it's low impedance balanced, it doesn't. Not at 100' anyway.
>
> Impedance and balance are two different things. Impedance only becomes
> an issue when the wave length of the signal on the cable becomes
> comparable to the length of the cable run.
That's interesting -- I never heard that. Maybe I just never dealt
with cables long enough. I'd like to learn more about it (off list
would be more appropriate, I suspect).
> Balance OTOH has only to do
> with rejection of common mode environmental noise, e.g. hum pickup,
> not
> with loss of signal amplitude.
Yup. But hums and pops and buzzes and stuff definitely count as
degradation.
> But this is theoretical knowledge. It precludes me from believing much
> of the marketing pitch of consumer grade electronics. I'm hoping to
> find some practical information that is in better conformance the
> established theory.
To an old audio engineer, that's gratifying to hear: today's hifi
marketing is astounding BS. And if you want some really practical info
about bandwidth and noise, get an oscillator and a meter and measure it.
I think you'll find that, coming from a modern solid state amp
(vanishingly low output impedance), you'll be hard pressed to find
significant high frequency loss on just about any 100' long piece of
cable. Your definition of "significant" is allowed to differ from
mine, however.
> I'm older now than when I bought the hifi. Hearing declines with
> age. But I can still tell the difference between the sound from my
> computer and from my hifi.
I'd first suspect the DAC/ADCs and the analog circuitry in the
computers -- in yours and the one that digitized in the first place.
Or maybe the digital sound's sample rate. Or, of course, the file
could be (badly done) mp3 or one of its buds...
> It may be that the age of real hifi has
> passed, just as the age of the vacuum tube has passed, but I'm hoping
> not (for real hifi. I don't mind the new dominance of transistors.)
I was around at the transition. And the early solid state amps were,
indeed, pretty nasty. Then somebody discovered how easy and cheap op-
amps were :-(
But they've learned how to work with silicon, and things are much
better now. These days, a properly designed solid state amplifier is
at least as good as could be done with vacuum tubes -- and a lot
quieter and more reliable.
> Thanks for reading to the end of this rant.
You're welcome :-)
--
Glenn English
g...@slsware.com
Paul E Condon
>
> On Oct 16, 2009, at 1:50 PM, Paul E Condon wrote:
>
>>>> Analog signals degrade on long cable runs, particularly
>>>> the high freq. part of the signal.
>>>
>>> Not if it's low impedance balanced, it doesn't. Not at 100' anyway.
>>
>> Impedance and balance are two different things. Impedance only becomes
>> an issue when the wave length of the signal on the cable becomes
>> comparable to the length of the cable run.
>
> That's interesting -- I never heard that. Maybe I just never dealt with
> cables long enough. I'd like to learn more about it (off list would be
> more appropriate, I suspect).
Actually my experience was with cable about 100m long, but with
signals that were ~10ns pulses. We wanted to measure time of arrival
to somewhat better than 1ns. The speed of light is about 30cm/ns.
Because of the dielectric constant of the insulator in coax cable, the
speed of signals in cable is close to 20cm/ns. We used RG58U cable
which is designed to have a characteristic impedance of 50 ohms.
Without termination, pulses would reflect off the ends of the cable
and 'echo' back and forth in the cable. Echos of earlier pulses would
corrupt the wave form of following pulses, and really mess things up.
If anyone claims that this sort of thing corrupts analog audio signals
in a significant way, I would mark it as marketing obfuscation, not
proper electrical engineering. But I'm really not sure. I don't
believe proper double blind listening tests have ever been conducted.
Such tests are expensive, and the question really doesn't have the
social importance of drug safety and efficacy.
I do know that I can tell the difference between hifi system sound and
desktop PC sound and I prefer the former. And I have a lot of
theoretical knowledge that inclines me to be skeptical of explanations
offered by marketing people.
OTOH, almost anything learned during the early days telephony should be
taken into account when doing the analog part of a modern sound system.
All sorts of unwanted sounds and distortions of wanted sounds can happen.
Much of that has dropped form view in the mad dash to computerize the
world.
>
>> Balance OTOH has only to do
>> with rejection of common mode environmental noise, e.g. hum pickup, not
>> with loss of signal amplitude.
>
> Yup. But hums and pops and buzzes and stuff definitely count as
> degradation.
Well yes, of course. It was being suggested that I just buy an adapter
cable and try it. But I know already that an adapter cable alone will
give performance that I find unsatisfactory. I gave one good reason,
you give three more. Any one of them, alone, would invalidate the
test.
Op-amps were not easy until Nyquist published his famous criterion. So by the
time transistors came on the scene that had been done, but most hifi firms
didn't want to pay their engineers to read his papers.
>
> But they've learned how to work with silicon, and things are much better
> now. These days, a properly designed solid state amplifier is at least as
> good as could be done with vacuum tubes -- and a lot quieter and more
> reliable.
>
>> Thanks for reading to the end of this rant.
>
> You're welcome :-)
>
> --
> Glenn English
> g...@slsware.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.orgwith a
> subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
>
--
Paul E Condon
peco...@mesanetworks.net
Andrei Popescu
> electronics store. I have never seen balanced output of stereo audio
> in a single jack on a computer. (An example of RC time constant
I definitely recall reading about sound cards with balanced outputs.
M-Audio would be a good start...
Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
ghe
On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:24 AM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Fri,16.Oct.09, 13:50:04, Paul E Condon wrote:
>
>> electronics store. I have never seen balanced output of stereo audio
>> in a single jack on a computer. (An example of RC time constant
>
> I definitely recall reading about sound cards with balanced outputs.
> M-Audio would be a good start...
ALSA has a driver for this amazing piece of hardware (balanced IO
available):
http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_hdsp_9632.php
--
Glenn English
g...@slsware.com
Paul E Condon
>
> On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:24 AM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
>
>> On Fri,16.Oct.09, 13:50:04, Paul E Condon wrote:
>>
>>> electronics store. I have never seen balanced output of stereo audio
>>> in a single jack on a computer. (An example of RC time constant
>>
>> I definitely recall reading about sound cards with balanced outputs.
>> M-Audio would be a good start...
>
> ALSA has a driver for this amazing piece of hardware (balanced IO
> available):
>
> http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_hdsp_9632.php
>
> --
> Glenn English
> g...@slsware.com
Yes, this is amazing. You have put me onto something that I was totally
unaware of and delighted to find.
Thankyou, thankyou, thankyou.
--
Paul E Condon
peco...@mesanetworks.net
Nick Lidakis
> this system. I had never heard of Pass Labs until you mentioned them
> in your email. Wikipedia puts them in the class where Adcom was when I
> bought. I don't want to re-join the craziness of puriest hi-fi audio,
> but I do want to investigate upgrading the way that the digital music
> that I have now on CDs is stored.
Nelson Pass did have a hand in a few Adcom circuit designs. I
would say the the Pass Labs equipment is a bit more expensive
although higher performing than the Adcom stuff. Mr. Pass is unique
in that he is heavily involved in the DIY community and many of his
desgins are released (for non-commercial purposes) to the community.
>From the Wikipedia article:
"Unusually for a leading figure producing commercial equipment, Pass
has also long been very supportive of the DIY audio community, by way
of published articles (Notably in "The Audio Amateur") and schematics
of out of production models on the Pass Labs site and more recently
the First Watt site. Extremely unusually for such a noted figure, he
is readily contactable and frequently interacts directly (if tersely)
with audio hobbyists individually: all of which hobbiests are
extremely grateful for and for which he is held in very high
esteem.[5][6][7] His nickname among the DIY audio community is "Papa".
You can find at this forum: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/pass-labs/
His DIY website: http://www.passdiy.com/default.html
> I think it ought to be possible to copy data that is now on CD onto
> modern hard-disk and play it with quality that is no worse than I have
> now.
Yes, I agree. You can use programs such as grip to get accurate rips
of your CD's and store them as FLAC files on really big cheap hard
disks. Some people swear by EAC (Exact Audio Copy), but it only runs on
Windows. Not an option for me no matter what they claim.
> I accept the inferiority of CD to true purist hi-fi. (CD is good
> enough for me, but I can't abide earphones.)
In my humble listening, CD's ain't all that bad considering that
they've have a long time to smooth out a lot of kinks. Besides, you
can get a good amount of music in high resolution (24 bit/96kh and
greaters) formats these days, e.g. http://hdtracks.com Trent Reznor,
of Nine Inch Nails fame, released one of his albums for *free* in a
variety of formats including 24bit/96khx FLAC and WAV.
Link: http://theslip.nin.com/
> I believe in free speach, free beer, and caveat emptor. If you have an
> idea that involves Debian, please discuss it here. I may not be able
> to use it myself, but it might be helpful to someone else.
Ok. Simply, Voyage Linux + MPD + PC Engines Engines ALIX single board
computer = audiophile grade open sauce goodness at 4 watts total power
draw.
Voyage Linux is a Debian based distro modified to run on
embedded and low power x86 machines. It's desinged to run entirely in
RAM and can load from compact flash cards as small as 128MB. Images
are available for the PC Engines ALIX series boards. Link:
http://linux.voyage.hk/
MPD is music player daemon. The daemon runs on the the headless ALIX
boards and plays your FLAC files. The client which controls MPD can be
on any other machine on your network. This can be your PC, laptop,
PDA, bluetotooth phones, IRDA remotes, etc., etc., etc. There are web
clients, Java clients, ncurses clients, GTK and QT clients, Windows
and Max OS X clients, iPod/iTouch clients... In other words, you have
many options for how you want to control your music.
Links: http://mpd.wikia.com/wiki/Music_Player_Daemon_Wiki
http://mpd.wikia.com/wiki/Clients
The PC Engines ALIX single board computers are small, power efficient,
AMD Geode x86 based single devices. They are totally fanless and dead
silent, a prerequisite for my dedicated listeing space. They're mainly used as
firewall/routers and wireless access points. I had been using one
their previous WRAP boards (and still do!) with m0n0wall as my primary firewall.
When PC Engines started to offer the ALIX, which now sports USB ports, I
got the idea to use the board as a USB music server feeding an external
USB DAC. I use both the ALIX 2d2 and the 3d2 as music servers. The
boards are relativley inexpensive (approx $125 USD for the board & $15 for case)
for the flexibilty that they offer. Links: http://www.pcengines.ch/alix3d2.htm
http://www.pcengines.ch/alix2d2.htm
Other reasons I am fond of the PC Engnines boards are their power
effiecncy and their general purpose desgin. My ALIX never draws more
than 4 watts of power (using s Kill-A-Watt meter) when playing files,
and they're general purpose desgins means that, in the future, I'll be
able to recylcle them for other uses in the event that i stop suing them as
music servers.
My setup is as follows: My Debian desktop, which resides in the
bedroom, is where I rip all my CD's to FLAC, and is also setup as an
NFS server. The ALIX resides in my listening room where is is
connected to my router via a CAT5 cable. The ALIX boots into Voyage
Linux and MPD starts up. MPD fetches FLAC's via NFS on my desktop. The
ALIX feeds an external Wavelength Audio Brick USB DAC; the standard
snd_usb_audio module is all that is required. Music is controlled from
any computer in the house, i.e., you can, if you wish, have mutiple clients
simultaneously controlling one mpd server, For example, I can use my
Nokia N800 tablet or my Thinkpad to control the music. Song changes
are nearly instantaneous over 100Mb network. The ALIX also sports
mini-PCI slots in case you want to implement this in a wirless fashion.
You can just about use any decent quality USB DAC that fits your
budget. Most are Linux friendly. Current versions of MPD support 32
bit audio, if you're considering high-resolution files in the future.
An upgrade of the USB DAC is all that would be required.
There are many high quality USB DAC avialble.
Links:
http://www.stereophile.com/digitalprocessors/ayre_acoustics_qb-9_usb_dac/
http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/system1/digital-analog-converter/dac1-usb
Less pricey: http://www.devilsound.com/DAC/
You could also use a USB to S/PDIF converter to feed a S/PDIF DAC. I
used to use a Trends UD-10.1 with my Adcom GDA-700 HDCD DAC before I
purchaed the Brick DAC. The Trends also as a DAC built in as well as
it is baed on the Burr Brown PCM2704 chip.
Links:
http://www.trendsaudio.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40&Itemid=28
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/Trends-Audio-UD-10-1-USB-Audio-Converter-Review
There's one on sale at Audiogon for cheap:
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?dgtlconv&1260475457&/Trends-UD-10.1-Lite-usb-audio-
> So far the responses that I have gotten comfirm without a doubt that
> what I was told by the sales person in Best Buy is not at all the
> whole story. There is *a lot* more to the solution than just buying an
> adapter cable. Mention of Burr Brown 24bit ladder DACs brought back memories
> of technical problems that simply have no solution via software alone.
Ack! Best Buy? Danger Will Robinson!
> Even if this information doesn't fit with your expectations, please make
> your recommendation.
This is my recommendation. And with a decent USB DAC it sounds
absolutley wonderful. So much that my Theta Data Basic CD transport
hasn't been power up in almost 18 months.
I hope this helps.
Chris Bannister
> > I have a couple of questions for you before I delve into details of my
> > recommendaion.
> >
> > What kind of hi-fi are we talking about? Do you have a dedicated
> > listening space or is this for casual listening when doing other
> > things, i.e., are we talking JVC or Pass Labs?
> >
> > How important is it that the software/hardware be GPL free? Would you
> > consider using something Debian based if it offered you truly hi-fi
> > results?
>
> Equipment:
> Adcom GTP-450 Tuner
> Adcom GCD-700 CDcarousel/player
> Adcom GFA-5000 dual audio amp
> Vandersteen Model 2 woofer/mid/tweeter combo (2 ea)
>
> I want to listen to classical music in the family room after my twin
> 8yr old grand-daughters have gone to bed. So dedicated listening but
> not dedicated space. No interest in whole-house sound system. No
> interest in 'quality' head-phones.
>
> I have been out of touch with the high-end audio world since I bought
> this system. I had never heard of Pass Labs until you mentioned them
Get yourself a "qood quality" turntable, Linn Sondek comes to mind, and
some decent vinyl and then you are talking "high end."
More and more people are turning back to records as they realise
anything else is just a compromise.
--
Chris.
Nick Lidakis
And don't forget a good quality phono preamp, as I'm sure that much gear
these days does not have such facilities. Might as well throw in "good quality"
record cleaner, stylus gauge, and record brush. And if anything else is just
a compromise then you might as well throw in a good quality turntable speed
controller. VPI makes for a penny under a grand USD. You'll also need a good
quality turn table stand to isolate it from mechanical vibrations. If you've
got problems with floating floors, etc., then you'll need something with more
mass and possibly fillable with lad shot, i.e., something a 'lil better than good
quality.
Don't get me wrong; I *love* the sound of my VPI turntable, but sometimes,
like at the end of wicked sixteen hour shift, the last thing I wanna do is
futz with the record brush, stylus cleaning solution, etc., etc., when I need
to salve my soul. 'Tis easier to pickup the Nokia N800 (instant on) and play
some tunes via my tubed USB DAC. And please don't think for a minute that a
quality USB DAC playing FLAC files is that far removed, these days, from a
decent vinyl setup.
Paul, if you're still following, did you happen to hear about the Devilsound
Labs USB DAC? Link: http://www.devilsound.com/DAC/
Micha Feigin
Nick Lidakis
> If you're going for a USB DAC, how about this one:
> http://www.usbdacs.com/
> :drooling: ...
I own one of those...