squeeze me....

julian2002

julian2002

Muper Soderator
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
5,094
Reaction score
1
Location
Bedfordshire
well stage 2 is complete. I finally took the plunge and ordered a squeezebox last night. big kudos to dabs for getting it to me in less than 24 hours even though i ordered it at 8.30 pm last night and only paid a fiver for delivery.
setup was simpler than simple once i'd worked out i'd transposed a digit in the wep key, doh.
i'm currently listening to some trance i've not heard in an age as it's been sat on my computer for 2 years as 128k mp3 with nothing to play it through except for krap pc speakers. it doesn't sound half bad - i'm now ripping some stuff to flac to see if that tightens up the bass and cleans up the treble.
using it is great, i can access the server from any of my pc's and play anything in the music directory.
next step an outboard dac!



editied to add:
well flacs seem to work just fine even transcoding from flac to wav on the fly on my poor old pII 400! definately sound better than 128k mp3 (sorry paul). comparisons with my cd5 are tough at the moment as the squeezebox has a lower level out than the cdp so seems quieter. still the bass is back although not as gunty as the cdp it seems, the treble doesn;t twitter and it even 'times' reasonably well. anyone want a cd5? hang on that means 2 hicaps on me 82 wahey....

cheers


julian
 
squeezebox is a little gizmo that connects to a pc / network either wired or wirelessly. it can play back music files (mp3, flac, aiff, wav, etc.) either through analog or digital outs.

flac is a lossless music file format. i.e. it will reproduce the music data exactly as it was on the cd rather than introducing distortion like mp3 or wma, etc. do.

wep key. wep = wired equivalency protocol. it's the (flawed) security protocol that wireless networks use. the security is based around a 64 or 128 bit key or hexadecimal number.

gunty is grunty without the 'r'

cheers


julian
 
dev,
:D
perhaps i jumped the gun a little there in all the enthusiasm. it'll probably be up for sale next month though.
cheers



julian
 
Julian heed my warning now. The initial sound can sound very exciting, all encapsulating, it may make other sources sound boring even.

The outcome though is (for me at least) very disappointing, consider if the products you use really are dedicated to music reply! I am saving right now for a CD player, a naim one.

Ultimately convenience has made my experiments fun, but the sound is appalling. I have a copy of Cinematic Orchestras, 'Man with a Movie Camera' playing both on record and from the Mac, the mac version sounds thin with odd ball bass end and no midrange to speak of. There is no fullness to the sound only the type of shite sound I would expect from 'other manufacturers'

Just please take a few weeks to make your considerations and do not be taken in with the convenience or 'new toy' factor, as I did, ultimately it will leave you wanting.
 
Have you given up on it Gary? You really need to try a better soundcard, and probably a better DAC. Would be a shame to junk all that work without trying a few more things out.

-- Ian
 
gary,
never fear i'll be waiting until i've found a replacement dac / transpport before selling the cd5.

what compression format are you using? raw wav, apple lossless, mp3, aac, reduced frequencies? i can't remember but if it's a lossy codec you really ought to look into trying lossless or raw wav files before rejecting the idea totally (if you haven't already of course).

also knowing your taste in music and presentation i'd be looking at the dac as a big contributor to the sound you describe - especially as it's quite an old one and probably hasn't had the care and servicing lavished on it that you're used to.

lastly i'd also look at the huge length of optical cable i believe you are using as another potential source of quality reduction. optical cables are not usually recommended as they tend to introduce lots of jitter, mudying the bass primarily. the dac 64 gets round this with it's internal buffer but an arcam dac of the age that you have is unlikely to have any internal measures to combat this problem.

at the end of the day though the sound you are hearing is the sound you are hearing and if it doesn't measure up then so be it. i'd follow ians suggestion and persevere a little longer though.
cheers


julian
 
Guys,

Go and listen to Merlins setup. It's rather good. It's not as good as a top quality CD source, but its more than good enough to be able to kick back and enjoy the music.
 
I remember a time when you just plonked a CD in the CD draw and pressed 'Play'.

Seems a lot more effort is needed nowadays. :D
 
Pumaman I remember those days too and miss it desperately!

Julian and Ian thanks for the tips. I have to make a decision though. I have heard this set up through a much better system compared against a CDS2. OK maybe not a totally fair comparison, but the computer sounded truly awful, laughable.

The scary thing is I need to use my record deck as reference, I am forgetting what good CD replay sounds like. Some nights I can have this mac outputting, and I think 'Thats not half bad' than I put a record on a BAM it hits you just how bad the mac sounds.

It reinforces one of my own personal beliefs, those people that discuss the improvements in a single hifi component over a period of months (normally on the naim forum it has to be said) are probably talking bullshit.

As for further work on the mac? Well I have tried about every compression format available to me, including the new Apple Lossless compression and this has had no effect on the general sound quality. I believe therefore that its time to look down the chain, yes maybe at the optical cable and the DAC. However my priorities has been tarnished by this experience. Logic tells me I am not going to achieve the sound I have become used to from naim sources, in fact I don't believe that I will be able to come close to a compromise I can live with. So I am saving for a naim CD player and giving the mac ideas up for now. Although no doubt I will keep the mac as a source, its very handy having the party mix facilities and to find a tuna really quickly when something pops in yer head to tell you too!
 
Originally posted by julian2002

well flacs seem to work just fine even transcoding from flac to wav on the fly on my poor old pII 400! definately sound better than 128k mp3 (sorry paul).
Click to expand...

LMAO!

Why are you apologising? I dont believe I ever said that 128K MP3's were even close to being original quality ;)

Personally I would NEVER use MP3 at all for ripping my own CDs, havent done for a long time, yet everyone here seems to be under the impression that I champion the format. Oh well...

Edit: Just so you guys know, that Perreaux, the new zealand hifi manufacturer is working on a new DAC that is designed to be plugged into the USB port of a computer (it may also have other inputs).

The DAC will be called the Perreaux SXD1, and is likely to cost £300 - £400 when its released. I have been in contact with a Perreaux rep about this DAC and apparently its going to have some features never before tried in DAC technology and that it should sound really, really good. Apparently it should be out sometime towards the end of summer or autumn.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Back
Top