or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming › Logitech Squeezebox Touch Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Logitech Squeezebox Touch Owners Thread - Page 23

post #661 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by doug1223 View Post

Thanks for all your help! Much appreciated. I am looking at the denon 4311ci,which is on sale at Newegg. I can't find any professional reviews of this unit, but it a step up from the Marantz 7005 if I understand correctly.y(both units made by Denon) Do you know what the Dacs are in this particular unit?

Denon and Marantz are both owned by the same parent company and do share some parts/technology, but the lines are separate and distinct. The Denon would not be a step up from the Marantz - it would be more of a lateral move IMO.

By all accounts I've read though, the Denon 4311 is a great unit and would be a huge upgrade from your current Onkyo. However, unless you're getting it for under $1500, I can't help thinking that it is way overkill for your needs and you'll be paying for features that you'll never use (such as the 9-channel 140 WPC amplifier).
post #662 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmfish View Post

Denon and Marantz are both owned by the same parent company and do share some parts/technology, but the lines are separate and distinct. The Denon would not be a step up from the Marantz - it would be more of a lateral move IMO.

By all accounts I've read though, the Denon 4311 is a great unit and would be a huge upgrade from your current Onkyo. However, unless you're getting it for under $1500, I can't help thinking that it is way overkill for your needs and you'll be paying for features that you'll never use (such as the 9-channel 140 WPC amplifier).

Everything I have read claims that the Marantz 7005 is a virtual clone to the Denon 3311ci. The Denon 4311ci has Audessy XT32 which I understand is a big step up in sound quality. It is considerably less than $1500 on Newegg now with a coupon code
post #663 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by doug1223 View Post

Everything I have read claims that the Marantz 7005 is a virtual clone to the Denon 3311ci. The Denon 4311ci has Audessy XT32 which I understand is a big step up in sound quality. It is considerably less than $1500 on Newegg now with a coupon code

Call me a skeptic, but I don't believe the difference between XT32 and XT is significant in the typical home. On paper, certainly, but not in the real world. But since you listen to your Oppo via analog, it's a moot point.

That Denon is a heck of a receiver for under $1500 though. It will be a huge improvement over your Onkyo.

I'm looking forward to hearing about your results!
post #664 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmfish View Post

Call me a skeptic, but I don't believe the difference between XT32 and XT is significant in the typical home. On paper, certainly, but not in the real world. But since you listen to your Oppo via analog, it's a moot point.

I disagree. I do not know what you mean by a "typical home" but my experience (and those of many others) is that XT32 is a significant advance on XT.

Quote:


That Denon is a heck of a receiver for under $1500 though.

Agreed.
post #665 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by doug1223 View Post

Everything I have read claims that the Marantz 7005 is a virtual clone to the Denon 3311ci. The Denon 4311ci has Audessy XT32 which I understand is a big step up in sound quality. It is considerably less than $1500 on Newegg now with a coupon code

correct on the 7005 being a virtual clone of the 3311...

correct on xt32 being a big step up over xt... in my "somewhat normal environment", anyway... subjectively (which i rarely trust myself on, i, like every other human am subject to placebo) and objectively (measured, which i do trust)...

it's a steal at under 1500... i've spent a lot more and gotten a lot less....

fwiw, i've owned both the av7005 and the a100 (anniversary edition of 4311).., the 4311 is in a completely different league (primarily due to dsp)... and i only use it in a 5.1 config (with dual subs)...

edit: i'd hook the disk spinner up via hdmi and use the dsp... any differnces between dacs (arguably transparent) would be completely dwarfed by the ability to engage room correction...
post #666 of 1055
Like I said, I'm a skeptic.

I've heard lots of claims about directional speaker cable, green magic markers, magnets and pyramids, etc. but I've never heard a sonic benefit.

At least XT32 is actually an improvement (the specs prove it). I've never had a demonstration so I'll take you at your word that it isn't the usual hyperbole.
post #667 of 1055
^^^

don't make the mistake of lumping dsp (proven measurable results, and actually does something to ameliorate the issues that virtually everyone has with their room) with snake oil (the rest of the stuff you list, as well as some of the other suggestions put forth in this thread)...
post #668 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

^^^

don't make the mistake of lumping dsp (proven measurable results, and actually does something to ameliorate the issues that virtually everyone has with their room) with snake oil (the rest of the stuff you list, as well as some of the other suggestions put forth in this thread)...

Oh, I have experienced the results of DSP first hand and know the benefits. It's just that when I read about "filter resolution points", it reads a lot like all the other questionable specs that matter.

Not to go off on a tangent, but I personally don't believe that there is an audible difference between 24 bit and 32 bit DACs, 24/96 and 24/192 recordings, etc.

The human ear (brain) is an incredibly sensitive and adaptive listening instrument. It subconsciously fills in the blanks and perceives things that don't exist.

Again, I'm not saying you aren't correct - I have no first hand experience with Audyssey XT vs XT32. I'm simply expressing my general distrust of specifications and their real vs. perceived effect on sound reproduction.
post #669 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmfish View Post

Not to go off on a tangent, but I personally don't believe that there is an audible difference between 24 bit and 32 bit DACs, 24/96 and 24/192 recordings, etc.

Hi Palmfish. Sorry, but I'm going to ride your tangent.

I agree, most people would not hear the difference. I also think that most would not hear the difference with 16-bit as well.

However, where the extra bit-depth and sample-rate really help is in the DSP processing. The DSP math will have scaling and rounding errors, and processing with 32-bit data will insure that your final results don't round to less than the 24 bits that the DAC supports. The same can be said for the "in-between" samples in a 192 kHz source.

If you have no DSP processing, then a CD's 16/44.1 may be adequate for most people. But if you try to do room-correction on that, you could end up with 12/44.1
post #670 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

Hi Palmfish. Sorry, but I'm going to ride your tangent.

I agree, most people would not hear the difference. I also think that most would not hear the difference with 16-bit as well.

However, where the extra bit-depth and sample-rate really help is in the DSP processing. The DSP math will have scaling and rounding errors, and processing with 32-bit data will insure that your final results don't round to less than the 24 bits that the DAC supports. The same can be said for the "in-between" samples in a 192 kHz source.

If you have no DSP processing, then a CD's 16/44.1 may be adequate for most people. But if you try to do room-correction on that, you could end up with 12/44.1

I didn't know that room correction DSP and the bit depth of the music had such a relationship. It does make sense that a higher bit rate gives the DSP more information to work with, but that it "consumes" it is something I have to wrap my brain around a bit.
post #671 of 1055
^^^

they don't... the room doesn't care how many bits there are...

the rest of the dsp, maybe... but i know better than to get into bitrate wars...
post #672 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmfish View Post

. . . It does make sense that a higher bit rate gives the DSP more information to work with, but that it "consumes" it is something I have to wrap my brain around a bit.

A better description than "consume" is that it needs to "round" it.

If you multiply two 24-bit signed numbers, the result is a 47-bit signed number. So, at some point, the final result needs to be rounded, and that is where dynamic range might be lost. One of the DSPs that I use has 56-bit accumulators to hedge against loss. Even then, it is not trivial to write a routine that has no loss.

By the way, this is the reason that some devices to not sound their best when their "digital" volume is not set at 100%. If a 16-bit PCM word is multiplied by 50% in a 16-bit accumulator, it is effectively reduced to 15-bits (the lowest bit being lost).
post #673 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

the rest of the dsp, maybe... but i know better than to get into bitrate wars...

Hi Chris,

I hear ya there.

My feeling is that the sample-rate makes almost no difference outside of the DSP. 48kHz and 192kHz will sound the same.

But the reason that they now master CDs at 352.8kHz is so they can digitally process the snot out of them before decimating them down to 44.1kHz. *sigh* There was something inherently simple about the old analog process.
post #674 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

By the way, this is the reason that some devices to not sound their best when their "digital" volume is not set at 100%. If a 16-bit PCM word is multiplied by 50% in a 16-bit accumulator, it is effectively reduced to 15-bits (the lowest bit being lost).

Which doesn't matter yet because I believe there are no DACs out there that have more than 15 Bits worth of S/N.

Going below 50% costs you another bit and that's when you start to hear things.
post #675 of 1055
hey mark...

yea, i'm on the same page as you there... within the dsp, having the extra bits to work with can't hurt... i should have been clearer in my response...

lol... yea, true dat... true of everything in the digital world now... look at photography... talk about digitally processing the snot out of stuff... heck, a lot of those "wonderful" pictures we see now are actually composite shots and then even further "enhanced".. looks "great" (i suppose) printed on paper, but nothing like it actually looks like in real life...
post #676 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by doug1223 View Post

Does anyone run the Touch thru an external Dac?

I'm using a Rega DAC with mine.
post #677 of 1055
This thing only has AUX out, not in, correct?

Would love to couple this thing with an Airport Express for Airplay but without AUX in that isn't possible.
post #678 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptysell View Post

This thing only has AUX out, not in, correct?

Would love to couple this thing with an Airport Express for Airplay but without AUX in that isn't possible.

It has USB and digital inputs.
post #679 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

It has USB and digital inputs.

No, it has USB, ethernet, and SD Card inputs, digital and analog outputs.
post #680 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by 60SXRD View Post

No, it has USB, ethernet, and SD Card inputs, digital and analog outputs.

Sure but the SD input won't help him nor will a list of the outputs.
post #681 of 1055
update: I'm now trying wired instead of wireless and it is working - no buffering/dropouts yet. If I did want to go back to wireless, does anyone have any suggestions on what may help?
_______________________________________

I've had a Touch for about two weeks now, wirelessly connected to my laptop. Everything worked fine for the first week and a half, playing flacs for two or three hours a day.

Now the Touch will play for a while, usually for a couple of songs at most, before going silent and eventually giving a buffering message. Sometimes it will come back quickly and other times it will take a while.

The laptop and touch are the only wireless devices I have in the house.
post #682 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

It has USB and digital inputs.

What digital inputs are you referring to then?
post #683 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by 60SXRD View Post

What digital inputs are you referring to then?

Ooops. You are right. Only USB (and ethernet).
post #684 of 1055
I don't see why someone would want to use both the Airport Express and Squeezebox Touch. With the exception of the interface, aren't they more or less redundant?
post #685 of 1055
I am using my Ipod touch to control the SBT. When I am on Pandora I can't seem to find out how to put my Pandora stations in alphabetical order as I have when just using the ipod touch to stream. There does not seem to be the usual icon of from A-Z for the squeezebox. Also, can I plug my Ipod touch into the USB port on the SBT and play music that I have on it. Thanks
post #686 of 1055
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shivaji View Post

I am using my Ipod touch to control the SBT. When I am on Pandora I can't seem to find out how to put my Pandora stations in alphabetical order as I have when just using the ipod touch to stream. There does not seem to be the usual icon of from A-Z for the squeezebox.

You can select to display your stations alphabetically or by date added through your Pandora account.

Also, can I plug my Ipod touch into the USB port on the SBT and play music that I have on it. Thanks

I don't know. The SBT will play your iTunes library that you load onto your iPod.

Hope this helps.
post #687 of 1055
Update for using Kindle Fire as SB remote: SlideMe.org is like an alternative Android market...for closed systems like the Fire (Amazon market), and probably B&N Nook and others. They have the SqueezeCommander app for $4.99.

Can't vouch for it yet (probably try it soon), but it's rumored to be "better" than the free app that Logitech has for pads and such (although that'll likely be on the Amazon market soon).

CD
post #688 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDLehner View Post

Update for using Kindle Fire as SB remote: SlideMe.org is like an alternative Android market...for closed systems like the Fire (Amazon market), and probably B&N Nook and others. They have the SqueezeCommander app for $4.99.

Can't vouch for it yet (probably try it soon), but it's rumored to be "better" than the free app that Logitech has for pads and such (although that'll likely be on the Amazon market soon).

CD

Check if squeeze control is available on slide me. Free, and much better than the Logitech app.
post #689 of 1055
Quote:
Originally Posted by fullerms View Post

Check if squeeze control is available on slide me. Free, and much better than the Logitech app.

It's not.

CD
post #690 of 1055
Wow; is the SBT a mess these days, or is it just me? I've been noticing some "skipping"...figured it was my file-server; now tonight, I see my 96kHz files are only tripping 48kHz on my DAC.

WTF? Need an update?

CD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming › Logitech Squeezebox Touch Owners Thread