My controversial post of the year...

heiney9

VR3 wrote: »

29 posts deep and here comes the left turn!

Sorry Trey, I am not looking for a fight, not even in the remotest sense. Just trying to get people to clarify because there have been some very wide, sweeping general comments made which IMO, are unfounded. So I'm just trying to get a better understanding where these comments are coming from.

I mean even the title of this thread is inviting controversy a little bit.

I am out, because obviously I'm a big meanie who beats up on everyone. Others can have their say, but I'm not allowed to have a discussion.

H9

VR3

lol...

Well when I posted this I kind of knew it would be like this in an arm jabbing kind of way...

I just have listened to ALOT of different components over the years and this definitely lends itself to what I have posted so far...

I would say the Decco 2 and the Parasound had more to do with it but I listened to the Symphonic Line player (granted with its DAC) and it sounded pretty damn good... it was not like it was on the Odyssey gear but enjoyable...

With the Squeezebox there is just no more life to the music, it sounds good - sure but it is missing that weight and depth and overall definition that was once there... It is replaced with digital smearing and a very 2D sound stage that calls alot of attention to the speakers...

Granted my speakers are super revealing and just about anything you throw in there it will tell it like it is for the most part...

steveinaz

I'm quite impressed that the SQB Touch and 3-5grand CDP's are even mentioned in the same sentence. My personal experience is that it is just as good (and in very subtle ways, better) than any transport I've had. Having said that, I've never owned a CD player over $1k. Also be aware I'm talking in reference to running it digitally to an external DAC.

How much do we expect at $249? (what I paid, new). I think just that fact that it can run with anything I've heard, at this price, AND make your entire music library accessible at the click of a button; justifies it nicely.

I'm pretty picky, and as I told Brock and other SQB users (before I bought mine) that all the convenience in the world doesn't mean squat to me, if the SQB couldn't perform as well as my existing transport--I have not been disappointed.

Sid, have you spun any 24/96 material yet? Make sure you're sitting on an adult diaper before you hit play.

VR3

To preface, I love the Squeezebox - I listen to my system 1000% more than I did before as I can call up any music on internet radio and all kinds of stuff as well as from my computer so it has expanded my music library and my choices tremendously as I am mostly a background listener at this point...

So yeah, the Squeezebox is awesome for the money and thats why I picked up the Decco 2 - for 600 bones it was a tube integrated with a nicer DAC.. just to make it all sound a little better...

But when I go to a gathering where someone has a nice DAC I will bring it if they do not have it - I Just have a hard time believing this or any other digital format can even come close to a high end CD player...

falconcry72

VR3 wrote: »

...With the Squeezebox there is just no more life to the music, it sounds good - sure but it is missing that weight and depth and overall definition that was once there...

Sounds like it's the DAC to me. I have heard many DACs, and the symptoms you describe are exactly the things that I look for when comparing DACs.

Do you still have the Symphonic CDP? Does it have a digital output? If so, run it digitally to the Nova and have your answer once and for all.:biggrin:

steveinaz

To get the most out of the SQB Touch, you must:

1. Run digitally/external DAC
2. Use only lossless music
3. If you run wireless to the Touch, at least run wired to your ext HDD (if setup that way) IOW, don't make 2 wireless "jumps."

LuSh

It's strange indeed. I'd recommend listening to a different DAC perhaps before passing absolute judgement. I can honestly say that I have not lost any performance vs my old transports.

VR3

I do not have the Symphonic Line CDP anymore...

It was very difficult to use the Symphonic CD player in my system because it is completely remote based - the Decco 2 and the Symphonic were on the same band so when I hit a button it would change the other lol...

But I listened to a few songs that are my references and was impressed at how close the sound was to my Odyssey gear, within reason - it was missing a little bit of that definition that made it what it was but it was still pretty enjoyable a 1/4 the cost...

VR3

steveinaz wrote: »

To get the most out of the SQB Touch, you must:

1. Run digitally/external DAC
2. Use only lossless music
3. If you run wireless to the Touch, at least run wired to your ext HDD (if setup that way) IOW, don't make 2 wireless "jumps."

I am doing all of those things, External HD to computer - wireless from router to Squeezebox

SDA1C

VR3 wrote: »

29 posts deep and here comes the left turn!

Im a bit surprised it took this long for a SQB thread.

heiney9

anonymouse wrote: »

This whole thread is apples being compared to oranges, and this is not even an A/B comparison

Bingo....we have a winner

H9

inspiredsports

Zero wrote: »

How's this controversial?

Agreed. Downloaded file technology just isn't mature yet.

tonyb

Trey, theres alot more to getting quality sound from a squeezebox/Sonos than some would have you believe, and it all starts with the quality of the file. Some will also say bits are bits, blah blah,blah.....lossless is lossless, etc. Unless it's ripped proper, with some sort of error correction too, the file is going to sound MP3-ish. With that, a good dac is needed, with good cables, and a decent pre section in whatever piece your using. Sounds like alot of trouble but it really isn't.

Think of it like this, think of a good cdp, the transport, dacs,power supply, design. When that was being built, they pretty much use parts to achieve a certain sound the designer/ manufacturer had in mind. With a SB/Sonos unit, you become the designer, you get to taylor the sound to your liking by designing your own with whatever you add to it.

Another good analogy is in audio we like to toss around the merits of seperates over a receiver, for the obvious reasons. Think of a SB as only one part of a seperates system over a cdp. Now, I'm not at the level yet in my own journey to toss the cdp away for good. I still need to find the right seperates to match my Sonos to give me the same soundstage I have with a decent cdp. I have a feeling your in the same boat.

steveinaz

VR3 wrote: »

I am doing all of those things, External HD to computer - wireless from router to Squeezebox

If you feel like your 98% of the way there, then an external PS may do the trick. I think with more extended listening, you're gonna love the sound of hard drive derived music---I find it ever so slightly smoother and more open than my transport. Treble is airy, and decay of notes is outstanding.

If your DAC is capable, go to Linn Music and download you some 24/96 goodness. This little plastic box will blow your socks off. Of course, in reality--it's nothing more than a wireless receiver.

dkg999

I agree with Steve, there are some simple improvements to the SBT as mentioned above that do make a noticeable difference. I also believe that using wired ethernet makes a nice improvement. It's been noted in several forums I've read that the SBT wireless introduces some noise or smear in the sound, and once you are able to compare the two you can hear it. In my nearfield listening system I can compare a CD played via my Rotel RCD-1072 or Jolida CDP and my Music Hall 25.3 DAC, and the SBT via that same DAC. Either CDP via the DAC will best the SBT via the DAC, and I summarize the reason why as "engagement". The CDP's via the DAC just have a more engaging presentation. I use my SBT for playback 80% of the time, but when I really want to sit down and listen it's usually via the CDP. So what part of the CDP chain drives a more engaging sound and presentation? I'm wondering if all the talk about issues with the FLAC format have some merit?

cnh

I don't have much to add here as even old-timers have crawled out of the woodwork for this one! lol

I have heard some reasonably Mid-to higher end DAC units. And all I have to ask all of you is how many of these DACs that you're running have that "warmth" that some of us seek, need to hear from our CDs? Or is that just an "easy" fix for you all, just add a cheap tube buffer and you're good!

That's my main problem with DAC units. The sound is clean, the resolution is good, highs are detailed, mids are prominent, lows are tight, you can locate instruments...but "warm"...uh, uh...not really.

I do notice that some of you do run the old tube buffers on those systems so the DACs must not be 'enough'? But then again Peachtree has "tubes" and some still feel that it's not 100 percent?

cnh

polkatese

I agree with Doug. SBT is very convenience and allow me to listen in to new album before I spend the money to buy the CD (unlike before).

Also, I noticed that streaming 320kbps does produce slight digital harshness/edge in the upper-end, which in my prior experience can be fixed by introducing analog DAC, specifically tube-based, to give its warmth and softness. I supposed if I am that ambitious and determined to migrate to SBT completely, I could do that. But for the time being, I'll let my Modwright Oppo do that job.

dkg999

cnh - I've tried to search out DAC's that mitigate the "digital harshness" and have a more analog sound. The Music Hall 25.3 (tube section for RCA output) and PS Audio DLIII both do a great job of presenting a warm, open, and engaging sound. Other DAC's have those qualities, however I am only commenting on the ones I own.

thsmith

If you want to be impressed run a Mac Mini with 8g of ram, Amarra, W4S DAC 2 with upgraded PC and USB cable.

Sorry, could not resist.

heiney9

mp3's shouldn't even be brought into the equation. Of course mp3's will introduce harshness/edge. It's the exact nature of the format. This thread has nothing to do with streaming mp3's.

Cnh, you just haven't heard the proper dac if you think they all are sterile and too detailed and lack some analog sound.

There is some work involved with mating gear and getting the synergy. While I know Doug and I have great respect for his opinion because I know his methods, I disagree. I don't find the SQB Touch lacking in 'involvement' one bit, nor is wired different than wireless, IMO. I've tried them both. But his kind of experience and opinions that go along with an evaluation you can trust because he's had all the gear for awhile and has taken a few years to use it, listen to it, hook it up various ways and compare apples to apples on numerous occasions.

Some of the rest of you are just drawing conclusions w/o a consistent evaluation.

H9

VR3

Maybe I am still ever so slightly old school but it seems you guys are willing to spend thousands to draw out the potential in a convenience oriented tool..

When I am sitting down to LISTEN to music I like to flip through CDs and listen to the entire CD...

Randomly shuffling through a library of music... going from artist to artist takes away the intimate side of listening to music that makes critically listening special for atleast me...

So for someone to say to make the Squeezebox sound good or even respectable I need to spend 3gs on a DAC, get a upgraded power supply - I would rather get a player like the Symphonic Line CDP or a Musical Fidelity top of the line player where someone knew what they were doing and voiced it to be jaw dropping awesome...

It just seems like it is a backwards mentality - but I again I am more "old school" in my approach and like the mix of tangible and hands on approach for critical listening...

To me the squeezebox is excellent for shuffling your library for non critical listening and branching out with the internet radio feature and so forth but to invest thousands to better a 250 dollar piece of gear just seems out of wack...

dkg999

To Brock's point(s), we all hear and perceive music differently. What I value in the presentation of music through my audio system is not always what others hear and value in their systems. I love big, open, engaging sound. I don't need the utmost in detail, however with my Magnepan speakers I get to combine detail with a big room filling soundstage. And the differences I perceive when using and comparing the SBT to my CDP's aren't huge nock-your-asshat-off differences. They are the differences noted through hours in the sweet spot making one change at a time and noting differences, both good-and-bad.

dkg999

VR3 - $200 for a Wellborne PS (and I don't recommend anybody buy from them, there are other PS's available) and $399 for a Music Hall 25.3 DAC (on sale at Music Direct which is a local store for me), plus $60 for an upgraded tube for the MH DAC, and about $30 for a Signal Cable digital power cable. At that total price point for the "player" part of the digital music system it doesn't seem unreasonable.

For my main system I have a PS Audio DLIII DAC ($599 at AudioAdvisor) and a PS Audio power cable ($59 at AudioAdvisor) and the same Wellborne PS unit and Signal Cable digital power cable. So I am less than a grand in either digitial playback system and they both sound very good.

tonyb

Trey,
Your over exaggerating buddy. Nobody is saying spend 3 g's on a dac. Plenty good dacs in the sub 1 g catagory. You yourself in your original post compared it to a 3-5 g cdp. Why would you spend that much on a cdp and not have the convenience of a SB ? If you spent the same coin on a SB system as you would on a higher end cdp, it should be killer.

SACD aside, you can put together a nice SB system for under a g note. It's a matter of finding that synergy, doesn't sound like your up to the task anymore.....like you were years ago anyway. No offense ment pal, but trial and error in this hobby goes along way.

steveinaz

With DAC's you either get accuracy or coloration---take your pick. IMO, "warmth" should be done on the speaker end. I'm not understanding the "putting big money into SB" argument; for south of $500 I got the touch and CI Audio external power supply. I already had the DAC. There's not a CDP in existence at or under $1k I'd replace my SQB with; if there was, I would. With hindsight, and really having an understanding of just how subtle things get past the sweetspot (point of diminishing returns)--I wouldn't bother with any CDP under $2500.

I don't think anyone is calling the SQB a giant killer---but it can be a heck of a good value if implemented properly. It's high-res capabilities are just the cherry on top.

heiney9

VR3 wrote: »

Maybe I am still ever so slightly old school but it seems you guys are willing to spend thousands to draw out the potential in a convenience oriented tool.

It's ok to spend thousand's on something that is clearly less convenient? I don't get it, but that's your POV and I respect that. It's funny how your tune has changed from the SQB isn't that great to well if you have to spend thousands on something that adds convenience (and I'll add flexibility) then I don't understand. Is your argument it's not capable of staying with an expensive cdp with the right components or is it just too convenient so therefore it can't possibly be as good?

What's the difference if I spend $3K to get the SQB to sound like a $3K cdp? Money is money spent on a product that delivers the same. I am supposed to discount the one that offers more convenience just because it's not the old traditional method of spinning a cd?

I suppose you still plow your fields with mules.

Again, I completely value your POV and how you choose to do it, I don't understand it completely and it certainly doesn't mean the SQB, with the right set-up, can't match or exceed a stand alone cdp.

H9

steveinaz

Trey, you sound like me 4 months ago.....LOL Right Brock? I was skeptical as all hell.

I feel you Trey---it's the tactile feel, the "ritual" that's hard to let go of. Sean and I talked about this element at length on the phone a few weeks ago. The love one feels for cleaning the vinyl, placing it on the platter, dropping that needle. I'm there, I'm old school---I "get" it. All this "computer" crap robs the fun out of it.

VR3

dkg999 wrote: »

VR3 - $200 for a Wellborne PS (and I don't recommend anybody buy from them, there are other PS's available) and $399 for a Music Hall 25.3 DAC (on sale at Music Direct which is a local store for me), plus $60 for an upgraded tube for the MH DAC, and about $30 for a Signal Cable digital power cable. At that total price point for the "player" part of the digital music system it doesn't seem unreasonable.

For my main system I have a PS Audio DLIII DAC ($599 at AudioAdvisor) and a PS Audio power cable ($59 at AudioAdvisor) and the same Wellborne PS unit and Signal Cable digital power cable. So I am less than a grand in either digitial playback system and they both sound very good.

Do not take this as a knock but I honestly do not see the DACs mentioned above being that great of an improvement over the Decco 2 DAC or say the Dac my Shanling CDP had a while back...

This brings me back to my point, even with a decent DAC and so forth the Squeezebox is not comparable to the likes of players like Symphonic Line, Musical Fidelity Tri-Vista, etc etc... which is ultimately the point of my original post -

Tonyb,
I am definitely not up for trial and error building anymore - just want basic music playback, so yeah I am out of it - I am more into modifying speakers and making things go boom in my home theater lol...

Brock,
I think you are misunderstanding me... the Squeezebox is $250.00 - investing lets say $3,000 on a DAC is 12 times what the Squeezebox is worth... like it or hate it to me that is just unreasonable... I would probably look into a higher end streaming method that I have seen from other manufactures...

I respect the Squeezebox for what it is and I have read way to many threads claiming the SQB to be the it in audio... and even using that 3,000 dollar DAC I just can't see it being a match just because the way it extracts the data and utilizes it has to alter the sound in some way...

heiney9

That's fine Trey, but all you are doing is guessing. Many of us aren't guessing, and like Steve, I was skeptical as hell 3-4 years ago too. My brother had one before me and we used to butt heads about streaming vs. a cdp. I finally experimented and haven't turned back and never will. There is not a single reason to own a high end cdp unless you are looking to play SACD. And with the Sabre chip bing used in dac kits like the one Rich (SCompRacer) is building the stand alone cdp will be a dinosaur because the Sabre chip can be tapped to extract SACD.

H9

F1nut

I find the convenience argument a non-factor. But then again, I don't have the attention span of a gnat.