Squeezebox and AV2

Posted by: Marc Evans on 16 September 2004

In keeping with the current threads on computer based music playback I just got my squeezebox the other day ( http://www.slimp3.com) and hooked it up to my AV2/175 via the coax digital output.

Music is ripped onto my server and compressed losslessly with FLAC. The result is interesting. It's early days yet but the first thing that hit me was how clean the sound was. "Ruthlessly transparant" would be a good phrase - if the CD is recorded well you know about it. If the CD is recorded badly you really know about it! I presume that putting a decent DAC in the chain would tame this behaviour slightly but that will have to wait for a bit (unless anyone's feeling generous in the name of experimentation Big Grin )

I think the sound through the squeezebox is more detailed than I'm used to from my CD player (Rega Planet), with better channel separation as well. It might be a tad "bright" although the difference is pretty subtle and it's certainly not enough to worry about, at least to my ears. One interesting thing is that I'd become used to hearing the planet whispering away in the corner during quiet passeges but with the squeezebox there is *no* noise so when the music stops I seem to notice it more.

So will I be keeping it? You bet. The sheer convenience of having every CD I own available at the touch of a button can't be overstated. I'm putting together a cheap RAID 1 mirror (because I don't want to rip everything twice) and that should do me for well into the forseeable future in terms of capacity.
Posted on: 16 September 2004 by Marc Evans
I haven't tried any other formats. Well that's not entirely true, I have a bunch of MP3s and at high bitrates (320kbps) they sound pretty good but as a matter of principle I'd stay away from that for a music archive.

All lossless compression schemes will end up feeding you with the same data so I didn't think there was any point in a lengthy auditioning exercise. From what I've read, Apple lossless may have better compression and there's a new Windows media lossless format which is supposed to offer 50% compression but hey, disk space is cheap these days!

I went with FLAC as it was open, non-proprietory and seemes to have the greatest chance of being adopted in the embedded device market. I want to avoid having 200GB of music encoded in a format that nothing else can play in 5 years time.

I'll keep an eye on the DAC thread, although I think the budget will keep me from doing anything about it for a while. It'll be interesting to see what people have to say though.
Posted on: 16 September 2004 by Martin Payne
quote:
Originally posted by Marc Evans:
I think the sound through the squeezebox is more detailed than I'm used to from my CD player (Rega Planet), with better channel separation as well. It might be a tad "bright" although the difference is pretty subtle and it's certainly not enough to worry about, at least to my ears.



Marc,

I don't think you should be talking about the "sound" of the squeezebox, since you aren't reallt listening to it - rather the digital out from the Squeezebox & the external DACs in the AV2.

cheers, Martin

E-mail:- MartinPayne (at) Dial.Pipex.com. Put "Naim" in the title.
Posted on: 17 September 2004 by Marc Evans
Martin: fair point, if a bit pedantic! I really meant to illustrate the configuration of the system as it is now, rather than as it used to be. Although weren't you arguing in another thread that the front end in an all digital system did make a difference? I think you need to get your story straight Wink

Julian: I'll give the MP3 transcoding a go sometime - I haven't really done an A/B on that.
Posted on: 17 September 2004 by Martin Payne
quote:
Originally posted by Marc Evans:
Martin: fair point, if a bit pedantic!



Marc,

guilty. I was just trying to avoid someone buying one and then being dissapointed to get the sound of a £100 (?) piece of consumer electronics, instead of the quality of a £2,300 Naim processor.

I doubt that the bare box would have "more detail than a Rega Planet".



quote:
Although weren't you arguing in another thread that the front end in an all digital system did make a difference? I think you need to get your story straight Wink



Agreed. If you re-read my posting you will see that I very carefully phrased it as "(listening to) the digital out from the Squeezebox & the external DACs in the AV2". As usual, I did indeed mean that you were "listening to" the digital output as much as you were listening to the DACs in the AV2.


I am fascinated by your comment that you'd like to hear the setup with "a decent DAC", which implies that those in the AV2 are rather average. How good/bad do you feel that they are in the AV2?

Cheers, Martin

E-mail:- MartinPayne (at) Dial.Pipex.com. Put "Naim" in the title.
Posted on: 18 September 2004 by Mr Underhill
Marc,

Are you using the wireless system?

Martin
Posted on: 19 September 2004 by prowla
I sometimes play my guitar through mine...

Paul
Posted on: 19 September 2004 by Marc Evans
quote:

Are you using the wireless system?

Martin

No, I've got it hanging directly off a 10/100 switch. I don't currently have a wireless LAN but that may change in the future.
Posted on: 19 September 2004 by Marc Evans
quote:

I am fascinated by your comment that you'd like to hear the setup with "a decent DAC", which implies that those in the AV2 are rather average. How good/bad do you feel that they are in the AV2?


It's really very hard to judge as I've got nothing to base a comparison on. I'm making the assumption that a DAC such as Julian is running (for example - not to single him out or anything!) which cost over 2000 UKP new would be better than the DAC component of a complete AV processor/preamp costing about the same.

The presentation of the sound has changed from what I'm used to hearing and this makes it hard to judge "quality".

I'm hearing masses more detail than I ever did before (as a result of the AV2) but I think the trebel is a bit forward - the presentation of the planet masked the detail but also toned down some of the harsh highs.

I don't notice this behaviour on movie soundtracks which sound superb. I guess this reflects both the quality of high-res sound from DVD and the design purpose of the AV2 which after all was sold as an AV processor, not a music DAC.
Posted on: 01 November 2004 by Marc Evans
Well it's been nearly two months since I started on this project and I've listened to a *lot* of music since then so I thought I'd finish the story.

At first I thought the sound using the AV2 as a DAC to the squeezebox was much better than my previous CD player. It was certainly more detailed but the more I listened the more I was irritated by the overly bright presentation. Cymbals really seemed to hit me in the face and it got quite wearing after a while.

I can't justify a DAC64 or anything even remotely in that price range (although I'm sure it would be excellent) so I managed to find a second hand rega "io" - the original upgrade path to my trusty planet - and voila! Problem solved. I now have music again!

So although I still rate the AV2 as a surround processor I have to say I wouldn't recommend it as a music DAC for digital sources. The only guess I can make is that music suffers because the digital input of the AV2 has to be routed through the surround processor; the "direct" bypass mode only works on the analogue inputs.

Having said that, once you do get a decent DAC in there then the squeezebox rocks! Assuming you have all the other prerequisites (PC, storage space, some geeky inclinations) then I'd definitely recommend the hard drive audio path as a way to go.
Posted on: 02 November 2004 by karyboue
Marc,

I completly agree with you.
I use a DVD player with the AV2 as a DAC. It is almost the same sound that my CD5/FC2. Almost impossible to say which of the two players is running but after long listenings I noticed that DVD/AV2 has something less than the CD5. It is irritating as you say but ... because I bought a DVD recorder and I am about to buy a DVD5 I needed a second and very good coax cable. I bought a Chord Digital Signature (my other one is a Chord Prodac). It has almost no sound difference with the Prodac ... but it links the music, it added something not perceptible at first. I thought about it and the irritation seems to comes from the "flow", not the digital flow, the flow of the music and the effort "asked".
For me a very good coax cable resolved the problem, I believe it is worth trying it.
Posted on: 02 November 2004 by kuma
marc & karyboue,

Which digital cable are you using?
Posted on: 02 November 2004 by karyboue
I was using a Chord Prodac and now the Chord Digital Signature.

For info : I now use the Prodac with a Sony DVD recorder and it is much much better than using an analogue cable (for instance a Chord Cobra 2).