Mac Mini vs Squeezebox

If you decided on the MacMini, you can always do music in other rooms via AirPort Express and/or Apple TV devices.

Eloise

>> Has anyone done a comparison of a Mini and a Squeezebox into a DAC? Is the output of the Squeezebox of high enough quality for a relatively high end DAC?

I have owned both, the AppleTV and the Squeezebox paired with a Lavry DA10 and a Benchmark DAC1. To me they sounded very close, but I recalled the Squeezebox sounded slightly better with its coaxial output.

The AppleTV was easier to use but the Squeezebox was a lot more flexible in terms of file formats and plugins support.

>> Anyone tried any of the iPhone apps for the Squeezebox? I read the various versions of the Squeezebox firmware affect sound quality, does this only relate to the use of the internal DAC?

I used iPeng for iPhone for both the Squeezebox and the Transporter, very useful with more options than the Apple Remote. Some people think firmwares make a difference, I do not think so and the ex-owner Sean Adams neither. But some firmware may muck up some parameters like replay gain and stuff like that. But those can be fixed with a few mouse clicks.

>> Finally, has anyone tried getting Squeezeserver to work on a QNAP NAS?

Yes I am using Squeezcenter with QNAP TS-219P, surprisingly it works even better and faster than running it from a dual core laptop.

>> I have tried a Transporter and didn’t really like the sound.

That’s a tough one, my Transporter was way superior to any combination of Squezebox + DACs, including the queezebox + Weiss DAC which I now have. The Macbook Pro Plus the Weiss DAC however is something else altogether.

>> I owned a Linn Majik DS which I quite liked but didn’t think gelled well with Naim and the interface was appalling!

Using addin software (Squeezgy DS?), you can actually use the Squeezebox as a slave to control the Linn DS using the Squeeze interface.

I have tried the Transporter with the Klimax DS. The Klimax was slightly better, but not THAT much better. The Transporter is very special, I miss it after selling it.

But like I mentioned, the Weiss + Firewire isvery special.

An apple tv is not an apple mini.

The mini will offer you far more options so has to be worth the punt.

I'm really happy with my Mini (into SuperNait DAC). I control it using either the "Remote" app on my iPod touch or more commonly, via screen sharing from a Macbook. All very convenient. Highly recommended.

Oh, and as Eloise advises, the Airport express is a low-cost option for sending music to other rooms etc. It only works with iTunes ou-of-the-box but there are some third-party apps that allow it to use other media players.

We also use it for video from iTunes downloads or sometimes direct from the 'net. (I had one issue with Hi Def video discussed elsewhere - but that's fixed now).

I currently use a QNAP-TS419P running SqueezeCentre. It streams to an SB3 which connects into a Beresford DAC. The sound quality is very good, I see no reason why the quality would not be high enough for a high end DAC. Indeed, I’m planning to try out the Naim DAC when available with my SB.

I’ve also compared the audio of my Laptop using W7 (via coax digital out of docking station into Beresford DAC) with MediaMonkey set up for “bit perfect” playback with the Squeexebox set up and found it difficult to notice any difference.

I’m using the latest version of iPeng on my iTouch which is very good. The new version (1.2) is much better IMO.

Having said that I wouldn’t say no to a Mac Mini, very cool piece of kit. You could always run SC on the Mac, plus you could have Spotify access at the same time!

JYOW…..how much difference is there between the Lavry and the Weiss, I would definitely like to compare both with the new Naim DAC?

Jack

Thanks all.

Not a bad idea of running SC on the Mac!

Any idea if you can play hires files on a Squeezebox if the DAC supports it?

Forgot to mention, you will need the latest SB receiver (touch) if you want to use hi-res files.

Jack

Wazza - the classic SB3 squeezebox will do 24bit/48khz natively, whereas the (new) squeezebox Touch will do 24bit/96kHz natively so the Touch is probably a better bet. Any higher sample rates are downsampled using sox. You can control either using the excellent ipeng on an apple Touch. There is a post on the slimdevices forum that suggests that the quality of the spdif output on the squeezebox Touch is better than that on the SB3. Noone knows yet whether either or both are sufficiently good to get SYNC on the new NAIM DAC. A Squeezebox Touch controlled from an apple Touch using ipeng would be a very pleasant system to use - a touch screen network music player next to your hifi and a touch screen remote control in your hand for about £400.
P.S. Another issue that's worth considering is latency. The NAIM DAC buffers data, so introduces a delay though how much is not yet public knowledge. A Squeezebox also has some latency, whereas a Mac should have less, so it might be that a Mac based system will feel more responsive.

quote:

Originally posted by garyi:
An apple tv is not an apple mini.

The mini will offer you far more options so has to be worth the punt.

I agree with that. The mini is also an excellent platform to be connected to a "serious" DAC asynchronously via Firewire or USB.

quote:

Originally posted by Jack:
JYOW…..how much difference is there between the Lavry and the Weiss, I would definitely like to compare both with the new Naim DAC?

Jack

This is from memory so take it with a grain of salt. With S/PDIF I not think there is a major difference. But the Firewire connection to a Macbook is a whole different animal.

I have seen people comparing the Berkeley and dCS and EMM DACs using AES/EBU or S/PDIF coaxial connectivity, mostly in favor of the more expensive DACs. Had they used Firewire on the Weiss, I am sure the story would be much different.

JYOW that is also my experience, the Weiss excels through it's firwire connection.

I've had all options - SB3/ Duet & Controller and finally Mac mini with firewire to a Weiss DAC2.

TBH - not much difference in SQ between the Mac and SB3 via SPDIF. As said before the Mac will give you more options. Personnaly i think the iTunes / remote app interface is much more elegant than the SB route but that's just me. The new touch looks interesting though

James

Get both a Mac Mini and a Squeezebox, best of both worlds!

quote:

I have tried a Transporter and didn’t really like the sound.

Wayne,

You're about to get a hard time (and family budget devastation) to sort out your source if Transporter was not up to your spirits

In fact, Transporter sits at the top of the existing streaming solutions offering a very low noise floor and very good sound clarity.
I have auditioned Majik DS several times and -- to my ears and on my tracks (mostly jazz) -- it was MUCH below Transporter in sound quality: clarity, soundstage, microdynamics.
I think TP is more towards Akurate/Klimax range although TP's price is really misleading on audiophile market.

What I miss with Transporter is the microdynamics and vinyl smoothness which can be found in top Naim sources.
It sounds on par with 5K$ CDPs like CD5X/HiCap (better in some aspects and giving up in others).
At the same time I found that PS Audio DLIII external DAC gave me more control over sound and a bit smoother presentation at cost of some noise floor and clarity.
I finally found myself running TP through DLIII most of my time -- to my own greatest surprise

Anyway, let audio circuitry aside the Transporter is one of the best digital streamers today in terms of output jitter and UI and which can perfectly pair with top-range external DACs.

I own Squeezebox as well. I tested digital outs of SB3 against TP -- both feeding the same external DAC and found that TP digital outs were much better in all aspects due to much lower jitter. This was very audible mainly because the DAC in test did not have a jitter rejection (except upsampling if we can consider it as a kind of anti-jitter treatment). If run TP and SB3 to a DAC with a serious anti-jitter circuitry it may possibly come that there will be no major difference between the two -- just guessing.

Oh, yes -- TP supports 24/96 with very low jitter (which is even more important for hi-res than for 16/44) while SB3 is limited by 24/48.
I really enjoy 24/96 LP rips on TP into DAC, much better than Red Books

Re: Transporter... Agreed.

The transporter can be improved substantially with a better dac.

I know, which is why I'm in the queue for Naim's one, but as a streamer the Transporter's hard to beat imo.

Never connected my mac mini to my 282, but have been running an SB3 for sometime. You don't have to have wifi activated to use a squeezebox remote.

I used it with a Beresford Dac, and now without. Just bought an upgraded "touch" ready power supply which is showing interesting results.

The touch will be seen on your network, and more importantly any usb attached storage to the Touch. so no need for a NAS anymore.

The Touch is now officially available (15/10/2009).

I listen mostly to the SB3, although the CDX/XPS is clearly better for SQ.

Peter

Agree with previous posters. Like I mentioned you will find it very hard to reach the Transporter level of performance using a stock Squeezebox and a DAC. I also compared the Linn Klimax DS with the Transporter and the result was inconclusive, 3 of us agreed slightly in favor of the Klimax, but part of that could be affected by perception of the astronomical price difference.

If you like the Squeeze interface, I do not think you will be disappointed with the Transporter. Especially with the street price nowadays.

I wonder if SB Touch S/PDIF out has the same jitter as SB3 or better?

Just difficult to imagine significant improvement if a stock pulse PS is still in use.

I don't have any experience with a Mac Mini, but I'm using a SB3 Classic and early this week I got me a Cambridge DACmagic.
Despite it modest price and size it's a serious source, and at least on a par with my CD5i. (for about half the price)

Alco

quote:

Originally posted by AMA:
I wonder if SB Touch S/PDIF out has the same jitter as SB3 or better?

Just difficult to imagine significant improvement if a stock pulse PS is still in use.

AMA,according to John Swenson on the slimdevices forum:

"In the touch the S/PDIF stream is reclocked by a low jitter flop fed directly from the main clocks. The SB3 has the stream coming directly from the FPGA. That almost certainly gives lower jitter on the touch output.

The SB3 has some EMI suppression devices on the output which messed up the impedance characteristics significantly increasing reflections on the cable, thus increasing jitter in the receiver of the DAC. The touch does not have these.

Both the touch and the SB3 have a separate "connector board" which is only a two layer board. Maintaining proper impedance of the traces when going from the multilayer main board to the double sided board was not done very well on the SB3, it seems to have been done much better on the touch.

So all in all the touch has a very well done S/PDIF output with a fair amount of effort put into preserving low jitter on its way to the DAC. Its not using expensive parts or any special "magic bullet", just honest good design and implementation with attention to the details. "

likesmusic, nice find - the touch is looking like a nice piece of kit and is certainly making me consider swapping my sonos for one, esp with the 96/24 support, touch screen....tempting

likesmusic

Thanks for info.
It seems that Touch is a serious digital streamer which may be used in audiophile world. If it can make the same job as Transporter when feeding a Naim DAC then Touch will definitely take it over. How much it will come?

I still have concerns on power supply. Difficult to make a super-fine clock when feeding a rattle like SB3 power supply.
At least I can suggest that coax output is no go as it will link a noisy ground of Touch with high quality ground of naim amps.