Squeezbox - Are they really that good?

[The_Burg]

Contemplating copying my entire CD collection to FLAC and streaming.
Question is how good will the quality be? I've heard some say the quality will actually be better than CD due to being re-read and streamed from buffered hard disk.
For reference current CD is Pioneer PDS901 and Musical Fidelity X-DAC. (Would the DAC in the Squeezbox be better than X-DAC?).
Amp is Exposure XX and speakers Rega EL8 and REL Q50.

Thanks.

[The_Burg]

Guess i will have to answer my own question as i've took the plunge and bought one.

£149.99 at PC World.

Setup will be my weekend task.

[SJobson]

Good price - I paid that for mine on special offer from Dabs earlier this year, but they've gone back up again online.

As for the internal DAC, it isn't as good as the one in my previous Arcam Alpha 7SE CD player. In fact, I couldn't distinguish between an MP3 and a FLAC copy of the same track through the built-in DAC.

I now run mine into a Musical Fidelity X-DAC V8 which works very well indeed. With FLAC files I think it is still distinguishable from the CD player (which is now an X-RAY V8) into the same DAC, but the sheer convenience of the Squeezebox interface means I rarely play CDs and don't care about the minor/possibly non-existent difference. The majority of my 6,000-odd music files remains MP3 (LAME encoded, VBR, approx 200kbps average) and they sound lovely too.

[The_Burg]

Got it working, only on test server and through headphones so far.
Took an eternity to get working, turned out to be me work VPN blocking it!
Looks pretty good but menu not the most intuitive, although i already want another for my alarm clock and another for the garage.

Got an old Dell Precision Workstation 220 which reckon will be ideal running Unbuntu. (Once i figure out how of course).

[The_Burg]

Having a bit of music session, not too sure about the quality so far but the fun of running through the 1000's of mp3 on my PC may outweigh the quality!
Very happy with my purchase so far, just a bit hard to see the display but maybe my lounge is too big or my eyesight is crap

[Baron Reg]

The_Burg said:

Having a bit of music session, not too sure about the quality so far but the fun of running through the 1000's of mp3 on my PC may outweigh the quality!
Very happy with my purchase so far, just a bit hard to see the display but maybe my lounge is too big or my eyesight is crap

The best result of my encoding >500 CDs into FLAC for my squeezebox was that I spotted items in my collection that I hadn't touched for years. The encoding was boring, boring, boring ... but it was a great chance to listen to stuff that I would usually pass over. It got me out of my comfort zone and encouraged me to start filling in the gaps in my collection.

BTW, look out for Exact Audio Copy. It's a good way of getting those FLACs well encoded.

[The_Burg]

Had a bit of chance to listen a bit now, have to say not really impressed.
For just general use it's fantastic, great way to access all my music without moving from my seat.
I've tried using EAC and FLAC / WAV rips, it all sounds very closed in and thin.
Plenty of bass, not involving though. The device gets great review so maybe i'm ripping to the wrong format? All lossless though.
Haven't tried the internal DAC so i'm using Musical Fidelity X-DAC.

Any suggestions? Or can someone send me a track that sounds good just in case i'm doing it wrong?

[davido140]

I demoted my CDs to the loft several years ago for a wireless streaming system (techie geek riding the crest of the gadget wave so-to-speak).

Mine went to MP3 though.

Unless you're a big audio-phile you wont notice the difference, my hi-fi kit is only a £1500 cheapo richer sounds system. Sounds fine to me!

I Ripped them at 192kps, its a bit less "lossy" and closer to CD quality.

It took me a whole weekend and 3 PCs to rip 300 CDs! good luck!

Edited by davido140 on Thursday 10th July 08:01

Edited by davido140 on Thursday 10th July 08:02

[telecat]

You obviously miss the detail lost, the problem is that's it's a compressed "lossy" format server. Get a server with a HUGE disk and transfer the CD/DVD-Audio/SACD native and you'll be better off, providing the playback side can handle it.

As for those who think they are all fantastic and state, "you'll never be able to tell the difference", well yes you can and in this instance it's fairly obvious the OP doesn't like the replay through a Hi-Fi. I tend to think that for most people MP3/AAC etc work well enough on Portable devices where the limit's are the size of the drivers in headphones. On More powerful systems with "large" speakers it's limitations are much more obvious.
As for those buying DAC's to "improve them" what's the Point?? It's pretty much a case of "GIGO".

Edited by telecat on Thursday 10th July 09:33

[The_Burg]

telecat said:

You obviously miss the detail lost, the problem is that's it's a compressed "lossy" format server. Get a server with a HUGE disk and transfer the CD/DVD-Audio/SACD native and you'll be better off, providing the playback side can handle it.

As for those who think they are all fantastic and state, "you'll never be able to tell the difference", well yes you can and in this instance it's fairly obvious the OP doesn't like the replay through a Hi-Fi. I tend to think that for most people MP3/AAC etc work well enough on Portable devices where the limit's are the size of the drivers in headphones. On More powerful systems with "large" speakers it's limitations are much more obvious.
As for those buying DAC's to "improve them" what's the Point?? It's pretty much a case of "GIGO".

Edited by telecat on Thursday 10th July 09:33

I used EAC and ripped to FLAC and WAV, couldn't tell the difference TBH.
Which is what made me think i was doing something wrong. The DAC is the same as for CDs, (Pioneer PDS 902 as transport).

[telecat]

The_Burg said:

telecat said:

You obviously miss the detail lost, the problem is that's it's a compressed "lossy" format server. Get a server with a HUGE disk and transfer the CD/DVD-Audio/SACD native and you'll be better off, providing the playback side can handle it.

As for those who think they are all fantastic and state, "you'll never be able to tell the difference", well yes you can and in this instance it's fairly obvious the OP doesn't like the replay through a Hi-Fi. I tend to think that for most people MP3/AAC etc work well enough on Portable devices where the limit's are the size of the drivers in headphones. On More powerful systems with "large" speakers it's limitations are much more obvious.
As for those buying DAC's to "improve them" what's the Point?? It's pretty much a case of "GIGO".

Edited by telecat on Thursday 10th July 09:33

I used EAC and ripped to FLAC and WAV, couldn't tell the difference TBH.
Which is what made me think i was doing something wrong. The DAC is the same as for CDs, (Pioneer PDS 902 as transport).

It's a tough one however I stand on "GIGO". The files have been processed and are now held on Disk. These have to be further processed to a Standard 16/44.1 datastream and they are in a device that at the price is not going to be as good a Transport as the Pioneer. Unless I'm mistaken the Pioneer is one of their "Stable Platter" units and will have a number of "tweaks" such as RFI Shielding and a stable and fairly hefty PSU. Not something I'd expect from the "Squeezebox" at that price.

Edited by telecat on Thursday 10th July 10:52

[Plotloss]

Telecat, the SQB3 is not intended as an audiophile component, thats what the SQB Transporter is for and that, given equal amplification, speakers and wire on a back to back test using the same source material significantly outshone a £4500 Linn Transport/DAC combination.

[The_Burg]

telecat said:

It's a tough one however I stand on "GIGO". The files have been processed and are now held on Disk. These have to be further processed to a Standard 16/44.1 datastream and they are in a device that at the price is not going to be as good a Transport as the Pioneer. Unless I'm mistaken the Pioneer is one of their "Stable Platter" units and will have a number of "tweaks" such as RFI Shielding and a stable and fairly hefty PSU. Not something I'd expect from the "Squeezebox" at that price.

Edited by telecat on Thursday 10th July 10:52

I thought the entire point was that using a PC should result in a bit perfect copy and thereby eliminate the errors from reading a disk in real time. Regarding the processing to 16bit 44khz this is native to CD so no processing should be required in WAV at least.
The Pioneer was fairly high spec in its day and indeed has the lovely turntable with rubber mat for the disk and weighs a ton!
May try upgrading PSU for the Squeezebox though i wouldn't have though this would make a huge difference. I suppose the actual PC and network makes some difference but, as the datastream is cached before playing and 100% bit perfect, then would this make any difference.
May try using CAT5 and maybe try the wired SPDIF rather than optical.

[telecat]

Plotloss said:

Telecat, the SQB3 is not intended as an audiophile component, thats what the SQB Transporter is for and that, given equal amplification, speakers and wire on a back to back test using the same source material significantly outshone a £4500 Linn Transport/DAC combination.

But we are not talking about the "Transporter" A device that costs £1500 and will have had more money spent on the design and components in order to lift it towards "Audiophile" quality. The device here is pretty much Basic design. And when was this test? Linn haven't had a Two box combination in their product range for an awful long time. That means the design is knocking on a bit compared to Modern Disc Spinners as is the "Transporter". I have no doubt it will be very good but it's horses for courses. If the quality output is good enough for you and you need that Mass storage it is a good solution. If ultimate Sound quality counts then it isn't. In this case The Pioneer is a better "feed" and quality counts. If it's a background player you need then it's OK.

[Plotloss]

Onboard it has the highest quality DAC available, no one, anywhere in the world of hifi uses a higher quality DAC, many of the DAC manufacturers indeed use exactly the same DAC.

I'm assuming you've not heard or tested a Transporter?

If so, how can you comment with any authority as to its capabilities?

[telecat]

The_Burg said:

telecat said:

It's a tough one however I stand on "GIGO". The files have been processed and are now held on Disk. These have to be further processed to a Standard 16/44.1 datastream and they are in a device that at the price is not going to be as good a Transport as the Pioneer. Unless I'm mistaken the Pioneer is one of their "Stable Platter" units and will have a number of "tweaks" such as RFI Shielding and a stable and fairly hefty PSU. Not something I'd expect from the "Squeezebox" at that price.

Edited by telecat on Thursday 10th July 10:52

I thought the entire point was that using a PC should result in a bit perfect copy and thereby eliminate the errors from reading a disk in real time. Regarding the processing to 16bit 44khz this is native to CD so no processing should be required in WAV at least.
The Pioneer was fairly high spec in its day and indeed has the lovely turntable with rubber mat for the disk and weighs a ton!
May try upgrading PSU for the Squeezebox though i wouldn't have though this would make a huge difference. I suppose the actual PC and network makes some difference but, as the datastream is cached before playing and 100% bit perfect, then would this make any difference.
May try using CAT5 and maybe try the wired SPDIF rather than optical.

Ah! I remember the "Perfect Sound every time" that Philips came up with when CD was introduced. You will never get a perfect copy but it should be pretty close unless there is a problem somewhere in the conversion chain. I'd try the Phono SP/DIF although most Toslink connections have a "fuller" sound than the Phono version. It could be down to lower grade components such as the SP/DIF, Toslink or Clock components. Also check that the Squeezebox is not recieving RFI from another source. This does have a big effect on the replay quality.

[The_Burg]

telecat said:

Ah! I remember the "Perfect Sound every time" that Philips came up with when CD was introduced. You will never get a perfect copy but it should be pretty close unless there is a problem somewhere in the conversion chain. I'd try the Phono SP/DIF although most Toslink connections have a "fuller" sound than the Phono version. It could be down to lower grade components such as the SP/DIF, Toslink or Clock components. Also check that the Squeezebox is not recieving RFI from another source. This does have a big effect on the replay quality.

Ah yes the original Philips bull.
Never expected perfect sound, the big difference being the way the data is taken from the CD, 1 minute error and a PC would fail whereas with music huge numbers of errors can occur with no obvious issue.
As i say the only difference is in using the Squeezebox as the transport in effect the rest of the replay chain is the same.
With a purely audio transport the difference in quality will to a large extent be to do with retrieval and stability of output, as the Squeezbox will be cached this should be less of an issue.
(Kind of feel in a way i may have a slightly substandard device maybe).
Still lots of things to fiddle with and learn.

[SJobson]

Funny, I run my Squeezebox through a Musical Fidelity X-DAC V8 and it sounds virtually indistinguishable from CDs (transport is an X-RAY V8) which runs through the same DAC. Have you checked the Squeezebox settings, such as Replaygain (should be off) etc?

[TomOSmith]

Have you got the digital output running at fixed (and maximum) volume?