[crooner]

Is not that simple. I've found that a drop of 30% in signal strength affects speed considerably. This is because packets need to be retransmitted. This is more noticeable in a laptop surfing the web. The Squeezebox has a fairly large internal buffer, so it is more resilient to network dropouts.

As for the dimensions of my unit, it's actually not large by stereo component standards. If you put the power supply and main unit together side by side it will approach the typical 19 inch front panel which is what I was aiming for.

One advantage of using a metal enclosure is that you get a certain degree of shielding from internally generated RFI or vice-versa. The extra shielding of the often noisy VFD display should contribute to the overall performance.

The Stillpoints ERS sheets which filter RFI/EMI are really effective, something I have demonstrated by placing a portable AM radio close to a source of interference. The noise would considerably go down when wrapped in this material.

Best regards,
crooner

I think that in discussing ethernet connections, either wired or wireless, a connection is either made or not.  It doesn't make any practical difference whether or not the signal strength is high or low, as long as there is a connection-all the packets will be reasembled at the end point.  The quality of the sound derived will be the same.  If accurate data communications were an issue w/ ethernet then it wouldn't be the standard that it obviously is. 
While your photographs certainly demonstrate your ingenuity and craftsmanship,the larger form factor is not necessarily a good thing.  The small size of the factory product, while problematic to modders does make placement less of an issue. 

[lcrim]

If the data being transmitted were text instead of music would it have more or less characters with a higher strength connection?  If the data transmitted was a picture, would it look any different if the signal strength were any stronger?  Ethernet provides error checking that assures that the data received is identical to what was sent.  There could be no reliable data communication if this weren't true.
There is in addition a buffer built in to the Squeeze Box and musical timing could not be affected as the buffer reassembles the packets before it plays. 
Put simply, there is either a connection or not, there is no better or worse.

[zybar]

If the data being transmitted were text instead of music would it have more or less characters with a higher strength connection?  If the data transmitted was a picture, would it look any different if the signal strength were any stronger?  Ethernet provides error checking that assures that the data received is identical to what was sent.  There could be no reliable data communication if this weren't true.
There is in addition a buffer built in to the Squeeze Box and musical timing could not be affected as the buffer reassembles the packets before it plays. 
Put simply, there is either a connection or not, there is no better or worse.

I am in agreement with Larry on this one.

Unless the music is "stuttering", choppy, etc... the transmission is fine regardless of what the signal strength might be.

George

[crooner]

My point was that a weak signal strength may cause a pause or muting of the sound while the buffer replenishes. Obviously there's never any audible stuttering or other distortions. The music simply stops when a serious dropout is encountered. Having a strong signal safeguards against this occurrence.

[tomjtx]

My point was that a weak signal strength may cause a pause or muting of the sound while the buffer replenishes. Obviously there's never any audible stuttering or other distortions. The music simply stops when a serious dropout is encountered. Having a strong signal safeguards against this occurrence.

That is an excellent point.

Putting my SB3 next to my Transporter I sometimes get dropouts on the SB3 but never on my TP with it's 2 external antenna.

It seems you have have gone all out , Crooner, to make the best performing, sounding and looking product possible. Isn't that what high end is all about?

[crooner]

Certainly Tom!

I got inspiration from many other products including the Transporter. I figured, if the wireless card has two connections, why not use dual external antennas? Overkill is never too much in high-end audio!

The planning of this project took a couple of months of researching. Without the web and its vast resources it would have taken much longer, I'm sure. I saw other enclosures with Squeezeboxes on them. Some were huge with a lot of empty "air" inside. Often I would see the main boards close to the front with long leads going to the rear connections, not good practice.

It has been common knowledge that vacuum fluorescent displays can cause noise to creep into the audio circuits. Just extending the flat cable going to the display would potentially reduce this interference. The metal shield would further reduce it.

I was happy that the main board ended up at the rear of the unit. Having seen the innards of the Transporter, this was the way to go. Short leads to the output connections and power input.

I was also concerned with all the stray RFI inside the SB and the EMI emissions of the power transformer. The ERS sheets proved to be the most practical means to combat this. Somebody commented that digital pulse transformers were prone to pickup RFI from the nearby wireless card. With this in mind, I shielded the transformer with a small piece of ERS material.

So, in all, I guess I can say this project pretty much encompasses all that I have learned about audio in the past two decades or so. A long journey, but I'm happy to say this is the best time ever to experience digital audio, no doubt about it!

My point was that a weak signal strength may cause a pause or muting of the sound while the buffer replenishes. Obviously there's never any audible stuttering or other distortions. The music simply stops when a serious dropout is encountered. Having a strong signal safeguards against this occurrence.

That is an excellent point.

Putting my SB3 next to my Transporter I sometimes get dropouts on the SB3 but never on my TP with it's 2 external antenna.

It seems you have have gone all out , Crooner, to make the best performing, sounding and looking product possible. Isn't that what high end is all about?

[tanchiro58]

You unit looks so much better than a garage built look.

Well most of big high end companies were started from "garage built," is that right?

[t-head]

1000a

For the new comers its not necessary to understand it.  The little beast can sound quite good with a few upgrades.

Can you explain upgrades to us dummies in plain english, please?

richard

presently using streaming audio or rips from same to hard drive.

[1000a]

1000a

For the new comers its not necessary to understand it.  The little beast can sound quite good with a few upgrades.

Can you explain upgrades to us dummies in plain english, please?

richard

presently using streaming audio or rips from same to hard drive.

Hi Richard

I am also quite new to this streaming music thing, so I may not be the guy to ask.  What I was trying to do in my post was to say to people who have not gotten an SB3 yet to not be overwhelmed by the super cool really fleshed out box the member had posted about here.
Meaning an incredible amount of effort is not required to get good sound from an SB3.

So from my understanding and experience thus far with mine compared to gear I have used.

1- a stock SB3 w the basic PS by itself is a good sounding player = say 300-350. CDP

2- a stock SB3 w the basic PS and a good DAC (very good ones available new at about 450-550 now a days) or purchase a 1,200 DAC used for about the same $$, will give you a very good player for little $$ (850.  = say a 1,200 CDP.)

3- add a good PS such as the Welborne (300.) and you have got a player = about a 2,200. CDP.

So what I am trying to say hear is bang for the buck a little effort can make the SB3 easily compete with CDPs considerably more expensive.  and then add the convenience its fantastic.

Now you can take another approach and have Wayne at Bolder Cable mod your SB3 digi and analogue both for I'm guessing check his site 650.00?  for performance matching or bettering the above.  He also has a no-holds bared PS for it at about 850.

or you can just do digi mods with him (250.) and stick with an outboard DAC.

I am getting very very good sound from mine with a used Birdland DAC (550.) and a Welborne PS (300.) so this makes my investment 1,150.  It would be again improved w Wayne's digi mod at 250., I am presently sitting on this decision can not part with it and love it sound right now.
Also I am curious what Wayne can pull out of his hat with the SB4 which I am told is coming fairly soon.  Hope all this helps.

Most of us want to better it, so

A-some are going w Wayne's digi and analogue mods
B-others are using a separate DAC that easily outperforms the on-board DAC before mods.
C-some of us in B are doing this with Wayne's mod to the digi section of the SB3
Finally most of us all are hearing improvements by using a better PS (35.-150.-300.-850.)

Gee this is long winded: but there are choices and all are good,

bare min should be decent PS, (35-150).
decent outboard DAC, (300-550)
big help from a digi mod (250)

or decent PS and let Wayne do the analogue and digi mods.

please keep in mind the $$ comparisons I have made are my estimates but I can say they are in keeping with most involved with the SB2 or SB3 who have done the basic upgrades mentioned above.  Keep in mind you will need to get a cable to connect the SB to a outboard DAC. 

[denjo]

I agree with 1000a who has encapsulated the options very well in his post!
I am using a stock SB3 with digital out to an external DAC (Altmann Attraction with JISCO) and a Paul Hynes shunt regulated PSU. It was a vast improvement from the wallwart power. you must defeat the volume controls on the SB3 for optimum digital out.
I also agree that the SB3 is one of the best things that has happened to hifi in a long while! I am not technically minded but setting it up and enjoying its benefits has been a wonderful experience. Now I hardly ever use my CDP!
Give it a try! You will love it and chnaces are you will not look back!

[1000a]

you must defeat the volume controls on the SB3 for optimum digital out.

I have not heard this before how do I accomplish this?  I was under the impression that the volume controll on the SB3 should always be at maximum to get its full potential? Are there settings in Slim Server for this?  Are there optimal settings I may be unaware of? that could be a good thing.     1000a

[bpape]

When listening critically, I always have the SB volume all the way up and use my preamp volume control.  When in party mode, I just set the preamp volume to the max level I'm comfortable with so nobody gets remote happy as listening is not as critical then. 

Bryan

[ted_b]

you must defeat the volume controls on the SB3 for optimum digital out.

I have not heard this before how do I accomplish this?  I was under the impression that the volume controll on the SB3 should always be at maximum to get its full potential? Are there settings in Slim Server for this?  Are there optimal settings I may be unaware of? that could be a good thing.     1000a

In Slimserver's player settings, set digital out as fixed (player settings-> audio -> digital volume control).

[1000a]

I'll try that and see what I think, Thanks.  is the fixed position just maxed out?
I guess the improvement might come from 1 less thing being served, anyway easy enough to compare cool, I may like it better.