[audio-heaven]

My Benchmark Dac also buffers and re-clocks the signal but it hasn't stopped the UD-10 beating my Squeezebox as a transport

My advice would be to compare the 2 if you can, I was surprised at the improvement over the Squeezebox that the UD-10 bought to my system!

So surprised I bought a UD-10 soon after I heard a friends

[mcullinan]

I dont think there is a way to do this because I have to go through wifi, computer upstairs, stereo downstairs.
Mike

[audio-heaven]

I dont think there is a way to do this because I have to go through wifi, computer upstairs, stereo downstairs.
Mike

Yes I understand your problem that is where the wireless squeezebox really does come into it's own, luckily my main system is in the same room as my PC, it's quite far away but I got myself a 5 metre USB cable which reaches the Hi Fi......just

Have you thought about having Bolder Cables mod your Squeezebox? The improvement it great or so I’ve heard.
You do loose some output though as it goes from 2V down to 1.5, ok if you run the SQ direct into your Power amp but if you don't you must have enough gain to get the volume you're used to.

[mcullinan]

Why should I have to reclock my digital information twice... IDK... Now Im lost in a swirling mass of TMI.
Mike

[Rashiki]

As I understand it the Squeezebox as a transport is held back by its poor jitter spec Wayne at Bolder Cables does a modification to the squeezebox to improve this less than great digital performance, the SB uses more than one crystal so it can pick up internet radio, this is o

I wouldn't say that the SqueezeBox has a poor jitter spec. Check out the review in Stereophile -- John Atkinson measured the jitter level and found it to be quite low.
http://www.stereophile.com/budgetcomponents/906slim/index3.html

I haven't seen any measurements of the UD-10's jitter performance -- it may be quite a bit better than the SB3, but to say that the stock SB3's jitter performance is "poor" is misinformation.

 -Rob

[AphileEarlyAdopter]

Why should I have to reclock my digital information twice... IDK... Now Im lost in a swirling mass of TMI.
Mike

You dont have to ..based on my reading on the internet, it looks like the Lavry is very much immune to jitter. Note, the way it reclocks the digital input is very different from the Benchmark. It puts things into a memory buffer and then clocks it out.
If you are the paranoid person, you can try some linear power supplies for the Squeezebox and/or different digital (especially some glass toslinks) cables.

[audio-heaven]

As I understand it the Squeezebox as a transport is held back by its poor jitter spec Wayne at Bolder Cables does a modification to the squeezebox to improve this less than great digital performance, the SB uses more than one crystal so it can pick up internet radio, this is o

I wouldn't say that the SqueezeBox has a poor jitter spec. Check out the review in Stereophile -- John Atkinson measured the jitter level and found it to be quite low.
http://www.stereophile.com/budgetcomponents/906slim/index3.html

I haven't seen any measurements of the UD-10's jitter performance -- it may be quite a bit better than the SB3, but to say that the stock SB3's jitter performance is "poor" is misinformation.

 -Rob

Hi, I am only going by what I have read about the Bolder Cable modifications where one of the problems addressed was to bypass the extra clock crystal which lowered the overall jitter of the SB (at least that's what I've read ) of course jitter is not the only thing Bolder does to improve the quality of the Squeezebox, the power supply is also subject to extensive improvements.

I am in no way trying to bring down the Squeezebox's performance which I think is VERY good, actually I own one so I don't think it' a poor performer, but there must be a reason why the UD-10 out performs my Squeezebox on transport duties.
I use a VERY high quality linear Power supply custom made for me with my SB and it sounds FAR better for it, however to my ears the UD-10 is smoother more detailed with better separation less grain and tighter in the bass than the stock SB.
So you can perhaps see why I have come to these conclusions? I'm certainly not trying to give any miss information.
Basically the SB 's Jitter performance is good but it can be made better otherwise Bolder Cable and Empirical audio's new ‘Pace Car’ add on which is designed to eliminate Jitter by re-clocking the Squeezebox wouldn’t have such a massive improvement in sound quality.

I am only relaying the personal experiences I’ve had with these 2 units other people’s will differ I’m sure but if there are any stock Squeezebox owners out there who get the chance to hear a UD-10 in their system they may find it to be quite an improvement over their un modded SB I did

[acd483]

I thought the UD10 had a DAC inside> No?
Mike

It uses a Burr Brown PCM2704 for the USB conversion but the UD-10 does not have any analouge outputs. in this respect it's just like your Squeezebox it is a transport only.



I also have a Squeezebox 3 but the UD-10 sounds a lot better, sure you loose the great functionality and wireless capability of the Squieezebox but the superior sound quality of the UD-10 more than makes up for it IMO
A modified Squeezebox is a different matter all together however at £75 the UD-10 is cheaper than having your Squeezebox modified at Bolder.
I hope to get my Squeezebox modded one day but untill then I'm loving the little UD-10 it sounds great with my Benchmark dac 1.

Of course the UD-10 has an analog-out...it's called headphone out!

[avta]

could the headphone out be connected to a preamp input? If so how?

[mcullinan]

look at the pic on the left...the headphone to stereo out, so I would say yes!

[lonewolfny42]

The connection from your computer to UD-10 and then on to your Hi Fi goes like this:

Computer USB out using a USB type A-A cable
Into the single USB port on the front of the UD-10
On the rear of the UD-10 you have a rage of digital output connections
eg: spdif XLR/AES/EBU Optical BNC
choose your preference from the digital outputs and connect to your DAC, you cannot use the UD-10 without a dac.

Hope this helps

Sounds simple enough...and its inexpensive...I'll have to give it a try.

pardales.....looks good......

[avta]

The usb connections on computers are for input devices. How does that work?

[audio-heaven]

could the headphone out be connected to a preamp input? If so how?

  Yes you got me there, the UD-10 actually comes with an adapter 'mini jack' to phono, what I meant to say was there are not any analouge out's on the rear like a normal DAC just lot's of digital outputs.

So using the headphone output is indeed an option that I forgot to mention sorry about that

I found that the UD-10 sounds a bit thin and lacking in the top end right out of the box, so it requires a bit of running in I think, I have only had it for a few days but already it has improved a lot, it is sounding much more full and the top is now very good, I'm not sure how long it will take to settle down completely but I am enjoying it allready

[mcullinan]

Could I run opticAL for about 60 or 70 feet? hehe. What a mess. Though Id love to hear if there was an improvement.
Mike

[audio-heaven]

Could I run opticAL for about 60 or 70 feet? hehe. What a mess. Though Id love to hear if there was an improvement.
Mike

I guess theoretically it's possible if you can get hold of such a long optical cable I don't know enough about the optical interface to know if very long runs of cable would introduce any errors or not but you can't get much faster than the speed of light and companies have sent data down optical cables of great distances so I don't think there would be a problem.

The longest USB cable I could get was 5 metres so you would only need an optical cable of 55 or 65 feet

[Wayne1]

For some more information and thoughts on the Trends USB converter, you might want to check out this thread

Trends USB DAC on BOLDER forum

I had one of those to play with a few months ago. Right away, I found the sound was a LOT better when used with an external 5 volt power supply, rather than the USB supply. There are quite a few things that can be done internally to this unit to improve the sound.

mgalusha finally removed some of the digital output connections and installed a set of RCA outputs to use in his office system.



The general conclusion of this unit is it does sound good, it can be made to sound better, but it does not come close to a modded SB in our systems.

[tonyptony]

Does anyone know if the E-mu 0404 has similar functionality, and if it does how it compares to the Trends?

[audio-heaven]

For some more information and thoughts on the Trends USB converter, you might want to check out this thread

Trends USB DAC on BOLDER forum

I had one of those to play with a few months ago. Right away, I found the sound was a LOT better when used with an external 5 volt power supply, rather than the USB supply. There are quite a few things that can be done internally to this unit to improve the sound.

mgalusha finally removed some of the digital output connections and installed a set of RCA outputs to use in his office system.

The general conclusion of this unit is it does sound good, it can be made to sound better, but it does not come close to a modded SB in our systems.

Hi Wayne, I have just bought a UD-10 as a stop gap until I can afford to send you my Squeezebox for modification, I have found my custom made squeezebox PS was a huge improvement on my UD-10 just as it was with my Squeezebox.

My only concern is the drop in output after modification, I can't really use the Squeezebox directly to my power amp 'which would be the ideal setup for sound quality' as I need to use my modified Denon 2900 as well.

I use a passive TVC, it has a 6db lift and I am hoping this would give me enough gain to cover the decrease in output, I have looked at the Burson buffer but it would increase the cost significantly.

Do you think the modified Squeezebox 3 would have enough output to work ok with my TVC? My power amp is quite insensitive but I am getting decent enough volume with the 2v sources I'm using at the moment.

Thanks

[Wayne1]

I use a passive TVC, it has a 6db lift and I am hoping this would give me enough gain to cover the decrease in output.

A lot will depend on which TVC you are using.

The 6db of gain should make the output level at full volume equal to the DVD player.

You might want to check with TomS. He was using a TVC with gain with his modded SB2.

He did end up using a Burson Buffer.

I have looked at the Burson buffer but it would increase the cost significantly

That IS a problem with this hobby. All the fun toys cost quite a bit of money 

[audio-heaven]

Thanks Wayne my TVC is a home constructed Music First using Stevens and Billington TX-102's with the 6db lift engaged.

From what you say I don't think I would have any problems

Thank you again for the reply