|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
198.27.204.17
In Reply to: RE: LOL! posted by Jaundiced Ear on July 19, 2016 at 20:02:48
Mid 2011 MacBook Air over WiFi (802.11n)
That particular laptop is slower when hooked directly to the Cat 5E wall jack as my RJ45 > USB adapter is a cheap 100Mpbs model. ;-)
The only difference I hear is on ClassicsOnlineHD streaming and that due to the fact that the player waits a while till the buffer/cache fills before it begins to play a track. On U-verse 'rated' at 20Mbps (but never performing that well) it could take up to 10 seconds to load a track and play, especially is streaming what they claim is 24/192.
Follow Ups:
How much RAM do you have in that Mac? Maybe if you bumped the amount of RAM it could buffer more tracks at one time.
JE
"A difference which makes no difference is no difference at all." - William James
The issue would appear to be download speed as both my old MacBook Air (4 Gig) and the newer (late 2014) Mac Mini (16 Gig) had the same long 5-10 sec.or more) between tracks streaming Hi Rez with ClassicasOnlineHD with slow/intermittent U-Verse service.
sorry.
Per the numbers Bibo01 has been posting, DSD playback does seem to take up extraordinary amounts of bandwidth.
As someone who has got a fat enough of a pipe to be able to fiddle with these bandwidths, have you discovered a point of diminishing returns between DSD128, DSD256, and DSD512?
JE
"A difference which makes no difference is no difference at all." - William James
from QOBUZ and TIDAL and then stream whatever ClassicsOnlineHD has which is supposed to be up to 24/192 and I suppose it is some form of PCM but I have no idea how it's encoded.
ClassicsOnlineHD is a CPU hog, actually it the playback engine OraStream that is the CPU hog.
Link below:
This is beyond bandwidth hogs, now we're getting into the realm of bandwidth black holes.
Where are the audio reviewers when you need them? We need them to tell us how the treble is much more delicate, the midrange much more liquid , the bass deeper, tighter and faster and that the general image has a broader and deeper soundstage and that the silences are blacker and more profound than usual. But only when you are streaming faster than 300 Mbs.
Can you confirm any of this?
JE
"A difference which makes no difference is no difference at all." - William James
But at least now I get SOUNDS!
Before it was dropouts and hesitation between tracks and lagging while the buffer filled and on and on.
Doubt I'll be tearing the sheet rock off the walls to rewire with CAT7 any time soon.
Even the SONOS (no buffer) works without problems when streaming Lossless FLAC.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: