[Derrick Swart]

There's pizza and there's pizza.
Not everyone is happy with the Napolitan originals.
That's ok. Eat your own.
I complimented Bosie here on how his pizza looked.
Pride forbid him to answer to that. Even that is fine.
My pizza however is the best there is.
Not something to be humble about.

The best pizza is the one in you hand (and remains in your hand)

 

[HumanFly]

Really curious about the Schitty Pi Project! Especially if it comes without mandatory software.
That could potentially sound awesome. And if you could still run volumio or Roon with the Pi as endpoint that would be the cherry on the Pi.
I kinda like my Volumio although Roon has me curious.

Edit:
And now that you guys are PiHeads you can easily figure out a way to get i2s straight into your DACs. No?

 

[ItsAllInMyHead]

I'm not going for 100% accuracy, but directionality. Pedants need not apply, but if I've got anything grossly incorrect, please chime in.

So my questions are this. If I leave my magni in low gain, does that correlate to the amp staying in class A longer (as it relates to the volume pot position) compared to high gain?

First, I don’t know if Magni 3 operates in class A at any wattage. But let's assume for fun it's an A/B amp. Then yes… that would be true. (I have no idea re: the topology or configuration of the Magni, and I'm too lazy to look)

And then what I'm really trying to figure out is how this applies to the pre amp portion. Am I correct in assuming the signal strength is like a snowball rolling downhill? The longer it rolls the larger it gets. If you feed an amp (class a/ab/d) a strong signal (voltage) from a good source, does more of that originating signal make its way to the speakers then if a weak signal is massively amplifed once it hits the amplification circuit?

Not really, no, but I see where you’re going with that thought.

Is this an ideal way to get a high quality signal through an amplifer? The stronger/better the signal the less the amplifer needs to do?

Not really…

The work an amp does is only related to the output. If you keep the volume from the speakers the same (output the same), the amp is working no more or less “hard”.

You do want to feed an amp the "best" signal you can. The only thing that matters is what does the best job of maintaining it along the way while amplifying it (or attenuating it). If you never wanted to change the volume, then by definition, the "best" signal would come straight from the Modi to your amp. If your Modi had enough juice (or speakers were efficient enough) then the best signal would be straight from the Modi to your speakers. If that boggles your mind, then pause here.

The more the amp needs to work the more the signal is changed, for good or for bad. If an amp has a stronger signal put into it, it can stay in it's peak linearity zone longer?

I tried to understand what you meant by this. If you're thinking that certain amps may sound better within a certain range of output wattages (the amount of work they're doing) then yes that's usually true. You control that with the volume you listen to your music and choosing speakers appropriate to your amp's rated output at certain impedances. Better yet, IMO, pick an amp appropriate to your favorite speakers. (See the posts related to the new Aegir as an example of why people are talking about high-sensitivity speakers and asking about low impedances).

By definition, the only thing you want an amp to change is the amplitude. That’s what an amplifier does. You’ve maybe heard the saying that the best amp is a wire with gain. As for peak linearity zone… most amps are very linear. They may add other noise/distortion, but most are extremely linear in their operating zones. Don't worry about input voltage (within reason) affecting the linearity of your amp. If you're hearing a difference in SQ, it's probably not because of that.

Will I get better sound through my existing aged 2 ch system if I run mimby into magni into my amp?

I’m doubtful, but maybe. Give it a shot. What are you using as your current pre-amp that you’d be subbing in the Magni for? Be careful! Start with the Magni on a low volume setting on low gain. You probably won't fry anything, but if you break something, then you've learned something.

I joke a lot on this forum and am usually reluctant to provide advice, but if you do try it out - I'd VERY strongly advise not switching from low to high gain while listening to your 2ch system except at low, low, low listening levels. Switching from 6dB to 17dB (I'm assuming the gain switch also effects the pre-outs) of gain while you're already jamming out, could do some permanent damage depending on your gear, and I'd feel bad. You might find yourself replacing speaker drivers and other stuff. If you're on low gain with the volume maxed, and it's still not loud enough for you, reduce the volume all the way, THEN switch to high gain.

 

[artur9]

@Baldr, some questions about the new USB.

I imagine there'll be upgrades to existing DACs with USB?

If there's an issue (bug) with the USB would it require a hardware swap or would it be upgradable in the field? I'm thinking kind of like some other things out there where you play a special kind of audio file that's really a firmware upgrade.

 

[RCBinTN]

I know y'all were wondering ... the anchovy + jalapeno pizza was very tasty. I added Italian sausage, because, I like sausage on pizza. Thanks for the tip!

I was amazed by the improvement that Gen5 USB made to the GMB.
It's rock-stable and the SQ is very good. If the new USB stabilizer (?) beats Gen5, that would be saying a lot.
Looking forward to it and to other new Schiit products.

As for the concept of musicians playing on, or ahead of, the beat - I am fascinated by that topic and ability.
Allen Toussaint plays ahead of the beat on some of his songs ... check out his Jazzity project - the albums Going Places and The Bright Mississippi - for examples.

I also heard a very interesting interview with Jon Batiste, another New Orleans guy, on NPR's Fresh Air with Terry Gross.
Jon describes a standard rhythm that all New Orleans musicians learn at an early age.
It's very complex and includes playing both on and ahead of the beat at times.

Cheers!
RCB

 

[RCBinTN]

Sam - I see you're on the thread - did y'all have any damage from Hurricane Michael?

 

[earnmyturns]

What they were discussing isn't called tempo (which is speed). I don't know if there's a formal musical term for it — musicians talk of playing (or singing) before the beat, on the beat, after the beat.

I don't know what to call it besides "tempo", that's why I used the term. After all, "tempo" translates "time," and ahead, on, or behind the beat is about timing

 

[RCBinTN]

Right. Tempo is the speed of the music. Musicians use a metronome to help them stay on-tempo for different music.

Ahead of, or on, the beat is different. The "beat" is the tempo, but the individual notes are sometimes played early ... it's more of a rhythmic thing.
A crappy explanation, I know. It's best to hear it, in some music.

 

[RCBinTN]

Here is a pretty good explanation ...
https://symphonynovascotia.ca/faqs/...lay-a-piece-and-why-are-the-terms-in-italian/

 

[Ableza]

Changing the tempo of a recording without simply speeding it up or slowing it down and thus also changing the pitch would be a nice bit of tricky math indeed.

 

[sam6550a]

Sam - I see you're on the thread - did y'all have any damage from Hurricane Michael?

Just a few minor limbs, not much rain. Power off for 23 hours, DSL out for 21 hours. We have a whole house generator with auto transfer switch and a 250 gallon propane tank, so we kept power, water [I am on a well], and air conditioning. The cotton fields took a beating from the wind, but it looks like it is mostly salvageable. 3o miles west of us is a different tale----it is the eastern edge of major damage/crop loss. Fortunately, minimal loss of life.
Thanks for asking
Sam

 

[ItsAllInMyHead]

Right. Tempo is the speed of the music. Musicians use a metronome to help them stay on-tempo for different music.

Ahead of, or on, the beat is different. The "beat" is the tempo, but the individual notes are sometimes played early ... it's more of a rhythmic thing.
A crappy explanation, I know. It's best to hear it, in some music.

Your explanation is correct and simple to understand IMO.

One of the better examples I could find.



Note - the tempo (overall pace) is precisely the same throughout at 120 BPM. The musician throws in their own caveats in their explanation, but I think it's a very nice example with real music at a reasonable tempo. There are others out there that go to extremes at slower tempos to make it easier to hear, but as Mike had said.... some things are almost subliminal, so I picked this one.

 

[RCBinTN]

That's a cool example ... very clear.

Here is Allen playing one of my favorite songs - Close Up - from the "Going Places" album.
The entire song is complex, but starting at 1:28 the piano goes ahead of the beat and comes back on-beat at 2:20 ... the tempo never changes.
Really fun stuff, to me!

 

[ItsAllInMyHead]

I know Mike's working on both the transport and the Sol, but I couldn't resist. BTW, I like vinyl, CDs, and (gasp) streaming, so I'm rooting for all products.

 

[478773]

Changing the tempo of a recording without simply speeding it up or slowing it down and thus also changing the pitch would be a nice bit of tricky math indeed.

Modern DAWs do this very easily - is the bread and butter of remixers (or whatever called/they are) to turn ballads into dance tracks - they alter tempo without changing the pitch so they can get the track to that sweet 120 bpm dance spot and the singer still sounds like the singer...

v