Sound bar

Adds a bit of reverb/delay/phase shift.

If you don't like it, press the button again and it will probably turn off.

Owain

price:

"Normal" surround sound uses 5 speakers and possibly a sub woofer. One wither side at the front, a centre speaker for the dialogue, and two rear effects behind you.

Using some nifty signal processing, the boxes of tricks have various cheapskate modes that attempt to do away with some of these speakers by the use of virtual speaker modes - i.e. feeding their content to speakers you do actually have in a way that tries to simulate what you would hear if you had the actual speakers.

How successful this will be will depend on many factors, so the easiest thing to do it try it and see.

Just because I'm an instrument maker doesn't mean I haven't got cloth ears, so take this with the proverbial, etc etc.

I've got an optical link between some bits of my audio kit and I'd say that it makes a worthwhile difference when making recordings but, given the same source, my ears can't tell the difference between signals that have been delivered via copper wire and those coming through the optical digital link into my amp.

Also, I can't tell any difference in quality between the 50cm optical link supplied with my kit by Sony and the 50cm optical link that I bought from the Pound Shop. Unless you need the extra length of the Argos device, I'd say that over fourteen quid is over thirteen quid more than you need to pay.

Nick

=A31.50 for 1.5m with free P&P and same day despatch from UK seller on ebay - 280484137876

Owain

Try

But unlikley to be gold plated ;-) ^^^ winking smiley

Of course not. If it did sound different it would likely make things worse as the 'copper' digits have to be converted to 'optical' then back again. Only possible benefit is in preventing ground loops.

Don't forget to get a special Russ Andrews mains cable:

How about £1.45 delivered, from ebay:

Wait for the next web free offer...

:)

I'm thinking of the link between my CD deck or MiniDisk where the choice is analogue (copper) or digital (optical) and my HHB CD recorder where the inputs include the same. My feeling is that, since I've got a digital source in both those instances, I'm losing some/more when I go D>A>copper>A>D than when I go D>optical>D.

Nick

Sounds like Compleet Cobbleurs to me.

Sorry in advance if I have misunderstood what you have understood... ...but Dave's comparison wasn't between analogue and digital, it was between digital delivered over copper and digital delivered optically.

Shouldn't be any difference between the two, unless one is so bad that the receiver can't pick up the bits properly. And over a few feet of undamaged cable, the receiver would have to be seriously crap for that to be the case.

In the sense that it doesn't faithfully reproduce the original performance* then yes, total cobblers.

In the sense that it subjectively enhances some listeners experience? I'll leave that for you to answer.

I'm not sure what people understand but AISI in the OP the top left picture is two channel analogue over copper so it is a comparison between analogue and digital.

homeopathically gold plated ;-)

Owain

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:15:12 +0000, Nick Odell enthralled us all with:

I suspect that it all depends on the quality of your DAC.

If you have a really good DAC in one bit of kit then it pays to deliver to this bit in digital (e.g. via TOSlink) then go analogue afterwards.

One temptation of a CD player with a USB socket - get your digital music files off the USB stick and then convert then to analogue using the DAC in the CD player which MAY be better than the DAC in your i or other pad/phone.

Cheers

Dave R

It's still got to get back to analogue for the power amp.