Submitted by The Computer Au... on Tue, 05/25/2010 - 18:46
The Logitech Squeezebox Touch outputs bit perfect digital audio at 16/44.1, 24/88.2 and 24/96 kHz. There I said it. I’ve been waiting to relay that fact to all Computer Audiophile readers for a couple weeks while finishing up this review. Support for high resolution audio via wireless streaming hasn’t come cheap over the last few years. The Logitech Transporter handled high resolution audio but started at $2000 and could easily double in price with some audiophile modifications. Bit transparency at 88.2 and 96 kHz via wireless for less than $300 is wonderful for audiophiles. If the Squeezebox Touch did nothing else correct it would still be worth the retail price. Fortunately there is much to like about the “Touch” including its sound quality.
What Is The Touch?
The Logitech Squeezebox Touch is a small and simple network music streamer. It features a 4.3” touchscreen and highly functional remote control. The “Touch” connects to any 802.11 b/g wireless network or via wired Ethernet. Analog audio outputs include a standard 3.5mm headphone jack and single ended analog RCA connections. Digital audio is output via either optical Toslink S/PDIF or electrical coaxial S/PDIF. Those not interested in connecting the Touch to a network can attach a hard drive directly to the USB port on the rear of the unit. The USB port will become increasingly useful as more audio companies release music on USB devices. Currently Cardas offers its USB Audio Cards and I’ve seen a prototype from an audiophile record label with similar offerings in the works. Due to the cramped quarters behind the Squeezebox Touch a little USB extension/dongle will be required for these USB Audio Cards.
Touching The Touch
Constructed completely of plastic the Squeezebox Touch is certainly not a product from Apple. Its $299 price tag (and support for FLAC) is also a clear indication it’s not from Apple. The Squeezebox Touch is likely constructed with more plastic than all components in the typical audiophile’s equipment rack combined. This and the fact it’s from Logitech, not a traditional high end audio company, are hurdles audiophiles will just have to get over. The 4.3” plastic touchscreen is nice. It’s many times better than the IMO Pivot Touch, but nothing like the glass multi-touch screen on an iPod Touch. The Squeezebox Touch is pretty responsive and requires no calibration like many touch devices. Fat fingers and all I was able to navigate through the menus and control buttons easily without error. After many hours of use with both the touch screen and remote control there is no doubt the remote is the best way to navigate the Squeezebox Touch. Even as I write this the Touch is sitting on my desk next to my keyboard, yet I’m using the remote to control the unit. This isn’t a knock against the touch screen. It’s more of a compliment to the designers of the remote control. I was able to navigate the menus much quicker using the remote because of its shortcuts like the Home button and number keys that double as letter keys in the same way as a telephone touch pad. The remote control is not built from a solid block of aircraft aluminium like some audiophile components but it may be more feature rich and functional than some of those expensive bricks. Some users will be happy to learn the Squeezebox Touch can be controlled via third party automation systems like AMX and Crestron.
Configuring The Touch
There are a few different ways to get music to the Squeezebox Touch. The simplest may be using the built-in USB port, but that method has too many limitations making it less practical. For example adding new music from a CD would require removing the USB drive, ripping the CD to the USB drive, and reconnecting the USB drive to the Touch. I’m sure this method will work great for some readers and may be just the thing to get network-nervous audiophiles into the Squeezebox era.
Another method of serving music to a Squeezebox Touch is through the Windows, Mac, or Linux version of Squeezebox Server currently at version 7.5.0. Using this method requires the server software to be installed on a computer. The software must run at all times for the Squeezebox Touch to access locally stored music. This configuration works best for users with a computer that contains all music on the local hard drive and can remain on 24/7. Sure this can also work with music stored on a NAS drive but there is a much better option when a NAS is in use.
The third method of serving music to a Squeezebox Touch entails running Squeezebox Server as a module on a NAS drive and pulling the music to the Touch directly from the NAS. This is the method I settled on for the review. I installed the Squeezebox Server module v. 7.5 on my Thecus N5200B Pro NAS. There is little configuration to be done via the web interface of the NAS module. The most important item is directing Squeezebox Server to the correct music folder on the NAS itself and scanning the music folder for music.
One minor gripe I have with this part of the Squeezebox Server software is the somewhat hidden and undocumented scheduled scan feature. Nobody wants to manually scan their library every time new music is added. For some reason Logitech has hidden this feature deep within the Advanced Tab. I overlooked this complete section during the first week of the review. Scheduled scans or auto scanning seems like one of the first features any company would enable and make very conspicuous. Scheduled scans are off by default and virtually impossible to find information about on the Logitech website or Google without the exact search terms. Users unfamiliar with the scheduled scan feature have likely been using the readily visible techniques.
Logitech has made this at least workable for the uneducated by allowing one to clear the entire library and rescan everything or look for new and changed music only. This manual button is easily visible on the first page of the Server settings. Creating a MySqueezebox.com account is encouraged by Logitech and allows one to synchronize some device settings and browse the app gallery, but it’s really nothing to write home about. It’s free and is pretty painless so I recommend readers create this account during setup.
Configuring the Squeezebox Touch device itself is fairly easy but not without some annoyances. The biggest time waster for me was attempting to connect the Touch to my 802.11n wireless network. I don’t like to read user manuals so I tried for about 20-30 minutes to get the Touch connected. Then I downloaded the manual and searched for 802.11. It was listed only once without specifying what type of 802.11 network is required. Reluctantly I tried the 802.11g band on my Airport Extreme Simultaneous Dual Band router. The Touch connected via 802.11g using WPA2 Personal encryption (not required) without a problem.
Once connected to a network selecting the music library is as simply as browsing the touch panel and selecting the name of the library.
The only other real annoyance I have is also related to wireless networking on the Touch. Whenever the power is lost to the unit it is necessary to reselect the correct wireless network. The Touch does remember the network name and password but for some reason is unable to automatically reconnect once power is regained. Simply browsing a few levels deep into the advanced menu allows the user to select the displayed wireless network name and all is well.
Using The Touch
During this review I used the Squeezebox Touch in two different audio systems. The main system consisted of the Touch pulling music wirelessly from my Thecus NAS and connecting via Kimber Select coaxial S/PDIF cable to the Weiss Engineering DAC202. Sound quality comparisons were conducted using this Touch based system versus a Windows 7 / J River Media Center 15 computer pulling music wired from my Thecus NAS and connecting via FireWire to the Weiss DAC202. The second system consisted of the Touch pulling music wirelessly from my Thecus NAS and connecting via Kimber Select coaxial S/PDIF cable to the Peachtree Audio Nova and a pair of Avalon NP 2.0 Evolution loudspeakers. The second system was placed outside my dedicated listening room in another area of the house.
Browsing one’s music via the Squeezebox Touch is self explanatory with menus like Artists, Albums, and Genre. I’ve seen CD players more difficult to operate. In addition to browsing through standard menus the Touch allows browsing through the folder structure of the music files. This is very handy if the music library has not been rescanned since the addition of new material. As I mentioned earlier, I really like the remote control and prefer it over the actual touchscreen. One reason for this preference is the ability to quickly select letters of the alphabet using the number keypad like a telephone. For example pressing the number seven four times on the remote quickly displays artists starting with the letter S. The way to do this via the touchscreen is to press and hold a little dot/scroll bar on the right of the screen and drag it downward. This method is a little difficult at first until the right “touch” is developed by the user.
Whether sitting in my listening chair or elsewhere in the house I also used the Squeezebox Touch web interface to control music playback. The multi-touch screen of an iPad works fairly well. I spent a few minutes trying to navigate a long list of artists without any success. Using two fingers to scroll was the simple solution. The 4.3” screen is on the borderline in terms of viewing it from the listening position. I usually sit between nine and twelve feet from my components. I was able to view the touchscreen enough to browse the menus via remote but I wouldn’t say I was easily and comfortably browsing the menus with my corrective lens aided vision. My familiarity with each menu certainly helped.
The Squeezebox Touch has a fixed viewing angle reported to be around 35 degrees. This viewing angle works very well in a couple situations. When the Touch is positioned on a component rack and one is viewing the unit from the listening position the screen is angled appropriately. In addition the Touch viewing angle is great for desktop use when the unit is only a couple feet from the user. I found the Touch a little awkward when it was placed on top of my Avalon NP 2.0 Evolution loudspeaker at roughly 35” plus spikes on a wood floor. At 5’ 8” I’m not setting any height records but the Touch was still a bit low for the most comfortable use. Viewing the Touch at this height was OK, but angling one’s wrist unnaturally to navigate the menus was fatiguing. An adjustable screen angle could make this a non-issue for users set on using the touchscreen over the nice remote control.
The Touch has five different background screen selections to view during playback. The default screen displays album art, track title, artist, album, and current track position. I used this screen most of the time as it provides the information I wanted to see. The other screens are somewhat cute but get old after a few hours. Namely the Volume Unit (VU) meter screen that harks back to the analog source days. It’s not a bad feature but it’s also not a feature I’d base a purchasing decision around.
The Touch feature that surprised me most was how much I liked listening to radio stations through the device. I figured the usual Internet based radio stations and services like Pandora would be available much like nearly all devices of this type. Most of the Internet stations don’t thrill me although Pandora is a wonderful service. I was surprised at the number of local FM and AM stations available with a simple tap of the screen. I didn’t have to setup a custom feed or jump through any hoops to hear something local. This information is likely not new to die hard Squeezbox users but is a major selling point for people ready to dip their toes into the digital streaming water. Like any user I prefer not to purchase a component until I am certain it’s capable of meeting my needs. Logitech has already addresses this issue by offering a great Station Search tool (Image 1, Image 2, Image 3). This allows potential buyers to search for radio stations they would like to hear through the Squeezebox instead of going through the hassle of purchasing the unit and returning it if it doesn’t meet the user’s needs.
Listening Through The Touch
Good sound from a plastic wireless music streamer for $299 may be a tough pill for some audiophiles to swallow. The Squeezebox Touch is far from a boutique product with a linear power supply and impeccable sonics. The device does have some weaknesses as most people would suspect. The typically noisy switching power supply is one weakness but it can be dealt with through proper isolation. There is no doubt the Touch stretches that $299 extremely far and will challenge some favored components for convenience and sonic superiority.
The absolute best part of the Squeezebox Touch is its ability to pass bit transparent digital audio at high resolutions including 24 bit / 88.2 kHz and 24 bit / 96 kHz. Without this capability the device would’ve been nothing special. With this capability the device is now a serious contender. All the extra features and niceties are simply minutiae to the most serious audiophiles. Using the new Weiss Engineering DAC202’s built-in transparency test I was able to varify the following sample rates are completely bit transparent through the Logitech Squeezebox Touch.
16 bit / 44.1 kHz, 16 bit / 48 kHz, 16 bit / 88.2 kHz, 16 bit / 96 kHz
24 bit / 44.1 kHz, 24 bit / 48 kHz, 24 bit / 88.2 kHz, 24 bit / 96 kHz
When sample rates above 24/96 are passed through the Touch they are halved by the unit. 176.4 kHz material is output at 88.2 kHz and 192 kHz material is output at 96 kHz. This conversion destroys all bit transparency. I prefer devices like the Touch that at least play the music even if it’s no longer perfect. Some devices will not play any material beyond the supported sample rates and that robs users of a musical experience.
During the review I only used the Touch via wireless 802.11g. The real advantage of this device is its ability to stream via wireless. I figured if it could perform via wireless it could perform via wired Ethernet. I played hours of 24/88.2 and 24/96 material and only suffered one minor dropout during playback. This may have had nothing to do with the Touch but I can’t pinpoint the cause. Even playback of 24/176.4 and 24/192 wasn’t an issue in terms of wireless dropouts. Throughout the house the wireless network is setup very well with two Apple Airport Extremes, one running dual bands of 802.11g and 802.11n. My experience may not translate to all networks, but I can guarantee nearly perfect wireless performance is possible.
My listening comparisons were all done using the coaxial S/PDIF output of the Touch into the coaxial S/PDIF input of the Weiss Engineering DAC202 and a Windows 7 PC running J River Media Center v 15 connecting to the DAC202 via FireWire. The Touch sounded really good with most music in my collection (Jazz, Rock, and Pop). Long term listening through the Touch wasn’t fatiguing but did reveal some sonically rounded edges and a tiny bit of dullness compared to the PC/FireWire system. I will not call the Touch a dull component overall. When compared to one of the best interfaces and software configurations available it appears just a tad dull. Without a direct comparison I’m willing to bet the Touch would fall right into place in most users’ listening environments and not raise any questions about dullness. The biggest weakness of the Touch was evident during complex dynamic classical pieces. One of my go-to tracks is Michael Daugherty’s Niagara Falls from Reference Recording’s Crown Imperial release performed by the Dallas Wind Symphony (16/44.1 release or 24/96 release or 24/176.4 release). Compared to the PC/FireWire system the Touch S/PDIF system was a little muddy and had a bit less separation of instruments, especially the drums, when the symphony really got going. Niagara Falls is a beautiful piece of music all the way through and offers some “highlights” throughout. At 1:40 and 3:15 into the track are some difficult passages to reproduce on some systems. The Touch didn’t best the PC/FireWire system but still offered good sound. At 5:18 there is a loud “WAP!” sound from an unknown (to me) instrument. Listening through the Touch there is a lack of texture to the sound when compared to the PC/FireWire system. This texture is even more evident on extremely resolving systems like the one I heard at Magico back in December. I was in awe when we played this track through the new Magico Q5 loudspeakers. Despite these weaknesses I really like the Logitech Squeezebox Touch. The overall sound is very good through its digital outputs. What’s there not to like about wireless bit transparency at 88.2 and 96 kHz for less than $300?
Touch Wrap-up
The Logitech Squeezebox Touch wireless music streamer is definitely not a classic high end audio component. Its plastic construction may even be frowned upon by some audiophiles. Those who aren’t overly stubborn and are willing to try the Touch will be rewarded by a very nice product. The Touch may not be the best everyday player in a high end system, but there are countless other great system configurations where the Touch will excel. As I complete this review I am listening through a pair of Ultimate Ears UE11 Pro earphones connected to the headphone jack in back of the Touch and accessing all my music wirelessly from my desktop without involving my computer. The $299 price tag of the Touch can’t be overestimated. For less than the sales tax on some audio cables the Squeezebox Touch offers wireless, high resolution, bit transparency, touchscreen, very functional remote, and very good sound quality. Although it’s far from perfect the low price, terrific features, and very good sound quality guarantee the Logitech Squeezebox Touch a spot on the Computer Audiophile Suggested Hardware List (C.A.S.H.).
Product Information
Associate Equipment: Verity Audio Fidelio loudspeakers, McIntosh MC275 amplification, Richard Gray's Power Company High Tension Wires, Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC, Wavelength Audio Proton, Ayre AX-7e Integrated Amp, C.A.P.S. server, Bel Canto USB Link, Halide Design Bridge, dCS Debussy DAC, dCS Puccini U-Clock, Kimber USB Cu, Kimber USB Ag, Benchmark DAC1 PRE, Kimber Select KS1011 Analog Cables, Kimber Select KS2020 Digital Cable, Kimber Monocle X Loudspeaker Cable, ASUS Xonar HDAV 1.3 Slim, Apple iPad, Sonic Studio's Amarra, M2Tech hiFace, Weiss Engineering DAC202, Lynx Studio AES16 Digital I/O Card.
__________________
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Chris, I've been running Squeezebox server on my CAPS server since I built it. Of course, Squeezebox server is quite memory intensive and I'd like to get the app off the CAPS server. Do you know if I could use Squeezebox server on my Thecus N7700? If so, can you provide some more color around how you installed and configured it, including if you had to separately install Perl. Thanks. JCR
Thecus has a packaging format (which they call a "module") that you can easily install through the web interface. Squeezecenter Server is one of them available.
http://naswebsite.com/wiki/Thecus_N5200_Module:_SQUEEZEBOXSERVER
From what I understand, the 7700 can use many of the 5200 modules, so you might try it to see if that works.
Chris, you might want to check out the iPeng iPod/iPhone app for controlling your Squeezebox; it's pretty slick and much nicer than trying to use the web interface on the same device.
http://penguinlovesmusic.de/
Hi Chris, thanks for the review. Compared to other digital sources, I regret the one angle you didn't touch in your review: analog out. Sound wonderful. How did it compare in your setup?
Hi Chris,
I find it hard to gap between the fact that two bit perfect feeds to the same DAC sound differently ?
Is it the DAC202 and the advantage of the jitter free firewire interface or something else that I missed ?
Do you expect similar results with the alpha as an example ?
Taking this argument a bit further - do we expect any change in sound between two bit perfect sound cards such as ASUS ST and Lynx Studio installed in the same CAPS server using the available SPDIF and AES interfaces inputs of the alpha DAC?
Rgd
Eli
Ayre CD + CAPS Server > TBD DAC > CJ CT5 > CJ Prem140 > AudioPhysics Virgo
Chris,
I think John Swenson did some of the development on this. Unlike the transport this is full linux system and it does support Host mode USB Class 1 Audio as a streaming output to 24/96.
Thanks
Gordon
J. Gordon Rankin
~~~~~~~~~~
Wavelength Audio
http://www.usbdacs.com/
http://www.wavelengthaudio.com/
http://www.guitar-engines.com/
I'd pitch the analogue as better than a DacMagic and not as good as a Lavry/Benchmark or my new favourite - the Dacport. But then again I never liked the DacMagic.
Digital out appears vastly improved over previous gen - equal to a pulse transformer modded SB3?? No - not convinced on that - I remember my modded SB3 being pretty good and, with spdif, as good or better than the TP spdif. TP AES better again.
Touch fell apart on complex orchestral. Fine for simple "girl with a guitar" stuff.
I liked my modded Valabs out of W7 64 + J River Waspai - HiFace more. The Valabs from the Touch didn't sound as good. Ditto a KRK Ergo. No doubt the Weiss has mucho superior jitter control (it should do :).
The HiFace makes a better digital transport IMHO depending on the jitter resisteance of the source.
Inbuilt SC server sucks: at least with a bus powered 2.5 usb drive. SQ suffers too.
Screen is big and well lit. But not big enough to see across the room like the SB3. The Touch screen works but again isn't super quick - slow cpu/ram - even for linux. More of a gimmick - I use the remote 90% of the time. Remote isn't as good as the SB3.
Squeezeserver 7.5.0 is dreadful. What were they thinking? Seriously a crap piece of interface. I remember the days of SB2 and slimserver when you had a non web based interface - it was sooo much better.
Overall - probably the cheapest and easiest decent 24/96 Transport around. While you are saving for a decent dac you can listen to the onboard one.
$300? What's not too like?
ps sold mine 1 week after buying it: usless as a stand alone and if I have to have a computer running I might as well just do the USB thing.
pps Happy with my Dacport as a Dac at present even without a 64x-32player asio driver. Awesome bit of kit.
If it sounds better to you then it is better...
The best way to control the Squeezeserver, I think. Well laid out and easy to use. Just select it under the "interface" tab on server settings.
Okay so Chris you compared the Squeezebox Touch to J.River via Firewire to the DAC202 - but in all honesty this is probably not a situation thats very likely in real world. So how about a comparison between an off the shelf netbook running into a DAC (Peachtree Nova perhaps) via USB, vs the Squeezebox Touch into the same DAC via SPDIF?
Or for that matter the analogue of the Squeezbox touch, vs. an off the shelf netbook with a HRT Streamer (for example) or other cheep DAC.
Eloise
Mac OSX 10.5 with iTunes (mostly ALAC) --USB--> Musical Fidelity A1008 --> B&W CDM 7NT (iPhone remote)
Good to hear the generally positive review. I have one being modded at the moment to work with my Empirical Audio Pace-Car. Presently using a modded Duet in the same setup. Digital is S/PDIF out to a MF X-DACv3.
I like the sound of my present setup, so I'm pretty excited about being able to listen to hi-res files natively reproduced on the SB system.
Will report back when I've heard the new setup.
Thank you for the excellent review. I have been struggling for many months with my decision concerning what music server would be best in my home given the fact that the server will be accessed in the family room as well as my listening area. [I’m already a computer semi-audiophile at work.] I decided on a couple of Touches into V-DAC/V-PSUs, a Squeeze clock radio, and Squeeze server running on a ReadyNas NVX Pioneer (rndz400e) with two 2TB Seagate drives (ST32000644NS). The equipment arrived the other day and my entire CD collection be ripped by Ready 2 Play here in California. I’ll let you know what I think once it is all set up.
One more practical aspect of the Touch that can’t be overemphasized is that, in addition to the features discussed in your review, it is perfect for the wife and kids. If I was single, I probably would have simply purchased the Olive HD and been done with it. The Touch’s combination of handling a wide range of files and sample rates, ease of use, visible touch based user interface, good iPhone apps for remote control if need be (e.g. iPeng) and low cost of replacement sold me. A few months from now, it’ll probably be $250 on the internet. If a kid breaks one (my kids are 4 and 6), or if the Touch remote cant be found, its not the end of the world. All other components can be locked away and controlled with my RF remote. Good, if not perfect, audio and no worries. I’m really excited.
Joe
Andrew S,
Thanks for the detailed report. About this:
"Inbuilt SC server sucks: at least with a bus powered 2.5 usb drive. SQ suffers too." With this, do you mean something like a memory stick? I.e., does SQ also suffer if one uses an external harddrive with its own power supply?
Best
Jens
PC -> Squeezebox Duet with Bolder Cables Power Supply -> Toslink (yes, sounds better than coax) -> EmmLabs DAC2 ->2 x Pathos Classic 1 mk III (bridged) -> Verity Fidelio Encore
For those of you, who are interested in some Jitter measurements of the Logitech Squeezebox Touch, see my attached files with a Jitter measurement on the SPDIF Out and on the TOSLINK Out. Both are in deed very good for this price point and you must look to find some similar for that price.
Also I do not give any Jitter numbers, it is better to look for the graph to see for the results. Also John Atkinson mentioned this in his last USB to SPDIF converter measurement, that the Lindemann with lower numbers does not sound as good, as also the jitter graph does not look as good as the Stello.
As a third measurement you can see the analog out with a – 3 dBFS 1 kHz 24 Bit Signal. The quality is very decent, but I use all of my squeeze boxes only via digital out, because the analog out doesn’t fulfill my needs (but this depends on the sound level you are looking at).
Juergen
Hi Juergen - Thank you for the information.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Pleasure.
I didn't bother trying it with a Stick or non usb powered external HDD. My interest was solely wrt a bus powered 2.5 HDD. I am sure with either of the former options it would be far more responsive esp the Stick with flash memory.
Overall I found it frustrating..compared to eg J River on my Asus UL30 with a a SSD and 4GB of Ram.
Happy hi fi
If it sounds better to you then it is better...
With every Squeezebox I own (SB II, SB Classic, SB Duet, SB Touch), there is a direct connection between the power supply and the SPDIF out (which should not in regular SPDIF out) and also with the analog out (which is mostly the case), but also with LAN Case and USB Case. So every thing you connect to this device will have a sort of ground loop.
It depend on your system complexity if this matters or not, but I would suggest for better sound to use a Linear Power Supply, with each Squeezebox, because this really improves the sound.
Also I use the TOSLINK Out (via Wireworld Glass Cable (Supernova)), instead of SPDIF (I know SPDIF alone is better than TOSLINK (but this could be different in a complex system)).
I am also using LAN Isolation device (to remove this possibility of ground loops (I know, a non shielded LAN cable will also prevent a ground loop)), but I want to be on the save side.
And additionally I have an optical USB extender (with duplex glass fibers) when I connect powered USB device to it (not necessary with USB Sticks or Bus powered devices).
What I do want to say is, that when I measure this device within a regular setup system, I get really some too many hum lines in the signal that I haven’t had when measuring in labor conditions.
I do not want to start an endless discussion about the possible tweaks; I just want to point only to some weak points, when connecting a squeeze box in a complex system.
Good luck.
Juergen
I contacted Thecus support to ask about using the N5200 module on the N7700. Here's what they had to say:
"Officially, we do not support 3rd party modules, please contact the module author for confirmation.
Unofficially, N5200 modules have been known to work in N7700, but this is not a guarantee that the Squeezebox module will do the same.
Also keep in mind that sometimes the only way to remove "mis-behaving" 3rd party modules is to delete and re-create RAID Array."
The last point is the one that will keep me from trying out the N5200 module. If someone else with a N7700 is braver than I and can report back on a successful installation of the N5200 module, I'd love to hear that.
I like iPeng on my iPad to control my three Squeezeboxes at home. However, I find that iPeng updates its cache for albums, artists, songs, etc. each time it is started up. This is an about 15 minute process to allow it to run to completion before it really works. A problem for now certainly while iPads can't multitask. I do not have that problem using the native remotes for the Squeezeboxes. JCR
15 minutes? Really? How may albums to you have on your server? Maybe L-Tech could come out with an app that works better, but that would eat up Controller sales. Have you tried the Controller in place of the remote that comes with the Touch?
Joe
Very interesting, Juergen. Your experience with improved power supplies mirrors mine. And I also find that Toslink sounds better. I hadn't thought about - and dind't know - about the optical USB isolation option, which I will try if and when I buy a SB Touch.
PC -> Squeezebox Duet with Bolder Cables Power Supply -> Toslink (yes, sounds better than coax) -> EmmLabs DAC2 ->2 x Pathos Classic 1 mk III (bridged) -> Verity Fidelio Encore
I began to think I was the only to ditch it asap. It failed to impress on every count. The screen is unreadable from 3 meters, unlike my SB3. Its angle is not adjustable. Why make it touch sensitive if it has to be tethered to a power supply cable? Without a DAC the sound is flat and at best mid-fi. Fed into my Weiss Dac2 it sounded slightly better than a SB3 but way off my Mac Mini firewire output. I cannot believe some are comparing it to the Transporter.
There is an alternative to removing the USB disk and attaching to a computer for adding new music. Touch can share the USB disk to the network. This is probably too slow to rip directly to the USB disk. But one can rip to the other computer's local disk and copy over the network to the Touch's USB disk. Better yet, use a folder sync program to update the Touch's USB disk. It's not lightning fast over wireless, but is something one can do overnight.
Nice review for a slick little device. Many other reviews miss the ability to listen to many Internet streams.
Frank
Greetings from Port Elizabeth, South Africa and I hope I do not bore you folk with might seem to be a very basic and trivial question.
I wish to capture my CD collection in a losslees format in an attempt to maintain as much as the original quality as possible. Currently I either use the Cd's(a pain to have to change all the time) or my Ipod connected directly to the stereo. The latter has obvious loss in quality implications but great for ease of use.
A digital "server" of sorts seems to be the solution to this dilemma and fortunately through my trolling on the web I came across this posting.
It would appear that the LOGITECH SQUEEZEBOX TOUCH would serve my requirements spot on however I do not have the where withal to set up a wireless home network. Would one be able to connect a hard drive directly to the Touch and then link this(via RCA/optical etc.) to the stereo?
I have explored other "hardrive" options such as the Pixel Magic MB200 Media box(a relatively old product with suspect backup service) as well as the Mede8er( a new product supporting the FLAC format) however these units appear to also be suitable for movies.
I am looking purely for an audio solution only and suspect that a product dedicated to Audio only(i.e. SQUEEZEBOX TOUCH)would be the better option?
Apologies for any grammatical errors. We have 11 official languages in South Africa and unfortunately English is not my first language.
Any advice would be much appreciated
Harold Pienaar
Hi Harold - Welcome to Computer Audiophile. The Squeezebox Touch does have a USB port on the back to plug in a hard drive. No network required. This should meet your needs.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
@ Juergen & Encore,
Could you explain what a linear power supply is and where it can be bought?
cheers,
Father12
Wonderful review Chris. I have a question though- does it support internet radio listening? I am currently subscribed to Sky.fm Premium internet radio and would like to stream that through the Touch to my dac.
Thank you, Peter
Onkyo ND-S1 →Reference 5 DSP/CA DacMagic → SPL Auditor/LD MK IV SE → balanced KRK RP10s/5
Cans: AKG K272 HD, Sennheiser HD555(Cardas), HD600(Cardas), ATH-M50
Hi .Sup - Thanks for the kind words. I just played some Sky.FM music via the Touch. There is also an app to that can be installed, by browsing the app menu on the Touch, that's called Sky.FM. I installed the app as well. There is a place to enter account information, but since I don't have one I can't tell you what it does.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
So there is hope! Fantastic, I will search for this app and try to learn more about it. Thank you very much! If I do decide to get the Touch I will be sure to post my impressions about it and the app here.
Onkyo ND-S1 →Reference 5 DSP/CA DacMagic → SPL Auditor/LD MK IV SE → balanced KRK RP10s/5
Cans: AKG K272 HD, Sennheiser HD555(Cardas), HD600(Cardas), ATH-M50
In some very basic words a linear power supply does have a mains transformer, an rectifier, some charging capacitor and a voltage regulator. So you have basically to deal only the some mains frequency to filter out and that can be done relative easy. A linear power supply can't be used over a larger mains voltage range like 100 V – 240 Volt, it must be bought to a specific mains voltage like 115 or 230, or must have a selector / switch to change from 115 to 230 or back.
A switched power supply basically transforms (switches) the mains frequency into higher frequency region (depends on the products how far outside audio bandwidth, and also the method to do this), in order to have higher efficiency and so smaller size and weight. But this higher frequencies are much more difficult to filter out, so typically you get more noise on the power supply. They do work normally over a wide mains voltage range from 100 to 240 volt.
There are huge differences in the quality in both technologies of power supplies and you must be aware, that a good linear power supply will cost you similar or more than the Squeezebox itself.
This one is relative reasonable, but no idea about the quality:
http://www.welbornelabs.com/squeeze.htm
A friend of mine has this one and is happy with it:
http://www.teddypardo.com/products/Powersupplies/TTouch.html
A very good reputation has this one:
http://www.paulhynesdesign.com/page7.html
I have my own linear power supplies, so I personally can't give you any personal advices.
Juergen
I have this: http://www.boldercables.com/servlet/-strse-395/%22Standard%22-Linear-Pow...
Apart from its ugly looks, it really works wonders. In every system I've heard it, it has made a very clear difference, using the digital out and an external DAC. I haven't experimented with the analog out.
PC -> Squeezebox Duet with Bolder Cables Power Supply -> Toslink (yes, sounds better than coax) -> EmmLabs DAC2 ->2 x Pathos Classic 1 mk III (bridged) -> Verity Fidelio Encore
Thanks for the explanation and links - however, I indeed ask myself about the sense of a power supply more expensive than the SBT itself. Would be interesting of course to hear before buying. Maybe I'll check if those are available here in good ole Germany.
Best regards,
Father12
Father12, I can understand your reservations. However, I've heard my Bolder power supply making the difference between acceptable and not acceptable sound. It's been a while since I compared in my own system, but I recently heard it with a Mcintosh MCD500, which was fed the digital signal from a SB Duet. The sound went from harsh and digital to acceptable by switching to the Bolder supply.
However, there are alternatives today that are better than they were when I bought my Duet a couple of years ago. Specifically, I'm very hesitant to spend too much money on a PSU for the SB Touch. Given its 96 kHz limitation, this device will also only be an interim solution. I'm considering the Olive HD, which should have a decent power supply, I'm told.
PC -> Squeezebox Duet with Bolder Cables Power Supply -> Toslink (yes, sounds better than coax) -> EmmLabs DAC2 ->2 x Pathos Classic 1 mk III (bridged) -> Verity Fidelio Encore
VERY promising device. If it is able to play albums with no gaps (e.g. 'The Dark Side of The Moon') - I want one!
Can you confirm if it plays FLACs gaplessly?
Yes, it does support gapless playback.
sorry for this, but how does this differ from the transporter? ie in what situation would one buy a transporter over this?
Thanks
Joshua
The Transporter has a better circuit, with better power handling (two separate toroidal mini-transformers) and I think better regulation, also it has a better DAC , has balanced outputs, has word clock in and out, can be used with in an effects loop (for instance with a sound processor for equalization).
So, the analog quality should be better, not speaking about the extra options not found on the Touch. Only as a digital transport, it still should be a little bit better. Now ,how much better, that is another story. I bought the Touch to use it as a digital transport, but that was also because I had a Weiss DAC2 with firewire input, and the extra cash for the Transporter to use it only as a digital out seemed too much. But still, Transporter is the better player or transport.
Adrian
Adrian,
Thank you for the concise answer. Makes sense to me, but my wallet doesn't like you now :)
Joshua
There is quite a bit of discussion on this at the Slimdevices forum. Especially from the SB beta-testers, who have a lot of experience with both the Touch and Transporter.
Summation of what they say:
Transporter sounds better through analogue outs: as digital transport only, the Touch is very close to the Transporter. The consensus there seemed to be that if you planned on using your SB unit as a digital transport only, and already have a good external DAC, not much reason to buy the Transporter over the Touch.
BTW, lots of users on other forums report improved analogue sound from the Touch by upgrading PS. Some also claim improved sound from the digital outs with better PS.
I copied the complete iTunes folder on an USB drive connected to the SBT. Unfortunately SBT server seems not to recognize the playlists. Strangely enough - when I choose the server software on my Mac in order to stream the music from the computer, the playlists are in. You just tick iTunes somewhere in the options and there you go.
Do you have similar problem or does somebody know, if the server software on the SBT itself is able to cope with iTunes data? Would be perfect of course, as you don't have to define your playlists from scratch...
Thanks for your help!
Father12
Father,
A playlist is a linked list of files and folders. Ounce you move the files to another drive all linking to the playlist is gone.
Thanks
Gordon
J. Gordon Rankin
~~~~~~~~~~
Wavelength Audio
http://www.usbdacs.com/
http://www.wavelengthaudio.com/
http://www.guitar-engines.com/
Thanks Gordon. Well, you think that is so although I copied the very same folder structure...? I'm really not sure that is the case. But who am I...?
Cheers, Father12
Father,
A linked list of files includes the source drive. Anytime anything in the link is changed, then the link is broken... including moving the songs to another drive.
Also playlists are not included in the music file system. They are located in a different folder.
Thanks
Gordon
J. Gordon Rankin
~~~~~~~~~~
Wavelength Audio
http://www.usbdacs.com/
http://www.wavelengthaudio.com/
http://www.guitar-engines.com/
I talked to the german hotline and the guy there told me it should work. But not being a native speaker, I'm not really sure if he got the point.
Gordon, you're talking of absolute links, but I think it would not be a problem to have relative links if it is programmed like that. Within the iTunes folder there are 4 "iTunes-specific" files and I think that the playlists are fixed there - in one of these 4 files.
I'll keep on asking around to see if I can find out more.
Cheerio,
Father12
My experience with the Touch and a USBdisc is not a positive story.
Disconnecting and connecting the disc is a nuissance. The Touch will refuse attach the disc and e.g. tell me it could not connect to the wifi?
I can not recommend the Touch with a USBdisc. Sadly I thought this combination would suit me and is why I bought it.
There is of course a possibility that the Touch does not like my Verbatimdisc but it really seems as the firmware is lousy.
The idea is to let the USB disc connected and not to plug it on and off all the time. It tried 3 discs and only the 3rd was recognized (WD Elements 250 GB). This one runs pretty much flawless since then. There's btw no need to unplug it once it's connected as you can store new files then via the network.
I attached a second one via WLAN yesterday - took me 5 minutes and that was it.
So in total I see only 2 issues with my setup: no playlists from iTunes so far and jumping to next song before it's finished from time to time.
Cheerio, Father12
No one would be happier than I if I could leave the USB-disc attached to the Touch all the time.
Have not been able to reach it through my network even if the Touch gladly connects to various internetradio stations. (I really like that)
Time to call in the network technician I guess to get some relief.
Thanks for your answer Father12
I read that streams from a directly connected usb drive sounded worse than streams from a network. Also navigation of files on the usb drive is meant to be limited.
I find it hard to beleive that the 1s and 0s should be treated differently. Maybe some hardcore audiophile with an engineering education can find an explanation that involves difference between the electical circuits behind USB and network inputs.
Regarding navigation of files;
Well maybe there is a difference in the squeezeserver thats installs on the USB drive and the one you download to your computer. I don't know.
The menu system / firmware could benefit from a brush up.
That's my opinion.
One thing I do know is that the information that comes with the product is rather sparse.
Edit
About USB input.
Just remembered that I have read about USB inputs in some DACs that were limited to 16bit. Maybe that is what raised your question.
Enicar, nobody claims that 0's or 1's are lost. Here's a very interesting page: http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com/p/squeezebox-touch-great-base-for-n...
PC -> Squeezebox Duet with Bolder Cables Power Supply -> Toslink (yes, sounds better than coax) -> EmmLabs DAC2 ->2 x Pathos Classic 1 mk III (bridged) -> Verity Fidelio Encore
Thank you Encore for link to interesting page.
However he did not say one word why we should not use e.g. USB discs.
There is general agreement among users (see the Touch thread on the Logitech Squeezebox forum) that the performance of the Touch isn't "up to snuff" when you use an attached USB drive. With a USB drive attached, the Touch uses it's internal processor and Tiny SB Server software to perform all the functions.
Pretty much everyone in the forum who has compared the Touch as a standalone product with USB drive vs. running it as an interface that is working in concert with a separate music server running SBS says the Touch performance as a standalone is compromised.
Differences have been noted in terms of time to scan music libraries, problems playing hi-res files, and general lessening of sound quality. In short, users report that the Touch "works" as an independent music server, but not that well. Apparently it just doesn't have the processing power to work as well as it should as a standalone. Again, YMMV, this is what is being reported at Logitech and other forums.
Thanks for the information.
Have you heard of any response from Logitech on the lessening of sound quality using USB? I have been suspecting the processing power is a bit low.
Would it be possible to run SBS and audio files from a NAS server if do not want to have my computer running all the time I am listening to music?
Not everybody hears the supposed difference mentioned above. I just made the comparison between music streamed from a time capsule via the Macbook into the SBT and directly from USB to the SBT. No difference whatsoever! Equipment is SBT digitally into Rotel RSP-1069, Rotel power amp into Electrostatic speakers - so good enough to find a difference I suppose. If there would be any...
Funny however, how fast this link goes around the world - just read of it yesterday here in Germany and a day later same stuff is discussed here.
Wishful thinking, if you ask me.
Cheers,
Father12
Any compelling sonic reason to switch from an Apple TV streaming 16/44 to the Touch?
Assume using toslink for both and aiff files.
Would it be possible to run SBS and audio files from a NAS server if do not want to have my computer running all the time I am listening to music?
Yes, shouldn't in general be a problem. Again YMMV, depending on the NAS.
As far as SQ and other problems with attached drives to the Touch: a lot of the complaints are from users with very large libraries and/or listeners to hi-res files. Again, whether you hear a difference is probably system dependent.
I just thought users here should know that many Touch users are unhappy with the unit as a standalone.If your big reason for buying the Touch is to use it as a standalone, you might want to try it before your buy (or buy from a merchant who allows returns).
Hi firedog - From the review, "The third method of serving music to a Squeezebox Touch entails running Squeezebox Server as a module on a NAS drive and pulling the music to the Touch directly from the NAS. This is the method I settled on for the review. I installed the Squeezebox Server module v. 7.5 on my Thecus N5200B Pro NAS. There is little configuration to be done via the web interface of the NAS module. The most important item is directing Squeezebox Server to the correct music folder on the NAS itself and scanning the music folder for music."
Does this answer your questions?
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Hi Chris,
Could I use my Time Capsule connected via LAN to the Squeezebox Touch the same way as a "pseudo-NAS"? Of course without having the mac switched on.
Cheerio,
Father12
Sorry to say, the Time Capsule won't work to serve files to squeezebox.
Mac OSX 10.5 with iTunes (mostly ALAC) --USB--> Musical Fidelity A1008 --> B&W CDM 7NT (iPhone remote)
Thank you,
it answers my question but the "little configuration to be done" scares me. Very rarely I find these things as easy as some people say (not meaning you).
- You just...
That´s a common start when the computer guys are about to explain something :-)
30% off + free shipping, direct from Logitech with coupon code bavcrepp_2009
Hi Chris et al,
I am not fully satisfied with the sound I have using a Rotel preamp, so I thought why not connect the SBT directly to the power amp? I did so and it seems to sound pretty cool - still some comparison to do, but first impression was very good. Volume can be adjusted via the Touch, connection is done via the analog output - so the Touch acts obviously as a preamp itself.
From an audiophile point of view - what arguments would there be against this solution?
I understood e.g. that turning volume down when connected digitally, you would loose signal quality - is that as well the case when done on analog output?
Thanks in advance for your help!
Cheers, Peter
If I understand correctly, the Touch isn't acting as a preamp, but simply as a line out.
I think there could be scenarios doing this where you send too large a signal to your system and damage your system.
Connected digitally: Logitech has said they will add a feature to fix the digital volume at 100%, as yes, turning down volume will lose signal, and makes it problematic if you want to send a DTS signal to the Touch. You need fixed 100% digital output for that to work.
If you want to vote for Logitech to fix the digital output bug, click to http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=14807 , login, and vote yes.
Well, good to know that they plan to fix the volume - then I should better not order this one:
http://www.sumoh.com/
I think this is a nice one for a second setup.
Cheerio,
Father12
See: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=77837&highlight=touch+vol...
On logitech forum.
On a previous comment I said I'd give an impression of the Touch when I replaced my Duet with it.
Overall, I'm quite happy with the Touch. I have a few quibbles with the touch screen and the UI, but minor ones. The included remote is useful, and makes up for some of the inadequacies of the touch screen.
A Duet controller or an iPhone/iPod Touch used as the remote for the SB Touch would be an even better solution.
I don't have a way to directly compare it to my previous setup with a Duet, but one thing is clear: the 24/96 material sounds much better with the Touch (in native resolution and not downsampled). More dynamic sound, and a fuller, thicker sound - and I mean that in a good way.
The hi-res material definitely sounds improved with the Touch, more real sounding, perhaps more analogue like.