seanadams Wrote: > True, there are a lot of ways to potentially slice it into two boxes. > But the costs don't work the way you think - a good chunk of it is the > chassis itsef, and there are many other cost savings as well as > functional advantages to having everything in one box. > > That said, Transporter's processor, wireless, and front panel hardware > are modular and could potentialy be upgraded separatey from the audio > section. However in reality it is extremely difficult to predict what > specific hardware lies ahead. While we did once offer a very popuar > hardware upgrade kit (the 280x16 dispay for SB1) it's not like we can > say yes there will be a CPU upgrade next year or anything like that. > Obviously we recognize that Transporter is a significant investment for > many, and we've designed it to have a very long useful life by making > the hardware extraordinarily flexible. For example, the word clock > output feature was a trivial programmable logic change - no hardware > change necessary... and there are a number of other such features on > the drawing board to take advantage of transporter's IO capabilities in > interesting ways. That is the sort of flexibility we have.
Ok, I fully understand your reasoning. But would the sound quality be compromised with a two-device system having word clock communication? I guess the jitter performance could potentially be affected? -- sbjaerum ------------------------------------------------------------------------ sbjaerum's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=237 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=26202 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
