alekz;267853 Wrote: > > Let's get back to the subject. I have a couple of questions to those > who have heard both the stock and modded Transporter. > > o- Frank, you mentioned that the stock TS sounds(-ed) more detailed. > Could you please elaborate? Do you hear less details now? Are they > masked by the noise floor? > o- Any differences in the sound stage? E.g. sources placement, the air > between them, depth/width, etc. > o- Did the stock TS sound brighter than the modded one? Did you notice > any sibilance? > o- Can you compare the dynamics? > o- Frank, what does the rest of your system look like? > o- Can anybody with a digital camera make some photos of the internals > of their modded by Dan TS? > > I have an Anthony's modded Transporter. This is what I noticed: > > o- Extremely detailed, revealing, cold and analytical. Probably too > revealing and analytical (like the rest of my system). Too often it > shows how bad the recordings are. Not how good the music is. > o- A bit on the bright side. Hot records will sound stingingly HOT. > Sibilants are a bit exaggerated. > o- Good dynamics and very low noise floor. You can clearly hear the > sound decays. > o- Pinpoint sound staging. > o- It never sounds messy even during complex passages. > o- The images are thin with not enough "meat" and body. (ML Ascent > feature?) > > So, I'm wondering if I can get the best out of two worlds and let my > Anthony modded TS be modified by Dan. Also, it's recommended to pair > Logans with tubes. > > Alex Peychev's mods (though it sounds very interesting) are a no-go for > me since his design is non-balanced and I have a fully balanced system.
Great to hear from another Transporter owner who's trying to make it even better ;-) Unfortunately, as Dylan Thomas remarked, "We share the barrier of a common language." I think I would have used the same descriptions you used for your modded player to describe the original. So I'm not sure I can answer your questions. I think the main change for me compared to my three weeks with the original Transporter is that the new one is more holographic or solidly "real" sounding. So before I would notice the detail and say "Holy Cow! I've never heard that before, cool!" Now I'm listening to Yo-yo Ma playing Dvorak's Cello Concerto, and I'm just swept away. I swear I can recognize Jacqueline du Pre's Strad in Yo-yo's hands. So I would say the detail is definitely there, but that's not what I find myself listening to. My sister is a flute player. Before she moved to Paris, she used to play for the New Jersey Symphony Orchestra and was a sub for the NY Metropolitan Opera. I sat in on a concert she played of the 4th Brandenberg. Today I was listening to the Marlboro Festival Orchestra playing the Brandenberg via the Transporter, and again, I had the feeling that I was right there, hearing the right tone of the silver flute, the wood of the violin bodies, and the occasional scrape of bows. It's the "there-ness" that I treasure, and that I felt was missing in my original experience with the Transporter. I'm not sure I can break it down into your language, but I'll try. * There's no noise. I can crank it up full, don't hear any tube rush or other noise. * Brightness? H'mmm. The stock unit maybe was a little brighter? It was certainly -- I don't know -- edgier? sounding, perhaps, but that sounds too negative. It wasn't in any way BAD sounding. Maybe a little more "in your face" like you were seated too close to the musicians? I kept hoping it would break in and settle down, so there was a certain edge about it that I didn't enjoy. A caveat about brightness: an my hearing isn't so fantastic anymore on high frequencies. So I tend to prefer equipment that's brighter than others like, probably because bright doesn't bother me. So it wasn't brightness, that's wrong word. Sorry, I'm struggling to find words for it. * Dynamics I can't talk to. I listened to some large scale orchestral stuff on the original Transporter and it was breathtaking. I haven't really compared the ModWright yet on that source material. I wouldn't expect it to be different, and I wouldn't trust my ability to tell the difference anyway. I'm not sure how relevant my system info will be. Everyone's is so idiosyncratic, it's hard to make generalizations. And I've actually got 4 systems in the house, so it's not even that simple. I've listened to the MW Transporter in two of my systems, so far. My impressions are a composite of those two systems. My music room has electrostats (some early Roger Sanders Eros), with his Innersound amplifiers. Probably not too different than your ML's, I would guess. I use a passive transformer-based preamp there. This system is brutally revealing, but whole-cloth honest. Mostly I listen to vinyl in this system. I have a nice Teres-based record deck, which is my primary source, via a K&K phono preamp. In my living room I have Magneplanar 1.6qr speakers which are actively bi-amped via a pair of heavily modified Harmon Kardon Citation amplifiers, basically 130 watts per channel (one amp channel per speaker driver). The Maggies are inherently sweeter sounding than the Eros, but lower resolution than the electrostats, although MUCH more capable of detail retreival than they were stock. This is the system for which I purchased the Transporter, but I like it so well, I think it will end up living in my music room, where I do my serious listening. For the living room, it's shared space. I'll probably spring for a Duet, and run it through my (ModWright-modified!) DAC. I don't know if this answers your questions or not. You can see a picture of the innards on the ModWright forum at AudioCircle. I think you'd like what the ModWright analog stage does. It certainly rescued the Transporter for me. Otherwise I would have returned mine, I just didn't find it all that compelling stock. Hope this helps! Frank -- HalleysComet ------------------------------------------------------------------------ HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43269 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
