On 01/10/10 13:34, michael123 wrote: > > empty99;579995 Wrote: >> To me High End may not be HI FI, which is High Fidelity. High End can >> sometimes be Anything You Wanted with lots of money ;^) > > Just take two boxes - Transporter and Touch - and open them side by > side. > There are no miracles.. Two good toroidal power supplies, separate > wiring for the front panel, Jung regulators, transformer-coupled > outputs, high quality AKM DAC, fully balanced design (e.g. 4 > amplification paths, "+" and "-" for each channel) with proper sum for > unbalanced outputs, precision clock (not the Audiocom Ultraclock, but > better than most hi-fi there), etc. > > There is nothing to compare between these two... > One is mass-market gadget, another is a personal achievement, statement > from Sean Adams..
You're making an huge assumption that all that stuff makes any difference, esp. if the touch is connected to a DAC. The Transporter is well-engineered, sure, but most of that is the for the analogue outputs, and I seem to recall Sean saying that the Touch DAC is actually pretty similar to the Transporter. Now, I haven't personally compared Transporter with Touch, so I'm not claiming that the one is better or worse than the other. However, regular contributors to this forum whose opinion I would trust have claimed that the Touch with a DAC is as good as the Transporter. So, I don't think it's as simple as saying "don't consider anything other than Transporter for high-end systems". R. -- "Feed that ego and you starve the soul" - Colonel J.D. Wilkes http://www.theshackshakers.com/ _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
