Skunk;256596 Wrote: > I don't see it that way because most audiophiles had the SB3 connected > to an external DAC anyway. Even a lot of non-audiophiles just connect > it to a HT receiver, negating the quality of the built in converter. > > Comparing the SB3 to Squeezebox Receiver you get the same level of > jitter on the SPDIF output, the same well implemented digital volume > control, and the same bit perfect digital passthrough allowing external > DTS and HDCD decoding, for $150 less. All that and the gold plated > connectors should make it even more appealing to audiophiles on a > budget IMO. Real audiophiles should just get a Transporter anyway.
I use an external DAC for my stereo system, but I am not going to make that kind of investment for multiple rooms in my house. Nor do I need that level of music in those other rooms. The SB receiver is priced perfect for multiple rooms, and they could have really improved the DAC if they had just invested a couple more $ per DAC. But given the DAC that SD chose, it seems to me that Slim assumes their target customers primarily listen to lossy compressed music. -- BetterDAC ------------------------------------------------------------------------ BetterDAC's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14931 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41813 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
