Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] What Would You Replace a Transporter With?
nicoff wrote: I started this thread long ago and would like to share with everyone where I am today. I followed this thread and did lots of research. Separate DACs/Streamers, etc. But I wanted something simple, a-la-Transporter! I read about the Oppo 105D player and its streaming capabilities. It could stream hi-Rez files, DSD files etc., and since I needed to upgrade my DVD/CD player, I thought I would give it a try. The Oppo is a great DVD/CD/Blue-Ray player, but as a streamer, in my opinion, it leaves much to be desired. The GUI and App that controls the unit do not compare to LMS. So let's just say that it did not work for me. Someone in this thread mentioned the Sony HAP-Z1ES unit earlier, but I soon learned that the Sony is NOT a streamer like the Transporter. The Sony has an internal hard drive and all music has to be stored in that hard drive. I felt that since I already had all my music in the NAS, it was going to be a pain to get my music into the Sony, and then if I add music to my NAS what happens? Well, recently, an audiophile friend mentioned, again, the Sony HAP-Z1ES as a possible solution. I read some more and learned that while it is not a streamer, it comes with a software app that can automatically transfer all your files from the NAS to the internal Sony hard drive and will keep it updated as you make changes to the NAS. Long story short, I bought the Sony and transferred all my music to its internal hard drive. it took about 24 hours to move the files (almost 11 thousand tracks) from the NAS to the Sony, but it all happened in the background while I was doing other stuff. The same software will keep both the NAS and the Sony hard drive in sync. This is important because I still have other slim devices in the house that connect to the NAS via LMS (I am not giving those devices up yet). So long story short, I spent several hours comparing the Transporter and the Sony and without hesitation I can say that the Sony betters the Transporter in sound. The Sony does NOT have digital outputs so I was thinking that there was no way it could better the Transporter. It did! The Sony has a very nice GUI that is a pleasure to use. It also has internet radio (no Pandora or Spotify yet, but who knows, that might be added in the future). All in all, I am very happy with the Sony as a replacement for the Transporter. I am still keeping the Transporter though... By the way, if you are into 2 channel stereo, you MUST listen to the Sony. (I listen to both stereo and surround). Thanks to all who chimed in with suggestions/ideas!! I bought one of these SONY HAPZ1ES players for my sister this past summer. She's admired my Transporter for years, but she has absolutely no knowledge or interest in any gear that has complexity attached. She has a Boom, but uses it only to listen to BBC radio in the bathroom. The SONY has an OK app for Androids/iPhones, which is a plus. But finding specific music, managing a large classical collection and managing playlists are all tasks for which the control software is ill-suited. The SONY swallowed 20,000 tracks without a whimper, but getting them back out again is a challenge. That said, the sound quality of the SONY is really outstanding. It can be even better too. For those audiophools who like to mod stuff, take a gander a what Red Wine Audio is doing to enhance sound quality even further on the HAPZ1ES. For her needs, it is a simple and useful device that sounds wonderful. For her, it is certainly nice to have a one-box solution on her audio rack that requires no internet connection to work (altho if you want to use the net-based control interface, you need it for that). I don't consider it a very good replacement for the Transporter, simple because of the lack of music database management. But as a playback device it is really, really good. If I had to replace my Transporter, I might look at the software PS Audio is developing for their net-based system. The Bryston/Aurelic players have great sound, but are pretty expensive by the time you add DAC and supporting boxes. Sonus music management sucks, as noted above, for any reasonably large collection. Frankly, I don't know what I'd do... HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=100948 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter to headphone amp options
GuyDebord;517932 Wrote: For the k701's the SPL Phonitor is one of the best options, plus it has a balanced input. I actually have had this combo among others until I settled with my Stax 4070 monitors :), the phonitor brings out the bass from those AKG's. If you dont care for the crossfeed the go for the SPL Auditor. Serious envy here!! I'd love to have the Stax 4070's at my listening chair! -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75310 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Newbie to the squeeze
Mnyb;519102 Wrote: But if they smell blood they have a really good attention span you never get rid of em ;) That's definitely true for the executives of my experience == if you substitute the word money for blood Made me laugh out loud. Thanks! -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75498 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter to headphone amp options
I offer a strong recommendation for a Mapletree Audio headphone Ear+ HD amp. You can use the Analog - out of the Transporter directly into the MAD amp, and control volume there. The Ear+ amp is a tube-based amp which I find adds a bit more body and realism to the Transporter, especially for female vocalists and jazz/classical which are my staples. The Mapletree Audio amps are hand-made by Dr. Lloyd Peppard in Canada, and cost about $600 U.S. Dr. Peppard will customize the amp to your requirements, including your choice of color, and key components (Blackgate caps in the power supply for instance, or the use of discrete resistor attenuator instead of Alps volume control). The sound quality is really spectacular. I commend your attention to several long threads on Head-Fi.org about the Mapletree amps. Head-Fi is a good source for other headphone amps as well. For instance, you will see there that the Benchmark cited above is well-regarded as a DAC, but tends to be limited in the headphones it will drive, so you might want to examine the best synergies between your headphones and your amp. I've been a Mapletree customer for the past 3 years, and I am extremely pleased with the sound quality, and the support provided by Dr. Peppard. Hope this helps! -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75310 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter to headphone amp options
kphinney;517602 Wrote: Thanks All. Anyone have experience with the Grace m902? http://www.gracedesign.com/products/m902/m902.htm I've demo'd the Benchmark Media DAC1 PRE as pointed out by Phil, but I wasn't all that impressed. The Mapletree Ear+ HD seems to be a very nice option, especially since I get to assemble it if I choose. I have an email into Lloyd to see if I can swap in balanced ins for the standard RCA. I had the Gracenote before I bought my Mapletree Audio amp. It was fantastic, I thought with AKG701 headphones, but ran out of oomph with my Sennheiser HD600's. The Mapletree has both high and low impedence outputs and enough power to keep me happy with Mahler at full throttle. Hope this helps! -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75310 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter to headphone amp options
Had a brain fart there. Muddled recollections of old gear. It's been too long since I had the Grace. I checked out my old listening notes (yes, I AM that anal). The Grace actually sounded better on the Senn's but did not drive them all that well on loud orchestral peaks, but the bass had nice quality. The combo of the Grace with the 701's is what caused me to sell the Grace. Overly analytical, and too forward sounding for my taste. The Mapletree is not rounded off or bloaty in the bass, unlike some tube units. If it is romantic, it is only in the midrange, and certainly not with my 701's, but somewhat with the Senn's. I have a new pair of Beyerdynamic Tesla's on order, which I hope will be a spectacular pairing with the Mapletree amp. Obligatory slim-content: The Transporter is an incredible source device with the Mapletree amp. Most days I listen to various internet feeds with the Sennheisers (relaxed, and rich), but settle down to serious listening with the AKG's in the evenings. Fun stuff! Who needs speakers? -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=75310 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Best Audiophile Rip and Store?
GHillTX;349513 Wrote: I'm taking the plunge and getting the Transporter for my Audio Research/VPI/BW system. I have the luxury of starting from scratch, not just using my existing desktop PC (Windows Vista) or laptop (also Vista). What would you folks recommend as a storage device/music server to store files, and what format would you use? I would prefer to save my discs in the format with the most music/ambience/imaging/etc. and not scrimp on file size. Also, any recommendations on setting up libraries and playlists? I'll want several different playlists and the ability to locate a title, album, or artist quickly for replay. If and when I choose to move these to a portable device, I'm assuming I can convert them then to MP3 for use on an iPod? Thanks, still learning about all this 21st century stuff. I used to run SqueezeCenter on an old PC that I re-tasked as a server with Linux installed. Last year, I bought an HP Media Server that runs Windows Home Server. Mostly I bought it because it has a nice set-and-forget backup solution for my wife's computer and our laptops. But I found it also makes a dandy server for SqueezeCenter. Small, quiet, lower power requirements than my old PC (about 79 watts measured with the original disk + 2 1TB drives). Not super-expensive by Transporter standards (mine was about $700 w. drives), and super-easy to set up and use. If I were doing it just for me, I'd stick with Linux, but the WHS solution is extremely nice for the whole family. I recommend it, especially if you don't have a secure backup solution for your Vista computers already. Oh, and FLAC, by all means. The meta-data is central to the Transporter experience IMHO HTH Frank -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=53344 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Behringer DEQ2496 in Transporter digital loop for room correction?
Robin Bowes;309997 Wrote: HalleysComet wrote: How do I turn this sucker on? Settings | Player | Audio | Effects loop input - choose the appropriate input Also, set Effects loop clock mode to Synchronous: Transporter is master R. No wonder I was having trouble! Perhaps I have the wrong version of SqueezeCenter 7 because this option doesn't exist on my list of settings under Settings | Player | Audio. I have 14 heading options there, and none of them is Effects Loop. I'll try updating to the latest version and see if it appears. Thanks so much! -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48350 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Behringer DEQ2496 in Transporter digital loop for room correction?
OK That's got it! Downloaded and installed 7.1 and there's the option. Whew!! I thought I was going nuts. Turns out the effects option wasn't shown in the first version of 7.0 that I've been using. I'll document my Behringer settings and results when I get the setup done, in case someone else wants to do this. Thanks again Robin! -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48350 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Behringer DEQ2496 in Transporter digital loop for room correction?
I thought it might be useful to someone to document the steps I went through to make the Behringer DEQ2496 work in the effects loop of the Transporter. So I'm attaching a couple of posts as sort of a primer, in the hopes that the next person who does this will benefit. First I'll talk about setup, then the process. Physical install: I used digital AES/EBU cables with XLR connectors I got from a pro music shop. Connected a digital AES/EBU cable from the TP output to the Behringer input. Connect another cable from the TP input to the Behringer output. Finally, connect calibrated microphone to XLR microphone input, and tape mike to listening chair in position of head. I used a tape measure to measure distance of microphone to center of speaker drivers. Adjust for exact distances required. You'll need your Transporter updated with the latest beta firmware, currently FV42. You'll also need the most recent SqueezeCenter supported release (I found this out the hard way). The option to select the effects loop doesn't exist in version 7.0! Choose to enable the loop using AES/EBU. Scroll down and make sure that the Transporter is running in Syncronous mode using its own clock. Once you've done this, you can turn on the Behringer to check it out. The DEQ2496 is by far the hardest part of this whole process. Push the I/O button on the behringer (right hand side, bottom center of 9-button matrix) to select the digital input. Rotate the select wheel to pick the Dig In XLR input Then play some music make sure the meter on far left is moving. Use lower button beneath meter to display different meter screens. when tired of this...push RTA button on top of second column of buttons to show the frequency bars (response by frequency) More setup: * Push the tab button on upper left by screen to select the second screen, then used the middle button on the left to select AES 3 * Pushed the tab button again to select the third screen, then selected the RTA Mic to use the microphone as the input for the RTA (Real Time Analyzer); note that there's a gain button here for the mike gain, if needed (lower left button) * Pushed the tab button for the fourth screen to confirm that there is no digital delay selected * Now you should set the unit to Dual Mono rather than Stereo. Push the Utility button on the lower left of the matrix of 9 buttons. Use the small scroll wheels to move up or down in the menu. Find the Channel Mode item, and rotate the large scroll wheel to Dual Mono and press to accept that setting Next post: Room equalization process -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48350 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Behringer DEQ2496 in Transporter digital loop for room correction?
Assuming things are working, it's time to try some measurement. Turn down the amplifier! * first, need to enable pink noise. Push I/O button again select first tab. Use large scroll wheel to move input from Dig In XLR to Pink Noise then push in scroll wheel to select. You should hear the rush/roar of pink noise. Turn it up until your significant other complains about the jet plane taking off (anyway, works better good'n loud). Then select another input or something so you don't have to listen to it while you finish getting ready * Now if you push the button on the upper left of the unit labelled RTA you can see the response of your room to pink noise played through your system. In theory, pink noise has equal energy at every frequency, so where the display shows peaks and valleys, that's the response of your system/room deviates from flat. Pretty discouraging, huh? So how do we fix this? First, you can relocate your speakers. Moving them closer/further from the wall, or closer/further from corners can have profound effects on their response. Second, you can change your room, such as by adding carpets, curtains, or room treatments, such as the very-effective RealTraps. Or you can try to change the relative frequency spectrum that is sent to your amplifier by your source via digital correction using the Behringer. If you use the Behringer, you can do it either manually, or let the unit Auto-Equalize. The latter is kinda cool, if you don't expect too much. I start with Auto as a baseline, then twiddle to make fine adjustments. There are some parameters that will make it work better, such as not letting it auto-equalize below 100Hz or above 18kHz. Also the usual rules apply: don't try to force your amp/speakers to produce frequencies of which they are incapable, so don't boost the low bass in an effort to squeeze blood out of a stone. Now it's time to set your target curves. This is the goal to which you are trying to optimize response. For starters, you can try for a flat response. There might be other target curves you prefer, such as the famous BBC curve. Press the upper left button (GEQ) in the matrix of 9 buttons on the right. This gives you a screen where you can see the frequency spectrum, and the boost or cut that the unit is applying. If you push and hold the button on the lower left of the screen you can reset these to flat The middle button on the left of the screen lets you select which channel you're viewing, right or left. If you hold it down for a couple of seconds, you can adjust both channels in tandem. BTW, this is one of the really cool parts of the unit. You can use the scroll wheels to select specific frequencies, then adjust them up or down with the big scroll wheel. The lower scroll wheel lets you change the bandwidth of the equalization, so you can create a nice parametric adjustment that is spread over related frequencies. If you push the lower scroll wheel, you can change its mode to a shelf mode that lets you boost or cut all the frequencies above/below a set frequency. Lotsa cool stuff here. Now it's time to let the Behringer do a self-adjust to reach your target curve. Push the button on the upper left RTA The screen has 3 tabs. The bottom left button lets you start the auto-EQ feature and sends you to your target curves. After you set your curves, press the upper left Page button which will take you to the second screen, showing your pink noise response again. This time, push the middle button on the left which starts the auto EQ process. Actually there are some other parameters you can set, such as how fast it modifies parameters (I like fast to start, then slow to finalize), but at this point the unit samples each frequency and auto-adjusts the parametric equalizer to come as close as possible to your target curve. When it stops moving things around, press Done, on the lower left, then go look at your curves. If you play pink noise again, you should see things are now much closer than they were before. Some frequencies are still whacked out, and you can manually set the lows to help manage room bass nodes. Back and forth between settings until you are all fiddled out. You can save these curves, and name them, and create new ones, and knock yourself out. But that's the basic process. Now you can go back to the I/O screen and select your TP as input Dig In XLR Then when you play music, you'll be amazed at the transformation. You may not like it at first, but give it some time. After a while you'll find it hard to go back to the unadjusted sound of most rooms. Hope this helps someone! Frank -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48350 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Behringer DEQ2496 in Transporter digital loop for room correction?
So I got the latest FW 42 downloaded and my Transporter still works. That's a start. Where do I go to enable the digital effects loop feature? I can select the digital input, but with an AES/EBU digital cable connecting output to input, when I select the AES/EBU input I don't see any options for the effects loop. The player will accept digital input from other sources, so that works, but I haven't seen a menu item in either the setup menu, the SqueezeCenter menus, or anywhere for the effects loop. How do I turn this sucker on? Thanks -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48350 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] OMG digital cables matter!
Phil Leigh;308253 Wrote: Worth an experiment...maybe the cable you were previously using had a defective connection/damaged shield or signal wire? I did an experiment recently and couldn't hear a difference between a Kimber D-60 and a freebie lead. This was exactly my experience. I even ran the test blind with a friend to switch (or pretend to switch) cables. Couldn't tell any difference, and whenever I thought I did, it was unreliable, no consistent characteristics emerged across a variety of music. We swapped roles and my friend was equally unsuccessful at hearing any consistent differences. Of course, the lovely velvet case that the Kimber D-60 comes in should make your system sound 50% better, right? -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48461 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
tricka;285116 Wrote: H doesn't it matter more about synergy in components and personal listening tastes? I've found that you really can't say something is better or not, just that it suits your system as you like to hear it. I'm fascinated at the emotion this stirs up! Personally I thought the original post wasn't that ra ra - I read it and took it for what it is: a personal perspective. I have different amp's for different music - my favourite 6CLC Spud amp for colour eg female vocals, jazz - and a Bryston 100 SST for large scale orchestral. The Transporter (stock) sounds to my middle aged ears just fine with both - different but fine. Less is more eh?? I was the OP, so I appreciate that you took the post as it was intended. I think the Transporter is a great piece of gear, but I too was taken aback by the strength of the emotions this perspective generated. Pretty much cured me from posting on this forum. Anyway, thanks! -- 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Question re TP Firmware 42
nuhi;307040 Wrote: I use FW42 with 7.0.1 all the time. Simply install 7.1, go to C:\Program Files\SqueezeCenter\server\Firmware for 32-bit or C:\Program Files (x86)\SqueezeCenter\server\Firmware for 64-bit Windows and backup aside these 2 files: transporter.version transporter_42.bin Now uninstall 7.1 and reinstall 7.0.1 or whatever. Then go to the same folder and copy those 2 backed up files there, overwrite as necessary. Restart SqueezeCenter for it to recognize it. Thanks for these directions! I was trying to figure out how to do the same thing. -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48306 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Behringer DEQ2496 in Transporter digital loop for room correction?
Has anyone successfully used the Behringer in the digital loop of the Transporter that became available with firmware v.40? I'm still trying to get it to work, which is more of a Behringer issue than a Transporter issue. Any advice would be welcome! I'm just now updating to V.42, but I assume the digital loop still works as described by Sean in the sticky? BTW, the Behringer is pretty transparent when used in the digital domain, which is a big improvement over trying to use its A/D and D/A circuits which do add some audible grunge. Thanks! -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48350 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
eiret;307320 Wrote: I have read that musicians use different acoustic guitars for different songs. Its still an acoustic guitar. I have read that some professional studio engineers use different speakers(monitors) for different songs. Its still speakers(monitors) Good point! I like different music played thru different systems myself. I designed and scratch-built a SE system for my bedroom, restored vintage 1950's tube stuff for my living room, and use modern solid state in my music room. Each gives a different presentation, none of which is invalid, I think. A lot of that is the different speakers (single driver vs. dynamic vs. planar) in the different systems. What is remarkable, I suppose, is that at least my feeble brain is convinced by the illusion of real music in each case. The Transporter certainly is an asset in any of these systems, but they seem to showcase different strengths in each context. And altho I've offended the gods by (horrors) modding it, and even worse throwing away perfectly good money fixin' something that don't need fixin' the result has been pleasing to my audiophile sensibilities. For me this is Fun! Back to truth vs. beauty. I don't know if modifying my Transporter has anything to do with objective truth if there is such a thing with recorded sound. I'm no believer that measurements can capture fidelity (even tho I make my living doing measurement). Music is such a complex time-domain phenomenon, that the vast majority of measurements used as standards of fidelity fall short of the mark. I don't know of anyone who has predictably reproduced real-life sonic holography. As for those who say that measurements prove a modded unit will be inferior to the original, I'm going to maintain that the measurements are flawed, even more than the (subjectively) experienced outcome. To quote Brian Beezely: A measurement can be a cardinal measurement that yields a value, such as total harmonic distortion. It may also be an ordinal measurement that yields an ordering (this amplifier sounds more distorted than that one). One is objective and the other subjective, but both are measurements. In principle, both can be made to any degree of repeatability by suitable experimental design. One value of a measurement, cardinal or ordinal, is that it defines what you're talking about. Once people agree on a measurement procedure, they can independently investigate something knowing they're all dealing with the same thing. In fact, for vague or ethereal phenomena, the measurement itself can serve as a definition. Without a good definition, communication about a phenomenon can be unreliable and difficult. Individuals may know exactly what they mean by an undefined term, but for others the meaning may be different. A clearly defined measurement procedure can prevent such misunderstanding. Definitions can change, and they can multiply. Measurement may reveal unexpected complexity. For example, IEEE 185-1975, the tuner testing standard, defines at least three measurements of sensitivity. The vague notion of signal pulling power turns out to be not so simple. I don't think we have the consistently agreed-upon measurements yet to adequately describe the magic part of music. Not that it isn't possible. But if they exist, they aren't commonly understood in a way that allows non-scientists to consistently communicate about them. Nor does the current state of audio measurement art allow different scientists to reliably achieve the same effect in reproducing musical events. Beauty, on the other hand is, and should be subjective. After modifying my Transporter, Beauty is certainly accomplished, at least for me. But then again, I suppose because beauty is such a subjective phenomenon, I shouldn't be surprised that other folks might object to such a subjective claim. After all, who am I to criticize someone else's concept of beauty? Unqualified, fer sure! Thanks -- 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Attenuators-recommendations
rydenfan;271268 Wrote: Wow, this is kind of dissapointing news. My TP from Dan is arriving tomorrow and I cannot believe I will not be able to fully enjoy it :( I guess I will have to do a frantic search to try and find an XLR pair as fast as possible. This sucks... It's also a function of the sensitivity of your power amps. At the moment, I'm running my ModWright TP directly into a pair of tube amps as I try it out in different configurations with different equipment in my home. My experience won't be completely relevant to you since I'm using the unbalanced connection. Nevertheless, at maximum volume it's about as loud as I ever listen... just below Headbanger level, reserved for certain metal recordings ;-) Anyway, I definitely don't have a problem with it being too loud, and there's lots of useful range using the built-in digital volume control. I'd recommend that you try it first before ordering attenuators. It's desirable to keep the volume control near the top of its range, which is the case in my current application. If you have to throttle it way back, then you're potentially throwing away a lot of bits, which is when you'll want an attenuator. But it MAY not be necessary. By the way, I think you'll love it! I'm certainly enjoying mine. Frank -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=42698 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Attenuators-recommendations
rydenfan;271284 Wrote: Do you have any recommendations of where to get a nice XLR set? Seems like Endler is not even accepting orders right now. An alternative source if you are DIY is KK Audio. See this page on the bottom of the page: http://www.kandkaudio.com/linestage.html Very nice quality, and/or you can use your own favorite brand/type of boutique resistors if you like. HTH! Frank -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=42698 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
ted_b;270145 Wrote: I am Dan's first Modwright TP customer and have had it for months now. It is the best digital front-end I've ever heard, and I've heard many. I like it, in my system, in my well-treated room, quite a bit more than the stock TP, a wonderful invention if I say so. I've posted pics and comments on another thread quite awhile ago. The vile and unsupported criticism (i.e without ever hearing it) on this thread is embarrassing. Thanks to Sean and Slim Devices/Logitech for inventing this wonderful product, along with the software to complement it. The support Sean and team have shown me is first rate. Thanks to Dan Wright for changing the sound to work better and synergize in my room, with my equipment. The power supply, sophisticated tube rectifier and analog stage, and subsequent 24/96 tube dac capabilities are music to my ears. YMMV. Hey Ted, I appreciate your sharing your experience. In fact, your posts were a big part of my initial interest in doing the upgrade with Dan. I certainly consider it money well spent! I just wanted to say a personal thank you! since you helped me discover the best digital sound I've yet heard in my home. I'm just now listening to my ModWright Logitech Transporter... I heard Lyle Lovett in concert Thursday night, and listening to his latest CD and comparing to the (admittedly flawed) auditory memory of that night is revelatory. I'm reliving it, and lovin' it! Thanks! 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
Pat Farrell;267868 Wrote: Shredder wrote:[color=blue] Glad you like it. As far as I'm concerned, anyone can listen to, and like anything, and its fine by me. Its your ears and your money. All the arguing about circuits and parts is hot air. IMHO. Ah, a breath of fresh air! As usual (perusing your past posts) you bring a terrific common-sense perspective to the discussion. I admired the Transporter in its original form, but not enough for it to be worth $2,000 to me. But in it's revised form it's worth $3,600 to me (what I paid). I like it so well, I think it's worthwhile for others to audition it. Hopefully some folks will find this useful, or at least provocative wink 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
GuyDebord;267603 Wrote: and the willingness to consume 4000 in credit or cash. the transporter has years of research and development on it, electrical engineers, designers, software engineers, etc. The technology, features and sound is truly worth 2000 euros, the tp reflects innovation and leadership by all standards, and i happily support a product like this. Now, modwright only parasites on all of this and still charges exactly what the tp is worth to modify it with an extremely standard tube stage, in my book, the value of something like that is ZERO and enters the unethical realm/// Im sorry. but auditioning something like this is against my time, logic and principles. Common sense and not audiofool sense tells me its another of many frauds in the industry/// While I respect your point of view, I disagree with one of your key premises. Dissatisfaction with the state-of-the-art, and the willingness to explore alternatives is central to progress in sound reproduction technology. Most of the leading lights in this industry started their careers with soldering irons in their hands and a spark of an idea in their heads. For instance, firms such as Conrad Johnson and Acoustic Research have their roots firmly in the foundation of modding other designer's work. Dan Wright of ModWright Instruments may have roots in modding, but I submit that he is an innovator who is driving the state of the art in the industry. He currently manufactures one of the finest preamplifiers extant, designed and built from scratch, and produced in his own factory. Dan was one of the first to accept and utilize the work of Jack Bybee, to deal with the effects of HF interference in high bandwidth audio circuits. He stands on the shoulders of designers like Alan Kimmel, famed developer of the constant current circuits with whom he partnered in developing Dan's award-winning stand-alone phono stage. The analog stage in his Transporter modification is hardly extremely standard nor is the sound of the resulting product. Willam Zane Johnson of AR is another fine example of a modder who evolved into a manufacturer of renowned high-end audio equipment. I still have one of his modded Dynaco amps of the 60's, where he first achieved a measure of commercial success. Innovations which include deep understanding of materials science, and the sound of individual components/brands/types is central to the toolbox of successful modders. It also represents one of the strongest reasons why modern electronics generally outperform classic designs of earlier decades. Of course, any hacker can start subbing parts and call themselves a modder, so I take your point about parasites. But at the same time, I think this process is central to the evolution of improved sound reproduction equipment, and successful modders are a boon, not a bane to our industry. I think you're sadly mistaken if you believe that modding is antithetical to excellence. Anyway, this is not the discussion I expected, when I originally posted my positive experience with the product! But interesting, and thanks for adding your point of view! 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
rydenfan;267776 Wrote: I am sure I will be flamed for my beliefs, but I have to say I do find it very interesting that everybody who KNOWS that either the Modwright Transporter is a waste of money or that the same thing could be achieved in another way has never heard one. Yet everybody who has indeed listened seems to have universal praise for the piece. In the end should not some emphasis be placed on how this piece sounds? Those of us who have purchased it and are enjoying it are deluded fools who are too easily parted with our money. Wiser heads need to cool down our ardor and point out that we're only listening to our delusions, fueled by self-fulfilling perceptions of improvement. Besides, who do these modders think they are anyway defiling what it took years of the finest engineers talent to develop? grin I'm lovin' it! 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
Timothy Stockman;267790 Wrote: OK, what is non-standard about his analog stage? Does he use a non-standard circuit topology? What is unique in his circuit? I don't have access to a circuit diagram, but from what I can see, and have read, the stage is optimized for class A operation of the 6N1P triodes he uses, and transformer coupled without caps in the direct signal path. The tube rectifier is a 5U4 type that apparently uses some clever (? unspecified?) rectification twists, including bespoke capacitors (teflon/foil in oil capacitors that Dan has made for him) which are said to account for some of the sound quality. At some point I'll dig into it and see if I can figure out the circuit, but right now I'm having too much fun listening! 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
opaqueice;267827 Wrote: Really? So much for ModWright, then. Yeah, I know. But really... Jack Bybee was able to develop a successful solution to allow sonar listeners to more reliably detect enemy submarines, using technology he developed that was kept classified by the US Navy for a number of years. So what do you do to monetize this technology when you go to the private sector? Well, the so-called Bybee Purifiers may or may not do anything for your system. Where they seem to matter is where you have very high bandwidth amplification, where high-frequency harmonics have the potential to impact the sonic spectrum. Digital circuitry in particular provides a certain level of nastiness that good design can mitigate, but the Bybee parts in the right application can provide a perceptible improvement. My electrostatic speakers turn out to be good high-frequency receivers. They in turn feed back some of this into my power amps -- or they used to. I perceived this as a certain slight veiled muddiness in the sound. I tried various approaches, such as ferrite clamps (deadened the sound) or sobel filters, but the Bybees seem to do the best job. On the other hand, they don't make a hill of difference in my living room system where I have vintage tube amplification dynamic speaker drivers. YMMV 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
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
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
I have recently upgraded my Transporter by having Dan Wright at
Modwright replace the output (analog) section with his tube-rectified,
output modification. I thought it might be useful to discuss my
experience with those who have not yet had the chance to hear this unit
compared to the original Transporter.
I had purchased the Transporter and was thrilled with the additional
control and access I now had to my music collection (ripped to FLAC).
But in comparison to my moderately expensive Musical Fidelity A5 CD
player, I was disappointed in the sound quality. [NB: in Audiophool
terms, is $2500 moderately expensive?]
I felt that the sound quality, while pristine and accurate, lacked the
breath of life that I cherish in my music. I go to an average of 2
concerts a month, so I'm intimately familiar with the sound of live
music, and the Transporter didn't deliver it for me. I was going to
return the Transporter at the end of the trial period, but then I
decided to use my Christmas Bonus to do the ModWright thing.
I suppose this comes down to the classic truth vs. beauty argument.
I think Sean Adams would argue that adding tubes (an antediluvian
technology) merely adds a pleasant distortion, but that it does not
reflect the true content of the original recording. I beg to differ.
I think the addition of the tube stage has recreated MORE of the
original musical experience. I don't think this can be explained in
terms of 2nd harmonic distortion. My experience is that the ModWright
Transporter now has the essence of the experience that it lacked
before.
For instance, I'm listening at this moment to Putamayo's Women of
Spirit. This is a fantastic album, if you're into female vocalists.
Anyway, I've heard both Cassandra Wilson and Ani DiFranco in concert,
and the tonality and flavor of the music through the ModWright is
right on! {said with an ex-hippie fist raised in the air}. This
same album played before with the Transporter was impressive in its
detail retrieval, but I didn't have the impression of real live
singers, sharing an emotional experience with me.
And to me, music is all about emotion, and not much about left-brain
rational exposition. I don't want to think about my music, I want to
FEEL it! I am now Transported and that's a good thing. So if your
Transporter leaves you cold (as mine did), there is an alternative out
there which IMHO is a real improvement over the already-excellent
original.
Hope this helps rescue someone else from Transporter let-down
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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
adamslim;267438 Wrote: Thanks for sharing (does that sound like an AA comment? ;) ). Out of interest, why did you go for the Modwright over other modders? I've previously purchased Dan Wright's modified Perpetual Technologies P3A DAC and was very pleased with the result (no tubes!). Frankly, I WAS concerned that this was a waste of money but being an audiophile, I've spent money foolishly in the past ;-) so I know what that feels like! Turns out, Dan's approach made a piece of gear that I didn't want to spend my time listening to into a piece of gear that I spend all my time listening to. That's worth it to me. I have four different audio systems in my home, including a system in the bedroom, living room, home theatre, and my music room. The last is where I do my serious listening, and the MW Transporter has taken up home there. And for another poster, no, you can't get the same result running thru a tube buffer. BTDT. But spending money and results are two different things (unfortunately). In this instance, I got results that were worth it to me, so I consider it a good investment in my musical pleasure. I probably spend $6-7,000 per year on this hobby --mostly for music and concert tickets/travel -- so it wasn't THAT big a deal for me money-wise. But it certainly hits my hot buttons. I've never been thrilled with digital music, partly because I'm an old fart with nearly 2,000 LP's, so that's the bulk of my listening. But I'm impressed that the Transporter does so well, and I do think the Modwright approach, which modifies none of the front end but only addresses limitations in the analogue stage, is a net improvement. Use your own ears, then let me know what you think? 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ModWright Transporter experience: truth vs. beauty?
Apparition;267456 Wrote: OK... just to clarify, I really am just looking for an explanation (this isn't a veiled attack on tubes or whatever). So: why would you get a different result doing the modwright rather than using a tubed amp? I don't get it--isnt the alleged virtue of both warmth or musicality? Color me confused. Yup, this is where one moves between science and religion! But maybe there's some common ground here. I think the issues are around the small-signal amplification by op-amp, and the power supply for that stage. If I understand correctly, this is where Dan focused his attention. As far as I can tell (not being an engineer) the stock stage represents best practices for today's players, taking the output of the DAC and creating a stable amplified signal for the subsequent amplifier (or preamp). I think Sean did a spectacular job with this circuit. It's truly clean sounding, based on my few weeks listening to the stock unit. It doesn't lack warmth. it doesn't impart any false sense of precision, yet all the detail is there. Nice work! So what's missing? Well, I don't have the language for it, but I think it might be described as a sense of real-ness or palpability. I wouldn't know how to begin to measure such a thing. Maybe like pornography -- we know it when we see it? I don't think this is a function specifically of tubes, or not. I've got a solid-state phono stage (Klyne) which is particularly good at rendering this from LP's, via extremely small signals from a phono cartridge. And my amplifiers are solid state Innersound ESL, feeding electrostatic speakers, which are supremely clear sounding. High resolution system, not biased inherently to mushy tube warmth. Anyway, I found fault with the Transporter for its lack of this characteristic, compared to my current CD player. I actually preferred a Bolder-modified Squeezebox to the Transporter. That unit belongs to a friend of mine who got me onto the whole computer-based audio trend (I was happily mostly listening to LP's before that). I was disappointed, because I consider the Transporter to have much better technology. And the Transporter is such a cool thing, I really wanted it to work in my system. So I tried a number of things, including inserting a tube preamp (either an Audible Illusions M3a or a Mapletree Ultra4), and a Musical Fidelity XDac which is a tube buffer. In the latter case, I felt that there was a false sense of warmth that seemed to me to be euphonic and phony. the Mapletree sounded nice as in listenable, but I lost a lot of detail. And the Audible Illusions also tends to the warmth side of the equation. Just sticking some tubes into the audio chain wasn't the solution. That's when I heard that Dan was modifying it. Since I have had a long experience with some of Dan's gear, I thought it was worth a try, or maybe I was just throwing more money at the problem? It seemed like a big risk, but I'm happy to report it is working out for me. I love the Transporter. I'm sure others who have tried it and have found it wanting might be interested in this experience, so I wanted to share, not because I'm such a smart guy -I'm not -- but trying to be helpful. I'm getting a lot of joy out of it and it's nice to share... 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
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 6moons preview ModWright Transporter
Dan Wright of ModWright is one of the good guys in the whole Audiophool business. I've talked to Dan, and find him both knowledgeable, and no-nonsense. I've got one of his (tube) preamps, as well as one of his earlier modded Perpetual Technologies DAC's (no tubes). Both represent clear assaults on state of the art sound reproduction. For that matter, so is the Transporter. Sean has accomplished remarkable things. Certainly, spending more for a source component for very small incremental improvements in sound quality doesn't seem very rational. I'm very happy with the sound of mine. But one thing I've discovered about audio electronics, is that everything matters... including parts placement, vibration control, electromagnetic shielding, and probably many other factors which may or may not be within the control of the designer. I've learned this in a hands-on manner, by tinkering, building audio stuff from circuit diagrams, and rebuilding vintage gear (but I'm no engineer). I do know that choice of type of resistors, capacitors, circuit layout, have all had substantial (discernable) impact on sound quality, although not always in ways that show up on a distortion meter or an oscilloscope screen. I discovered, for instance, that when I improved the physical damping of capacitors in an amplifier circuit, I got cleaner sound. This was a repeatable, reliable test (remove the silicone glue and the sound deteriorated, replace it and it improved). So I'm willing to believe the Transporter can be improved. And perhaps Dan is the guy to do that. Dan Wright has a good ear. If you read up on his blog on AudioCircle, you can get some insights into the process he went through in developing his mods for the Transporter. I'm convinced that he has in fact discovered a way to improve the sound, focusing on the DAC output interface and the analog output stage. Improved how? What is the standard for measurement? Without reducing accuracy, can the impression (illusion) of live music be enhanced? Making music sound more alive sounds hocus-pocus, and the true believers will prate on about harmonic richness (more second harmonic distortion?) etc. In my experience however, some electronic gear really does improve the feeling of listening to a live performance. I went to more than 30 concerts last year, so I think I have a reasonable understanding of what live music sounds like. I want (and am willing to pay more) to have audio equipment that better delivers the immersion in music that I get at a live performance. So, is the improvement worth twice the price of the Transporter? Last week, before Dan left to go to CES, I put a deposit down to get my Transporter modded. Butchery! Defilement! Destroying what fine engineers have spent years refining? We'll see. I'll post after I've had some time with it and let you folks know what I think. -- HalleysComet HalleysComet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14590 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41756 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
