Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter
You could and most probably will soon be able to use the TACT as a dsp processor inserted tween the transporters digital output and it's own DAC. FW40 allowed you to do that but it was withdrawn cos it was a tad unstable (evidently) In all probability , there would be a difference tween using the tacts dac vs the transporters , I havent tried comparing dacs yet cos FW40 was creating major problems for me. -- Rodney_Gold Sb3/Z-sys RDP1/meridian DSP5500's TP/X-cans v3/Senns 650's TP/TACT 2.0/SCM 50a's TP/Meridian DSP5000's The nicest thing about smacking your head against the wall is...the feeling you get when you stop Rodney_Gold's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14618 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46636 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter
I have an SB3 with the Bolder digital mods and power supply. I send the digital signal to a TacT 2.0 pre/DAC. I know the Transporter is a lot better than the SB3 if you're using their respective internal DAC's. My question, is the Transporter a step up from the SB3 if I'm using an exteranl DAC? -- ecruz ecruz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4048 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46636 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter
ecruz;294050 Wrote: I have an SB3 with the Bolder digital mods and power supply. I send the digital signal to a TacT 2.0 pre/DAC. I know the Transporter is a lot better than the SB3 if you're using their respective internal DAC's. My question, is the Transporter a step up from the SB3 if I'm using an exteranl DAC? No sense in using an external dac with the TP. Sb3 yes, TP no. Your set up is more complicated with more variables. Are you using the room correction in both cases? TP as just a transport should be better than SB3 but not by a large margin. TP is slightly better than SB3 into Benchmarck Dac in my experience. -- mr_bill mr_bill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6737 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46636 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter
I am using (and LOVE) the room correction on the TacT. I was thinking that there probably wouldn't be much difference since I'm using and external DAC. From what I've heard, the big upgrades to the Transporter are on the analog side. -- ecruz ecruz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4048 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46636 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
NewBuyer;251721 Wrote: What is the retail price of that Linn Unidisk? How did you rip your music files (what program, etc), and what format? The unidisk sc is a cd multi player , and preamp, i think it cost around 5000 usd. Its not like the transporter it still uses its cd drive as transport . The trick is to use the sb3 as transport into the digital input here it sounds almost as good as with cds, thats what im doing at the moment. Linn have just launched a akurate DS player wich also is a memory player but it dossnet have the same functions as the transporter and its twice as much. I have no idea have it sounds only that its much much better then the unidisk sc. Soon more cheaper sources will come from linn that streams music from the hardisk. Linn is adapting this tech throuh out therer product lines, and there studios and recordt company will also. Infact linn started this hardisk based audio several years ago long before the sbin there kivor system , through the years the have perfeccted and refinent it. And now we get the fruits -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
NewBuyer;251721 Wrote: What is the retail price of that Linn Unidisk? How did you rip your music files (what program, etc), and what format? For the test we used waw files,we also compared appel looslees aiff and heard no audioble difference between the formats. We used a appel powermac and ethernet connection and ripped with appel itunes (not the same as pc itunes). Every thing was setup perfectly The unidisk sc is a cd multi player , and preamp, i think it cost around 5000 usd. Its not like the transporter it still uses its cd drive as transport , both the unidisk can play all cds, movies and can also work as a suround preamp The trick is to use the sb3 as transport into the digital input here it sounds almost as good as with cds, thats what im doing at the moment. Linn have just launched a akurate DS player wich also is a memory player but it dossnet have the same functions as the transporter and its twice as much. I have no idea have it sounds only that its much much better then the unidisk sc. Soon more cheaper sources will come from linn that streams music from the hardisk. Linn is adapting this tech throuh out therer product lines, and there studios and recordt company will also. Infact linn started this hardisk based audio several years ago long before the sbin there kivor system , through the years the have perfeccted and refinent it. And now we get the fruits -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
I don't believe that price is what matters! I started with the analogue outputs of the transporter and compared it to the Linn Akurate CD Player. I was surprised that it was difficult to hear a real diference, maybe the Linn had a better soundstage, but the rest was not really worth mentioning. Then I compared both with the Scarlatti DAC linked to the transporter. I would not say that it was distinctly better. The situation changed, when I used the word clock output of the dac and connected it to the transporter. Now the dac acted as master and the transporter as slave. This really made a difference! Broader sound stage, great timing and a lot more details! The only downside is the flaw in the transporter: If it is set to word clock input and that signal stops (because you switch the dac to another input and it does not send a word clock signal) then the transporter crashes, has to be set to internal clock and then back to slave. The next step to avoid this was using a separate master clock and I also added the purcell upsampler. This gave the best sound I have ever heard with excellent musicality. You could clearly hear the different sound of the acoustic guitars Jackson Brownie is using in his life concert, piano sounds natural and voices as if the singers were just sitting there in your room. I cannot stop listening to all kinds of music and detect nuances which I have never heard before with different top systems. It is astonishing that also older simple CD-recordings have a great sound. I have all my Vinyls on the Hard drive and in this system I hear them as I would play them back via my turntable. I think the most important improvement to the system is using an external master clock for the dac and the transporter. I don,t know any other network player than the transporter where this is possible. But to get high end sound this feature is necessary. -- mofuv mofuv's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13768 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
dlhamby wrote: Since you would not be using the Squeezebox or Transporter audio outputs, both players should sound identical in Firedog's proposed architecture. Why should they? Differences between digital sources are well-documented. R. ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
If I understand the original post correctly, Firedog intends to use a separate DAC to do the actual analog to digital conversion. In this architecture, the Slim player will pass the digital bit stream to the DAC which will jitter buffer it, retime it, and do the actual digital to analog conversion. In this architecture, Slimserver will transcode the material to lossless and the Slim player will recover the bitstream and transmit it to the DAC. Assuming you start with a lossless source (FLAC, Apple Lossless, or a disc), the transformation from bitstream to analog signal in the final DAC will have a large effect. If I were using this architecture, understanding the role of the Slim player, I would use a Squeezebox for this application. Since you would not be using the Squeezebox or Transporter audio outputs, both players should sound identical in Firedog's proposed architecture. Both have optical digital outputs which would probably be the way to go. FLAC and Apple Lossless have been validated, so starting with FLAC, Apple Lossless, or WAV material, the Slim player will deliver the original bits to the DAC. You should hear sound very similar (identical) to what you hear playing the original lossless digital recording in this system. Do beware of placebo effect when making evaluations. If you do careful double blind testing, you should not be able to tell which source (CD transport or Squeezebox) is in use. Audio reviewers (hard disks sound better than CD's) fall for placebo effect every time. In summary, start with a Squeezebox and trade up to Transporter if you plan to use its audio outputs. Both are damned good. You can always use the Squeezebox in a second system or with a Tivoli table radio. -- dlhamby dlhamby's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12801 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
mofuv;251572 Wrote: I don't believe that price is what matters! I started with the analogue outputs of the transporter and compared it to the Linn Akurate CD Player. I was surprised that it was difficult to hear a real diference, maybe the Linn had a better soundstage, but the rest was not really worth mentioning. Then I compared both with the Scarlatti DAC linked to the transporter. I would not say that it was distinctly better. The situation changed, when I used the word clock output of the dac and connected it to the transporter. Now the dac acted as master and the transporter as slave. This really made a difference! Broader sound stage, great timing and a lot more details! The only downside is the flaw in the transporter: If it is set to word clock input and that signal stops (because you switch the dac to another input and it does not send a word clock signal) then the transporter crashes, has to be set to internal clock and then back to slave. The next step to avoid this was using a separate master clock and I also added the purcell upsampler. This gave the best sound I have ever heard with excellent musicality. You could clearly hear the different sound of the acoustic guitars Jackson Brownie is using in his life concert, piano sounds natural and voices as if the singers were just sitting there in your room. I cannot stop listening to all kinds of music and detect nuances which I have never heard before with different top systems. It is astonishing that also older simple CD-recordings have a great sound. I have all my Vinyls on the Hard drive and in this system I hear them as I would play them back via my turntable. I think the most important improvement to the system is using an external master clock for the dac and the transporter. I don,t know any other network player than the transporter where this is possible. But to get high end sound this feature is necessary. Mofuv, Are you running your digital front end through a preamp and if so what preamp? Have you tried running the Transporter direct to amp? Thanks, Bill -- mr_bill mr_bill's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6737 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Robin Bowes;251603 Wrote: dlhamby wrote: Since you would not be using the Squeezebox or Transporter audio outputs, both players should sound identical in Firedog's proposed architecture. Why should they? Differences between digital sources are well-documented. R. I have one foot firmly in the blind testing camp and one in the open-minded camp. I think sources can sound different. However, I believe the better sources sound rather similar and to make unbiased judgements on the subtle differences between them (are they just different to me, or do I prefer one to another and if so which one) requires blind listening. This is because the real differences are so subtle they can be trodden on easily by suggestion or expectation. Darren -- darrenyeats SB3 / Inguz - Krell KAV-300i (pre bypass) - PMC AB-1 Dell laptop - JVC UX-C30 mini system darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Mofuv, Are you running your digital front end through a preamp and if so what preamp? Have you tried running the Transporter direct to amp? To compare transporter, Linn and Scarlatti dac with and without master clock I used an integrated amp (LUA Sinfonia). Thus I could do double blind testing. Now I am running the transporter's digital output to the upsampler, then to the dac and from there directly into the main amp (Accuphase). Volume control via dac. As I mentioned the differences using the transporter's internal clock as master with the Linn and the Scarlatti dac have only been very suttle, using the dac's or even a separate master word clock improved the whole sound incredibly. It was easy to tell the difference in a double blind setup. In such a setup jitter seems to be reduced distinctly and the upsampler and the external dac could work in an optimal setting receiving the digital data from the transporter in the same timing as they then internally process them. -- mofuv mofuv's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13768 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
darrenyeats;251617 Wrote: I have one foot firmly in the blind testing camp and one in the open-minded camp. I think sources can sound different. However, I believe the better sources sound rather similar and to make unbiased judgements on the subtle differences between them (are they just different to me, or do I prefer one to another and if so which one, or was I just imagining the difference) requires blind listening. This is because the real differences are so subtle they can be trodden on easily by suggestion or expectation. Darren And you have comapared legions of top level digital sources in the same system ? With all do respekt dont think you know it all just becaue you find your sb3 sounding great, or base your knowledge on what some skepticks rave about in here. I have had varous fine digital sources and the differences are not subbel , not even in dbt that seems to comfuse many peoples mind. What i have found to be the best way to evaluate a surthen component or a complete system is to use well knowen cds then skip to you find where the spicial moment in the music comes , and its exactly herer i find BIG differences between sources. An those big differences are basicly make or beake. Some pieces of music will sound very close to idendical . I have for a long time found the transporters analog outs not satisfing , some special music diddent sound right or just a littel borring. So me and a frind did a tes with his unidisk sc through a linn klimax kontrol preamp. An example Didos melankolic track stoned from the album life for rent in a blind test with level match , between the Linn unidisk sc and Transporter , it starts out sounding almost idendical i have to really listen hard to here a variation, but then the chorus comes , wich is a very dynamic and moving piece that have a amazing synth in the back ground ,on the transporter this sound very borring lacking imaged deepth impact it was actually very disapointing and have botheredme ever since i got te transporter , because the music really builds up to this peak but then nothing really happens. Schifting over to the unidisk is like listning to a completly nother piece of music the unidisk sound VERY dynamic emotive and spreads out a very deep soundstage where the beautiful synth is very clear and satisfing. Now if i diddnt had used the chorus as reference point i would be saying the both sound pretty much the same. I ges if you are the usaly hifi type that basicly only uses music to test the gear you will not know what im talking about but if you listens to music because it makes you feel a surthen way i strongly recorment using my method. Or use the linn tune dem method , dont just put some music on and flip the swich a couple of times . -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
The most important difference between the squeeze box and the transporter is that the transporter has a world clock input. So if you are using a high-end dac with an world clock output as master you have very low jitter. You can also connect both and maybe a separate upsampler to a sepate world clock and you will hear the best high end sound which is currently available, even better than with the best CD-transport if you have saved the CD's bit correct to HDD e.g with EAC. I am using the transporter with a scarlatti world clock as master, then a purcell updampler to DSD and a scarlatti dac connected to a Accuphase A-60. The sound is exceeds by far the one if I am playing CD's on my Linn Accurate CD player. -- mofuv mofuv's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13768 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
From my experiments I find that if you take the SB3, change the PSU for a linear one, and use a good enough external DAC (Something with a highly rated capability for removing jitter)then the result will stand comparison with some other very good sources. If you don't want 24/96 playback then I would go the SB3 + DAC route and don't forget it will still handle up to 24/48 which gives at least some of the improvement of high quality digital audio. -- adrianh1960 adrianh1960's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5421 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
There's been a lot of talk about linear ps for SB. What are people using? -- avta avta's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1860 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
mofuv;251477 Wrote: The most important difference between the squeeze box and the transporter is that the transporter has a world clock input. So if you are using a high-end dac with an world clock output as master you have very low jitter. You can also connect both and maybe a separate upsampler to a sepate world clock and you will hear the best high end sound which is currently available, even better than with the best CD-transport if you have saved the CD's bit correct to HDD e.g with EAC. I am using the transporter with a scarlatti world clock as master, then a purcell updampler to DSD and a scarlatti dac connected to a Accuphase A-60. The sound is exceeds by far the one if I am playing CD's on my Linn Accurate CD player. Thats a very impressiv digital playback system you have there that system must must cost 4 times as much as the linn akurate cd player. No wonder it sounds better , but the real interresting thing is what is better to you ? more soundstage , more detajl? but what about musicality , what about PRAT . But i totally agree with you that the transporter as a adigital only transport is a aboslute higend component and even better then most other cd transports. -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
harmonic wrote: Thats a very impressiv digital playback system you have there that system must must cost 4 times as much as the linn akurate cd player. No wonder it sounds better Yes, because obviously the more a system costs the better it sounds. , but the real interresting thing is what is better to you ? more soundstage , more detajl? but what about musicality , what about PRAT . So tempting, so tempting, but too easy. I'll resist... R. ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
mofuv;251477 Wrote: The most important difference between the squeeze box and the transporter is that the transporter has a world clock input. So if you are using a high-end dac with an world clock output as master you have very low jitter. You can also connect both and maybe a separate upsampler to a sepate world clock and you will hear the best high end sound which is currently available, even better than with the best CD-transport if you have saved the CD's bit correct to HDD e.g with EAC. I am using the transporter with a scarlatti world clock as master, then a purcell updampler to DSD and a scarlatti dac connected to a Accuphase A-60. The sound is exceeds by far the one if I am playing CD's on my Linn Accurate CD player. Im curious about how are you connecting the transporter to your dcs's and accuphase, wich inputs and outputs do you use? who gets the signal first? could you diagram it? -- GuyDebord Reference 3A Royal Master monitors biwired with van den Hul Inspiration cables, REL Strata 5 sub. AMP: Pathos Classic One MKIII. ANALOGUE: Michell Gyro SE, Technoarm Lyra Helikon SL cartridge, ASR Mini Basis SQ phono preamp linked with Audioquest Colorados. DIGITAL: Mac Mini, SlimDevices Transporter linked with van den Hul The Second XLRs. POWER: Isotek Mini-sub GII, Isotek Elite cables (Mini-Sub, Rel Transporter) van den Hul Mainstream cable (Pathos) van den Hul Mainserver cable (ASR). GuyDebord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14587 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Transporter is connected via balanced AES/EBU to the purcell upsampler. The Ethernet output then links to the dac and from there via balanced outputs to the A-60 (balanced inputs). The master clock is connected via BNC to the transporter, the upsamler and the dac. -- mofuv mofuv's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13768 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
darrenyeats;250989 Wrote: Personally I like the sound of accuracy. Low distortion and a flat frequency response sound good to me, although I admit many listeners find these create a flat, sterile sound. It appears you tend toward the latter opinion. All these impressions are equally valid because they're personal. Everyone has their own tastes. Harmonic, I'm happy to read your opinions about equipment, but I do so knowing our tastes differ. Darren We all have different tasts , hifi is like cigars and woman there really is no right or wrong. My linn amps do sound very accurate , the cremonas do not however with the to together i get that magic that makes all my lunatic efforts pay of. I beleive that system synagi is the most improtant aspekt in have to buil a system that really sing, many times more expensiv dont equal better sound, infact my cremonas where much more to my likeing then some of the more expensiv models from sf. thanks -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Oh well then here it goes with the tune dem method the linn ikemi beat then transporter handely. (tune dem is basicly a method for mesasuring a system , what you do is simply listen for have well you can follow individuel notes in the playback the better you can do this the more musical it sounds. The transporter was more analytical and darker sounding to and much less PRAT. The ikemi is the entry level cd player from linn then there are the all the 3 different level unidisk`s the SC , the 2.1 , and on top the 1.1 then the is the new akurate DS (the sam as the klimax only much cheaper)and on top the Klimax ds. Go figure It do cost 9 times a s much as the transporter and the ikemi is also a littel more expensiv and dosssent have preamp and all the other great functions that the TP has. So all in all the transporter is still a god bargin but the real winner is still the sb3 because ironicly it sounds very close to the transporter IF you use it with a good linare PS. -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
harmonic;250799 Wrote: ... linn ikemi beat then transporter handely. ...The transporter was more analytical and darker sounding to and much less PRAT. Is this the stock TP or the super tube job? . -- haunyack haunyack's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9721 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
haunyack;250819 Wrote: Is this the stock TP or the super tube job? . Stock transporter. I have no experince with the modwright one you are refering to. I did have a modded one and it dos sound somwhat better but the tune dem tyhing is the same , but the real shortfall of the transporter is its analog design , dont think you can get past this no matter have much you mod it. I somtimes i wonder if the transporter was designd above all measure good !, sounding good is a nother thing. I remember the sony top of the linn Sony cd players , the had specs no one could compete with but the where also som of the most steril and analytical players you could buy. -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
harmonic;250827 Wrote: Stock transporter... linn Sony cd players...steril and analytical players you could buy. Is there a correlation between the two according to your subjective response? -- haunyack haunyack's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9721 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
harmonic;250827 Wrote: I remember the sony top of the linn Sony cd players , the had specs no one could compete with but the where also som of the most steril and analytical players you could buy. This is part of the age-old debate between the specification measurement wonks and the critical listener folks. After many years I am inclined towards the latter view, because as I get older I realize that the science is far from perfected in a comprehensive way. There are sometimes things going on that we have not come or learned to measure, but that our god-given ears - being the most sensitive audio measuring device ever devised - can nevertheless detect (on a side note, our human organs are so incredible that the human eye can detect a single photon of light). So when some engineer tells me that their product measures audibly perfect on a 'scope, I consider it with considerable sodium chloride. I don't hear my system with a 'scope. Despite its perfect sound forever, most CDs don't convey all the musical information that a good vinyl setup can, and we're now closing in on 2010. Nothing is ever perfect. What we strive to do in audio is play the strengths and weaknesses of the parts against each other to reach a relatively cohesive and balanced whole. -- sgmlaw sgmlaw's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13995 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
I full hartly agree. I was at a hifi show in copenghagen last month, when i walked into the Gamut Audio room my grilfriend that was with me out of no where said that sound horrible . The sound came from the new top of the lin gamut L9 speakers that weigh in at 115.000 usd. -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
haunyack;250828 Wrote: huh? Do you believe there's correlation between the two according to your subjective response? . Yes i do, the both measure very good and both sound very analytical -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
darrenyeats;250989 Wrote: Personally I like the sound of accuracy. Low distortion and a flat frequency response sound good to me, although I admit many listeners find these create a flat, sterile sound. It appears you tend toward the latter opinion. All these impressions are equally valid because they're personal. Everyone has their own tastes. Harmonic, I'm happy to read your opinions about equipment, but I do so knowing our tastes differ. Darren I full-heartedly agree with you Darren, well said. -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
harmonic;250468 Wrote: SoftwireEngineer;250466 Wrote: Phil Leigh;250135 Wrote: I think linn`s way of doing it by using the orginal master track data directly into the playback is the way ahead. I where at a local demo where the compared the Linn klimax DS digital source with other sources , the klimax ds was amazing. However when the played studio master files over the DS i heard somthing i had never heard before or thourgt possible with digital. Do you have an idea how the Klimax DS compared to the transport/SB3 stuff ? -- redil redil's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14488 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
redil;250559 Wrote: harmonic;250468 Wrote: SoftwireEngineer;250466 Wrote: Do you have an idea how the Klimax DS compared to the transport/SB3 stuff ? I have a friend that have have had both the transporter and sb3 in his linn system. He sold the transporter because his linn ikemi had better PRAT and where more musical. He keept the sb3 and used its digital outs into a unidisk sc wich is has excelent dacs and pre amp build in. The ikemi is under the unidisk sc wich is under the unidisk 2.1 and then is the akurate at the top. The last two are pure analog sources with no preamp. The new linn akurate DS harddisk player sounds ALOT better the the akurate but every one that have heard the klimax DS vs the akurate DS says that the klimax vs akurate is the biggest step up. Go figure I sold my transporter because the sb3 with a linare ps sounded almost the same as the transporter , but when i heard the unidisk sc with the sb3 feeding the data i realized that the analog section in the transporter sounds HIghly analytical and thin. -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
What are you talking about? I just looked at the moderator log and no one has touched this thread or any of your posts. Mike -- mvalera Michael Valera Online Communities Manager Logitech Streaming Media Systems slimdevices.com mvalera's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11086 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
tomjtx;250176 Wrote: sgmlaw, you might be surprised by Transporter. It excells in the very areas you think it will falter. I second that. I've heard the Transporter in an extremely revealing chain and I can tell you it won't be easy to find a better DAC no matter what price tag it has. -- michel michel's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4393 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
sgmlaw;250114 Wrote: While my ears will be the final judge, I am fully expecting the TP to sound reasonably dynamic, and somewhat musical, but slightly restrained at the very bottom and rounded off in the upper midrange and treble, and not with the same equal measure of tonal clarity and fullness as a proper OPA627 implementation, and nothing near the lush presentation of a tube or FET design. Expectation is a prison. If that's what you expect it to sound like, that's how it will sound to you. -- cliveb Transporter - ATC SCM100A cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
cliveb;250301 Wrote: Expectation is a prison. If that's what you expect it to sound like, that's how it will sound to you. That sounds like CYA talk. Once invested in their gear, folks often develop an excessive opinion of it. Expectations are benchmarks. I've been doing audio for a very long time and am fairly impartial at this point. If it surprises me, I'll be the first to say so. If it turns out to be the case, it wouldn't be the first time I moved down for better sound. -- sgmlaw sgmlaw's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13995 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
sgmlaw;250305 Wrote: That sounds like CYA talk. Once invested in their gear, folks often develop an excessive opinion of it. Expectations are benchmarks. I've been doing audio for a very long time and am fairly impartial at this point. If it surprises me, I'll be the first to say so. If it turns out to be the case, it wouldn't be the first time I moved down for better sound. Nothing wrong with a bit of healthy skepticism. Make sure the sources are exactly level-matched when you do a comparison. I wouldn't make a definitive judgement (especially on subtle differences such as those between digital sources) unless the test was blind - speaking for myself. Darren -- darrenyeats SB3 / Inguz - Krell KAV-300i (pre bypass) - PMC AB-1 Dell laptop - JVC UX-C30 mini system darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Phil Leigh;250135 Wrote: sgmlaw;249843 Wrote: At the end of the day, we're all listening to the modulation of a chain of power supplies. Very true...and this chain stretches all the way back to the microphone, desk, outboard gear, recorder etc...oh and you'll find plenty of 5534's and 5532's (or worse...Eventide used to use 741's!) in that chain, so the signal is already shredded before it gets to the CD or whatever. This isn't about the search for truth - it's about tuning for personal preference. Analogue stages of DAC's can be modded to taste. Your taste may vary from that of the manufacturer. I agree about the sub-par equipment in the recording part of the chain. But the issue is the overall effect is a multiplication of all elements each represented by a factor less than 1. So if there is sub-par equipment in the playback, it is going to matter too. I am saying this because I am trying to reduce jitter in my playback (I guess you are using an Altmann for this) and thinking about this made feel that the actual digital values in the CD itself may have jitter (i.e. samples are not evenly spaced per 1/44.1khz of a second). Maybe if we know what equipment it was and created a jitter opposite to that in the recording chain we will have perfect playback. Probably the analog addicts might really have a point. Jitter there is not of such frequency (variation in the speed of the LP cutter or turntable) that it does not change the character of the sound so much. In digital, we get a very fine veil/haze, which seems tougher and tougher to remove as it gets smaller and smaller. -- SoftwireEngineer SoftwireEngineer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7000 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
michel;250280 Wrote: I second that. I've heard the Transporter in an extremely revealing chain and I can tell you it won't be easy to find a better DAC no matter what price tag it has. The DAC (AK4396) is good, the output stage is forever crippled by cheap sounding opamps. -- AudioFrog AudioFrog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9568 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
SoftwireEngineer;250466 Wrote: Phil Leigh;250135 Wrote: sgmlaw;249843 Wrote: At the end of the day, we're all listening to the modulation of a chain of power supplies. I agree about the sub-par equipment in the recording part of the chain. But the issue is the overall effect is a multiplication of all elements each represented by a factor less than 1. So if there is sub-par equipment in the playback, it is going to matter too. I am saying this because I am trying to reduce jitter in my playback (I guess you are using an Altmann for this) and thinking about this made feel that the actual digital values in the CD itself may have jitter (i.e. samples are not evenly spaced per 1/44.1khz of a second). Maybe if we know what equipment it was and created a jitter opposite to that in the recording chain we will have perfect playback. Probably the analog addicts might really have a point. Jitter there is not of such frequency (variation in the speed of the LP cutter or turntable) that it does not change the character of the sound so much. In digital, we get a very fine veil/haze, which seems tougher and tougher to remove as it gets smaller and smaller. (Hmm..that gives me an idea..if the jitter of a playback device can be determined, say a soundcard, then maybe the card itself might be driven with opposite jitter - like equalization for freq. response. Is anybody ready to work on a patent with me ? :-)) I think linn`s way of doing it by using the orginal master track data directly into the playback is the way ahead. I where at a local demo where the compared the Linn klimax DS digital source with other sources , the klimax ds was amazing. However when the played studio master files over the DS i heard somthing i had never heard before or thourgt possible with digital. -- harmonic harmonic's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6879 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Where does one begin . . . Let me start by saying that the TP is a $2000 price point device, and it should not be reasonably expected to contain the parts selection or execution of a $3000-$5000 DAC. It is performing much more functions than the latter, and it is an understandable from a purchasing and manufacturing standpoint that some compromises have to be made somewhere. This is not a no-cost-barred product. I have no doubt that the manufacturer may deride the use of some upper tier parts, but the reality is that there is no way they could have employed them and kept to price point. And there is nothing wrong with that. In addition, some of the more subtle differences in these matters are not going to be noticeable on the vast majority of hobbyists systems. Systems capable of detecting those very subtle differences will typically have downstream components of very high caliber. While this is not always desirable, and I am not an adherent to the detail cult, the very best systems are extremely revealing while still remaining musical and relatively forgiving. Someone comparing the TP to a Wadia on a $2000 Rotel system is not going to hear the differences that a Classe/Thiel pairing might reveal. I am no fan of rows of Holcos, Blackgates, and Hovlands for the sake of them. Some of my very best sounding equipment has 29 cent polyester interstage coupling caps throughout. It is the synergy of all the equipment together that matters most. But bear in mind that we are talking strictly about output stages here. Not the DSP stages, and not anything else. The TP's is, predictably, an op-amp design. However, while there are some very nice op-amp based designs out there, my ears have always found them ultimately wanting against a discrete FET or tubed output stage. Tonal depth and smaller nuances in complex passages are usually missing or thinned down with the former. There is no need to name names; JFET output stage DACs can be bought right now for under $1500. And they do sound terrific, albeit with less resolution than a more premium DAC might provide. The old CAL Alphas of ten years ago had similarly wonderful sounding output stages, but were limited in their DSP execution (I think CAL overweighted the back end of their products), so were not quite as resolving. Most DACs and players have effective bit resolution of under 10 bits once all deficiencies are factored in. Unfortunately, the vast majority of gear out there uses opamps, including my present DAC. I compromised on the output stage to get a stronger DSP section, keep balance, and stay under $5000. But where a premium design like my Assemblage DAC 3.1 might use an OPA627, which is a good sounding chip, the TP opted for the NE5534. That's a tried and true solution, but very middle of the road sounding. Every one I have ever heard has been unruly in the upper midrange and into the treble. That the TP has capacitively coupled it (if my research is correct) will help tame that edginess, but at the expense of some resolution. Why did they use a 5534? Cost. Implementing a OPA627 solution is expensive, and involves additional capacitance headroom to accommodate its current demands that most manufacturers would rather not spend on, and I would never expect to find it in a $2000 all-in-one digital box. The difference a better opamp implementation can make can be nothing short of incredible. Dropping OPA627s and doubling supply capacitance turned a Marantz CD67se into a giant killer in some informal experiments we did around here recently. Absolutely amazing transformation, noticeable even in a modest system. While I have not gotten my hands on a schematic, the few internal pictures of the TP chassis (plenty of wasted space in there - the chassis could be reduced by half) I have seen do not indicate supplies of the overall robustness I typically see (and hear) in more expensive designs. Is that bad? No. And the 5534 doesn't really need or will necessarily benefit much from a big Nichicon sitting next to it. And again, I would never expect to see that sort of implementation at this price point. I am in the process of getting my hands on a TP for audition at some point. While my ears will be the final judge, I am fully expecting the TP to sound reasonably dynamic, and somewhat musical, but slightly restrained at the very bottom and rounded off in the upper midrange and treble, and not with the same equal measure of tonal clarity and fullness as a proper OPA627 implementation, and nothing near the lush presentation of a tube or FET design. The TP looks to be a super deal at $2000. But I would never match its output stages up against a higher end DAC. I don't care what you do with it, a 5534 is never going to better a well executed FET design. Never. Does that mean that the TP should sound worse? Not necessarily, as it is the complete package that always counts. If the TP's front end is strong enough to compensate
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
sgmlaw;249843 Wrote: At the end of the day, we're all listening to the modulation of a chain of power supplies. Very true...and this chain stretches all the way back to the microphone, desk, outboard gear, recorder etc...oh and you'll find plenty of 5534's and 5532's (or worse...Eventide used to use 741's!) in that chain, so the signal is already shredded before it gets to the CD or whatever. This isn't about the search for truth - it's about tuning for personal preference. Analogue stages of DAC's can be modded to taste. Your taste may vary from that of the manufacturer. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... ...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some very expensive cables ;o) Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Thanks for taking the time to post. It was well written and a good read. Personally, I have not yet had a chance to demo a good high end DAC in my home and compare it against my Transporter, so I have no basis to form an opinion. I know that one day I will demo a higher end DAC and I look forward to it. I do have a very neutral and revealing two channel rig (IMHO), so it will be interesting to compare. I do realize that the laws of diminishing returns will apply, and if it takes 2-3k more to hear a subtle improvement over a stand alone Transporter, I'll be keeping the Transporter. Mark -- yooper yooper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8835 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
sgmlaw, you might be surprised by Transporter. It excells in the very areas you think it will falter. At least it does balanced through very top tier amps and speakers. I've heard it through rowland/watt/puppies and have heard it through thiels and several other combos. I have compared it with some very expensive competition and it compares very well. Let us know what you think . -- tomjtx tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Hi- B3 vs Transporter I want buy one of the devices and connect it by the coax (rca) digital out to an existing DAC unit of the stereo system I own. The system in question is of very high quality. In this case, is there any difference in sound quality between a Squeezebox and a Transporter? Again, I'm not asking about convenience and features,just sound quality when using the digital out. Thanks -- firedog firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
The transporter has facilities beyond the squeezebox, in particular the ability to play or pass through 24/96 files, which are now becoming available for download. Of course if you don't think you want this facility, then that is of little interest. I think it would be helpful if you could tell us what the equipment you currently have is. Don't make the mistake of thinking that the internal DAC for the Transporter is easily improved upon. I have the excellent Trichord Pulsar One DAC, which is worth more than the entire TP, yet in my system I preferred the tp as a stand alone unit. What I am trying to say here is, that the tp with its analogue outs may be an improvement on the DAC you have - assuming you are not using any digital bass management, in which case the game changes entirely. What everyone else will tell you on this forum is that the Squeezebox through a good external DAC also sounds very good, and it's a keeper. If you buy one now and upgrade to the tp later, the squeezebox is useful for a second (e.g. the kids) system. -- bigfool1956 David Ayers Music is what counts, hifi just helps us enjoy it more bigfool1956's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13782 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
Were this a straight SB v. TP comparison with nothing more added, then it is no contest. But I suspect the answer is going to be determined by the degree of jitter control you can apply after the SB. I am slowly coming to the conclusion that with sufficient jitter correction, the SB should be competitive with any other head source (the TP's ability to pass 24/96 media notwithstanding). This is coming from the owner of a CEC deck. Using the TP as a pure head end seems quite unnecessary, even by audiophile standards. If you have a system of sufficient caliber, then you know that the analog end of things is just as critical as the DSP sections. While the TP is very good, I can't say it is quite the equal of some upper tier DACs in that respect. Like you, I have solid upstream gear. So I don't necessarily need everything the TP brings to the table. At the end of the day, we're all listening to the modulation of a chain of power supplies. Still, for the guy walking into it with $2,000 and no other pre-existing digital front end, the TP alone looks like money well spent. -- sgmlaw sgmlaw's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13995 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs Transporter via external DAC
sgmlaw;249843 Wrote: ...you know that the analog end of things is just as critical as the DSP sections. While the TP is very good, I can't say it is quite the equal of some upper tier DACs in that respect... I wonder if you could please expand upon this a little - what are the shortcomings of the TP analog section, over the others you have in mind? -- NewBuyer NewBuyer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7862 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41160 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SB3 vs. Transporter with outboard DAC
I planned to get SB3 and use it with Lavry DA10 DAC. Recent introduction of Transporter messed up my plans a bit. New Transporter specs look highly promising, they claim to make a hard work done with regard to jitter handling. But I'm wondering how important may it be when used with DAC that has highly effective jitter reducing mechanism. What do you think guys? SB3 is not bad at all as a digital source, Transporter seems to be much better, but costs nearly 7 times more. Can I justify it if only digital section will be used? -- 325xi simaudio nova cdp simaudio moon i-5 revel performa m20 via acoustic zen matrix reference ii and acoustic zen satori -planned additions: sb3 deq2496 lavry da-10 ... or will it be transporter?- 325xi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5661 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=25983 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
