Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
seanadams;467358 Wrote: I don't mean to give the manufacturer too hard of a time, in fact it looks like a reasonable product and I think just a pot might be OK for many situations. But it is no panacea... personally I would prefer a) full level signals going into an amp with a gain knob on it or b) an active preamp with very low noise floor or c) stepped attenuation using quality metal film resistors. In roughly that order of preference, using a few dB of digital attenuation in the TP as needed. Thank you Sean for explaining, I understand better now. :) I wonder whether stepped attenuation is packed in a (simple) consumer product. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;465958 Wrote: Well, you can put a passive preamp if you like : http://www.creekaudio.com/products/obh22.php It has only switches and an Alps potentiometer, it does not affect quality at all, as it has no preamp stage. The specs of that preamp are kind of a joke when compared to that of the transporter. The channel separation is only specified as ' 80dB @ 1kHz', Muting is '90 dB'. 80dB is the equivalent of only a 13 bit DAC! 90dB is a 15-bit DAC. The transporter has what, a 120 dB dynamic range? You're going to have a *mighty* hard time beating that. For example, you could digitally attenuate by 40dB, and still be better than that passive preamp. (i.e. 120 - 80 = 40dB). The 120dB of the transporter covers virtually the entire dynamic range between pain and the threshold of audibility. One of their other products (aheadphone amp) have these specs: OBH-21 THD is 0.01% == -80dB == 13.3 bits OBH-21 SNR of 70dB == 11.7 bits. IMO, these are not the specs of a high quality, or even mid-quality audio device. Also, the channel separation spec on that 'preamp' says nothing above or below 1kHz. It will very likely get much worse at higher frequencies. It's undeniably true, that if you're comparing a transporter set to -40dB gain, vs. a transporter set to no gain followed by a 40dB pad (that passive preamp), and all else being equal -- the passive preamp (a.k.a. potentiometer) will perform better. But all else is probably not equal. -- ccrome2 Caleb Crome Sr. Hardware Engineer Logitech SMBU (i.e. the Squeezebox people) BThe future is here. It's just not widely distributed yet./B I-William Gibson/I ccrome2's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18023 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
ccrome2 wrote: The channel separation is only specified as ' 80dB @ 1kHz', Granted, it would be better to say that the spec is greater than 80dB 20-20kHz, but in practice, there is little difference between 80 and 90 dB of channel separation. Nearly no real recordings use that much channel separation, in any stereo recording, there is much more than that much bleed from one mic to the next. There are times when audiophiles focus too much on specs that have no relationship to music. The TP's 120dB of signal is unusable, no listening room is dead silent, and if you claim that the room is 30dB (not likely) then you would have to have the max output at 150dB, well past permanent damage to your ears. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
ccrome2;467135 Wrote: The specs of that preamp are kind of a joke when compared to that of the transporter. The channel separation is only specified as ' 80dB @ 1kHz', Muting is '90 dB'. 80dB is the equivalent of only a 13 bit DAC! 90dB is a 15-bit DAC. The transporter has what, a 120 dB dynamic range? You're going to have a *mighty* hard time beating that. For example, you could digitally attenuate by 40dB, and still be better than that passive preamp. (i.e. 120 - 80 = 40dB). The 120dB of the transporter covers virtually the entire dynamic range between pain and the threshold of audibility. I wish I knew what are you talking about... what S/N ratio has to do with attenuation ? Perhaps you think that dB is an absolute unit of measurement, or what ?oO -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
DCtoDaylight;466123 Wrote: Unfortunately, this isn't exactly true Passive preamps generally have lowish input impedances, and highish output impedances, which, depending on what they are connected to, can have a significant affect on the quality of the signal With the right source's and loads, they can be the ultimate in transparency, but with the wrong gear, they can cause all kinds of distortion and frequency response problems I don't know how it happens generally, you may be right. Nevertheless, this one specs input 20kW and output 20kW. Don't know whether it enters your trouble category. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;467211 Wrote: I don't know how it happens generally, you may be right. Huh? He is absolutely right. A passive preamp is just a potentiometer. A variable resistor. A voltage divider. It has a low-impedance input and a higher-impedance output, period. Google voltage divider impedance or read the first chapter of The Art of Electronics. Nevertheless, this one specs input 20kW and output 20kW. Don't know whether it enters your trouble category. That's ohms, not watts. And the specs make no sense - if he wanted to do his customers a favor he would just come out and SAY what the pot's value is. I'm guessing 20K but I'm not sure if he actually groks the implication of that from the way he's written his specs. The correct answer, of course, is that it depends where you set the knob! Whether a higher Z output (Z means impedance) is a significant problem depends on what you're feeding. If it's going a short distance straight into an op-amp buffer then you're probably fine. But if it's got some capacitance or noise nearby, then you may have a problem. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
seanadams;467284 Wrote: Huh? He is absolutely right. A passive preamp is just a potentiometer. A variable resistor. A voltage divider. It has a low-impedance input and a higher-impedance output, period. Google voltage divider impedance or read the first chapter of The Art of Electronics. probably was a way of speaking, Sean. Certainly, should have been better. I didn't open this device, don't know what it is or how it is made, but I'm curious to know what makes you think that a firm that makes amplifiers don't know about all what you say. And why they couldn't (or wouldn't) produce a passive amp (to switch sources that have only fixed outputs, I presume ?) correctly ? -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;467310 Wrote: probably was a way of speaking, Sean. Certainly, should have been better, I admit. I didn't open this device, don't know what it is or how it is made, but I'm curious to know what makes you think that a firm that makes amplifiers don't know about all what you say. And why they couldn't (or wouldn't) produce a passive amp (to switch sources that have only fixed outputs, I presume ?) correctly ? The firm is Creek, not Crook. :) I don't mean to give the manufacturer too hard of a time, in fact it looks like a reasonable product and I think just a pot might be OK for many situations. But it is no panacea... personally I would prefer a) full level signals going into an amp with a gain knob on it or b) an active preamp with very low noise floor or c) stepped attenuation using quality metal film resistors. In roughly that order of preference, using a few dB of digital attenuation in the TP as needed. -- seanadams seanadams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
All in one design w/ decent DAC implementation and analog stages? If they can rid it of the digital volume control scheme and instead put a discreet analog step ladder volume pot in it, sign me up! -- empty99 empty99's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3488 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
empty99;465737 Wrote: All in one design w/ decent DAC implementation and analog stages? If they can rid it of the digital volume control scheme and instead put a discreet analog step ladder volume pot in it, sign me up! I agree that the Touch with a decent DAC would be the equivalent of a Transporter. And what you are suggesting would be a Transporter/analog preamp hybrid. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
ralphpnj;465757 Wrote: I agree that the Touch with a decent DAC would be the equivalent of a Transporter. And what you are suggesting would be a Transporter/analog preamp hybrid. Just a Transporter with a knob (a GOOD knob, ala discreet metal film resistor clicker to adjust volume) SB3A3.24MFDAC25k Alps2NakPA7sN802Nice! Good to be back to the forum. -- empty99 empty99's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3488 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
empty99;465905 Wrote: Just a Transporter with a knob (a GOOD knob, ala discreet metal film resistor clicker to adjust volume) SB3A3.24MFDAC25k Alps2NakPA7sN802Nice! Good to be back to the forum. I don't think so. The only volume adjustment presently available on the Transporter is in the digital domain. To be able to adjust the volume in the analog domain would mean adding an analog preamp stage (circuit) to the Transporter, which is a lot more than just adding a knob, even a good quality knob. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
ralphpnj;465912 Wrote: I don't think so. The only volume adjustment presently available on the Transporter is in the digital domain. To be able to adjust the volume in the analog domain would mean adding an analog preamp stage (circuit) to the Transporter, which is a lot more than just adding a knob, even a good quality knob. the analog outs on the TP as is has plenty of voltage, both XLR and RCA outs, see specs. My vision calls for disabling the digital volume control (or leave it at 100% in software), then put a pot on the analog outs, even on the XLR (cost a bit more to build due to doubling of parts) -- empty99 empty99's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3488 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
empty99;465922 Wrote: the analog outs on the TP as is has plenty of voltage, both XLR and RCA outs, see specs. My vision calls for disabling the digital volume control (or leave it at 100% in software), then put a pot on the analog outs, even on the XLR (cost a bit more to build due to doubling of parts) I guess what you're describing could be done but I doubt that there is not enough of market for such a configuration for it to be worthwhile for LogiTech to create such a beast. On the plus side it would eliminate two issues: 1) having to worry about the digital volume attenuation effecting the sound quality 2) the need for a separate analog preamp should one chose not to use the digital volume control Of course one could just get a good quality integrated amp with balanced inputs. Problem solved! -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Well, you can put a passive preamp if you like : http://www.creekaudio.com/products/obh22.php -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;465958 Wrote: It has only switches and an Alps potentiometer, it does not affect quality at all, as it has no preamp stage. Unfortunately, this isn't exactly true Passive preamps generally have lowish input impedances, and highish output impedances, which, depending on what they are connected to, can have a significant affect on the quality of the signal With the right source's and loads, they can be the ultimate in transparency, but with the wrong gear, they can cause all kinds of distortion and frequency response problems -- DCtoDaylight Audiophile wish list: Zero Distortion, Infinite Signal to Noise Ratio, and a Bandwidth from DC to Daylight DCtoDaylight's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7284 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
JohnSwenson;461506 Wrote: What I primarily mean is take the board out of the touch box, stick it in a new box with a very good DAC/analog stage board. Tap into the I2S signals on the Touch board and feed them into flops clocked by the local low jitter oscillators. (you need a clock mux here and some method of determining which clock the Touch is using, easy to implement in an FPGA) This is not hard to do. Anyone with enough knowledge to implement a decent DAC can easily do this so we might actually start seeing such things. I'm certainly going to be building one for myself. John S. John, this really is promising to read. I am not in any way capable of designing something like this, but I see the advantages of combining a Touch and a DAC in the same box. Short cable runs for I2S, room for power supplies etc. I hope you can find the time to do this experiment and also to share your findings. Thanks -- OGS OGS's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32981 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
S/PDIF pre-dated MPEG by at least a decade... But I agree. They both suck. To John's point - I fully agree that using i2S or Wordclock to let the DAC drive the transport is the best solution... and that hard-wiring the SB to the DAC is preferable. I agree not because I understand all of the technicalities, but simply because the best systems I have ever heard did not involve S/PDIF (or AES/EBU). Frustratingly in my own system this is not easily achieved without significant mods to Touch, TACT and DAC (actually I guess the DAC mod is quite easy since it already has an Ultraclock installed). I can't live without Room Correction. It is by far the single biggest improvement I've ever made after the speakers. I'm looking into RC on the PC (ie pre-SB), which would then open up the option of a Touch-DAC link as you describe. I for one would love you to detail more of your findings/wisdom, but appreciate the effort involved is significant. Regards, Phil -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
JohnSwenson;461420 Wrote: The RIGHT way to use a SB is have low jitter oscillators right next to the DAC chips and feed those to the SB in place of its local crystals, this is what I do in my own personal DAC, it works extremely well. As was mentioned in this thread the best approach would be to build a DAC with the SB interface hard coupled in so no S/PDIF etc. This is definitely doable with the touch, nobody is doing it commercially, but it might just happen in the future. I don't quite understand what hard coupled means... I'm not a DIYer so I know hardly more than the basics about dacs. What does this modification imply for the touch ? I mean, if it's not too hard to explain. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;461468 Wrote: I don't quite understand what hard coupled means... I'm not a DIYer so I know hardly more than the basics about dacs. What does this modification imply for the touch ? I mean, if it's not too hard to explain. What I primarily mean is take the board out of the touch box, stick it in a new box with a very good DAC/analog stage board. The DAC board contains very low jitter oscillators that are at the same frequencies as the crystals in the Touch. Tap into the I2S signals on the Touch board and feed them into flops clocked by the local low jitter oscillators. (you need a clock mux here and some method of determining which clock the Touch is using, easy to implement in an FPGA) Feed the low jitter clock signals into the Touch board instead of the existing crystals. This synchronizes the touch to the new clocks. Of course you need to follow good practices such as separate power supply for the touch and probably shielding between it and the rest (such as sub-enclosures inside the box). This is not hard to do. Anyone with enough knowledge to implement a decent DAC can easily do this so we might actually start seeing such things. I'm certainly going to be building one for myself. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
pfarrell;461425 Wrote: It was never seen as an audiophile or pro-audio connection. An interesting tidbit on S/PDIF is that I think it was designed for studio use originally. If you look at the stream it bears a remarkable resemblance to a baseband video signal. I have heard that it was designed to be fed directly into the video in jack of the 3/4 studio VCRs as a quick way to store digital audio without inventing a whole new recording technology. The weird block structure was chosen to mimic the video sync pulses so the VCR would accept it as video. And as much as I dislike it I've actually built a DAC that uses S/PDIF, but it has both in and out streams. Its designed to be used with computer soundcards that will sync their out stream to an in stream. The decoding of the input stream to the DAC is done without a PLL because its assumed the external card has already synced it to the local clock. It actually works extremely well and gets around some of the major flaws with S/PDIF. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
JohnSwenson;461506 Wrote: What I primarily mean is take the board out of the touch box, stick it in a new box with a very good DAC/analog stage board. The DAC board contains very low jitter oscillators that are at the same frequencies as the crystals in the Touch. Tap into the I2S signals on the Touch board and feed them into flops clocked by the local low jitter oscillators. (you need a clock mux here and some method of determining which clock the Touch is using, easy to implement in an FPGA) Feed the low jitter clock signals into the Touch board instead of the existing crystals. This synchronizes the touch to the new clocks. Of course you need to follow good practices such as separate power supply for the touch and probably shielding between it and the rest (such as sub-enclosures inside the box). This is not hard to do. Anyone with enough knowledge to implement a decent DAC can easily do this so we might actually start seeing such things. I'm certainly going to be building one for myself. John S. Looks an very nice plan (thanks for having explained simply). :) It would be nice to combine the versatility of a touch with the precision of an integrated-dac design. Very, very interesting indeed ! I hope such a device will exist one day(with a nice price tag). ;) (Themis, who is also a bit fedup with S/PDIF) -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
I'm the one that gave that report on the touch S/PDIF output. I am a beta tester and have taken one apart and examined it very thoroughly and have a good idea of how the S/PDIF output works. I have done extensive listening between the touch and stock SB3 and a modified SB3. I have not done the modifications to the touch (yet!) The SBs were run into several good DACs, some which had reclocking and some which did not. I'm also a DAC designer and have a pretty good understanding of the technical issues involved, if people are REALLY interested I can cover some of the more detailed technical issues involved. In order to do this I would like real interest in the subject because I would wind up spending many hours writing it all down, its not short or simple. And to make it more interesting there is still a lot we don't know about WHY certain technical aspect causes particular sonic signatures. So there is still a fair amount of it seems to be this but we are not really sure BTW the modifications I was talking about above are replacing the SB crystals with very low jitter oscillators. Even when feeding a DAC using the infamous Sabre DAC chip, which has what is supposedly one of the best ASRC implementations the SB3 with the low jitter oscillators sounds quite a bit better than the stock SB3. The stock touch is in between these two. On a DAC with out any form of reclocking (Crystal receiver driving DAC chips directly) but with very good analog stage, the difference is even bigger. On the subject of S/PDIF in general, I despise it, I consider it one of the worst things ever foisted on the general public. The RIGHT way to use a SB is have low jitter oscillators right next to the DAC chips and feed those to the SB in place of its local crystals, this is what I do in my own personal DAC, it works extremely well. As was mentioned in this thread the best approach would be to build a DAC with the SB interface hard coupled in so no S/PDIF etc. This is definitely doable with the touch, nobody is doing it commercially, but it might just happen in the future. John S. -- JohnSwenson JohnSwenson's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5974 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
JohnSwenson wrote: On the subject of S/PDIF in general, I despise it, I consider it one of the worst things ever foisted on the general public. Its not a bad design given its target audience. It was a consumer, mass market interconnect, aimed at the same folks who have never listened to anything other than heavily compressed MP3s over the ear buds included in your PMP. It delivers on that requirement. It was never seen as an audiophile or pro-audio connection. While I don't think its acceptable for critical systems, I disagree that its worthy of hatred. Its perfect for 2 inch diameter full range speaker systems. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Phil Leigh;459408 Wrote: Well as a Beta tester I can tell you that the Touch via S/PDIF into a decent DAC outperforms (in that I prefer it!) the SB Classic. The difference isn't life-changing though. I have a friend with a TP and soon hope to do a 3-way head-to-head comparison. Oh well , time to pre-order one I hope a Meridian G68J counts as a decent dac :) The price is not soo steep, so I don't need life changing. Imho if you get very dramatic differences at this level of performance something is severely broken (usually the pixie dust cottage hifi mod ;) ). -- Mnyb No it can NOT be controlled with iTunes Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Mnyb;459846 Wrote: (usually the pixie dust cottage hifi mod ;) ). lol Indeed, there can't be any -dramatic -differences for something responsible for (hardly) 3-5% of the overall resulting sound. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Gazjam;459220 Wrote: Hi, OP here. At the moment I guess advantages/benefits are all good - but all just on paper. Once more people get to hear a Touch, and more importantly COMPARE against a Classic through a decent Dac and a Transporter, will the TRUE picture come out. Beta testers say the Touch SPDIF out is better: Great. I'm insterested in how MUCH better, how CLOSE to the Transporter does it get through a Dac. Thats the meaty stuff in my opinion! :) Well as a Beta tester I can tell you that the Touch via S/PDIF into a decent DAC outperforms (in that I prefer it!) the SB Classic. The difference isn't life-changing though. I have a friend with a TP and soon hope to do a 3-way head-to-head comparison. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... SB Touch Beta (wired) - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods) - Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Blue Jeans Digital,Kimber Speaker Chord Interconnect cables Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Hi, OP here. At the moment I guess advantages/benefits are all good - but all just on paper. Once more people get to hear a Touch, and more importantly COMPARE against a Classic through a decent Dac and a Transporter, will the TRUE picture come out. Beta testers say the Touch SPDIF out is better: Great. I'm insterested in how MUCH better, how CLOSE to the Transporter does it get through a Dac. Thats the meaty stuff in my opinion! :) -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
I own the Transporter, but I know I could have a lot of fun with the SB/Touch as server to a outboard DAC. But that is because I'm crazy! I'm continuously fiddle farting around with my audio system, and I know I will continue to do so until the day I die! I have $500/pair maggies that I have modified to sound very very good! I havent compared them to $10K speakers nor will I probably ever have the opportunity to do so. They, to me, satisfy like a $10K speaker would - at least what I would expect from a $10K speaker. Is it fun to take a $300 component and make the most of it? You bet! Not all are like me though (thats a good thing). Many like to put the system together and expect it to perform and satisfy with minimal fuss and tweaking. Nothing wrong with that! As far as an SPDIF protocol sounding different or better from one piece of equipment to the next - I'm not convinced that one could reliably come to that conclusion - It would be easy to find a difference between component A and component B, but to attribute that difference to the SPDIF interface would be dubious. I am of the camp that everything makes a difference. I didnt used to be. I was a cable sceptic for many years. I think it is important for us as audiophiles - more importanly to our bank accounts - to stay focused on not just what makes a difference but what makes a significant improvement. It needs to make sense as well! -- earwaxer Waxer Transporter Winsome labs mouse (modified) Maggie MMG's (modified) JPS Labs power cords Audioquest Granite speaker wire Silver Bullet interconnect HSU research sub earwaxer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32040 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Gazjam;456855 Wrote: Squeezebox Touch SPDIF output compared to the Classic compared to the Transporter. As a lot of us use our Squeezeboxes as a transport into a Dac, so this possibly is quite the question for habitual audiophile upgraders. :) Early reports say the Touch has a much better implemented digital out than the Classic. Subjective reports say it sounds a fair bit better through a good Dac. One to watch, if ongoing reports continue to indicate the Touch sounds better than the Classic into a Dac then I'm upgrading when its available in the UK. And how close to the Transporter digital out is the Touch I wonder, and if using an external Dac ANYWAY. how close to the Transporter will the Touch get? Anyone any thoughts? I think that you're right about the Touch begging comparisons with the SB3 and the Transporter, particularly when using the digital output into an external DAC. Right now the only way to play back 24bit/96kHz files without down sampling is to use the $2,000 Transporter, which is a bit of money to spend especially if one already owns a decent external DAC or A/V receiver with a built-in DAC. With the Touch at $300 and a mid-priced external DAC (somewhere between $400, like the Cambridge DAC Magic, and $1000, like a host of others) it may now be possible to get very close to the performance of the Transporter for significantly less money. So the comparison is more than justified. I also wonder how many people who own A/V receivers realize that the DAC built into the receiver may sound better than the DAC in either the SB3, the SB Receiver or the Touch. And finally, with the Touch available for a fraction of the cost of the Transporter the era of readily available 24/96 hi-rez files may finally be approaching. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Can't speak to the Transporter part of this discussion yet, but it is already known that the S/PDIF output on the Touch *-IS-* better then the output on the Classic. Don't have the posts for that rounded up yet, but it has been discussed on the Forum already. -- iPhone *iPhone* Media Room: Transporter, VTL TL-6.5 Signature Pre-Amp, Ayre MX-R Mono's, VeraStarr 6.4SE 6-channel Amp, Vandersteen Speakers: Quatro Mains, VCC-5 Reference Center, four VSM-1 Signatures, Video: Runco RS 900 CineWide AutoScope 2.35:1 Living Room: Duet, ADCOM GTP-870HD, Cinepro 3K6SE III Gold, Vandersteen Model 3A Signature, Two 2Wq subs, VCC-2, Two VSM-1 Kitchen: Squeezebox BOOM Bedroom: Second Boom Bathroom: Squeezebox Radio Ford Thunderbird: Duet, Mac Mini Ford Expedition: SB Touch, USB drive iPhone's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13622 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
iPhone;458797 Wrote: Can't speak to the Transporter part of this discussion yet, but it is already known that the S/PDIF output on the Touch *-IS-* better then the output on the Classic. Don't have the posts for that rounded up yet, but it has been discussed on the Forum already. I don't mean to be a pain in the neck, but just how exactly can the S/PDIF output be better since if the device (whether the device is the Classic or the Receiver or the Touch) is acting only as a digital pass-through and the bits (the digital signal) are received exactly has they were sent out from the server and are then passed along intact via the S/PDIF output to an external DAC? Isn't that one of the primary tenets of digital audio, that bits is bits? Of course other than the fact that the Touch supports and thereby passes along high resolution files. The differences in the DACs I clearly understand but not so the differences in the S/PDIF outputs. If I'm mistaken then please correct me but in layman's terms, if possible. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
ralphpnj wrote: I don't mean to be a pain in the neck, but just how exactly can the S/PDIF output be better since if the device (whether the device is the Classic or the Receiver or the Touch) is acting only as a digital pass-through and the bits (the digital signal) are received exactly has they were sent out from the server [snip] Of course other than the fact that the Touch supports and thereby passes along high resolution files. The differences in the DACs I clearly understand but not so the differences in the S/PDIF outputs. The DAC has nothing to do with SPDIF output, the signal is sent out the SPDIF output before it goes to the DAC. What you seem to be missing is that SPDIF needs to be clocked, and there is nothing in the TCP/IP stream that tells how to do that. So a smarter device could do a better job. Note, I have no insight into what is in the Touch from an engineering standpoint, but unlike prior slim devices, its a real computer with lots of ability to do additional stuff. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
pfarrell;458801 Wrote: The DAC has nothing to do with SPDIF output, the signal is sent out the SPDIF output before it goes to the DAC. I'm sorry that I didn't make myself clearer since I'm well aware of the above. pfarrell;458801 Wrote: What you seem to be missing is that SPDIF needs to be clocked, and there is nothing in the TCP/IP stream that tells how to do that. So a smarter device could do a better job. Now that's more like it. But I'm still unclear as to why one S/PDIF output would sound better than any other S/PDIF output since most good external DACs will reclock the output anyway. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
ralphpnj;458806 Wrote: Now that's more like it. But I'm still unclear as to why one S/PDIF output would sound better than any other S/PDIF output since most good external DACs will reclock the output anyway. Well, reclocking is good on paper. And S/PDIF output is good on paper too. In practice, though... things are slightly different. Although, you're probably right, there're much less (clocking) problems with most good external DACs, as you say. Simply much less is not equal none, I suppose. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;458809 Wrote: Well, reclocking is good on paper. And S/PDIF output is good on paper too. In practice, though... things are slightly different. Although, you're probably right, there're much less (clocking) problems with most good external DACs, as you say. Simply much less is not equal to none, I suppose. Otherwise, why would designers bother using the worse (and cheapest) S/PDIF output chip, or why would they bother implementing it correctly ? And again, it begs the question: how much better can the S/PDIF output of the $300 SB Classic be than the S/PDIF output of the $300 SB Touch? And if the S/PDIF output of the Touch is better will actually sound better with a given DAC, other than when playing back high resolution files? -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
In my opinion : the difference is probably too small to actually be an advantage for the vast majority. In any case, the difference is much smaller than -say- two different dacs of the same price tag (which is already very small). -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Themis;458820 Wrote: In my opinion : the difference is probably too small to actually be an advantage for the vast majority. In any case, the difference is much smaller than -say- two different dacs of the same price tag (which is already very small). Nonetheless I'm excited about the fact that the Touch can play back hi-rez without down sampling and for the same price as a SB Classic. So I guess the real important comparisons will be between the Transporter and various Touch/external DAC combos. As I have already stated, $300 isn't much to spend for those audiophiles out there who already have an external DAC and want to jump into the world of high resolution downloads. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
ralphpnj;458800 Wrote: I don't mean to be a pain in the neck, but just how exactly can the S/PDIF output be better since if the device (whether the device is the Classic or the Receiver or the Touch) is acting only as a digital pass-through and the bits (the digital signal) are received exactly has they were sent out from the server and are then passed along intact via the S/PDIF output to an external DAC? Isn't that one of the primary tenets of digital audio, that bits is bits? Of course other than the fact that the Touch supports and thereby passes along high resolution files. The differences in the DACs I clearly understand but not so the differences in the S/PDIF outputs. If I'm mistaken then please correct me but in layman's terms, if possible. I think this is the answer you're 'looking for' (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=456536postcount=5). It is why I posted Touch is better then Classic/Receiver using S/PDIF. And I agree that the Touch has a bunch of potential for being the transport for ones external DAC as the S/PDIF appears to be better then the Classic/Receiver and has native 24/96 support. -- iPhone *iPhone* Media Room: Transporter, VTL TL-6.5 Signature Pre-Amp, Ayre MX-R Mono's, VeraStarr 6.4SE 6-channel Amp, Vandersteen Speakers: Quatro Mains, VCC-5 Reference Center, four VSM-1 Signatures, Video: Runco RS 900 CineWide AutoScope 2.35:1 Living Room: Duet, ADCOM GTP-870HD, Cinepro 3K6SE III Gold, Vandersteen Model 3A Signature, Two 2Wq subs, VCC-2, Two VSM-1 Kitchen: Squeezebox BOOM Bedroom: Second Boom Bathroom: Squeezebox Radio Ford Thunderbird: Duet, Mac Mini Ford Expedition: SB Touch, USB drive iPhone's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13622 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
ralphpnj;458823 Wrote: Nonetheless I'm excited about the fact that the Touch can play back hi-rez without down sampling and for the same price as a SB Classic. So I guess the real important comparisons will be between the Transporter and various Touch/external DAC combos. As I have already stated, $300 isn't much to spend for those audiophiles out there who already have an external DAC and want to jump into the world of high resolution downloads. I completely agree with that. ;) -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
iPhone;458832 Wrote: I think this is the answer you're 'looking for' (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=456536postcount=5). It is why I posted Touch is better then Classic/Receiver using S/PDIF. And I agree that the Touch has a bunch of potential for being the transport for ones external DAC as the S/PDIF appears to be better then the Classic/Receiver and has native 24/96 support. Thanks for the link, it goes a long way in explaining just what is going on and if everything sounds as good in reality as it looks on paper, then the Touch may be a very BIG winner. Now I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on one. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
I'm also thinking the touch is winner here I own a Meridian G68J A/V preamp i'm not interesting in analog outputs on any source, in fact all sources including tv have digital outputs in some form be it toslink spdif mhr or hdmi . This processor does 24/96 nicely. Transporter would be a waste of $ for me. -- Mnyb No it can NOT be controlled with iTunes Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Squeezebox Touch SPDIF output compared to the Classic compared to the Transporter. As a lot of us use our Squeezeboxes as a transport into a Dac, so this possibly is quite the question for habitual audiophile upgraders. :) Early reports say the Touch has a much better implemented digital out than the Classic. Subjective reports say it sounds a fair bit better through a good Dac. One to watch, if ongoing reports continue to indicate the Touch sounds better than the Classic into a Dac then I'm upgrading when its available in the UK. And how close to the Transporter digital out is the Touch I wonder, and if using an external Dac ANYWAY. how close to the Transporter will the Touch get? Anyone any thoughts? -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
I'm going to go out on a limb here with some vast generalities! My opinion is that how you get the bits from the computer wirelessly to the DAC is a fairly benign digital process without much if anything to worry about in terms of sound quality issues. When you start the D/A process is where the rubber meets the road! I'm not a big fan of SPDIF (coax and optical) but that is my bias. Other folks have no problems with it. I personally dont want my 1's and 0's converted to SPDIF so that my DAC can handle it. I2S is supposed to be better, but it is difficult to handle, and it is only designed for very short runs, not in cable lengths. USB is another option - not crazy about that either (although asyncronous seems decent - Wavelength DAC). Firewire might be better - jury is still out. Where does that leave us? The transporter takes care of it without dealing with the above issues. For me - I sleep better at night. It's not the final word though - I would like to hear a SB going SPIF to a Berkley Alpha DAC! But then we are talking $5K for the Alpa! Dream on! -- earwaxer Waxer Transporter Winsome labs mouse (modified) Maggie MMG's (modified) JPS Labs power cords Audioquest Granite speaker wire Silver Bullet interconnect HSU research sub earwaxer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32040 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
earwaxer wrote: My opinion is that how you get the bits from the computer wirelessly to the DAC is a fairly benign digital process without much if anything to worry about in terms of sound quality issues. True, if the thing that receives the bits is smart enough and has sufficient buffers. Then you just use TCP/IP and ignore everything else. That technology has been proven, the engineering has been done. When you start the D/A process is where the rubber meets the road! I'm not a big fan of SPDIF (coax and optical) but that is my bias. Other folks have no problems with it. I personally dont want my 1's and 0's converted to SPDIF so that my DAC can handle it. I2S is supposed to be better, but it is difficult to handle, and it is only designed for very short runs, not in cable lengths. USB is another option - not crazy about that either (although asyncronous seems decent - Wavelength DAC). Firewire might be better - jury is still out. Firewire is a technology that time has passed by. It is already down to niche markets, and will disappear RSN. I'm not seeing the value of all these distinctions. Put the CPU, buffer, network management within the box, add a DAC and analog circuit and you are done. I see no point in a separate DAC when the cable and connector cost as much as the CPU, buffer, memory and NICs. Where does that leave us? The transporter takes care of it without dealing with the above issues. While CPU and memories have gotten cheaper and draw less power today then way back when the Transporter was designed, its not clear that it makes a difference. Part of the Transporter's market spot is that it costs $2000, so it is considered audiophile grade. If Moore's Law allows it to get 25% cheaper every year, its not clear to me that it would make it more attractive as a piece of Audiophile gear. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Check out this link - Wonder why Wavelength declined to participate? http://www.avguide.com/article/tas-194-the-state-usb-audio -- earwaxer Waxer Transporter Winsome labs mouse (modified) Maggie MMG's (modified) JPS Labs power cords Audioquest Granite speaker wire Silver Bullet interconnect HSU research sub earwaxer's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32040 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The next major Audiophile question on here?
Gazjam;456855 Wrote: how close to the Transporter will the Touch get? Sean seems to be quite confident about the digital output implementation of the Touch : http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=454830postcount=23 I'm probably being naive, but I trust Sean on this. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67711 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
