bhaagensen;508887 Wrote:
> You value sound-quality, hence choose the alternative with the best (for
> you) price/performance ratio, the Touch. That't not complicated :) Or if
> you want the very best from the two worlds, keep your TP as a digital
> source if funds allow. Both makes much sense to
ASenna04;508855 Wrote:
> Thanks all for your comments.
> So if I do go the Naim DAC route (seems likely), then I might replace
> the duet with the Touch.
You value sound-quality, hence choose the alternative with the best
(for you) price/performance ratio, the Touch. That't not complicated :)
Or
Thanks all for your comments.
TO make things even more complicated the new Touch will be released
soon. Reading elsewhere on this forum, it seemd to have better digital
out then the Duet. So if I do go the DAC route (seems likely), then I
might replace the duet with the Touch. The touch interface
ModelCitizen;508529 Wrote:
> Funny, I find at the is level it's very hard to quantify the audible
> difference at all.
For me the hard part is getting grips on what it is that is good, bad,
or doesn't matter (that much). Also, many of the quality-measures one
can listen for appear, for all inten
I agree. As for my reference to the listening test of the TP versus the
Naim CD5x I am not implying the latter is superior by any notion of
absolute measure. I should also emphasise that I suspect the Naim DAC is
better than the TP in the context of a Naim system, in case it was not
clear.
--
b
cliveb;508562 Wrote:
> And yet, my foot is tapping.
Naim kit can make you tap your foot to you music you don't like. :-)
MC
--
ModelCitizen
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known
Last.fm/user/ModelCitizen
--
I've not heard the new Naim DAC, but given that Naim deliberately
engineer all their kit to the "house sound", it seems extremely likely
that it will sound distinctly different to a TP. Not better or worse -
different. Which one you like best will depend on your personal
preferences.
ModelCitizen
bhaagensen;508510 Wrote:
> Mind you, I also think that at this level, we are talking in subtle
> differences where the end-result depends equally much on caring for
> details all the way through the replay chain including room accoustics.
> But you knew that :)
Funny, I find at the is level it's
ASenna04;508451 Wrote:
> bhaagensen,
>
> You make important points here. If the DAC does indeed render all
> reasonable quality digital sources equal, then why would Naim market to
> sell it with the new CDX2-2 (with S/PDIF) when a CD5XS would be
> sufficient?
>
> ASenna04
Just because its the
bhaagensen;508253 Wrote:
> Indeed. And on the Naim-forum I've in fact been posing the challenge
> that the DAC should render all reasonable quality digital sources equal.
> Obviously being in the world of hi-fi and audiophiles, this is met
> with... lets say "some skepticism".
>
> Anyway, as lon
and the mods may want to move this thread to the audiophiles section as
I suppose the DAC is if for nothing else than the cost, of limited
public interest.
--
bhaagensen
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/
Also I belive TP-user 'davebk' has one on order. So perhaps look out for
new postings from that side.
--
bhaagensen
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums
ASenna04;508100 Wrote:
> I think that will make the Transporter and Duet sound the same. If they
> do then the only advantage Transporter has is High Resolution music
> files.
>
Indeed. And on the Naim-forum I've in fact been posing the challenge
that the DAC should render all reasonable qualit
Is it called reclocking? The idea used by Naim is really simple and
elegant - the only downside being that it doesn't really warrant a fancy
naim :) Buffering in a 'time-independet' way, really describes well all
they are doing.
Anyway. Its up to everyone to trust in what is written or not, but
ASenna04;508100 Wrote:
> Well, Naim state that they buffer the datastream and reclock it. I think
> that will make the Transporter and Duet sound the same. If they do then
> the only advantage Transporter has is High Resolution music files.
>
> ASenna04
DAC manufacturers say lots of things in t
ModelCitizen;508077 Wrote:
> I'd be very interested to hear that Naim dac but would be more
> interested in sticking it on a Transporter than a Receiver.
>
> MC
Well, Naim state that they buffer the datastream and reclock it. I
think that will make the Transporter and Duet sound the same. If th
I'd be very interested to hear that Naim dac but would be more
interested in sticking it on a Transporter than a Receiver.
MC
--
ModelCitizen
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known
Last.fm/user/ModelCitizen
-
DaveWr;508072 Wrote:
> I think Pippin mean't connected to the Duet. It can't do 96k! If you
> are using USB - well no Duet needed.
>
> Dave
OK, I see. Good point.
ASenna04
--
ASenna04
ASenna04's Profile: http://forum
I think Pippin mean't connected to the Duet. It can't do 96k! If you
are using USB - well no Duet needed.
Dave
--
DaveWr
DaveWr's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9331
View this thread: http://fo
pippin;508059 Wrote:
> No 24/96?
According to Naim White paper, the Naim DAC uses two mono, true
multi-bit Burr-Brown PCM1704K DAC chips. The PCM1704K is a precision,
24-bit digital-to-analogue converter.
The White paper also states:
"USB memory stick Naim DAC will play WAV files with sampl
No 24/96?
--
pippin
---
see iPeng, the Squeezebox iPhone remote, at penguinlovesmusic.com
pippin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13777
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.
Has anyone done any serious comparison between the Transporter and the
new Naim DAC feed from a Squeezebox Duet receiver? I know the DAC has
just been released but someone might have tried this.
I have a Transporter and it is very good. But since the rest of my
system is Naim I am seriously consi
Have you tried contacting SD support? If you do have a bad unit, they
may swap it out for you.
On Jan 9, 2008 4:28 AM, NewBuyer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I wish my Transporter was working flawlessly. :(
...
>
> I wonder what others can please advise here. What would you do?
_
I wish my Transporter was working flawlessly. :(
Some of the various issues I've been finding with it, are mentioned in
the "Transporter issues" thread in this General Discussion forum.
For instance, approximately 30 minutes ago, the volume knob completely
stopped functioning AGAIN, this time af
JJZolx;256272 Wrote:
> If you don't use the knob or the buttons, don't use or switch to and
> from the digital inputs, then it seems to work just about flawlessly.
> Once you begin using the features that make it functionally unique from
> a Squeezebox, then you may see some of the problems.
I'l
SuperQ;255941 Wrote:
> It sounds like you had a bad Transporter. I have none of these problems
> on mine (or my SB3 for that matter). It is a finished product and works
> flawlessly for me.
There have been many similar reports of Transporter flakiness, no doubt
from perfectly healthy units. I
SuperQ;255941 Wrote:
> It sounds like you had a bad Transporter. I have none of these problems
> on mine (or my SB3 for that matter). It is a finished product and works
> flawlessly for me.
>
I am willing to consider that my experience reflected a subpar unit.
However, in view of a few others
mcb;255824 Wrote:
> 2. The Transporter was *much* flakier than the SB3: random pausing, one
> or two random reboots, hanging on too many inputs too quickly (annoying
> when adjusting the volume), display getting bright for no reason, etc.
> It doesn't seem like a finished product. While I believe
My observations on comparing the Transporter and SB3.
For the longest time I was interested in a quality computer-based music
server, but I successfully dithered (joke) long enough for Slim Devices
to provide a solution in the form of the SqueezeBox 3.
I subscribe to Stereophile, so I was very i
I saw this little thingy and was wondering if anyone else had seen it.
I also wondering if an audio only comparison could be done?
http://www.neodigits.com/new/body/products/Xline/x5000.asp
--
bflatmajor
bflatmajor's
So, this Transporter thingy. Supposedly for audiophiles. When I bought
my SB3 I was under the impression that, if used with an external DAC,
it was capable of exceeding very high end audiophile CD players in
sound quality.
Can anyone tell me if, in theory, the Transporter should be any better
qua
31 matches
Mail list logo
