Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Page 2 of 45 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 443
  1. #11
    Senior Member Mnyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vństerňs Sweden
    Posts
    16,159
    It would be impossible to say for sure , the Transporter is well designed product developer by sane people .
    So the outputs should be ok all of them , the may differ measurably , but a product like this do not really have audible jitter levels for example .

    AES/EBU is actually not better than spdiff on Transporter ( there are som words from the designer Sean Adams about that on this forum ) . AES/EBU has raised some magic thinking in audiophile press and fora as it is a "professional format" . The professional part is really about repurposing xlr cables and patch switch boards to make a conversion from analog to digital studio cheaper and simpler ,this was a concern in the 80's and 90's.

    So use any output they are probably all beyond human abilities to tell apart .

    On the other side the DAC you intend to use ? Then it can get different it should not but it can if that design is somehow flawed so it prefers one input .

    So no one can really say without knowing what DAC you intend to use .

    If we assume you buy any reasonably designed DAC , a say just pick one output .

    Best solution would be to actually sell the transporter and get an PI with some digital out board .
    Transporter is "only" a 24/96 device using the digital out would not change that .
    This would not matter much either but more exotic formats would need server transcoding .
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub.
    Bedroom/Office: Boom
    Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
    Misc use: Radio (with battery)
    iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
    (spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
    server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

    http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by Julf View Post
    Probably not. Some have non-optimal reconstruction filters on purpose, and others have analog stages that are tweaked for a "house sound".
    And that's why I said "very many reasons why they would sound the same" instead of just saying that they all sound the same.

    I've looked at a few DACs that have non-optimal reconstruction filters, probably with the intent of making them sound different. The designer apparently overestimated the sensitivity of the ear to the suboptimal performance, and the DAC still sounded the same. There are some where the suboptimality of the design is soo bad that they even sound different.

    One of the best ways to make the analog stage actually color the sound is to put a transformer in it. Runs the price up, too.

  3. #13
    Senior Member Julf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,451
    Quote Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
    One of the best ways to make the analog stage actually color the sound is to put a transformer in it. Runs the price up, too.
    Tubes/valves seem pretty popular for that too...
    "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
    Don't. The Transporter internal DAC is first-rate.

    I recently saw an industry survey that showed over 400 different makes and models of ADCs.
    It may very well be but I'd be surprised if even Sean Adams feels that 10 years ago he designed the bestest ever, never to be improved upon, DAC. As far as your comment on the industry survey, any chance you were referring to DAC's and not ADC's?

  5. #15
    Senior Member Mnyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vństerňs Sweden
    Posts
    16,159
    The point is that some (maybe quite many) modern DAC's will ofcourse be even better but you wont hear that . They all surpassed our hearing abilities a decades ago , unless tweaked to "sound diffrent" .
    And TP was very good at it's time and audio is mature tech there is not as much development as hardware mfg's wants you to believe.
    After all if S/N ratios is at 120dB and surpass most recordings ever dones intrinsic SQ what can your realy do ?

    So get a new DAC when the old one breaks or does not have the desired features or inputs, not to get "improved SQ".
    There ara other sample rates and DSD et all nowadays .

    In the transporter case it's a squeezebox that have external inputs but not as well featured as some dacs. Some DAC's have USB inputs and multiple SPDIF inputs etc.

    If OP want to leave the squeezebox ecosystem , another DAC bougth from the money you get by selling the transporter migth be a good idea for many other reasons ?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub.
    Bedroom/Office: Boom
    Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
    Misc use: Radio (with battery)
    iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
    (spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
    server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

    http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by daverich4 View Post
    It may very well be but I'd be surprised if even Sean Adams feels that 10 years ago he designed the bestest ever, never to be improved upon, DAC. As far as your comment on the industry survey, any chance you were referring to DAC's and not ADC's?
    Yes, it was a typo - DACs not ADCs.

    Thanks for the correction.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by daverich4 View Post
    It may very well be but I'd be surprised if even Sean Adams feels that 10 years ago he designed the bestest ever, never to be improved upon, DAC.
    Irrelevant. The human ear is far from perfect, and so are the recordings we listen to and the rooms that we listen to them in. We've had DACs that have been free of audible imperfections since the middle 1980s.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,007
    (Which doesn't mean they all sound the same.)
    --
    Hardware: 3x Touch, 1x Radio, 2x Receivers, 1 HP Microserver NAS with Debian+LMS 7.9.0
    Music: ~1300 CDs, as 450 GB of 16/44k FLACs. No less than 3x 24/44k albums..

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by drmatt View Post
    (Which doesn't mean they all sound the same.)
    ...but in general they do sound the same if you do a good listening test, as opposed to what most audiophiles actually do.

    (1) Level match
    (2) Time synch
    (3) Blind test

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,007
    I remain sceptical that a test designed solely to make it hard to tell the difference is representative of long term differentiation capability. But that's just my opinion and we are very aware that many people disagree with that.
    --
    Hardware: 3x Touch, 1x Radio, 2x Receivers, 1 HP Microserver NAS with Debian+LMS 7.9.0
    Music: ~1300 CDs, as 450 GB of 16/44k FLACs. No less than 3x 24/44k albums..

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •