PDA

View Full Version : TransNav knob has room when rotating?



Audiotic
2007-04-15, 12:05
Is this just my Transporter, or do more people have it? When I turn my TransNav knob, it seems to have some room, it can move a little bit beyond the stop points, sometime like one stop more. And I am not forcing it!

It actually is annoying, as the "feel" of the lists you are browsing is not very "firm", almost like you skip over items.

Thanks for your responses.

ModelCitizen
2007-04-15, 12:51
This'll be interesting. Does anyone else use Pat Farrel's knob?
MC

TheRooster2000
2008-10-18, 09:15
(...) When I turn my TransNav knob, it seems to have some room, it can move a little bit beyond the stop points, sometime like one stop more. And I am not forcing it!

It actually is annoying, as the "feel" of the lists you are browsing is not very "firm", almost like you skip over items (...)

Hey, I accidentally found this older thread.

That's just the same way in which my Transporter's knob behaves!
I'm new to Transporter and thought that this behaviour is normal and I was a bit disappointed about the "imprecise" feeling of the knob...

So is this evidentially normal? Or is my TransNav damaged somehow and do I have to send my Transporter back and get a new one?

Maybe it helps to "glue" the aluminum knob to the axle of the force feedback device that's used inside the Transporter?

Please help!
Christian

Audiotic
2008-10-19, 09:00
Hey, I accidentally found this older thread.

That's just the same way in which my Transporter's knob behaves!
I'm new to Transporter and thought that this behaviour is normal and I was a bit disappointed about the "imprecise" feeling of the knob...

So is this evidentially normal? Or is my TransNav damaged somehow and do I have to send my Transporter back and get a new one?

Maybe it helps to "glue" the aluminum knob to the axle of the force feedback device that's used inside the Transporter?

Please help!
Christian

Actually that may not be a bad idea, as the room is because the know is only clamped on. Since it's pretty unlikely you will ever have to remove it, use some cyanoacrylate glue, a drop (so when in need you can still reove the knob with a bit more force), and let us know!! You may have quite some followers if it works!

JJZolx
2008-10-19, 09:54
Is it actually physically slipping, or is the feedback just not done very well?

TheRooster2000
2008-10-19, 11:46
Hi all!

Today I pulled the aluminum knob off the force-feedback-device's axle. It fits very tight onto the axle and is fixed with some kind of steel leaf spring which is screwed inside the knob.
So that's why it's impossible for the knob to slip and there's no need to glue it with cyanoacrylate.

I noticed some amount of "play" between the axle and the housing of the force-feedback-device so that it can minimally move sideways.

That might be one reason for the lack of precision.

Furthermore I think the programming of the FF-device should still be optimized... ;)

Greetings from Germany,
Christian

norman12
2008-10-19, 11:59
I've recently upgraded to a Transporter and I must admit to being a more than disappointed with the 'Knob'.
Played with it a few times but, it feels a little lumpy, notchy and imprecise to me. Is this normal behavior or have other users had a more pleasurable experience?

ModelCitizen
2008-10-19, 12:49
I must admit to being a more than disappointed with the 'Knob'. Played with it a few times but, it feels a little lumpy

I'm amazed anyone feels the need to touch their knob. Why do you do it? Have you not got a remote or a controller (or even heaven forbid, a computer)?

BTW. Good to see you're still looking horny Norm.

MC

JJZolx
2008-10-19, 12:56
I'm amazed anyone feels the need to touch their knob. Why do you do it? Have you not got a remote or a controller (or even heaven forbid, a computer)?

If it felt better, I might use it. The button placements are also very much less than ideal on the Transporter. It's amazing how much better the Boom turned out with a cheap wheel and a handful of well placed buttons.

norman12
2008-10-19, 13:26
So would the consensus be; the 'Knob', while on paper seemed intriguing in reality is a rather useless, partially functioning appendage?

TheRooster2000
2008-10-19, 13:40
...my Transporter's knob even makes a ticking noise on every step when I navigate up/down or left/right through the menus with the standard remote... :-/

Christian

ModelCitizen
2008-10-19, 13:40
So would the consensus be; the 'Knob', while on paper seemed intriguing in reality is a rather useless, partially functioning appendage?
I was very disappointed that the Transporter was produced with all that useless and fragile extraneous paraphernalia... knobs, buttons,... why? Are we living in the 60s? How many people sit right next to their hifi units anyway?

When you have a remote (and now a controller) what's the point?

MC

norman12
2008-10-19, 13:53
I was very disappointed that the Transporter was produced with all that useless and fragile extraneous paraphernalia... knobs, buttons,... why? Are we living in the 60s? How many people sit right next to their hifi units anyway?

When you have a remote (and now a controller) what's the point?

MC

This is true but, if you have one it'd be nice if it worked well.

You've been busy - 2000 posts! I've made 41 in 3 years although I lurk often.

ModelCitizen
2008-10-19, 14:05
You've been busy - 2000 posts! I've made 41 in 3 years although I lurk often.
Yes. Sometimes I think I should have stuck with the iPod.

MC

pfarrell
2008-10-19, 14:12
ModelCitizen wrote:
> I was very disappointed that the Transporter was produced with all that
> useless and fragile extraneous paraphernalia... knobs, buttons,... why?

Different market. Its an audiophile product. A lot of those guys don't
accept that remotes are good.

JJZolx
2008-10-19, 14:28
> I was very disappointed that the Transporter was produced with all that
> useless and fragile extraneous paraphernalia... knobs, buttons,... why?

Different market. Its an audiophile product. A lot of those guys don't
accept that remotes are good.

What a load of crap. If anything, a cynic might say the extra paraphernalia was added to increase the perceived value and justify the price point.

The idea of having a front panel was good. It's not necessary, but it can be handy. I can certainly see them on future Squeezeboxes besides the Boom. Execution is another matter... I think it missed on the Transporter, is much better on the Boom, and can be improved further.

norman12
2008-10-19, 14:35
No audiophile mud slinging in the General Discussion section please;-)

pfarrell
2008-10-19, 14:36
JJZolx wrote:
> What a load of crap.

You are entitled to your opinion, but its just an opinion.

The audiophile market is not at all similar to the mass market.

> If anything, a cynic might say the extra
> paraphernalia was added to increase the perceived value and justify the
> price point.

Completely wrong. Audiophile do not use "features" to justify price
points. One of the current magazines has a 60w amp that costs $8000. No
knobs at all. That's 30 or 40 times what other 60w amps sell for.

JJZolx
2008-10-19, 14:52
Audiophile do not use "features" to justify price points.

That's probably right. But audiophiles didn't design the Transporter. That same cynic would say it was the designers of the Transporter that felt a need to put the doodads on an expensive unit targeted at that market.

pfarrell
2008-10-19, 15:04
> That's probably right. But audiophiles didn't design the Transporter.
> That same cynic would say it was the designers of the Transporter that
> felt a need to put the doodads on an expensive unit targeted at that
> market.


Jim,

I don't understand why you post so often when you are clearly so unhappy.

Take a chill pill


--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

JJZolx
2008-10-19, 15:10
I don't understand why you post so often when you are clearly so unhappy.

What it is this time, Pat?

I don't understand why you post so often, apparently for the sole purpose of being able to view your opinions in a public forum.

pfarrell
2008-10-19, 15:16
JJZolx wrote:
> I don't understand why you post so often, apparently for the sole
> purpose of being able to view your opinions in a public forum.

Or to correct your mistakes.


--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

kdf
2008-10-19, 15:48
That's probably right. But audiophiles didn't design the Transporter. That same cynic would say it was the designers of the Transporter that felt a need to put the doodads on an expensive unit targeted at that market.

It seems obvious from the resulting design that feedback was heard from threads such as these:

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=16376
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=14750
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=1592

The graphics in the first thread are no longer online, but they did have buttons much the same as those seen today.

A true cynic would suggest that your negativity now is more a case of not getting exactly what you wanted, as opposed to bad or ill-considered design.

just MY opinion, based on a few researched facts.

-kdf

JJZolx
2008-10-19, 16:01
It seems obvious from the resulting design that feedback was heard from threads such as these:

I remember those threads quite well. They were a lot of fun, and I was thrilled to see the design of the Transporter take them to heart.


A true cynic would suggest that your negativity now is more a case of not getting exactly what you wanted, as opposed to bad or ill-considered design.

I don't feel I'm being negative, just stating what others have apparently also observed. The Transporter front panel design wasn't perfect, but few things are. The wheel isn't as useful as it might have been, IMO due to the layout of the buttons and the feel of the force feedback knob. But the Boom hit it nearly on the nose and that knowledge could be used to produce a better Transporter II, or incorporated into future products.

pfarrell
2008-10-19, 16:16
JJZolx wrote:
> I don't feel I'm being negative, just stating what others have
> apparently also observed.

You are being silly, argumentative and negative.
Give it a break

kdf
2008-10-19, 16:22
On 19-Oct-08, at 4:01 PM, JJZolx wrote:

>
> kdf;351342 Wrote:
>> It seems obvious from the resulting design that feedback was heard
>> from
>> threads such as these:
>
> I remember those threads quite well. They were a lot of fun, and I
> was
> thrilled to see the design of the Transporter take them to heart.
>
good. Without fun, there is no third party community.

>> A true cynic would suggest that your negativity now is more a case of
>> not getting exactly what you wanted, as opposed to bad or
>> ill-considered design.
>
> I don't feel I'm being negative, just stating what others have
> apparently also observed.

Fair enough. How that message come across, my not be entirely as you
intended, perhaps.

> But the Boom hit it nearly on the nose and that
> knowledge could be used to produce a better Transporter II, or
> incorporated into future products.

I'd expect no less. The Transporter is a major technological leap
from where Squeeze- products were before. Given the branding it has,
I would expect we may not the its like again any time soon, but
certainly lessons have been learned and the benefits already show.

-kdf

ModelCitizen
2008-10-20, 00:10
Different market. Its an audiophile product. A lot of those guys don't accept that remotes are good.
I didn't know that. My Naim pre-amp had a remote and I though they were generally considered a good thing now.

Audiophiles are a strange bunch. One of the great things about network players is that you don't have to keep going to the device to change the media (cds). You'd think it it would not take long to cotton on that a remote would be pretty useful in this scenario.

I think the buttons and knobs cause the most damage to general reputation of the Transporter and I can't believe that many people at all use them on a regular basis.

I'm sure that their inclusion was an error (much like the omission of a usable headphone socket for the Boom).

MC

kdf
2008-10-20, 00:32
> I'm sure that their inclusion was an error (much like the omission of a
> usable headphone socket for the Boom).
>
I suggest you spend some time looking up the old threads discussing the
wish list for future products around the time that the Transporter was
in development (go back as much as one year from it's release date).
You'll see that this was very much NOT an "error", as much as simply
"not a device made specifically for you".

btw...the headphone jack placement is also getting to be an old gripe.
Let other people take it up if needed,but you have said your peace and
gotten your reponses.

-kdf

Rodney_Gold
2008-10-20, 00:48
The transporter is totally overengineered. The front panel is useless for most , the double display is not of any great use.
The price break tween a TP and a SB is rediculous. The TP coulda had the better dac and all the features of the TP for far far less. To pay huge amounts extra for aesthetics , knobs , thick front panel and silly handles is rediculous. I'm an audiophile , and like most of em , the prime concern is the sound of a unit, and thr TP is lacking imho in terms of its sonic sig with its DAC. It sounds cold , clinical and lifeless.
In the interim , im on my 3rd TP , the first ones knob was broken and the 2nd ones display died on me.......so much for adding extra parts.

norman12
2008-10-20, 10:17
None of this diatribe is helping those of us who may have hard or soft bugs with their 'Knobs'
The Transporter is what it is, the aesthetics and ergonomics are a subjective issue. I like knobs and buttons (within reason) and I'm very happy that the Transporter has some!