Adding a DAC to Transporter

[sgmlaw]

… Are they lights out better?... or just some new chips and tweeks ? Still gets us into upgrade mania though.

If it were that easy, we’d all be running $75 Toppings, and having the latest Sabre chipset would be all that mattered.

It is not that easy, and it’s a lot more than just how new the chips are.

[bunkertoy]

The Bel Canto 3.7 was a pricey $6000 combo of Dac & Power supply. think they made it until around 2014. Not a ton of reviews online, closest would be the 3.5 version. I think it was considered "High-end" The more I research today's Dac's I feel like there is always going to be something new and shiny around the corner. Not many comparing the differences of a 10 year old Dac compared to today's Dac(going to search for that). Are they lights out better?... or just some new chips and tweeks ? Still gets us into upgrade mania though.

[Apesbrain]

I believe...

All that matters.

[bunkertoy]

I believe my Bel Canto 3.7 dac with a separate power supply has to be better than the Transporter DAC.

[fishtoprecords]

I have a Transporter and a Benchmark DAC1. I got the Benchmark before the Transporter was released. There is no need for a downstream DAC, just use the Transporter.

[bunkertoy]

Thanks for the insight Sgmlaw.

[sgmlaw]

I don’t think on a higher caliber downstream instrument it is going to make much difference whether you feed it a balanced or coaxial S/PDIF connection from the TP.

I use an AES cable with my setup, as the D2D-1 reconstructs and reclocks the bitstream to under 2ps jitter no matter the input format. I just happened to have a nice AES cable on hand.

To my ears, I don’t hear further improvements over 96khz, and won’t waste the money chasing those higher sample rates on the hardware. Besides, the media is twice the price anyway.

The old Bel Canto is a good DAC even today. Think of the TP as a solid state transport, and don’t look back.

[Apesbrain]

So when I use these digital outs like the coax or AES, it does bypass the Transporter's DAC correct ?

Yes.

[bunkertoy]

I did eventually go with an external DAC. I got a Bel Canto 3.7 dac(worth $5000 in its day). I'm using the AES/EBU output on the Transporter. I recently read that the designer suggests using the coaxial output instead of the AES. My Bel Canto also has BNC connections. not sure if I'll notice a sound difference. Thoughts ?
So when I use these digital outs like the coax or AES, it does bypass the Transporter's DAC correct ?

[Bscott]

I used the DAC inside the Transporter for many, many years and was quite happy. After recently ripping all my Sacds and Bluray audio discs, I decided to try the DAC inside my Krell Digital Vanguard integrated amp. I found the Krell to sound significantly better than the Transporter. So am using the Transporter connected via coax to Krell Amp.

Now I am limited by the Transporter in terms of 96 kHz. So, thinking of switching it out for a Rpi 4 with piCorePlayer if I can get the HDMI connection to work. Currently getting music and static at higher frequencies... another topic... another thread elsewhere....

To answer your question, yes, there are some DACs that will improve sound over the Transporter. However, I was quite happy with the Transporter DAC for many years. Whether your Bryston is better is subjective and only you will know. Give it a try...

[sgmlaw]

Hi All,

Wondering what your opinions are regarding adding a decent DAC to the stereo chain. So this DAC would be hooked up to the Transporter. Transporter -->Bryston BDA DAC --> Preamp --> Amp.
Is this a worthy added expense /, will I notice my digital files sounding better ?

Thanks for any input you might have.

Cheers

Oh boy. This one has been discussed and fought over for more years than I can remember.

FWIW, I run my TP through a two decade old Assemblage D2D-1/DAC 3.1 Platinum (which I guess is now somewhat of a cult classic DAC). And it stomps all over the DAC and analog output stages of the TP. Still one of my favorite sounding digital instruments.

I've also run it through an old CAL Alpha, and it's a coin toss (depending on which 5751 you roll in it). The CAL Alpha is a wonderful upgrade to a Touch, however.

The TP is simply a flawless digital head end, especially running under ethernet. I don't think anything under $1k in a modern DAC is going to substantially better what's in the TP.

Analog output stages are what separates the great ones from the good ones, and quality analog stages cost serious money.

[kristina]

I’ve been using a Denafrips Ares II with my Touch, and am very happy with it. I had the chance to compare it to the Schitt Bifrost, and felt the Ares sounded a bit better to me.

[mftech]

Are you aware that Sean Adams explicitly stated that the AES output is technically inferior to the COAX? (Not that you'll notice any audible difference).
He said that it was just included for completeness sake.

I tried both...the protocol is the same between AES and SPDIF, (the consumer bit is not present on AES) I got both connected I didn't notice a difference on the NADAC.
Not sure if the Transporter use a 110 Ohms isolation transformer for the AES output.
I use a 110 Ohms Belden 1805 cable to connect the Transporter with the NADAC.

[cliveb]

I'm using the AES output of the Transporter with the Merging NADAC.
The DAC inside the Transporter is excellent quality, Sean Adams was smart enough to do an excellent implementation with the AKM DAC.

Are you aware that Sean Adams explicitly stated that the AES output is technically inferior to the COAX? (Not that you'll notice any audible difference).
He said that it was just included for completeness sake.

[mftech]

I'm using the AES output of the Transporter with the Merging NADAC.
The DAC inside the Transporter is excellent quality, Sean Adams was smart enough to do an excellent implementation with the AKM DAC.
Rpi + Picoreplayer is also an very inexpensive solution.