Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    Thanks everyone for the replies. I was just trying to see if as a streamer/transport there was any other choice that would sound better with my external DAC. I donít plan using the onboard DAC of whatever unit I get (if I do).

    Looks like for Tidal only, there will not be any SQ difference. However, I never considered MQA option which I do now. I should take advantage of it if I can.

    I was actually thinking to use Audirvana with my Macbook Pro because I have read about Leedh processing. I realized it is only out for Windows 10 right now.

    I am leaning towards a new streamer with MQA capability and be able to play Audirvana Leedh. My homework is to come up with a unit with both features now

    Thanks again guys!

  2. #12

    Why MQA??

    My understanding is that the whole MQA story is pretty suspect - compressed/lossy stream 'enhanced' by stuff .. not actually high-res at all.

    Articles by a number of proper audiophiles have thrown massive doubt on all the high flown claims for MQA, like this one:

    https://archimago.blogspot.com/2017/...st-part-i.html

    If you decide to go down this route, it will be interesting to get feedback!!

    Andrew

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by sherington View Post
    My understanding is that the whole MQA story is pretty suspect - compressed/lossy stream 'enhanced' by stuff .. not actually high-res at all.

    Articles by a number of proper audiophiles have thrown massive doubt on all the high flown claims for MQA, like this one:

    https://archimago.blogspot.com/2017/...st-part-i.html

    If you decide to go down this route, it will be interesting to get feedback!!

    Andrew
    Iíd like to experiment to see if it works for me. Same thing with Leedh.

    I know archimago and another site that does all kind of measurements. Frankly, I donít think measurements mean everything for me. Sure, it tells you something but not the best way to try/buy something. On the other site there is a horrible measurement for Topping TP-60 amp. This amp is one of the best amplifiers I have heard. Go figure.

    This is how I see it. There are many kind of salt you can eat. Sea salt, rock salt, etc. they pretty much have same amount of sodium in them. I prefer salt spring (never even heard of it, right?. This type of salt is very tasty and my favorite. It does have a same/similar sodium content like other salt though. So, they measure almost same like his measurements, almost same on paper.

    Donít know if it is a good example but at least I tried

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by celo View Post
    I keep coming back asking this question.

    Is there anything better than SBT currently? The technology has improved a lot so there must be something better, right? No?

    I didnít do a big changes/tries but I couldnít really tell any difference between SBT, Allo Digione, Raspberry Pi or Macbook. All connected to my DAC. They all sounded the same/similar. Nothing to give up SBT. Sometimes I think people just say they heard difference to say it because they had a new unit to try

    As I said, my ďupgradesĒ if you can call it that were all small. If buy a network streamer from say Aurender, SoTM, Sonore, Auralic, Bluesound or similar brands, would I really hear a difference?

    I am not sure, so wanted to see if someone could answer with a experience upgrading from the SBT?

    Thanks!
    Itís all opinion. But we at my house are now up to over a dozen SB clients, and I have had extended intimate listening and underhood time with all the major players for well over a decade now: SB3, Touch, Receiver, and TP. While I remain fully committed to the ecosystem, I am not a blind fanboy, and am willing to point out the flaws as well.

    The Slimserver/LMS architecture is still the best in my book. It can handle most file formats, has great Internet radio support, and does a better overall job than Roon, iTunes or any of the others. Community support and iPeng has kept it current. It has a broad compatibilty with clients of all kinds. And the formats and sampling rates it does not support in my opinion are not meaningfully superior sounding. 96/24 audio resolution is already better than most systems can fully reproduce. By todayís computing standards it is a very light resource footprint, and most of the remaining issues with it are client networking ones. Most machines can host it. It is close to a universal audio streaming app. And itís free. Keep it and its clients in a modern ethernet environment, and it is fast and trouble free 99% of the time.

    The SB3 is a fair digital front end and an ok player. It was hampered by a cheap and very dirty power supply. It takes a lot of digital reprocessing/reclocking to make it sound good as a digital head end, but it is doable. It is fine for a casual or bedroom system. But the Touch and TP are clearly better machines.

    The Touch is a very good digital head end and a decent player. Its receiver, filtering and conversion sections are good, but its output stage is definitely midfi caliber. As in harmonically thin and tonally unnuanced. At the price point, they did all they could. But as a digital head end feeding a better dac with a good output stage it is still a good option for many systems. Throw on the digital pass-through app, and you can play 192khz media through one. Still not bad for a decade old product. And it still presents a pretty face. Just picked up a clean spare one for $70 last month.

    The TP is an outstanding digital head end and converter section, even by todayís standards. That is where its designers spent the budget. And that is why it was such a measurement champ with the audio rags. Its failing is a mediocre (but not bad) analog output stage. Just not up to snuff with the big boys. The analog stage is where the big bucks go in better audio equipment. High quality output stages are expensive. And that is why you can now pick up OEM TPs for under $400. It is overall still a very good player. But as the digital head end to a really first-class DAC with a serious output stage, the TP is as good as anything out there even today. It is capped at 96/24 and stumbles on some FLAC codings. But as I said, the differences going to higher sampling rates or to DSD are not all that meaningful. I have one feeding a fairly expensive two-chassis DAC in what could be termed a high end system. And the TP in that role has yet to be unseated by a series of more recent higher end clients in repeated auditions. It is still that good.

    Thatís my opinion and YMMV.

  5. #15
    @sgmlaw
    What unit is TP?

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,463
    Quote Originally Posted by celo View Post
    @sgmlaw
    What unit is TP?
    (Slimdevices or Logitec) Transporter
    Last edited by garym; 2019-01-22 at 18:04.
    Home: VBA 4TB (2.5)>LMS 7.9.2>Transporter, Touch, Boom, Radio (all ethernet)
    Cottage: VBA 3TB (2.4)>LMS 7.9.1>Touch>Benchmark DAC I, Boom, Radio w/Battery (ethernet, Radio WIFI)
    Office: Win10(64)>LMS 7.9.2>Squeezelite
    The Wild (no internet): PiCorePlayer 4.0 on rPi 3B+, hifiberry Dac+Pro, 4TB USB (LMS & Squeezelite)
    Controllers: iPhone6 & iPadAir2 (iPeng), CONTROLLER, or SqueezePlay 7.8 on Win10(64) laptop
    Files: ripping: dbpa > FLAC; post-rip: mp3tag, PerfectTunes; Streaming: Spotify

  7. #17
    Thanks garym! Should have figured it out.

    For the record, I have done blind test at home with my wife DSD vs 16/44. We both picked 16/44. Many times too.

    However, I am still curious about MQA and more curious about Leedh considering Soulution used Leedh processing in their DAC. I read someone was saying it was night and day with Leedh (in a good way). So this made me more curious

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hertfordshire
    Posts
    2,844
    Quote Originally Posted by celo View Post

    For the record, I have done blind test at home with my wife DSD vs 16/44. We both picked 16/44. Many times too.
    Probably different mastering for the DSD.

    Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by sgmlaw View Post
    Itís all opinion. But we at my house are now up to over a dozen SB clients, and I have had extended intimate listening and underhood time with all the major players for well over a decade now: SB3, Touch, Receiver, and TP. While I remain fully committed to the ecosystem, I am not a blind fanboy, and am willing to point out the flaws as well.

    The Slimserver/LMS architecture is still the best in my book. It can handle most file formats, has great Internet radio support, and does a better overall job than Roon, iTunes or any of the others. Community support and iPeng has kept it current. It has a broad compatibilty with clients of all kinds. And the formats and sampling rates it does not support in my opinion are not meaningfully superior sounding. 96/24 audio resolution is already better than most systems can fully reproduce. By todayís computing standards it is a very light resource footprint, and most of the remaining issues with it are client networking ones. Most machines can host it. It is close to a universal audio streaming app. And itís free. Keep it and its clients in a modern ethernet environment, and it is fast and trouble free 99% of the time.

    The SB3 is a fair digital front end and an ok player. It was hampered by a cheap and very dirty power supply. It takes a lot of digital reprocessing/reclocking to make it sound good as a digital head end, but it is doable. It is fine for a casual or bedroom system. But the Touch and TP are clearly better machines.

    The Touch is a very good digital head end and a decent player. Its receiver, filtering and conversion sections are good, but its output stage is definitely midfi caliber. As in harmonically thin and tonally unnuanced. At the price point, they did all they could. But as a digital head end feeding a better dac with a good output stage it is still a good option for many systems. Throw on the digital pass-through app, and you can play 192khz media through one. Still not bad for a decade old product. And it still presents a pretty face. Just picked up a clean spare one for $70 last month.

    The TP is an outstanding digital head end and converter section, even by todayís standards. That is where its designers spent the budget. And that is why it was such a measurement champ with the audio rags. Its failing is a mediocre (but not bad) analog output stage. Just not up to snuff with the big boys. The analog stage is where the big bucks go in better audio equipment. High quality output stages are expensive. And that is why you can now pick up OEM TPs for under $400. It is overall still a very good player. But as the digital head end to a really first-class DAC with a serious output stage, the TP is as good as anything out there even today. It is capped at 96/24 and stumbles on some FLAC codings. But as I said, the differences going to higher sampling rates or to DSD are not all that meaningful. I have one feeding a fairly expensive two-chassis DAC in what could be termed a high end system. And the TP in that role has yet to be unseated by a series of more recent higher end clients in repeated auditions. It is still that good.

    Thatís my opinion and YMMV.
    Now, you got me change my direction, maybe????

    Is the Transporter noticeably better than the SBTouch? I mean both while being used with an external DAC, as a digital transport ONLY.

    The only thing is lacking USB which is not a huge deal.
    Last edited by celo; 2019-02-02 at 20:19.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,463
    Quote Originally Posted by celo View Post
    Now, you got me change my direction, maybe????

    Is the Transporter noticeably better than the SBTouch? I mean both while being used with an external DAC, as a digital transport ONLY.

    The only thing is lacking USB which is not a huge deal.
    I have two transporters (one in main system, one a spare). I obviously like the TP. I use the balanced analog outs of the TP to feed my preamp. If I was using a separate DAC, I'd be equally happy with the Touch or TP. The TP is a good digital transport, but using it only as such is a waste of its really good DAC and analog audio chain.
    Home: VBA 4TB (2.5)>LMS 7.9.2>Transporter, Touch, Boom, Radio (all ethernet)
    Cottage: VBA 3TB (2.4)>LMS 7.9.1>Touch>Benchmark DAC I, Boom, Radio w/Battery (ethernet, Radio WIFI)
    Office: Win10(64)>LMS 7.9.2>Squeezelite
    The Wild (no internet): PiCorePlayer 4.0 on rPi 3B+, hifiberry Dac+Pro, 4TB USB (LMS & Squeezelite)
    Controllers: iPhone6 & iPadAir2 (iPeng), CONTROLLER, or SqueezePlay 7.8 on Win10(64) laptop
    Files: ripping: dbpa > FLAC; post-rip: mp3tag, PerfectTunes; Streaming: Spotify

Posting Permissions

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