Behold the Slim Devices Transporter (http://www.slimdevices.com/)... AKM professional-grade DACs, 96kHz support, balanced analog, analog VU meters, word clock input... EDIT: I think the VU meters are simulated on a VFD display. Still, that's cool.

You can preorder now for $2K and they'll give you a Squeezebox to hold you over until it arrives in December.

until it arrives in December.

September 18th! :)

It's an estimate, but we're usually dead-on with our ship dates.

Just a heads up .....

I am a BIG fan of my Slimdevices Squeezebox v3.
It has mega-convenience to get to my ripped & uncompressed music, but certainly is no sonic comparison to a better CDP.
( I even have mine plugged into a Shunyata Hydra-8 and fronted with a Monarchy DIP Upsampler / Jitter-Reduction)

I just got some promo-email of their upcoming "audiophile grade" music server, called the Transporter.
http://www.slimdevices.com/index.html
http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_transporter.html

They have lots of audiophile-speak of balanced analog stages, jitter reduction, power regulation, etc.
I look forward to hearing further comments on its "audiophile sonics" once it starts to ship Sept 18.
It's not exactly cheap though at $1999 but includes a bonus Squeezebox.

- Andy

Looks like great minds think alike! (And so do ours)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=702875
I'll try to get these threads merged...

This is far from a $20K component, but the fact that it is designed to provide audiophile quality sound should interest more than a few members of this board.

Transporter PDF datasheet (http://www.slimdevices.com/marketing/Transporter-Datasheet-US.pdf)
Link to Transporter site (http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_transporter.html)

In a nutshell, one can now losslessly rip (while simultaneously error-correcting) your CD collection using any CD or DVD-ROM by employing it along with Exact Audio Copy, store every track (with tag data) on a HDD (or server as the case may be), and stream this bit-perfect data to the Transporter and out to your favorite amplifier(s).

The internal componentry and PSU parts selection looks as though it falls right in line with current audiophile thinking, so I would not be suprised to see this give more than a few very high end transports a run for their money. Notwithstanding the instant access to your entire CD collection via remote control (searchable by genre, title, artist, conductor, year, etc. via menus) and it makes a very tempting proposition. No? Thoughts?

threads merged

what- no 5.1 analog?

***merged from the other Transporter thread!***

threads merged

what- no 5.1 analog?

5.1 analog is a tough thing to cope with, due to the fact that most (if not all) media that would contain 5.1 audio are pretty tightly locked in terms of proprietary media or DRM.

The powers at be try to fight even CD ripping by adding DRM to regular CDs...

This is really tempting. How does this feature work:?

"Synchronize music to more rooms—Broadcast the same music or independent streams to 2, 10 or even 20 rooms by adding players to stereos in each location."

I'd like to synchronize my music in two rooms - my family room and my media/ht room.

EDIT: Can the squeezebox and transporter both be linked?

The Slimserver interface, accessible via browser for easiest setup, allows you to Synchronize multiple players in a variety of ways. Here is a screenshot of my setup, I have 2 Squeezeboxes:

http://home.earthlink.net/~lu_max/data/SS_screenshot.jpg

Oh, BTW, the currently playing song is not intended as any type of message, subliminal or otherwise! (not that there is anything wrong with that...)

It also can directly tie in to your iTunes music libraries & playlists.
It is vastly simple to use iTunes and convert all your music to Apple Lossless.
( I know there is much debate/evidence that ripping via EAC sounds better ).

The music server software can service more than one Squeezebox device.

- Andy

The Gizmodo overview:

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/slim-devices-transporter-exclusive-first-look-at-the-ultimate-audio-streamer-189484.php

Nothing really new here though.

You know, to be honest, this device could also serve as an opportunity for many people to experiment with a high-end outboard DAC. The reviews on the AKM DAC look quite good, really; and this device does take digital inputs.

Hmmmm....I wouldn't trade my Sonos ZP80, with CIAudio VDA•2 outboard DAC for it. :)

it's not audiophile unless it can stream redbook audio CD to a DAC over AES/EBU and with a master clock coming from the DAC. Which according to the data sheet it seems to be able to do.

I would have to evaluate one with my DCS DAC to see if it would actually work... the DCS is finicky when it comes to locking on remotely clocked transports (why I don't know... I thought easier tracking should be one advantage of master clocking from the DAC).

But $1700 sounds pretty pricey for essentially a ethernet to SDPIF interface... ok, there is some software involved, but still.

This would make for a fun redux of our transport bakeoff... if this unit could perform indistinguishably from the DCS Verdi transport, now that would be something cool. THough I would still need the Verdi for SACD.

Hmmmm....I wouldn't trade my Sonos ZP80, with CIAudio VDA•2 outboard DAC for it. :)


that's because you don't have an external DAC with master clocking...

September 18th! :)

It's an estimate, but we're usually dead-on with our ship dates.

seanadams,

Did you work on this project?

Can you explain the three separate jitter specs? Are the digital inputs auto-sensing?

- Steve O.

Did you work on this project?


Yes, I know the hardware inside and out.

Can you explain the three separate jitter specs?

Not completely, in the confines of this little text box, but i'll give it a shot :)

Jitter, like any kind of noise, accumulates at each component or wire, so it is instructive to report it at a few key points in the system. When manufacturers talk about jitter it is not always clear where and how it was measured, or if they just pulled a number out of the sky. Our measurements are taken using a high speed scope and specialized software, looking directly at the clock or spdif signals. This gives a very high level of precision and the ability to see minute relative differences during the process of designing incremental improvements in board layout and such. It would be hard to describe everything with a single number, so the three points indicated are:

Oscillator: this is the IC and crystal which generate the clock signal to begin with.

DAC: this is right at the clock input pin on the internal DAC, after the signal has traversed through one other IC and a few inches across the PCB.

S/PDIF receiver: this at the end of a cable connected to the intrumentn with a 75 ohm terminator, and indicates what an external s/pdif receiver would "see".

Are the digital inputs auto-sensing?

If you mean in terms of which one to use, no, they are individually selected as separate inputs.

Yes, I know the hardware inside and out.


This is cool! Care to answer more questions?

1) What other DACs were considered during the project?
2) Was USB/IEEE1394/I2S never on the table?
3) Why no upsampling options?
4) After-market modifications: Is the Transporter mod-friendly? Was the team inspired by mods of previous Slim Devices products?
5) Can the faceplate graphics be customized/skinned?

- Steve O.

// 1) What other DACs were considered during the project?

We also tested the top-of-the-line parts from Burr-Brown(TI) and Analog Devices, not just their eval boards, but also in our own designs as a complete system including the super regs. With a couple exceptions all the high-end parts performed well, but in the end we preferred the AK4396 by a hair.

// 2) Was USB/IEEE1394/I2S never on the table?

I just don't understand the fuss over USB/Firewire for non-desktop use, and i2s is scarcely any improvement over s/pdif as an inter-chassis interconnect because it is clumsy to hook up, and does nothing to isolate jitter. The best solution for an external DAC is to put the oscillator right at the DAC, and then "slave" the external source to that clock. This is what we support by way of the word clock input, and we can also slave to an external s/pdif source feeding the digital input. Although clokc outputs are not widely available on outboard DACs, if we're going to be the "chicken to someone's egg" this is the best solution.

// 3) Why no upsampling options?

It could be added later in software... what benefits are you looking for?

// 4) After-market modifications: Is the Transporter mod-friendly?

Definitely more so than SB3 - more room in the chassis, larger board, lots of power etc.

// Was the team inspired by mods of previous Slim Devices products?

With the exception of the Super Regulators, no.

// Can the faceplate graphics be customized/skinned?

Yes... already there are several new display modes that use the dual screens, including a stereo spectrum analyzer, but more will be added.

Sean,
What's a "325 MHz 8-way multithreaded RISC processor"?

larry

I just don't understand the fuss over USB/Firewire for non-desktop use, and i2s is scarcely any improvement over s/pdif as an inter-chassis interconnect because it is clumsy to hook up, and does nothing to isolate jitter. The best solution for an external DAC is to put the oscillator right at the DAC, and then "slave" the external source to that clock. This is what we support by way of the word clock input, and we can also slave to an external s/pdif source feeding the digital input. Although clokc outputs are not widely available on outboard DACs, if we're going to be the "chicken to someone's egg" this is the best solution.


PCs as music servers definitely goes hand-in-hand with the iPod/mp3 player trend. Given that there are external USB DACs in the market at competiting price points... To fully take advantage of the Transporter, a user will also have to get a pro audio card with AES/EBU, and have a PCI slot available.


// 3) Why no upsampling options?

It could be added later in software... what benefits are you looking for?


I'm not asking to upsample mangled mp3s... more like what can be done with the Perpetual Technologies P1A or upsampling done ala Anagram SRC. The results can sound nice with certain types of music.

Is there a window open before release for product revisions, based on user input?

- Steve O.

...To fully take advantage of the Transporter, a user will also have to get a pro audio card with AES/EBU, and have a PCI slot available.
I disagree completely. I use an Infrant NAS which streams the bit-perfect audio via ethernet to both of my Squeezeboxes. I use the PC interface to build playlists, etc, but most of the time (particularily at night or when guests are over) my PC is not even turned on. My NAS has over 1000 CDs on it in FLAC format. I even listen to FLAC files on my portable player at the gym.

None of my music files are accessed on my PC by Slimserver, but they are backed up on it's big HDDs.

To fully take advantage of the Transporter, a user will also have to get a pro audio card with AES/EBU, and have a PCI slot available.

huh??? This is just plain wrong - miles off base... but since I don't know where you're coming from, I'm not sure what to say. Transporter (or Squeezebox) is not like a "DAC for the computer". The whole point is to give you access to your music _away_ from the PC!

seanadams,

I was looking at it strictly from an external DAC perspective. Lowest jitter of the Transporter would be via AES/EBU.

- Steve O.

This is far from a $20K component

Depends on the type of computer and hard drive you hook it up to, no? :D

You know, to be honest, this device could also serve as an opportunity for many people to experiment with a high-end outboard DAC. The reviews on the AKM DAC look quite good, really; and this device does take digital inputs.

FWIW, I have a SqueezeBox 2 which I have hooked up to my Dodson DA-218 DAC in my main rig at home. Not quite up to the performance of my reference Oracle transport, but very very close and still very pleasing to listen to. I suspect that this new Transporter will do a superb job...

seanadams,

Did you work on this project?



FYI - Sean is the CEO of Slim Devices...

Lowest jitter of the Transporter would be via AES/EBU.


That would be surprising. AES/EBU's physical interface (the 3-pin XLR) is fundamentally wrong for digital audio.

--Andre

That would be surprising. AES/EBU's physical interface (the 3-pin XLR) is fundamentally wrong for digital audio.

--Andre

How so?

How so?

Unless you use one of the Neutrik digital XLRs that have a circumferential shield termination (ie. 360 degree termination with no gaps in the shielding between connector body and shield), the shielding is pretty worthless: not only is the standard XLR shield termination not circumferential, it usually ends as a pigtail which increases its inductance, both of which make the rest of the shielding much less effective. The impedance of the connector and most cables used for XLRs also isn't great. The only reason AES/EBU's use of XLR came into use was that someone thought people could reuse all those analog XLR cables they had lying around the studio. Unfortunately, that brought up another issue which is people mistakenly plugging analog components into digital components and vice versa. All around, it was just FUBAR.

Today, AES standardizes on coax with BNCs.

--Andre

Lowest jitter of the Transporter would be via AES/EBU.


Sorry but that is just not true. The lowest jitter by far (on the order of 90% lower than AES/EBU) would be achieved using Transporter's internal oscillators to play your music over the network.

I have a modified SB2 (better power supply and internals), and it beats my Proceed PMDT into either my Ack Dack 2.0 DAC or my Proceed AVP's DAC. I gave up listening to CDs, especially since all of my music is available with a few presses of some buttons. And, it's searchable. I can't go back to normal CDs.

OK, so what would be a good inexpensive (relatively) word clock to match up with this? I know there is a Big Ben by Appogee, anything else not priced according to this forum? Would it even be worth it?

Blake

As for the XLR debate for a digital connection, I use this for the connection between my Proceed PMDT and my Proceed AVP for movies, and I compared this with very fancy RCA and glass optical fiber. I preferred the AES. but I might be using the Neutrik digital XLRs.

As for the XLR debate for a digital connection, I use this for the connection between my Proceed PMDT and my Proceed AVP for movies, and I compared this with very fancy RCA and glass optical fiber. I preferred the AES. but I might be using the Neutrik digital XLRs.


My Oracle transport has both XLR/AES/EBU and BNC/SPDIF outputs, and I can't really hear a difference between the two into their respective XLR and BNC inputs on my DAC. Both are better than when I hooked up a BNC/RCA cable to my DAC's RCA input...

Behold the Slim Devices Transporter (http://www.slimdevices.com/)... AKM professional-grade DACs, 96kHz support, balanced analog, analog VU meters, word clock input... EDIT: I think the VU meters are simulated on a VFD display. Still, that's cool.

You can preorder now for $2K and they'll give you a Squeezebox to hold you over until it arrives in December.


Holy...I have been looking for such device all my life...well at least for the past three years. :)

yeah, how so... DCS recommends AES/EBU for it's interconnect choice, and from a quite google:
"AES/EBU

(Audio Engineering Society/European Broadcasting Union) A professional serial interface for transferring digital audio from CD and DVD players to amplifiers and TVs. AES/EBU is typically used to transmit PCM and Dolby Digital 5.1, but is not tied to any sampling rate or audio standard."

but AES probably doesn't know what it's talking about.

"AES/EBU

(Audio Engineering Society/European Broadcasting Union) A professional serial interface for transferring digital audio from CD and DVD players to amplifiers and TVs. AES/EBU is typically used to transmit PCM and Dolby Digital 5.1, but is not tied to any sampling rate or audio standard."

but AES probably doesn't know what it's talking about.

What is your point? The quote above doesn't mention quality. It just tells you what it's used for. Look up AES3, and then let's talk about what the AES recommends.

--Andre

Unless you use one of the Neutrik digital XLRs that have a circumferential shield termination (ie. 360 degree termination with no gaps in the shielding between connector body and shield), the shielding is pretty worthless: not only is the standard XLR shield termination not circumferential, it usually ends as a pigtail which increases its inductance, both of which make the rest of the shielding much less effective. The impedance of the connector and most cables used for XLRs also isn't great. The only reason AES/EBU's use of XLR came into use was that someone thought people could reuse all those analog XLR cables they had lying around the studio. Unfortunately, that brought up another issue which is people mistakenly plugging analog components into digital components and vice versa. All around, it was just FUBAR.

Today, AES standardizes on coax with BNCs.

--Andre

So if you use a Neutrik digital XLR, it should be fine, right?

And aren't there additional benefits to running a balanced signal, particularly for long runs? BNCs are just for single-ended SPDIF, right?

One or both of my manuals for my Proceed PMDT or AVP recommends balanced digital ICs, which is why I went that way (I already had some obscenely priced RCA IC, so I wouldn't have started down that path). To me, balanced ICs make sense, and I try not to use unbalanced unless I have no other option.

Andrew, you really haven't answered anyone's question. Your description of why AES/EBU connections are bad focuses on poor shielding---but it doesn't actually get to the point which is the performance of the connection, in terms of the only ways that matter: uncorrected bit errors or increased jitter.

Are you suggesting that AES/EBU Type I is actually worse than Type II or III---or more practically, S/PDIF optical or coax---in either of those aspects?

I've never heard of any suggestions that Type I causes undue numbers of bit errors under typical circumstances. And as for jitter, sure, I suppose shielding could help, but someone like Tzucc is going to be using a master clock anyway, so that's irrelevant.

Sorry but that is just not true. The lowest jitter by far (on the order of 90% lower than AES/EBU) would be achieved using Transporter's internal oscillators to play your music over the network.

now I am confused. SeanAdams, are you saying that the Transporter performs best with it's internal DACs, and NOT using the external word clock from an external DAC like the DCS DACs?

What is your point? The quote above doesn't mention quality. It just tells you what it's used for. Look up AES3, and then let's talk about what the AES recommends.

--Andre

I hadn't even worried about the quality of the shielding of my xlr cables used for digital data (yes, they are the good neutriks), because isn't the whole point of differential or balanced signalling to get rid of the need for a shield to kill off all noise? What happens if there is some noise injected on wire of the unbalanced but nicely shield coax, versus that same noise appearing on both of the xlr's.
The xlr is supposed to reject the common mode, right?

My point originally is your surprise at AES/EBU being used for digital audio data transport, given that just about any DAC and transport will sport AES/EBU connectors for just that purpose.

Tzucc---when I read that post of Sean's I assumed he was speaking strictly about scenarios that use the Transporter's analog outputs.

Obviously an external DAC that supplies a word clock to the Transporter inherits that DAC's jitter characteristics.

thanks, makes sense.

yeah, how so... DCS recommends AES/EBU for it's interconnect choice, and from a quite google:
"AES/EBU

(Audio Engineering Society/European Broadcasting Union) A professional serial interface for transferring digital audio from CD and DVD players to amplifiers and TVs. AES/EBU is typically used to transmit PCM and Dolby Digital 5.1, but is not tied to any sampling rate or audio standard."

but AES probably doesn't know what it's talking about.

You have to understand that Transporter is not like a "DAC for your computer". Instead, the computer sends the music across the network to Transporter in exactly the same way that this web page gets to you from a server somewhere. i.e. there is NO clock signal involved in the transmission at all. The clock is generated downstream, inside Transporter, as it moves the data into the DAC chip. Furthermore, there is no chance of data errors because the system will retransmit data until it is received correctly.

AES, S/PDIF, or I2S are all connections which involve transmitting a clock signal (plus the music data) from one device containing the clock source to another containing the DAC. It is in this process of encoding, transmitting, receiving, and recovering the clock where a relatively massive amount of jitter is introduced compared a local clock.... not to mention the possibility of data errors.

If you want to compare AES to S/PDIF, for example, then we can talk about that...

now I am confused. SeanAdams, are you saying that the Transporter performs best with it's internal DACs, and NOT using the external word clock from an external DAC like the DCS DACs?

No - when using a word clock signal, it is dependent on the clock in the DAC. (This is a general statement, not specific to Transporter).

The idea with using a word clock signal is to _confine_ the path that the clock has to take to just a short hop from the oscillator to the DAC, which are both in the same chassis. Effectively it turns your s/pdif or aes/ebu connection into "just data" instead of "clock + data".

Yep, we get it, Sean---indeed, many of us on this forum have been specifically waiting for a network player with a master clock input, and even considering building one ourselves. Needless to say I'm going to put up my soldering iron!

You have to understand that Transporter is not like a "DAC for your computer".

yeah, got it, in fact, we may have gotten it before you got it... as MG says, we've been talking about this for years. Nonetheless, happy to see someone finally do it. I don't see why the box has to cost $1700 though, but that's your decision.

I would DIY with an HTPC and one of those high end audio cards that takes in a master clock, but the concept of fan noise from the HTPC power supply pretty much kills that solution.

$2K doesn't seem particularly out of line given the target market. I'm guessing they'll sell plenty at that price. I'd rather pay $1K for a standard Squeezebox modded with a word clock input, but oh well.

So if you use a Neutrik digital XLR, it should be fine, right?

And aren't there additional benefits to running a balanced signal, particularly for long runs? BNCs are just for single-ended SPDIF, right?

Maybe. The connector's still not 110 Ohms, and the cables aren't particularly great at maintaining a constant impedance especially when subject to mechanical stresses. As for distance, due to the impedances, and signalling conventions, shielded twisted pair AES/EBU can maybe go 300 feet, but AES3id, which uses coax, can go over 1000 feet.

Balanced is useful for rejecting noise in so far as the sending and receiving circuits maintain their impedance balance over the frequencies of interest. For high frequencies like digital audio signals, that's at least 10 MHz if not more. I don't think there are any balanced circuits that have matched impedances to that high a frequency, so balanced doesn't buy you much for RF. That's why high frequency transmission uses coax instead of twisted pair.

For coax, there are certain construction techniques well-known in industries where noise rejection matters that are used to deal with noise impinged on the cable's shield. The important thing is to never let common-mode noise enter the chassis. One example is a chassis-mounted BNC jack whose ground is capacitatively coupled to the chassis to prevent low-frequency ground loops, but still allow a low-inductance path for RF to the chassis, which in combination with a ferrite bead on the signal conductor and the capacitance of the shield of the input pulse transformer which is tied to ground forms a pi-filter for preventing common-mode RF noise from entering the chassis.

Shielding is important because jitter is just one effect of noise injection into the system. There are lots of things out there (eg. cell and cordless phones) that can put RF noise into the system and not only introduce jitter in many parts of the design, but can also mess up other parts of the system. Audiophile designers seem to like using high-speed opamps that often don't have well-designed power supply bypass structures (eg. through-hole parts, bypass caps far away from the the device, etc.), and that's an invitation for RF to cause trouble.

--Andre

yeah, got it, in fact, we may have gotten it before you got it... as MG says, we've been talking about this for years. Nonetheless, happy to see someone finally do it. I don't see why the box has to cost $1700 though, but that's your decision.

I would DIY with an HTPC and one of those high end audio cards that takes in a master clock, but the concept of fan noise from the HTPC power supply pretty much kills that solution.
Your comments on pricing are always funny. If it's a high-end tweaky audiophile player 20K is OK. But if it's a well engineered piece of equipment that is more mainstream, $1700 is high :rolleyes:.

I disagree completely. I use an Infrant NAS which streams the bit-perfect audio via ethernet to both of my Squeezeboxes. I use the PC interface to build playlists, etc, but most of the time (particularily at night or when guests are over) my PC is not even turned on. My NAS has over 1000 CDs on it in FLAC format. I even listen to FLAC files on my portable player at the gym.

None of my music files are accessed on my PC by Slimserver, but they are backed up on it's big HDDs.
Could you elaborate on this. How are you able to access your media with the PC off? What "enables" that feature? Is it the fact that your Infrant is acting as a web server and the Slimbox can access your music that way?

Edit: I looked at the web site and see that Infrant is preloading the NAS with Slimbox software to enable this.

These jitter readings are in ps, I thought that jitter is traditionally measured in BERTs? (Bit Error Rates).

This VIDEO demonstrates an applications procedure for testing BER.

National Instruments (http://www.ni.com/swf/demos/us/modularinstruments/biterrorrate/)

These jitter readings are in ps, I thought that jitter is traditionally measured in BERTs? (Bit Error Rates).

...


Jitter is usually expressed in seconds, radians or degrees... Can even sometimes be in Hz..

Your comments on pricing are always funny. If it's a high-end tweaky audiophile player 20K is OK. But if it's a well engineered piece of equipment that is more mainstream, $1700 is high :rolleyes:.

I wouldn't spend $20k on anything for the media room except speakers. Not even $10K for any single item. Indeed, my DCS 'player' or transport cost like $4k. And that was only to match with the DAC, where I believe there is much differentiation in quality of results.

However, all this box does for me is convert ethernet packets into SPDIF stream clocked externally. As such, this can be taken care of in like two chips and a power supply. For me, all their work on the analog section and DACs is of no use.
I readily recognize that I am in a tiny minority. And volumes being small, price needs to climb.

For me a box like this is kind of like the whole video server debate... for me, the value difference between DIY and the fancy sw of the K'scape is not worth $15-20K.

Yes, but at least people have actually built DIY equivalents of the Kscape. (By equivalent of course I don't mean equivalent quality, just on key functionality.)

Has anyone built a DIY audiophile-quality streaming music server, one which specifically feeds to an external DAC supplying a master clock? I mean, I know you and I have looked at various sound cards, etc., but I know I've not bothered to actually build one.

I don't think anyone else has, either. And that points to a rather large difference here. In the ways that matter (to you in particular), the Transporter is truly unprecedented.

Well, Michael, I was about to build one when I had my HTPC/Media server thing going on, but once I got the kaleidescape I figured my HTPC's days were numbered. Even using my system for music only didn't make much sense once I played with the interface on the K'Scape and knew music would be coming eventually. I had priced out everything except for the master clock input back then. Still glad I didn't get that far.

The large difference is not in ability, but in demand. Most people do not demand external master clocking.

I wouldn't spend $20k on anything for the media room except speakers. Not even $10K for any single item. Indeed, my DCS 'player' or transport cost like $4k. And that was only to match with the DAC, where I believe there is much differentiation in quality of results.

T, you do realize the $20K component membership requirement isn't for a lifetime? It has to be renewed every 3 years with another component or you get kicked out of the club. We'll all miss you dearly. ;)

here is the question though... Has anybody compared a "non" externally clocked network audio player to one that is?

Do we really need that when we have a clean TCP/IP stream coming in? I mean if a Video player with both digital surround and the video does not need it, why does the audio playback?

I AM NOT TALKING THEORY!!!!!!!! I am talking for real.

I mean if a Video player with both digital surround and the video does not need it, why does the audio playback?

I AM NOT TALKING THEORY!!!!!!!! I am talking for real.

You may want to qualify that to exclude PAL. There is a 5% speedup problem with PAL that is corrected via an external 100khz Master Clock. You can read about it on the Esoteric website. Television studios use atomic global master clocks but primarily for time synching.

Could you elaborate on this. How are you able to access your media with the PC off? What "enables" that feature? Is it the fact that your Infrant is acting as a web server and the Slimbox can access your music that way?

Edit: I looked at the web site and see that Infrant is preloading the NAS with Slimbox software to enable this.

Sure, the Infrant 'CPU' runs Slimserver (the Squeezebox & Transporter software) on their NAS products (600, X6, NV, even after-market NAS devices featuring the Infrant board). As I mentioned, the PC interface is quite handy for setting up the player, building playlists, customizing user settings, and a myriad of other tasks (see the Slimserver page here. (http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_features.html)), but one of the most important aspects of the interface is that these same functions (for the most part) can be accessed via the remote control and verified on the VFD. Looking at the Transporter remote, it appears to be even more versatile.

When I have guests over or simply want some mood music for various extracurricular activites, the last thing I want to be doing is dicking around with my PC. If I was listening to one of my mellow playlists when I shut off the Squeezebox, I just grab the remote and hit the PLAY button (yes, only 1 button since my bedroom amp has auto-signal sensing) and viola', instant romance! Else, I just click through the "Now Playing" menu and select the correct playlists or favorites, done deal.

I keep my NAS in a basement storage room plugged into a UPS, then route the data via gigabit switch to my Squeezeboxes.

http://home.earthlink.net/~lu_max/AVS/network_a.jpg

Nice audio setup, no? Jealous OB? :rolleyes:

You can download and play with Slimserver for free from the Slim Devices website.

BTW, since I switched to the Home Depot steel & particle board rack, it is as if a 'veil' has been lifted from the music. The bass is 'tighter', the highs 'airier', and the soundstage has gotten both deeper and wider. ;) Although, I still prefer the sound of CAT5e cables over newer CAT6. :p

p.s. QQQ, I promise to clean out my inbox soon

p.s.s If anyone is coming to Denver for CEDIA I would love to get together with the folks I have come to know via this forum and finally put some faces to the various screen names. I'm a Denver local, so if you need any intel on Denver, please PM me (after I clean out my inbox and make room that is)

Dizzman,Has anybody compared a "non" externally clocked network audio player to one that is?No, probably not. But I don't think it's necessary to get this specific. The network aspects of the player really don't figure into quality issues here. The prebuffering you get in a network player is not materially different from the prebuffering you can get from a good transport.

It's entirely reasonable, IMO, to extrapolate experience from standard RedBook transports to this setting. The question really boils down to the clocking architecture of the audio connection (master/slave versus standard S/PDIF-style clock recovery): which delivers less jitter to the analog outputs, and whether such jitter is audible in the first place.

So, is jitter audible at the levels that occur in commone equipment? Well, I'm not willing to say no, for two reasons. First, I haven't personally done the blinded listening tests. And second, I understand the physical mechanism by which jitter corrupts an analog signal, having encountered it in my own work. So because I am certain that jitter produces measurable differences, I'm willing to consider the possibility that those differences are also audible. I'm skeptical, but that's as far as I'll go.

This is in stark contrast to tweaks that claim to actually alter the bitstream---which is of course a load of crap.

These jitter readings are in ps, I thought that jitter is traditionally measured in BERTs? (Bit Error Rates).

This VIDEO demonstrates an applications procedure for testing BER.


BER is a result that can be predicted by knowing jitter, but now we are talking about jitter as it pertains to high-speed communication, not audio. the implications are different.

On a gig ethernet line for example, if you have too much jitter you will lose bits because the data may be misaligned with the clock. This is not really an issue in audio - instead we are concerned with how clean the received clock signal is, something that does NOT matter in telecom provided it is clean enough to receive the data.

To predict BER you look at the distribution of the jitter and the figure out the probably of a cycle being far enough out on the outlying "tails" of the distribution that it would cause a bit error.

Hopefully you get a very small number, maybe one bit error every couple years or something. That is why it is done this way - it is not feasible to measure a statistically significant number of _actual_ errors, but you can predict them by knowing the jitter. Thus you (more or less) can get the figure in seconds instead of decades.

So BER is not a unit of jitter. However, there is one other very common unit you will see which is "UI" or "unit interval". This just means whatever fraction of one clock cycle, and can be converted back and forth to (pico)seconds depending on the clock rate.

Television studios use atomic global master clocks but primarily for time synching.

Gee, and i thought they used things like a grass valley frame synchronizer

T, you do realize the $20K component membership requirement isn't for a lifetime? It has to be renewed every 3 years with another component or you get kicked out of the club. We'll all miss you dearly. ;)


Fine.. this is one club I can stand to get kicked out of!

Has anyone built a DIY audiophile-quality streaming music server, one which specifically feeds to an external DAC supplying a master clock? I mean, I know you and I have looked at various sound cards, etc., but I know I've not bothered to actually build one.

I don't think anyone else has, either. And that points to a rather large difference here. In the ways that matter (to you in particular), the Transporter is truly unprecedented.

I agree. Still... $1700... I would only buy if I could get an eval unit to compare against my DCS transport. I am not interested in trading sound quality for convenience.

But T, even assuming for purposes of discussion there is an audible difference in sound quality, it still does not have to be either/or. It can be both.

-----------------------------------
Ron Party

here is the question though... Has anybody compared a "non" externally clocked network audio player to one that is?

Do we really need that when we have a clean TCP/IP stream coming in? I mean if a Video player with both digital surround and the video does not need it, why does the audio playback?

I AM NOT TALKING THEORY!!!!!!!! I am talking for real.

I just placed an order for a Transporter, so if anyone here in the NY/NJ area wants to give it a shot when I receive it in September, I'm more than happy to coordinate. (my DAC does not have a word clock output :eek: , so I would need someone else who has one).

Also fyi - I just signed up as a reseller for SlimDevices, so obviously from this point forward, my comments on the subject are no longer unbiased.... :o

A simple test would be to compare a Transporter to a SqueezeBox. Connect the S/PDIF optical or coax ouptuts of both to the DAC in question, and the master clock output of the DAC to the Transporter. I believe you can actually sync the streams being sent to both devices, so they both can play the same tune at the same time, with only a small delay between them due to differences in network timing and clocking delays.

If jitter really matters at these levels, this kind of test is likely to reveal it. The bits, after all, will be the same between the two.

But what if one stream uses Monster Cable and the other uses Belden. THAN you could be hearing the differences between the cable!

:D

You got me there!

But what if one stream uses Monster Cable and the other uses Belden. THAN you could be hearing the differences between the cable!

:D

No worries...I will use a coat hanger for both... ;) :D

Also fyi - I just signed up as a reseller for SlimDevices, so obviously from this point forward, my comments on the subject are no longer unbiased.... :o
Hey everyone; PhilNYC is going to sponsor an unbelievable super special power buy price for AVS Forum members! Pass it on! :D

if anyone in the bay area is going to resell these or has one I can borrow for a night of testing, that would be great to hear.

Ron, I agree, but hoping to achieve equal sound quality to my current setup, with an increase in convenience is too much to hope for... but I am eternally optimistic, hence my desire to evaluate.

JetLag...eh...you do realize that the SlimDevices CEO is reading this forum, right...? :eek: :D

tcuzz...if you order from SlimDevices' website, there's a 30 day return policy... :cool:

hey Phil, I realy like my new handle 'tcuzz' ... very nice.

hey Phil, I realy like my new handle 'tcuzz' ... very nice.
I don't know if it's the Lagavullin, but definitely LOL! :D

------------------------------
Ron Party

No worries...I will use a coat hanger for both... ;) :D


Nice.

That must be the new cat-9 cabling standard that I've been hearing so much about. I'm sure we'll see monster introduce a new line of networking cables that will become very successful. Their new nine-tails/tales line.

And to think, all these years people have been mastering, editing, and storing digital audio sent through ethernet networks with all this jitter. Maybe we can get them to go back and redo it all.

Make sure you replace the power cord (but only up to the wall plate)
http://www.psaudio.com/products/xstream_power_plus_sc_overview.asp

:)

tzucc...sorry, was posting from my Treo, and my thumbs got crossed... :eek: :D

bleair...ask Chu Gai about the coat hanger... :)

I am using Air-Tunes through my house music system. Meaning I can play all of my I-tunes songs in any zone via any of my computers around the house.... What sets this apart from the simple and reliable Airtunes (811G also)?

I am using Air-Tunes through my house music system. Meaning I can play all of my I-tunes songs in any zone via any of my computers around the house.... What sets this apart from the simple and reliable Airtunes (811G also)?

In addition to doing the same thing you are doing with Air-Tunes, the theory is that you get higher sound quality because of the attention they paid in the design and selection of quality parts. Asides from that, you can look at the spec sheet to see all of the other functions (eg. word clock, RS-232 port for integration with Crestron et al, digital-input allowing cable/satellite-box/playstation/xbox/etc to use the internal DAC, etc)...

The basic SlimDevices Squeezebox is more similar to AirTunes (although still slightly more expensive)...

tzucc...sorry, was posting from my Treo, and my thumbs got crossed... :eek: :D

bleair...ask Chu Gai about the coat hanger... :)


Oh Crap... i did not need to know that i can feed this addiction from my treo!

I am using Air-Tunes through my house music system. Meaning I can play all of my I-tunes songs in any zone via any of my computers around the house.... What sets this apart from the simple and reliable Airtunes (811G also)?
No DRM!

Check this out!
http://inguzaudio.com/RoomCorrection/

Room correction for the squeezebox.

nice link Jermmd.

JetLag...eh...you do realize that the SlimDevices CEO is reading this forum, right...? :eek: :D


Wait, so are you saying you won't be doing a power buy? ;)

Jeff

yeah, got it, in fact, we may have gotten it before you got it... as MG says, we've been talking about this for years. Nonetheless, happy to see someone finally do it. I don't see why the box has to cost $1700 though, but that's your decision.

I would DIY with an HTPC and one of those high end audio cards that takes in a master clock, but the concept of fan noise from the HTPC power supply pretty much kills that solution.

There are passive power supplies out there, Antec Phantom to name one if thats an issue.

There is no reason why a computer now a days should output more than 25db at any given time.

There are passive power supplies out there, Antec Phantom to name one if thats an issue.
I use Antec Phantom with Valhalla power cord and PS Audio Power Plant. See 10 MB video (http://poollogics.is-a-geek.net/pictures/forum4/System/video/ValhallaPC.PowerPlants.(2006.08.01).DivX.avi). It's better than $4000 Cary 303/300 as transport.

I use Antec Phantom with Valhalla power cord and PS Audio Power Plant. See 10 MB video (http://poollogics.is-a-geek.net/pictures/forum4/System/video/ValhallaPC.PowerPlants.(2006.08.01).DivX.avi).
I think your video would be much better and get your point across in a far superior fashion if it were really shaky and poorly focused like the serious "artsy" clips you sometimes find on YouTube and elsewhere :rolleyes:

I think your video would be much better and get your point across in a far superior fashion if it were really shaky and poorly focused like the serious "artsy" clips you sometimes find on YouTube and elsewhere :rolleyes:
I have only 512 MB memory card in digital camera, so it needs to be quick and shaky. :p

The point is, Power Plant needs extreme cooling when connecting computer to it. 40cm table fan on max speed. That's right, centimeters.

Wait, so are you saying you won't be doing a power buy? ;)

Jeff

Certainly not for a JETS fan... :eek: ;)

(Giants fan for nearly 3 decades...) :cool:

Certainly not for a JETS fan... :eek: ;)

(Giants fan for nearly 3 decades...) :cool:


J - E - T - S! JETS! JETS! JETS!

;-)

I'll be 30 this year and have been a long suffering fan as far back as I can remember. I was at both Giants SB wins though and don't hate the Giants like I do the Phins. At least the next stadium won't make us the redheaded stepchildren like the current one does. I wonder who they'll sell the naming rights to....

Jeff

Oh holy cow, ValhallaPC, please stay the hell off this thread. There are already two devoted to your power cord evangelism.

Here's a SlimServer question for folks out there familiar with it. I've played around with the web ui a bit and it is pretty slick. I'd say for a web based interface it has to be one of the best I've used (although iTunes web UI replicators like iTunes Catalog are also pretty slick). So, I know I can just have SlimServer "see" the iTunes library and all. However, there's no way to use the AirTunes feature in iTunes to send to Slim hardware right? It's just an interface question as my wife is familiar and comfortable with iTunes. Of course, using iTunes as the back end might very well compromise the feature set and make the hardware less useful and more of a dummy AE. Alternatively, are there substitute interface designs for the SlimServer? I know they allow 3rd party development and it's hard to keep up with all the new stuff.

Jeff

Jeff, Dont think that is possible. SB3 is only designed to receive instructions from Slim Server as far as I know.

I have a question, though as stupid as it may sound...

I am currently thinking about setting up a "music" room separate from the HT, you know, tubes, etc. The transporter sounds like a great device for my purposes as I already have an macmini running as an HTPC, so the music is already stored and tagged. However, will it make much of a difference compared to my HT setup if the music streaming to the Transporter is MP3? Or, will I have to convert everything to lossless? The problem with this is I have 210 GB of MP3 at 320hz and getting all this to lossless, I will need terabytes of space...

Pablo, If you're going to primarily be playing compressed MP3's, I don't think the Transporter will be worth it to you...and the same holds true for a "high end" dedicated 2-channel music system in general. A Squeezebox 3 + decent midfi rig would work, but if you want to "get into tubes et al" and have a good 2-channel system, the first thing you'd need to do is to re-rip all your music to at least one of the lossless formats (FLAC, Apple Lossless). Hard disks keep getting cheaper, too...

Pablo, If you're going to primarily be playing compressed MP3's, I don't think the Transporter will be worth it to you...and the same holds true for a "high end" dedicated 2-channel music system in general. A Squeezebox 3 + decent midfi rig would work, but if you want to "get into tubes et al" and have a good 2-channel system, the first thing you'd need to do is to re-rip all your music to at least one of the lossless formats (FLAC, Apple Lossless). Hard disks keep getting cheaper, too...

That's what I figured...Yes, hard discs are getting cheaper, so that might be the way to go...I wasn't getting the high end 2 channel system just for the mp3's or flac, wav, etc, but rather for a cd transporter and vinyl...I was actually not even thinking about streaming content for that room, but when I started reading about the transporter, it sparked my interest...

Also, re-ripping from CD would be a project in itself...Around 1300 albums would be extremely time consuming, so would converting the mp3 to lossless be a happy medium, or would this "decompression" already be destroyed because of the compression from the mp3 format?

Also, re-ripping from CD would be a project in itself...Around 1300 albums would be extremely time consuming, so would converting the mp3 to lossless be a happy medium, or would this "decompression" already be destroyed because of the compression from the mp3 format?

You've already lost data because of the compression into MP3 format. I don't think there's a way to recover it...

Phil's right---the loss due to MP3 compression is unrecoverable. However, you can always send your CDs to a ripping service, to save time. Ready to Play (http://www.readytoplay.com) is one based here in my neck of the woods. I haven't used them yet but I intend to.

You've already lost data because of the compression into MP3 format. I don't think there's a way to recover it...

There isn't a way. As Phil says, the compression has already been done so recreating the bit for bit exact original file isn't realistically possible. Re-ripping is your only option.

Have you considered not doing the re-ripping yourself. 1300 CDs is a substantial collection, but there are several ripping service options out there who will do all the work for you. For that many CDs, the cost per disc should drop way below what the normal is for 100, 200, 300, etc. Most services can give you the resulting output on a variety of formats including FLAC, Apple Lossless, etc. With a collection that large in lossless formats, they'll really only be able to give you the output onto multiple HDDs (would require an awful lot of even DL DVDs and I don't think any of them are offering archiving to BR or HD-DVD yet). So, you'd probably be able to wrok it out with them so that you could provide HDDs that you would be purchasing anyway to store the collection. At the end, you'd have a completely ripped and tagged collection in lossless on HDDs ready to go into your system.

Just a thought.

Jeff

Do any of these ripping services have any issues with data accuracy? Or do they use something like EAC to rip?

Hmm, I don't know; that would be interesting to find out. But let's keep in mind two things. First, even EAC uses one quick pass for nearly all CDs if you have a player (EDIT: I mean, a CD-ROM reader) with C2-level error detection and correction---because the C2 verification insures that exact information was retrieved.

Secondly, if your C2 info reveals uncorrectable errors, you've got yourself a pretty messed up disc already. And such bit errors do not manifest themselves as a subtle degradation of sound quality over the entire CD. Instead, they're fairly localized, and usually produce harsh and obvious results (clicks, etc.) My point being that if the rip sounds good, it's almost certainly bit perfect.

At the very least though I would want to know if these services can indicate if their rips are C2-perfect, and flag the ones that fail.

At the very least though I would want to know if these services can indicate if their rips are C2-perfect, and flag the ones that fail.

If they use EAC, including the rip log would be enough.
The log file is automatically generated by EAC and looked like this:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EAC extraction logfile from 3. April 2004, 9:02 for CD
Gidon Kremer & Martha Argerich / R. Schumann: Violin Sonatas Nos 1,2

Used drive : PLEXTOR CD-R PX-W1210S Adapter: 3 ID: 3
Read mode : Secure with C2, accurate stream, disable cache
Read offset correction : 0
Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out : No

Used output format : Internal WAV Routines
44.100 Hz; 16 Bit; Stereo

Other options :
Fill up missing offset samples with silence : No
Delete leading and trailing silent blocks : No
Installed external ASPI interface


Range status and errors
Selected range
Filename C:\Create\Schumann\CDImage.wav

Peak level 91.8 %
Range quality 100.0 %
CRC CED24391
Copy OK

No errors occured

End of status report

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FWIW; I contacted one of the ripping services (I do not remember which) before I ripped my collection myself and peppered them with questions. If I recall correctly, they just do a single pass with C2 (not all CD-ROMS have high quality C2 built in BTW), and DO NOT use secure mode.

Secure mode does 2 reads (at a minimum) and compares the data to ensure accuracy and will re-read a sector a number of times if it detects an error. On most of the forums (Slim Devices, Hydrogenaudio, Head-Fi, here), the consensus seems to be if you are going to go through the trouble you may as well ensure that it is done perfectly by employing secure mode.

Also highly recommended is using the AccurateRip plugin. It compares the CRC value from your rip to a master database of other users rips to see if they match. This provides you with further proof (along with a warm fuzzy feeling) that your rips are accurate. EAC and the AccurateRip plugin are both free.

The ripping service I spoke to employed neither secure mode nor the AccurateRip plugin because it increased rip time 3 fold (or even longer for dirty/scratched discs). I prefer the guarantee of knowing I have perfect rips.

Perhaps you have a nephew or son who you could pay to do this for you?

Oh, and don't forget to BACK UP your lossless database or you may have to re-rip your collection once again sometime in the future.

I hope this was helpful. :)

Slim Devices does ripping (sorry if this was covered)

http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_ripping_faq.html

FYI - just received my Transporter today. Right out of the box, it is way better than the entry-level Squeezebox (as expected). Anyone in the NY/NJ area interested in checking it out, please give me a shout...

http://www.sonicspirits.com/Transporter.JPG

Phil's right---the loss due to MP3 compression is unrecoverable. However, you can always send your CDs to a ripping service, to save time. Ready to Play (http://www.readytoplay.com) is one based here in my neck of the woods. I haven't used them yet but I intend to.

Do you know if there is a way to preserve your mp3 tags if you do that? Pop tags are usually good enough, but classical Tags are usually way off. 80% of the time I spent ripping classical music was in entering the right Tags!

Well, the Ready to Play folks claim to be savvy about classical music, but I have no first-hand experience, so you should check with them first. Of course there are other services too. Perhaps there are some classical music forums where people have discussed experiences with ripping services?

Interesting thread...ANy idea how the sound quality compares to Escient?

I don't think that the Escient was designed with this level of sound/build quality in mind. Still, the proof is in the listening, and I've not listened to either yet. (After all, some people on this forum are raving about the sound quality of the $500 Toshiba HD-DVD player, so cost can't mean everything :))

Well, the Ready to Play folks claim to be savvy about classical music, but I have no first-hand experience, so you should check with them first. Of course there are other services too. Perhaps there are some classical music forums where people have discussed experiences with ripping services?

The ideal would be if I sent them a database of MP3s on a HD, and it came back in some other format. ;)

Removed duplcate post.

...Do you know if there is a way to preserve your mp3 tags if you do that?...

Don't know the direct answer to your question but, after much pain and suffering, I have found 'The Godfather' to be the best at editing tags. It's freeware, too.

BTW, last I looked, Freedb--a popular database that holds info on cd tracks--was in jeopardy due to internal feuding amongst the volunteers that created and maintained it. (I hope I have represented that fairly since I am only reading what's on the web site.)

The ideal would be if I sent them a database of MP3s on a HD, and it came back in some other format. ;)
Why would you want to pay to have lossy data transcoded? I can only imagine how crappy MP3 will sound on the Transporter vice the same song properly ripped into FLAC, Apple Lossless or a full bitrate WAV file.

If you are only playing MP3s, might I suggest saving your cash and using the cheaper SB2 or 3? Either of those can clearly demonstrate the difference between lossless and lossy, but they will at least save you some cash.

Swampfox is smart enough that I'm going to assume he was trying to be clever and/or funny. I will admit though I didn't quite get it.

Why would you want to pay to have lossy data transcoded? I can only imagine how crappy MP3 will sound on the Transporter vice the same song properly ripped into FLAC, Apple Lossless or a full bitrate WAV file.

If you are only playing MP3s, might I suggest saving your cash and using the cheaper SB2 or 3? Either of those can clearly demonstrate the difference between lossless and lossy, but they will at least save you some cash.

What I meant was that I would prefer to send my current database And my CDs so that the CDs could be re-ripped, but all the work I put into getting the tags the way I like was preserved. Most my CDs are already ripped at "extreme". I understand the concept of lossy data compression.

"...all the work I put into getting the tags the way I like was preserved..."

Swampfix: Do you have an efficient method for doing this? I have pretty much converted my seedee collection==a tedious affair--and the hardest thing to get right was the tags. Have you got a good way to do this?

I've been using MP3Tag (http://www.mp3tag.de/en/), quite happy with it. After I finished all of my ripping, I simply used it to tweak the tags. No issues at all, but works best with a widescreen display so you can see everything at once.

Swampfix: Do you have an efficient method for doing this? I have pretty much converted my seedee collection==a tedious affair--and the hardest thing to get right was the tags. Have you got a good way to do this?

I use J River. I fairly certain that if I put a CD in the reader, it looks at the internal DB first, and gets the tags. I beleive if I choose to rip the CD again all of the tags are preserved.

I found classical to be the worst for accurate tag data. Many, many file names were stuff like "Allegro". Well, without knowing the name of the work, it's crazy, you'd have hundreds of songs named allegro or adagio. Compounding matters is that often times Artists will record different composers on the same CD. Then there are many CD's that have the Artist as the composer. I'll give you a clue, Beethoven did not record anything.

So after taging all of CDs, I then renamed the files from the tags (usually Composer-"Song"-Conductor, or Composer-"Song"-Artist.

Thus the file "Allegro" would become "Beethoven-Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67 I. Allegro con brio-Karajan". It may be lengthy, but at least it's descriptive.

Way too much work to do again.

Ahh . . I feel better now, Down from the Soapbox.

Swampfox,
Most of my seedee collection is classical so I resonate with your description of the problems in getting the tags right.

Looking briefly at the J River website they mention that they have their own cd and track lookup database.

How does the J River database do for classical? Can you compare it with Freedb or Amazon?

I think all of the computer file playing entities (eg. MP3, AAC, etc.) didn't consider classical music very well when they designed their formats. Besides the horrible tagging, there's also the incorrect use of the term "song" for individual tracks, and no real support for gapless playback for movements which are played attaca, or when one movement goes right into the next without stopping, like the 3rd and 4th movements of Beethoven's 5th symphony, for example.

In many ways computer music file formats are still a regression from what CDs had in 1982.

--Andre

Swampfox,
Most of my seedee collection is classical so I resonate with your description of the problems in getting the tags right.

Looking briefly at the J River website they mention that they have their own cd and track lookup database.

How does the J River database do for classical? Can you compare it with Freedb or Amazon?

It mostly sucks. The DB is filled in by users. So, if you put a CD in your computer, and it doesn't find a match, a fill in screen pops up. It only includes Tag 1 info. Once you fill it in it submits it to the DB. So, if you lucky enough to have CDs filled in by an anal-retentive classical music fan, its great. One the other hand, if the 1st person to enter the CD was a lazy slacker, its' easier to start from scratch. Even if you get good tract info, you still need to enter composer and conductor.

The good thing about JRiver, is that the first place it looks is the local DB. So if I insert a CD that I already ripped, it knows it, and know the tags that I entered. I'm fairly certain that I can re-enter all my CD s in a different format and preserve the tags. Yet, life is too short to spend my life ripping and re-ripping. :(

I think all of the computer file playing entities (eg. MP3, AAC, etc.) didn't consider classical music very well when they designed their formats. Besides the horrible tagging, there's also the incorrect use of the term "song" for individual tracks, and no real support for gapless playback for movements which are played attaca, or when one movement goes right into the next without stopping, like the 3rd and 4th movements of Beethoven's 5th symphony, for example.

In many ways computer music file formats are still a regression from what CDs had in 1982.

--Andre

Agreed.

Yes, this is particularly true for Classical. However, even a significant number of CDDB and other online DBs aren't exactly 100%. I alway double check the boxes in EAC after it downloads to ensure accuracy, helps avoid time spent correcting tags later.

Most inconsistent? Genre! IMOHO of course.

Yes, this is particularly true for Classical. However, even a significant number of CDDB and other online DBs aren't exactly 100%. I alway double check the boxes in EAC after it downloads to ensure accuracy, helps avoid time spent correcting tags later.

Most inconsistent? Genre! IMOHO of course.

Genre is too arbitrary.
Is Bonny Raitt blues or rock?
Does it make sense to have Duke Ellington and Ornette Coleman in the same genre? What genre do you put Willie Nelson's blues album in?
The list goes on and on.

Most inconsistent? Genre! IMOHO of course.

Yes. By and large the Genre suggestions are ridiculous.

Genre is too arbitrary.
Is Bonny Raitt blues or rock?
Does it make sense to have Duke Ellington and Ornette Coleman in the same genre? What genre do you put Willie Nelson's blues album in?
The list goes on and on.
Precisely

Btw - don't know if you guys saw the news, but Slim Devices was just acquired by Logitech this past Thursday...

Has anyone hereabouts actually bought the Transporter? What do you think of the device? There was one fellow some posts ago...maybe he is too busy enjoying it to share this thoughts?

Copied from a post of mine on Audiocircle:
I have an unmodded Transporter and thought I should comment. My system sounds better than ever before. I am using the Transporter directly into my McCormack DNA-500 via Outlaw RCA interconnects. The amp is connected to my Salk Veracity HT3's.

I had been using a Bolder digital only modded SB3 with the Basic rev 1 PS with film caps. The modded SB3 went to my Parasound prepro for DAC/preamp function and then to the amp and speakers. It's obviously not an apples to apples comparison but the Transporter is worlds better. The detail is there but there's improved imaging and instrument separation. The bass through the treble is more realistic, balanced, and musical. My Salk HT3's sound the very best that I've heard them and they are wonderful speakers.

Now, I also think my present set up is superior to my original modded SB3 rig and this is more of a fair comparison. I originally had the Squeezebox digital out going directly to an Aberdeen modded Tact which served as DAC and preamp with much lauded room correction. I used the same amp and speakers and I was never completely satisfied. The sound was better than the Parasound set up but I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as I do the Transporter. The Transporter just sounds great. And I have to admit, the display is really cool. Thumbs up

The Slims people are having an open house this Friday and I thought I would check out the Transporter for myself. I appreciate your post; at this point I suppose I am looking for a reason not to buy...but given the few reviews I have seen, it looks like I will be driving home with one as they have all been positive.

Too bad I'm on the other side of the country. It would be cool to check out all the models in person. I bet they'll have some good deals too.

Jeff

Too bad I'm on the other side of the country. It would be cool to check out all the models in person. I bet they'll have some good deals too.

Jeff

Jeff...where are you? I'm in northern NJ and I have one...

Jeff...where are you? I'm in northern NJ and I have one...

Is Atlanta considered an NYC suburb? ;) Otherwise, I'd gladly take you up on that.

Jeff

I went down to the Slims OPEN HOUSE today and I purchased the Transporter, but alas, they are behind so, with the purchase of a transporter they are giving away a slingbox for free. Only because they are behind. Nice shop. good people. Oh, the slingbox sounds great.....can't wait for the Transporter. I was first there, still, no Transporters available. I get to go back when they call me.

I am running the slingbox through my Audio Aero Capitole's coax and it really sounds great!

I have a Transporter and am quite happy with it.

Also quite happy that my SB2 just sold on eBay for more than I originally paid for it!

I went down to the Slims OPEN HOUSE today and I purchased the Transporter, but alas, they are behind so, with the purchase of a transporter they are giving away a slingbox for free. Only because they are behind. Nice shop. good people. Oh, the slingbox sounds great.....can't wait for the Transporter. I was first there, still, no Transporters available. I get to go back when they call me.

First, I'm sure you meant Squeezebox (and not Slingbox)... :cool:

Second, the Transporter is running about a 2-3 week backlog...it's purely a matter of assembly (all the parts are available, but they are hand-assembled). Apparently, the demand for the Transporter has been far beyond their initial projections, so they are building as fast as they can.

Third, I agree they are good people...far more of the high tech mentality than the high end audio mentality in terms of customer (and dealer) support... :cool:

Yes, I did mean squeezebox. I am going to have to take notes on how I get to certain spots as I find a really good station and then, I can't find it again. Makes for more (interesting)forced browsing.

There is a whole lot more to this thing than the manual lets on. No question that it sounds much better than what did come out of my Apple G5. So much so that I just re-burned some CDs in Lossless and they now sound much better than the default available in Itunes.

If the squeezebox sounds this good on my system, I can't wait for the transporter!

My Transporter just arrived. Hey folks, this is a truly audiophile component to play what is on your computer. Also, it is good enough to discern between various streaming audio feeds. The good ones are fantastic; others are terrible. This is a really wonderful way to put all of your CDs onto your computer and get a sound as good as you should expect.

It is so good that I had to burn my CDs in Apple Lossless as what I had before was not good enough. This lets me create a folder of my favorite CDs and I can use random mix and BINGO(!) I get 250 songs in ultra high quality, total random mix.

Slim Projector digital to Audio Aero Capitole to McIntosh CR12 to twin McIntosh 2102 amps (bridged) to Kef Referance 205 speakers.

Life is good.

It is so good that I had to burn my CDs in Apple Lossless as what I had before was not good enough.


FYI - if you use Apple Lossless, you lose the ability to fast-foward or rewind within a song. I just converted my entire apple lossless music collection to WAV...all 5000+ songs...! :eek:

FYI - if you use Apple Lossless, you lose the ability to fast-foward or rewind within a song. I just converted my entire apple lossless music collection to WAV...all 5000+ songs...! :eek:
Can you forward or rewind using WMA Lossless?

I had actually never tried FF or RW. I use nothing but FLAC files. Does not seem to work. Only pauses for a second then resumes playing.

Basically, you can only use the ffwd/rwd functions with file formats that are natively decoded by the Transporter (and not on the server). If you're having problems using these functions with FLAC, go to the File Types page on Server Settings and make sure that FLAC is sent as FLAC over the network (and not decoded to WAV on the server).

WMA Lossless is not natively decoded in the Transporter, so those functions will not work with WMA Lossless...

here's further info:

FAQ on fwd/rwd for Slim Devices (http://faq.slimdevices.com/index.php?action=artikel&cat=2&id=128&artlang=en&highlight=forward)

OK, I think maybe I've got this bass ackwards. I thought that when a box IS NOT checked that my Transporter or SB3 is doing the decoding for that format, and if it IS checked the decoding is being done my my ReadyNAS (i.e. Slimserver host PC or server), correct?

http://home.earthlink.net/~lu-max/my_webs/File_format.jpg

OK, I think maybe I've got this bass ackwards. I thought that when a box IS NOT checked that my Transporter or SB3 is doing the decoding for that format, and if it IS checked the decoding is being done my my ReadyNAS (i.e. Slimserver host PC or server), correct?

http://home.earthlink.net/~lu-max/my_webs/File_format.jpg


You want FLAC/FLAC to be checked (currently you have FLAC/WAV checked, so the decoding is happening in Slimserver instead of your Transporter)...

I notice the web site now shows 3-5 days delivery for the Transporter in black so I will try one :)

Yes, it was the exact opposite of what it should be. I guess I misread the explanation above the options.

Q

the Slim Devices web site says rack ears are an available option(in the PDF brochure):

now customer service says there is no rack mount option for the Transporter

anyone rack mount their Transporter?

ouch. Where do you get the screen as posted:

FILE FORMAT CONVERSION SETUP

looks interesting..I think I have missed something, bigtime.

ouch. Where do you get the screen as posted:

FILE FORMAT CONVERSION SETUP

looks interesting..I think I have missed something, bigtime.

From the Slimserver web interface (http://localhost:9000 on the computer running Slimserver), click on "Server Settings". This will bring you to the "Basic Settings" page; at the top of the page, there is a drop-down box that is set to "Basic Settings"...click on the drop-down and select "File Types". This will bring you to the File Format Conversion Setup page. On this page, you can configure SlimServer regarding how it treats all the various audio file formats (eg. send it to the Transporter natively vs. decode the file to another format before sending)...

got the Transporter today: ordered it on line Wednesday

Gorgeous display: beautiful unit: excellent audio; excellent UI



edit: see later post

call Slim Devices and they confirm this is normal

what a shame :(

WILL THAT BE THE CASE WITH A kALEIDASCAPE OR A iMERGE BASED SERVER LIKE THE CRESTRON, REVOX TOO?

Given Kaleidescape's closed architecture meant more for movies than music, I highly doubt it will play nice with a Transporter.

Thanks Michael

Transporter DOES work with Fireball

I gave up on the software and went right to the Transporter menus: hit browse and it found and played music from the Escient Fireball :)

This is a very nice unit: I chose all black finish

now if Slim Devices will offer rack ears (it looks easy to do) I will be all set!

For some reason it will not connect via wireless but does work over ethernet connection

Mine is working perfectly via "G". It even supports 128 bit WPA-TKIP. Check the signal strength on your TP, mine was not a strong enough signal initially.

Michael; Is music ripped to the K-Scape encrypted even if it is done by the user/installer, or does it apply some form of DRM? When I get a chance I will ask Sean if KS to TP or SB has been succesful.

Can someone offer a quick comparison between the Squeezbox and the Transporter in terms of sound from the analog outputs? How about using a high-quality dac with the SB?

Can someone offer a quick comparison between the Squeezbox and the Transporter in terms of sound from the analog outputs? How about using a high-quality dac with the SB?

From the analog outputs, there is really no comparison IMHO...the Transporter is clearly superior in every respect sonically. To my ears, the Squeezebox has a sound that's on par with various CD/DVD players from the likes of Toshiba, Pioneer, etc...good enough for the average consumer or entry-level audio enthusiast on a budget, whereas the Transporter analog outs perform at a level that is clearly in the mix of what most consider to be high end (perhaps not to the folks on this ultra-high-end forum, but certainly in the conversation of those with Arcam cd players et al).

Using a high quality DAC with the SB will get you closer or beyond the Transporter's analog out, depending on which DAC you use. I've compared a SB+Lavry D10 with the Transporter, and thought it was close (but preferred the Transporter for being a little warmer-sounding), and the SB+Dodson DA-218 clearly surpasses the Transporter both in sound quality and price. Personally, I use the Transporter to drive my Dodson DA-218 for most of my listening (although admittedly using my Oracle CD1000 transport outperforms my Transporter by the thinnest of margins)...

Smokester--They gave me a squeezebox when I ordered the Transporter as the Transporter is currently back ordered. So I got a week of squeezebox before the Transporter arrived. The Transporter is much better. So much so that it will entice you to re-burn all of your CDs in lossless, wav, etc. to get the most information into that really nifty DAC in the Transporter. This DAC is a wonderful match to my computer as well as to streaming audio.

This makes my computer my primary source of music whereas before I relied on my very high-end CD player because the computer just couldn't match the quality, even using the internal DAC in my CD player.

My system: Apple G5 connected by ethernet to Transporter which feeds into my Audio Aero Capitole via S/P DIF cable(I tried AES/EBU, toslink and coax, with S/P DIF sounding best) and the Audio Aero is bi-amped into a pair of bridged McIntosh 2102 amps and the speakers are Kef Referance 205.

Thanks for the info PhilNYC and Unclejeff,
Based on what you guys say it seems like I could get a SqueezeBox and push the SPDIF out into my Wadia 861xi's DAC and get decent sound. I'm going to order one.
(My seedees are already riped to lossless FLAC so I am roaring to go.)

I have to give up on the Transporter:

as good as it sounds, it's connectivity with the Escient Fireball is very limited: basically you can only fetch one song at a time: and while the software sees it: it reports a UPN error which Slim Devices confirmed: they confirmed it does not support communications with the Fireball


also note that while the Transporter has support for iTunes, it will not play any purchased iTunes because of copyright laws

Neat product with excellent display, UI, and audio qualities but very limited connectivity for me

markrubin; interesting post. I only have a huge number of CDs in my iTunes computer. The random playlist is fantastic...it shunts out my NEC plasma 50XM5 visual. kinda scary.

Has anybody fussed over the best possible process for ripping seedees to disk? Since getting a SqueezeBox, and since the sound is so good through my Wadia DAC, I am now revisiting this in order to get the best possible sound.

I am currently ripping to FLAC using EAC with AccurRip and secure settings from Slim Devices web page: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?EACBeginners.

In reading up on this it seems, to my surprise, almost impossible to get an absolutely accurate rip every time and also to quantify the accuracy or even know whether the rip that one has made is accurate or not.

So, can anyone share their formula for the best way to do this? I would also be willing to invest in the best possible seedee ROM reader if I know which one that was.

I'm lifting my post from another forum in hopes of understanding the Transporters audio capabilities.

I have an Anthem AVM50 pre-amp and Anthem MCA 50 Amp.

Currently, I have the Transporter connected to the pre-amp using balanced XLR cables.

It appears some people recommend using digital out via AES/EBU or BNC S/PDIF.

This is where I become somewhat confused. Perhaps, my newness to this technology is causing my thinking to become flawed.

If one of the most important feature of the Transporter is it's dac, doesn't using a digital out render this feature useless since the Anthems's dac would be used instead? I thought using the analog balanced out to the pre-amp was the only way to take advantage of the Transporter's dac. Maybe there is more going on within the Transporter than I am aware?

Please advice as I want to be sure I am taking full advantage of what the Transporter offers.

On another note, It appears BNC S/PDIF is not available on my AVM 50, I've never used such a connection, but don't see anything that resembles a connection matching the Transporter, I assume both ends match? Would the AES/EBU option available to me provide an adequate alternative if BNC S/PDIF is not an option?

Thanks,

Mark

If one of the most important feature of the Transporter is it's dac, doesn't using a digital out render this feature useless since the Anthems's dac would be used instead? I thought using the analog balanced out to the pre-amp was the only way to take advantage of the Transporter's dac. Maybe there is more going on within the Transporter than I am aware?

Using the digital-out from the Transporter would basically bypass the use of the Transporter's internal DAC. To use the Transporter's internal DAC, you can use both the balanced and single-ended analog outs. Some people (myself included) use an external DAC with the Transporter because we have founded dedicated DACs which we feel sound better than the Transporter's internal DAC (in my case, I use a Dodson DA-218, which is priced 4x more than the Transporter). Whether you'd be better off using the Transporter's DAC versus the Anthem's DAC is probably one that you'd have to try yourself, but I'm guessing that you'd get better performance from the Transporter's DAC.

On another note, It appears BNC S/PDIF is not available on my AVM 50, I've never used such a connection, but don't see anything that resembles a connection matching the Transporter, I assume both ends match? Would the AES/EBU option available to me provide an adequate alternative if BNC S/PDIF is not an option?

AES/EBU is probably a better connection to use over BNC SPDIF, anyways....

I went from using the toslink cable from my squeezebox to my Audio Aero Capitole directly to using the digital from my new Transporter to my Capitole. The result using the Transporter is much superior to that which I had been getting from the squeezebox. The improvement in sound left me believing that the Transporter was doing something the squeezebox couldn't with both using the digital outputs.

If indeed Phil is correct, it looks like I might be doing some more experimenting with analog outputs.

I spent some time using the Transporter analog outlets direct to my amp and switching to digital out through my Audio Aero Capitole. Indeed, the Thransporter's DAC is really quite good and it can rival my Capitole's. About the only thing that I can notice is that for some reason the Transporter's volume control must be set at max while using digital. One should be aware of this when shifting back to analog(!). I would consider any control of volume on the digital outputs a flaw in the Transporter as a normal volume control actually should limit the feed: the lowest volume setting on analog is maximum attenuation of signal. All digital feeds should go through at 'max'; no need for volume enhancements.

In sound, the quality is much the same as I compare, with the Transporter being 'brighter', or perhaps more 'raw' while the Capitole's influence is to make it all sound 'warmer'. This is the so-called 'musicality' signature of the Capitole.

About the only thing that I can notice is that for some reason the Transporter's volumn control must be set at max while using digital. One should be aware of this when shifting back to analog(!). I would consider any control of volumn on the digital outputs a flaw in the Transporter as a normal volumn control actually should limit the feed: the lowest volumn setting on analog is maximum attenuation of signal. All digital feeds should go through at 'max'; no need for volumn enhancements.
.

There is a setting on the Transporter (and Squeezebox) that allows you to fix the digital output. It is in Player Settings -> Audio....set this to "Digital output level is fixed", and your problem is solved....

Phil, once again, I thank you! I will try it tonight.

So, I have been looking at the Transporter for a little while. Currently I have about 19k songs ripped onto my music server now. Unfortunately, it's all in mp3, which doesn't bother me for my whole house system, living room, parties, etc. But, I think I'll use this in the "listening" room. I have about 400 cd's that I would really want for the transporter. No need for all 19k songs. First, the time to re-rip would kill me. Second, don't have all the discs anymore, anyway. So, what's the best format to rip these? Flac? Based on how cheap disk space is, I could do it for far less that what I could get on ebay for these CD's.

Thanks

So, what's the best format to rip these? Flac? Based on how cheap disk space is, I could do it for far less that what I could get on ebay for these CD's.

Thanks

I would definitely recommend FLAC. Since I'm running Slimserver on my Mac and using iTunes to manage my music, I can't use FLAC. Originally had all my stuff ripped to Apple Lossless...got great sound, but because of the way the Transporter is designed, you can't fast fwd/rwd within a song using Apple Lossess. So I converted everything to WAV files...and unfortunately, WAV files have very poor file tagging support, so with this format, I lost a lot of my song information used for sorting/navigation (so for example, some of my compilation CDs are now broken up among different artist listings instead of being in one consolidated album list).

The Transporter supports native FLAC decoding, so you can fast fwd/rwd within a song, and also has great tagging support, so you can arrange your music very easily.

I am currently ripping to FLAC using EAC with AccurRip and secure settings from Slim Devices web page: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?EACBeginners.

In reading up on this it seems, to my surprise, almost impossible to get an absolutely accurate rip every time and also to quantify the accuracy or even know whether the rip that one has made is accurate or not.EAC + FLAC is (IMO) the best option for accuracy and tagging support. I previously had my collection ripped to mp3 but am re-ripping the discs to FLAC (yes, a lot of work). I recommend getting a couple of cheap CD drives and stacking them up in your machine (you can run multiple instances of EAC). Things go a lot faster if you're ripping 4-5 at a time.

With the Transporter I don't even bother to listen anything on my computer that is MP3, or anything else shy of Apple lossless. The Transporter is much too revealing of the shortcomings.

one note on high end audio... at CES I ran into Music Giant which is selling downloads of high quality music using WMA lossless codec. Doesn't really help me to buy music off the net for playback via my DCS DAC though.

I'm not sure I understand... with a Transporter you can drive the DCS DAC in master clocking mode...

one note on high end audio... at CES I ran into Music Giant which is selling downloads of high quality music using WMA lossless codec. Doesn't really help me to buy music off the net for playback via my DCS DAC though.
Music Giant's DRM is even worse than iTunes. Not at all portable and only plays on the computer you download it on. Can't move songs to a DAP or server (I use an Infrant NV) and have it play from there. I wrote about it in a thread last year & at that time there library was not very big.

Here is a snipet from their "terms fo service":
"... If you have registered with us, we collect information about what music files you possess on the PC you use to sign up with our service and any other PC's networked to that PC. We also collect information regarding where you obtained that music. We may collect information concerning licenses to access music obtained from third party providers. We collect information concerning the bit rate of the encode of music files contained on your PC and/or any PC connected to that PC."

Also from their website:

"Our interface can tell you how many tracks you need to complete your collection and how much money it will cost you. The neat part is that you have the ability to complete your collection without having to re-buy what you already own—and anything that might have been, let's say, 'acquired' through the Internet at no charge, you have the ability to come clean here. If you click the 'Go' button, it's going to complete your collection in high fidelity and purchase any music that you may have been—we'll just say that you're 'borrowing' it.

I would not touch them with a ten foot pole. Give their site a good read before signing up, even more scary stuff in the trems of service.

jetlag, thx for the detail.

MG, I mean to say that the DCS DAC can't understand WMA codecs... it only understands redbook audio or upsampled redbook. If the networked transport streams in WMA from the server, what would it put out on the spdif or coax.... would it decode the WMA and put out redbook? I suppose that makes sense... so perhaps this would be, except for jetlags comments, a good solution for high end networked audio content.

Well, Jetlag's comments are definitely worth heeding. It seems easier, albeit perhaps a bit more expensive, to just buy the discs and send them to a good ripping service.

But from a technical feasibility standpoint, you just need a network player that can do the decoding and send the results to your DAC---such as a transporter. Or, you can use an HTPC with a professional audio card with a master clock input. M-Audio makes one I believe.

This is my mini-Transporter review from the SlimDevices forum, updated to today:
I thought I'd throw my $.02 in here. I have just installed the TP this week in my system. I am looking to replace the redbook capability of my modded tubed Modwright Denon 3910 (likely keep it for hirez, though) with something that gives me all the obvious advantages of hd-based playback (convenience, clutter-reduction, etc.). However, it is imperative that this step is a step forward, sonically. I am eval'ing the TP becaue I know that, in my system, the accompanying SB3 stock will not cut it in the sonically-equivalent department, but might be a candidate for Boulder or RedWine's soldering gun and upgraded PS's if the TP doesn't come through for me.

My system is very highly resolving, but with a tendency to get to strident if I don't watch out. My Krell KSA-100 is the original (read: highly-regarded, not the later cold, analytical ones) version of that Class A beast and is, IMO, difficult to fault in some favorite areas (iron-gripped bass control, dynamics, quietness). But it's tendency toward midrange ice requires me to feed it vacuum tubes. My front end is a tubed universal and analog vinyl fed into a Modwright tubed SWL 9.0 SE linestage. As an aside, when I recently eval'd the vaunted Moscode 401HR it's warmth and midrange bloom was too much for my front-end, so I'm happy with the balance right now. My main speakers are RSA's new Sason mega-monitors, and the lowest registers are augmented by a Paradigm Servo 15 room EQ'd by the Velodyne SMS-1. The Sason's are electron microscopes into the soundstage, and I like that. Enter the TP. I'm using FLAC album sized files with cue sheets, and sending FLAC across the wireless network. No dropouts yet, although I'm completely open to going wired if needed.

To paraphrase the latest 6 Moons review about computer audio, the insertion of the TP was one of remarkable clarity, unsurpassed levels of information, powerful bass, reference level dynamic performance and excellent transparency. This TP does very many things very very well!! Most of this is likely due to the superiority of the AKM dacs and the supposed superiority of the lower jitter due to hard-disc playback. The main criticism I have is there is some major stridency in the upper midrange and treble, and that on lesser recordings it's quite problematic. I'm not sure how much of this will "break-out" of the system as it breaks-in (I am a firm believer in break-in of components, although I've read very little discussion about the evolution of the TP break-in process here or anywhere). My modded 3910 is no slouch, and to compare it's near-SOTA vacuum-based midrange buttery smoothness (even though it's not a tube rec'd power supply yet) to the TP is looking/listening in only one aspect of the solution...but an important one. Update: after about two weeks of listening and constant burn-in, it still just doesn;t sound musical. it's way too analytical and bereft of midrange weight and necessary air and bloom. It's great food without the right spices.

I am going to do a few things over the next few weeks (during my 30 day eval period). I am going to let the TP break-in, I am going to do more a/b with the Modwright, and I'm also going to set up my to-be-sold ATC active 150's and run balanced outs from the TP direct into the 150's (ala CliveB at Slim forum)

Here are my long-term options:
a) stock TP once it breaks-in and shows me good midrange bloom (update: it just isn't getting any warmer; it's not really musical in my system and is going back to Slim Devices within the 30 day trial)
b) Anthony modded TP to "install" sonics such as better midrange
c) mod the SB3 digitally (with good linear PS) and go outboard DAC, such as APLHiFi's upcoming tubed NWO DAC (see update beow)
d) stay computer-based but go the USB/I2S route with tube-based DACs such as Wavelength, etc.
e) stay disc-based and get Dans's new tubed-rectified PS for the 3910. This is least favorite in that I'm hooked on the convenience and power of computer-based audio.

In any regard I am going to go with Dan''s new LS36.5 linestage which is tube-rectified and slightly warmer than his current linestage. I'll ping back in when things change.

Update: I bought a slightly used RedWineAudio modded SB3 this weekend and expect it Tues or so. I'll post my comparisons to the stock Transporter when I can. Tonight I'll see what a balanced TP -> active ATC 150's pure-and-simple system (no addtl pre or amps) sounds like (the ATC's are behemoths and will take some time to set up again). I'm not exactly sure what I'll do if I like the setup cuz I'm very satisfied with the sound of my Sason's. Oh well, it's all about synergy, right?

ted_b
c) mod the SB3 digitally (with good linear PS) and go outboard DAC, such as APLHiFi's upcoming tubed NWO DAC (see update beow)

Thank you for the informative review. I am using a stock SB3 through Toslink to a Wadia DAC. I have not experimented with alternative configurations (exept for the SB3 analog outs which are inadequate) but I am getting very good sound...possibly better using the SB3 than with the Wadia transport.

I plan to upgrade to a linear supply on the SB3 probably with the Welbourne Labs SB power supply.

I think that your option c) with FLAC is by far the best. You will be able to get (near-)bit-perfect digital images from your server accurately clocked into the DAC of your choice. The DAC is the final element in this chain and it really is important that it synergize with the rest of your system. Having the flexibility of choice in this last element is very important as I believe you are finding out by experience.

You are correct in that the Transporter is highly analytical. This does not bother me. However, since I have the Audio Aero CApitole which is known for the warmer musical touch that you are after, I do run the feed from the Transporter through the AA's DAC. This allows me to bi-amp from the Transporter, using separate volume controls into another room using the Transporter's analog outputs that feed a less high-end system that otherwise meet the standards of my main system. I am running everything with wires; no wireless interphases.

Well, Jetlag's comments are definitely worth heeding. It seems easier, albeit perhaps a bit more expensive, to just buy the discs and send them to a good ripping service.

I looked at Music Giant, too, and there is no way I would subscribe to this. First, the music I am interested in is $15/album at MG. I already purchased much of it at less than $10/album (e.g. the reissued RCA classical hybrids) so it's too expensive. They also don't make it clear which mastering of an album they are selling and it can make a difference.

Secondly, I (fairly) use my music on four different sources--Squeezebox, audiophile portable (OGG, 300 kbps), gym portable (MP3, 128 kbps), and round-the-world travel player (MP3, 192 kbps) (obsessive, I know). Each of these players requires different levels of compression and my understanding is that MG's DRM would not allow me to make these transfers since it requires Windoze Media Player. (I am not sure that it is even possible to play directly through SqueezeBox although apparently there is software that can strip out the DRM...Does anybody know this for sure?...Surely a violation of their EULA in any event).

Thirdly, I customise my Tags so that I can find the music easily given the limited search capabilities of these digital players. This is where much of my time is spent in getting an album into my archive and so getting them already ripped is not so much a saving.

Fourthly, the intrusiveness of their inventory system is beyond what I am willing to tolerate in violation of privacy and of potential compromise to the security of my computer and network (Don't know much about this. Just paranoid).

Too bad...It could be a convenient source for filling in a library.

You are correct in that the Transporter is highly analytical. This does not bother me. However, since I have the Audio Aero CApitole which is known for the warmer musical touch that you are after, I do run the feed from the Transporter through the AA's DAC. This allows me to bi-amp from the Transporter, using separate volume controls into another room using the Transporter's analog outputs that feed a less high-end system that otherwise meet the standards of my main system. I am running everything with wires; no wireless interphases.

Thanks. Yeah, as you and smokester point out, the DAC (and it's ever important analog stage after the conversion) is the varaible I plan on using to get proper synergy back into my Slim Devices-driven signal path. I'm finding more and more that as one's system becomes increasingly resolving, it becomes equally more important to read and understand reviews that are done in an environment similar to ones own. It's kinda like expensive clothes (or any clothes for that matter, but I am in the ultra hi-end forum after all); you may look great in an Armani suit, but for me it looks too (fill in blank). Doesn't mean Armani is not a good label. The variables involved in highly resolving systems make in-home demos absolutely necessary. Conversely, if a review doesn't like the warmth or bloominess of a component, it could simply be that their system interactions are warm to begin with....I need to read with a different perspective from now on.

The Transporter is too expensive for me to justify as a digital-only transport, however. Anxious to hear the modded Sb3. Just realized USPS is off today. :(

Has anyone seen that Linn is selling Master Tape quality downloads here? Anyone tried them?

http://www.linnrecords.com/artists-classical.aspx

Has anyone seen that Linn is selling Master Tape quality downloads here? Anyone tried them?

http://www.linnrecords.com/artists-classical.aspx

Interesting stuff. I'm trying to understand what kind of WMA lossless file would give Linn ( who is no slouch; usually knows what it's talking about) the right to say it's quality is identical to the SACD. Is it WMA 24/192, if such an animal exists? It certainly is a large file; the compressed WMA lossless of the Vivaldi cantatas is still 1.3gig.

I'm trying to understand what kind of WMA lossless file...

From their web site:

"The quality is identical to that of an SACD. The format will be dependent on the actual recording method we used originally. No DSD files are offered as it is not possible to play them back on a PC so an equivalent PCM format is offered:

I am downloading some as we speak but it is taking a while. :)

Do let us know. I think it's safe to say that a clean 24/176.4kHz conversion of DSD would be "effectively" lossless. Who knows, maybe the PCM master they drew from comes before DSD conversion in their SACD chain.

The Lizt Piano Grand Etudes (track 4) was downloaded as a Studio Master (WMA lossless). It's properties info says it is a 24/88 WMA 9.1 lossless 2 channel, VBR 100 quality, and runs at 2.27mps.

I can't exactly say 24/88 is SACD quality, but there are a few DVD-Audio discs that pawn themselves as hi-rez and only sport a 24/48 resolution for their stereo mix. It sounds great so far, on pc speakers, but this exercise was more about what kind of resolution was available. This 4:45 track took 80gig of hd space.

ted_b,

The Lizt Piano Grand Etudes (track 4) was downloaded as a Studio Master (WMA lossless).

H did it sound? Also, how does one get the Squeezebox v3 to play play this? The other "seedee quality" downloads I got from the Linn site had to be converted to FLAC first since Slimserver, etc does not support lossless WMA.

How does one get "Studio Masters" to play (at full resolution)?

Smokester,
I don't know the sound quality except through WMP and my pc speakers right now (sounds fine, but that means nothing). I only downloaded it (a big $2.75 investment) to find out the resolution. Although WMA files are supported formats in Slimserver 6.5.x I'm not sure it can support this type (i.e lossless 24/88). Also, a weird thing happened during download. I lost the internet connection for a moment, and when I restarted it downloaded an 80 gig ASPX file. WMP read it ok, but it doesn't present itself to other players as a WMA file!!! I tried to re-downlaod but Linn doesn't allow it. I may email them.

Ted

Ted,
I had a glitch in my ordering process with Liin (ordered a physical seedee by mistake). I emailed them and they quickly refunded the money. Seems like a class act all around.

ted_b, since the WMA files that Linn sells do not have DRM, they can be converted without loss to another format that is compatible with your player. Linn recommends some software on their web site that can do those kinds of conversions, though I don't know if that software works with their 24-bit files.

Slimserver plays it fine on the Transporter and Squeezebox3, but only when I told Slimserver to convert WMA -> FLAC or WAV (not WMA built in). The players show it as a WMA file, playing at 22.7khz with a bitrate of a high 2283kbps VBR, but I'm not so sure that's not info coming off the tag, not what the network is seeing. I'll eval the sound quality tonight, while I a/b the TP and the modded SB3. Last night's initial foray into hearing the RWA SB3 "off the grid" (battery power) was very very promising. Black backgrounds, a frickin boatload of bass information (much more than the TP) and a wonderful musicality. Evrr so slightly rolled off at the top.

I just downloaded an entire album; Barb Jungr - Walking in the Sun;
I'm on Mac iTunes; Had no problem playing the file in QT Pro using the flip4mac wma plug-in; and then converting to AIFF which imported to iTunes Apple Lossless; All worked as advertised;

On Meridian dsp system - sounds as good as any other average master reference file I have... Significantly better than CD of course...
After that, it's studio recording dependent and hard to tell since I've never heard this particular album before...

good album too...!

ken

hi everyone, just joined the thread and thought i could get some opinions and questions answered. first of all, i just bought an olive music server that i use with a dedicated dac. unfortunately, the ui is clumsy... constant freezing, repeat function doesn't work properly, all in all, its not for me. in any case, i am interested in either the SB3 or the TP. note that i want it only to be a transport. so, (i am always up for mods),
1.) which would you all recommend me get (best transport only)?
2.) tell me if this would work. i would like to get a NAS, a SB3/TP and a nokia tablet pc/pda. thats it, NO computer in the house. can it be done, since the pda will have interent connectivity (and sort of act like a pc)?
3.) do i need a wireless router (i have a hardwire one right now that distributes to all rooms of my house). does the SB3/TP act as the central point or does the PDA do this?

any help is appreciated. thanks.

1.) which would you all recommend me get (best transport only)?

The Transporter is a better transport than the stock SB3. If you are into mods, there are companies that offer mods to the SB3 that can get it pretty close (and in some cases better) to the Transporter for what would amount to be a couple hundred dollars less.

2.) tell me if this would work. i would like to get a NAS, a SB3/TP and a nokia tablet pc/pda. thats it, NO computer in the house. can it be done, since the pda will have interent connectivity (and sort of act like a pc)?


Yes, this should work. In fact, Slimserver has a "Nokia 770" interface available. The only question is how would you get your music onto the NAS? You would still need a computer to rip your music to the hard drive...if your tablet PC/pda could handle that, then you're set.

3.) do i need a wireless router (i have a hardwire one right now that distributes to all rooms of my house). does the SB3/TP act as the central point or does the PDA do this?


You do not need a wireless router if you have ethernet available. Not sure what you mean by "central point", but Slimserver would run on your NAS and would be accessible by any Slim Devices product (SB or TP) in your house. You could control everything from the Nokia (even multiple room SD setups). Otherwise, your SB3/TP can be controlled via the included remote control very easily.

sweet. thanks a lot phil, you always seem to be able to answer my questions. yes, i have a laptop that i will use to rip the music, but since i leave it at work most of the time, that is why i want the system to not rely on a computer (sooi don't have to bring it home every night). i think im going to bite the bullet and go this route. the olive is not my cup of tea, too much freezing irritates me, and the ui is not as good as i had hoped. so in relation to the transport, what would you suggest is the best "money well spent"? go with a stock TP for digital out (i can use aes connection which is good, but is it true balanced design) or i can get a fully modded SB3 (which i assume the digital output and ps will be superior???, but can only use spdif (rca). what would you do in my case phil?

I'm not sure that Slimserver will run off the Nokia Tablet. What operating system does it use?

sweet. thanks a lot phil, you always seem to be able to answer my questions. yes, i have a laptop that i will use to rip the music, but since i leave it at work most of the time, that is why i want the system to not rely on a computer (sooi don't have to bring it home every night). i think im going to bite the bullet and go this route. the olive is not my cup of tea, too much freezing irritates me, and the ui is not as good as i had hoped. so in relation to the transport, what would you suggest is the best "money well spent"? go with a stock TP for digital out (i can use aes connection which is good, but is it true balanced design) or i can get a fully modded SB3 (which i assume the digital output and ps will be superior???, but can only use spdif (rca). what would you do in my case phil?
I think a lot of what you pay for with the Transporter is the DACs. I recommend the SB3 with digital only Modification. This should definitely cost less than half of what the Transporter costs.

Anthony...There are a few good SB3 modders with great reputations, and I've been a customer of modding companies in the past. I've heard the Boulder mods to the SB3, and I think it gets you close enough to the Transporter's performance that the few hundred bucks saved is probably worth going that route. However, I've personally gotten to a point that I generally prefer the non-modding route, so I am using the Transporter in my main rig.

Jermmd...he can run SlimServer on the NAS (not the tablet PC). Slim Devices has a relationship with Infrant and comes bundled on some versions of ReadyNAS...

I cannot see the justification for using the TP for digital only. Slim Devices spent a lot of time and $$ in the DAC and analog sections, in the balanced outs, etc. My RWA-SB3 outperforms, in my system, the TP, in analog mode. I'd buy an SB3 and then any one of the linear PS's up to the grandaddy Ultimate PS II. You'd still have nearly $1k left to invest in a DAC or whatever. What DAC are you using currently that you feel confident you only need a digital transport?

Finally, I'm not sure where you'd configure the web interface (all the album art, etc) if you don't have a pc (I ask this truly out of ignorance; maybe the programming, art tagging, etc is easily done from the tablet)? And if you aren't going to develop a nice web gui then why get a Nokia tablet if you' re just gonna use the standard web interface/skin; just use their remote.

In any case. Good luck. You'll be happy with Slim Devices.

I And if you aren't going to develop a nice web gui then why get a Nokia tablet if you' re just gonna use the standard web interface/skin.

He can use the Nokia 770 skin...

to answer your question ted, i have a laptop that i do all my "stuff" on, but since i usually leave it at work, i want something at home that will enable me to play the music without bringing home my computer. i realize that infrant nas has the slim sooftware built into it, but i was wondering if anyone knows if i can actually use the nokia or any pda/tablet pc to run the software. this way, if i buy a cheaper nas device that doesn't have the slim software built it, it would still work. does anyone know if this is possible?

to answer your question ted, i have a laptop that i do all my "stuff" on, but since i usually leave it at work, i want something at home that will enable me to play the music without bringing home my computer. i realize that infrant nas has the slim sooftware built into it, but i was wondering if anyone knows if i can actually use the nokia or any pda/tablet pc to run the software. this way, if i buy a cheaper nas device that doesn't have the slim software built it, it would still work. does anyone know if this is possible?

As long as the tablet was running one of the supported OS (Windows, MacOS, Linux, etc), and you could fix the IP address of the tablet, I don't see why not. The only question is whether or not your music library must be attached directly to the tablet or not...if you can specify a network location for your music library, it should be fine (slimserver allows you to configure a location for your music, but I don't know if you can enter a network location rather than a hard drive attached to the computer running slimserver).

I'll find out...

He can use the Nokia 770 skin...

I know, that's why I said he'd use the skin in my post. My point wasn't what skin he'd use, but was why go to the trouble of using an expensive remote device if you have no glitz and customizations (like album art, liner notes, etc.) but a simple Nokia 770 skin (which in its raw state does little more than the standard remote control). Later posts establish that he will use a laptop to do the programming, and would like to use the Nokia as his music server. I'd think the tablet would be a peformance bottleneck for the system, but I really don't know. A cheap old pc would do the trick.

Regarding specifying a network address for your music library with Slimserver, here's the answer I found on the SlimDevices website:

"If you are running on Windows NT, 2000 or XP, SlimServer is running as Windows service. Windows services do not have permission to use networked drives by default. The only way that can work is if you set the service to have the capability to interact with the desktop, which can sometimes cause some undesirable behavior, and is known to not work properly in many cases.

Therefore it's recommended to use UNC-style path to specify your music library in the Server Settings page. Instead of X:\path for a mounted volume, use \\SERVER\path\ style (e.g. \\192.168.1.105\Files\Music\) addressing. This may work for some servers where direct volume letter mapping does not. You may have to use the IP address of the machine sharing the network drive, instead of using the name of it, though. Please note that in order for this to work, the network share must not require authentication (a username or password)."

sweet. thanks a lot phil, you always seem to be able to answer my questions. yes, i have a laptop that i will use to rip the music, but since i leave it at work most of the time, that is why i want the system to not rely on a computer (sooi don't have to bring it home every night). i think im going to bite the bullet and go this route. the olive is not my cup of tea, too much freezing irritates me, and the ui is not as good as i had hoped. so in relation to the transport, what would you suggest is the best "money well spent"? go with a stock TP for digital out (i can use aes connection which is good, but is it true balanced design) or i can get a fully modded SB3 (which i assume the digital output and ps will be superior???, but can only use spdif (rca). what would you do in my case phil?

Anthony,

I just wanted to offer an alternate opinion. Go with the stock Transporter, which offers features that cannot be added to a modded SB3.

The Transporter has both AES/EBU balanced digital outputs and a Word Clock Input. When you connect it to a High End outboard DAC, you will want to utilize both AES/EBU and re-clock it from your DAC's master clock. This will minimize jitter.

For now, you can use the Transporter's built in DAC's and analog outputs, which are already good quality. Later, when you purchase a high end DAC, by owning the Transporter you are already future proofed.

yeah, i thought about it that way also. "it's good to have", but ultimately i truly believe that the ps is the most important part in any component, and having an sb3 modded with separate ps will offer the best signal delivery from that particular unit. i could always mod the transporters ps, but thats more money and if in the end the reult is the same, well.....

so the main advantage i see of the transporter is that yes, it has aes which i can use, as well as rca if i ever need it in the future. the re-clock i have no idea how to make use of it, if any one could clarify this for me that would be great. as i understand it, only a select few dacs have this feature (emm, dcs, etc). so if im not using a dac that takes advantage of the re-clock is it useless for me?

also, is the aes digital output on the tp a true balanced design with 110 ohm impedance?

Anthony...the AES/EBU output on the Transporter is listed on their spec sheet as being 110ohms; whether it really measures that way, I have no idea.

In terms of the word clock, you can use dedicated master clock devices such as the Apogee Big Ben without a specific DAC; whether that reaps the entire benefit of a master/slave clock architecture, there are others on this forum that could answer this question better than I could...

understood. i guess its a nice feature to have although at the time being i won't need it. in any case, simply having the aes digital out may be the ticket for me... i may eventually opt for a ps mod for even better transport performance. in any case, if i were to use a pda or the nokia, how does the user interface look like? is it similar to the olive in any way (eg. albums, artists, playlists, etc.) is this how it shows up?

I honestly don't think there would be much benefit to using an external clock if you go with the Transporter's own DAC. My understanding is that they worked pretty hard to get a good clock in the Transporter.

The real reason to use an external clock is for pairing the Transporter to an external DAC. Using an external clock eliminates jitter caused by the S/PDIF clock recovery mechanism in the DAC.

In fact, if anyone out there mods Squeezboxes with an external clock input, I'd say you're pretty much there paired up with your favorite DAC. Granted, I'm quite the objectivist, but I don't think there'd even be a good reason to go with a power supply upgrade if you could just get the external clock input by itself.

Michael,
The OP stated right up front that he is NOT gonna use the TP's analog outs (i.e it's DACs). That's what all the last twenty or so posts have been about. Yes, it would be silly to use the word clock inout if using the TP dac; that's not what it's for.

Anthony,
the Nokia 770 skin is simply a reformatted webpage for the Slimserver web interface that presents it nicely in the Nokia 770 landscape dimensions. It has no inherent album art; you need to go get that stuff. That's why I've been asking what you'll use to do that "programming" if you don;t have a pc. Your answer: your laptop.

Here's a sample:
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/plugin/attachments/SlimserverAndNokia770/home.png

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood PhilNYC's post. I did know the OP was going to use an external DAC but I assumed the thread had deviated far from him at this point :)

okay ted, so if i use my laptop to do all the tagging and webart for each album (and assuming i will go with the nokia) will it still show each album art on it or will it still be as basic as the pic you showed me (i understand that the nokia simply uses the slim web interface)? if that is the case, what would be a better option to make it more aesthetically pleasing?

upon further research, i assume i could do without an infrant readynas (price $$$) and go with a simple hdd like this.

eBay item number: 130067693252

is it possible to use this without the aid of internet? i would simply plug it into the back of the TP and access the ui through the ip address using a pda/nokia. would this work?

okay ted, so if i use my laptop to do all the tagging and webart for each album (and assuming i will go with the nokia) will it still show each album art on it or will it still be as basic as the pic you showed me (i understand that the nokia simply uses the slim web interface)? if that is the case, what would be a better option to make it more aesthetically pleasing?

Here's the search by album art screen:
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/plugin/attachments/SlimserverAndNokia770/browse_artwork.png


Here's an example of a now playing page:
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/plugin/attachments/SlimserverAndNokia770/nowplaying.png

sweet thanks, that looks awesome. perhaps i should opt for a touchscreen instead with a bigger display. most pda's are 3.5" with the nokia being an exception at 4". i can't seem to find one that is bigger and offers the wireless connection. hmm, any other ideas of what to use?

sweet thanks, that looks awesome. perhaps i should opt for a touchscreen instead with a bigger display. most pda's are 3.5" with the nokia being an exception at 4". i can't seem to find one that is bigger and offers the wireless connection. hmm, any other ideas of what to use?

A cheap laptop? To me the Nokia will be big enough, I think. Dunno if a Sony PSP is larger, but folks use it too.

So, I went to the Linn Records download site and downloaded both the seedee quality files and the "Studio Masters" version of Liszt's Sonata in B minor and Etudes by George-Emmanuel Lazaridis (pianist). The studio master is 24 bit, 88 kHz.

Finally got to listen to them this morning. The seedee is very good. The "Studio Master" is fantastic. I blind-tested my wife and she could distinguish between the seedee-quality file and Studio Master every time.

This is a superb album with a great interpretation of exciting piano music, great performance, great recording, great sound and available in fabulous high-resolution, non-DRM'd digital files.

They should make more like this (and they do, but not enough).

btw - I emailed SlimDevices regarding the below issue from their online help. Here's what they responded with:

"This is correct for past versions. The current version is a service by default, but it can run in userland which gets by the network drive issue. To do this simply right click the slimtray icon in the bottom right corner and select "Automatically run at login". "


Regarding specifying a network address for your music library with Slimserver, here's the answer I found on the SlimDevices website:

"If you are running on Windows NT, 2000 or XP, SlimServer is running as Windows service. Windows services do not have permission to use networked drives by default. The only way that can work is if you set the service to have the capability to interact with the desktop, which can sometimes cause some undesirable behavior, and is known to not work properly in many cases.

Therefore it's recommended to use UNC-style path to specify your music library in the Server Settings page. Instead of X:\path for a mounted volume, use \\SERVER\path\ style (e.g. \\192.168.1.105\Files\Music\) addressing. This may work for some servers where direct volume letter mapping does not. You may have to use the IP address of the machine sharing the network drive, instead of using the name of it, though. Please note that in order for this to work, the network share must not require authentication (a username or password)."

Is there a Power Buy planned for the Transporter?
Thanks

btw - I emailed SlimDevices regarding the below issue from their online help. Here's what they responded with:

"This is correct for past versions. The current version is a service by default, but it can run in userland which gets by the network drive issue. To do this simply right click the slimtray icon in the bottom right corner and select "Automatically run at login". "

i am going to try this out in the next little while. i am looking at this particular ebay item (#130067693252). it is a simple hdd that uses ethernet connection. i assume that i could simply plug it directly into the TP, ans avoid using the internet. since the readynas is a hair expensive (and i really don't care for raid), do you think phil that this will work with the above instructions you provided. so, i would load the slim software on my nokia and setup everything there with this little hdd. what do you think, is this possible?

i am going to try this out in the next little while. i am looking at this particular ebay item (#130067693252). it is a simple hdd that uses ethernet connection. i assume that i could simply plug it directly into the TP, ans avoid using the internet. since the readynas is a hair expensive (and i really don't care for raid), do you think phil that this will work with the above instructions you provided. so, i would load the slim software on my nokia and setup everything there with this little hdd. what do you think, is this possible?

I'm not sure that will work, because Slimserver needs to access the drive, and if you're running Slimserver on the Nokia, I'm not sure how it would access a drive physically attached to the TP.

I think you'd be able to attach this HDD to your network router, then have Slimserver access it via the above feedback from SlimDevices. You're using the wireless network, but not the Internet...

ahhh, understood. yes, i guess plugging it into the router would make more sense. cool, i think im gonna bite the bullet on the TP. all thats left now is ripping. (sigh)

Question: Does the Transporter need to be told to digitally out put something better than 44.1? I have not yet loaded some of my Chesky Albums that were recorded at a higher rate into my computer to try this. Is there a setting i am missing?

Question: Does the Transporter need to be told to digitally out put something better than 44.1? I have not yet loaded some of my Chesky Albums that were recorded at a higher rate into my computer to try this. Is there a setting i am missing?

According to the documentation, the Transporter will support a 24/96 recording. I don't believe there's anything you need to set; presumably, you'd be storing this as a WAV file, right?

I am using Apple Losless. I have some 24/96 recordings. I will try them tonight.

any updates?

I just got my Transporter serviced at slimdevices and I got same-day service. My power supply failed on the unit due to a screw penetrating at the wrong spot and I contacted slimdevices on Thursday and I dropped it off on Friday. It was fixed and ready for pick-up that afternoon. They were able to fix it and still had a chance to monitor its performance for a couple of hours before I came for it.

All service under full warranty.

it is my understanding that the transporter can be used as a pre as it contains volume control. my question is this: if im using the unit primarily connected to my preamp and dac, and also connect a separate amp to it for say, my inwalls that are around the house for background music, can i use both connections on the unit no problem without doing any settings change everytime or have to switch things around every time i listen to one or the other?

it is my understanding that the transporter can be used as a pre as it contains volume control. my question is this: if im using the unit primarily connected to my preamp and dac, and also connect a separate amp to it for say, my inwalls that are around the house for background music, can i use both connections on the unit no problem without doing any settings change everytime or have to switch things around every time i listen to one or the other?

The only issue I can think of is regarding volume control. If you plug the TP directly to an amp, then you'll be using the built-in volume control, and I don't think there's a way to dedicate the volume control to only one of the analog outputs...so your other system (with the preamp) will be receiving a signal that varies as you control the volume instead of a fixed max-volume signal.

In my setup, I've got the TP hooked into my main system via digital-out (into my DAC), and use the analog outs to hook into my headphone amp. I keep the TP outputing fixed/max volume, then use the volume controls on my respective preamp/headphone amp....

okay, so to get the fixed-max volume do you simply set the volume manually to max or is there a specific setting for this?

also, if i were to plug my dvd player into the tp and use its internal dacs, i assume that i would have to bypass my pre and use the tp as the pre, and use its volume control. is this correct?

I have to give up on the Transporter:

also note that while the Transporter has support for iTunes, it will not play any purchased iTunes because of copyright laws



There's an easy and perfectly legal fix for that. Just burn your iTMS tracks on a CD and then rip them, for example, in FLAC. It won't sound too good, because iTMS tracks are only in 128 kbps, but at least you'll be able to play them on your Transporter.

okay, so to get the fixed-max volume do you simply set the volume manually to max or is there a specific setting for this?

There is a setting in the Slimserver software for setting volume to "fixed"

also, if i were to plug my dvd player into the tp and use its internal dacs, i assume that i would have to bypass my pre and use the tp as the pre, and use its volume control. is this correct?

No. Using the TP's internal DAC would be exactly like using a stand-alone DAC. You would set the TP's source to "SPDIF" (instead of "Network"), and it then uses your DVD as the sound source instead of Slimserver....then you could use your pre as the volume control.

Of course, you could do it the way you described, but that's not how you'd have to do it...

awesome, thanks foe thw info phil. this thing looks better and better. one final question (sorry, they just pop into my head from time to time). is there any sort of bass management on the tp? if using a dac for a dvd player, i assume there is no bm?

I would appreciate if someone can help me locate a module to integrate the Transporter in Crestron TP1700c Panel.
Thanks

There's an easy and perfectly legal fix for that.I wouldn't exactly call that easy; it's kind of a pain in the ass, actually. But it does work, and as a byproduct you have an optical backup for your music. Indeed it would be good practice to burn a RedBook CD with a separate data session containing the original AAC files.

And of course, there are not-so-legal fixes as well. (Actually, I believe that personal use of a DRM stripper for the purposes of insuring interoperability is entirely within the bounds of DMCA, but I am not a lawyer.)

one final question (sorry, they just pop into my head from time to time). is there any sort of bass management on the tp? if using a dac for a dvd player, i assume there is no bm?

As far as I know, there is no bm on the TP.

I would appreciate if someone can help me locate a module to integrate the Transporter in Crestron TP1700c Panel.
Thanks

I don't have any experience with Crestron...does this help?

http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?PluginRemoteControls

I use the TP's digital output pre-set at max to an external DAC in my living room and I then can use the TP's analog output with volumn control to another room. Works really great. This toy is so nice that I am not watching movies near as much as I used to.

Anyone tried using the Transporter to get 'late-night' streaming audio a bit earlier?

I live on the West Coast and starting at about 8PM I check out selected East Coast stations that have gone into late-night mode. The three-hours helps. Few commercials, no talk and great music. Mid-day I am searching London late-night and there is some good stuff coming from Paris, too.

I use the TP's digital output pre-set at max to an external DAC in my living room and I then can use the TP's analog output with volumn control to another room. Works really great. This toy is so nice that I am not watching movies near as much as I used to.


thats exactly what im planning on doing. glad it works for you, some reassurnace is always good.

...and someday I will find a less voluminous way to spell volume

it is my understanding that the tp outputs 24/96 but the sb only 44.1? is that correct? also, does that apply only when using the analog outs not digital out?

Here is a link to the Transporter User Guide (PDF) (http://www.slimdevices.com/documentation/Transporter-Owners-Guide.pdf), I believe it will contain the information that you are looking for. I read it cover to cover prior to ordering mine, but of course I do this for just about everything that I buy...

okay so i confirmed that the tp has a max sample rate of 24/96, whereas the sb has a 24/48. is this only the case when using the units internal dacs or does it apply when using the digital out (in my case into an external dac)?

okay so i confirmed that the tp has a max sample rate of 24/96, whereas the sb has a 24/48. is this only the case when using the units internal dacs or does it apply when using the digital out (in my case into an external dac)?

I'm pretty sure it also applies to the digital out, although I've not been able to confirm that (I don't have any 24/96 recordings to try out)...

I tried a 24/96 CD from Chesky label and I loaded it into my G5 using apple losless. My external DAC still says it is receiving 44.1, while it gets a higher bit-rate from my satellite receiver with digital inputs.

Also, for what it is worth my external DAC always reads 44.1 even when I am getting 128 bits from a top notch streaming audio station over the internet.