What is the best top end player now ?

[pkfox]

Hi all, the title says it all , I've been away from the front line for a
while now and get the impression that the Transporter is no longer king
! Is this the case - if so who is the new one ?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
pkfox's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5346
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Archimago]

Do you mean music streamers?

If so, I assume the Linn DS series must be high on the list. These will
play hi-res files up to 24/192. Have no idea how good the interface on
this works...

IMO, I still prefer the Transporter for its flexibility, capabilities
and very cool display :-). I'm also one who believes there is no reason
to listen to 24/192 and I've done multiple DAC shootouts (either blind
or instantaneous switch) and have not heard anything that bests the
Transporter (including EMM, Weiss, Benchmark, Ayre units). In other
words, I believe the technology is mature and there is essentially
nothing to be gained other than esthetics, ergonomics, and features
rather than sound quality.

YMMV.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Wombat]

Archimago wrote:
> Do you mean music streamers?
>
> If so, I assume the Linn DS series must be high on the list. These will
> play hi-res files up to 24/192. Have no idea how good the interface on
> this works...
>
> IMO, I still prefer the Transporter for its flexibility, capabilities
> and very cool display :-). I'm also one who believes there is no reason
> to listen to 24/192 and I've done multiple DAC shootouts (either blind
> or instantaneous switch) and have not heard anything that bests the
> Transporter (including EMM, Weiss, Benchmark, Ayre units). In other
> words, I believe the technology is mature and there is essentially
> nothing to be gained other than esthetics, ergonomics, and features
> rather than sound quality.
>
> YMMV.
Well said. I dislike the situation as it is but secretly i hope my old
fellow Slimdevices Transporter will last for a while and grow old in
grandeur here. I didnŽt listen these Weiss and other recent flagships
but i guess the benefits coming from a so called "better" DAC these days
are minor against other things you can change in your chain.
Of course you can get some fancy stuff that does insane upsampling,
adding harmonics and this NOS things. Reading about the audiophile
reasoning about these units will give you the impression that all gear
since 2X upsampling was a pure waste, so for the last 20 years all DACs
sounded bad by design :) Not my cup...


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

The top digital players are manufactured by dCS and their "ring DAC" is
pretty much the king. For redbook only, the Naim CD-555 is world class.
Those and many, many other players (excluding the many outboard DACs)
have sound quality that will surpass the sound quality of the
Transporter by a huge margin. Here's a shortlist:


dCS "Ring DAC" (Scarlatti, Paganini, Debussy, Puccini)
Naim DAC (CD-555)
CH Precision C1 DAC
APL DAC-M (Designer: Alex Peychev)
Light Harmonic Da Vinci
Playback Designs MPD-5
MSB Diamond DAC IV
EMM Labs DAC2
Burmester (069, 089, 113)
Wadia 9 series
Audio Research Reference DAC
Simaudio 750D (built in transport but mainly a DAC)
Zanden 5000S


Note that the next level down includes players such as the Cary 306 SACD
Pro, which is now my reference player. The leap in sound quality over
the Transporter was shocking. My speakers are very high resolution, so
that's part of the equation, but nonetheless I would not have recognized
the sound of my system by ear with the Cary replacing the Transporter.
And that's no hyperbole.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[pkfox]

Interesting observations - keep em comin


------------------------------------------------------------------------
pkfox's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5346
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

Note that the complete MSB "stack" priced at $50,000 is reviewed in
Stereophile this month. I haven't read the article yet, but it better
compare favorably to the dCS Paganini. Frankly, it should be MUCH
better at that price for redbook and hi-rez since its transport doesn't
support SACD. The primary reason I wanted a transport at all was for
SACD and my player supports HCDC too.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[pkfox]

jh901 wrote:
> Note that the complete MSB "stack" priced at $50,000 is reviewed in
> Stereophile this month. I haven't read the article yet, but it better
> compare favorably to the dCS Paganini. Frankly, it should be MUCH
> better at that price for redbook and hi-rez since its transport doesn't
> support SACD. The primary reason I wanted a transport at all was for
> SACD (and my player supports HDCD as well).

Hi there, I notice in your signature you have 'Transporter as a server'
, would you mind explaining how you use it and what kind of server it is
? As I said I've been away for a while.

Kind regards


------------------------------------------------------------------------
pkfox's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5346
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Wombat]

I didnŽt look up all devices jh901 listed but on first sight none of
them can serve as streamer for your digital music collection as the
Transporter does. I doubt the Transporter will be considered as good
enough transport for all these DACs even ;)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[garym]

pkfox wrote:
> Hi there, I notice in your signature you have 'Transporter as a server'
> , would you mind explaining how you use it and what kind of server it is
> ? As I said I've been away for a while.
>
> Kind regards

I'm sure he means that the Transporter is the network music player
(i.e., taking the digital music from the computer/NAS running LMS).
Then the Transporter digital outs feed his DAC. The transporter is not a
"server" in the sense of running LMS, storing music, etc.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[pkfox]

garym wrote:
> I'm sure he means that the Transporter is the network music player
> (i.e., taking the digital music from the computer/NAS running LMS).
> Then the Transporter digital outs feed his DAC. The transporter is not a
> "server" in the sense of running LMS, storing music, etc.
>
> edit: his signature indicates he runs SC/SbS/LMS on a readynas. So this
> NAS is his "server" (in SB lingo). If he was using a TOUCH instead of a
> TRANSPORTER, he would have said "TOUCH as server" in his context. (as an
> aside, of course, unlike a Transporter, a TOUCH could in fact *also* be
> a server, by using "tinyLMS" inside the touch and connecting music files
> to the touch with a USB drive or SD card.)

Thanks for the explanation, I've been in IT for 40 yrs and the jargon
still changes - I see my TP as a "player" and my ReadyNas as a server.
Thanks again.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
pkfox's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5346
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Archimago]

jh901 wrote:
> The top digital players are manufactured by dCS and their "ring DAC" is
> pretty much the king. For redbook only, the Naim CD-555 is world class.
> Those and many, many other players (excluding the many outboard DACs)
> have sound quality that will surpass the sound quality of the
> Transporter by a huge margin. Here's a shortlist:
>
>
> dCS "Ring DAC" (Scarlatti, Paganini, Debussy, Puccini)
> Naim DAC (CD-555)
> CH Precision C1 DAC
> APL DAC-M (Designer: Alex Peychev)
> Light Harmonic Da Vinci
> Playback Designs MPD-5
> MSB Diamond DAC IV
> EMM Labs DAC2
> Burmester (069, 089, 113)
> Wadia 9 series
> Audio Research Reference DAC
> Simaudio 750D (built in transport but mainly a DAC)
> Zanden 5000S
>
> ...

Of that list I've compared the EMM DAC2 with a DAC even lower than the
Transporter, honestly neither myself or friend could discern a
difference when single-blinded listening one afternoon (about 4 hours
total listening with breaks in between) - this was of course on good amp
and speakers.

I'm really suspicious how this list came about... Zanden 5000S? Really?
After these kind of results?
http://www.stereophile.com/content/zanden-5000-mkivsignature-da-converter-2000-premium-cd-transport-measurements
If John Atkinson's measurements are correct (assuming of course we might
not hear these limitations), I would not be happy with this - not
exactly SOTA for a $15K DAC! No hi-res either? I cannot imagine ANY DAC
based on the TDA-1541 be considered 'best' in 2012!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

Yes, I'm using Transporter as a "network music player" and files are
stored on a ReadyNAS. I use the Cary analog outputs in this case and,
with my current gear, the sound quality compared to the Transporter
analog outs is night and day. So much so that my non-audiophile
neighbor simply couldn't believe it and even asked if I'd added a
sub-woofer (as the Cary is known, among other things, for bass
extension).

That list is not comprehensive or "official". I'm sure we have members
here who prefer to believe that the Transporter is the best DAC ever and
if you are satisfied, then I have no argument. As for others looking
for far superior sound quality in all areas (transparency, freq
extension, transient speed, etc) and you have the speakers and amp to
provide the resolution, then the list is a decent starting point. If
you drop down a notch to the likes of the Cary 306, which remains among
the very best at under $10 grand, then you will still have quite an
amazing upgrade. The next rung up will require a bit of investment, but
prices may be coming down as Esoteric has recently reduced theirs.

It's an exciting time in digital.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Wombat]

jh901 wrote:
> That list is not comprehensive or "official". I'm sure we have members
> here who prefer to believe that the Transporter is the best DAC ever and
> if you are satisfied, then I have no argument. As for others looking
> for far superior sound quality in all areas (transparency, freq
> extension, transient speed, etc) and you have the speakers and amp to
> provide the resolution, then the list is a decent starting point.
Am i right that between your DAC and amplifier you use a Cary Audio
SLP-05 with Tube?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

Wombat wrote:
> Am i right that between your DAC and amplifier you use a Cary Audio
> SLP-05 with Tube?

Yes. I had the SLP-98 tube pre before (now in storage) and the SLP-05
tube pre, fully balanced and with tube power supply, does live up to its
world class reputation. So my system is all Cary electronics with Focal
speakers. Each are known to be very fast and transparent and provide a
high level of overall resolution. I do place the speakers at the thirds
and keep the sweet spot off of the rear wall. I also have DIY cylinder
bass traps (9" and 16") and Richard Gray AC conditioner. I've found
that having components at roughly the same performance level with a
proper set-up leads to quite an impressive "hi-end" experience,
particularly with well mastered source material. It is very easy to
hear deep into a recording at low volume (inner detail, low noise floor,
etc). Again, I was shocked upon upgrading from the Transporter analog
outs to the Cary's. It was several days and many hours of listening
until I was able to associate the level of sound quality with my own
system. This is why I don't mind pushing members toward pricey CD
players. They are worth it.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[pkfox]

jh901 wrote:
> Yes, I'm using Transporter as a "network music player" and files are
> stored on a ReadyNAS. I use the Cary analog outputs in this case and,
> with my current gear, the sound quality compared to the Transporter
> analog outs is night and day. So much so that my non-audiophile
> neighbor simply couldn't believe it and even asked if I'd added a
> sub-woofer (as the Cary is known, among other things, for bass
> extension). I have been using the transport of the Cary these days
> since the result is better than using the digital inputs. I'll mess
> around with the Transporter or other front end options at some point.
>
> That list is not comprehensive or "official". I'm sure we have members
> here who prefer to believe that the Transporter is the best DAC ever and
> if you are satisfied, then I have no argument. As for others looking
> for far superior sound quality in all areas (transparency, freq
> extension, transient speed, etc) and you have the speakers and amp to
> provide the resolution, then the list is a decent starting point. If
> you drop down a notch to the likes of the Cary 306, which remains among
> the very best at under $10 grand, then you will still have quite an
> amazing upgrade. The next rung up will require a bit of investment, but
> prices may be coming down as Esoteric has recently reduced theirs.
>
> It's an exciting time in digital.

Hi there, I also have a ReadyNAS , how do you find the performance of
the NAS , mine is better since I doubled the RAM but I wish I'd done
more homework before I bought it ' the fan noise would be enough to stop
me buying it now.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
pkfox's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5346
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

pkfox wrote:
> Hi there, I also have a ReadyNAS , how do you find the performance of
> the NAS , mine is better since I doubled the RAM but I wish I'd done
> more homework before I bought it ' the fan noise would be enough to stop
> me buying it now.

I keep my NAS box in a separate room (wi-fi networked). I'm not using
it right now since I'm enjoying using a CD transport for the first time
in many years. I'll switch back eventually for casual listening, but
I'll continue to use the CD transport for serious listening. Although
the Cary addresses jitter coming into the digital inputs, the sound
quality isn't as good as playing the actual disc. At some point, I will
upgrade to a no compromise server based system, but I wanted the best
redbook/SACD unit that I could afford which had a DAC section.
Considering that my pre and power amp are Cary, it became quite clear
that the 306 was it. Perhaps the most shocking and rewarding upgrade
that I've experienced.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

jh901 wrote:
> The top digital players are manufactured by dCS and their "ring DAC" is
> pretty much the king. For redbook only, the Naim CD-555 is world class.
> Those and many, many other players (excluding the many outboard DACs)
> have sound quality that will surpass the sound quality of the
> Transporter by a huge margin. Here's a shortlist:
>
>
> dCS "Ring DAC" (Scarlatti, Paganini, Debussy, Puccini)
> Naim DAC (CD-555)
> CH Precision C1 DAC
> APL DAC-M (Designer: Alex Peychev)
> Light Harmonic Da Vinci
> Playback Designs MPD-5
> MSB Diamond DAC IV
> EMM Labs DAC2
> Burmester (069, 089, 113)
> Wadia 9 series
> Audio Research Reference DAC
> Simaudio 750D (built in transport but mainly a DAC)
> Zanden 5000S
>
>
> Note that the next level down includes players such as the Cary 306 SACD
> Pro, which is now my reference player. The leap in sound quality over
> the Transporter was shocking. My speakers are very high resolution, so
> that's part of the equation, but nonetheless I would not have recognized
> the sound of my system by ear with the Cary replacing the Transporter.
> And that's no hyperbole. Anyone who suggests that DACs sound pretty
> much the same either (a) have never heard a great one (b) have other
> weak links in their chain (c) have such a poor set up that no system
> will sound good or (d) have limitations with hearing. There's a good
> reason why many seeking the very best pay $5, 10, 20 thousand or even
> much more for a digital front end.
>
> Note that dCS is set to release Vivaldi soon. Priced at over $100
> thousand. I'm betting it will be worth it for those with "statement"
> speakers and amplification.

Great list but what I really would like ti know is exactly what it is
that you are drinking? And where can I get some this magic audiophile
elixir?

Seriously the one thing that I found to be true about state of the art
and statement level audio products is that they do sound different
markedly from low end audio gear but only marginally different, or
better, than well built and well designed mid level audio gear. And the
Transporter is a well built and well designed piece of mid level audio
gear.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Archimago]

Yup. Some of that gear IMO sounds different but not necessarily
accurate.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

Archimago wrote:
> Yup. Some of that gear IMO sounds different but not necessarily
> accurate.

The Zanden 5000S for example


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[michael123]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Great list but what I really would like ti know is exactly what it is
> that you are drinking? And where can I get some this magic audiophile
> elixir?
>
> Seriously the one thing that I found to be true about state of the art
> and statement level audio products is that they do sound different
> markedly from low end audio gear but only marginally different, or
> better, than well built and well designed mid level audio gear. And the
> Transporter is a well built and well designed piece of mid level audio
> gear.

Weiss Media+ is state of the art product, sound-wise and
measurement-wise.
.. if you care about measurements..
It is a 20,000$ piece, though

what I am thinking.. when my Transporter will retire.. is either to get
a MAN301 streamer or build a PC + Medea..


------------------------------------------------------------------------
michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

michael123 wrote:
> Weiss Media+ is state of the art product, sound-wise and
> measurement-wise.
> .. if you care about measurements..
> It is a 20,000$ piece, though
>
> what I am thinking.. when my Transporter will retire.. is either to get
> a MAN301 streamer or build a PC + Medea..

The Weiss Media+ was not the list in question. Anyway my point was that
the audiophile community, which in turn is at least partly driven by the
audiophile press, is always claiming "sound quality that will surpass
the sound quality of (insert any name here) by a huge margin" when, in
fact, the differences are marginal at best and make believe at worst.
Add to this the fact that the differences are often just that. i.e.
differences, with no real improvement in sound.

When discussing DACs I do feel that can be and often are audible
differences units but most of these differences occur on the analog side
of things after the conversion of the digital signal, which is why "high
end" music streamers are such a lot of bull. The lowly SB Touch will
"sound" exactly the same as any and all mega-buck digital streamers when
its digital output is fed into any and all mega-buck DACs. And, no I
don't have to listen to each and every combination just as I don't have
to jump off a tall building to know that the force of gravity is going
to hurl me to the ground below - see that's how scientific FACTS and
LAWS work.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

Weiss seems fine very welll thougth out and put together .but some of
the exotic audiophilia would actually performe worse than the Touch or
any 50$ DVD player ie voodo designs with tubes or NOS DAC etc .

That's what's wrong with those lists .

Re Weiss is not so that some professional model is more or less the same
as Medea but at a lower price ?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

The Transporter's DAC is not capable of reproducing sound anywhere near
the level of my Cary 306 SACD, which is a great player, but a solid
notch down on top shelf DACs. That is, one will hear a clear and
convincing improvement (Cary over Transporter) in all aspects of
fidelity in a system comprised of gear capable of reproducing the finest
detail. I feel badly for anyone participating in discussion on an
"Audiophile" forum who has never had the experience of hearing a true
hi-end DAC in their own system.

Note that a DAC won't make much difference in a low or mid-fi system. A
hi-end DAC, or any other hi-end component, won't make much difference in
an untreated listening space with the speakers in the corners and the
listening position back up agains the wall. Likewise, a comparison of a
Porsche 911 and a Toyota Camry on black ice will both turn out the same.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

jh901 wrote:
> The Transporter's DAC is not capable of reproducing sound anywhere near
> the level of my Cary 306 SACD, which is a great player, but a solid
> notch down on top shelf DACs. That is, one will hear a clear and
> convincing improvement (Cary over Transporter) in all aspects of
> fidelity in a system comprised of gear capable of reproducing the finest
> detail. I feel badly for anyone participating in discussion on an
> "Audiophile" forum who has never had the experience of hearing a true
> hi-end DAC in their own system.
>
> Note that a DAC won't make much difference in a low or mid-fi system. A
> hi-end DAC, or any other hi-end component, won't make much difference in
> an untreated listening space with the speakers in the corners and the
> listening position back up agains the wall. Likewise, a comparison of a
> Porsche 911 and a Toyota Camry on black ice will both turn out the same.

I'm sick. That is sick of hearing how great your stereo system and how
crappy my system is and how I'll never be able to hear the difference
between a mega-buck DAC and the Touch's built-in DAC. Nonsense. First
you know absolutely nothing about my stereo system, which is pretty damn
good and happens to sound fantastic.

For the record: Transporter -> balanced analog outputs -> Sim Audio
Celeste P-5002 pre-amp -> Sim Audio Moon W-5 power amp -> Vandersteen
Model 3A Signature speakers with one Vandersteen Model 2wq subwoofer.
The system is well set up as per Vandersteen's guidelines and includes
Cardas cables and wires. I also have a McCormack UDP-1 universal disc
player and a Linn LP-12 turntable with the Lingo power supply, an Ittok
IV II tonearm, a Grado Reference cartridge and a Grado phono pre-amp.

Okay so now you know a little something about my stereo system. Add this
the fact that my listening position is not up against the wall and the
speakers are not in the corners. I am 100% certain that running the
digital outputs of the Transporter into any and all mega-buck DACs will
NOT produce a night and day difference in the sound over the
Transporter's analog outputs. Will it sound "different"? Sure but not
night and day different and perhaps not even enough of a positive sonic
improvement to really matter.

Now if I had shelled out $20,000 on a DAC I would sure as hell be on
this forum singing a completely different story because I would
desperately need to somehow validate why in God's name I had spent
$20,000 when I could have spent $2,000 for an equally nice sounding DAC.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

You lost me there, Ralph. Where exactly did I comment on your audio
system?

No one must spend $90,000 on a car either, but how many of us believe
that a Camry is pretty much the same thing?

I would challenge Ralph to swap in a dCS Puccini or a Playback Designs
MPS-5. Must have? No. Must have for the absolute best sound quality?
Yes.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

jh901 wrote:
> You lost me there, Ralph. Where exactly did I comment on your audio
> system?
>
> No one must spend $90,000 on a car either, but how many of us believe
> that a Camry is pretty much the same thing?
>
> I would challenge Ralph to swap in a dCS Puccini or a Playback Designs
> MPS-5. Must have? No. Must have for the absolute best sound quality?
> Yes.

I realize that you were not commenting on my system per se but the
implication was there nonetheless. Automobiles are not audio systems,
however in many ways one might actually want a Camry instead of a
$90,000 sports car, perhaps one has a few pieces of luggage to take to
the airport or a few small children to drive to school.

I also agree that a mega-buck DAC would most likely offer many, very
positive improvements to the sound of my system, but again I temper this
statement by adding that there are probably many other less expensive
DAC available which would offer the same degree of difference in the
sound. The law of diminishing returns hits hardest when the price is
steepest, which is one reason why many of the audio magazines rarely
compare equipment from different price levels.

Now to further muddy the waters let's consider that there may be only a
small handful recordings on which the differences between say a $2,000
DAC and a $20,000 DAC would be clearly audible. Just the difference
between a Camry and Porsche 911 would be meaningless while sitting in
rush hour traffic.

Finally I do concede that since the title of this thread is "What is the
best top end player now?" mentioning many of the most expensive DACs is
to be expected.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

I don't have the time nor likely the ability to get into CD mastering
quality. I do collect "vintage" CDs mastered by the likes of Barry
Diament, Steve Hoffman, and others. Additionally, there many examples
of early CD masterings issued to the Japan market pre-1990 well worth
hearing on a mega-buck system. And finally, there are many SACDs
mastered by Hoffman, Kevin Gray and others plus DCC Gold (Hoffman), a
few MFSL, many Audio Fidelity, etc. Digital gets a bad wrap and, as
stated earlier, I'm not able to type up a convincing argument.

I do not believe it is necessary spend $15,000 plus on a CD player ( or
stand alone DAC) in order to experience a dramatic improvement in sound
quality. My own personal experience with the very highly praised Cary
306 SACD Pro, at $8,000 MSRP, is all that it took for me to realize that
it's pretty clear that hi-end gear manufacturers are serious about DACs.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

jh901 wrote:
> I don't have the time nor likely the ability to get into CD mastering
> quality. I do collect "vintage" CDs mastered by the likes of Barry
> Diament, Steve Hoffman, and others. Additionally, there many examples
> of early CD masterings issued to the Japan market pre-1990 well worth
> hearing on a mega-buck system. And finally, there are many SACDs
> mastered by Hoffman, Kevin Gray and others plus DCC Gold (Hoffman), a
> few MFSL, many Audio Fidelity, etc. Digital gets a bad rap and, as
> stated earlier, I'm not able to type up a convincing argument.
>
> I do not believe it is necessary spend $15,000 plus on a CD player ( or
> stand alone DAC) in order to experience a dramatic improvement in sound
> quality. My own personal experience with the very highly praised Cary
> 306 SACD Pro, at $8,000 MSRP, is all that it took for me to realize that
> it's pretty clear that hi-end gear manufacturers are serious about
> DACs.
>
> Note that Simaudio is the real deal and I'd love to hear Ralph's system,
> especially with a Moon 750D. Do you believe that Simaudio would produce
> great gear and then drop the ball on the DAC? Hm.....
>
> And finally, I love the Transporter. It changed the way I hear my
> music. But there is always a time to move on. Once I had my Focal
> speakers and other top Cary electronics, it was time to try a Hi-end
> SACD player with a redbook DAC section. I was far from disappointed.
> Way far.

Good post. One minor comment: why the focus on SACD players. Streaming
24bit/88.2 or 96 kHz high resolution files via either the Touch or
Transporter into a DAC of your choice should result in the same quality
as SACD playback plus you can stream these files to any room. For
example I have a Transporter (main stereo) plus three Touches in my
house and I can now enjoy high resolution playback in four different
rooms without SACD players and discs.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Good post. One minor comment: why the focus on SACD players. Streaming
> 24bit/88.2 or 96 kHz high resolution files via either the Touch or
> Transporter into a DAC of your choice should result in the same quality
> as SACD playback plus you can stream these files to any room. For
> example I have a Transporter (main stereo) plus three Touches in my
> house and I can now enjoy high resolution playback in four different
> rooms without SACD players and discs.

This would be terrific if the primary driver of digital sound quality
was the bitrate, etc. There are so many 16/44 PCM "redbook" CDs with
better sound quality that any hi-res available simply because the modern
day mastering engineer shoots for "loudness" and doesn't understand
dynamic range and proper, natural EQ. As it pertains to the DSD trapped
on SACDs we have, for example, Steve Hoffman's mastering of the CCR
catalog (Analogue Productions). Amazing doesn't begin to describe it.
We have Kevin Gray's new mastering of several Holly Cole albums and the
Norah Jones catalog (Analogue Productions). There 50 Blue Note label
albums (so far) mastered by Hoffman/Gray also on Analogue Productions).
There are more examples, but the bottom line is that the mastering work
remains misunderstood, ignored, underestimated....you name it. Go for
the mastering and not the resolution. I've learned this lesson over the
past several years.

And now...back on topic!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

jh901 wrote:
> This would be terrific if the primary driver of digital sound quality
> was the bitrate, etc. There are so many 16/44 PCM "redbook" CDs with
> better sound quality that any hi-res available simply because the modern
> day mastering engineer shoots for "loudness" and doesn't understand
> dynamic range and proper, natural EQ. As it pertains to the DSD trapped
> on SACDs we have, for example, Steve Hoffman's mastering of the CCR
> catalog (Analogue Productions). Amazing doesn't begin to describe it.
> We have Kevin Gray's new mastering of several Holly Cole albums and the
> Norah Jones catalog (Analogue Productions). There 50 Blue Note label
> albums (so far) mastered by Hoffman/Gray also on Analogue Productions).
> There are more examples, but the bottom line is that the mastering work
> remains misunderstood, ignored, underestimated....you name it. Go for
> the mastering and not the resolution. I've learned this lesson over the
> past several years.
>
> Not every truth is convenient or easy to accept.
>
> And now...back on topic!

Agreed. However that was not what I asked, which is when a high
resolution, good sounding and well produced master of a recording is
available why do you seem to prefer the SACD version over the 24bit/88.2
or 96kHz files version? In other words disc playback instead of streamed
playback.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Agreed. However that was not what I asked, which is when a high
> resolution, good sounding and well produced master of a recording is
> available why do you seem to prefer the SACD version over the 24bit/88.2
> or 96kHz files version? In other words disc playback instead of streamed
> playback.

I make an effort to acquire the best mastered digital mastering of any
50s/60s jazz, 60s-80s rock, some classical and other, etc. I listen to
"real music" and not typical audiophile naptime stuff. If it came to my
attention that a superior mastering existed only as a flac or WAV
download for music I enjoy, then I'd be interested. The best mastering
work as far as I'm converned can be found on CDs mastered pre-1990
(including many issued only to Japan market), audiophile label such as
DCC Gold (now Audio Fidelity) and select MFSL, and select SACDs. You
are welcome to provide an example where you believe a superior hi-rez
download exists.

Again, this truth, should that be the case, is not convenient. I'm more
interested in audio quality than convenience.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[AndrewFG]

jh901 wrote:
> The best mastering work as far as I'm converned can be found on CDs
> mastered pre-1990 (including many issued only to Japan market), ... and
> select SACDs.

My favourite example is Dire Straits Love Over Gold, where the Japanese
CD was notably better than the USA or European releases, and where the
Japanese SACD is perhaps even better.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
AndrewFG's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15838
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[banned for life]

AndrewFG wrote:
> My favourite example is Dire Straits Love Over Gold, where the Japanese
> CD was notably better than the USA or European releases, and where the
> Japanese SACD is perhaps even better.

+

The typical Japanese listening area is much different from elsewhere.

b


------------------------------------------------------------------------
banned for life's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56269
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

The formula for hearing recorded music at its very best is:

- Great electronics throughout the chain (no weak links) driving great
speakers
- Position speakers and listening position with little or no compromise
(start at the "thirds")
- clean the electricity with a conditioner (lowers noise floor)
- install passive room acoustic treatment such as cylinder bass traps
(must address early reflections on the side walls and floor and large
diameter bass traps)
- track down the finest mastering of any given album. easy example, the
entire CCR catalog is mastered by Steve Hoffman on the Analogue
Productions label (hybrid SACD).
- sit back and enjoy the "magic".

Identifying great mastering work is overlooked and I can't explain why.
Sure, it's not easy to figure it out, but it's worth the effort. There
are dozens and dozens of examples where the earliest digital mastering
remains the very best or are at the very least FAR better than loudness
era remaster. Additionally, out of print DCC Gold (Hoffman) can be
pricey, but many remain the best (McCartney). For those who appreciate
music recorded from the 50s to the 80s, then understanding that the
mastering is the key is essential. I cringe at the thought that so many
audiophiles ignore their digital front end under the impression that CDs
can only sound mediocre.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[stop-spinning]

jh901 wrote:
>
>
> Note also that the digital outs(Transporter)/digital ins(Cary) are
> inferior to using the Cary's transport. This is related to jitter
> handling, etc. My next digital upgrade in 5+ years will not be
> compromised in this way.

The above would answer my question, why not try ripping your well
mastered CDs as files then try streaming through the Transporter to see
if there is any difference? You would have thought that the mechanics of
using a CD would be compromised by the laser, rotating disc, real-time
error correction etc - but in your case - apparently not.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
stop-spinning's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=43254
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

stop-spinning wrote:
> The above would answer my question, why not try ripping your well
> mastered CDs as files then try streaming through the Transporter to see
> if there is any difference? You would have thought that the mechanics of
> using a CD would be compromised by the laser, rotating disc, real-time
> error correction etc - but in your case - apparently not.

I do have several hundred CDs ripped using dBpoweramp into flac or WAV
codec. If I stream a WAV file to the Transporter and send it out to the
Cary's DAC section (S/PDIF), then the Transporter is providing the
clocking. The input receiver in the Cary has a buffer that some way or
another addresses the incoming jitter, but this is different from what
happens to the PCM as read directly from the CD (in the Cary's disc
spinner). In this case, the data goes to a RAM buffer (not an input
receiver). The clocking is all Cary as there is no other component
inolved. Bottom line here is that there isn't a deficiency with the WAV
file/streaming necessarily, but rather with handling of the data once
streamed.

I haven't tested this in a while as I've been doing just fine spinning
discs old school for the first time in years. At some point, I'll get
the hard drive going again and perform a comparison.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[stop-spinning]

jh901 wrote:
>
>
> I haven't tested this in a while as I've been doing just fine spinning
> discs old school for the first time in years. At some point, I'll get
> the hard drive going again and perform a comparison.

Yes I would appreciate a re-test! I too have a friend who has not yet
been convinced about computer based / streamed audio having compared
these methods against his top quality CD Player. Perhaps music libraries
are convenient, but for the very best SQ a hi-end CD player (or perhaps
better still a turntable) still rules the roost.

We must take into consideration here that the Transporter is
nevertheless superb value for money and I doubt a CD player for that
price would touch it - it takes a CD player like yours to signficantly
better it, which you must admit is not cheap.

Perhaps we can take advantage of your reference system and see how you
get on with other comparative streamed music applications too, such as
JRiver over USB to a high quality async USB DAC for example.

Over here in the UK, Linn has completely abandoned making CD players,
because they deem CD players inferior to their network music players in
terms of SQ.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
stop-spinning's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=43254
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

stop-spinning wrote:
> Yes I would appreciate a re-test! I too have a friend who has not yet
> been convinced about computer based / streamed audio having compared
> these methods against his top quality CD Player. Perhaps music libraries
> are convenient, but for the very best SQ a hi-end CD player (or perhaps
> better still a turntable) still rules the roost.
>
> We must take into consideration here that the Transporter is
> nevertheless superb value for money and I doubt a CD player for that
> price would touch it - it takes a CD player like yours to signficantly
> better it, which you must admit is not cheap.
>
> Perhaps we can take advantage of your reference system and see how you
> get on with other comparative streamed music applications too, such as
> JRiver over USB to a high quality async USB DAC for example.
>
> Over here in the UK, Linn has completely abandoned making CD players,
> because they deem CD players inferior to their network music players in
> terms of SQ.

Believe what you want to believe.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[mlsstl]

Two points.

First, for all those who believe that a CD system is superior to a hard
drive based playback system, keep in mind that commercial recordings are
not made direct to CD. The music is recorded to a hard drive and
processed from there. Now a listener may happen to prefer the flavors
that the circuitry of a particular CD player adds (or doesn't add) to
the playback sound, but there is nothing inherently "superior" about
picking up your digital data from a spinning piece of metallicized
plastic versus an HDD.

Second, some manufacturers are moving away from CD players for the
simple reason is they aren't selling as many as they used to. They feel
the future lies elsewhere. That's the way life works. Even fewer
companies make tape-based recording & playback machines even though
there are some who still prefer the sound of that playback method. Tape
is a very small niche market now. History will repeat itself with the
CD.

CDs still have a lot of life yet as it's still a pretty solid way to
distribute music. However, most of the world that actively uses CDs
already has a CD player so people aren't buying new ones or upgrading as
quickly as in the past. That leaves an eroding sales base that is has
become oriented toward a declining replacement market. If a company
wants growth in that area, they need to look elsewhere.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[sbb]

mlsstl wrote:
> Two points.
>
> First, for all those who believe that a CD system is superior to a hard
> drive based playback system, keep in mind that commercial recordings are
> not made direct to CD. The music is recorded to a hard drive and
> processed from there. Now a listener may happen to prefer the flavors
> that the circuitry of a particular CD player adds (or doesn't add) to
> the playback sound, but there is nothing inherently "superior" about
> picking up your digital data from a spinning piece of metallicized
> plastic versus an HDD.
>

well, "metalized plastic" versus "magnetized glass"... on different
aspects, I don't think one is vastly superior to the other.

I don't get your "Now a listener may happen to prefer the flavors that
the circuitry of a particular CD player adds (or doesn't add) to the
playback sound" since it's probably less dependant on the "drive itself"
than on the DAC circuitry. And if you go for a HD based system, the
situation is the same: sound's flavor will mainly depend on the DAC.

Apart from that I share your opinion on the fact if some manufacturers
are stoping CD players it's just because they don't sell much anymore...
and the "superior sound" argument for "server/client systems" is just
marketing bullshit (they should emphasize only on SQ and how software
can improve the listening experience regarding the ease of use).


------------------------------------------------------------------------
sbb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14322
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[mlsstl]

sbb wrote:
> I don't get your "Now a listener may happen to prefer the flavors that
> the circuitry of a particular CD player adds (or doesn't add) to the
> playback sound" since it's probably less dependant on the "drive itself"
> than on the DAC circuitry. And if you go for a HD based system, the
> situation is the same: sound's flavor will mainly depend on the DAC.


Not sure what's so confusing about my statement. The vast majority of CD
players on the market have the DAC integrated into a one-box unit. (I
believe the audiophiles refer to the drive-only units as "transports".)
Plenty of opportunity for the manufacturer to tweak things to achieve
the sonic signature they think will better appeal to buyers.

No disagreement that external DAC makers do the same.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Julf]

mlsstl wrote:
> The general intent of my comment was directed toward the apparently
> large number of audiophiles who think there is something superior about
> the CD format itself.

"CD is better than computer audio"
"Vinyl is better than CD"
"Tubes/valves are better than solid state"
"Mono is better than stereo"

Spot the pattern? :)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[stop-spinning]

Julf wrote:
> "CD is better than computer audio"
> "Vinyl is better than CD"
> "Tubes/valves are better than solid state"
> "Mono is better than stereo"
>
> Spot the pattern? :)

Yep - advances in technology are having a negative impact on SQ ;)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
stop-spinning's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=43254
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[mlsstl]

stop-spinning wrote:
> Yep - advances in technology are having a negative impact on SQ ;)

Forget mono. Some think 78s do a better job of capturing the true
essence of music. And let's not even mention the Edison Cylinder!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

mlsstl wrote:
> Forget mono. Some think 78s do a better job of capturing the true
> essence of music. And let's not even mention the Edison Cylinder!

While it's true that there is a definite Luddite tendency among many
audiophiles, it is also true that in the early days of many new and
"improved" technologies there are often many kinks to be worked out
before all the improvements can be fully appreciated. Add into this the
fact that many people have invested lots of time and money into the
older technology and how can one not expect some form of Luddite
backlash.

Although digital audio is now over 30 years old, digital is still
misunderstood and misrepresented by many audiophiles and most of the
high end audio press. Hence the fixation on inaudible jitter, ridiculous
sampling rates, equally insane bit depths and vastly overpriced
"digital" cables. For me the best thing to do was to stop drinking the
kool-aid and get off the bus. This is not to say that my audio system is
prefect but rather that going forward I will only make improvements in
the areas where the improvements useful. In other words, on the analog
side of the system such as speakers, DACs (I consider DACs to be on the
analog side) and other analog electronics. The digital side of my audio
system will remain either a Touch or Transporter along with a server,
some hard drives and lots of jitter filled flac files.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

I don't think anyone was asserting that redbook CD is better than a
properly ripped WAV file. Computer audio has come a long way, but there
are kinks yet to be worked out. Even so, my claim is much different and
I don't see how it would be hotly contested. It is a fact that in my CD
player the circuitry is different when playing a CD from it's own
transport versus accepting the digital into the DAC section via S/PDIF.

I'm not sure where all of the anti-audiophile stuff is coming from, but
if anyone genuininely believes that there are little or no sonic
differences between the Transporter and a hi-end player at $5 grand and
up, then I'll start taking bets. Gotta have serious hi-end speakers and
supporting electronics and then prepare to have your mind blown. And I
am dead serious. I did not believe that the Cary 306 SACD Pro as a DAC
versus the analog outs of the Transporter would result in much of a
difference, but I nearly fell out of my chair. I would not, under any
circustance, have believed that I was listening to my own system (same
speakers, pre/power amp, only swap DAC) had I not been sitting there
myself. The bass alone was over the top convincing (deep/taught).
Digital artifacts I didn't know were there...gone. Etc, etc.

And again, the topic of this thread is "BEST top end players". While
the Cary 306 is excellent and has earned quite a reputation (see
reviews), it will be easily beaten by $15 grand and beyond leaders in
digital. It's difficult to make a "value claim" for an $8,000 CD/SACD
player, but taking that leap into "BEST" is very expensive. Why?
Proprietary chip sets and more.

Finally, the Transporter is awesome. Period. I have no clue why the
Transporter must be heralded as the best DAC ever made at any price
point when A) that's a ridiculous line of thinking and B) it was a
remains a great unit at $1,000 and C) many here continue to enjoy it.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

jh901 wrote:
> I don't think anyone was asserting that redbook CD is better than a
> properly ripped WAV file. Computer audio has come a long way, but there
> are kinks yet to be worked out. Even so, my claim is much different and
> I don't see how it would be hotly contested. It is a fact that in my CD
> player the circuitry is different when playing a CD from it's own
> transport versus accepting the digital into the DAC section via S/PDIF.
>
> I'm not sure where all of the anti-audiophile stuff is coming from, but
> if anyone genuininely believes that there are little or no sonic
> differences between the Transporter and a hi-end player at $5 grand and
> up, then I'll start taking bets. Gotta have serious hi-end speakers and
> supporting electronics and then prepare to have your mind blown. And I
> am dead serious. I did not believe that the Cary 306 SACD Pro as a DAC
> versus the analog outs of the Transporter would result in much of a
> difference, but I nearly fell out of my chair. I would not, under any
> circustance, have believed that I was listening to my own system (same
> speakers, pre/power amp, only swap DAC) had I not been sitting there
> myself. The bass alone was over the top convincing (deep/taught).
> Digital artifacts I didn't know were there...gone. Etc, etc.
>
> And again, the topic of this thread is "BEST top end players". While
> the Cary 306 is excellent and has earned quite a reputation (see
> reviews), it will be easily beaten by $15 grand and beyond leaders in
> digital. It's difficult to make a "value claim" for an $8,000 CD/SACD
> player, but taking that leap into "BEST" is very expensive. Why?
> Proprietary chip sets and more.
>
> Finally, the Transporter is awesome. Period. I have no clue why the
> Transporter must be heralded as the best DAC ever made at any price
> point when A) that's a ridiculous line of thinking and B) it was a
> remains a great unit at $1,000 and C) many here continue to enjoy it.

901: While I enjoy your writing and can easily tell by the tone that you
are not looking to pick a fight or start a flame war, may I just point
out that many here are not "anti-audiophile" nor are there claims that
the Transporter is the best DAC. On the other hand, this a public forum
and not one of the high end audio magazines, so statements like:

"I did not believe that the Cary 306 SACD Pro as a DAC versus the analog
outs of the Transporter would result in much of a difference, but I
nearly fell out of my chair. I would not, under any circustance, have
believed that I was listening to my own system (same speakers, pre/power
amp, only swap DAC) had I not been sitting there myself. The bass alone
was over the top convincing (deep/taught). Digital artifacts I didn't
know were there...gone. Etc, etc."

will only invoke lots of nasty comments because the simple fact is that
regardless of the DAC and the audio system used the sonic differences
between that DAC and the Transporter's analog outputs will be, at best,
subtle. Please leave all the hyperbole and "the greatest thing since
sliced bread" comments to the audio rags. I do believe that you did hear
and experience a very real and audible difference, I only have an issue
with your placing these differences into the realm of "night and day".

By the way, have you tried the magic green marker on the edges of your
hard drive platters? Really a night and day improvement :) Might void
the warranty but definitely worth it!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

The subject was partly about digital transports not only the analog side
.

If digital transports differ into a decent DAC one of them is broken or
you be hearing things .
or the DAC is very weird ( it could be in this case )
If Carys SACD thing is also a tube thing it may explain stuff ,not the
same design goal proper rendering of the signal vs a sound effect .

No I don't "believe" in the tube "magic" there is only thd and weird
impedance . I have heard set triode stuff and other tubed amps nice but
in treality they are all bettered by ht recievers found in the
supermarket sorry .

So if you know how to design electronics you don't use vacuum tubes in
audio applications , unless you are confused yourself ( lost in the mire
of subjectiveness ) or a cynic that rips of audiophiles .

My pet hate is audio note thier equipment is extremely expensive junk
they represent all that is wrong with high end in one company :)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

ralphpnj wrote:
>
> will only invoke lots of nasty comments because the simple fact is that
> regardless of the DAC and the audio system used the sonic differences
> between that DAC and the Transporter's analog outputs will be, at best,
> subtle. Please leave all the hyperbole and "the greatest thing since
> sliced bread" comments to the audio rags. I do believe that you did hear
> and experience a very real and audible difference, I only have an issue
> with your placing these differences into the realm of "night and day".
>
>

Well, had I not heard a night/day, then I'd have passed on the
expenditure. Not many of us likely have $6 grand or more to burn. I
can't describe my own experience in a way that will allow any given
reader of this forum (or any other) to truly grasp exactly what I'm
getting at. I can add that my non-audiophile neighbor who heard the
Transporter in my system many times, was under the distinct impression
that something other than a CD player upgrade had taken place.

But look, there are a lot of factors. My system had a single "weak"
link as it turns out and Focal Utopia line speakers are not forgiving.
The DAC upgrade (and by DAC, I mean the whole design including digital
stage, power supply, analog stage) was a significant leap up the food
chain and the impact on the sound of my system was FAR beyond what I'd
have been able to grasp had I not heard it. I wish I could do a better
job articulating this. Bottom line: go out and borrow a Cary 306 or
one of the world class units (dCS Puccini, etc) and if your system is up
to it, then you will be overwhelmed. That is my honest view.

Finally, I find it disappointing that "we" are so overwhelmingly
suspicious of the R&D carried out by the likes of dCS. Further, is it
truly rational to believe that those shelling out $50, 80 or 100 grand
for elite products from dCS are simply nuts or confused or showing off,
etc? Really?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

jh901 wrote:
> Well, had I not heard a night/day, then I'd have passed on the
> expenditure. Not many of us likely have $6 grand or more to burn. I
> can't describe my own experience in a way that will allow any given
> reader of this forum (or any other) to truly grasp exactly what I'm
> getting at. I can add that my non-audiophile neighbor who heard the
> Transporter in my system many times, was under the distinct impression
> that something other than a CD player upgrade had taken place.
>
> But look, there are a lot of factors. My system had a single "weak"
> link as it turns out and Focal Utopia line speakers are not forgiving.
> The DAC upgrade (and by DAC, I mean the whole design including digital
> stage, power supply, analog stage) was a significant leap up the food
> chain and the impact on the sound of my system was FAR beyond what I'd
> have been able to grasp had I not heard it. I wish I could do a better
> job articulating this. Bottom line: go out and borrow a Cary 306 or
> one of the world class units (dCS Puccini, etc) and if your system is up
> to it, then you will be overwhelmed. That is my honest view.
>
> Finally, I find it disappointing that "we" are so overwhelmingly
> suspicious of the R&D carried out by the likes of dCS. Further, is it
> truly rational to believe that those shelling out $50, 80 or 100 grand
> for elite products from dCS are simply nuts or confused or showing off,
> etc? Really? And that those independently reviewing these products
> around world are colluding with the industry in order to continue a
> decades long charade!?

I didn't mean to offend or even question that you did, in fact, hear a
very noticeable difference. Since the analog and digital outputs on the
Transporter are both active were you able to do a simple A-B test? Not
even double blind, just a simple A-B test. It is truly amazing what a
simple test can show you regarding perceived "night & day" differences.
Then again, I do believe that a modern, state of the art DAC would offer
a significant improvement in sound over the Transporter. But that's the
great thing about digital - the $300 Touch (or even the Transporter)
feeding a digital signal to a modern, state of the art DAC will sound
the same as mega-buck CD transport or mega-buck music streamer feeding
the same DAC. In addition one can also throw away the $1,000 digital
interconnect since a good $5 digital interconnect will produce the same
results.

I know that the above is anathema to the high end audio press but since
cable vendors make up the bulk of these dying magazine's advertising
revenue, how could they possibly tell their readers these simple truths
about digital?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

I agree that transport prices can get out of control. There are
definitely ways to overspend on hi-end audio. And yeah, that's an
understatement.

For my purposes, I needed an SACD transport. It's the only legit way to
get at the DSD encoded on the disc. It would be nice if there was a
universal DSD output for transports, so then one could buy an uber
hi-end DAC that handles DSD and then buy a budget SACD transport.

I do reiterate that those who have all the hi-end pieces in place
(including speaker positioning, acoustic treatment, etc) with the
exception of a hi-end DAC to give one a try. I had been considering
whether or not to dip into vinyl. After my updrade experience I'm no
longer tempted.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Julf]

jh901 wrote:
> It would be nice if there was a universal DSD output for transports

There is. 'DSD over USB' (http://dsd-guide.com/dop-open-standard). Not
sure I would bother - the usual arguments I hear for DSD are mostly of
the "it is technically closer to analog, so it must be better" ilk...


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

Julf wrote:
> There is. 'DSD over USB' (http://dsd-guide.com/dop-open-standard). Not
> sure I would bother - the usual arguments I hear for DSD are mostly of
> the "it is technically closer to analog, so it must be better" ilk...

Julf,

I'm not sure what is happening but there seems to be the beginning of
movement in the audiophile world regarding DSD being "better" than high
resolution PCM (24or 32 bit/88.2, 96, etc. kHz). Why this is happening I
do not know but this is not the first time I've heard this. Could be a
backlash against high resolution streaming (which uses PCM) versus high
resolution silver disc based playback, i.e. SACD. Old habits die hard.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Julf]

ralphpnj wrote:
> I'm not sure what is happening but there seems to be the beginning of
> movement in the audiophile world regarding DSD being "better" than high
> resolution PCM (24or 32 bit/88.2, 96, etc. kHz). Why this is happening I
> do not know but this is not the first time I've heard this. Could be a
> backlash against high resolution streaming (which uses PCM) versus high
> resolution silver disc based playback, i.e. SACD. Old habits die hard.

Old habits die very hard. There is definitely a luddite, anti-technology
fringe among audiophiles. DSD, being pulse-density modulation, is a more
primitive, "more analog" encoding than the very "computer-y" PCM... So
of course DSD sounds "natural" and "analog" while PCM sounds "hard",
"edgy" and "grainy" :)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

Julf wrote:
> Old habits die very hard. There is definitely a luddite, anti-technology
> fringe among audiophiles. DSD, being pulse-density modulation, is a more
> primitive, "more analog" encoding than the very "computer-y" PCM... So
> of course DSD sounds "natural" and "analog" while PCM sounds "hard",
> "edgy" and "grainy" :)

With "digital glare"


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

Julf wrote:
> There is. 'DSD over USB' (http://dsd-guide.com/dop-open-standard). Not
> sure I would bother - the usual arguments I hear for DSD are mostly of
> the "it is technically closer to analog, so it must be better" ilk...

Yea DSD is basically sony's attempt to copy protection by obscurity ,
none of the soundqality arguments really holds water .
The copy protection seems to work , no consumer computer stuff seems to
able to handle the stuff, never seen an SACD drive or ripper or consumer
software that plays DSD files.

Technically ( if I got it rigth ) SACD is equal to 20bit except in the
extreme treble where it is less than 16 bit , yes SACD has less S/N then
reedbook at 20kHz then it progressively gets worse ,but the SACD player
should filter out the ultrasonic residues at some level I don't know
what appropriate , and actually many SACD player uses PCM anyway to use
the DAC's and filters aviable on the market.

A 24/88.2 pcm file would encode all the relevant stuff there could be in
in a SACD DSD stream .

There are some laughable attempts to decode DSD passively it sort of
works :) and sounds "different" so of course it has traction among the
mystics....


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[bhaagensen]

stop-spinning wrote:
>
> Over here in the UK, Linn has completely abandoned making CD players,
> because they deem CD players inferior to their network music players in
> terms of SQ.

There is no doubt the CD is dying as a mainstream distribution media -
its already in the grave among the younger generations. The interesting
thing about Linn making this move a couple of years ago is that this is,
or, was?, not Linns primary customers base. Rather the more conservative
audiophile market. So interesting for this reason.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

bhaagensen wrote:
> There is no doubt the CD is dying as a mainstream distribution media -
> its already in the grave among the younger generations. The interesting
> thing about Linn making this move a couple of years ago is that this is,
> or, was?, not Linns primary customers base. Rather the more conservative
> audiophile market. So interesting for this reason.

Yes that’s pretty much the only way to coax over audiophiles to computer
based solution another kind of expensive box to oh and ah about :) the
philes tend to "hear" all kinds of subjective differences between
perfectly good digital sources (they for the most cases do not exist in
objective reality ) .

So it won't "sound" good until a sufficiently expensive and bizarre
contraption is used and it should not be easy to use ! it should only be
for the initiated few, the unwashed masses can not appreciate and
understand (bla bla) if you have fiddle around with the computers
drivers a processes the better ,there is a bunch of audiophile software
players to...
Such is the state of this cargo cult .


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[bhaagensen]

Not sure Im following Mnyb. As far as the high-end manufacturers go, I
think they've been trying to the opposite - to make it easy and
userfriendly. Most either support upnp or use their own protocol like
SB. The driver stuff is for the DIYers who do *not* want to spend their
bucks on the expensive highend plug'n playish systems.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

bhaagensen wrote:
> Not sure Im following Mnyb. As far as the high-end manufacturers go, I
> think they've been trying to the opposite - to make it easy and
> userfriendly. Most either support upnp or use their own protocol like
> SB. The driver stuff is for the DIYers who do *not* want to spend their
> bucks on the expensive highend plug'n playish systems.

Yea I confused some of my rant with what they do with external USB dac's
vs upnp streamers like linn ,sorry . For dlna solutions the "expensive
box syndrome" holds ,but upnp sort of works striaght out .
Audiophiles rarely think in multiroom it is often one player solutions
they want .


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[agentsmith]

Hi, I happen to owned both the Transporter and a Naim DAC. Since then I
have "upgraded" to dCS Debussy driven by Mac Mini and Pure Music.

I never made a comparison between these DACs, but I still miss the
Transporter for its excellent display and interface. And my memory of
it, not having made comparison side by side, is not too shady either.

Question for below, have you tried mating the Transporter with one of
those DACs, especially the Debussy? Will I reap the full benefit of the
improvement? Or is USB/Pure Music or Amarra the connection of choice.


I am about to order a Transporter SE before they disappear from the face
of the earth, which it seems is the direction it is heading.

thanks in advance.

jh901 wrote:
> The top digital players are manufactured by dCS and their "ring DAC" is
> pretty much the king. For redbook only, the Naim CD-555 is world class.
> Those and many, many other players (excluding the many outboard DACs)
> have sound quality that will surpass the sound quality of the
> Transporter by a huge margin. Here's a shortlist:
>
>
> dCS "Ring DAC" (Scarlatti, Paganini, Debussy, Puccini)
> Naim DAC (CD-555)
> CH Precision C1 DAC
> APL DAC-M (Designer: Alex Peychev)
> Light Harmonic Da Vinci
> Playback Designs MPD-5
> MSB Diamond DAC IV
> EMM Labs DAC2
> Burmester (069, 089, 113)
> Wadia 9 series
> Audio Research Reference DAC
> Simaudio 750D (built in transport but mainly a DAC)
> Zanden 5000S
>
>
> Note that the next level down includes players such as the Cary 306 SACD
> Pro, which is now my reference player. The leap in sound quality over
> the Transporter was shocking. My speakers are very high resolution, so
> that's part of the equation, but nonetheless I would not have recognized
> the sound of my system by ear with the Cary replacing the Transporter.
> And that's no hyperbole. Anyone who suggests that DACs sound pretty
> much the same either (a) have never heard a great one (b) have other
> weak links in their chain (c) have such a poor set up that no system
> will sound good or (d) have limitations with hearing. There's a good
> reason why many seeking the very best pay $5, 10, 20 thousand or even
> much more for a digital front end.
>
> Note that dCS is set to release Vivaldi soon. Priced at over $100
> thousand. I'm betting it will be worth it for those with "statement"
> speakers and amplification.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
agentsmith's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1838
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[caseyse]

agentsmith wrote:
> Question for below, have you tried mating the Transporter with one of
> those DACs, especially the Debussy? Will I reap the full benefit of the
> improvement? Or is USB/Pure Music or Amarra the connection of choice.

Hi,

I'm about to pull the trigger on a Debussy to add to a Transporter. I'm
very accustomed to the sound of the Transporter's DAC and I'm looking
forward to adding the transparency of dCS' Ring. I use Stax SR-009 cans
with an SRM 727II amp, using XLR balanced output from the Transporter.

I recognize there's no best setup for all. I happen to be in a small
minority of people who like "analytically" sounding music without added
"warmth". I want to hear everything, the spit on the lips, the dead
space between the notes. I liked jh901's analogy to a Camry...my two
daily drivers are a 1k hp F1R 427 meth injected Vette and a 700 hp Gen
IV Viper. Like DACs, different tastes for different people.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
caseyse's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=36880
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

Hi Res PCM versus DSD: I don't care if either is better necessarily,
but I do care about who is doing the mastering work. THAT is the key
and audiophiles overlook that aspect of digital (or vinyl) and likely
always will until Stereophile and Absolute Sound figure it out. Steve
Hoffman/Kevin Gray have mastered 50 Blue Note albums on Hybrid SACD for
Analogue Productions and also the entire CCR catalog, which is sublime.
Additionally, Audio Fidelity has released a few SACDs in the past and
recent news indicates that they are planning more (finally).

Is there a single Hi-Res PCM download that I'd take over my excellent
redbooks in the rock genre (50s to 80s)? I doubt it. Redbook is pretty
killer when the mastering is right and a hi-end DAC is involved.

Now then, it does bother me that Sony has trapped DSD in the SACDs.
Ridiculous. But that's the situation. I understand that it isn't going
to change anytime soon so I've moved on. There are plenty of hi-end
SACD players with a Hi Res PCM DAC section (to hook up a network
player). Granted, they are rather costly but do we really expect to
have $1,000 front end for a $25+ grand system!?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

agentsmith wrote:
> Hi, I happen to owned both the Transporter and a Naim DAC. Since then I
> have "upgraded" to dCS Debussy driven by Mac Mini and Pure Music.
>
> I never made a comparison between these DACs, but I still miss the
> Transporter for its excellent display and interface. And my memory of
> it, not having made comparison side by side, is not too shady either.
>
> Question for below, have you tried mating the Transporter with one of
> those DACs, especially the Debussy? Will I reap the full benefit of the
> improvement? Or is USB/Pure Music or Amarra the connection of choice.
>
>
> I am about to order a Transporter SE before they disappear from the face
> of the earth, which it seems is the direction it is heading.
>
> thanks in advance.

I would only use a network/computer "player" with USB outputs in order
to take full advantage of the Debussy. The asynchronous USB will ensure
that the Debussy will slave what it is fed to its own clock. I'm not
sure if there is a solution with an interface that is as nice as what
Squeezebox offerered, but I'd sacrifice a little bit in that area in
order to get the best sound quality from a $10+ grand DAC investment.
You should work with your dealer or contact your region's dCS rep.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[TheOctavist]

if you want DSD, just get the mytek DAC and software of choice.

job done.


IMO, the SBT is still the king of them all. nothing else offers the
same flexibility, format handling, apps, radio, and convenience coupled
with fantastic SQ.

these other "streamers" are terrible wastes of money. Linn? LOL

Naim? ? Give me a break.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
TheOctavist's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52700
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[bhaagensen]

Mind elaborating? Because there is no difference, littlebut too little
difference, difference for the worse, less features, too expensive
somehow, or???


------------------------------------------------------------------------
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

bhaagensen wrote:
> Mind elaborating? Because there is no difference, littlebut too little
> difference, difference for the worse, less features, too expensive
> somehow, or???

Two simple reasons:

1) All digital audio streamers (aka music streamers) do is feed a
digital audio data stream to a DAC. That digital audio data stream is
normally located on some remote server. Any properly functioning
streamer will just stream the digital audio data UNALTERED to the DAC,
therefore since the data must be UNALTERED, all streamers will "sound"
the same, just as ALL properly functioning digital cables (coax,
optical, HDMI, Cat 5/6 or USB) "sound" the same.

1A)The SB Touch is one of the least expensive music streamers
available.

2) The SB Touch user interface and music library management (aka
Squeezebox Server or Logitech Music Server) software along with its the
vast array of feature enhancing plugins is far superior to any other
streaming device's user interface and music library management software.
For example iTunes and Microsoft Media Center are both totally
worthless.

That said perhaps the Sooloos system is equal to or even superior to the
SB Touch/LMS system but at $10,000 I will never find out. In any event
the Sooloos system is far less flexible on the computer hardware side.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[bhaagensen]

Lots of people have gear in the 10k-class - especially if bought
pre-loved.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

bhaagensen wrote:
> Lots of people have gear in the 10k-class - especially if bought
> pre-loved.

I have plenty of expensive audio equipment, much of it bought
"pre-loved" but no single piece of equipment in the 10K+ class. Please
note that I did state that Sooloos system may be better than or equal to
the SB Touch/LMS system. Perhaps you or one of those people with 10K+
equipment would care to give us poorer folks some first hand
observations :)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

I have a complete Meridian home theater >10k$, but I would never spend
that money on the digital front end as it makes no sense .
The high end brands also have streamers ,but as a pure digital front end
they makes no difference and the LMS server combined with iPeng is the
best interface I know of so why pay more for less ?
For an audiophile in need of an excellent DAC and only one player ( no
multi room ) there is a niche for the linn's etc .


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[bhaagensen]

The problem I intended to adress was that of mixing cost (value for
money) with the question of wether front ends can sound relatively
better/worse/different. Also there is some confusion as to wether a
front end includes a dac-stage or not - said Linn and Naim have no
digital only transports and only one pure dac afaik. So we're not
talking about Naim and Linn as expensive digital transports here, I
assume?

My experience is that transports make a difference - regardless of
definition - but I do not have enough experience to in terms of cost,
classify sound quality - if such classes exists at all? I do know that I
have heard some rather expensive stuff sounding better than anything
else I've heard. I've heard many, but far from all budget-offerings.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[caseyse]

bhaagensen wrote:
> My experience is that transports make a difference - regardless of
> definition - but I do not have enough experience to in terms of cost,
> classify sound quality - if such classes exists at all? I do know that I
> have heard some rather expensive stuff sounding better than anything
> else I've heard. I've heard many, but far from all budget-offerings.

I consider digital only transports, no upscaling, no analog, pretty much
the same (video and/or audio). Gone are the days of my spending $$$ for
a transport where I'm only outputting a digital signal. Same with
digital cables, assuming you stay within the boundaries of their
ratings.

I almost fell out of my chair when ordering my Debussy DAC. To help
close the sale, the dealer through in a 1 meter XLR digital cable. He
said this was the entry level cable for this particular brand (there
were two more expensive cables in the brand) but I could trade it up to
a better cable within a year and receive full value. After one year I
would get 70% value. I'm totally dazed trying to understand the
conversation, but I thanked him for the cable and said I'll forgo
purchasing my $28 cable from Blue Jeans Cable. The tone of his voice
dropped a notch as he said the 1-meter digital XLR cable he as giving me
sells for $500 USD!

So, I can't wait to use this awesome 1-meter $500 digital cable. It
will be an excellent complement to my $28 analog Blue Jean XLR cables I
will be using to connect the Debussy to my Stax 727II amp (soon to be
upgraded to a Cavalli Liquid Lightning amp.) All kidding aside, I'm
sure it's a beautiful cable. But only being 1-meter in length, I don't
think I was at significant risk for dropping digital packets between the
Transporter and DAC. However, I have been thinking about getting one of
those $1,000 oxygen free power cables for the Debussy so I can deliver
the quality power this DAC demands :-)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
caseyse's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=36880
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[DaveWr]

Mnyb wrote:
> I have a complete Meridian home theater >10k$, but I would never spend
> that money on the digital front end as it makes no sense .
> The high end brands also have streamers ,but as a pure digital front end
> they makes no difference and the LMS server combined with iPeng is the
> best interface I know of so why pay more for less ?
> For an audiophile in need of an excellent DAC and only one player ( no
> multi room ) there is a niche for the linn's etc .

Note Linn DS has fully multiroom capability. You can synchronise lots
of them.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
DaveWr's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9331
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Archimago]

ralphpnj wrote:
>
> That said perhaps the Sooloos system is equal to or even superior to the
> SB Touch/LMS system but at $10,000 I will never find out. In any event
> the Sooloos system is far less flexible on the computer hardware side.

Ralph,
Curious what's so special about the Sooloos stuff anyways? The Media
Core 600 looks like a nice server and it looks like some good looking
hardware... Touch screen interface/monitor seems cool but iPengHD or
SqueezePad is just fine (they've got an app as well obviously). Am I
missing something? Basically an expensive turnkey system marketed to
those who can afford (or want) it transferring audio data via Ethernet?

Here's in interesting look into one of the units - don't know which
model, I guess the touchscreen base unit:
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=408084

VIA Epia motherboard?
RME Hammerfall PCI soundcard?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

Archimago wrote:
> Ralph,
> Curious what's so special about the Sooloos stuff anyways? The Media
> Core 600 looks like a nice server and it looks like some good looking
> hardware... Touch screen interface/monitor seems cool but iPengHD or
> SqueezePad is just fine (they've got an app as well obviously). Am I
> missing something? Basically an expensive turnkey system marketed to
> those who can afford (or want) it transferring audio data via Ethernet?
>
> Here's in interesting look into one of the units - don't know which
> model, I guess the touchscreen base unit:
> http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=408084
>
> VIA Epia motherboard?
> RME Hammerfall PCI soundcard?

Thanks for the link - a very interesting and eye opening read. The link
to the Meridian Sooloos site
(http://www.meridian-audio.com/sooloos/index.php) features a very nice
video of how the Sooloos system works, complete with a British accented
voice over. For those of you who are not from the US, here in the US
anything sold with a proper British accent is understood to be very
classy and very expensive :)

After reading the thread and watching the video I now feel pretty
certain that I have a computer based digital music playback almost on
par with the very classy and expensive Sooloos system. My system
consists of a Squeezebox Transporter with the balanced analog outputs
feeding my SimAudio preamp and power amp and Vandersteen speakers. My
dedicated music server is an HP desktop computer running Windows 7 along
with two Drobo arrays which hold my digital music library, a library
comprised of 16/44.1, 24/44.1. 24/48, 24/88.2 and 24/96 fully tagged
flac files. To complete the faux Sooloos experience I also have a laptop
computer which runs the latest version of MUSO
(http://klarita.net/muso.html), a very nice front end controller for the
Squeezebox Server. Although MUSO is not a touch screen interface, it
does offer of the features found in the Sooloos interface, should one
care to take the time to rate the music in one's collection as well tag
things like mood, scenario, etc. In addition I also use Moose
(http://www.rusticrhino.com/drlovegrove/), another very nice front end
controller for the Squeezebox Server. While Moose is not as feature rich
as MUSO it does offer blazingly fast good old text based searching,
something I treasure given the large size of my music library.

I also have an additional three SB Touches, one SB Classic and one SB
Duet located throughout my house, giving me complete access to my entire
music library anywhere I have an audio system. All in all, I'd say that
the Squeezebox based streaming digital music playback system is on par
with any other streaming digital music playback system currently
available, regardless of price.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[jh901]

ralphpnj wrote:
> My system consists of a Squeezebox Transporter with the balanced analog
> outputs feeding my SimAudio preamp and power amp and Vandersteen
> speakers.

Gotta get a hi-end DAC involved. You will forget about the Transporter
analog outs in a heartbeat. If you live anywhere within a hundred miles
of a Cary, dCS, Playback Designs, etc dealer, then I urge you to borrow
a burned in unit for a few hours. It will be worth it simply for the
post describing your experience in this thread. LOL. I predict it will
be a classic.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[bhaagensen]

Anyway as far as choosing Naim as an example of.... what Im not sure,
but it seems ill-chosen. In fact I think they have gone to lenghts in
keeping up with times. Their Uniqute integrated amplifier features
streaming, FM, DAB, USB input, iDevice digital connecticity, analouge
and digital inputs, ie can be used as dac, 24/192 capability, and of
course an integrated amplifier mobile-apps at a price of about 1500
gbp/2400 usd. Keeping in mind that Naim was never budget, I think this
is a very fair offering for an all-in-one package with up to date
features - hardly niche! There is even the (more expensive) Unity-model
with a CD player in.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[bhaagensen]

ralphpnj wrote:
> All in all, I'd say that the Squeezebox based streaming digital music
> playback system is on par with any other streaming digital music
> playback system currently available, regardless of price.

Arguably The best up to the point of derivering the digital stream.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

jh901 wrote:
> Gotta get a hi-end DAC involved. You will forget about the Transporter
> analog outs in a heartbeat. If you live anywhere within a hundred miles
> of a Cary, dCS, Playback Designs, etc dealer, then I urge you to borrow
> a burned in unit for a few hours. It will be worth it simply for the
> post describing your experience in this thread. LOL. I predict it will
> be a classic.

I was hoping to win at part of the recent $580 million PowerBall jackpot
but no dice. So for now I'll just have to live with the Transporter,
although I don't doubt there are plenty of very nice sounding DACs which
can improve on the Transporter.

bhaagensen wrote:
> Anyway as far as choosing Naim as an example of.... what Im not sure,
> but it seems ill-chosen. In fact I think they have gone to lenghts in
> keeping up with times. Their Uniqute integrated amplifier features
> streaming, FM, DAB, USB input, iDevice digital connecticity, analouge
> and digital inputs, ie can be used as dac, 24/192 capability, and of
> course an integrated amplifier mobile-apps at a price of about 1500
> gbp/2400 usd. Keeping in mind that Naim was never budget, I think this
> is a very fair offering for an all-in-one package with up to date
> features - hardly niche! There is even the (more expensive) Unity-model
> with a CD player in.

The problem with the Niam is the same as the problem with almost all
other "high end" streaming devices/systems, except for the Sooloos,
which is a substandard user interface and terrible music library
management. Sure there are mobile/tablet apps that help but they are
still way behind the SBS/LMS interface and music library management.

bhaagensen wrote:
> Arguably The best up to the point of derivering the digital stream.

Agreed, but as I stated in post #75 above, all music streamers should
deliver identical digital data streams to the DAC so it's only the cost,
flexibility, user interface and music library management which (should)
set the streamers apart.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

Ok linn do multi room to ,how is the user interface ? But it would be
pricey just like doing multi room with sooloos ?
I can see a sooloos system at my local hifi dealer ( he constantly tries
to sell it to me ) and a naim unit but the naim unit he showed had very
poor UI it was like an old mp3 player ( migth have been an old model ).

I agree about the substandard UI and terrible dlna/upnp solutions ,
coincidentally sooloos like squeezeboxes uses thier own proprietary
system ,but even here there is a problem .
No third party apps .
And many such options are very limited in other systems too ,do they do
spotify and bandcamp ?
People always nag Logitech for not supporting [ insert new music service
of the week ] but it seems to me that our squeezeboxes has massive
support compared to others ? And with the new Qubous plugin the only
product with the possibility of a lossles streaming service , if speak
French :/

And then I agree that you are going to need to conect it to a good DAC ,
I disagree that only the most obscure and expensive DAC's would cut it ,
there are properly done DAC's for less that are transparent to humans .
I for example have problems with solutions that introduces to much a
"house sound" never liked naim for that reason they have improved but I
would rank any solution that introduces deliberate colouring of the
sound less than a squeezeboxes .
Squeezeboxes analog stuff falls short on thier natural limits but that's
gets you much further than following some confused fetisch idea that
guides much high end design ?

Of topic : having the speaker crossover done digitally offsets the whole
scheme this makes much more difference than any DAC could or even a good
analog active crossover does it . The coloration introduced by passive
xover are magnitudes greater than what the DAC does ( unless it is one
the flawed dac designs ).
The problem here is that the selection of active speakers are a bit
limited and active digital speakers are even rarer , if you can't find
one suitable to your taste or acoustics You can't have one.
But at the eye watering prices we are discussing here you could convert
a room to an acoustically treated studio an buy pro speakers and be done
for less, but then is high end really about sound these days it seem to
be something else;) a squeezebox + a treated listening room + active (
digital ) pro speaker your done for a 1/10 of the price :) if sound is
what you want .


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Archimago]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Thanks for the link - a very interesting and eye opening read. The link
> to the Meridian Sooloos site
> (http://www.meridian-audio.com/sooloos/index.php) features a very nice
> video of how the Sooloos system works, complete with a British accented
> voice over. For those of you who are not from the US, here in the US
> anything sold with a proper British accent is understood to be very
> classy and very expensive :)
>
> After reading the thread and watching the video I now feel pretty
> certain that I have a computer based digital music playback almost on
> par with the very classy and expensive Sooloos system. My system
> consists of a Squeezebox Transporter with the balanced analog outputs
> feeding my SimAudio preamp and power amp and Vandersteen speakers. My
> dedicated music server is an HP desktop computer running Windows 7 along
> with two Drobo arrays which hold my digital music library, a library
> comprised of 16/44.1, 24/44.1. 24/48, 24/88.2 and 24/96 fully tagged
> flac files. To complete the faux Sooloos experience I also have a laptop
> computer which runs the latest version of MUSO
> (http://klarita.net/muso.html), a very nice front end controller for the
> Squeezebox Server. Although MUSO is not a touch screen interface, it
> does offer of the features found in the Sooloos interface, should one
> care to take the time to rate the music in one's collection as well tag
> things like mood, scenario, etc. In addition I also use Moose
> (http://www.rusticrhino.com/drlovegrove/), another very nice front end
> controller for the Squeezebox Server. While Moose is not as feature rich
> as MUSO it does offer blazingly fast good old text based searching,
> something I treasure given the large size of my music library.
>

Nice system!

Speaking of plugins and front ends like MUSO, do anyone know if there is
a plug-in / front end that will scan the directory of albums and look
for scanned covers/booklets/etc.? For example, some HDTracks downloads
have PDF books, and over the years I have scanned in pictures of the CD
booklets usually put in the "Art" directory where all my FLAC's are
located.

This is one thing I have missed - being able to 'flip' through the
booklet when listening to the music...


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

Archimago wrote:
> Nice system!
>
> Speaking of plugins and front ends like MUSO, do anyone know if there is
> a plug-in / front end that will scan the directory of albums and look
> for scanned covers/booklets/etc.? For example, some HDTracks downloads
> have PDF books, and over the years I have scanned in pictures of the CD
> booklets usually put in the "Art" directory where all my FLAC's are
> located.
>
> This is one thing I have missed - being able to 'flip' through the
> booklet when listening to the music...

That is exactly what MUSO does! Using MUSO I can view any jpg in the
same folder as the flac files or in a "scans" subfolder. Unfortunately
MUSO does not read pdf files. You can also view simple 'info" text files
located the same folder. so yes, you can flip through the booklet while
listening to the music.

And thank you for the compliment about my main stereo system. I think
that it sounds pretty nice. I also have a very nice sound system in my
computer room as well as a fairly good sounding home theater system,
both of them with SB Touches. My main system is one of the reasons that
I'm not so fond of those "like night and day difference" statements all
too common among audiophiles since, at best, most changes to my system,
be they equipment, cable/wire or source (CD versus SACD versus high rez
download versus vinyl), often result in only subtle differences.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[caseyse]

agentsmith wrote:
> Question for below, have you tried mating the Transporter with one of
> those DACs, especially the Debussy? Will I reap the full benefit of the
> improvement? Or is USB/Pure Music or Amarra the connection of choice.

I've been using a Transporter (XLR balanced) into a Stax 727II amp with
SR-009 cans. I'm receiving a Debussy in about a week to use with the
AES/EBU output from the Transporter. I'll compare this to USB, but I
don't expect to hear a jitter reduction of 15 picoseconds and I don't
have content to take advantage of the 192khz, but I'll give it a try.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
caseyse's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=36880
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

caseyse wrote:
> I've been using a Transporter (XLR balanced) into a Stax 727II amp with
> SR-009 cans. I'm receiving a Debussy in about a week to use with the
> AES/EBU output from the Transporter. I'll compare this to USB, but I
> don't expect to hear a jitter reduction of 15 picoseconds and I don't
> have content to take advantage of the 192khz, but I'll give it a try.

Thank you for putting all this fascination with USB versus coax/optical
into the proper perspective - 15 picoseconds indeed!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[gorman]

Would LMS be capable of transimitting hi-res multichannel files if the
player connected was HDMI equipped? That's the only think I would
*really* like.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
gorman's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[michael123]

pkfox wrote:
> Hi all, the title says it all , I've been away from the front line for a
> while now and get the impression that the Transporter is no longer king
> ! Is this the case - if so who is the new one ?

Weiss MAN301 - with DAC or without. I heard DAC202 on my system and it
easily beats my modded Transporter on redbook, with high-rez they are
close. That's what is going to replace my Transporter anyway once Daniel
implements parametric EQ.

Aurality L1000

Aurender S10

PS Audio PerfectWave DAC with Bridge

upgraded Linn Klimax DS

Naim HDX

Resolution Audio Cantata

Bladelius Embla

Constellation Audio Cygnus


These are players (with or without DAC). dCS, EMM, etc. - are DACs.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[TheOctavist]

a touch with external dac can not be bettered. the touch already
measures excellently add an external DAC to further nullify non existent
digital bogeymen and really, it is as good as it gets.

nothing can top it performance wise. nothing.


maybe different features, gui, audiophile jewelry bling..but
performance? cant be bettered.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
TheOctavist's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52700
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[SBGK]

TheOctavist wrote:
> a touch with external dac can not be bettered. the touch already
> measures excellently add an external DAC to further nullify non existent
> digital bogeymen and really, it is as good as it gets.
>
> nothing can top it performance wise. nothing.
>
>
> maybe different features, gui, audiophile jewelry bling..but
> performance? cant be bettered.

agree 100 %, I hope they carried out double blind tests before coming up
with these lists.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[DaveWr]

SBGK wrote:
> agree 100 %, I hope they carried out double blind tests before coming up
> with these lists.

Bit of a cop out - assuming low jitter, the sound quality is down to the
DAC.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
DaveWr's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9331
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[banned for life]

SBGK wrote:
> agree 100 %, I hope they carried out double blind tests before coming up
> with these lists.

for sure


------------------------------------------------------------------------
banned for life's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56269
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[darrenyeats]

You guys are nailing it IMO. Mastering is the key factor for SQ, not
format.
Darren

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk 2


------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[darrenyeats]

jh901 wrote:
> Gotta get a hi-end DAC involved. You will forget about the Transporter
> analog outs in a heartbeat. If you live anywhere within a hundred miles
> of a Cary, dCS, Playback Designs, etc dealer, then I urge you to borrow
> a burned in unit for a few hours. It will be worth it simply for the
> post describing your experience in this thread. LOL. I predict it will
> be a classic.

I've heard dCS at shows several times. They've always been great
sounding systems. But, impressed, I wandered over to the loudspeakers on
each occasion...I'm not a high-end source believer! Sure, some of these
high end front ends sound great.

But I believe well-engineered digital sources which are designed for
transparency will all sound very similar, if not identical, on the
highest end systems available. Anything which sounds distinctly
different is probably designed to sound exactly that way, not to be
transparent.

What happened to megabuck CD players--Krell etc-- from the 90s? No doubt
they were good for their time but their performance has been eclipsed by
cheap modern DACs. Technical advancement in the digital domain is much
quicker than the traditional hi-fi! When I wonder if a megabuck source
would help, I remind myself about those old megabuck CD players and how
they are good for door stops now.

My view is that Benchmark DAC2, Weiss are currently top draw from a
technical performance POV despite being cheaper than ultra high-end.
Darren




Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 2


------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[darrenyeats]

The most important things are recording, room acoustics, loudspeakers.

The effective SQ of a good recording on my Roberts kitchen system far
exceeds that of a poor recording on my main system. You can't un-brick
wall a brick walled remaster etc. In this sense "source first" is
correct. It's just that variation between recordings utterly dwarfs any
differences between well-engineered digital front ends. It's probably
well worth spending effort, time and money on seeking out better masters
of your favourite recordings.
Darren

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 2


------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

darrenyeats wrote:
> The most important things are recording, room acoustics, loudspeakers.
>
> The effective SQ of a good recording on my Roberts kitchen system far
> exceeds that of a poor recording on my main system. You can't un-brick
> wall a brick walled remaster etc. In this sense "source first" is
> correct. It's just that variation between recordings utterly dwarfs any
> differences between well-engineered digital front ends. I believe it's
> well worth spending effort, time and money on seeking out better masters
> of your favourite recordings.
> Darren
>
> Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 2

True Darren but also keep in mind that even the best mastering cannot
rescue a bad recording. For example even the superbly remastered
collection of the original Louis Armstrong Hot Five and Hot Seven, "The
Complete Hot Five and Hot Seven Recordings" cannot manage to provide the
missing high and low end that was not captured when these seminal
recordings were made back in the 1920s. Sure this is an extreme case but
nonetheless just as great equipment cannot correct poor mastering, great
mastering cannot correct a poor recording.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

ralphpnj wrote:
> True Darren but also keep in mind that even the best mastering cannot
> rescue a bad recording. For example even the superbly remastered
> collection of the original Louis Armstrong Hot Five and Hot Seven, "The
> Complete Hot Five and Hot Seven Recordings" cannot manage to provide the
> missing high and low end that was not captured when these seminal
> recordings were made back in the 1920s. Sure this is an extreme case but
> nonetheless just as great equipment cannot correct poor mastering, great
> mastering cannot correct a poor recording.

I'm surprised that there are no 24/192 version available yet, they must
sound soo much better ;)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

Mnyb wrote:
> I'm surprised that there are no 24/192 version available yet, they must
> sound soo much better ;)

Sorry to disappoint you but back in the 1920's when the recordings were
made there was only 6 bits (75 cents) available and the only digital
elements involved were Armstrong's fingers.

But all kidding aside, these recordings, as well many other early jazz
recordings, just prove that great music always trumps not so great
music, no matter how much better the recording may be. Case in point:
"Jazz at the Pawn Shop" versus these spectacular early Louis Armstrong
recordings.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Sorry to disappoint you but back in the 1920's when the recordings were
> made there was only 6 bits (75 cents) available and the only digital
> elements involved were Armstrong's fingers.
>
> But all kidding aside, these recordings, as well many other early jazz
> recordings, just prove that great music always trumps not so great
> music, no matter how much better the recording may be. Case in point:
> "Jazz at the Pawn Shop" versus these spectacular early Louis Armstrong
> recordings.

Must enrich myself with more early jazz recordings :)

Don't bash " jazz at the pawn shop" to hard , it is used out of it's
cultural context (I'm from Sweden to btw as are the players on that
record ) they swing quite ok for not being the real thing , but it is
played to destruction at hifi demos .... btw that actual club " the pawn
shop" sounds like that had a beer or two there.
See it like hip hop not from the ghettos of USA people from around the
world will try the genre themselves making something else out of it.

It is in itself quite remarkable that in the 30's 40's 50's 60's etc
there was a large faction of Swedish musicians trying to play Jazz ,that
emulation might not suite people used to the real thing :) this was
obvious white middle class people but they saw the quality in the music
and did their best and i like some of their efforts ., I don't think
racism ever was an issue for those dudes (way ahead of their times ) .

Btw 2: Jazz at the pawnshop is an old analog recording 197X captured on
an old NAGRA open reel deck, it's has it own limits so the SACD is the
usual audiophile scam ,but on the other hand the CD master is old and a
remaster was overdue so the remaster was obviously released on SACD .

BUT YOU ARE CORRECT THE REAL THING BEATS IT ALL , I TO HAVE PROBLEM WITH
ERZATS AUDIOPHILE MUSIC THAT PRETENDS TO BE THE REAL DEAL ? I HAVE A
CERTAIN DISLIKE FOR STOCKFISH RECORDINGS FOR EXAMPLE .
You are Toast the day you select recordings from these special
audiophile brands instead of taking part in the general music culture
and I don't mean the top 100 ,there are a lot of special esoteric music
around that never will hit the charts,


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[ralphpnj]

Mnyb wrote:
> Must enrich myself with more early jazz recordings :)
>
> Don't bash " jazz at the pawn shop" to hard , it is used out of it's
> cultural context (I'm from Sweden to btw as are the players on that
> record ) they swing quite ok for not being the real thing , but it is
> played to destruction at hifi demos .... btw that actual club " the pawn
> shop" sounds like that had a beer or two there.
> See it like hip hop not from the ghettos of USA people from around the
> world will try the genre themselves making something else out of it.
>
> It is in itself quite remarkable that in the 30's 40's 50's 60's etc
> there was a large faction of Swedish musicians trying to play Jazz ,that
> emulation might not suite people used to the real thing :) this was
> obvious white middle class people but they saw the quality in the music
> and did their best and i like some of their efforts ., I don't think
> racism ever was an issue for those dudes (way ahead of their times ) .
>
> Btw 2: Jazz at the pawnshop is an old analog recording 197X captured on
> an old NAGRA open reel deck, it's has it own limits so the SACD is the
> usual audiophile scam ,but on the other hand the CD master is old and a
> remaster was overdue so the remaster was obviously released on SACD .
>
> BUT YOU ARE CORRECT THE REAL THING BEATS IT ALL , I TO HAVE PROBLEM WITH
> ERZATS AUDIOPHILE MUSIC THAT PRETENDS TO BE THE REAL DEAL ? I HAVE A
> CERTAIN DISLIKE FOR STOCKFISH RECORDINGS FOR EXAMPLE .
> You are Toast the day you select recordings from these special
> audiophile brands instead of taking part in the general music culture
> and I don't mean the top 100 ,there are a lot of special esoteric music
> around that never will hit the charts,

We are way, way off topic now but just to finish up the JATPS
discussion, there is plenty ersatz swing jazz still being played today
and most it happens right in NYC on W. 47th St.. The main reason I don't
like this treatment of jazz is that it treats jazz as if it's a dead
that needs to be preserved rather than as a living and thriving music.
So I'll take living musicians playing modern music along with recordings
of the jazz giants of old instead of watered down recreations of the
music such as JATPS.

Not to say that there isn't a place for presentations of jazz repertory,
just not at the expense of living, creative musicians and their music.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[Mnyb]

ralphpnj wrote:
> We are way, way off topic now but just to finish up the JATPS
> discussion, there is plenty ersatz swing jazz still being played today
> and most it happens right in NYC on W. 47th St.. The main reason I don't
> like this treatment of jazz is that it treats jazz as if it's a dead
> that needs to be preserved rather than as a living and thriving music.
> So I'll take living musicians playing modern music along with recordings
> of the jazz giants of old instead of watered down recreations of the
> music such as JATPS.
>
> Not to say that there isn't a place for presentations of jazz repertory,
> just not at the expense of living, creative musicians and their music.

Even more off topic if you are going to do a "cover" infuse some
originality into it ,most music are not original but usually covers
,that’s okay if you do something with it. I'm starting to think that
modern culture has no memory , they are now remaking movies less than a
decade since they original release ??

Are you very into Jazz ? maybe some hint of current musicianship in
another tread ? (as a contrast I’m listening to something modern and
electronic just now )


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407

[darrenyeats]

ralphpnj wrote:
> True Darren but also keep in mind that even the best mastering cannot
> rescue a bad recording. For example even the superbly remastered
> collection of the original Louis Armstrong Hot Five and Hot Seven, "The
> Complete Hot Five and Hot Seven Recordings" cannot manage to provide the
> missing high and low end that was not captured when these seminal
> recordings were made back in the 1920s. Sure this is an extreme case but
> nonetheless just as great equipment cannot correct poor mastering, great
> mastering cannot correct a poor recording.

Yeah sure. The remaster comment was an example of how one recording can
be better than another but obviously the original recording can be as or
much more important. Close mic in a booth is a terrible way to record
vocals IMO but almost all recordings do that!

My comments are purely about SQ not artistic merit. Most of my favourite
music isn't recorded that well and I put up with it!
Darren

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 2


------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407