Slim Devices Transporter!/New $2000 Slimbox
Jul 27, 2006 at 4:41 AM Post #91 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by ehlim
End of the day, it's still better to have an external DAC of your choice with a standard SB3.

Regards


In that case, at the end of the day, it's still better to have the Transporter, an external DAC connected via AES and word synched with an external clock.
 
Jul 27, 2006 at 11:36 AM Post #92 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrith
There's a thread about the Transporter over at audioasylum.com that has many saying it looks like just an upgraded version of the SB3.

On the DAC chip inside the Transporter, the Empirical Audio guy has this to say in the thread: "I have extensively tested this AKM DAC chip. True, it has resolving power, but I just dont feel that it is musical. I have their evaluation board and I modded it extensively. I still dont think it compares to the AD1853 or the BB PCM1704."

I'm looking forward to a detailed comparison (hopefully with at least a bit of blind testing) to other DACs.


Isn't DAC chip is all about resolution power? How can it be musical or not out of the specific circuitry context?

Let's do a test - ask him what CPU is more musical to feed his USB I2S interafce - AMD 64X2 or the new Intel Conroe?
 
Jul 27, 2006 at 8:43 PM Post #93 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by hungrych
No I don't agree with you. I fail to see how the brand name determines the value of a product. I wish you would stop taking every opportunity to diss other dacs so you can get more zhaolu's sold. If zhaolu made a 2k dac I'm sure it would be a revolutionary and unrivaled new entry into the digital world in your eyes, or at least that's what you'd tell everyone.

Small step in features? It's an entirely diffrent product from the Squeezebox, I don't see how you can compare the two at all. The Squeezebox is for streaming audio around the house and acting as a good digital transport, with pretty good analog outputs too. The Transporter is meant as a fully featured audiophile source meant to compete with companies like Wadia or Levinson.



LOL--maybe i have misread something in this thread ,but i have seen no where ori has posted buy a zhaolu from him.


All i have seen is ori posting his Opinions.Thats what a forum is supposed to be about
right?

The dac looks like it has alot of promise though.Atleast it looks nice,but it is all about the sound
 
Jul 28, 2006 at 2:42 AM Post #94 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L
Well, not according to this
smily_headphones1.gif


http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i...;topicseen#new


This link now leads to an offer to sell the 500gig Opus for $2200 with no reference to a flaw or a fix. Apparently it has been edited since you cited it. Could you please say directly what this alleged issue is with the Opus and what the fix is. Thanks.
 
Jul 28, 2006 at 2:49 AM Post #95 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by Riboge
This link now leads to an offer to sell the 500gig Opus for $2200 with no reference to a flaw or a fix. Apparently it has been edited since you cited it. Could you please say directly what this alleged issue is with the Opus and what the fix is. Thanks.



There were scope readings that showed significant amounts of jitter. The fix (by Mauimods) drastically reduced the jitter. Apparently it was an Opus specific problem, and not a problem for the other Olive players.
 
Jul 28, 2006 at 7:51 PM Post #96 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by Riboge
This link now leads to an offer to sell the 500gig Opus for $2200 with no reference to a flaw or a fix. Apparently it has been edited since you cited it. Could you please say directly what this alleged issue is with the Opus and what the fix is. Thanks.


Yup, it's edited, but if you really want to open Pandora's box, you may (or may not) want to read this thread:
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i...?topic=29947.0
 
Jul 28, 2006 at 9:19 PM Post #97 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleestack
In that case, at the end of the day, it's still better to have the Transporter, an external DAC connected via AES and word synched with an external clock.


Wouldn't it be best to use the clock inside the DAC? Why have yet another external device, additional cables, and so forth? Is there something so magical about the clock inside an external device compared to the clock in a high-end DAC?
 
Jul 28, 2006 at 11:45 PM Post #98 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrith
Wouldn't it be best to use the clock inside the DAC? Why have yet another external device, additional cables, and so forth? Is there something so magical about the clock inside an external device compared to the clock in a high-end DAC?




I clock 5 amps and the Transporter to the same clock. Can't do that with an internal clock.
 
Jul 29, 2006 at 2:53 AM Post #100 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleestack
I clock 5 amps and the Transporter to the same clock. Can't do that with an internal clock.


Wow, that must be some setup. So each amp is a DAC also?
 
Jul 29, 2006 at 3:30 AM Post #102 of 148
Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrith
Wow, that must be some setup. So each amp is a DAC also?


Yes. The reason I use the TACT Boz 216/2200s in my 5.1 setup is because of their versatility. For each channel (2 per 2200) you can route signals, set low pass, band pass and high pass Butterworth or Butterworth Squared crossovers (up to 24th order), adjust gain, delay, level, etc. It is all controlled through the 216. I use each 2200 to bi-amp and set crossovers for my Andra IIs, but with a push of a button, I can activate a different setup. I'm waiting on the Mutec iClock, which I will use with everything in that setup. All of the TACT pieces have word synch, including the 2200s. The 2200s only accept a digital signal. The amps are transparent, which is all I ask for, but the versatility is a gearhead's dream. You're always welcome to check it out.
 
Jul 29, 2006 at 11:11 AM Post #104 of 148
That was a good read I was all set on getting the Opus, but know I don't now. Going to have to consider the Transporter now. Although I still like the conveince of the Opus of it being a stand alone unit. Transoter is is much cheaper (1799 through A.Techpushers) but is not a stand alone unit. decisons decisions....
 
Jul 29, 2006 at 2:44 PM Post #105 of 148
Thanks for making my life harder SD!!! I was going back and forth between a Sonos system and the Olive Musica with outboard DAC (Never really considered the Opus as it seemed overpriced). I was leaning more towards the Sonos since the Olive players cannot currently access music on a NAS drive (According to Olive tech support). Now SD throws the transporter into the mix and I can use my old Axim as the remote .... decisions, decisions
confused.gif


P.S. If you haven't read the link above about the Opus, you have to read it. The most audio entertainment I have had without listening to my system
biggrin.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top