AudioCircle
Industry Circles => ModWright Instruments (MWI) => Topic started by: IronLion on 10 Apr 2008, 04:12 am
-
If so, I'm wondering how you juggle adjusting the volume without a) losing resolution by attenuating too much digitally and b) having the volume level be too loud. I thought from Srajan's review that there were internal jumpers to adjust the TP's gain, but Dan told me in an email that the internal attenuators (which I'm assuming are the jumpers I just referred to) are bypassed with his mods?
-
I ran mine directly to my amp before adding the 36.5. As long as you stay above -36 or so DB on the Transporter you should have no loss of information. That being said, adding the 36.5 opened up a whole other world of music for me.
-
Ditto here for preamp mo betta. For me, this even holds true for the big NWO 3.0-GO by APL Hifi which is fitted with a variable output for amp direct drive. While Alex laughs me off as liking "pleasant colorations", things with a premium preamp gain in dynamics and intensity. Forget colorations, we're talking a different level of realism. That's true for the Transporter, for the $30,000 NWO and most any source I've tried yet. Granted, it won't just be any preamp that'll do the job and to find one that performs demonstrably better could be costly. I've heard it said that Dan voiced the Transporter with his own LS/PS-36.5, hint hint, cough cough :green:
-
Thanks everybody for replying, I guess what I'm wondering though is, is there any chance that the TP's volume set at -36db will still be too loud in a small room with 26db gain monoblocks, and if so, does that mean I have to get a pre to attenuate the signal without cutting into it digitally?
-
I've run my Modwright TP into my McCormack DNA-500 (gain 27db) and found the digital volume to work fine (-36db only lops off a little resolution, and you're working with 24 bits to begin with). I'd think you're ok.....but:
I third David and Srajan's comments about adding a pre (specifically for me the MW 36.5 dual box DM). Way mo' better.
-
Thanks Ted. Per everybody's comments about the active pre, my reason for not getting a 36.5 is not because I'm convinced source-direct is the best (though I'm also not convinced it isn't, either), but because I don't have $5000 of disposable income at this point. Maybe next year, if the government decides to give out $5000 stimulus payments...
Edit: Ted, do you recall where on the TP's digital volume control you did most of your listening?
-
Lion, look into the Burson Buffer. They're a *LOT* less expensive, and they are the only addition I've made to the chain that didn't degrade the performance. To the contrary, pace was clearly improved.
I haven't tried Dan's pre-, though, and pending what happens with my Transporter, I may have one sooner than later.
-
I third David and Srajan's comments about adding a pre (specifically for me the MW 36.5 dual box DM). Way mo' better.
Even a loney single box seems to work ok for me :wink:
-
Thanks Ted. Per everybody's comments about the active pre, my reason for not getting a 36.5 is not because I'm convinced source-direct is the best (though I'm also not convinced it isn't, either), but because I don't have $5000 of disposable income at this point. Maybe next year, if the government decides to give out $5000 stimulus payments...
Edit: Ted, do you recall where on the TP's digital volume control you did most of your listening?
I looked into ordering external attenuators to solve this very issue and the Endlers pretty much seemed to be the highest regarded.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4c5pt/id2.html
-
DU, thanks for the suggestion, I have considered the Burson solution before and may end up going that route, though more likely I see myself being happy with source direct for a good while and maybe someday in the future getting the itch to try an active pre. I'm not crazy about having to get another power cord and another pair of IC's either. Do you still use one in your system?
-
Ironlion, I read this thread the other day about the loss of SNR and dynamic range and it definitely changed my view on no signal being lost. It is worth a read...
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30916
-
Thanks for the link rydenfan, that is certainly an edifying discussion for anyone interested in running their TP directly into their amps or any other digitally attenuated situation for that matter.
-
Do you still use one in your system?
Nope. The one I auditioned was for just that; auditioning. After gathering opinions from me and others, Wayne did some modifications and is still (I believe) working on projects which incorporate some element of the Buffer.
It worked wonderfully in my system, and if I had known I'd never want the ability to add another source, I'd have ordered one one the spot. Truth is, I was waiting for Wayne to devise some sort of Buffer-based pre, but I don't think it ever materialized.
Incredible performance for the money. All the sonic benefits of the best, most neutral active preamps IMHO, sans the ancillary functions (additional inputs, HT bypass, etc.).
I doubt you'll miss having one, though. I've not suffered without a separate pre, and Dan's modifications will afford you an even better presentation than what I've lived with the past couple of years.
Besides, as my wife is fond of saying, "You can't miss what you don't know you don't have." :D
-
The point of that Slim Devices thread (which not everyone in the thread appreciated) is that when a signal is attenuated then distortion of some kind or other occurs.
1. If the attenuation is done with a passive pre, low distortion I guess, but I've read about issues with impedance matching with passive pres.
2. If the attenuation is done with an active pre, you get some additional distortion and noise.
3. If the attenuation is done digitally, there is no additional distortion or noise but you lose SNR because the signal is quieter but your original noise isn't.
The discussion of bits is a red herring because, at normal volume ranges, no bits are lost from 16 bit material with 24 bit DACs. However any digital attenuation, at normal volume ranges or not, reduces SNR. In order to minimise this loss of SNR it is vital to match the source with your power amp with in-line attenuators (or a power amp with variable input sensitivity). It has nothing to do with bits - and none are lost anyway at normal volume ranges - you are trying to minimise the loss of SNR.
You need to think about whether you prefer the problems of 1/2 or the problems of 3. I think that if after digital attenuation you are left with a final SNR at the power amp of 96db or greater (the SNR of 16 bit recordings) then the only downside of digital attenuation has not managed to pop up its head. In this case digital volume is the nearest thing to perfect available. Assuming you get the in-line attenuation right, subtract 96db from the SNR of the DAC to see how much db you can chop off with digital volume control before getting to that 96db SNR point. For a stock TP that's 24db or 52/100 on the dial. But you have to get the sensitivity matching right first.
Darren
-
Thanks for the post darrenyeats, a very useful summary of the link rydenfan put up and some useful advice. I'll be running the TP direct into some Channel Islands Audio D200's, so impedance-wise it will be a good match, 110ohm on the TP going to a 100k input on the D200's (with 26db gain). Hopefully I won't have to use in-line attenuators (I don't even know if I would, maybe that would drive me to get an active or passive pre) in my setup with soon-to-be-made Timepiece Minis (87db/1w/1m) and a smallish (12'x15') room and the digital attenuation will be just right for my listening needs.
-
Hi IronLion. :)
If the volume at 100 is too loud (warning: could very well be damaging) for your power amp then you will need in-line attenuation. You'll find any decently constructed in-line attenuator to be transparent, in essence they're little resistors. I wouldn't even compare it for a moment to placing any active component in your signal path.
Darren
-
Yeah I'll have to be careful about the volume level for sure, though I must admit I haven't heard good things about in-line attenuators and would be a bit hesitant to put them into my system. I guess for the price though, they might be worth a try. Does anybody know if anybody other than Rothwell makes quality-oriented in-line attenuators for us audio freaks?
-
I looked into ordering external attenuators to solve this very issue and the Endlers pretty much seemed to be the highest regarded.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4c5pt/id2.html
Ironlion, you may have missed my post on the first page. But, I looked quite a bit into attenuators, and the Endler's listed above were the clear favorite. No signal loss at all. He is so busy with orders for them you will have to contact him to see about a deilvery date.
-
Ahh I did gloss over that, thanks rydenfan, those look pretty damn cool. Do you have any on order? I might check these out.
-
Ahh I did gloss over that, thanks rydenfan, those look pretty damn cool. Do you have any on order? I might check these out.
I did, but I cancelled them when my 36.5 shipped and I hadn't received them. I think he is about a one month wait, but you should contact him. They were the best I found.
-
In the Positive Feedback review of the Endlers I see that EVS also makes some, though at nearly three times the cost of the Endlers. I wonder how the two compare...