Slim Devices TRANSPORTER vs. SB3 + DAC?

Hoots · « **on:** 22 Jan 2007, 07:12 pm »

With Transporter on the cover of Stereophile and a great review I wonder how this could compare to SB3 + a ~$1k DAC?

Is the SB3 DAC better than options under $1k stand alone?

Are the other improvements in the 1 box solution over a 2 box SB3+DAC? perhaps Transporter has lower jitter as a transport AND better DAC?

I currently have an m-Audio REVO card w/Meedio player using ASIO to bypass k-mixer and was simply looking to add a DAC but if this is a better performer and value I would consider it.

I Have the following:
* Onix Ref 3 speakers
* Emotiva DMC-1 pre/pro & MPS-1 amp
* Perpetual Technology P1A interpolation box w/SOCS for Ref 3
* HP Media PC w/Revolution card, Meedio player w/winamp engine & ASIO

I am also interested in a tube pre-amp...like the Dodd Ref Pre I heard in my system last year.

My room is 16' wide by 20' long above garage with 2 dormers on left and pitched side walls. The room is sealed closed by one door at rear center.

tomjtx · « **Reply #1 on:** 22 Jan 2007, 07:27 pm »

There are differing opinions on that, so the best thing you could do is take advantage of the 30 day trial and compare the TP (transporter) to other DACs.

I had a SB3 into a LavryDAC10 which is a great sounding combo. I did prefer the the TP in the end and I sold the Lavry.
I have a friend who sold his TP and kept his Lavry , of course he was off his meds at the time

Truth is we do good naturedly rib each other about our respective decisions.

The TP is the best digital sound I have had in my system and comes real close to the Ayre cx5 .

So close I am sure I would fail a blind test.
Having said all this all the above is just IMO.

Let us know what you decide after all the auditioning.

95bcwh · « **Reply #2 on:** 22 Jan 2007, 07:31 pm »

There's no comparison. You gotta hear both to decide which is best for you. If you haven't yet got a DAC, You can try a Transporter for 30 day risk free. If you like the sound, then you're home and dry.

If you already have a DAC, then you can still try the transporter so you can compare its DAC with your DAC and see which one you like better. If you like your DAC better, then perhaps you don't need to spend $2000 for a transporter.

The next option, is to try a Bolder Cable Company fully modified SB2/3 with Ultimate PS, which will extend your budget to above $2500.

The thing about audio is, you gotta hear it in your system. You will always hear people with different opinion, some say A is better than B or vice versa, it means little unless you have exactly the same gears as the reviewer. You will hear things like: "This is the best I've heard in my 30 years experience, or this is the best I've heard for gears under $20k". A complete meaningless BS talk.

In some instance, even if you have the same gears, you don't have the same ears, and may not share the same taste.

Jitter measurement is only part of the story, I have auditioned the transporter, it has very good measurements, but it doesn't synergize with the rest of my gears even though the source I used is a modified SB3 with much higher jitters.

By the way, Hoots, if you tell us what's the rest of the gears, we may be able to help you to identify the weakest link.

USAudio · « **Reply #3 on:** 22 Jan 2007, 07:40 pm »

Maybe what's needed is what I suggested over at the Slim Devices forum:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=31935

tanchiro58 · « **Reply #4 on:** 22 Jan 2007, 07:58 pm »

Quote from: 95bcwh on 22 Jan 2007, 07:31 pm

There's no comparison. You gotta hear both to decide which is best for you. If you haven't yet got a DAC, You can try a Transporter for 30 day risk free. If you like the sound, then you're home and dry.

If you already have a DAC, then you can still try the transporter so you can compare its DAC with your DAC and see which one you like better. If you like your DAC better, then perhaps you don't need to spend $2000 for a transporter.

The next option, is to try a Bolder Cable Company fully modified SB2/3 with Ultimate PS, which will extend your budget to above $2500.

The thing about audio is, you gotta hear it in your system. You will always hear people with different opinion, some say A is better than B or vice versa, it means little unless you have exactly the same gears as the reviewer. You will hear things like: "This is the best I've heard in my 30 years experience, or this is the best I've heard for gears under $20k". A complete meaningless BS talk.

In some instance, even if you have the same gears, you don't have the same ears, and may not share the same taste.

Jitter measurement is only part of the story, I have auditioned the transporter, it has very good measurements, but it doesn't synergize with the rest of my gears even though the source I used is a modified SB3 with much higher jitters.

By the way, Hoots, if you tell us what's the rest of the gears, we may be able to help you to identify the weakest link.

[

Hi,

I completely agree with 95bcwh. I will add to the comments of 95bcwh with your listening room and your own room treatments since this matter is also a very critical to your musics. I only trusted the reviewers since I just started to listen to high-end system and now with so many years I have listened to my close friend systems (cost more than 20K) and those at CES and other audio shows I have started to trust my ears and taste.

95bcwh · « **Reply #5 on:** 22 Jan 2007, 08:31 pm »

Good point, I would recommend all new people to follow what Tanchiro58 did, attend a couple of audio shows, it will help you to find the right path.

jermmd · « **Reply #6 on:** 22 Jan 2007, 08:55 pm »

I like the Transporter analog out more than my old Bolder digital-only modded SB3 (with one of the old upgraded power supplies) into a Tact 2.2 (Aberdeen upgraded) and I liked it better than the same SB3 into my Parasound processor. The Tact and the Parasound both have good DAC/preamp stages.

I use a McCormack DNA-500 amp and Salk Veracity HT3 speakers.

This is strictly a matter of taste because I know people who totally disagree with my opinion.

As for the linked thread, I think the Transporter is pretty fairly priced compared to other high end audio equipment. I wish it had a home theater bypass input and I like the idea of a screen on the remote. An internet enabled PDA can be used as a remote now.

ted_b · « **Reply #7 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 04:58 am »

I have both the Transporter (on 30 day) and a used RedWine fully modded Sb3. I like the RWA-SB3 better. To me the TP is clearly quite resolving and detailed, but unmusical in my system. I have reviewed these two in other posts here, on Nervosa and at Slim Forums. It's all about a personal in-home evaluation, as room, upstream and downstream equipment and personal tastes make all the difference.

Thx

Ted

desertrat58 · « **Reply #8 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 05:04 am »

The Squeezebox or Transporter from SlimDevices is used to stream audio from a PC in one room to an audio system in another room, either wirelessly or with an ethernet network cable. This is primarily so you don't have to have a noisy PC in the same room as your audio system. If you have your PC in the same room as your audio system, then you do not need a SlimDevices gizmo. You simply run the PC audio out into your preamp/processor, with possibly an external DAC in between. If you want to experiment with DACs, there are many options from $200 to $1K.

FWIW, I am in the process of exchanging a new SB3 to try a Transporter. If the TP doesen't tickle my fancy, I will try the SB3 with a Benchmark DAC1. I hope I like the TP, even though it is about $500 more than a SB3 + DAC1 combo. The TP has balanced analog outs (like the DAC1), but also has inputs (at least 2 sets) that let you choose between RCA, BNC and optical connectors, that let you plug in other digital devices to use the TP's DAC, plus you can also clock-sink it to another digital device. While the standalone DACs I've looked at also let you connect other devices, none are as versatile as the TP. Plus the TP just looks so darn cool.

Double Ugly · « **Reply #9 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 06:17 am »

Quote from: desertrat58 on 23 Jan 2007, 05:04 am

FWIW, I am in the process of exchanging a new SB3 to try a Transporter. If the TP doesn't tickle my fancy, I will try the SB3 with a Benchmark DAC1.

If you like most of what the TP does but find it's a little analytical or dry, you might consider having it modded unless you're averse to the idea of spending more on it. Despite my concerted efforts to prove myself wrong, I've yet to add a component or cable into the chain and not have it degrade the sound. IME, source --> amp(s) is the only way to go if the system allows.

I've owned two highly-modified SB2s, and I don't miss either of them since taking possession of a Anthony Padilla-modified Transporter. On properly recorded material, I can assure you it is neither dry nor analytical. Obviously no one can say with any assurance what will perform best in your system, but it works for me.

Sorry, can't compare it to a stock model because I had it modded en route.

FWIW, and as always, YMMV.

-Jim

SYSTEM
SP Technology Timepiece 2.1 speakers
Modified Slim Devices Transporter
Butler Monad monoblocks
Stealth Indra Interconnects
Gregg Straley's Reality speaker cables
Black Sand Cable Silver Reference MK V power cords x 3

desertrat58 · « **Reply #10 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 06:10 pm »

Hi Jim:

Sorry, I'm not interested in mods. Somehow, voiding a 3 year warranty on an audiohile (i.e. possibly finicky) device doesen't sit right with me, among other reasons.
If the TP is considered bright and analytical, then that is exactly what I am looking for. The SB3 sounds like mud in my system. I caused quite a stir at the SD forum when I posted "need to brighten sound of SB3 --> TP or DAC?"
Thanks for your input.

Richard

95bcwh · « **Reply #11 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 06:35 pm »

I have listened to both the stock SB3 and the stock TP. I think you will be disappointed if you think that the TP will be brighter than the SB3. In my system, the stock SB3 is certainly brighter. The stock TP has a much more forward sound, certainly warmer than the stock SB3.

If your system is muffed when using the SB3, your best bet is to change your speakers.

Quote from: desertrat58 on 23 Jan 2007, 06:10 pm

Hi Jim:

Sorry, I'm not interested in mods. Somehow, voiding a 3 year warranty on an audiohile (i.e. possibly finicky) device doesen't sit right with me, among other reasons.
If the TP is considered bright and analytical, then that is exactly what I am looking for. The SB3 sounds like mud in my system. I caused quite a stir at the SD forum when I posted "need to brighten sound of SB3 --> TP or DAC?"
Thanks for your input.

Richard

ehart · « **Reply #12 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 07:25 pm »

This is where words get tricky! I think of "more forward" and "brighter" as basically the same thing. But the previous poster says that the Transporter is not "brighter" but is "much more forward" than the SB3. What to make of that?

95bcwh · « **Reply #13 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 07:30 pm »

Quote from: ehart on 23 Jan 2007, 07:25 pm

This is where words get tricky! I think of "more forward" and "brighter" as basically the same thing. But the previous poster says that the Transporter is not "brighter" but is "much more forward" than the SB3. What to make of that?

Bright = emphasis on high frequency

Forward = soundstage is closer to you

See this thread for more discussion on these terms:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=783077&highlight=warm+forward

ctviggen · « **Reply #14 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 07:39 pm »

Quote from: ehart on 23 Jan 2007, 07:25 pm

This is where words get tricky! I think of "more forward" and "brighter" as basically the same thing. But the previous poster says that the Transporter is not "brighter" but is "much more forward" than the SB3. What to make of that?

I was under the impression that you were correct. However, perhaps "forward" does mean that the soundstage is closer to you. In my system, using a modified SB2, the soundstage is well behind the speakers.

95bcwh · « **Reply #15 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 07:57 pm »

ctviggen,
That's what i noticed too.. with the SB2/3, the soundstage is behind the speakers, with the TP, the soundstage is on the same plane as the woofers.

barry

Quote from: ctviggen on 23 Jan 2007, 07:39 pm

I was under the impression that you were correct. However, perhaps "forward" does mean that the soundstage is closer to you. In my system, using a modified SB2, the soundstage is well behind the speakers.

ctviggen · « **Reply #16 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 08:24 pm »

Interesting information about the location of the soundstage. On my SB2, I have analog and digital mods. I've compared these quite a bit, such as SB analog out versus digital out to my Ack Dack, the output of my Proceed transport to my Proceed AVP (as DAC), digital out to my Ack Dack versus my Shengya CDP. Overall, the SB analog out won (though I haven't tried Proceed transport out to Ack Dack -- perhaps I should do this comparison). However, I never thought to compare location of soundstage, although I did compare location and clarity of singers/instruments across the soundstage and reality (at least what I perceived to be reality) of the singers and instruments. If I perform another comparison, I'll also see if I can tell where the soundstage resides.

tomjtx · « **Reply #17 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 08:30 pm »

The soundstage with the TP in my system is decidedly NOT forward. It is well behind the speakers.
95, perhaps you should consider upgrading your speakers or experimenting with speaker placement and room tuning.

The TP soundstage is deep with very natural imaging through my Watt/Puppies, a speaker which is known for it's neutrality and soundstaging.

95bcwh · « **Reply #18 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 08:42 pm »

Upgrade to Watt/Puppies? I have listened to them many times, good sound, although my taste differs. I'm glad you like your speaker though.

Sorry if I wasn't clear on my previous post, when my said my soundstage is on the same plane as the woofer, I was referring to the front of the soundstage, the depth of the soundstage is a different matter, it extends well behind the speakers.

The other thing that will impact the soundstage is the room, my speaker is less than two feet from the backwall, I noticed that if I push the speaker farther away from the backwall, it increase the depth of the soundstage. And then comes the preamp and amp... with my Tact 2.0S, I can play with the target curves to push the front of the soundstage from my nose to 5 ft behind the speaker. I don't have preference on either, all depends on my mood.

The point of my previous post is not to show off my speaker, the point is to note that keeping all things equal, the TP has a more forward sound than the SB3.

Be careful, there're many fans of Salk Speakers in this forum, you don't want to offend them.

Quote from: tomjtx on 23 Jan 2007, 08:30 pm

The soundstage with the TP in my system is decidedly NOT forward. It is well behind the speakers.
95, perhaps you should consider upgrading your speakers or experimenting with speaker placement and room tuning.

The TP soundstage is deep with very natural imaging through my Watt/Puppies, a speaker which is known for it's neutrality and soundstaging.

tomjtx · « **Reply #19 on:** 23 Jan 2007, 08:45 pm »

In your system , you mean.
In mine the TP is not more forward.

BTW, I didn't know you had Salks and I am not dissing them. Different speakers react differently.
Notice I refered to placement and room acustics as well.

So Salk lovers: please no flames

I haven't heard the Salks but I know they are well regarded here.