[James Romeyn]

It seems the convenience of servers could make CDPs virtually obsolete one day in the not-too-distant future of audiophileland.

It also appears that the best, ultimate performance is from CDPs w/ on-board DACs, not outboard.  One might surmise an ultimate performance server will probably mimic this architecture. 

I know very little about servers, but have heard them several times.  One I heard at my place was surprisingly good for being stock & very affordable (though not inspiring regarding build). 

The www.Sooloos.com server may be a good base for modification, w/ its dual-mirrored hard-drives.  Each drive mirrors the data on the other.  A failed drive is replaced & you are done.  I think pre-exisiting data is automatically copied.  Jeff Joseph of Joseph Audio used it at CES '07 & said he liked it.  Sorry didn't check the price.

I wonder if there is anyone who might be interested in tackling such a modification?  Hmmmmm...anyone....?





   

[JoshK]

Do you mean HD based players built around a PC or servers that serve the streams to a playback device?  I don't see what mod'ing a server would accomplish.  There isn't any analog in the server, the computer is quite complex and you are likely to screw something up doing this.  It can also be shown that jitter isn't an issue in a server, so it all comes down to the device that takes the stream and turns it into a compatible analog or digital signal to your audio gear.  There is where the problems lies and where the talent will pay dividends.

Olive HD based 'servers' are already being modded by some.  Playback devices like USB > SPDIF devices, USB Dacs and Squeezeboxes are being modded too.

[ted_b]

I just want Dan to build a max'd out DAC!!   I'd love to have his Platinum tubed stage in a DAC, back-ending a nice digitally modded Squeezebox.  I know Vinnie and Wayne have great SB3 mods (I own Vinnie's) but Dan's tubed stage and tube rectified PS are my personal sonic goals.

Ted

[James Romeyn]

A wireless server seems so convenient it's silly, compared to dropping CD's into a drawer.

A one-box source would appear to have higher ultimate performance potential than a server/outboard DAC combo.  Correct this newb if incorrect, but I was under the impression all the serious folk are using their server w/ an outboard DAC-no?

I like the feature in the Sooloos w/ dual mirrored hard drives.  One fails, replace it, done.  Nothing to copy or back up, it's done automatically.  In fact I suppose you could just have a replacement hd sitting around waiting to pop in.  (Though whatever is available at the time one breaks will be newe, probably better & w/ more storage.)

 

[JoshK]

Jim, that is called mirroring, its known as RAID level 1.  I have that in one of my PC's.  I have a slightly more sophisticated version of that in my server, which is called Raid 5, in this case I have 4 HD's which use only 3/4 of the space available, instead of just 1/2 and when any one dies, replace it and you are good to go, no interruptions (theoretically).   There is advantages to having your server seperate from the box IMO, mostly from a noise and EMI seperation.

I personally prefer the Squeezebox solution to the other solutions I've seen because of computer isolation, interface and ability to have noisey parts in another room.

[James Romeyn]

Thanks Josh!

Yes, I like the new SB "Transporter".  I'm asking around now among some of the best modifiers to see if someone will bite the request to "kick it up a notch" as an old fireman used to say...Stereophile says it's good but still below a stock $6k Ayre C-5xe Universal stereo player.  All I want is a step or two above that...Is that asking too much? 

[Double Ugly]

Thanks Josh!

Yes, I like the new SB "Transporter".  I'm asking around now among some of the best modifiers to see if someone will bite the request to "kick it up a notch" as an old fireman used to say...

Mine is already modified, and someone I know said he intends to approach TRL about modifying his stock unit.  Based on what I've heard (mostly read) about them, if they're willing, I'll probably let 'em take a look at mine. 

You can't have too much of a good thing, right? 

[James Romeyn]

Well that's great news.  The more people that bug Brian at TRL about the mod, the more likely they'll do it.

I just now emailed him the same request concerning the SBox "Transporter".  I love the sound of my TRL, but the thought of not having to search for CD's is just tooooo delicious! 

Amen to good things!

[Double Ugly]

I've never heard a stock Transporter, but my modified version is good enough that I'm not shy about comparing it to any digital rig currently available, regardless of price.  Given TRL's reputation, I believe it is conceivable they could take it to yet another level if so inclined.

Unfortunately, the remoteness of my location means my willingness to compare is virtually useless, and thus is reduced to just more 'talk' with no quantifiable support.    

[modwright]

I am very intrigued by the 'Transporter' also, especially after reading the S'Phile review.  A tube output stage is a possibility, or some sort of improved analog stage.  From what I read of its build and design, the clock and power supplies are already very well done.  My guess is that op-amps are used in the output stage and these are not the ideal analog stage for any product.

I am watching this technology closely and design ideas for a DAC are solidly rooted in the back of my mind.  At the moment, I have a full plate as far as production products for MWI - ModWright Instruments Inc. - but am very interested in the Transporter from a mods standpoint.

If someone is willing to send me one to look at and work on, I can guarantee that I will make it worth your while and will offer very generous pricing for the opportunity to have one unit to work on.

Thanks,

Dan W.

[ted_b]

I am very intrigued by the 'Transporter' also, especially after reading the S'Phile review.  A tube output stage is a possibility, or some sort of improved analog stage.  From what I read of its build and design, the clock and power supplies are already very well done.  My guess is that op-amps are used in the output stage and these are not the ideal analog stage for any product.

I am watching this technology closely and design ideas for a DAC are solidly rooted in the back of my mind.  At the moment, I have a full plate as far as production products for MWI - ModWright Instruments Inc. - but am very interested in the Transporter from a mods standpoint.

If someone is willing to send me one to look at and work on, I can guarantee that I will make it worth your while and will offer very generous pricing for the opportunity to have one unit to work on.

Thanks,

Dan W.

Now ya tell me.!      I just sent one back, cuz I disliked the stock sound.  Very unmusical, IMO.   

Not to quell the idea, but the Transporter is a version 1.0 product (in many ways) for Slim Devices, and I wouldn't be surprised by a newer transport soon.    That being said, if you can do your "magic" on it, I'm in.   

[modwright]

Okay, it sounds like a good product on paper.  I had an Olive Musica in here briefly and was VERY unimpressed with its stock performance too.  I looked over the DAC chip and its capabilities and decided that it just wasn't something that I wanted pursue.  I know that others are modifying the Olives and possibly with good success.

The technology is here, it is just a matter of eliminating compression and using good quality DACs and analog stage.  I am not sure how much the software, etc. are effecting the sound, but this approach SHOULD be very musical if done right.

Dan

[Imperial]

I believe the problem as of yet is that to really get the most out of a "computer" storage solution you need that chip that does not exist yet. Namely the asynchronus chip.
The "Nugent transcriptor" we could call it...
But given time, I believe it will be made. Maybe by Steve Nugent.
My bet is on him...

When that chip is there, we've got a direct dac feed without as much as a hickup of jitter...
Then we can "serve up" the meal...

Imperial

[tomjtx]

ted_b ,

Did you listen to the stock TP with RCA or XLR.
In my system the XLR sounds better.

Tom

[Syrah]

Dan,

I don't have Transporter, but I do have an extra SB2 (in addition to your unbelievable fully done up Sony 9100).  According to Wayne (Bolder Cables) the SB2 is easier to mod than the SB3 - more room.

I could send you that to look at, as I have two other SB2s that have gone through the Bolder Cable mods that I use.

Based on comments of members, it's pretty much a draw between the Transporter and a Bolder modded SB3.

Interested?

[ted_b]

ted_b ,

Did you listen to the stock TP with RCA or XLR.
In my system the XLR sounds better.

Tom

RCA's only.   I'm sure the balanced outs are better, but at least I'm comparing se to se (SB3).

[rbrb]

I think this component is a perfect candidate for getting the Modwright treatment...
http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/summary.php?PID=39&Title=Azur%20640H%20Music%20Server%20-%20with%20AudioFile%20technology

[modwright]

I do have a Transporter here right now and stock impressions purely as a DAC are favorable.  I will share more as I get deeper into it.  I agree that there is a need to be filled here.

Thanks,

Dan