Transporter Mods...in the works...need input!

Danny Kaey · « **Reply #80 on:** 14 Aug 2007, 06:14 pm »

as I've been saying all along: leave it up to Dan to challenge the big boyz...

aa

mmuuuuuahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa... muuuuuuuuaahahahahahahhaaaaaa!!!

modwright · « **Reply #81 on:** 15 Aug 2007, 01:53 am »

Speak softly and carry a big tube...

.

Seriously though, thank you for your support first of all. This is an exciting project.

The reason for not using the 5687 is because I don't feel that it is a good fit here tonally, and also because I want to use a tube that is readily 'rollable'. The 6DJ8/6922/7308 family is also compatible with the 6N1P and the 6CG7/6FQ7 if you do it right. Add to this a number of rectifier tube options, not just limited to the 5AR4 and you have a lot of flexibility.

The transporter is all about convenience, flexibility and extreme cool factor, in my opinion. To give this unit World Class sonics too, makes it an IDEAL source.

It has digital inputs AND digital outputs, so you can use it with a computer server or laptop, CD/DVD transport, feed it XM radio or other digital source and all will benefit from the ModWright tube analog stage. Building it all into one box makes it elegant, clean and allows for MUCH great WAF (wife acceptance factor). Heck, I know that my wife has raised here eyebrows at it. I'll be working away on the laptop in the kitchen while she cooks dinner and switch albums/tracks and she doesn't understand at first, but thinks it is VERY cool.

In short, convenience is one thing and is worth a lot. If we can make it convenient AND high performance, then we have done our job!

Thanks,

Dan

rpf · « **Reply #82 on:** 16 Aug 2007, 12:27 am »

From you, Dan, World Class Sonics is a given.

A wide choice of output tubes and tube rectification in one box!!!!!

I'm sold.

truckfighters · « **Reply #83 on:** 17 Aug 2007, 04:03 pm »

I am really getting excited too!!!

one question:

with any new SLIMSERVER-software update, the transporter's firmware is beeing updated automatically.

will this be an issue for future firmwares, when you mod the device or is your mod in any case independent from firmware updates?

+ another question for the tube family:

since I have no experience at all with tubes, are there any good sites out there to explain some of the mentioned tubes and their sonic characteristics?

cheers!

modwright · « **Reply #84 on:** 17 Aug 2007, 05:08 pm »

The mods that we are implementing will have no impact whatsoever on the firmware/software updates. It is very cool that the unit automaticly updates itself!

Hmmm...resources for tube info. I would say that the tube asylum at Audio Asylum is quite good. I am afraid that while I am knowledgeable of the tubes that we use, from a technical perspective, I am really not a tube afficianado and don't have the scoop on all the collectibles etc. There are many on AA Tube Asylum that are however.

Thanks,

Dan

PLMONROE · « **Reply #85 on:** 18 Aug 2007, 01:42 pm »

Dan, is there a way to I2S outputs to this -- please, please. please?

Paul

DARTH AUDIO · « **Reply #86 on:** 18 Aug 2007, 01:52 pm »

Truckfighter, Check out this web site. Click on "Tube Data".

http://www.tubebuilder.com/index.html

ted_b · « **Reply #87 on:** 18 Aug 2007, 02:22 pm »

Quote from: PLMONROE on 18 Aug 2007, 01:42 pm

Dan, is there a way to I2S outputs to this -- please, please. please?

Paul

???
Why would you want to bypass all of Dan's work (let alone the internal Transporter DACs) and want to go I2S (a DAC interface) out? If you're into I2S then call Steve Nugent and have the Transporters little brother, the Sb3, umbilicaled to his Pace-Car (which is I2S). Dan's work is all about the tube modded analog stage, which will not be in the signal path if you talk I2S. Please explain.

PLMONROE · « **Reply #88 on:** 18 Aug 2007, 07:26 pm »

Because I would like to run the Transporters output into the I2S input of Steve's wonderful PaceCar and then on to my DAC which is superior to the internal DAC of the Transporter. Since few might want this feature (which if possible might well be costly) Dan, perhaps you could make it available as on option? (BTW I have a SB3).

ted_b · « **Reply #89 on:** 18 Aug 2007, 09:07 pm »

Quote from: PLMONROE on 18 Aug 2007, 07:26 pm

Because I would like to run the Transporters output into the I2S input of Steve's wonderful PaceCar and then on to my DAC which is superior to the internal DAC of the Transporter. Since few might want this feature (which if possible might well be costly) Dan, perhaps you could make it available as on option? (BTW I have a SB3).

So, I ask again, why would you want to pay $2k for Dan's wonderful tube analog stage (as well as $2k for the Transporter), and then bypass it and use only the TP front end (same as SB3). Why not just use the SB3 at $299. The Pace-Car reclocks, your DAC does the analog conversion and the analog stage.....what exactly is the Modwright Transporter doing?

Ted

Danny Kaey · « **Reply #90 on:** 18 Aug 2007, 10:14 pm »

good question Ted...

now I am really interested in the answer...

modwright · « **Reply #91 on:** 19 Aug 2007, 12:26 am »

I2S is a good digital format. At this time, I don't see us making this available as part of our work because I am striving to make the Transporter a one-box solution - okay, excluding computer or other digital source.

Dan

04dgmsilv · « **Reply #92 on:** 19 Aug 2007, 01:55 pm »

Dan,

Does what output voltage and impedance does your analog circuit run at? Will this remove the Transporters attenuation options on the SE side? In order to keep the digital attenuation to a minimum in my pre-amp less system I currently run the jumpers in the Transporter @ -20 dB w/ my Gainclone.

I'm currently building a DIY Firstwatt F3 (lower gain) and I may not need as much attenuation, I guess we'll see!!

Thanks for your efforts!

Dan

jrebman · « **Reply #93 on:** 20 Aug 2007, 11:44 pm »

Quote from: truckfighters on 17 Aug 2007, 04:03 pm

with any new SLIMSERVER-software update, the transporter's firmware is beeing updated automatically.

will this be an issue for future firmwares, when you mod the device or is your mod in any case independent from firmware updates?

I don't know about the Transporter specifically, but at least with the SBs, there are reported sonic differences between different firmware versions.

You can get a patch for Slimserver that disables the automatic firmware upgrade either when you install a new version of slimserver, or bring a new player into the system.

And who knows, maybe Mike Galusha will be able to easily update his firmware selector program so you can conveniently load whatever version you like. He's th guy to ask about that though.

-- Jim

ted_b · « **Reply #94 on:** 20 Aug 2007, 11:55 pm »

His firmware selector works great and is easy to run. I run V15 (the supposed audiophile version).

modwright · « **Reply #95 on:** 21 Aug 2007, 05:21 am »

The output at full volume level from the Transporter is about 2V or so. I run it into my preamp and it works well. It is a bit lower than the standard CD output level, but the volume control will not be disabled. The unit will still be functional run direct to the amp.

Output impedance for SE and balanced outs is about 110ohm.

NOW SCHEDULING START DATES:

This week, we are going to start scheduling start dates for these mods. Price is $2000 (mod only), including tube analog stage, balanced and SE outputs, tube rectified with two output tubes. One-box design with no external supply. We will not be stocking the transporters at least initially, only offering mods for customer supplied units.

A $500 deposit (non-refundable) will be required to schedule a start date for the work. Once scheduled, we will arrange ship dates such that the time without music is limited

. We are tooling up for this right now.

Thanks!

Dan

modwright · « **Reply #96 on:** 23 Aug 2007, 03:56 am »

We have once again compared the modified Sony 9100ES to the modified Transporter, this time with the transporter having output transformers installed for balanced and SE outputs and tube-rectified supply installed.

This test proved conclusive that while there are slight tonal differences between the Sony and the Transporter, they are both on the same level of performance. The Transporter for instance may even be a bit more detailed than the Sony, while the Sony had a slightly fuller and warmer tonal balance.

I do believe that we have achieved or goal and I now DO feel that the Transporter is not only a convenient source, but also an exceptional audiophile performing source.

Please contact us if you are interested in having a Transporter modified by ModWright.

Thanks,

Dan W.

richidoo · « **Reply #97 on:** 23 Aug 2007, 04:43 am »

Dan,
Will the tubes be fully enclosed in the case, or protruding? Any special ventilation requirements different from stock?
Thanks and Congrats!! Looking forward to hearing it in Denver aa
Rich

modwright · « **Reply #98 on:** 24 Aug 2007, 04:50 pm »

All tubes will be exposed and heat rejection will be outside the chassis. If it is deemed necessary, then additional ventilation may be added to the bottom of the chassis. It is the intent to use the chassis exterior as heat sink for SS devices and have tubes exposed for heat rejection.

It will actually look really cool with the big rectifier and output tubes exposed

.

Thanks,

Dan

mateo · « **Reply #99 on:** 29 Aug 2007, 04:02 pm »

Might be a dumb question...but where are the locations of the tubes? (left, right, center, etc.) Or maybe is there a photo of the prototype?