ModWright Modified Transporter - The Wave of the Future!

ted_b · « **Reply #60 on:** 17 Feb 2008, 12:33 am »

David,
What discs? EAC uses freedb and I've not come across more than a couple out of 850 so far, except for undocumented compilations (NY Rave), etc.

rydenfan · « **Reply #61 on:** 17 Feb 2008, 12:41 am »

Last night Disc 3 of the 6 disc Miles Davis Cellar Door Sessions would not register. Also a Phish live in Vegas album did not register. I am on an Apple using MAX software so it is slightly different for me.

Another question, using a bit perfect rip I am averaging about 25 minutes per disc. Is this in line with what you guys are experiencing? Or is this longer? I feel like it will takes months to burn my collection at this rate...

ted_b · « **Reply #62 on:** 17 Feb 2008, 12:45 am »

For me, on a less-than -stellar Liteon LTR-52327S cd rom drive, an EAC rip is typically about 5-7 minutes. A 25 min rip in EAC means quite a few errors detected and re-read. My wife's Linda Ronstadt Greatest Hits Vol 1 took 9 hours overnight..........but it ripped.

cwt108 · « **Reply #63 on:** 17 Feb 2008, 04:56 pm »

I recently gave up my HTB system and went for 2-channel system. I am thinking to use DAC to substitute for my existing AVR.
I wonder if anyone has a take on using Modwright Transporter for such a task. Will I run into the program of decoding digitla signal?
The most important is how the sound will improve with transporter DAC and Modwright Tube add-on.

Anyone has expereince of connecting your blue ray or dvd through the transporter???

I also consider Benchmark DAC1 with USB... however, I much prefer Dan's Tube output.

I currently own Dan's 9100es and very happy with it. The ability to play music from server is not a main concern right now.

As far as the comparison, I suspect that 9100es probably is still better than transporter... anyone has a take on this>>

rydenfan · « **Reply #64 on:** 17 Feb 2008, 11:18 pm »

So, lets talk about some tubes...

As soon as I placed my order with Dan last week, my next call was to Branden to discuss some different tubes to try out. Tube rolling seems like it could be both a gift and a curse for us perfectionist tweek minded people

After talking for some length with Branden about my system he suggested a Cryo treated 5AS4 Rectifier Tube and a pair of Cryo treated 6BQ7 Signal tubes. I would love to hear more about what you guys have experienced with these tubes and other tubes? And how they differ from the stock tubes Dan supplies.

ted_b · « **Reply #65 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 12:09 am »

David,
Dunno about the diff between cryo'd and non-cryo'd. Mine are all NOS non-cryo'd. I personally like both the GZ32 and the 5U4G (both bottle styled) as rectifiers, with the GZ32 my fave. For signal tubes I like the 6BQ7's in the unit right now. My second fave is the 6N1P's.

rydenfan · « **Reply #66 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 12:21 am »

I am not too sure about the Cryo difference except that Branden told me he selects his best tubes for Cryoing and as I have no real tubes knowledge to go on, I simply went with his recommendation. I will of course use the tubes that Dan provides before I start to tinker. I am very curious as to how different tubes will effect the sound.

Philistine · « **Reply #67 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 12:54 am »

To some extent the rectifier tube I've found to be system dependant. The 5U4G sounded less detailed with more rounded muffled bass in my system, the GZ32/5AS4 type is more neutral and the 5AS4 is more strident (more detail and articulate bass). With a tendency towards the 5AS4 I talked to Brendan who didn't believe the TP put enough stress on the tube to warrant trying a cryoed version, but is probably tending towards recommending the cryoed version based on the initial selection of a stronger tube.

As far as signal tubes are concerned the 6N1P's offer such incredible value and beat 6FQ7's & 6H30's that I've tried, but I will try the 6BQ7's in the near future.

The approach I've taken is to start with the 6N1P's as the constant and just roll the rectifier tube, too many variables confuses the issue.

ted_b · « **Reply #68 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 01:16 am »

Phil,
Your 5U4 is not a G, I don't think. Anyway, it's wayyy different sonically and physically than mine (mine's bottle-shaped, yours is not). Yours did sound a bit muffled; my 5U4G is anything but.

Frank S. · « **Reply #69 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 01:24 am »

I'm using a cryo'ed 5AS4 and pair of cryo'ed Tung Sol 6BQ7s with great results so far. I also have a pair of cryo'ed RCA 6BQ7s to try. All tubes are from Brendan at Tubeworld. The MWTP is a marvel with the tubes as shipped from Dan, although I feel the Sovtek 6N1Ps lack some dimensionality and project a forward soundstage.

How about a vintage black plate or metal plate Mullard 5AR4 for the rectifier? Worth it at $325?

https://www.tubeworld.com/kuhltubedetails.htm#82B

Any other suggestions? This is fun

Frank S. · « **Reply #70 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 01:26 am »

Ted- did you ever try a 5AS4 rectifier, and if so how did it compare to the GZ32 and 5U4G?

ted_b · « **Reply #71 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 01:32 am »

Yes and no; Phil lent me his, and I only had about an hour to compare. They were darn close, and I was going though other system changes. Phil did a very nice thing to loan me the tubes while he was in town for business, and I immediately had work meltdown issues (and system changes) that got in the way of listening for any more than an hour to the loaned 5U4 and the 5AS4, this over a two week period.

zybar · « **Reply #72 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 01:47 am »

Quote from: ted_b on 18 Feb 2008, 01:32 am

Yes and no; Phil lent me his, and I only had about an hour to compare. They were darn close, and I was going though other system changes. Phil did a very nice thing to loan me the tubes while he was in town for business, and I immediately had work meltdown issues (and system changes) that got in the way of listening for any more than an hour to the loaned 5U4 and the 5AS4, this over a two week period.

I hate when work gets in the way of audio!

I have spent less time in front of my system over the last two months than any time over the last 5+ years...work is just crazy and it seems like I am traveling each and every week.

Frank, given the cost of the tubes you are thinking about, why not "buy and try" in your system?

George

rydenfan · « **Reply #73 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 01:57 am »

I am interested in talking with different tube vendors to try and get some different points of view. I found this thread which I thought might be of interest to us.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=34599.0

Philistine · « **Reply #74 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 02:13 am »

I talked to Andy at the Vintage Tubes Store (he has a great reputation) , he was out of town for an extended period and I took a conscious decision to go with Brendan as he was advising both Dan and Ted on options. It made sense to give feedback through Brendan in order to help new TP owners to short circuit (no pun intended) the tube rolling process. At the same time he's reliable, honest, knowledgeable and gets tubes out pronto.

The reason Brendan recommends the 5AS4 is that it has a lot of headroom - this is what gives me the deep, tight bass and detail, but it might be too forwards in some systems. The GZ32 is a great tube, I started with the $20 version. I think you're on track with letting the TP burn in first of all, and after a month start to look at tube rolling. By this time their should be more data points.

I have bought tubes on ebay - it's a bit hit and miss, even though its more expensive I feel better informed and know what I'm getting from Brendan.

NB
Ted could have kept the 5AS4 longer, guess he's on the way to becoming a too polite Brit.

Philistine · « **Reply #75 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 12:56 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 18 Feb 2008, 01:16 am

Phil,
Your 5U4 is not a G, I don't think. Anyway, it's wayyy different sonically and physically than mine (mine's bottle-shaped, yours is not). Yours did sound a bit muffled; my 5U4G is anything but.

One of the objectives in letting Ted try these tubes was to check on my 5U4, from this I would ignore my 5U4 comments as not being representative.

modwright · « **Reply #76 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 10:22 pm »

I am not sure exactly which software Neal uses in the Music Vault to rip CD's. I will ask him and hopefully he will post here. I know that it doesn't use EAC, but beyond that, I don't recall what he said it uses.

Thanks,

Dan W.

Sound Science · « **Reply #77 on:** 18 Feb 2008, 11:37 pm »

Hi,

Neal here from Sound Science.

The Software on the Music Vault is Called Grip. Grip uses CD Paranoia to insure rip accuracy. My research indicates that its Performance is very close to that of EAC. I have a USB Hard Drive of ripped wave files from the time before we developed the Music Vault and in comparison to the FLAC files on the Music Vault I can't hear any difference. I ripped all the Wave files before the Music Vault using EAC.

One of the other things GRIP has in common with EAC is that they both use FreeDB to get the metadata for the CD.

I had a conversation with one of the Development fellows at Logitech while I was driving home last week and learned that there is a way to turn on Album art in the latest version of SlimServer 7. I needed both hands while driving so I didn't get to take notes but will be looking into this more this week.

I have a software engineer working on a way to update Slimserver automatically and expect to have that worked out in the next week to 10 days.

We found a quieter case that we are now using for the Music Vault so it looks different than the original picture posted by Dan and Srajan. If you are interested in its new look you can take a peak at my website. www.soundscinececat.com

Thanks for your interest and I hope to start working on a FAQ for the website soon.

Regards,

Neal Van Berg
owner Sound Science

AB · « **Reply #78 on:** 19 Feb 2008, 12:34 am »

Neal, your link is misspelled.

I'll just add it here...

www.soundsciencecat.com

ted_b · « **Reply #79 on:** 19 Feb 2008, 02:28 am »

His signature also has a link, which works. But yes, AB you are correct, Neal needs to fix it within the body of the post.

Neal, good looking new vault box.

By the way, recent Squeeze Center 7 releases have lately been taking forever to scan, due to the new idea that artwork thumbnails be provided as a default (due to Jive, and all the PDA's and pocket PC's being used as remotes). Without caching these, the users first impression of artwork browsing with Jive will be very slow and painful. Many of us are pleading that they turn it off as default, or offer a toggle. I have no real issue with it, due to the fact that I ripped to album files, so I have only as many thumbnails as files. But for those who have album art associated with every song, it can become thumbnail hell. Likely Logitech will fix it (they are great about that) but until then be aware, or use earlier nightlies.