What have you compared your MW Transporter to?

ted_b · « **Reply #20 on:** 15 Feb 2009, 10:57 pm »

Michael,
Welcome to the Modwright Transporter's owners club!! It's great source, huh?

Now, let it break in for about 200 hours......
then.......c'mon over to the tube rollers thread.

Oh...and bring your wallet. Can you say "EML and octal adapters"?

JerryH · « **Reply #21 on:** 15 Feb 2009, 11:31 pm »

I agree totally with you, Michael.
I had the stock Transporter for a couple months before having it modded. My turn around was only 2 days, so my familiarity with stock was fresh. The stock TP was pleasant, but to me a bit clinical and obviously a digital source. It was convenient, but my preferred listening sessions were vinyl.
With the Mod, at that time before the Hyper, the MWTP took on a much more analog, natural feel. Also the sounstage was wider. The stock TP was OK, but I missed my modded XA777ES (by both Modwright and Richard Kern). But after getting the TP modded, I knew I'd made the right decision.
The Hyper mod with the Bybees further defined and pinpointed the soundstage, adding further that analog feel and deepened the resolution, control of the bass, and brought that human live presence to the midrange.
I had been using the 6H30 DR's with a brown base Mullard. My recent EML acquisition has now brought the MWTP to parity with my vinyl setup, depending on the recording. For the first time in years, I don't automatically reach for an LP when I really want to get lost in the music.
For me, that's a revolutionary posture, a paradigm shift.

mfsoa · « **Reply #22 on:** 15 Feb 2009, 11:57 pm »

Anyone w/ MWTP vs. Bryston BDA-1 experience?

-Mike

zybar · « **Reply #23 on:** 16 Feb 2009, 12:01 am »

Quote from: mfsoa on 15 Feb 2009, 11:57 pm

Anyone w/ MWTP vs. Bryston BDA-1 experience?

-Mike

Isn't the BDA-1 a DAC?

How would you like to compare it to the Modwright TP?

Digital out of the Modwright TP into the BDA-1 vs. the complete Modwright TP?

George

mfsoa · « **Reply #24 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 02:29 am »

Quote

Digital out of the Modwright TP into the BDA-1 vs. the complete Modwright TP?

I guess this would be the comparison.

Ryden made the point here that it'd be silly to go TP into a DAC, but I was thinking that this would be a good way to get high-rez data to the DAC. (I don't think the SB/Duet can pass greater than 16/44 to a DAC).

I like the fact that the Bryston has multiple digital inputs and can act as a control center for digital data from a CD transport, wireless device, USB, HD radio etc. and is supposed to sound great.

But if the MWTP poops all over the Bryston sound-quality-wise I guess the MW would be the way to go, and one can just use the TP inputs for at least a few digital sources (Not sure how much can be connected to the TP - You can connect a CD player's digital out to the TP, right?)

Thanks

-Mike

ted_b · « **Reply #25 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 02:35 am »

Yes, the TP has multiple digital inputs, and is capable of 24/96 max. It has coax, AES/EBU, BNC coax (true 75 ohm) and toslink.

Philistine · « **Reply #26 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:47 am »

Quote from: JerryH on 15 Feb 2009, 11:31 pm

For me, that's a revolutionary posture, a paradigm shift.

Jerry, I think you've hit the nail on the head with this statement. With the EML tube the MW TP no longer sounds like a digital source and has the extra detail you can't get from vinyl, I sit listening to music thinking this must be exactly what it sounded like in the recording studio or at the venue.
Phil

zybar · « **Reply #27 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 01:50 pm »

Quote from: mfsoa on 17 Feb 2009, 02:29 am

Quote
Digital out of the Modwright TP into the BDA-1 vs. the complete Modwright TP?

I guess this would be the comparison.

Ryden made the point here that it'd be silly to go TP into a DAC, but I was thinking that this would be a good way to get high-rez data to the DAC. (I don't think the SB/Duet can pass greater than 16/44 to a DAC).

I like the fact that the Bryston has multiple digital inputs and can act as a control center for digital data from a CD transport, wireless device, USB, HD radio etc. and is supposed to sound great.

But if the MWTP poops all over the Bryston sound-quality-wise I guess the MW would be the way to go, and one can just use the TP inputs for at least a few digital sources (Not sure how much can be connected to the TP - You can connect a CD player's digital out to the TP, right?)

Thanks

-Mike

Mike,

Going with a stock Transporter into the DAC of your choice could make sense. Spending all that money to have Dan modify a stock Transporter with that fantastic analog output stage to only run digital out is crazy and simply a waste of money.

George

ted_b · « **Reply #28 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 02:00 pm »

George,
But Mike's last comments, about using the MW TP as a DAC itself is a good one. I do that sometimes. When friends bring over a cd I will hook up the dig out of my Denon 3910 into the MW TP, to take advantage of the TP DAC and Dan's analog stage. (However, in my case the Denon also has that cuz it's a Modwright too, but the later TP DAC is better for cd, just can't do SACD). BTW, the BNC connection is the cleanest by far. IMO (haven't tried AES).

rydenfan · « **Reply #29 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 02:10 pm »

I have been toying with using it more as a DAC as well. I have an Otari pro DAT deck that I use for most of my live recordings with are on DAT. Currently I run it analog out into my 36.5. I may also try digi out into the TP and see what that yields for sonic differences.

zybar · « **Reply #30 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:07 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 17 Feb 2009, 02:00 pm

George,
But Mike's last comments, about using the MW TP as a DAC itself is a good one. I do that sometimes. When friends bring over a cd I will hook up the dig out of my Denon 3910 into the MW TP, to take advantage of the TP DAC and Dan's analog stage. (However, in my case the Denon also has that cuz it's a Modwright too, but the later TP DAC is better for cd, just can't do SACD). BTW, the BNC connection is the cleanest by far. IMO (haven't tried AES).

That makes perfect sense Ted.

However, doesn't that reinforce my point about it being a waste to get a Modwright TP if you aren't going to use the analog output stage?

George

ted_b · « **Reply #31 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:16 pm »

Yes, it does. A few on the Circle have postulated that. It's a waste.

arthurs · « **Reply #32 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:19 pm »

I haven't compared it to anything yet, I keep thinking maybe George, David or Ted will loan me theirs for a comparison?

zybar · « **Reply #33 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:21 pm »

Quote from: arthurs on 17 Feb 2009, 03:19 pm

I haven't compared it to anything yet, I keep thinking maybe George, David or Ted will loan me theirs for a comparison?

Art,

I will gladly lend you mine on my next business trip out of the country.

George

rydenfan · « **Reply #34 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:26 pm »

Art, you are welcome to borrow mine whenever it is convenient for both of us.

ted_b · « **Reply #35 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:31 pm »

I'll be shutting down the music room for the redo (riser, painting, carpet) here in the next month, so mine will be available too.

rydenfan · « **Reply #36 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:37 pm »

Art, you can borrow all three at the same time and report back on the sonics differences between each of our TPs

arthurs · « **Reply #37 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:40 pm »

Wow, I was kidding....but heck now I'm not! What great and generous people we have the opportunity to meet in this hobby....thanks guys.

Let me figure out a couple things on my end and I may just hit one of you up for the favor!

zybar · « **Reply #38 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:48 pm »

Quote from: arthurs on 17 Feb 2009, 03:40 pm

Wow, I was kidding....but heck now I'm not! What great and generous people we have the opportunity to meet in this hobby....thanks guys.

Let me figure out a couple things on my end and I may just hit one of you up for the favor!

I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the performance of the Modwright TP Art. Heck, maybe we can even get you to ditch that old fashioned cd player!

George

rydenfan · « **Reply #39 on:** 17 Feb 2009, 03:51 pm »

Now that would be something