[owenmd]

I've mentioned this before, but my experience with the MWT is that using a Burson is significantly better than direct amp connection.... in the case of a quality preamp not being available.

[daz_bike]

Hi,

I find the feedback regarding adding a preamp at odds with my findings.  This week I have tried a Nuforce P9 and Shindo Aurieges L and the direct connection was significantly better.  I believe the board that Dan uses for the MWT is based on 36.5 preamp and think that this contributes to what I am hearing  (less connections, which is degrading to signal).   My amps are Nuforce Ref 9SE V2.

I have a Burson buffer, so I will give that a try soon, but so far no luck with SS pre or Tube pre and the search is still on for a preamp in the US$3,000 range that will be better than the direct connection.  It sounds like the 36.5 is a good match, although I have not been able to try that combo.

Rgds

[zybar]

Hi,

I find the feedback regarding adding a preamp at odds with my findings.  This week I have tried a Nuforce P9 and Shindo Aurieges L and the direct connection was significantly better.  I believe the board that Dan uses for the MWT is based on 36.5 preamp and think that this contributes to what I am hearing  (less connections, which is degrading to signal).   My amps are Nuforce Ref 9SE V2.

I have a Burson buffer, so I will give that a try soon, but so far no luck with SS pre or Tube pre and the search is still on for a preamp in the US$3,000 range that will be better than the direct connection.  It sounds like the 36.5 is a good match, although I have not been able to try that combo.

Rgds

I sent you a PM.

George

[ted_b]

I've tried the MW TP with a pre (Bent TAP passive, Audio Valve Eklipse, Modwright dual mono 36.5 2 box) and without.  In my system, with my ears it is an absolute lock that driving the MW TP with a pre is the way to go..weight, dynamics, soundstage......plus you lose resolution with the internal digital volume control, especially if using 24/96 files (there are no extra bits in the 24 bit buffer to lop off).

[Bigfish]

Rich,

Please keep in mind that each system will be different and the level of attenuation required will also be different.  For example, when I was using the Modwright TP direct into my amps, I listened anywhere from -5 to -25 on the volume control.  In this range, I don't believe I was losing any resolution.  Was I listening at silly levels?  Nope.  It was a combination of having relatively low efficiency on my speakers (~86db), having amp with a relatively high voltage input (almost 3 volts), and a good sized listening room.  On the flip side, I know of Modwright TP owners who had to listen at -50 or even lower and were absolutely losing some resolution.

You and others are spot on about a preamp improving the Modwright TP's performance.  In my case it is a Plinius M8 (sorry Dan) that is doing an excellent job.

George

George:

In both systems where my Transporter was direct connected we had to reduce the volume control to the minus 40 to minus 50 range.  Both times this was done after having had the Transporter connected to a preamp with the Transporter level set to maximum level.  In all honesty with the Transporter direct connected, with the low volume settings, the music died.  I am glad to hear others can direct connect the ModWright Transporter to their amps but there is no question in my system with the SP Tech Timepieces, I cannot.

Ken

[rydenfan]

I as well have tried the TP directly to my amps and with a variety or pre's. Everytime my preference has been with the pre in the chain.

[jwes]

I spoke with Dan about this once, and although it was a matter of debate at the time, he was guessing that once you start attenuating more than 10 db in the Transporter digital domain, you're starting to lose bits significant to resolution.  In my case, I had to decimate resolution for this to work.  There are some fairly decent attenuators (i.e., simple passive pre-amps) that don't cost too much and control volume after the analog output.  Of course there you're missing the value of a good active pre-amp.

Here's one that is supposed to be fairly good for I think around $300:  http://www.goldpt.com/sa1.html

Jim

[ted_b]

There's really no guessing, it's been heavily discussed and documented by the Logitech folks.  That's why I mentioned it here in this thread a couple times, and mention it anytime one talks about using the TP as preamp.  The digital volume control on the Transporter uses a 24 bit scheme, meaning it adds dither to allow for 8 bits of zeros.  Many people think it's ok to reduce volume and it "just throws those extra zeros away", but that's just not true.  It is still reducing s/n by reducing the digital volume even one db, just that the noise floor of the DAC may not have been reached yet, so theoretically we might be able to lessen the damage with the extra 8 bits.  It's still damage, and at some lower/later point is no longer a full 16 bit digital signal.  With a 24 bit signal (24/96) you have even greater risks using the digital volume.  Net/net, attenuate analog-ly.   

FYI, here's Sean Adams, founder of Slim Devices, talking about it:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=164814&postcount=12

[yammy1688]

For people plugging TP directly into amp, change the jumper to match the input of your amp.  it does -10, -20, and -30 db I believe. 

[ted_b]

As posted earlier, if you speaking about the MW TP (as the original poster did) then the analog attenuators (jumpers) are no longer available.  They are for the stock TP (but then again I personally dislike the stock TP as being unmusical).  Dan transformed a beast into a beauty.    It's the only time I have agreed with Alex Peychev; he dislikes that stock AKM dac too, but saw it as having potential with a lot of work....Dan did a LOT of work.  Alex dabbled, gave up, and went elsewhere with his work.

[Philistine]

Indiesound,

why don't you start with an unmodded TP ?

It sounds great, is significantly better than the Duett and , IMO, is one of the best DACs around.

You can always send it in later to mod it if you still want to do so.

You can find a TP new at a discount or buy used for a substantial savings.

Before you spend money on wire be aware that no one has been able to identify differences in wire in controlled blind testing.

Anti cables are likely the most money you will ever need to spend.

Indiesound,
If you want to manage your cash outlay starting with a regular TP is a serious option to consider.  As suggested it gives you a great DAC and the option to mod in future or not.

[yammy1688]

Would it be safe to say that a passive pre doesn't help the TP much?  I'm curious if a burson buffer with attenuators would well.

[ted_b]

Would it be safe to say that a passive pre doesn't help the TP much?  I'm curious if a burson buffer with attenuators would well.

Well, I loved the sound of my TP through my passive Bent TAP pre.  Go figure.   

[daz_bike]

Thanks guys on your feedback with direct connection v's via a preamp.  Ted, thanks for the link to Sean Adams post about the using the digital volume control.

The thing is I am still getting better results with a direct connection compared to the two preamps I mentioned.  I have a Promitheus TVC (Dual boxes) and I must admit that this does sound marginally better than the direct connection, but it is very close.   The advantage of the passive is that I can set the MWT to output at fixed volume and use the passive volume control, which should give a better signal to the amps (per Sean Adam's post).  The disadvantage of the TVC is no extra gain and no remote .... at least the Promitheus unit I have.

I will continue to try active preamps when available at the price I mentioned to see if one with surpass direct connection or TVC.  For now I am happy with either the TVC or using the direct connection and messing with the SNR.  Dunno, it still sounds great?!

In terms of the original topic, my pick would be for the MWT.  I have had SB2/3 in various forms and if you can afford the MWT then this is the way to go both for great sonics (I have not heard the Bolder), aesthetics and future proofing  i.e High rez playback ...  not to mention the fun of tube rolling!  Regards

P.S  I have a heavily modded SB2 (not Bolder) sitting in the corner gathering dust while the MWT sings ....

[Bob Wilcox]

If running a Transporter direct to amp, it is good to have an analog volume attentuator in the path so you can run the Transporter at maximum output and use the analog control to set the volume level.

If the system a lot of gain, this could be accomplished with just analog attentuators on the amp input.  Lowering the Transporter's attentuator will sound noticably inferior to using an analog control to do this with the Transporter attentuator at maximum output. I have tested this using the Hybrid attentuator in my APL player/DAC which operates in analog for the first 40db of attentuation.

Other reasons a preamp can sound better with the Transporter is because more gain is required and/or the preamp presents a better impedance interface to the amp than the Transporter does. As George points out much of this is system dependant but if you have the Transporter attentuator set at less than about 85% of maximum, you are losing resolution.

[zybar]

Before making any comments on the original post, I wanted to clearly state that you can't go wrong when working with Dan or Wayne.  Both guys produce high performing, high quality and high value products and modifications that are backed by excellent customer service.

As others have previously stated, there is no right or wrong answer, but rather certain fundamental questions probably need to be answered in order to make the right selection for any individual.  Here are some of those questions:

1.  Are you going for the absolute best performance regardless of cost?
2.  Do I need or want to be able to upgrade or improve in stages?
3.  Do I need or want the ability to handle hi-rez music?
4.  Do I need or want a single box solution?

I had all of the best work that Wayne could muster (including the best PS, Bybees, etc...) and it was outstanding!  I absolutely enjoyed my maxed out SB2 and thought it was better than many digital setups that cost significantly more.

So why did I go with the Modwright TP?

I went with it for a few reasons:

1.  To my ears, I enjoy the sound of the Modwright a little more than the Bolder SB2 setup.  This is obviously very subjective and probably somewhat system dependent.

2.  I wanted the ability to listen to hi-rez music.  Once you hear a 24/96 or 24/88 version of a song or album, it is tough to go back to regular 16/44.

3.  I wanted to move to a single box setup. 


The OP wanted to know if there was a subtle or large difference between the Bolder and Modwright offerings.  I think there is definitely a difference, but how noticeable and significant it is, absolutely depends on the quality of your associated gear.  In my system, it was substantial enough that I thought it was worth the price difference between what I sold my full blown Bolder SB2 setup for and what I paid for my Modwright TP.  My TP has also significantly improved by tube rolling (which ironically includes 6SN7 adapters made by Wayne).  This isn't something that is possible with the Bolder setup.  Of course, tube rolling increases the costs of the Modwright even more.

Tough choices, but either way should lead to improved musical performance and hopefully to increased enjoyment of your system.

George

[ted_b]

George's post is absolutely spot on, IMO.  Great, well-thought-out post.  It's almost impossible to add to it, so I will say simply: this isn't about which is "better", it's about trade offs.  Both are modded, both are backed by the best customer service around, both are musical, both are positive steps to get away from jewel cases, clutter and, IMO, the inherent noise and sonic degradation that takes place in anything but the most state-of-the-art cd transports.  The Modwright Transporter will take you farther on that journey, but cost you more.  Both are huge values.