How good is the transporter?

[ob1]

Chris who sold me his audionet ART v2 now using transporter and I notice more and more wammers going down that route. My naim dealer said he saw the SB stand at the show comparing the transporter side by side with Naim CD5x!

The question here is How good the transporter when compare with 2nd hand cd player that worth around£1,000?

Don't forget we are talking just Hifi sound qaulity here, you know....details, soundstage, dynamic range....I am not too bother about convinence side of thing.

cheers

[Papa Lazarou]

IMO the transporter does not sound as thebetter £1k secondhand CD players ie Marantz SA1-S1, Audionet ART V2, Meridian 588 etc.

OB - you may have noticed few wammers have realised this and sold theirs recently.

[AmDismal]

A guy I know is selling his - he did a test of the Transporter, SB+ and Naim CDX. The CDX was the best, the SB+ a fairly close second and his Transporter a distant third (to the extent that they were thinking it may have a fault at one point!). He's selling his Transporter and buying an SB+, as he wants a streaming solution.

My SB+ sounds quite a lot better than my Shanling CDT100 did.

Depending on budget, the Linn Akurate DS might be worth considering, as their digital stuff has always sounded good. And then there's the Modwright Transporter...

[ray70]

ob1 wrote:

Don't forget we are talking just Hifi sound qaulity here, you know....details, soundstage, dynamic range....I am not too bother about convinence side of thing.

I have a Transporter in a second system and it sounds very detailed and measured. It is not very musically engaging though, and I found my old Marantz SA-11S1 to be much better.

I also owned a SB+ and this was a significant improvement on the Transporter. Not quite as good as the SA-11S1, but very close. Close enough for it to be my main source for about 6 months in fact.

If you're not bothered by convenience OB1, then I'd say forget about the Transporter and similar products. Don't forget that you also need to spend a significant amount of time ripping your CDS, so it's actually quite an inconvenient solution to start off with. If I wereyou, I'djust keep swapping CD players instead ;).

[Davewhityetagain]

What's a "transporter" ?

[ray70]

Davewhityetagain wrote:

What's a "transporter" ?

http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_transporter.html

[darrenm]

Ob, if you're just thinking of trying this route out then I reckon a normal Squeezebox Classic or Duet, plus a DAC, is a more flexible route, should you change you mind later.

You could always buy a CDP that has a digital input, like the Resolution Opus or the Cambridge Audio models. That way the CD and Squeezebox share the same DAC and allow good comparisons.

[ob1]

I do love my Audionet Art V2 very much and recent A/B demo with Naim CDX 2 (twice the price, 2nd hand) make me rate the ART even higher.....It also see off Densen 400 plus and Cyrus DAC XP

I was just wondering since Mr. Technobear upgrade from the ART to transporter then it must be awesome! may be Chris was down grading ;).

[Papa Lazarou]

ob1 wrote:

I do love my Audionet Art V2 very much and recent A/B demo with Naim CDX 2 (twice the price, 2nd hand) make me rate the ART even higher.....It also see off Densen 400 plus and Cyrus DAC XP

I was just wondering since Mr. Technobear upgrade from the ART to transporter then it must be awesome! may be Chris was down grading ;).

I wouldn't say it was an upgrade at all.

[Matt J]

Did he say he was upgrading though Ob?

Not everyone swaps boxes to upgrade!

[earlofsodbury]

He admitted he couldn't hear a difference, now that can mean either of two things... ;)

Heard quite a few of these streaming devices, all of them perfectly adequate if you value convenience over the last iota of extra resolution that a decent CDP gives you.

[AmDismal]

It's worth bearing in mind that the current crop of streamers are made by tech companies not established audiophile companies (with Linn the exception). When more companies bring out products, there should be a decent improvement in quality.

Digital streaming is, quite simply, a better mechanism (sorry) than getting the data off CD each time. The Transporter was the first audiophile device (actually the SB+ was, I guess) - give it some time and there will be improvements. Although they will probably be priced as audiophile products not as tech products!

Linn claim that their DS is their best ever digital replay system. There is something in this, not just convenience.

[Lawrie]

ob1 wrote:

I do love my Audionet Art V2 very much and recent A/B demo with Naim CDX 2 (twice the price, 2nd hand) make me rate the ART even higher.....It also see off Densen 400 plus and Cyrus DAC XP

I was just wondering since Mr. Technobear upgrade from the ART to transporter then it must be awesome! may be Chris was down grading ;).

IMO, the Transporter and similar type of streaming devices sound best when connected to a good external DAC. That indicates to me that their DACs (not forgetting their internal power supplies) could do with somemore improvements.

While I like the convenience idea, I also like very good sound quality and for me to go down this route, it would have to be with the support of an outboard DAC. Having consideredacquiring a streaming device,I have now shelved the idea as I just don't have the time to audition the various DACs out there and I am not even sure if I would like to go down the external DAC route again. However,it will be revisited at some point in the future.

OB1 - you say you like the ART V2 very much. Have you heard the new ART G2?



Enjoy the musicâ„¢

Lawrie

[Purite Audio]

Can the internal dac on an SB/SB+/ transported be a by passed completely, also they stream the new 24/96 high res downloads becoming available ? Thanks Keith.

[AmDismal]

Lawrie wrote:

IMO, the Transporter and similar type of streaming devices sound best when connected to a good external DAC. That indicates to me that their DACs (not forgetting their internal power supplies) could do with somemore improvements.

While I like the convenience idea, I also like very good sound quality and for me to go down this route, it would have to be with the support of an outboard DAC. Having consideredacquiring a streaming device,I have now shelved the idea as I just don't have the time to audition the various DACs out there and I am not even sure if I would like to go down the external DAC route again. However,it will be revisited at some point in the future.

Lawrie,

This is rather misguided. By using an external DAC you introduce jitter that need not be there. If you consider a Transporter as a DAC with a streaming system attached, you can see why it could be the best system for digital replay - the DAC can work with the minimal possible jitter, as its incoming data comes without the timing stream.

I agree that currently they can need DACs to get the best out of them, but this will change as the good DAC companies bring out network players. The streaming bit is aa lot easier to get right than the DAC bit, and separating them only introduces problems.

Of course, you can get around this by using the clock in on the Transporter, if you have a DAC with a clock out. It is difficult to see how this would not perform at least as well as the best transports out there.

[Lefty]

coopee wrote:

also they stream the new 24/96 high res downloads becoming available ? Thanks Keith.

I think the Transporter can but not the SB+

However, most people seem to prefer the basic sound quality of the SB+ over the Transporter.

Lefty

[Davewhityetagain]

ray70 wrote:

Davewhityetagain wrote:

What's a "transporter" ?

http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_transporter.html

[Lawrie]

AmDismal wrote:

Lawrie,

This is rather misguided. By using an external DAC you introduce jitter that need not be there. If you consider a Transporter as a DAC with a streaming system attached, you can see why it could be the best system for digital replay - the DAC can work with the minimal possible jitter, as its incoming data comes without the timing stream.

I agree that currently they can need DACs to get the best out of them, but this will change as the good DAC companies bring out network players. The streaming bit is aa lot easier to get right than the DAC bit, and separating them only introduces problems.

Of course, you can get around this by using the clock in on the Transporter, if you have a DAC with a clock out. It is difficult to see how this would not perform at least as well as the best transports out there.

AmDismal,

I'm just scratching my head here trying to figure out why you think my assertion that "current streaming devices require outboard DACs to get the best out of them" is misguided when in your second paragraph, you agreed with me completely. Have I missed something? Even the EUR 12k Sooloos System requires an outboard DAC to really sing. It is currently on display and available for audition at a dealer near me. See here: http://www.sooloos.com/www/the-system.html

However, while I agree that things will get better when audio companies jump on board, they will have to put in some effort to producing a better product but what effect (saleswise) this will have on their existing CD only players is anyone's guess. Let's look at Arcam and its 400Gb MS250 server, currently doing the rounds with reviewers. I have not yet personally heard it but someone who has described it as "not quite there yet, sonically and ergonomically, for the price". One user unfriendly quirk of the player is that when recording LPs onto the hard drive, only one track at a time can be recorded instead of a whole LP side whereas CDs can be burned in their entirety. It is minor thing I know but one that will prove to be irritating to TT owners who would like to record their LPs. The unit also exhibited a high level of vibration (perhaps due to the hard disk) and power supply noise for a GBP 3k player (I'm not sure if that was a bad sample).

Anyway, I still believe that streaming devices will rule the roost one day but not just yet.



Enjoy the musicâ„¢

Lawrie

[technobear]

earlofsodbury wrote:

He admitted he couldn't hear a difference, now that can mean either of two things... ;)

It could mean I am one deaf bear

I think that when I stated I couldn't hear a difference, I still had the ATC SIA2-150. I also didn't have the Acoustic Zen speaker cable (that stuff is a revelation).

The Croft is a somewhat different amplifier to the ATC. It lets one hear the parts other amps don't reach. It is subtle, highly resolving and unfailingly musical. I love it.

When I had mobettermusic's Zu Druids here for a day, we had a little Transporter/ART shootout using the Croft.

There was a clear winner*

The Transporter only needs a DAC if you are comparing it to a £5k CD player. Come to think of it, you'll need a £5k CD player to beat the Transporter's jitter spec. It is much cleaner in the high treble than most CD players.

Granted these things are a matter of taste but in my system the Transporter does not lack in any area. I don't understand comments that it is unmusical or not as musical as a CD player. It's unfailingly musical here. Perhaps it's a synergy thing.

* the loser got sold to a very happy new owner

[AmDismal]

Lawrie wrote:

I'm just scratching my head here trying to figure out why you think my assertion that "current streaming devices require outboard DACs to get the best out of them" is misguided when in your second paragraph, you agreed with me completely.

I think we are in agreement - I took your assertion as being that streaming devices in general need DACs, which I consider to be untrue (although I could accept that it may be the case at the moment - different question). You, on the other hand, outrageously misquote yourself to put a whole new spin on your original comment ;) And even bloody put it in italics!

So yes, it's the future, and the current devices will be superseded. It is a genuinely great way to find the dark corners of your music collection too