ted_b wrote: > PhilNYC;135174 Wrote: >> At $2K, there's no way SD would be able to put in a high-quality analog >> volume control that would be significantly better than the digital >> volume control (assuming the Transporter oversamples and extends words >> to 24-bit, the amount of "distortion" introduced by bit-shifting is >> negligible until you get to very very low volumes). Wadia uses digital >> volume controls, and no one every accuses their products of being less >> than "high-end"... > > Phil, > Hi. I agree about Wadia using a great high quality very expensive > digital volume control. it costs lots of money to do this right. So > don't expect it at $2k...that's part of my point. It's a noisy > solution. The Benchmark DAC gets good reviews when it bypasses the > volume pot (i.e is used as a pure DAC into a preamp) for same reasons. > I know why SD has it there....convenience, but certainly not for sonics. > My point earlier was simply that if the volume option is sonically > suboptimal and the poster wasn't going to use the dac in the > Transporter, why buy it.
Huh? I think you're missing the point. Digital volume control, using 24-bit samples, is practically noiseless, until you get to very low volume levels. And the Transporter has built-in adjustable attenuation so you can set the output signal to a lower level, leaving the digital volume up high. That said, if you don't want to use the digital volume control you don't have to. I imagine it's there as a convenience feature for those who want it. Remember, disabling digital volume is not like, say, bypassing an analogue tone stage; this is all in the digital domain, so turning it off means "don't use the volume reduction algorithm on the bitstream", i.e. when it's off, it's off. I'm still not sure of your point. R. _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
