GeeZa;186035 Wrote: > ... Hifi people tend to prefer more boxes and higher price tags. I think > this *may* account for the bias towards using the Transporter as a DAC > simply because Hifi reviewers might feel more comfortable with a robust > mechanical tranport for their data rather than thin air (Wifi). ...
HiFi people as a rule have a fetish for beautifully and robustly built mechanics. The mechanical craft that goes into these devices is admirable, and thus psychoacoustics kicks in - it is pleasing to look at and touch, thus it sounds better to the ears. The more senses are involved, the better. Slim Devices went a long way in making the Transporter pleasing as hardware, supposedly the "touch" is very satisfying, and Stereo.de remarked on the overall "feel" of the package. GeeZa;186035 Wrote: > Imho using a computer's Wifi signal as a data transport is almost a > faultless audio soltion for two channel data, just not sure everyone > sees it like that. So I guess I was saying that the Wifi->Transporter > method is more akin to the old one-box player solutions in that it's > elegant and does away with SPDIF, which is long overdue imo. > > That probably isn't clear either is it? :-) Indeed. One aspect to this is that one needs to stay uncompromisingly true to what always seems to work at the end of the day in audiophile environments: superb mechanical engineering, uncompromising isolation of clean power to the different, visually modular subsystems, and a full bag of additional "secret sauce" tricks to make the analog signal that comes out as accurate and musical as conceivable. -- pablolie ------------------------------------------------------------------------ pablolie's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3816 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33276 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
