opaqueice wrote:

> I suspect the Transporter was designed like that - SD tried to
> produce something with the least possible jitter at the digital out,
> the lowest distortion, etc. - all defined by theory and measured with
> scopes.  My guess is listening tests played a very small role,
> because we are talking about differences typically far below the
> threshold of audibility.  Whether the end product actually sounds any
> better than a stock SB is open to question, and same goes for the SB+
> - which is why I asked Patrick about listening tests in the first
> place.

Are you seriously questioning whether the Transporter sounds any better
than the stock Squeezebox (2 or 3) ?

Have you even heard a Transporter?

(The same applies with the SB+ but I've not heard one so I can't say how
it sounds).

In another thread, you said:

> I just hope we don't get to the point of censorship, like banning any
> mention of DBT (audiocircle) or not allowing any report of an 
> improvement without having first done a careful DBT (hydrogenaudio). 
> That really does stifle discussion, to the point that the board
> becomes pretty boring.

I find your constant scepticism and bringing up of DBT does indeed
stifle discussion and makes this board very boring.

You don't *have* to perform DBT to be able to hear that there is a
difference (or not) between two systems - your ears can do that for you,
or at least mine can.

I suggest you get some better ears, or train the ones you have better,
and stop with the constant DBT stuff.

R.

_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles

Reply via email to