> Interesting perspective. I do not know the difference between > platforms, sorry. What is this?
The SB1, SB2, SB3 and Boom use essentially a hardwired specialized controller, which was pretty dumb. The Touch, and maybe the Radio (can't remember) are real full Linux computers running a special internal OS, with programs, etc. > Do you know that it did not sell in volume or is this your assumption? I do not have official sales numbers, never heard anyone talk about it. But one can get a good feel from hanging in this forum. I'm sure they sold 100, I have no idea if they sold 1000. I'll bet more than a few beers that they sold way under 10k > My personal experience, with many, is that they more than > excepted it and had been pretty much embraced...me included. You are entitled to an opinion, but if you look at the reviews in TAS and Stereophile, they lust after tubes and vinyl records. > I do not have any notion on how to improve it but would guess that the > dac could be as well as the analog section. Actually, Sean put a ton of effort into the analog section, after the DAC. Sure, it could be improved, but not without a ton of engineering. You could put in a different DAC chip, might be better. But it won't be a night and day difference. The current DAC is impressive. > Dan Wrights changes to the analog section certainly were well received. By a very small niche group, but you can't run a business that way. The cost of electronics is not the cost of the parts. Its the engineering, NRE, non-recurring engineering expense. The only way to lower the impact of the NRE is to move more units. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
