Phil Leigh;526537 Wrote:
They must have access to better drugs than I do. This 2-stage process is
sheer nonsense. They clearly don't understand how computers or digital
audio works...
Correction: It turns out the people that use the 2 step process were
referring to a specific program, Wave
firedog;527390 Wrote:
Correction: It turns out the people that use the 2 step process were
referring to a specific program, Wave Editor, that they use for
upsampling. They think the program has a superior upsampler to other
programs, but that a bug results in the two step process giving
Not sure I understand - I don't seem to have that problem. I always
leave the transporter out at 100 and use the tact to control the volume
that's fed back into the transporter.
For what you suggest to happen the transporter would have to control
the volume digital output of the tact.
My setup
twheatley;527419 Wrote:
Not sure I understand - I don't seem to have that problem. I always
leave the transporter out at 100 and use the tact to control the volume
that's fed back into the transporter.
For what you suggest to happen the transporter would have to control
the volume digital
cliveb;527155 Wrote:
I realise this is tempting fate, but FWIW I've *never* seen this
message. I've had a Transporter since December 2006.
Just checked the voltage as reported by SqueezeCenter a few times, and
it was 236, 238, 237, 238, 237. That seems pretty stable, and I'm not
using any
I have read that many are using the Transporter as a preamp and connect
it directly to active speakers or to a power amp.
Now my question: is it possible to easily select different imputs in a
way that I can let's say connect my CD player via optical output to the
transporter and use the built
I ran my TP straight to power w/no pre for 2 years. Because I used
balanced outputs, I needed to use an attenuator (Endler stepped was
excellent) to control the gain. Worked very well, although I eventually
added a really nice pre and it sounded even better.
Anyway, yes, it is easy to switch to
Phil - Many thanks for this advice. I completely agree that I'm running
a huge risk with this - I just assumed that the Transporter (having been
around for a couple of years now) was stable enough to warrant direct
connection. I used to run a SB3 to Benchmark DAC1 to Simaudio P5 preamp,
bt found
ntropy;527432 Wrote:
I have read that many are using the Transporter as a preamp and connect
it directly to active speakers or to a power amp.
Now my question: is it possible to easily select different imputs in a
way that I can let's say connect my CD player via optical output to the
iPhone;527456 Wrote:
If you rip to FLAC, why do you need the CDP anyway (other then maybe for
SACDs)? Just wondering.
Yes, SACD is an example. Or if a friend brings along his CD, I don't
want to rip it first before we can listen. Maybe I will still get rid of
the CDP since I don't own many
Shredder;527444 Wrote:
I ran my TP straight to power w/no pre for 2 years. Because I used
balanced outputs, I needed to use an attenuator (Endler stepped was
excellent) to control the gain. Worked very well, although I eventually
added a really nice pre and it sounded even better.
Anyway,
twheatley;527451 Wrote:
Phil - Many thanks for this advice. I completely agree that I'm running
a huge risk with this - I just assumed that the Transporter (having been
around for a couple of years now) was stable enough to warrant direct
connection. I used to run a SB3 to Benchmark DAC1 to
ntropy;527462 Wrote:
I also plan to use the balanced outputs. I think I read somewhere that
there are already attenuators on the board. But you need to open the
case of the transporter to access the switches (am I right about
this?).
The selection of the input sounds easy. Is there a way
Phil Leigh;527471 Wrote:
The attenuators are inline with the unbalanced outputs. If using
balanced you will need some Endlers or similar.
I'm drifting a bit away from my main question, but if I understand this
right I only need an attenuator when I don't want to use the volume
control too
ntropy;527480 Wrote:
I'm drifting a bit away from my main question, but if I understand this
right I only need an attenuator when I don't want to use the volume
control too much so I don't lose resolution?
I got active speakers where I also can set the gain/attenuation so I
probably don't
ntropy;527460 Wrote:
Yes, SACD is an example. Or if a friend brings along his CD, I don't
want to rip it first before we can listen. Maybe I will still get rid of
the CDP since I don't own many SACD.
Someone will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the SACD
spec require that you
ntropy;527462 Wrote:
I also plan to use the balanced outputs. I think I read somewhere that
there are already attenuators on the board. But you need to open the
case of the transporter to access the switches (am I right about
this?).
The selection of the input sounds easy. Is there a way
SuperQ;527487 Wrote:
You might be able to do this with a universal remote, and some
modifications to the IR control files. (In the source/IR/ directory)
The IR maps already contain keys for:
digital_input_aes-ebu
digital_input_bnc-spdif
digital_input_rca-spdif
digital_input_toslink
thanks - will try the Rothwells for a start.
I can't thank you guys enough - I have moved closer to hifi nirvana in
the last week than I have in the last 2 years.
Now - for the final tweak I really need to master the Tact. I've been
using the beta PC software for the last year (using the quick
twheatley;527419 Wrote:
Not sure I understand - I don't seem to have that problem. I always
leave the transporter out at 100 and use the tact to control the volume
that's fed back into the transporter.
For what you suggest to happen the transporter would have to control
the volume digital
I see that AK4396 supports up to 192/24.
Isn't the limit of 96/24 artificial?
--
michael123
michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745
View this thread:
Transporter with its digital volume can't be used as a preamp, unless
you listen to a very high volume or you have a gain control on your
amplifier.
In my system, its volume is fixed on 100% (as well as in every review
of Transporter, e.g. Absolute Sound or Stereophile)
--
michael123
callesoroe;527532 Wrote:
I have the problem because i turn all my system off at outlet when
I am going to bed. And by power off it does not store settings.
Which would also happen after a power cut...
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't
michael123;527539 Wrote:
I see that AK4396 supports up to 192/24.
Isn't the limit of 96/24 artificial?
No, it's a limit of the speed of the CPU.
--
snarlydwarf
snarlydwarf's Profile:
twheatley;527508 Wrote:
thanks - will try the Rothwells for a start.
I can't thank you guys enough - I have moved closer to hifi nirvana in
the last week than I have in the last 2 years.
Now - for the final tweak I really need to master the Tact. I've been
using the beta PC software for
snarlydwarf;527560 Wrote:
No, it's a limit of the speed of the CPU.
and given that it already struggles to decode certain flac files, I
think it is safe to say there is no way to make it support 24/96.
You need to get a Touch :-)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it
I do not believe this, as I saw recent posts by Sean Adams, CPU could be
lowered by lower compression ratios of FLAC, or just using WAV files.
Also, the code might be optimized.
5 years ago 96/24 was quite good, it still good enough for today, but
to be competitive, this piece shall support up
michael123;527542 Wrote:
Transporter with its digital volume can't be used as a preamp, unless
you listen to a very high volume or you have a gain control on your
amplifier.
In my system, its volume is fixed on 100% (as well as in every review
of Transporter, e.g. Absolute Sound or
Phil Leigh;527567 Wrote:
and given that it already struggles to decode certain flac files, I
think it is safe to say there is no way to make it support 24/96.
You need to get a Touch :-)
With the help of one of the gurus here, I modded my Transporter with
Burson discrete HD op-amps, plus
michael123;527568 Wrote:
I do not believe this, as I saw recent posts by Sean Adams, CPU could be
lowered by lower compression ratios of FLAC, or just using WAV files.
Also, the code might be optimized.
5 years ago 96/24 was quite good, it still good enough for today, but
to be
Phil
did you check personally?
I hear these things every day..
Just last week I sat with our programmers and we improved algorithm 10
times.
Things can always be improved, I do not buy it.
Since nobody is working on the transporter firmware, why not release it
into public domain?
--
Or.. How can I become contributor?
--
michael123
michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76496
Phil
I can leave with this dead-end for next 10 years,
again, the level of the mod is so high, that the player now competes
with the
sound of Metronome and EMM Labs
Few bugs in firmware and optimization of the code is not something not
possible.
If SlimDevices/Logitech guys read this, I would
michael123 wrote:
Since nobody is working on the transporter firmware, why not release it
into public domain?
That is not a realistic request. Sean and Dean talked in the past about
making the firmware be under an Open Source license. But the sticking
point is that the firmware needs a special
michael123;527582 Wrote:
Phil
I can leave with this dead-end for next 10 years,
again, the level of the mod is so high, that the player now competes
with the
sound of Metronome and EMM Labs
Few bugs in firmware and optimization of the code is not something not
possible.
If
michael123 wrote:
Few bugs in firmware and optimization of the code is not something not
possible.
This makes zero sense. Its an EOL product. Live with the bugs, or buy a
new product that does what you want. Perhaps if the TP was new, but its
not. Moore's law has marched on. There are better
pfarrell;527584 Wrote:
Sean and Dean talked in the past about
making the firmware be under an Open Source license. But the sticking
point is that the firmware needs a special compiler and linker, and
the
license for that costs solid five figures. So they thought that no one
would spring
If you want to work on insane sample rates, your best bet is to talk to
John Swenson who is working on doing this for SB Touch, since the
firmware for that is open enough.
The ip3k firmware can never be open-sourced unfortunately, as it
contains proprietary code from Ubicom.
--
andyg
38 matches
Mail list logo
