ralphpnj;588362 Wrote:
However I would say that the Touch is quite a bit better than the Duet
Receiver, whether using the analog or digital outputs.
For digital out how so (other than 24/96)? Does the Receiver corrupt
the digital output in some way?
--
HeadBanger
BTW Pat, what are you replacing the Benchmark with ?
--
tomjtx
tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=83188
On 11/11/2010 11:40 AM, tomjtx wrote:
BTW Pat, what are you replacing the Benchmark with ?
I did it a few years ago: Slim Devices Transporter.
I could not tell which was better in my AB testing, so I kept the
Transporter because it looked better than separate SB and Benchmark.
Pure WAF, which
pfarrell;588695 Wrote:
On 11/11/2010 11:40 AM, tomjtx wrote:
BTW Pat, what are you replacing the Benchmark with ?
I did it a few years ago: Slim Devices Transporter.
I could not tell which was better in my AB testing, so I kept the
Transporter because it looked better than separate SB
HeadBanger;588674 Wrote:
For digital out how so (other than 24/96)? Does the Receiver corrupt the
digital output in some way?
It doesn't corrupt the bitstream (the bits are still 100% correct), but
it is noisier which can make it harder for DAC's to retrieve a totally
accurate clock (hence
On 11/11/2010 11:58 AM, tomjtx wrote:
I did it a few years ago: Slim Devices Transporter.
Seems like you might be as bad as me about selling old gear :-)
Yes, I'm terrible. But I'm getting into taking more photos with my DSLR
and need lights, stands, etc. And to keep the WAF high, some of the
Ah, OK.
The DacMagic is renowned for being extremely resilient against jitter
and even copes with the most noisy / jittery of computers via USB
input. There is a review by HiFi Choice (UK) that comments on this -
search Cambridge Audio's website as they had it available as PDF.
In short,
HeadBanger;588713 Wrote:
Ah, OK.
The DacMagic is renowned for being extremely resilient against jitter
and even copes with the most noisy / jittery of computers via USB
input. There is a review by HiFi Choice (UK) that comments on this -
search Cambridge Audio's website as they had it
As far as I can tell, there doesn't seem to be any reason (other than
modest price) to get the Receiver rather than the Touch, unless you
want the Controller and get a Duet. Even if you don't need or want the
touch screen, the higher quality all around would seem to tilt the
balance in the
I don't have an iPod, but I can't imagine that the Touch wouldn't be a
better route:
- the Touch's internal DAC is a superior unit, comparable in some
opinions to qood quality external DACs. I'll wager it's substantially
better than the iPod's
- I'd be really surprised if the analog out from
Just curious -- who has used the headphone out from the Controller? If
the quality is decent, would be easily the most convenient headphone
source. I tried once or twice, had no technical problems, but didn't
really do a serious listening test.
Every once in a while I'll accidentally get the
I've used it a couple of times as a player, but not for critical
listening. My first issue is that the headphone switching is very
unreliable - it's supposed to detect that headphones are plugged in,
and automatically switch the output from the speaker to the headphone.
This never worked
Phil Leigh;588714 Wrote:
The DacMagic is a good design (especially for its price) - but it isn't
magic :-) and it's certainly not jitter-proof.
DAC's that are relatively unphased by input jitter include the
Benchmark and Lavry designs (and a few really expensive ones!).
Bottom line: you
My only Apple product is the iPod, and I have to say that it's very well
done for what it is. Not to defend the Evil Jobs, but the iPod is a
pretty slickly engineered device.
I have a SB Radio and like it quite a bit (especially since the beta
software solves most of its firmware problems). I
I'll have to try it again. I did it before because of what I'd heard
about the processing problems. As noted, I didn't experience any of
those problems, at least that I noticed.
I'll check them out with my Shure e3c buds, good reliable sound, quite
efficient, hence volume shouldn't be an
What I do know about the Transporter is that it can be finessed to
outperform itself. My experience has been that the Transporter
performs the best under certain conditions. 1. convert redbook to
24/96. 2. use ethernet over WIFI. and finally, down the line - 3.
replace fuse with audiophile grade
I have been thinking about getting a DEQ2496, too. It's on my Xmas
list.
It has a word clock, right? Are you connecting that, too?
Are you going to use Room Eq Wizard for the measuring or is there some
other way to set it up. I have an Earthworks mic that I am hoping to
use for it. I was
17 matches
Mail list logo
