Nonreality;326415 Wrote:
I have to disagree here. Until your speakers reveal flaws in the Yamaha
that would be where to put the money,not in another amp. The Yamaha is
actually better than you think it is. So it would be speakers, amp
then transport to me. But If you like it how it is
bugfixer;325703 Wrote:
I'd say Transporter is worth the premium if
a) you do have a high-res material (better than 44.1/16 flacs)
b) the rest of the system is analog only high end stuff
c) you like the look of a Transporter that much :)
Come on, just think: one transporter costs as much
Nonreality;325146 Wrote:
Actually you can do that in the Yamaha's menu which works better. It's
not much and there is no distortion to begin with or I probably would
have told him. He can compare and all it takes is investing in a
connect. As far as borrowing a dac, I've found it's not
Fakarava;325469 Wrote:
Nonreality,
I am speaking with the experience of my own reality ;-) i.e. what I use
and what I have heard (not heard...of).
I don't have any Yam (or others) receiver of this sort, so I can't tell
anything about it.
My kitchen setup is SB3 on a Kenwood K-701 mini
Nonreality;325488 Wrote:
I believe that FMHE it would be the same my friend. :) But maybe not
for others.
and you have a nice musical Sunday also!
Only MHO ;-)
Based on things I have and music I've heard.
I am not a proselyt in any way...
'coz long distance hearing and extending from
x94blair3;324048 Wrote:
...
Currently I have my audio running digitally from a PC (XP, kernel
streaming through foobar) to a rx-v2700 which is powering Axiom M60's.
...
so if my stuff isn't good enough to appreciate what a transporter can
do I might as well save my money.
-Nick
I'd
fakarava2;325133 Wrote:
- First, you can already make the test: compare the SB versus the
rx-v2700 internal DAC. Notice that you may have to put some attenuation
(via the squeezecenter menu) otherwise you might find a lot of
distortion and conclude that SB is junk (I've marked 6, which
Nonreality;324480 Wrote:
I think you'll find the SB3's dac to be of a bit better quality than
your 2700 but very close. Just my pref but I run my 1800 with the with
the analog outs most of the time. I'm almost certain the 1800 and the
2700 use the same dac. BTW nice musical AVReceivers
marsboer;325158 Wrote:
I have the RX-V1800 and I can report that the SB3 is completely
destroyed by the Transporter SQ-wise using the analog inputs (which I
suspect is converted to digital internally in the Yamaha for
sub-filtration, volume etc)
The rest of my setup is more high-end, the
Of course I don't want the receiver to move it back to digital, but
since the volume control is everything but an analog unit I'm pretty
sure all modern receivers do a ADA process to do volume, even in pure
mode. I'm using straight mode by the way, as pure mode doesn't allow
sub-filtering.
The
I did test the differences in my previous setup also, which was a
dedicated stereo setup, with a dual-mono balanced analog signal path
all the way through. My current opinion my be influenced by this test,
which of course were done on somewhat more resolving equipment.
This were my setup back
marsboer;325352 Wrote:
I did test the differences in my previous setup also, which was a
dedicated stereo setup with a dual-mono balanced analog signal path all
the way through. My current opinion my be influenced by this test, which
of course were done on somewhat more resolving equipment.
- First, you can already make the test: compare the SB versus the
rx-v2700 internal DAC. Notice that you may have to put some attenuation
(via the squeezecenter menu) otherwise you might find a lot of
distortion and conclude that SB is junk (I've marked 6, which stands
for -6dB).
- You could also
x94blair3;324375 Wrote:
If I was using the DAC in the transporter...why would the receiver
impact much? Isn't it just taking the analog and passing it through?
Especially on something like the rx-v2700 which offers 'pure direct'
mode?
So, if an amplifier - in analog mode, or a simple
x94blair3;324048 Wrote:
I'm sure that even asking this question means no..but I have to ask
anyway.
Currently I have my audio running digitally from a PC (XP, kernel
streaming through foobar) to a rx-v2700 which is powering Axiom M60's.
This setup works fine for the most part, but the
Nonreality;324480 Wrote:
I think you'll find the SB3's dac to be of a bit better quality than
your 2700 but very close. Just my pref but I run my 1800 with the with
the analog outs most of the time. I'm almost certain the 1800 and the
2700 use the same dac. BTW nice musical AVReceivers
Yep, try it but IMHO the SB3/Transporter differences would get lost by a
mid-range AV Receiver.
--
amcluesent
amcluesent's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10286
View this thread:
amcluesent;324373 Wrote:
Yep, try it but IMHO the SB3/Transporter differences would get lost by a
mid-range AV Receiver.
If I was using the DAC in the transporter...why would the receiver
impact much? Isn't it just taking the analog and passing it through?
Especially on something like the
I'm sure that even asking this question means no..but I have to ask
anyway.
Currently I have my audio running digitally from a PC (XP, kernel
streaming through foobar) to a rx-v2700 which is powering Axiom M60's.
This setup works fine for the most part, but the PC is getting noisy
and I'm
sounds to me like you are exactly the person that logitech's 30 day
trial is designed for. Go for it. You have a SB and you can compare
with a TP and see for yourself in your system.
Really the only downside is that you might slip onto the audiopile
slippery slope in which case forget who
20 matches
Mail list logo
