• 01-11-2007, 06:14 PM
    avgjoe
    Interference from computer
    Ok, so I was at my friend's house today and he showed me his father's b&w 805s. I was impressed by the sound considering I have/bought a used pair of dm601s for a very good price. Nonetheless, we got into an argument talking about the squeezebox 3 and transporter. I was presenting Mike Andersen's viewpoint that the music sounds better if not as good from sb3 w/ an outboard dac or even better from a transporter than a high end cd player like his father has. After giving him a list of reasons why the sound should be the same if not better, he posed an interesting question. He stated that no matter how silent you make a pc, even its presence would adversely affect sound quality of one's music if the pc is located in a room with the squeezebox 3 where the main speaker system sits. I thought this was far fetched and untrue. However, I countered his argument by saying that you could buy a transporter, a wireless router, and a wireless server and the price/performance ratio would still be better than a high end cd player. Furthermore you would get the convenience of having all your music on demand and available easily and able to be backed up by a wireless server. He said my claims were rubbish.

    :6: I want to prove him wrong. Who do you guys think is right?
  • 01-11-2007, 06:27 PM
    Dusty Chalk
    I thought the Transporter was already wireless? Or is it wired only?

    But look -- you took the PC out of the room with your hypothetical situation, so his main criticism falls apart.

    That said, I've heard a Transporter as a DAC vs. a Wadia (the Wadia was acting as transport in both cases) -- the result? Indistinguishable. I wish we could have compared a ripped disk to the same disk being played in both cases, as I think the wirelessness adds a small degree of jitter, but I don't know whether or not it will be audible.
  • 01-11-2007, 07:50 PM
    mlsstl
    I've used a SB3 for some time now and been extremely pleased. It is easily the equal of my Nad C542, a highly regarded and musical transport (though not a pricey one.) My music server is several rooms away on a different floor. PC noise is not an issue. I ordered a Transporter and it arrived today and it is clearly superior to the SB3. The hard question now during my evaluation period, is it $1,700 better? Listening to Julian Bream play a little Granados on the classical guitar right now. Very impressive. One guitar with nothing to hide behind.
  • 01-11-2007, 07:55 PM
    mlsstl
    An addendum - the Transporter supports both ethernet and 802.11b/g wireless. Works fine either way (I've tried both.)
  • 01-11-2007, 09:46 PM
    avgjoe
    Yes, but for the sake of argument, I don't think the presence of the computer in the room if it is off will create jitter or am i wrong? And even if there is jitter added would it be an audible even to those "golden ear audiophiles."

    Nonetheless at least I know i'm right about the sb3 and its capability as a music source. :6:
  • 01-12-2007, 12:59 AM
    Dusty Chalk
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    ...I don't think the presence of the computer in the room if it is off will create jitter or am i wrong?

    No, not at all, I was speaking too quickly, and two concepts accidentally came together.
    Quote:

    And even if there is jitter added would it be an audible even to those "golden ear audiophiles."
    Well, that's the question now, innit? And no generalizations can be made -- each setup has its own jitter, and each listener has his own threshold of ...well, not "pain" per se, let's call it threshold of intolerance -- that value of jitter beyond which one can't tolerate it. Some people's "JIT" (Jitter Intolerance Threshold) is pretty high -- mine's pretty low. It's not "golden ears" low, but it's pretty low.

    That said, none of this is important. I was confirming that his premise -- presence of computer negates "blackness" of background that golden ears require -- was rendered moot by your moving the computer out of the room. So, you're right.
  • 01-12-2007, 03:27 AM
    aevans
    I've got to vote for a negative here, the electronic gadgets that you are suggesting to put up against some very heavy hitters just can not compete.

    You will have RF interference from the equipment as it all uses the same electronics and dirty power supplies of a PC. you can do what ever you want with the digital signal, but after the DAC you need to keep it as far away from anything not blessed by the audio gods.

    Unless you take the lid off and it looks something like this, keep your rca's/xlr's away from it.
    http://i15.ebayimg.com/07/i/000/83/0c/c240_3.JPG
  • 01-12-2007, 05:12 AM
    mlsstl
    Not sure what your photo proves. I see lots of "dirty electronics" in that device. Power supplies, transformers, dirty integrated circuits, digital circuitry, nominal internal shielding, dreaded ribbon cables, electrolytic caps and so on. My "dirty" PC is too far away from my system to be a source of RF interference - remember from a physics standpoint that the inverse square rule applies when it comes to distance and RF power. The digital stream from the PC is buffered by either SB3 or Transporter and then the clocking is supplied by the units not the PC. The jitter measured on the Slim Devices units is lower than many high end CD players.
  • 01-12-2007, 04:23 PM
    aevans
    I'm talking about the sb3/transporter being more dirty than a purpose built high end cd player, by means of power supply and additional electronics that are needed for the ethernet connection, processor, etc. etc.

    From what I can tell, without looking under the hood, the slim audio stuff is basically a lowend pc that has been stripped and upgraded with some audiophile stuff.
  • 01-12-2007, 06:13 PM
    avgjoe
    Yes but even when your computer is off is it still producing RF interference if it located in the same room as the main speaker system? I mean if you have a server that is on 24/7 a floor beneath, you can't be telling me that the the computer source a floor beneath has an effect on the sound quality from the sb3/transporter.

    BTW getting a sb3 for myself!!!
  • 01-12-2007, 08:08 PM
    mlsstl
    > the slim audio stuff is basically a lowend pc...

    Wrong. The SB3 and Transporter are not personal computers. No hard drive, no Intel or AMD CPU, no video card. It is an ethernet/wireless 802.11b/g receiver with a DAC. It does some minimal processing to control the display, play music and respond to the remote. Anything that responds to a remote has a processing unit. If you want avoid dirty RFI, you need to ban your TV, cell phone, and about a bazillion other devices to the next state.

    Your CD player generates a digital data stream similar to what the SB/TP receives from the remote computer's hard drive. The hard drive actually has an advantage because it can stream at such a high speed and that data is buffered in a memory device. Many CD players deliver data much slower and the data is not buffered which can complicate jitter problems.

    If you stop and think about how digital music is recorded, it is written to a hard drive and streamed from there for editing, mastering and further recording. One can argue the SB/TP method of delivering music to your amp and speakers is closer to what the recording studios do than how CDs handle the issue.
  • 01-12-2007, 08:44 PM
    aevans
    so you are suggesting that the Transporter has a cleaner signal than any cd player because it does not have a cd player in it? it's and interesting idea that I had not thorugh about.

    I'd still like to see what the components inside the transporter look like.
  • 01-12-2007, 10:20 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aevans
    so you are suggesting that the Transporter has a cleaner signal than any cd player because it does not have a cd player in it? it's and interesting idea that I had not thorugh about.

    I'd still like to see what the components inside the transporter look like.

    You don't have to wonder, there are plenty of photos on the Slimdevices forums.

    Also, look at the jitter measurements:

    http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_transporter.html

    Jitter (standard deviation):

    * 11ps at oscillator (intrinsic jitter)
    * 17ps at DAC
    * 35ps at S/PDIF receiver

    Anybody who says they can detect jitter that slight should step up and prove it in a blind test. I sure as hell don't have ears that good.
  • 01-12-2007, 10:28 PM
    Mike Anderson
    This thread has some photos of the innards, although I think there are some better shots somewhere:

    http://forums.slimdevices.com/showth...os+transporter
  • 01-12-2007, 10:35 PM
    Dusty Chalk
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aevans
    so you are suggesting that the Transporter has a cleaner signal than any cd player because it does not have a cd player in it? it's and interesting idea that I had not thorugh about.

    I'd still like to see what the components inside the transporter look like.

    I think what you meant was, "I'd still like to hear one for myself."

    Right?
  • 01-12-2007, 10:36 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    I was presenting Mike Andersen's viewpoint that the music sounds better if not as good from sb3 w/ an outboard dac or even better from a transporter than a high end cd player like his father has.

    Just to clarify slightly, my position is that if you're comparing a high end CD player to something like the Transporter or a SB+high end DAC, the two are basically indistinguishable, at least to anybody without extremely exceptional ears.

    Perhaps someone with extremely exceptional ears could differentiate between the two, but I don't know any such person, and I don't know which they would say is better.


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    He stated that no matter how silent you make a pc, even its presence would adversely affect sound quality of one's music if the pc is located in a room with the squeezebox 3 where the main speaker system sits.

    What was the logic behind his statement?


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    He said my claims were rubbish.

    Based on what?

    If you want to prove him wrong, you have two choices:

    (1) Challenge him to lay out his thinking in a logical, analytically rigorous, factually accurate fashion, then counter him with your own logical, analytically rigorous, factually accurate response; or

    (2) Get him to take a blinded listening test and challenge him to distinguish between two such systems.

    Even if you could do both of these, you may never convince him. People can be amazingly stubborn with their opinions!
  • 01-12-2007, 10:46 PM
    aevans
    there are other things besides jitter that color sound, but everything does look pretty well layed out. one thing that struck me is that I did not see any opamps.. they may be there, I just didn't see them.

    I still think it would be a strange thing if it could match the sound of a krell or similar priced product.
  • 01-12-2007, 11:10 PM
    Mike Anderson
    What comparable product does Krell make?

    Keep in mind, the Transporter is not a preamp. Technically, it can be used as a pre-amp (because it has volume control), but it's really designed more to function as a transport+DAC, not a preamp.
  • 01-12-2007, 11:18 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aevans
    there are other things besides jitter that color sound

    Only in the analog output stage, assuming you have a bit-perfect digital signal. With something like the Transporter or the Squeezebox, you don't even need to use the analog stage. I run my SB2 into a Benchmark DAC1, although I'm sure there are DACs with better output stages and lower jitter -- mind you, I don't hardly claim my system is perfect, just comparable to or better than what you'd get with a CD player for the same amount of money, particularly when you account for the music management capabilities.
  • 01-12-2007, 11:39 PM
    aevans
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    What comparable product does Krell make?

    Keep in mind, the Transporter is not a preamp. Technically, it can be used as a pre-amp (because it has volume control), but it's really designed more to function as a transport+DAC, not a preamp.

    transport/dac/opamps/optional preamp:
    http://www.krellonline.com/html/m_ClassA_p_KPS25sc.html

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    Only in the analog output stage, assuming you have a bit-perfect digital signal. With something like the Transporter or the Squeezebox, you don't even need to use the analog stage. I run my SB2 into a Benchmark DAC1, although I'm sure there are DACs with better output stages and lower jitter --

    My original comments were based around using the rca outs on the back of the transporter

    yeah running through an extrenal dac removes any problem that could come up, it's like using any cd player as a transport.. as long as it has optical out it does not matter where it is comming from minus jitter stuff which I think we both agree is crap for the most part.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    mind you, I don't hardly claim my system is perfect, just comparable to or better than what you'd get with a CD player for the same amount of money, particularly when you account for the music management capabilities.

    The OP was about compairing it to more expensive cd players which is where my initial objection occured. I'm sure it's a price/performance leader and all of that, but it's not the end all be of digital transports as far as I can tell.
  • 01-13-2007, 12:01 AM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aevans
    transport/dac/opamps/optional preamp:
    http://www.krellonline.com/html/m_ClassA_p_KPS25sc.html

    I wouldn't have thought of that as a "comparable" product.

    First off, I bet that thing costs a fortune. But I know you were thinking of a price-free comparison. Now I know the thread started with a comparison of the SB with high-end stuff, so fair enough -- but --

    With that thing, you have all the mechanics required to read the data off the CD -- with the SB or Transporter, you don't have to pay for that, because you can let your computer do the work (and take the time) necessary to get a bit-perfect copy.

    Now, putting price aside:

    That Krell has a Class A pre-amp. Neither the SB nor the Transporter is designed to act as such. (Although they have the flexibility such that you could feed this thing with either.)

    But most importantly, that Krell can't manage your collection of 1200 CDs, or 10,000 CDs, or whatever.

    That's the thing people don't get about the new computer-based devices: I can choose any song from a collection of thousands of CDs, in a couple seconds, without getting out of my chair.

    Or, I can have it play songs at random. Or, I can build playlists with dozens of songs, instantly. Or, I can browse or search through my collection instantaneously.

    Want to randomly play all songs in the genre "jazz"? Simple. Want to play all songs from 1996? Just as easy. Want to play all songs with the word "Winter" in the song title? No problem.

    How about Internet radio, can the Krell do that? I didn't look at it very carefully, but somehow, I don't think so!

    I really have to say, until you've experienced this, you have no idea how cool it is! It has literally changed the way I listen to music. And with the Internet radio capability, it has also expanded my musical horizons literally by an order of magnitude.

    Now it's a bit unfair, because we're trying to compare apples and oranges here (and I realized you're focused entirely on sound quality), but... that's the whole point! This is a whole new category of fruit. Don't ignore it just because you don't think it's not true audiophile. If you want "true audiophile", just run the thing into a $5k DAC and the best pre-amp/amp/speakers in the world. Just don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!
  • 01-13-2007, 12:05 AM
    aevans
    here is the difference:
    Impedance: 100 Ohms

    While good and tons better than say your average sony which is 1000 ohms the krell's opamps are putting it down to 16 ohms. This is where you get your added details.

    If you outputted to an external dac, then to an external opamp, like the burson audio opamps I posted a review of, you would be in the 13-30ohm range, but you can do that with any cd player really, and would probably be a good lower cost upgrade to the SB3 than the transporter.
  • 01-13-2007, 12:16 AM
    aevans
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    I wouldn't have thought of that as a "comparable" product.

    now you see understand why I was not agreeing with the jist of the original argument.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    Just don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!

    cool stuff is just that, cool.. I've been using my comp for storing and sorting audio for years, but I don't think of it as a audiophile product.. I could get a good sound card and output to a dac, but at this point I'd rather dig through my collection of cd's everytime I want to hear something really sound good, it kind of a meditation that prepares me for listening.

    I'll give it a few more years to solidify and when they have a few more companies doing it I may be able to justify the cost of conveniance, but I'm not interested right now. At this point they would need to stop selling cd's tomorrow for me to purchase something like this, it's just not my cup of tea.
  • 01-13-2007, 12:19 AM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aevans
    but you can do that with any cd player really, and would probably be a good lower cost upgrade to the SB3 than the transporter.

    Yabutt... Name me a CD player you can load X thousands of CDs into, that will access them instantly, with very good quality sound, and has all the music management capabilities I mentioned above?

    Now, sound quality-wise, I can't speak to the Transporter versus the SB, because I have yet to hear a Transporter, so you may well be right on that score. (And which is exactly why I recommended that sort of solution to the OP, who is clearly conscious of quality for the dollar.)

    But as far as CD players, forget it. And I'm not talkin' sound quality there, I'm talking THOUSANDS OF CDs AT YOUR FINGERTIPS, ALL MANAGEABLE, SEARCHABLE, AND CONTROLLED BY COMPUTER!
  • 01-13-2007, 12:25 AM
    aevans
    whats the output impedance on the SB3? I can't find it listed in the specs?