Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Any experience with the slim device transporter?

I'm considering purchasing a slim devices transporter. I've been using a PC to send digital audio (xp, kernel streaming, foobar) to my rx-v2700 receiver for a while now. The receiver is powering a pair of M-60's which I love. Sounds fantastic (at least to me).

I've been toying with the idea of replacing the PC with a NAS solution and then streaming audio and video to various components around the house (laptops, squeezebox, possibly transporter). I just don't need the big noisy PC anymore.

I haven't tested the squeezebox in my setup because I assumed the DAC's in the yamaha would be better (perhaps incorrectly). Obviously I would expect the transporter to be an upgrade, however would my setup even notice? While the m60's are great speakers it seems like most people have about 8 layers of electronics and speakers I've never heard of when they consider themselves to be "audiophile".

Just wondering if anyone had any experience and can comment on whether I would notice a difference with my gear/speakers. What about with the M80's? I've considered going with a dedicated music room/setup as well.

-Nick

I don't have the experience nor the ear to enter the argument as to weather or not the DAC can make a big audible difference, but no matter what side of the fence you are on, I remember that when I researched the Squeezebox, most all forum responses were that the DAC in the SB was actually quit good. At least as good as most consumer level receivers.

Of course, there is their audiophile level, and priced, Transporter version that is supposed to be better. I would have to be seriously convinced in blind listening tests before I would pay out that much extra money for a device that does pretty much the same thing as their SB version.

Perhaps it does sound better but does it sound that much better considering the laws of diminishing returns verses the price difference?

Don't know the answer, just thought I'd share what I read at the time.

I'll just echo what Murph says. I've almost purchased a Squeezebox two or three times, but never pulled the trigger.

They are neat devices, but I was turned off by the fact that I'd have to leave a music server running 24x7. Edit: Yes, I see you can just use a NAS now. That's definitely an improvement.

The Transporter is supposed to be exceptionally good, but IMHO it's too expensive for what it does. $2,000 is a lot. Maybe not for you but for me it is. For $2k, you could build a really nice little HTPC for your den. Way more functionality than any Squeezebox. You can download a virtual Squeezebox/Transporter and try it out. I'd recommend that. I've tinkered with it a couple of times but wasn't that impressed, as it seemed very time-consuming and cumbersome to navigate my music collection on that screen. YMMV

My solution was found in an AppleTV. I really like it. It works beautifully for music, is controllable anywhere in the house (via iPhone or laptop), and of course does movies and video too. In listening to lossless-encoded music (toslink to AVR), I really don't know how it would sound much better. And the interface, well, it's Apple and it's on my big-screen TV, so it's a breeze to find, view, & play everything. For my money, it's a winner.

That was my first thought. That's a lot of cash for a special purpose device. 2k will build you a LOT of htpc. There are a number of compact mobos and cases on the market now.

Of course, I can't talk to my htpc from my iphone, wait, don't have (or need) one of those...

I do not have the Transporter, but I do have 2 SqueezeBoxes. One of the best AV purchases made. I LOVE them!

Mark

This was posted by someone who has the Transporter at AVS.

------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDLehner

Thomsens, thanks for sharing your thoughts about the Transporter. I am not trying to deter anyone who thinks it is worth the price of admission. I just think it's worth pointing out, for anyone in this thread who might be considering it and not familiar with the extraordinary Linn line, that your Artikulat system is likely a high 5-figure rig ($30k?).

I guess my point is, those with more modest systems might not hear the differences between a Transporter and the less-expensive front-ends, like the SBC and Duet Receiver, especially when paired with a decent external DAC.

I'm am curious: have you been able to do any A/B between the Transporter and any of the other Squeeze devices?

Thanks,
CD

Totally agree with your points - it's a revealing system. My point in mentioning that was merely to point out that the transporter can hang in a good system using it's own DAC, not to suggest anything else. I'm actually quite skeptical of the audiophile game personally. I believe that the SB3 with a good DAC will be indistinguishable from the Transporter or even a good CD player for that matter. I have a crappy Samsung DVD player feeding the DAC in my Bryston pre-amp and I can't really tell the difference from that vs. the Transporter either.

I did get a chance to A/B the Linn Sondek CD (reference CD player) vs. the Linn Klimax DS ($18K) streaming device and I think I could hear a slight difference there. While I might hear a difference between the Transporter and the Klimax, I doubt I'd think it was worth it (9x). Especially given how powerful the SqueezeCenter sw is (DLNA for Linn is a whole other subject).

Just to keep the barbs from coming in...I've never had a completely controlled A/B test, so my results aren't really valid to scientists or audiophiles. But, since I can't tell the difference under normal conditions that's valid enough for me. The transporter looks cool. That's why I bought it. And it would be odd to splurge for the speakers and then get an SB3 for my source. For those who don't know, the transporter does allow you to use it's DAC for another external device as well. So, you could hook your cheap CD player up to it via SPIDF and avoid buying any extra DAC or a fancy CD player.

Unfortunately AppleTV and Itunes doesn't support flac. I've got 500 plus CD's ripped in the format and I like that it's open source lossless format. I do quite like itunes and it would solve my 'usability' issues when friends come over to simply make the switch. Unfortunately I'm a stubborn man.

The other concern with an HTPC is the whole bit-perfect debate. I've been land locked into foobar (which is great for it's small footprint) because Windows requires 'massaging' to get the audio out without working any magic and I can't do it with Itunes. Maybe that isn't a problem with an AppleTV, but it's an old problem in the HTPC world.

Long story short, I've backed off the ledge of a transport after doing some A/B testing with my current HTPC and Squeezebox2. Probably picking up some M80's and a outlaw RR2150 to have more places in the house I can listen to music

iTunes will support FLAC, using this. But I don't know if that'll do you any good with the ATV (doubt it.)

I in fact started to use FLAC just last night, in experimentation to see if I can tell the difference (in my headphones I think i can, and when the cable guy leaves I'll test it on the Axioms).

iTunes will let you use FLAC using Fluke, but I also suspect ATV won't recognize it, because in using my ipod touch as a remote it won't recognize the files from a list. If i start an album, then the remote can navigate through it just fine, but only shows the current song in the playlist. A little odd.

Just thought I'd put my experience out there. Internally on iTunes it works like a charm though.

I appreciate the suggestions. I did try out fluke but I think if I was going to embrace appleTV or even itunes I would just bite the bullet and do the conversion. I'm on the road a lot so I'm sure I could batch job it and check remotely while I'm gone.

Given what I'm envisioning for the living room (with the M80's) and my LCD, it would be pretty slick to have itunes running through there.

In the end it doesn't matter as long as it's lossless - I'm just being anal retentive.

As far as FLAC sounding better - not sure if you mean compared to ALAC or MP3, but if you mean MP3 and you've got axioms I don't see how you won't notice a difference. The sound stage is much broader and vivid (obnoxious words I know...but I never got them till I bought some "real" audio gear like this stuff).

I know there is 'science' to stuff the music that gets cut out with mp3 back in, but with well recorded audio, I don't just don't see it being the same and I enjoy lossless much more.

Which of course is all that matters in the end for any of us

-Nick