Eric51

Take it easy Chris! - I LIKE research, and I LIKE high end audio. You completely misinterpreted my comment! <br /> <br /> You like to challenge people who make assertions by asking for the research to support it. In this case I was responding in a positive way with the "bada bing" comment! The writer responded with the research you were requesting - you probably were not expecting that! I did read the research and felt it added to the discussion. <br /> <br /> I think you need to take a look at how much of a control freak you are, unless you just want writers that tell you and your little sponsors how great you are!<br /> <br /> cheers<br /> Eric

Bada bing bada boom! - Gotta love the research - not much of that in audiophillia land!

Good job on the USB primer 101! - even though it sounds a bit like an advertisement for asynchronous USB products - ex. Wavelength - who happens to advertise on your site! - <br /> <br /> Another perspective on why manufacturers may be taking the easy way out by using "quick and dirty" adaptive techniques, is that wired computer based audio may be a passing fad! Lets face it. Getting rid of the wire is MUCH more flexible and convenient. Even companies like HSU research is now using wireless for their subwoofers! If you want to run two or more subs, not having wires running all over your listening area is a key feature! The opinion that wired is always better than wireless is as debatable as the superiority of USB over SPDIF! Like you said - its a matter of implementation.

Just want to clear up one thing - Squeezebox website lists the "max" throughput for the transporter via wireless as 54 Mbps, 100 Mbps over wired ethernet. USB 1.0 is much slower - 12 Mbps or so. Even with wireless overhead that is quite a bit better throughput. USB 2.0 is of course is much faster (at 480 Mbps or so ) but I'm not sure if many DACs are using 2.0. Here is the comparison test I would like to read - Modwright Transporter (via wireless) vs. Wavelength Audio Cosecant DAC (via USB) vs. Berkeley Audio Alpha DAC (via SPDIF/optical)! In 2008 Srajan Ebaen from 6moons rated the Modwright Transporter "State of the Art Performance in the WiFi catagory" - so how does state of the art in wifi compare with state of the art in wired? Let the games begin! Eric

bzlrbi - just wondering if you got your transporter and what your impressions were? thank Eric

Hi Chris Common sense is what I am talking about here. Digital is bits from start to finish. Noise is analog. You can take digital and copy it and transfer it time after time and it will remain the same. The issue is that there is always a noise element in the transfer and reconstruction process. Electrical noise that is transferred over a USB cable is analog noise. You don't need an EE degree to know that! Eric

There seems to be this wired debate all over the internet. I feel that the future is wireless. Lets take a look at how well satellite/Wireless broadcast TV has worked. Just as well as cable! If not better! I have Direct TV now. Just as good if not better than my Comcast cable in terms of audio and video quality. Why wouldn't audio be the same? There is no reason! No electrical interference. The future is here! Go wireless! Eric

my point was - if you have data or personal experience that wired is "better" than wireless lets have it! - I have been through so many pieces of equipment that it is hard to remember. Lets have a discussion! - my point remains - if a wired "digital" protocol is effected by a cable then I wonder what else is going on! - Eric

I honestly havent compared WiFi to Firewire, USB or any other of the numerous combinations and permutations available to the audiophile today! This is the frustrating part of this hobby! We are all just jackin off when it comes down to it! I can only report on my narrow limited sphere of experience. As is true of most of us. At least the honest ones! Even Gordon "admits" in his own way that wireless is "complicated" and hence not as desirable as USB! Just because something is complicated doesn't make it inferior. This is a new and uncharted field of audio. Lets be open minded, and check it out for ourselves when need be and report our experiences. All I said was that I was "disturbed" by the admitted fact that a USB cable makes a difference in sound! - It "shouldn't" and I stand by it! Eric

This topic has got my dander up! - The problem of availability of product, opportunity for an "audition", and an overall lack of useful information, is why posts like this one engage so many in a heated discussion. I remember writing a post when I was in a "good mood", and how I enjoyed the "pursuit" of the audiophile hobby. Someone responded back as to how frustrated they were in not being able to know what the heck they were buying until they bought it, and then had to put up with "restocking fees" etc. to try not to take a total loss on the product. I am frustrated by how difficult it is to get the straight dope on a product before you buy it. No other product I can think of is like that. I test drive a car before I buy it. The same experience applies for other major purchases, why cant it apply to audio? I can easily spend as much on audio as I have on my cars, and many companies expect me to do just that, sight unseen. The take away from this experience is this: - don't buy the expensive stuff. Look for the "giant killers". They are out there. They don't get a ton of reviews and coverage. - The back page of Stereophile maybe. They do get talked about. Mostly in forums like these. Sometimes in the DIY section of the mega bucks audio mags. I get more satisfaction from buying from the "little guy" than the flashy megabux audio crack dealer. That's were China has been making inroads. I just bought some Obbligato caps for my Maggies from China - 22uF for $25 a pop. They got here in 4 days from the day I ordered them. Out of the box - awesome! Beware of those companies with super high priced stuff, that also have components at a "reasonable" price. They know the game. They figure you will be a sucker for the lower priced stuff thinking you got a deal! Screw that! - If your stuff is that good then you should be able to make a good living selling it at those prices! Don't insult my intellegence! Eric

It seems like this sub forum has some wind left in it! - I haven't thought about my sub in a while so I will try to make this quick and dirty! My two cents is that I would go for a larger vs. smaller enclosure, and at least a 12" if not 15" woofer. That is if one is looking for a "true subwoofer" that can go to 20hz at over 100db with less than 10% distortion and cross it over at 50-60hz. IMO a "sub" should not be making music above that anyway! Any decent "bookshelf" speaker these days can do well down to about 60hz. If you want a "sub" to cover the higher bass frequencies then you might look more at a 10" woofer in a smaller sealed cabinet. I personally can hear the position of the sub when it is crossed over any higher than 60hz or so. That bothers me, especially if the sub is placed behind the listening position. With my maggies I sometimes want a little more "punch" in the midbass and a "sub" with an 8" woofer might do the job, but that would complicate things! I need to live with the fact that the planar speaker is not going to have the punch of a cone. You win some and loose some! The smaller sub enclosures that use high power and a ton of EQ to make it down to 20hz are probably not going to sound as fluid and natural in the lower registries, as a larger enclosure and driver IMO. When it comes to bass -a bigger enclosure/driver is usually better - as far as making 20-40hz. An alternative is 2 smaller enclosures placed appropriately in the room to get the most out of the synergy (they dont need to be driven as hard and can complement each other very well when placed right!) My experience with placement is that trial and error is the best solution. If your system lacks focus anyway then placement doesn't make as much of a difference. Moving the subs around usually means you have to play with the phase as well. I have my HSU as 180 degrees out of phase to the mains and that seems to place the bass in the middle of the room between the speakers. HSU has gone to wireless. That could be interesting with 2 or more subs. I would be curious to hear their new 15"! You shouldn't need two of those unless your room is huge! I'm getting worked up here! I thought I was done with the sub! I guess its OK to dream right! Eric

fair enough - here is what i likened the V-DAC (on my system) sound to - I have a cheap phillips upsampling DVD player that I occasionally play around with because I can change the upsampling rate from the menu. I have listened to it at various rates and have found that at first I really liked the 24/196. With further listening It was apparent that the sound was precise and not at all irritating but lacking in "realness" and hence not very satisfying or engaging. I think that our ear is tuned to the realness of sound, and that is what makes an audio system "exciting" (one that can recreate the realness of the recording). I have heard reviewers refer to this as the "goose bump effect" I don't think that these subtleties can be measured in terms of distortion etc. I think it has more to do with timber. That is why vinyl is still popular IMO (even though I don't have any - and I probably secretly wish I still did - I had probably 200 albums at one point - topic of a different thread!) hope that helps! Eric

Gordon - thanks for your input on the wired vs. wireless! Your expertise is much appreciated! My question is - does the "noise" that is associated with the wireless transmission get through to the music? It appears that with a wired connection noise and artifacts do in fact get through - hence the difference in sound with cable choice. I cant think of any other reason why a cable would make a difference with a purely digital interface! Thanks Eric

Cubist - I think the thing I didn't like about the sound of the V-DAC was that it sounded very digital to me - going in the opposite direction from where I was wanting to go. In comparison, the MSB sounded what I would call NOS (non oversampling) like ie. not as squeaky clean from a distortion standpoint but more lifelike. I could tell right away that MSB used good quality components in their DAC, with a good power supply. That was NOT the experience I was looking for! I let the V-DAC run for a couple of days and the verdict was the same. It could be a system thing. I dont know. I do know that my Magies tend to "show it all" in the mids and highs. There is no place for skinny sound to hide.

I would not recommend the V-DAC. I had one for a few days that I bought from AA. It sounded so bad compared to my 10 yr old MSB Link DAC III that I sent it back! I dont care how much it needed to burn in! It had that far to go. Now that we are talking about the MSB, that would be a great buy on the used market for a couple hundred bills. Especially with the full Nelson upgrade, or upgraded power supply. You cant have mine! - I'm going to keep it. I am now running a Transporter through a Winsome Labs Mouse t-amp, Magneplanar MMG's outfitted with silver cabling. The Transporter has a better sound than the MSB but the MSB sounds very fine through COAX. I also sold my Rega Apollo after getting the Transporter. I was surprised how good of a resale the Rega was. Lots of folks out there trying to save a couple hundred bucks for a "new" sound. Cheers Eric