sturgl

Well. After much thinking/reading/talking/listening, I've come to the realization that many of the "problems" I'm now trying to solve are more closely related to my amplifier than they are my source. So after all that, while I've learned aplenty about the current state of digital audio, I'm now looking at upgrading my amp first. That's just a little ironic since I bought my Paradigms after finding them to have better synergy with my little Creek than the other speakers I liked. (I know, I know - speakers first, then amp - but at the time I wanted to upgrade my speakers only). Thanks all for your input and advice. Down the rabbit hole I go!

Hey all, I haven't, over the last few years at least, paid much attention to the audio coming off my HTPC (home theater PC). I've got the listening room system, which is 2-channel only, and that is where I tend to pay a lot of attention to audio (which is streamed via ethernet from the HTPC). Long story short, I've a decent soundcard in the HTPC, s/pdif to the good-enough AVR, et voila: 5.1 OK-sounding channels. It seems that USB to s/pdif converters have come a long way, and way down in price since I put the current system in place 4+ years ago. I wonder if I might gain some significant improvement in audio quality by spending a hundred bucks on a converter. It must be able to pass multi-channel audio though (the HTPC is our DVR, and is used for DVD playback, in addition to casual music playback). So. Can do? A few searches would indicate that this is such a basic question that it's not specifically addressed in manuals, literature, or here on the CA forums. I'd like a clear thumbs up before I go out making purchases. I'm thinking, specifically, of the NuForce converter - but am open to anything. In theory, at least - if the source format is Dolby Digital or DTS, will the USB interface simply "not care" and pass the stream accordingly - or will it downmix to 2-channel? Thanks all!

Thanks Firedog. I'm not too concerned about the 96k sample-rate limitation on the Transporter. The jury's very much out as to whether there's audible benefit to 192. So long as I can play 24-bit files, I'm a happy camper on that front, I think. The latter part of your comment does concern me though. While there's a pretty substantial developer community around SBS, I sure don't expect Logitech to continue supporting it for much longer. Does that really matter? It almost certainly will one day, when I upgrade OSes on my media server. OTH, I've yet to observe what I'd regard as a well-sorted UPnP implementation. UPnP/DLNA have the advantages of being known standards (and that's a very big deal IMO) - but implementation is complicated. You've a server, a renderer, a controlpoint, and a UI. It seems that most have concentrated on the renderer - the physical audio component in the mix. Makes sense. They variously seem to fall down at the server, controlpoint and/or UI though. PSA isn't there yet on the server or UI fronts (though following an email exchange with Paul McGowan, I will say it appears they are working very hard on both these fronts), Linn appears to be close but no cigar yet, and I can't say I've explored others in much depth. Point is, SBS is a mature technology - even if it's no longer supported. So long as you've sweated the details around tagging, it pretty much "just works". Implementation of UPnP, though, seems (to me) to be very much a work in progress. I'd argue it is the future of networked audio, however, while servers that do not adhere to industry standards (such as SBS) will be the past in a few years time. I've been on the bleeding edge for a long time. I built my first media server exactly eight years ago. Back then it was a mess: overscan on the TV, terrible audio quality until ASIO and a pro-audio soundcard, too much noise from the HTPC. Then it was a Roku Soundbridge to DAC, in a separate room from the server. ...and the HTPC was properly cooled, silenced, and housed in a credenza of my own design. Audio came off the HTPC via s/pdif to a Niro virtual surround system. The entire library was organized, viewable and searchable on a 50" plasma via remote control and the 10-foot UI that is Media Center. Much better - especially the Roku to my Totems. ...until of course I (gasp) upgraded the router firmware and blew up the Roku. God forbid. A rollback, accompanied by much wailing and gnashing of teeth solved that problem. Then there's of course the various Microsoft patches that blew up their own product (Windows Media Center). Wailing, gnashing of teeth, and constant upgrades. HTPCs and computer audio had become a hobby in its own right. Then came the Transporter. It was a... breathtaking upgrade. I'd finally gone from a system that was equivalent in sound quality to my CD players to something that was substantially better. That meant new speakers - my Totem Acoustic monitors couldn't do it justice. A dedicated, treated listening room. Room correction to tame that last mode. Hand-built speaker cables. Very (very) specific speaker & equipment placement. ...and here I've sat for years now - blissfully ignorant of whatever "the next great thing" might be, able to simply sit back and enjoy the music. Until now. Here's the difference today: I don't want to be on the bleeding edge. I don't want to be constantly fixing/fiddling with things (I'm a fiddler by nature (a "sharpener" if that Stereophile column from a few years ago appealed to you): I regard being able to sit back, relax and simply enjoy something a giant step forward in my personal evolution). The point? I just want to listen to music today. To that end, I should regard the maturity of SBS as an asset, and the bleeding edge status of UPnP implementations in audiophiledom a detriment. Right? So perhaps a DAC upgrade is the way to go for me, while I wait for the new generation to network streaming technology to mature. I'm even kicking around the NAD M2 (which I had not considered at all - and back to the bleeding edge!), keeping the Transporter, selling my little Creek integrated, and calling it done. For now.

I'd wondered. ;-) I read Chris' review of the PS Audio. He sure seemed impressed with the Mk. II. Unfortunately, in spite of being blessed with a number of great shops in my area, there are no PS Audio dealers around here. Same for Chord. I could go listen to the players from Linn, Naim, NAD, and Bryston (at, conveniently, 4 different shops) tonight if I were so inclined. Along with PS Audio (they'll allow an in-home audition), it sounds like Linn and Naim should comprise my shortlist so far. Or perhaps a stellar outboard DAC. I gather the collective mind here is that the Transporter has been significantly surpassed - even the ModWright Transporter. Is that assessment correct? Time to do some listening, I think!

Sorry for the confusion with my cross-posts, people. I've asked Chris to merge my posts into this forum.

Agreed, good idea.

Why grudgingly? Just curious...

No, it's a re-post. I originally posted in Music Servers, and realized that might not be the best forum for it. Sorry for the confusion!

Hi all, I've been running a Transporter as my front-end for a few years, and have pretty happily managed to avoid my usual upgrade-itis. Now I'm considering next steps. I could have the Transporter modified (probably ModWright), or I could leapfrog into something else. Problem is, I don't know what "something else" might be, as I've been blissfully ignorant of the digital landscape for the last couple years at least. I am vaguely aware for the Bryston BDP/BDA combo, and the Linn Klimax/Akurate/Majik line - but digital moves fast and I don't honestly know what else is out there. My... proclivities & biases: I'm not excited about having a true server in my listening room. My server is currently in a separate part of the house, and that's how I like it. The server is on a gigabit backbone (for distributed video, audio, etc.), and I'm running ethernet to the listening room. No CAPS servers or asynchronous USB DACs for me. I DO really like having a client - a front-end - in the listening room. It suits my personal bias towards keeping the clients and the server separate, doing separate jobs. I'm happy with the Transporter's performance over my network in terms of UI performance, and controlling it with my phone and/or tablet is fun. I DO like having a front-end with excellent analog outs. Not having to throw a DAC in the mix strikes me as a win. However, I'm certainly open to it, if DACs today are vastly superior to the Transporter's. While I do own quite a few 24/96 albums, I can't say I'm sold on the benefits of 24/192 - so if that's the only reason to upgrade, I'd probably pass. So. Any suggestions for the next (giant) step up from the Transporter? Has digital come so far that I should leapfrog the ModWright approach and shop for something shiny and new? A whole new front-end? Or "just" a DAC? I'd like to be somewhat informed before I go talking to the salespeople. Oh, and let's put the budget at, say, $3,000. Thanks all!

Hi all, I've been running a Transporter as my front-end for a few years, and have pretty happily managed to avoid my usual upgrade-itis. Now I'm considering next steps. I could have the Transporter modified (probably ModWright), or I could leapfrog into something else. Problem is, I don't know what "something else" might be, as I've been blissfully ignorant of the digital landscape for the last couple years at least. I am vaguely aware for the Bryston BDP/BDA combo, and the Linn Klimax/Akurate/Majik line - but digital moves fast and I don't honestly know what else is out there. My... proclivities & biases: * I'm not excited about having a true server in my listening room. My server is currently in a separate part of the house, and that's how I like it. The server is on a gigabit backbone (for distributed video, audio, etc.), and I'm running ethernet to the listening room. No CAPS servers or asynchronous USB DACs for me. * I DO really like having a client - a front-end - in the listening room. It suits my personal bias towards keeping the clients and the server separate, doing separate jobs. I'm happy with the Transporter's performance over my network in terms of UI performance, and controlling it with my phone and/or tablet is fun. * I DO like having a front-end with excellent analog outs. Not having to throw a DAC in the mix strikes me as a win. However, I'm certainly open to it, if DACs today are vastly superior to the Transporter's. * While I do own quite a few 24/96 albums, I can't say I'm sold on the benefits of 24/192 - so if that's the only reason to upgrade, I'd probably pass. So. Any suggestions for the next (giant) step up from the Transporter? Has digital come so far that I should leapfrog the ModWright approach and shop for something shiny and new? A whole new front-end? Or "just" a DAC? Oh, and let's put the budget at, say, $3,000. Thanks all!

Hi all, I've been running a Transporter as my front-end for a few years, and have pretty happily managed to avoid my usual upgrade-itis. Now I'm considering next steps. I could have the Transporter modified (probably ModWright), or I could leapfrog into something else. Problem is, I don't know what "something else" might be, as I've been blissfully ignorant of the digital landscape for the last couple years at least. I am vaguely aware for the Bryston BDP/BDA combo, and the Linn Klimax/Akurate/Majik line - but digital moves fast and I don't honestly know what else is out there. My... proclivities & biases: * I'm not excited about having a true server in my listening room. My server is currently in a separate part of the house, and that's how I like it. The server is on a gigabit backbone (for distributed video, audio, etc.), and I'm running ethernet to the listening room. No CAPS servers or asynchronous USB DACs for me. * I DO really like having a client - a front-end - in the listening room. It suits my personal bias towards keeping the clients and the server separate, doing separate jobs. I'm happy with the Transporter's performance over my network in terms of UI performance, and controlling it with my phone and/or tablet is fun. * I DO like having a front-end with excellent analog outs. Not having to throw a DAC in the mix strikes me as a win. However, I'm certainly open to it, if DACs today are vastly superior to the Transporter's. * While I do own quite a few 24/96 albums, I can't say I'm sold on the benefits of 24/192 - so if that's the only reason to upgrade, I'd probably pass. So. Any suggestions for the next (giant) step up from the Transporter? Has digital come so far that I should leapfrog the ModWright approach and shop for something shiny and new? A whole new front-end? Or "just" a DAC? Oh, and let's put the budget at, say, $3,000. Thanks all!

I can vouch for the CD version, at least. For a pop album, there's good dynamic range and pace. I'd imagine the hi-rez version could only be better, benefiting from what I'd surmise was strong effort from the engineer to make a clean, fairly uncompressed recording.

I just bought, and listened to the 24/44.1 album from HDTracks last night. I bought it without bothering to listen to any of the tracks - I really like Jones' voice, heard an interview with her that morning, was intrigued by Danger Mouse's influence, and it was on sale. So there you go. It's quite a departure from Norah's previous stuff, for better or for worse. I'm just fine with that: I like Norah for her voice, and welcome the exploration of something new. For me, the voice is precisely the problem with this album though: on nearly every every track, the vocals sound very processed. Very little Norah comes through, know what I mean? To my ears, that wry, sexy voice of hers has been replaced by something... other. Maybe it will sound better in the car, or through a transistor radio.

I've found that conversion to 16/48 mp3 @ 320kbps using Foobar works pretty well. I'm not a great fan of AMI - I definitely seen better interfaces from Lincoln (Microsoft Sync) and Cadillac at very least. AMI aside though, the sound emanating from the B&O set up is darned good for a car. I've read about some upgrading the subwoofer in these systems, but I honestly can't see any reason why. ...not, at least for the music I generally listen to (mostly jazz). The biggest problem I have now isn't so much fidelity as it is the AMI UI. You get a bunch of albums onto the onboard HDD, and it becomes a bit difficult to quickly find what you want. A good problem to have, I suppose... More food for thought: I recently traded my 2009 S5 for a 2012 S4. I assume your Q5 will have the same onboard HDD that my S4 has (the S5 did not have this). Audi doesn't provide much guidance here... but I can tell you that it is very easy to import music files from a thumb drive to the car's HDD. You must purchase a USB dongle ($60 or so), however. I already had one for/from my S5, so that was fine for me. The other, native option is to copy your music to a SD card. AMI can then import your music from the SD card. Fun, eh? I know you'll enjoy your Q5 when it arrives - that's one heckuva nice vehicle. Finally, check out the Audi forums for various bits of useful info on your Q. www.audizine.com or www.audiworld.com

So this is obviously a bit off topic, but I figured I'd give it a shot. Here's the question: Can anyone confirm that the Audi Music Interface (MI) will properly play back 48khz files (16/48, that is)? The Gory Details - read at your own risk. I've a 2009 Audi with the MI. I've started tinkering with my non-iPod options (a la thumb drive), as I am clearly too lazy to connect and detach my iPod as needed. So here's my recent discovery: while Audi provides clear documentation that the MI does not support any of the lossless formats, it makes no statement as to bit depth or, particularly, sampling frequency. A bit of experimentation has proved that it will not play 24-bit files, as expected. Fine. Here's the interesting bit: when I convert 24/96 flac to 16-bit AAC (using Foobar), I get a 96khz file. 16/96. Hmmm... Surprisingly, the file actually plays back in the car - but very slooow and low. Like a tape player with dying batteries. Or good barbeque. Moving on. When I convert to mp3 (320kbps), I get a 16/48 file - more in line with expectations. This could work. BUT, I've a hunch that the Audi MI is also playing the 48khz file just slightly lower and slower than it should - than it would a 44.1 file, which it probably "expects". I could probably just force a conversion to 16/44 and compare - but I thought I'd bear my soul to a few thousand of my closest friends instead. Your thoughts? Oh, right... why not use dbPoweramp, you ask? Because I've used it in the recent past, converting 24/96 flac to 16/44 WMA for the above purpose - and I get this "ringing" sound around cymbals, steel pan, anything metallic. No such problem with conversions of lower-rez files. So I'm tinkering with my converters as well, hoping to settle on a single process that consistently "just works". That way, I can listen to the music I purchase from HDTracks, etc. in the car, along with all my other stuff.