 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.204.147.60
In Reply to: RE: Logitech Transporter... OR? posted by Astroimage on September 04, 2011 at 17:02:42
Based on my experience, the Transporter would be a downgrade, that is unless it is reclocked with a competent reclocker and then feeding a good DAC. Then it's the reclocker master clock that you are listening to, not the Transporter clock. It's the clock that is important here, not so much the DAC. The Transporter is a good choice just because it's easy to reclock because it has a word-clock input.
Finding a better clock than the Touch uses is not that easy, even though there are much better clocks out there. You cannot expect to spend a few hundred for an upgrade like this. This is actually more important than the DAC itself.
You might consider as a first step, just to use the digital out on the Touch to feed a really good DAC using a good digital cable, such as the Ridge Street Audio. Dont eliminate the Touch yet.
When this is not good enough, then maybe consider a USB converter with a really low-jitter clock, better than that in the touch to drive your new DAC.
Steve N.
Follow Ups:
Are you referring to using the $685 1.5M digital with a $300 Touch?
rw
.
rw
nt
Cut-Throat
Try pure polished silver ribbon, double-annealed, then assembled into a cable with mostly air dielectric and then cryo-treated. Whe it comes to silver, the metallurgy is extremely important.
All very nice and shiny, but why does this affect the sound?
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
At the molecular level, the crystal lattice of the silver is uniform and not full of fracture defects. This minimizes the reflections in the material. I have TDR traces showing these reflections in a broken crystal lattice. They are real. My brother is a metallurgical engineer.
At the macro level, the ribbon is very thin, so skin-effect is minimized. Dielectric absorption is minimized with the dielectrics used.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Hey, that is nothing. I use $4600 amps and $2600 worth of subs with $500 speakers. And my front end is probably more than 5 times the price of the speakers.
No one here remembers the bending of our minds
Forgive my question, but it is an honest one:
What is the difference between upsampling and reclocking?
When upsampling, is there not essentially reclocking being done?
I borrowed a friends Byrston BDA-1 with optional "synchronous" upsampling...it took 44.1 and upsampled to 176.4, and 96K to 192.
With upsampling engaged (and I have never been a fan), 90% of the time the results were superior. Shockingly so in some cases.
What is the difference between upsampling and reclocking?
Reclocking establishes a new master clock without changing the music data. Upsampling establishes a new master clock, but changes the data by resampling. Upsampling hardware is usually not immune to incoming jitter, but reclocking can be immune to incoming jitter.
When upsampling, is there not essentially reclocking being done?
Yes, a new master clock is established.
I borrowed a friends Bryston BDA-1 with optional "synchronous" upsampling...it took 44.1 and upsampled to 176.4, and 96K to 192.
This will generally improve the jitter, but nothing like reclocking.
Steve N.
Thanks for the explanations. Much appreciated.
If understand you correctly, upsampling and reclocking, when done optimally, should be separate processes, and trusted to devices specialized for each function.
Hence dcs and the 80K stack.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
