Slimdevices Transporter no longer "supported"

[Mike B]

Originally Posted by Pug

Do you have an iPhone? You can use iPeng which is a lot cheaper than the Squeezebox remote.

http://penguinlovesmusic.de/ipeng-th...squeezecenter/

I do develop some iPhone software for work but don't actually own one.
Yeah I just checked the price- $300 for just the remote. That's silly, forget that.


The only reason I could see for discontinuing the Classic and replacing it with the Touch is if the price is the same. Otherwise, it's a fine device and they should certainly have some sort of relatively "low-end" budget model.

Yeah maybe the guy that told me they were discontinuing it didn't know what he was talking about. He had me wait a minute and asked someone to "confirm" it but whatever. I ended up finding it cheaper 2nd-hand anyway. At the very least, they seemed to stop offering refurbished products, which is a shame.

[SamS]

I'm pretty sure the Classica aka Squeezebox3 is going away, to be replaced by the touch.

Don't buy the $300 SB Controller. Get an 8GB iPod Touch for $199 and buy the $10 remote app. It works really well, and is a huge improvement over using the standard remote.

[RadioClash]

Originally Posted by SamS

Don't buy the $300 SB Controller. Get an 8GB iPod Touch for $199 and buy the $10 remote app. It works really well, and is a huge improvement over using the standard remote.

Sounds like the way to go.

[dgstrat]

Originally Posted by Mike B

I paid $1300 for the Transporter. The Squeezebox is, what, $300 new for the basic model? Plus, how much is a DAC that matches the performance of the Transporter. About a grand? It just seems like for what I paid, we're talking 6-of-one half-a-dozen, here, so I went with the compactness and features of the Transport.

I was actually using a DAC + Squeezebox and wanted to upgrade, and saw this as a way of doing that while simplifying my set-up.

The nice thing about an external Dac is that you can also run another digital source, like a cd player through it. I currently have a Benchmarc Dac1 with a squeezebox and a Sony CD/SACD changer hooked up. That signifigantly upgrades 2 components.

[TONEPUB]

another great reason for buying an external DAC instead of a heavily modded piece like the transporter....

[SamS]

Originally Posted by TONEPUB

another great reason for buying an external DAC instead of a heavily modded piece like the transporter....

The Transporter has 4 digital inputs, more than most DACs. It also has a word clock input.

[Metronome]

Keep in mind that the TP is beyond 3 years old now, is "aged" technology in this digital game and, therefore. might well suffer from parts availability issues in the event that their suppliers no longer stock "outdated" parts for them to build with. I'm thinking the screen technology in particular.

So, unless Logitech has procured sufficient stock inventory it might well be that the TP is on its last legs since I would think that Logitech would have little to no interest in committing new R&D costs to keeping/maintaining or designing a new TP in what is essentially a niche, audiophile product category for them.

[Metronome]

Originally Posted by TONEPUB

another great reason for buying an external DAC instead of a heavily modded piece like the transporter....

Only if you are of the belief that using a seriously flawed SPDIF protocol in the process is a non issue in terms of sound quality.

I know that reclockers are such that ASRC and PLL have worked wonders getting jitter levels down but none of these clock systems are benign on the sound from SPDIF woes.

By far the best way to eliminate SPDIF issues is to not involve them in the first place. The TP, and the other all in one units, does this.

[Shakey]

Again, I don't work for them. Logitech, but was told there is much untapped potential under the Transporter's hood. Further they told me they are currently developing more improvements. The DAC is the same model that's in my MH ULN-2, a AKM4396 I believe.

To be frank, I am not a fan of upsampling DACs, SRC on the fly, or transcoding. I am however curious of some of the recent filtering innovations, we'll see if that's really an innovation.

Naim and some others have stuck with what some will say is dated technology, yet they are top of the heap, my words.

The Transporter should be viewed as a DAC, with exceptional connectivity and able to be a Network Music Player, to boot.

Just my thoughts.

[Metronome]

Originally Posted by Shakey

Naim and some others have stuck with what some will say is dated technology, yet they are top of the heap, my words.

True, Terry. But realize that Naim is strictly in the business of high end audio and therefore it makes sense for them to spend money either maintaining their designs and its resultant production or sitting down and re-designing when they are faced with the inevitability of unavailable supply parts. Or, you will see such audio companies buy out all of the remaining parts if the supplier is no longer supplying/producing a particular item.

A company like Logitech is known for its mice, its computer keyboards and its wireless computer gadgets. I have little confidence that they would have much, if any, interest in shelling out any of their resources on what is a very low volume, niche audiophile market in the event they are forced into supply issues with TP components.

I think the best hope for continuation is for them to license off the technology to some other audio company who has very deep pockets! But are there any of them around anymore though?

Bill

[jlw2000]

Originally Posted by Mike B

The DAC on the Squeezebox is weak, even compared to Pro-Ject USB DAC I'm now using at work for headphone listening, and certainly weaker than the MusicHall DAC I just sold. I'm plugging this thing into my stereo and use digital music listening as my main playback, I need a high-quality DAC.

I agree with this statement. The SB3, while perfectly fine, is a pretty uninvolving little beast. I eventually got around to adding a Rega IO DAC and, while helpful, still wasn't as good as the IO paired with the Jupiter transport playing a real CD. Perhaps something with my server settings, or my ripping (all FLAC), but eventually backed away from the SB3 entirely. Just don't need my entire CD collection at my figertips... I tend to rotate through 3-4 CDs at a time. With the Squeezebox, I never seemed able to sit through an entire album. Either because I was uninvolved, or it encouraged ADD behaviors.

[jlw2000]

Originally Posted by Claude

I don't think a $2000 music server makes sense, because these devices are so quickly outdated, in terms of formats they support, and usability.

I'd rather go for a Naimuniti once they start floating around 2nd hand....

[SamS]

Originally Posted by Claude

In the future, many Transporter owners will play files from the latest $300 Squeezebox connected to the Transporter DAC, the server part having become useless.

That's like saying a paragraph in a Microsoft word doc will no longer be available to read one day. Why would the server software become useless? Even if it ceased being developed today it still works.

Have I mentioned the Transporter has 4 digital inputs plus a word clock?

I'm not trying to justify the Transporter in particular. I'm just perplexed by the comments that are so fearful of future advances (?) that it prevents them from experiencing their music today (and the forseeable future) in the best possible sound and convenience.

[gd0]

Originally Posted by SamS

I'm not trying to justify the Transporter in particular. I'm just perplexed by the comments that are so fearful of future advances (?) that it prevents them from experiencing their music today (and the forseeable future) in the best possible sound and convenience.

Computer Business Model mentality.

The industry has been relentless in its must-have-latest-incremental-tech-advance / must-have-this-week's-max-storage-capacity brainwashing program to the point where the original intent of various gadgets – that otherwise work fine – is obscured or forgotten.

Or maybe I'm just ranting because I can't afford to keep up.

[Shakey]

All I was trying to say is not everything new is necessarily better and the latest chip or whatever in not always an improvement. At the same time, just because one box has the same parts as the other box, many times will sound different.

I am no designer but I believe that taking a look at what can be improved upon in the present, take for instance 16/44.1; minimum phase filters, apodizing filters, discrete analog sections, da da da sometimes results in better sound with current technology.

While increasing bit depth and sampling rate was thought to be the panacea for 16/44.1 digital sound 10 years ago, some designers are getting better sound from tweaking the older technologies.

A lot of people think that throwing a USB input on a DAC makes it the equal or better of others, we are finding out that they are not. Some of the solutions are software based at present, and may be the direction advancements will be harvested in the future. Who knows, I certainly do not.

But I do know this, not every advancement is better, that's marketing.

[Claude]

Originally Posted by SamS

That's like saying a paragraph in a Microsoft word doc will no longer be available to read one day. Why would the server software become useless? Even if it ceased being developed today it still works.

You should quote the rest of my post as well. If newer players have more usability features and support more lossless codecs (like Monkey audio or Wavpak), people will want to replace the Transporter, the player part that is, while the DAC is still state-of-the-art.

A streaming player is like a PC or a MP3 player. They tend to become outdated very quickly. They can still do their job, but they are more limited than the newest ones.

[SamS]

Originally Posted by Claude

You should quote the rest of my post as well. If newer players have more usability features and support more lossless codecs (like Monkey audio or Wavpak), people will want to replace the Transporter, the player part that is, while the DAC is still state-of-the-art.

A streaming player is like a PC or a MP3 player. They tend to become outdated very quickly. They can still do their job, but they are more limited than the newest ones.

My point remains.... you say that one should consider a newer DAC with USB and/or HDMI, but how long until even those connections and protocols are obsolete? Every 5 years we think we have a "future-proof" standardized connection or interface, but that never lasts.

If anything, the TCP/IP interface of Cat5/Cat6 on the Transporter is the most "future proof" connection we've got.

Also, if you're pretty confident that you're going to run with FLAC or ALAC for the next 10+ years, then why wait for something that supports Wavpack, etc?

I also don't agree with your assumption that the DAC remains state-of-the art long after the music-streamer is obsolete. Is anyone using a DAC from 1998 that they think is still state of the art?

[Shakey]

Back to the subject of this thread, I just checked their site again and the Squeezebox Classic is gone.

The Tramsporter is still there, as is the Touch and the others.

[Mike B]

Originally Posted by SamS

The second display is essential! Use this plugin http://www.herger.net/slim-plugins/detail.php?nr=446 You'll have plenty of room to show Artist, Album, Track Num/Name and time for every song.

Actually one of the display options for that second display is artist and album. So I was exaggerating with it being "completely useless," because all the pictures of it show the VU meter (which is completely pointless ). Maybe they upgraded the firmware for it or something.

I've been meaning to check out some of the plugins and open-source software stuff out there but I can't really think of anything I'm missing right now.

As for using it as a standalone DAC, I found a little quirk that explains why it didn't work for me at first- after setting it to the input, I have to change the volume, like I'm "waking it up" or something. So kind of annoying but not big deal.

I've been using it in the past couple of days to watch Jazz Icons DVDs through my computer. It's pretty cool.