Slim Devices Introduces Transporter

[LHawes]

I think it would be a killer app for audiophiles if Real (or Urge or iTunes or any other download site out there) to offer high-def sound (at least 24-bit/96kHz x 2ch). I'd even pay double ($2/track) for the priviledge. This service would make products like the Transporter a lot more attractive and could serve to rejuvenate the lackluster high-end industry.

Here here. I'd also gladly pay top dollar (or two) for a single track in the best/lossless format possible. Then with a vehicle like Transporter you create a gateway into the best that digital has to offer without buying and catalogging 100's of CD's. But there is always that pesky DRM thing that puts the kibash on most of that idea.

 

[Geoh]

Here here. I'd also gladly pay top dollar (or two) for a single track in the best/lossless format possible. Then with a vehicle like Transporter you create a gateway into the best that digital has to offer without buying and catalogging 100's of CD's. But there is always that pesky DRM thing that puts the kibash on most of that idea.

The Transporter now makes this a legitimate need or at the very least lossless importing of Redbook CDs which is going to require bigger hard drives
On that note, what are you guys using now to import your CDs to your hard drive?
MP3 type or something else?

geoh

 

[LHawes]

The Transporter now makes this a legitimate need or at the very least lossless importing of Redbook CDs which is going to require bigger hard drives
On that note, what are you guys using now to import your CDs to your hard drive?
MP3 type or something else?

geoh

I use EAC (Exact Audio Copy) and rip to FLAC. FLAC is considered by those who know more than I to be pretty darn good as a lossless format.

As far as large hard drives I just bought 250 gigs for $75 or some other rediculous low price. I don't have a thousand CD's but the Olive folks say their Opus with 750 gigs will hold 2100 CDs at redbook quality so that should have most folks covered.

Many folks scoff at the sound quality of MP3's and I can definetly hear the difference, but for a lot of folks that should be fine and SOOO simple to set up in Itunes or whatever.

 

[Geoh]

I use EAC (Exact Audio Copy) and rip to FLAC. FLAC is considered by those who know more than I to be pretty darn good as a lossless format.

As far as large hard drives I just bought 250 gigs for $75 or some other rediculous low price. I don't have a thousand CD's but the Olive folks say their Opus with 750 gigs will hold 2100 CDs at redbook quality so that should have most folks covered.

Many folks scoff at the sound quality of MP3's and I can definetly hear the difference, but for a lot of folks that should be fine and SOOO simple to set up in Itunes or whatever.

What about iTunes Lossless format?
SlimServer and iTunes seem to go together like peanut butter and jelly.

geoh

 

[krabapple]

I think most people who are willing to pay the $2K are going to understand the basic difference between relying on the internal DAC and using an external DAC.

I wouldn't bet the rent on it.

Not everyone wants to stick an $80 eyesore on their system.

So hide it. It's only a little bigger than a pack of cigarettes.

 

[krabapple]

I think Slim Devices should be commended on releasing a very innovative product. The problem is that the current content distribution methods don't allow the full capabilities of the Transporter to be utilized. The best sound format you can deliver to this box is Red Book CD. Otherwise it's 128kbs MP3 (ugh!).

First, doesn't the Transporter support MP3 at bitrates higher than 128?

Seond, have you done your own ABX tests to determine that you can actually *hear* such differences?

Third, the vast majority of music content available to consumers is mastered as Redbook CD. The amount of SACD and DVD-A content out there is miniscule, even if you could stream it. And leaving aside the highely questionable proposition that SACD and DVD-A sound inherently better than CD.

Slim Devices apparently has a relationship with RealNetworks as their Squeezebox and Transporter devices access Rhapsody. I think it would be a killer app for audiophiles if Real (or Urge or iTunes or any other download site out there) to offer high-def sound (at least 24-bit/96kHz x 2ch).

From what recordings? You'd be limited to the comparativey tiny catalogue of music that's been mastered in that format.

(upconverting a 16/44 source to some higher sample rate or bit depth won't get you 'high def' sound)

 

[krabapple]

Here here. I'd also gladly pay top dollar (or two) for a single track in the best/lossless format possible. Then with a vehicle like Transporter you create a gateway into the best that digital has to offer without buying and catalogging 100's of CD's. But there is always that pesky DRM thing that puts the kibash on most of that idea.

the 'regular' Slim device (Squeezebox) can handle FLAC and .wav already, and was already an 'audiophile' favorite. I'm still trying tosee what the point of this new device is, other than feeding into audiophile mythology...in order to charge boutique prices.

 

[Audioholics]

It would be hard to conceive installers putting a Squeezebox 2 or 3 into a house (simply due to its form factor and lack of RS-232 control), but the Transporter would rack up nicely.

This is a CI product - and a welcome addition (since you can still buy the SB3).

 

[Biscokid]

Its amazing what happens when you slap a 2k price tag on something and make it bigger!

 

[WorldLeader]

I use Apple Lossless for all my CD ripping needs, it works great and is compatible with everything I use.

When I create my own songs via Logic, I use AIFF. Uncompressed and works in any CD player.

Usually if I need to compress a song I use iTunes and set it for 196 ACC with VBR. ACC is a nicer codec than MP3 and it makes similar-sized files.

For websites I use 128 MP3, because it makes small files.

 

[Sleestack]

Its amazing what happens when you slap a 2k price tag on something and make it bigger!

And add more connectivity and a better DAC. Some people are just oversimplifying the differences between the Transporter and SB3. It might not be worth the jump in price, but it is hardly just the SB3 in a bigger box.

 

[Biscokid]

but you have stated before that you would not use a SB because of its shape and that you will not be using the DAC. So where am I wrong?

 

[Sleestack]

but you have stated before that you would not use a SB because of its shape and that you will not be using the DAC. So where am I wrong?

AES + word Synch. Those connectivity options were exactly what I was looking for in my system.

Furthermore, while I might not use the other features, the Transporter is not the SB3 in a bigger casing. Sure, it shares some of the same functionality, but why ignore the other key differences?