Music Servers VS Excellent Transports?

Thanks for the responses Walt & Bigamp.

I have slaved my RME souncard to both the DAC clock and a very expensive rubidium clock, but the EMM transport sounds so much better, it's not even close. I am running AES to the DCC2. Not sure what the issue may be. I have used both foobar and a better program for sound, not ease of use, samplitude to make the comparison. The soundstage and detail are all gone with the computer transport. I so much want it to sound the same due to the ease of use, so i'm not biased here. It may be some OS/hardware problem, i guess. I think I'll demo the transporter again.

Askat1988 - If you slave the Transporter from the DAC word-clock, then it should be as good as the transport slaved from the DAC, although it's a lot of money just to get a digital output from WiFi. It does evidently do 24/96, which is a plus. If the result is not identical, then there is something wrong with DAC clocking/slaving.

Steve N.

Would love to hear a shootout at a show. Any chnace this kind of demo would happen?

Deshapiro
Hi David,
Did you ever get the chance to put the AMR CD77 you were expecting up against your Wavelength Crimson?

Regards

Steve,

Thanks. Yes, it is a lot of money, but not nearly as much as the EMM transport if you look at it that way. And the ease of use is much better. I just wonder if there are other issues at play. I am not an engineer. I think people like Alex at Alpshifi disagree that a music server, like the transporter, can equal a high-end transport, like the EMM. I don't want to put words in his mouth, jusy my opinion from his posts. And I do respect his opinion. It is definitely worth a shoot-out.