Logitech Transporter + Berkeley Audio Alpha DAC 2

Anyone using a Berkeley Audio Alpha DAC 2 with a Transporter?
I figure this would be a good upgrade and leaves a nice path to getting the Berkeley Audio USB sometime in the future.

Is the Transporter good enough as a transport?


I expect that will be a killer combination.
Evilteddie, I've used my MW Transporter as a transport with several tube and SS DACs in the past and it works fine. In all situations, I prefer the AES/EBU over RCA or bnc connections.

Good Luck!
Transporter + minimum phase filter + latest version of sox (the one included with SBS is not the latest version) is close to Alpha DAC1. Perhaps not a bad idea to try the free "upgrade" first.

Anyone with similar experience?

This sounds interesting.
Where do I get the latest version of SOX?

I found your article here:


Are the instructions still the same to turn this filter on?


BTW, where do I find convert.conf on a Mac?
I have 7.7.2 installed on a Mac but I don't seem to be able to locate this file.


I suppose it depends on what "good enough" means to you, or to what level of quality you are trying to reach...

I did not find the digi out on the TP to be that great once I got a DAC and began to use it... Quickly switched to a Bolder mod SB3 for a temporary solution and it was night and day! Way cleaner! The TP's digi out just sounded dirty. But maybe this software tweak will fix all of that.
I didn't like the Transporter as a transport to another DAC. I tried a couple DAC's with it, and the Transporter made them all sound like the analog outs of the Transporter. Mine was modded by Modwright when I had it at the time.
OK, so I found a large amount of information on this minimum phase ana Antipodal Filtering:


Will this work if I use the TP as a transport or is it a funciton of the DAC.
Please excuse my ignorance :)

Yo2tup, mine too and I agree. Good for its time, or good for someone at its used level but not great for a transport for a diserving dac. But as stated before. It depends on your level. The MWTP is very good in its own right and at its level.
You can use the min-phase filter whether TP is used as a transport or transport+DAC.

In the case of using the TP as a transport with min-phase filter enabled, the sound of your DAC will be influced (I think positively, unless your DAC already has a min-phase filter) by the filter and parameter you set.

The headfi article is a little old. I have since modified the sox function to adjust the DAC sound to my taste. Right now I have touch (with boulder PS) running the min-phase filter into Cary exciter and the combo sounds wonderful in my secondary system.

I am no longer using transporter for much of anything since I acquired Linn Klimax.
So here's another twist...

How about using an Empirical Audio Pace Car between the TP and DAC?


or should I just ditch the TP and go the USB route with a Berkeley USB or Empirical Off Ramp 5?


I don't know, I find the TP to be very satisfying on digital out.

Have compared it to several decent CD/SACD players and like it better by a decent amount. Granted, not to super high end CD players. And also to a non-modded Touch - no comparison imo. Granted, I use a decent power cable, and decent digital cable from TP to DAC and I'm careful to tune the Squeezecenter configs.

If the Transporter is only serving as a bridge to a USB input on a good DAC, and not part of a whole home music distribution system, and your DAC has a reputable USB input, I'd say going straight from computer to DAC on USB is a good option also.
06-21-12: Yo2tup
I didn't like the Transporter as a transport to another DAC. I tried a couple DAC's with it, and the Transporter made them all sound like the analog outs of the Transporter.
Definitely not my experience with the MW Transporter. The sound is dependent on the digital cable or PC on the DAC that I use.

DAC is like computers, I don't chase the latest or greatest. I choose to invest in mature areas of my system. I've auditioned many DACs / SACD players that costing much more and so far have not found any that has motivated me to change.
OK, I also found that the Berkeley DAC 2 has this feature:

Unequalled interpolation technology up-samples 44.1kHz CD’s to provide almost 176.4kHz quality and produces superb fidelity at all sampling rates from 32kHz to 192kHz.

Maybe the TP will be fine :)
So is the Berkeley Audio DAC Series 2 a better DAC than the internal TP DAC?
I got mine tonight.
You better believe it is!
Shockingly good.

People say it sounds like vinyl.
I think it sounds better.
Well, better than my analog rig and it cost me $20K 10 years ago.
I'm running 1.5m AES and balanced silver cables direct into the power amp and feeding it with a 1m PS-Audio AC-10 cable from a PowerPoint.

It's showing the TP minimum phase filter is working, because it detects it as 96KHz.
Now I have to sell the TP and buy the Berkeley USB now.
I have to.
If 96KHz sounds this good, I want more, more, MORE!!!

That's encouraging news. I have compared BADA2 using CDP as transport in one system and TP w/ Min-phase filter in another system, and I couldn't bring myself to buy the BADA2, as I didn't now whether the min-phase filter effect is additive/subtractive.

Not it appears that TP + BADA2 is a great combo. Before I go jumping on BADA as a replacement for my DAC in my 2nd system, could you run a test between TP internal DAC w/ min-phase filter and BADA2 using CDP or another source as the transport?
I don't have another transport to test with, sorry.

BUT, PureMusic will do the same software upsampling to using minimum phase filtering and you get an arguably superior transport to the TP.
It will play 24/192 native whereas the TP is stuck at 24/96.

You should be able to get a dealer to return it within a week or so if you don't like it...

I have the Berkeley with a squeezebox touch (w/CI PS), not transporter, so thinking result may be similar. I upsample/clock the SB with an Esoteric G25U (pretty good cables)to 192k and sound is very, very good I do prefer my PC (in next room)+ 30 foot apogee (bnc) spdif out of an ESI Juli@ sound card into the Esoteric clock/upsampler. It has shown me that the SB is not as dynamic and slightly (slightly) veiled. BUT, breaks my heart to say, my multi year/multi thousand dollar forray into PC audio, it still doesn't sound as good as my Esoteric X03SE (w/G25U clock) into a regular old preamp. the randomness of music play is great but if I really want to listen, I'm still chained to physical media, being vinyl, tape, fm or cd's various methods.
I hear you but in my case it is clearly better.
This is not something I would have believed possible from digital.

Have you tried using USB with JRMC rather than the Touch?
This is where I think the gains will be made.

Everyone I've talked to, including Steve from Empirical think the USB route will give much better quality.
I could put a Pace Care reclocker between the TP and Berkeley, but he tells me I would be wasting my money. Better to sell the TP and buy an Off Ramp 5 for the same money.

Now I'm torn between the Off Ramp 5 and the Berkeley.
Steve is super responsive and answers every email whereas Berkeley haven't responded to one.
That kind of customer support doesn't fly with me.
I'd rather invest my $$$$ with someone who actually takes the time to interact with me.

I absolutely hate USB and would never implement it. USB transmits data in packets, not streams. This is an inherent flaw and as cute as you want to get, you are not eliminating this issue. I have conversed within these forums with Steve and, to me, he was much too opinionated, defensive and self promoting. I have some pretty hard core facts backing up my statement - my ears. Seems like Steve knows how everything sounds - without listening to it. I have been listening to vinyl quite a bit lately, as well as my cd player on both redbook and sacd and at this point, don't expect to invest any more money into the music server route. My CD still sounds better and my vinyl still blows it all away so I just ask myself, why not just play vinyl?