View Full Version : would a decent transport outperform my DAC/PC ?
nbaptista
03-08-2012, 20:13
Hello,
I´m running my Rega DAC with my PC with Foobar 2000 and EAC for ripping cd´s. I prefer this comb to my low budget Cambridge 340 C as a transport!Much better timing and Prat in general with the PC. Would a Rega Apoolo R or a Cyrus CDT transport improve the sound and outperform the PC/DAC comb?
The next month I will try hear it for myself!
Stratmangler
03-08-2012, 20:38
I doubt that another transport is going to be any better than the PC.
What OS is on the computer, and have you utilised ASIO (for WinXP) or Wasapi (for Vista & Win7) drivers for Foobar?
nbaptista
03-08-2012, 20:40
Wasapi for Win 7
Stratmangler
03-08-2012, 20:49
Welcome to the world of file based music playback.
A transport might give a different sounding version of events, but the data stream off it is likely to be less accurate than a securely ripped CD off a HDD.
nbaptista
03-08-2012, 21:04
Welcome to the world of file based music playback.
.
Yes, indeed.
It's great :cool:
JPlay will improve your sound - try the demo at JPlay.eu.
You could try using a better USB transport into your Rega DAC.
I have organised a tour of my USB devices, both DACs & USBto SPDIF device, here. You could sign-up but I see you are in Portugal & will be touring the UK first.
There are my recommendations for best sound from a PC in my user guide which might be worth reading - here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HZ7Vya2A6x196kZhmWVAJvBthXc1R-XiGlSAL-CH188/edit)?
I give a big vote for Jplay too. The cut down JPLAYmini, which doesn't have a sexy user interface, sounds to my ears rather better than when used with Foobar or Jriver. Give Jplay a try. There's no way I'll be going back to my optimised Foobar.....
jandl100
04-08-2012, 07:57
"would a decent transport outperform my DAC/PC ?"
Yes, that is certainly my experience.
I've done several comparisons, including a bake-off specifically arranged to do such a comparison - a good CD transport won every time.
Word on the street is that some of the new streaming devices have got this sorted - including the one from NVA that Marco and Ali have tried, I think. The Lampizator streamer also gets good reviews. But they are very expensive. A decent Pioneer stable platter CDP used as a transport costs less than £100 and easily beats SBTs as well as some very sophisticated streaming setups etc, imho.
A std Pioneer Stable platter cdp was nowhere near as good as a Chevron Audio clocked Teac P500 transport in my system.
When the Teac laser went belly up I had the Pioneer clock linked to my dac, now its in a different league.
jandl100
04-08-2012, 09:10
A std Pioneer Stable platter cdp was nowhere near as good as a Chevron Audio clocked Teac P500 transport in my system.
When the Teac laser went belly up I had the Pioneer clock linked to my dac, now its in a different league.
Well, OK.
Remember the "box swapper credo" -- there is always something better, or at least interestingly different! :D
So if a standard Pioneer stable platter is better, then a re-clocked one should punt most streamers into the weeds, no problemo! :eyebrows:
I also run a Macbook/Pure Music into the same dac via async usb, its close but the clock linked Pioneer edges in front, it just sounds more natural.
nbaptista
04-08-2012, 10:09
I can buy a Mac mini, too!:scratch:
Yep a Mac Mini would be nice along with a Hiface 2 to go between it and your dac;)
nbaptista
05-08-2012, 13:11
JPlay will improve your sound - try the demo at JPlay.eu.
Can I still run Foobar with JPlay in the background, like I did with the demo?
A decent Pioneer stable platter CDP used as a transport costs less than £100 and easily beats SBTs as well as some very sophisticated streaming setups etc, imho.
Well I totally disagree with that opinion Jerry, ain't no way a Pioneer stable platter CDP is going to sound better than a properly configured file based audio system - if it does, then you are doing something wrong ;) (IMHO)
Can I still run Foobar with JPlay in the background, like I did with the demo?
Yes, the full version of Jplay is the same code as the demo minus the code that inserts gaps in the music.
I brought my laptop and DAC to a few systems and so far compairing like for like recordings I not heard a Transport and DAC beat this combination
Well I totally disagree with that opinion Jerry, ain't no way a Pioneer stable platter CDP is going to sound better than a properly configured file based audio system - if it does, then you are doing something wrong ;) (IMHO)
I agree, an un-modified Pioneer sounded pretty average to me when I tried it with my dac.
sq225917
05-08-2012, 16:43
Funny how it's always windows users saying streaming isn't as good as a decent transport into a dac. I wonder what the determining factor is? ;-)
Funny how it's always windows users saying streaming isn't as good as a decent transport into a dac. I wonder what the determining factor is? ;-)
Is that the case? John on an active thread (visit to MartinT) uses Windows with JPLAY, as I do. I have a friend who uses JPLAY under Windows on a Mac. We're all doing this because we find the transports we've tried lacking. Of course we've not tried all transports.....
I think also there's an idealogical aspect, ie do you want to stick with CD or go file-based, either because you want flexibility files bring or you see little future in the silver disk.
I think Simon is inferring that those dissatisfied Windows users have not got their machines set up correctly for audio
playback.
I think Simon is inferring that those dissatisfied Windows users have not got their machines set up correctly for audio
playback.
If that's correct, I agree.
The first area to investigate is ground-loops. This is the most damaging issue in computer based audio because it is insidious. Common mode noise causes sensitive circuits to perform rather badly as the ground reference is disturbed by this noise.
Check this initially by trying a laptop running on batteries. If there is an improvement in the sound, it is most likely CM noise. Test it by grounding the laptop & seeing if the sound remains the same or not.
If that's correct, I agree.
The first area to investigate is ground-loops. This is the most damaging issue in computer based audio because it is insidious. Common mode noise causes sensitive circuits to perform rather badly as the ground reference is disturbed by this noise.
Check this initially by trying a laptop running on batteries. If there is an improvement in the sound, it is most likely CM noise. Test it by grounding the laptop & seeing if the sound remains the same or not.
Couldn’t agree more regarding the grounding issues. I came to the conclusion that one of the factors that give a purpose built file server an edge over a properly set up laptop is the grounding along with what supplies power where.
Some Dacs seem more sensitive to grounding issues than others.
To answer the OP, I haven’t heard a CD transport or player that can outperform a well set up file system yet.
Is it that an Apple is so much more expensive than the competition that owners can't face the idea of buying a transport too?
;)
"would a decent transport outperform my DAC/PC ?"
Yes, that is certainly my experience.
I've done several comparisons, including a bake-off specifically arranged to do such a comparison - a good CD transport won every time.
Word on the street is that some of the new streaming devices have got this sorted - including the one from NVA that Marco and Ali have tried, I think. The Lampizator streamer also gets good reviews. But they are very expensive. A decent Pioneer stable platter CDP used as a transport costs less than £100 and easily beats SBTs as well as some very sophisticated streaming setups etc, imho.
Is it on general sale yet?
Well I totally disagree with that opinion Jerry, ain't no way a Pioneer stable platter CDP is going to sound better than a properly configured file based audio system - if it does, then you are doing something wrong ;) (IMHO)
Me too, but then I've only tried a few CDP transports... Still, blown away by all the File Based systems I've tried! :)
Is it on general sale yet?
Yes, available on eBay.
NVA TFS - Computer Hifi / Digital Streamer (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NVA-TFS-Computer-Hifi-Digital-Streamer-/220905606633?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_Other&hash=item336f000de9)
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w63/greatgig/IMG_2850.jpg
Funny how it's always windows users saying streaming isn't as good as a decent transport into a dac. I wonder what the determining factor is? ;-)
When I was using Windows XP > FLAC or WAV > Foobar2000 > ASIO > HagUSB it sounded good, and so did the HiFace that replaced the HagUSB, but neither are at the level of my reference CD transport.
When I was using Windows XP > FLAC or WAV > Foobar2000 > ASIO > HagUSB it sounded good, and so did the HiFace that replaced the HagUSB, but neither are at the level of my reference CD transport.
Mainly out of curiosity and the more recent comparison of John's laptop with Martins Ayre CD player, what is this refernce CD transport?
Should there be any difference in these file servers versus studio PCs running PC Tools/Nuendo/Pyramix/Sequoia etc etc?
Studio machines aren't anything special other than a good combination of hardware chips that proove super stable for the OS and software, they're pretty standard machines, no tweaks hardware-wise (well, for fan noise maybe) and then you load up the software..
So is it that all the tweeking of grounding and software combos that people do is to make up for weaknesses in file streaming software and USB output devices (instead of using proper, direct to the internal bus, I/O cards)?
Has anyone with an interest in recording music ever compared their studio machine with an "audiophile" file player?
I also run a Macbook/Pure Music into the same dac via async usb, its close but the clock linked Pioneer edges in front, it just sounds more natural.
Funny how it's always windows users saying streaming isn't as good as a decent transport into a dac. I wonder what the determining factor is? ;-)
Hmmm.... maybe you're wrong there Simon.
If though in general it appears to be true you have to take into account that Apple-love is completely blind and Linux geekery is blinkered..
Just to clairfy I thought Martin Ayre player was really good Probarly the best CD player I heard
What we did was to hear Martin player with a selection of CD SACD and DVD A I had a definaite preference for DVD A
We then heard my DAC trough the Touch and the sound was not that great. The Touch has a lot of work done to power supply
We then heard my DAC through the laptop using Jplay first without Hibernation and then with Hibernation we both agreed full Hibernation was better and performing above the Ayre using standard CD resolution playback
When we back to Ayre I asked Martin if we could try a power cable I brought along this improved the Ayre a lot. We did not try the cable on the DAC (we just used the Kimber cable Martin was using for the Ayre with the DAC).
I think the main thing to remeber I was using a basic £200 DAC with a Tenor chip for the USB input, a better DAC would of taking things further
When using the DAC with the Touch the DAC sounded pretty poor and also with his DVD player (not the Ayre) butwhen we used the laptop via it USB input the difference was huge
PS this is via a WIndows based system using Jplay
It seems like we have two main camps:
1) CD transports better file based computer setups
2) File based computer setups better CD transports
We don't all listen for the same characteristics of musical delivery but even so the the two camps are very polarised.
Trying to simplify to get to the reasons, here's my theory.
File based systems can sound anywhere between really bad and really good. Could it be that those who don't rate them haven't heard a well setup one?
CD transports, whilst clearly model each has it's own sound, they vary in sound less than computers do.
Except for a handful of commercial products, each computer setup is a one-off. I've heard Foobar dumped onto a PC sound absolutely dreadful, I've heard it sound pretty good on a PC that's been heavily tweaked. Operating System tweaking bring Windows, OS X, Linux etc all much closer together; as vanilla setups they sound very different. We then have tweaked or specially built harware, again many more variables. We have in-memory players such as XXHighEnd and JPLAY - these aim to reduce the hardware and software tweaks needed to get a really good sound.
So is it that the computer naysayers simply haven't been exposed to a good computer setup?
jandl100
06-08-2012, 08:37
So is it that the computer naysayers simply haven't been exposed to a good computer setup?
Well, I've not had a computer setup of my own. I've only ever listened to other people's setups.
But they were seriously into it, and would be most aggrieved if anyone said their computer-based systems were badly set up! :eyebrows:
Anyhoo - if you enjoy it -- :thumbsup:
For me it's too simplistic to say CD transport Vs file based...
Yes a well ripped file will always be more capable of being reproduced as 'bit perfect' than a CD transport equivalent , but that's not the only consideration with sound quality...
There's the interface with the DAC, cables, clock, galvanic 'bloody' isolation, jitter, asynchronous vs synchronous...even assuming one has configured the file server in the optimum fashion. Oh and then we're into power supplies too...
For myself a well set up SBT & an M-Dac beats my old Audiolab CDM transport, but that's a 2 box solution too...;)
For me it's too simplistic to say CD transport Vs file based...
Yes a well ripped file will always be more capable of being reproduced as 'bit perfect' than a CD transport equivalent , but that's not the only consideration with sound quality...
There's the interface with the DAC, cables, clock, galvanic 'bloody' isolation, jitter, asynchronous vs synchronous...even assuming one has configured the file server in the optimum fashion. Oh and then we're into power supplies too...
For myself a well set up SBT & an M-Dac beats my old Audiolab CDM transport, but that's a 2 box solution too...;)
I agree that it's not so simple but I would add that some of the items you specify are also important for a CD transport. The the difference that all the details are hidden in off-the-shelf products. Don't forget grounding too, which can be subtly different to galv isolation......:-), if we omit this Mr Keny will be after us!
Mainly out of curiosity and the more recent comparison of John's laptop with Martins Ayre CD player, what is this refernce CD transport?
I'll tell you, and create a thread for it, when I own at least 3x decent units!
My last one I got for a tenner, but it's a "battleship" DVD player that retailed for over £600 in the 90s. It buffers the CD data into memory (much like PS Audio's "PerfectWave Memory Player" but without the marketing...).
A large step up from my Pioneer PD-S505, which itself is a great little transport.
I'll tell you, and create a thread for it, when I own at least 3x decent units!
Orly!?
Is it that unreliable. :eek:
(Sry Neil, just couldn't help myself) ;)
nbaptista
06-08-2012, 12:51
Terry Bateman, Rega engineer doesn´t see USB "as a high-tier interface"!
Should there be any difference in these file servers versus studio PCs running PC Tools/Nuendo/Pyramix/Sequoia etc etc?
Studio machines aren't anything special other than a good combination of hardware chips that proove super stable for the OS and software, they're pretty standard machines, no tweaks hardware-wise (well, for fan noise maybe) and then you load up the software..
So is it that all the tweeking of grounding and software combos that people do is to make up for weaknesses in file streaming software and USB output devices (instead of using proper, direct to the internal bus, I/O cards)?
Has anyone with an interest in recording music ever compared their studio machine with an "audiophile" file player?
I’ve made such a comparison Nat.
(I’m going to have to write the rest of this from behind the sofa)
:sofa:
I’ve compared my server to a purpose built laptop designed for professional mobile recording. I don’t know exactly what specification the laptop has, but it gets dragged around various studios and has a wide selection of DSP apps and to listen to on replay sounds very good indeed.
Now this is where I should write ‘but my server outperformed it in every respect and was far superior’.
The problem is it didn’t. :(
I’ve spent not an inconsiderable amount of money and time on it. :doh:
It’s quite possible that my amateur tinkering and propensity for large hammers rather than accepted computer best practice produced a bit of a pig’s ear, but I’ve been happy to accept others assessment that I may just have made a silk purse. :)
Much like with pig’s ears and silk purses under ABX conditions, assuming of course you shaved the coarse hair from the pigs ear, the two can be hard to tell apart. ;)
There were differences between the laptop and server and depending on the other equipment including mains power, grounding, isolation etc, these differences were more or less pronounced.
I hesitate to use the term synergy, but careful consideration of the known strengths and weaknesses of the rest of the equipment in the chain can make small, but noticeable improvements.
For example, my server is designed to transfer data via USB, although it does have an SPDIF out. I tend to get better results with Dacs that are designed primarily for this method of data transfer.
I use linear regulated power supplies and while this may not have direct impact on the sonic qualities of the server in isolation, it does seem to make a very small but significant difference in a balanced power studio environment and in my home.
I chose to spend the money and time because I enjoy building stuff but in a “take any laptop and any purpose built file server and stick it in any randomly chosen system” test, I would be very surprised if the listener didn’t come away scratching his or her head and muttering “Wtf did he spend all that money and time for!?”.
I would expect say, that Gary’s under three hundred pound build to sound just as good as mine in an “any system test”.
I have heard this,
http://store.voyage.hk/KMPD2g.php?id=65
in a few systems (even cheaper) and ended up feeling that perhaps I ought to get married and let my wife handle my money. :mental:
What I am pleased about is at last here on AoS some people are beginning to accept that a file based system can perform as well as CD and record based systems. If the file server has to be dressed up in a audiophile approved posh box with every possible tweak applied and an idiot proof GUI to persuade the skeptical, then so be it.
I can come out from behind the sofa now and indulge in some friendly camp banter.
None of the above means that any half decent file system wont completely annihilate any CD transport based system whatever the bloody cost and if you cant hear this you must be deaf, or yer kits crap. :ner:
Oh btw,you missed a rather important consideration in you next post; geeky Linux may be but it's free. :D
Yes well that his choice One of the reasons why the Rega is not to good via USB
Yes well that his choice One of the reasons why the Rega is not to good via USB
Agreed John. There are plenty of people who are similarly negative about SPDIF. The truth is probably that both can be fine but it depends on the details of their implementation.
John, you are next in the list of people to receive my tour DACs so you can decide yourself the validity of Mr Bateman's statements. AndrewR has just posted his (short) impressions on the PFM forum (I believe he will be writing something a bit longer in his blog?). Anyway, it's close to his Audio Note Signature DAC which retails at > 6 times the price. How close, I'll let him say but he has written me a comprehensive email comparing the two & I'm happy :)
BTW, this tour is brought to you by Clive who was kind enough to post the two spare review DACs that he had in his possession.
PS, I've emailed you asking for your surname for posting purposes.
nbaptista
06-08-2012, 18:22
Yes well that his choice One of the reasons why the Rega is not to good via USB
My Rega sounds great via USB, much better than the DacMagic. But why Rega didn´t go asynchronous like the most manufacturers?
My Rega sounds great via USB, much better than the DacMagic. But why Rega didn´t go asynchronous like the most manufacturers?
Cost.
purite audio
07-08-2012, 09:39
Lack of technical expertise, they could licence the tech ,but as you say that would add to the cost .
Keith.
Interesting and much debated question this one.
I took around six months or extensive trailing and building of PC devices, a dedicated mains conditioner for the PC, no conversion of audio data in the PC, and the use of a rare earth master clock (this was slaved to the pc and the dac being used) to genuinely upset a quality transport in the red book format for myself.
Only by using red book master downloads @ 1.411Mps was this achieved, not by ripping.
This year I was fortunate enough to be in closed door demonstration at Munich with a very well known manufacturer demonstrated their 'Uber' streaming device, one of the assembled crowd asked if the guy demonstrating had the same track on CD as the playback device, he confidently said yes, the result was somewhat embarassing for him, the CD playback was clearly superior.
Now with any device it is all down to implimentation, some are much better are making the format work than others.
The biggest issue with PC audio is the two fold, the raw masterfile in which the file was generated from, and the implimentation of the pc playback device.
So far I have only come across one PC device (outside of the industry) that can match a genuine high quality transport in RED BOOK playback @ 16Khz 44.1Khz Not upsampled red book via the PC playing device just plain red book fed to the dac.
Only by paying careful attention to every part of the audio data playback chain in the PC can you then begin to approach the quality transport. IMHO
My Rega sounds great via USB, much better than the DacMagic. But why Rega didn´t go asynchronous like the most manufacturers?
Unfortunate they are plenty costing less that out perform it via USB IMHO
Well yes, by Quality Transport the same attention to detail you are calling out for in the PC playback chain is also required in the transport. IE: its been optimised by the manufacturer, simply streaming from a PC without any attention paid to it is not an Apples to Apples comparison. It took me quite a while and not without a lot of effort to finally get my SqueezeBox setup to out perform my CD player...
The biggest issue with PC audio is the two fold, the raw masterfile in which the file was generated from, and the implimentation of the pc playback device.
So you feel that a lossless rip of a CD will differ in quality to the master used to create it...assuming the master was red book 16/44.1. :scratch:
Even if the rip was done using a high quality drive, using appropriate software, with error correction etc. of an unblemished CD?
By the way I'm not being facetious, I'm curious :)
I myself have ripped my 2k+ CDs via dBpoweramp to FLAC. Now this gives me a check sum digit for each track ripped, which can then be compared to a DB of other rips, by other users, of the same track...using the same software (which is the crucial part).
So all I really know from this is that under the right circumstances dBpoweramp will reliably and repeatedly extract the exact same data file from the CD track. But I have no means of establishing if it is bit for bit identical to the original :eyebrows:
However from listening comparisons between my SB, and my CD transport (Audiolab CDM), I don't feel like I'm missing anything, in fact quite the reverse, the FLAC playback sounds better to my ears (both going into the same M-DAC).
-snip-
But I have no means of establishing if it is bit for bit identical to the original :eyebrows:
-snip-
Yes, you can verify if DBpoweramp produces bit perfect rips - rip a HDCD CD & play it back through Foobar (or any playback software with HDCD capability) into a receiver with HDCD indicator. The HDCD is a bit flag!
Yes, you can verify if DBpoweramp produces bit perfect rips - rip a HDCD CD & play it back through Foobar (or any playback software with HDCD capability) into a receiver with HDCD indicator. The HDCD is a bit flag!
...good point, well made ;)
Anyway I'm well inside the file based camp, but I am curious as to what Mr C thinks I could be missing from my rip :)
...I couldn't face doing them all again :doh:
Well, this is a very interesting topic, and interesting how I think we become emotionally attached to our own choices - I for instance am convinced my File Based Audio solution sounds better than my CD player - but then, I wanted it to, didn't I? It's been about a year now since I "abandoned" CD - I'm going to go back to it for a while, and see how it fares now, and if it was a true "upgrade" - although of course the ease of use and space premium will never be as good with CD...
Is bit perfect even an issue? :scratch:
Good ripping applications will make repeated checks if there is any doubt about the data integrity. Some will even refer to a data base and check that what it read was the same as what others had read.
You can even pull zeros and ones out of a data stream and some music players wont even notice. :eek:
Suppose there are bits missing, what would you expect to hear, a pop like a scratched record?
Next, if bits are missing or even damaged :mental: and you did get a pop like on a scratched record, it only affects that bit, not the entire album.
Computers are exceptional at handling data, they’re like tiger, it’s what they do best. :)
I don’t read from people who watch video that in their ripped copy the scenes changed or the actors had body parts missing.
Having concerns regarding noise, electrical and mechanical and data timing with regard to audio seems reasonable; worrying that the data may not be a perfect copy of the original seems a bit daft.
It’s data, not audio while it’s in the digital domain. Computers either can, or can’t handle the reading and manipulation of data with sufficient integrity so that copy and transfer are identical to the original. If you’re not prepared to believe this then start taking screenshots of every scene in any video you may watch so you can compare the screenshot to the original medium in case the puter left some stuff out. :D
( I don’t know if I should risk closing this document before I post it in case it changes itself to read ‘some people seem to be losing their marbles’)
So you feel that a lossless rip of a CD will differ in quality to the master used to create it...assuming the master was red book 16/44.1. :scratch:
Hello Will,
Yes I do firmly believe that. I have been down this road before many times :). Which I should imagine will attract a lot of ridicule from a great many quarters.
Even if the rip was done using a high quality drive, using appropriate software, with error correction etc. of an unblemished CD?
By the way I'm not being facetious, I'm curious :)
Will I undersatnd where you are coming from and your logic and it makes complete sense:-
If we take a unmolested audio CD, place into our streaming ripping PC, use exact copy and set for the most accurate copy, then confirm it is bit perfect to the original disc it was copied from.
Then you play the disc you make the copy from your drive you ripped the disc from, then play the bit perfect file you made through the same playback software at identical sample rates (some commercial players use the SRC secrete rabbit code to upsample automatically) and level match the volume.
Theoretically there should be no difference at all, is that correct Will?
I myself have ripped my 2k+ CDs via dBpoweramp to FLAC. Now this gives me a check sum digit for each track ripped, which can then be compared to a DB of other rips, by other users, of the same track...using the same software (which is the crucial part).
So all I really know from this is that under the right circumstances dBpoweramp will reliably and repeatedly extract the exact same data file from the CD track. But I have no means of establishing if it is bit for bit identical to the original :eyebrows:
However from listening comparisons between my SB, and my CD transport (Audiolab CDM), I don't feel like I'm missing anything, in fact quite the reverse, the FLAC playback sounds better to my ears (both going into the same M-DAC).
I am not doubting your findings at all Will
My comments are based on our findings and that of the flac wav files that clients brings along to play.
Now If I go back to my above paragraph discribing the ripping section, in the system we use, you can hear a difference between the ripped file and the CD it was copied from when played through the PC, it is slight and the copied CD just edges it just.
That is using an offboard dac fed via a ethernet cable.
If we then take the CD we made the bit perfect copy from, placed it a modest CD transport (£2700) and played into the same dac via the same cable with level matched volume.
The result is much more depth, relality, texture and life compare to either the ripped file or the same CD played via the PC drive.
The copied file is BIT perfect.
Now to throw another iron in the file, if we then take the same CD, only this time a downloaded redbook master file @ the same red book red rate 16bit 44.1kHz (Say from HD tracks) then using the same software player, compare this to the bit perfect ripped file would you expect absolutely no difference at all Will?
Then compare the orignal redbook mater download file with the CD played by the transport.
This time the orginal downloaded file is superior than the orginal CD played on the transport!
Not possible they must all sound the same if they are bit perfect right?
Is the downloaded red book master bit perfect to your copy:stalks:
does it matter?
Well there in lies the rub, with all optical media you must convert the 1's and 0's read from the disc to a PCM format before all the D to A goes on.
All bit perfect copying does is match the 1's and 0's from the read media to the recorded media, it does not take into account any possible imperfections in the media (which can still read 100% bit accurate)
Now the redbook master file was 98% created using Pro tools or a similar studio recording, mastering suite it was rendered in it's raw format usually FLAC, WAV or DSD as a digital file.
Now placing that on an optical disc (redbook, sacd, dvd-a, Blu ray) will this sound absolutely identical to the matser file or is there the possibility that errors could be introduced?
Will ,do you play your files direct from a HDD?
Ali Tait
07-08-2012, 12:17
I can say that the TFS and valve dac is the best sound I've had in my system to date.
You can rely on a computer reading a file perfectly, as long as there is no error message. When there is an error the computer stops.....
You cannot be sure that a redbook optical drive would output the same datastream twice, it just not designed to work that way. It should get close though!
Guys,
I am firmly in the PC audio camp, I have been for close to four years now, I rarely listen to CD's, and Vinyl for me personally has little appeal (though this is not because its a bad medium it can and does sound stunning with the right set up), I just prefer a higher level of reality playback.
Over the year I have acquired just over 5K' of physical CD's, I've ripped around 50 of them, cannot get the quality I desire from this method, however fully understand a lot of people wish for ease of use, I-pad, phone controller ability, no physical media on display, it does tick a lot of boxes for a great many people and we cater for those who wish to explore this area.
The vast majority of my listening is via red book mater files and above in resolution terms, I have amassed close to 320Tb worth of stored music, which sounds a lot, though when some of the individual tracks are 1.2GB+ then memory does get eaten up!
We had some high quality 50Gb flash drives made, I use these to play direct from even when using a bespoke memory player etc.
As with all things the key lies in the implementation of the data replay system from start to finish.
However which ever format you use, they are good recording and bad ones you cannot escape that.
You can rely on a computer reading a file perfectly, as long as there is no error message. When there is an error the computer stops.....
You cannot be sure that a redbook optical drive would output the same datastream twice, it just not designed to work that way. It should get close though!
Hello Clive
I agree the computer will copy the data you give it copy neigh on 100% every time, however PC read /copy data is a different way to a dedicated red book transport. They take blocks of data and compare them against each other.
The device on a red book transport is called the Reed Soloman Interleave error correction
Explanation of CIRC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-interleaved_Reed%E2%80%93Solomon_coding)
For those of you interested in further information
More in depth information (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed%E2%80%93Solomon_error_correction)
It performs the same function for CD via a different method.
sq225917
07-08-2012, 12:44
A bit perfect lossless file should sound the same as playing back the cd that the file was ripped from.
But there's nothing to say that it will.
Take a Squeezebox for example, there's a software setting to choose between processing the flac file on the server, or to do it locally on the Squeezebox itself. That's a perfectly good reason why flac might sound worse via a Squeezebox- it the electrical overhead of decoding the file locally somehow affects the integrity of the D/A procedure performed upon it.
For every reason why it 'should' sound the same there are myriad caveats as to why it might not due to differences in software and operating systems.
Not all inputs on all dacs are as good as each other. Check out some of the reviews of dacs by Paul Miller, check the data on his site. Some USB dacs are far better at rejecting jitter via their USB input than by their spdif inputs, the Benchmark DAC USB is one such example. There are also examples that work the other way, where a USB capable dac is frankly poor via it's USB input (step forward Arcam rDac owners) ;-)
Either input should sound the same, but it's only in the better designed components where this is likely to actually be the case.
Trying to make a case either way for all types of replay being identical or one being better than the other is simply foolish. There are no hard and fast rules. The substitution of one piece of hardware of adjustment of one software setting can flip the game entirely on its head.
Hello Clive
I agree the computer will copy the data you give it copy neigh on 100% every time, however PC read /copy data is a different way to a dedicated red book transport. They take blocks of data and compare them against each other.
The device on a red book transport is called the Reed Soloman Interleave error correction
Explanation of CIRC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-interleaved_Reed%E2%80%93Solomon_coding)
For those of you interested in further information
More in depth information (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed%E2%80%93Solomon_error_correction)
It performs the same function for CD via a different method.
And if the optical drive can't make sense of the data it fills the gaps in with some previous samples. I would agree it shouldn't happen often - my point is that a computer will NEVER do that, it would simply fail and it would be most obvious! My PC has never done this, one day the disk will fail....I have 2 copies of everything....and the original CDs.
Simon
A very reasoned and open post from you, I'm quietly surprised :)
Which goes back to my one of my first sentances on this thread:-
"Only by paying careful attention to every part of the audio data playback chain in the PC can you then begin to approach the quality transport. IMHO"
Clive
I am not disagreeing with you at all, however practice can give somewhat counter intuitive results.
USB asyncronus inputs seem to be all the rage currently, one listen to a piece of DCS will quickly re assign your senses on that score :)
Clive
I am not disagreeing with you at all, however practice can give somewhat counter intuitive results.
USB asyncronus inputs seem to be all the rage currently, one listen to a piece of DCS will quickly re assign your senses on that score :)
Well......my 500€ dac with async may not be quite a match for a DCS but it's close enough to make the DCS an expense that's pointless. I've heard a few DCS, have you heard a JKDAC32 with music streamed from JPLAYmini?
I think there is some confusion regarding something being bit perfect and the introduction of distortion (noise) due to the various algorithms used in conversion processes.
Will ,do you play your files direct from a HDD?
Hi Tony, thanks for your detailed response...I most certainly wouldn't ridicule anyone's personal findings, particularly when they are accompanied with supporting evidence...:cool:
I was a lot more opinionated when I first joined this site, experience has taught me to be a little more open minded ;)
FYI My FLAC files are played using an SBTouch(EDO)/M-Dac streaming via WiFi from a linux server.
Hello Clive
I agree the computer will copy the data you give it copy neigh on 100% every time, however PC read /copy data is a different way to a dedicated red book transport. They take blocks of data and compare them against each other.
The device on a red book transport is called the Reed Soloman Interleave error correction
Explanation of CIRC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-interleaved_Reed%E2%80%93Solomon_coding)
For those of you interested in further information
More in depth information (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed%E2%80%93Solomon_error_correction)
It performs the same function for CD via a different method.
BTW there are no 1s and 0s on a CD, its not magnetic media ;)
Regarding CIRC all the books use the same interleaved coding EDC & ECC schemes along with 8 to 14 bit modulation so it does not matter if its Red, White, Orange, Yellow etc. All use additional layered EDC/ECC to correct for errors. The rate being stated as 1bit error in 1 Terabyte of data! :stalks:
The difference between Red Book and say Yellow book is in additional sector embedded EDC/ECC which allows for correction after the data has been reconstructed from the disk.
I don't see any issue with any PC based transport being incapable of ripping a perfect copy of the disk unless its a very very early unit from the 1990s where firmware implementation was not fully developed and often drives would simply not correct for C1 or 2 errors ;)
USB asyncronus inputs seem to be all the rage currently, one listen to a piece of DCS will quickly re assign your senses on that score
Don't DCS use said technology on their Debussy Dac :rolleyes:
Sorry I was being sarcastic to me DCS sounds like digital with corners knocked off a soulless wonder: lol: DCS<>lounge lizard music
Yes I have indeed owned one of this lovely little; detail freaks good implementation of the newer BB 32 bit dac chipset. I'm not a fan of the Sabre chipset's too fussy and forward, great care needed with clock grounds, ultra clean supplies and a quality I/V fully discrete back end
I did build a better power supply for it though which helped no end.
Some of my digital designs are used in a few noted pieces Clive.
I much prefer the AKM 32 bit dac chips, far more analogue and palpable than all the others, though the 32bit BB version is nice implementation
BTW there are no 1s and 0s on a CD, its not magnetic media ;)
Huh?
Data on an optical disc is stored in a digital form, which is a sequence of 1s and 0s. These ones and zeros and recorded (or burnt as some like to call it) by a series of pits or depressions along a track, which are embedded into the plastic and have a metal coating. The transition from pit to the raised area or vice versa is read as a 1 and the duration within the pit or raised area is read as a 0.
I'm actually analysing data from a CD right now in hexadecimal, which is a series of 1s and 0s, or it sure was when I was taught binary ;)
Yes, but there is no storage of 1s and 0s they are a time based representation of a data stream, as you say a pit to land or land to pit transition indicates a channel bit with the length of the land or pit representing a RLL bit stream.
BTW there are no 1s and 0s on a CD, its not magnetic media ;)
Hello Neal,
Ok, an more thorough expanation would be the interpratation of the differences between the physical depth of the pits and troughs are then transposed as 1's and 0's :)
I don't see any issue with any PC based transport being incapable of ripping a perfect copy of the disk unless its a very very early unit from the 1990s where firmware implementation was not fully developed and often drives would simply not correct for C1 or 2 errors ;)
I don't recall anyone actually feeling this is the case at all Neal.
The PC we use for streaming duties is three months old it does use a respectable £35 drive, and it has never failed to produce a bit perfect copy unless the the media being read is faulty.
If you have exhasuted all possible causes only the impropable remain :stalks:
Neal, you are in Bucks we are not too far away, why not make some copies of your current music selection you know well, bring along the CD's you made them from and have a listen you are more than welcome.
sq225917
07-08-2012, 14:55
T, I'm offended that you should think I'm ever less than entirely reasonable ;-)
Hello Neal,
Ok, an more thorough expanation would be the interpratation of the differences between the physical depth of the pits and troughs are then transposed as 1's and 0's :)
The depth? No thats fairly constant its the length.
I don't recall anyone actually feeling this is the case at all Neal.
The PC we use for streaming duties is three months old it does use a respectable £35 drive, and it has never failed to produce a bit perfect copy unless the the media being read is faulty.
If you have exhasuted all possible causes only the impropable remain :stalks:
Neal, you are in Bucks we are not too far away, why not make some copies of your current music selection you know well, bring along the CD's you made them from and have a listen you are more than welcome.
I may have misread I thought you where questioning the ability to obtain a bit perfect rip from CD...thank you for the invite BTW.
sq225917
07-08-2012, 15:53
and anyway, you rocket scientists, it's pits and lands.
it's pits and lands.
http://www.courvo.biz/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/splitting-hairs.jpg
:lol:
Huh?
Data on an optical disc is stored in a digital form, which is a sequence of 1s and 0s. These ones and zeros and recorded (or burnt as some like to call it) by a series of pits or depressions along a track, which are embedded into the plastic and have a metal coating. The transition from pit to the raised area or vice versa is read as a 1 and the duration within the pit or raised area is read as a 0.
I'm actually analysing data from a CD right now in hexadecimal, which is a series of 1s and 0s, or it sure was when I was taught binary ;)
Let's all get nerdy!
Binary is a specific numerical system USING 1 and 0s to represent numbers.
Whilst the dents on a CD is translated somewhere along the line as 1s and 0s, this isn't a binary system being used, it's something else, EMF code or maybe the RLL thing NRG mentioned.
The depth? No thats fairly constant its the length.
Isn't it the total path lengths of the beams (the outgoing and reflected) that effect the interference pattern?
So if the CD is vibrating enough (like when in a cheap transport) the pattern could kind of flip for a fraction of a second creating a false '1'? Especially if the laser is finding it hard to track the data on an eccentric disc so that the intensity of a pattern is low and so the threshold filter is working on it's limits of discernability..
So 'depth' in that sense (total path length) can vary. Maybe this can happen too with scratching changing the thickness of the polycarbonate.
Can anyone tell I'm winging it with this one?
I’ve made such a comparison Nat.
(I’m going to have to write the rest of this from behind the sofa)
:sofa:
I’ve compared my server to a purpose built laptop designed for professional mobile recording. I don’t know exactly what specification the laptop has, but it gets dragged around various studios and has a wide selection of DSP apps and to listen to on replay sounds very good indeed.
Now this is where I should write ‘but my server outperformed it in every respect and was far superior’.
The problem is it didn’t. :(
I’ve spent not an inconsiderable amount of money and time on it. :doh:
It’s quite possible that my amateur tinkering and propensity for large hammers rather than accepted computer best practice produced a bit of a pig’s ear, but I’ve been happy to accept others assessment that I may just have made a silk purse. :)
Much like with pig’s ears and silk purses under ABX conditions, assuming of course you shaved the coarse hair from the pigs ear, the two can be hard to tell apart. ;)
There were differences between the laptop and server and depending on the other equipment including mains power, grounding, isolation etc, these differences were more or less pronounced.
I hesitate to use the term synergy, but careful consideration of the known strengths and weaknesses of the rest of the equipment in the chain can make small, but noticeable improvements.
For example, my server is designed to transfer data via USB, although it does have an SPDIF out. I tend to get better results with Dacs that are designed primarily for this method of data transfer.
I use linear regulated power supplies and while this may not have direct impact on the sonic qualities of the server in isolation, it does seem to make a very small but significant difference in a balanced power studio environment and in my home.
I chose to spend the money and time because I enjoy building stuff but in a “take any laptop and any purpose built file server and stick it in any randomly chosen system” test, I would be very surprised if the listener didn’t come away scratching his or her head and muttering “Wtf did he spend all that money and time for!?”.
I would expect say, that Gary’s under three hundred pound build to sound just as good as mine in an “any system test”.
I have heard this,
http://store.voyage.hk/KMPD2g.php?id=65
in a few systems (even cheaper) and ended up feeling that perhaps I ought to get married and let my wife handle my money. :mental:
What I am pleased about is at last here on AoS some people are beginning to accept that a file based system can perform as well as CD and record based systems. If the file server has to be dressed up in a audiophile approved posh box with every possible tweak applied and an idiot proof GUI to persuade the skeptical, then so be it.
I can come out from behind the sofa now and indulge in some friendly camp banter.
None of the above means that any half decent file system wont completely annihilate any CD transport based system whatever the bloody cost and if you cant hear this you must be deaf, or yer kits crap. :ner:
Oh btw,you missed a rather important consideration in you next post; geeky Linux may be but it's free. :D
What a great post John! Thanks for your honesty and lack of ego-pride going on there.
The way I see it - rather simplistically - is that the music is recorded digitally on a PC in the first place and the CD just a vehicle of distribution.
How that vehicle of distribution can suddenly be superior to the original recording PC I don't know...
Even more so these days as the recording resolution is bound to be much higher than the CD.
Still, I will keep hankering after a great CD transport as much as a great turntable, simply because it's more than just the music, it's the different physical interaction and variety that also counts.
The day that all music and reading and information access and film/tv and personal communication etc etc etc all goes through the very same, homogenised interface that is the computer will be a very very sad one. It will be a kind of "worldly-interactional" death and I won't allow that to happen to me!
Bad enough the amount of time I spend using computers already and I'm trying to cut down! Don't want to move my music over to one too if I can help it..
If people are still arguing over which is best then it must be marginal and not worth my bother.
Having said that.. the Emotion software from Merging Technologies sounds interesting, not least of all because it runs off their expensive studio hardware. Their old soundcards were also sold OEM and can be picked up for about £150 from audio/visual suites who upgrade (check US eBay).
People who have tried it (still in Beta) do say it's the best they've heard. It is basically just a different user front end for an up and coming studio standard system (like Pro Tools) that is used by BBC Radio 3 for example for their live concert recordings (have seen it running in their trucks outside Barbican when it was hot and they had the door open.
Because it uses a DSP card, the computer can probably get away with being quite simple.
If people are still arguing over which is best then it must be marginal and not worth my bother.
This is a very good point and ultimately if the difference is marginal and you prefer a certain medium, then stick to it as the music and how you enjoy it, is the most important thing IMO - I would also agree that when you reach a certain level, the differences will always be marginal, but this is an audiophile forum and that's what interests people, wringing out that last tiny (often imperceptible to many) improvement in their sound and AoS members love the most bang for their buck.
But from my experience (and I was a huge skeptic at the start too) what isn't marginal is the cost difference to achieve the same level of performance, especially if you or a friend can build a server/streamer. That for me was a no brainer. My mind was made up when I hooked a Gator Caiman and Samsung Netbook up to a frighteningly expensive Byston/PMC system in a local dealers. It literally shocked me (and the dealer), especially when we started to compare it to some very esoteric CDP's. At that level the CDP's were arguably better, some more than others, but those differences were not night and day - the price however was.
My current build now exceeds the performance of the Caiman/Netbook/foobar combo, but I have spent Richer Sounds levels of money to get to where I am now. There is also a great level of satisfaction achieved from doing it yourself and once you start its something you can constantly tinker with and improve, which admittedly you can do with a TT, but not so much with a CDP.
Agree with what you say Tim. Cost for file-based will vary according to what kit people have lying around and need to buy. In my case I use an old laptop from work (free) but I needed to buy a new Windows licence and a Jplay licence, total cost about £150.
We can argue the finer points but I sold my Meridian 588 for £1,000, I was left with £850 in my pocket and a sound the at that time when using Foobar was better too (it's better again with Jplay). I find I play more varied music somehow too - just because it's so easy to click a filename rather than go searching through my CDs. Sure I bought a DAC but I would have by now anyway, so that's cost neutral. My transport cost me £150.
nbaptista
08-08-2012, 09:32
A Zen Music server Is a good start point,for computer audio
http://www.amazon.co.uk/LIV-Zen-Music-Server-2Tb/dp/B0082WV1Z6
But my VRDS transport (TASCAM 701) cost me £240 with a seperate jog wheel consul type thing with LED display and live scrubbing etc etc.
Just to get me a physical control surface of the same quailty for a PC would cost near £800. And the software, if bought legally, to use it probably another £2-300
We're not comparing like for like to compare cost.
Get the same audiophile company to make the high end transport and the server pc and they will both cost loads! You're approaching one from a DIY point of view and another you're purchasing from a dealer..
of course in terms of value for money, you will always do better if equipment has more than one use, like a pc. You will also do better if you can use a generic mass market thing to do the job of a specialist piece of equipment.
Then we have the time cost of ripping CDs, the downtime of a PC, the time taken sorting out the metadata, the lifespan of a pc and hd compared to cd player etc etc all factors being left out the equation. CDs you just want to hear quickly in full quality without loading it all into a database first.. Will you be using the same laptop in 3 years time even? Renew it every 4 years? My CD transport is 20+ years old. who still runs a pc 20 years old, appart from NASA who have specialist equipment built for the job?
Then if it still might be maginal then.. who's to say which is best, even cost wise?
Depreciation of a computer is a killer, no resale value after a few years.. great secondhand transport will keep its value. blah blah
I'm not really on one side or the other to be honest, playing devils advocate perhaps but I don't think all long term factors are being considered properly. In the long term I'd even just want a cd player to take advantage of all the cheap CDs, like why I first wanted vinyl.
Think I killed the thread...
I think it's more that everyone will contrast costs relative to their personal situation and preferences so there's not much discussion to be had on this aspect.
In the long term I'd even just want a cd player to take advantage of all the cheap CDs
In the long term there are not going to be as many CD's available, its a dying medium, the pundits all figure (and I agree with them) you are going to be left in the main with digital files and vinyl. Cheap CD's have a very limited life at the moment, the iTune masses are not buying them anymore and Amazon now sell more downloads than physical CD's - how long can a medium survive that? The flip side to that however, is it will only help the resurgence of vinyl.
Also, why do you need a "CD player to take advantage of all the cheap CD's"? I still buy CD's and will do for as long as I can, but I don't need a CD player to play them ;) The CEO of the largest record company in the US recently claimed that their figures show that over 90% of the CD's they sell are only ever played once (i.e. ripped). Like it or not record companies are not going to produce an item at a loss just to satisfy audiophiles. Its the future.
Also, why do you need a "CD player to take advantage of all the cheap CD's"? I still buy CD's and will do for as long as I can, but I don't need a CD player to play them ;) The CEO of the largest record company in the US recently claimed that their figures show that over 90% of the CD's they sell are only ever played once (i.e. ripped). Like it or not record companies are not going to produce an item at a loss just to satisfy audiophiles. Its the future.
Likewise Tim, the best of both worlds, convenience and album art/sleeve notes, and it gives me yet another 'Disaster Recovery' option...should my other three options fail ;)
CDs aren't suddenly going to self destruct are they? Sounds like that CEO is saying that the quality of secondhand CDs are going to get better and better..
Imagine the delight today if 90% of vinyl had only been listened to once!
People are still buying CDs and they are getting cheaper and cheaper secondhand.. Even after production stops there will be billions available dirt cheap for decades.
When you buy a CD from a charity shop for say 50p, what do you have to do to give it a quick listen in full quality (because some CDs sound immediately amazing even though the music is crap)?
Just press the on botton on the transport, open the draw, press play and listen in great quality! Magic eh?
Starting up a PC ( or waking it if you like wasting electricity), moving the mouse around, click on a few things, open the cd draw, wait 30 seconds for the computer to recognise what it is - perhaps it is set up to play straight away but that will sound crap so you have to rip it to get the full quality - start the rip,nwait a few minutes, does some checking on the Internet to check its bit accurate, goes to get the metadata which it can't find cos it's a bootleg live CD.. aaargh! Aren't you feeling frustrated yet? Just want to listen to the damn thing in best quality!
All the while having to concentrate on a screen - can use the CD transport with my eyes closed. I thought progress made things quicker and more efficient?
File based player might be good choice if you have all your favourites on there and you are happy investing all that time ripping and organising the files AND it sounds better.
But no need to throw out the CD transport in the name of 'progress'.
Edit: and paper sleeve notes don't give you eye strain like a pc screen does and you can read them on the sofa rather than going up to the pc monitor. Unless you've splashed out on an iPad to control it all.. Would have to be a dedicate iPad as it's hard enough sharing one for Internet use. iPad specifically being non-multi tasking means you couldn't say watch an embedded video whilst controlling some background music from the system - spose there are good android amps now though.
Cd transports are just simplicity and ease of use IMHO in comparison.
guyhayton
10-08-2012, 10:57
The last 100 CDs I have purchased (new & second hand) have actually never been played if the definition of that is listening to the CD. When they arrive I insert into my laptop and iTunes automatically rips it into my library in ALAC format. They then go into a cardboard box and into storage.
Fine by me and just part of my "workflow" now - I don't miss the option of listening to the CD as a source.
My four pence!
Stratmangler
10-08-2012, 11:10
CDs aren't suddenly going to self destruct are they? Sounds like that CEO is saying that the quality of secondhand CDs are going to get better and better..
Imagine the delight today if 90% of vinyl had only been listened to once!
People are still buying CDs and they are getting cheaper and cheaper secondhand.. Even after production stops there will be billions available dirt cheap for decades.
When you buy a CD from a charity shop for say 50p, what do you have to do to give it a quick listen in full quality (because some CDs sound immediately amazing even though the music is crap)?
Just press the on botton on the transport, open the draw, press play and listen in great quality! Magic eh?
Starting up a PC ( or waking it if you like wasting electricity), moving the mouse around, click on a few things, open the cd draw, wait 30 seconds for the computer to recognise what it is - perhaps it is set up to play straight away but that will sound crap so you have to rip it to get the full quality - start the rip,nwait a few minutes, does some checking on the Internet to check its bit accurate, goes to get the metadata which it can't find cos it's a bootleg live CD.. aaargh! Aren't you feeling frustrated yet? Just want to listen to the damn thing in best quality!
All the while having to concentrate on a screen - can use the CD transport with my eyes closed. I thought progress made things quicker and more efficient?
File based player might be good choice if you have all your favourites on there and you are happy investing all that time ripping and organising the files AND it sounds better.
But no need to throw out the CD transport in the name of 'progress'.
Edit: and paper sleeve notes don't give you eye strain like a pc screen does and you can read them on the sofa rather than going up to the pc monitor. Unless you've splashed out on an iPad to control it all.. Would have to be a dedicate iPad as it's hard enough sharing one for Internet use. iPad specifically being non-multi tasking means you couldn't say watch an embedded video whilst controlling some background music from the system - spose there are good android amps now though.
Cd transports are just simplicity and ease of use IMHO in comparison.
You're just looking for reasons to justify your dinosaur stance, aren't you :ner:
I suppose you'll start making comments about the exercise you get toing and froing to the player in order to change the shiny beer mats, and selling that as a benefit :eyebrows:
Stratmangler
10-08-2012, 11:12
I'd like to add that all of the CDs I've bought over the last five years have been played once - to rip them.
My music files are stored on a very power efficient NAS (Zyxel NSA310).
Its power consumption is 17W when being accessed, 0.24W when it spins down and awaiting a "wakeup" signal (WOL).
I have a multitude of ways of controlling the Squeezebox Touch players running on my home network.
They are (1) by the touch screen on the player (2) by using the supplied IR remote control (3) by use of an app on my smartphone (4) from any computer on my network by use of a web browser (5) one player controlling another.
But my VRDS transport (TASCAM 701) cost me £240 with a seperate jog wheel consul type thing with LED display and live scrubbing etc etc.
Just to get me a physical control surface of the same quailty for a PC would cost near £800. And the software, if bought legally, to use it probably another £2-300
Thinking about your wonderful play control - does it do this across your entire CD collection.....nope, but a mouse on a file-based system does....for a CD transport to do this would require all your CDs loading, that would be a big beast! :)
A Zen Music server Is a good start point,for computer audio
http://www.amazon.co.uk/LIV-Zen-Music-Server-2Tb/dp/B0082WV1Z6
Pricey though....
You are totally missing the point Nat, but I'm not going to bang my head against the wall here as it's a pointless argument, if you like your CDP then play your CDP - job done. And no CD's are not going to self destruct, but what happens when you can't cheaply buy new music on a CD? I like new music and new bands - if all you play is what you have or what you buy in a charity shop then that's fine too, you can stick to your CDP.
File based audio is not for everyone which is totally understandable. I only moved over to it at the point of an upgrade when I was going to spend around £2,000 on a new CDP - but when I found I could get a better sound than a £2,000 CDP for a quarter of the price, I was happy to change over and its the best thing I ever did. I play more music than I ever have, so I'm really happy and that's whats it's all about, being happy with what you've got.
:cool:
I'd like to add that all of the CDs I've bought over the last five years have been played once - to rip them.
My music files are stored on a very power efficient NAS (Zyxel NSA310).
Its power consumption is 17W when being accessed, 0.24W when it spins down and awaiting a "wakeup" signal (WOL).
I have a multitude of ways of controlling the Squeezebox Touch players running on my home network.
They are (1) by the touch screen on the player (2) by using the supplied IR remote control (3) by use of an app on my smartphone (4) from any computer on my network by use of a web browser (5) one player controlling another.
Bang on Chris, and add to that that your entire collection is available in any room in the house, at any time, in perfect lossless quality...whether synchronised or independent.....:cool:
Edit; Damn I also forgot to mention that I can also copy the FLAC files onto the 64gb sdhc card on my Android smartphone, either via wi-fi, or cable for use as portable entertainment, at the last count I had 120 lossless albums, that's quite a large ruck sack of CDs you'd need to replicate that...
Rip once, use often ;)
Pricey though....
Indeed, I use one of these...
http://www.amazon.co.uk/QNAP-TS-119-1-2GHz-Memory-Module/dp/B002GHTIVM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1344600792&sr=8-1
...runs LMS 7.2.2 very well, 2K+ albums index rebuild in 45mins, and handles 5 SB clients without any issue.
12W on, 5W sleeping, WOL, RAID 1, silent :)
But my VRDS transport (TASCAM 701) cost me £240 with a seperate jog wheel consul type thing with LED display and live scrubbing etc etc.
Just to get me a physical control surface of the same quailty for a PC would cost near £800. And the software, if bought legally, to use it probably another £2-300
We're not comparing like for like to compare cost.
Get the same audiophile company to make the high end transport and the server pc and they will both cost loads! You're approaching one from a DIY point of view and another you're purchasing from a dealer..
of course in terms of value for money, you will always do better if equipment has more than one use, like a pc. You will also do better if you can use a generic mass market thing to do the job of a specialist piece of equipment.
Then we have the time cost of ripping CDs, the downtime of a PC, the time taken sorting out the metadata, the lifespan of a pc and hd compared to cd player etc etc all factors being left out the equation. CDs you just want to hear quickly in full quality without loading it all into a database first.. Will you be using the same laptop in 3 years time even? Renew it every 4 years? My CD transport is 20+ years old. who still runs a pc 20 years old, appart from NASA who have specialist equipment built for the job?
Then if it still might be maginal then.. who's to say which is best, even cost wise?
Depreciation of a computer is a killer, no resale value after a few years.. great secondhand transport will keep its value. blah blah
I'm not really on one side or the other to be honest, playing devils advocate perhaps but I don't think all long term factors are being considered properly. In the long term I'd even just want a cd player to take advantage of all the cheap CDs, like why I first wanted vinyl.
I have to agree with you Nat, CD is by far the more convenient medium.
While it’s true the CD player and format is likely to become obsolete, CDs are going to be around for a while yet and you can amass a considerable collection buying second hand these days for a fraction of the cost of decent vinyl, or net downloaded music.
I would also agree that if you started from scratch; that is don’t already have a computer, and more importantly, know very little about them, then a good quality second hand CD capable player and a few hours on Amazon is probably the cheapest and easiest way to play recorded music and with the right player possibly films as well.
I’ve spent more on hard drives than the price of a very decent second hand CD player.
Now I know I’m deaf and my kits rubbish and I measure stuff but when I have sat down and compared file based audio to CD replay, file audio just sounds better.
In fact, it has been one of the very few system changes I’ve made over the years apart from loudspeaker improvements that I can honestly say made a really significant improvement.
It isn’t always easy to get file based audio to sound better, but the scope for improving the sound is far greater (and once the ripping and storage are taken care of) cheaper than that offered by a CD player and more particularly in your case, using a transport and Dac.
There are plenty of people on this forum and others who have spent thousands of pounds on CD players. I would be pretty confident that I could produce a sound from a five hundred pound laptop with the appropriate software and a similarly priced Dac that would be acknowledged as ‘better’ in any unbiased comparison.
You’ve included the cost of software in your assessment. All the software I use in my server is Open Source and free or written by people I know.
The life span of computer v CD player is an interesting point.
Both use electronic components that are very similar. It’s true when people say hard drives fail, but so do CD transports. I can see no reason why a decently built file server shouldn’t last as long as a CD player. When one of my hard drives fails I just buy a new one and plug in a back up. I haven’t had a hard drive fail in the last six years.
When a CD player fails it probably costs more to have fixed than the price of a hard drive and you don’t get to play any music.
A few of the guys here are very keen on fairly complex methods of feeding the data from storage to Dac and backing up their files. It doesn’t have to be like that. I don’t use wireless streaming, don’t rely on auto back up software, don’t have special drive enclosures, don’t network, don’t pad or touch and I don’t get anything like the problems one sees reported on the forums.
If all you want is machine capable of feeding audio data to a Dac you can build something that will do the job for under one hundred pounds.
You're just looking for reasons to justify your dinosaur stance, aren't you :ner:
I suppose you'll start making comments about the exercise you get toing and froing to the player in order to change the shiny beer mats, and selling that as a benefit :eyebrows:
Yes!! :lol: I've never been so fit! And I keep good arm strength with the large Laserdiscs too - something you don't get with DVDs..
Thinking about your wonderful play control - does it do this across your entire CD collection.....nope, but a mouse on a file-based system does....for a CD transport to do this would require all your CDs loading, that would be a big beast! :)
Well, I have one of these:
http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/666proceedcd.jpg
No I don't actually...
You are totally missing the point Nat, but I'm not going to bang my head against the wall here as it's a pointless argument, if you like your CDP then play your CDP - job done. And no CD's are not going to self destruct, but what happens when you can't cheaply buy new music on a CD? I like new music and new bands - if all you play is what you have or what you buy in a charity shop then that's fine too, you can stick to your CDP.
File based audio is not for everyone which is totally understandable. I only moved over to it at the point of an upgrade when I was going to spend around £2,000 on a new CDP - but when I found I could get a better sound than a £2,000 CDP for a quarter of the price, I was happy to change over and its the best thing I ever did. I play more music than I ever have, so I'm really happy and that's whats it's all about, being happy with what you've got.
:cool:
Save your head Tim! You must have missed my earlier post:
I'm not really on one side or the other to be honest, playing devils advocate perhaps but I don't think all long term factors are being considered properly. In the long term I'd even just want a cd player to take advantage of all the cheap CDs, like why I first wanted vinyl.
Bang on Chris, and add to that that your entire collection is available in any room in the house, at any time, in perfect lossless quality...whether synchronised or independent.....:cool:
Edit; Damn I also forgot to mention that I can also copy the FLAC files onto the 64gb sdhc card on my Android smartphone, either via wi-fi, or cable for use as portable entertainment, at the last count I had 120 lossless albums, that's quite a large ruck sack of CDs you'd need to replicate that...
Rip once, use often ;)
Yep, I do that with my 2009 Nokia N900 too.. drag and drop into the folder on the phone. ? Think it's pretty standard so don't worry if you forget to mention it.
I think the strap line of not needing to carry around a bag of CDs was around when the first MP3 players came out, before even the iPod. Or was it a bag of cassettes?
I have to agree with you Nat, CD is by far the more convenient medium.
While it’s true the CD player and format is likely to become obsolete, CDs are going to be around for a while yet and you can amass a considerable collection buying second hand these days for a fraction of the cost of decent vinyl, or net downloaded music.
I would also agree that if you started from scratch; that is don’t already have a computer, and more importantly, know very little about them, then a good quality second hand CD capable player and a few hours on Amazon is probably the cheapest and easiest way to play recorded music and with the right player possibly films as well.
I’ve spent more on hard drives than the price of a very decent second hand CD player.
Now I know I’m deaf and my kits rubbish and I measure stuff but when I have sat down and compared file based audio to CD replay, file audio just sounds better.
In fact, it has been one of the very few system changes I’ve made over the years apart from loudspeaker improvements that I can honestly say made a really significant improvement.
It isn’t always easy to get file based audio to sound better, but the scope for improving the sound is far greater (and once the ripping and storage are taken care of) cheaper than that offered by a CD player and more particularly in your case, using a transport and Dac.
There are plenty of people on this forum and others who have spent thousands of pounds on CD players. I would be pretty confident that I could produce a sound from a five hundred pound laptop with the appropriate software and a similarly priced Dac that would be acknowledged as ‘better’ in any unbiased comparison.
You’ve included the cost of software in your assessment. All the software I use in my server is Open Source and free or written by people I know.
The life span of computer v CD player is an interesting point.
Both use electronic components that are very similar. It’s true when people say hard drives fail, but so do CD transports. I can see no reason why a decently built file server shouldn’t last as long as a CD player. When one of my hard drives fails I just buy a new one and plug in a back up. I haven’t had a hard drive fail in the last six years.
When a CD player fails it probably costs more to have fixed than the price of a hard drive and you don’t get to play any music.
A few of the guys here are very keen on fairly complex methods of feeding the data from storage to Dac and backing up their files. It doesn’t have to be like that. I don’t use wireless streaming, don’t rely on auto back up software, don’t have special drive enclosures, don’t network, don’t pad or touch and I don’t get anything like the problems one sees reported on the forums.
If all you want is machine capable of feeding audio data to a Dac you can build something that will do the job for under one hundred pounds.
Less than £100 I'd say!
I don't understand why people completely bypass decent PCI soundcards and go for problematic USB DACs and then some special software that is needed to get the audio over USB properly, perhaps some kind of special USB -> S/Pdif device that costs a few times more than a decent secondhand PCI card.. At least in the past USB soundcards for pro use were always problematic.
It's an odd world this music server fan boy world. It's like there's an attitude of sticking two fingers up to the high-end dealers yet for some reason they've never stuck two fingers up before by getting a decent hi-end CD transport together for cheap.
As if it's their first foray into DIY or something and that is all wrapped up in the enthusiasm.
I think anyone spending £2k odd on a transport from a dealer is crazy so of course freeing yourself from that if that's what you once believed was how it had to be is surely going to again raise some passion from within.
I though see a great transport in perhaps the kind of eyes as Lampizator - you can take a well built, reliable CD player from yesteryear and with a few tweeks make it a giant killer. Probably spend less in total than one of the NAS's mentioned in the posts above!
I take the long view, the holistic view though.
I think more in terms of a feeling of ease, of a synergy and therefore more of a kind of zen relationship with things I use, my hifi for example.
In general a computer is not very 'natural' in terms of a human interface. Of course we have all grown up with them and we learned to use them well but ultimately it is not very natural - I get eye strain, a bit of wrist RSI from my laptop trackpad and keyboard, bright light in my face is tiring, bad posture too either at a desk or laptop on a table or lap etc etc. Even the way you have to conceptualise files and how programs work etc to get them to do what you want is a learned and jarring interaction on the whole (linear menus v say individual buttons and controls on a physical interface).
Take a look at the studio world for example. It has pretty much all gone digital onto PCs. Sure, people at one time would do everything via mouse and keyboard shortcuts but that was 10 years ago! Because people are working on PCs all day long in these studios they have come to realise how 'unnatural' the systems are to use, how they stifle creativity, how they push you into thinking logically and analytically about everything rather than a real instinctive, response and interactive work flow.
So what do they do now? They spend thousands upon thousands on physical control surfaces! They wanted to get back to the physical interactions of the old mixing desks and transport punch in buttons, scrub wheels etc. I see today's music file server fans as being the same as studio people from the mid 90's - all enthusiastic about the possibilities but not thinking about how they are going to get on with it when used long term. Touch screens are a step in the right direction but still can't compete IMO to the feeling of a physical, weighted control wheel, button etc.
So I would never throw out a decent CD Transport, or even sell it on for the sake of a few hundred pounds. I'll set my music server up soon enough for higher bitrate things and my own recordings etc, vinyl rips perhaps and favourite CDs but it will be just another source not taking centre-stage.
With luck, maybe it will sound slightly better too but that extra sound quality would be there for special occasions, not for everyday use because it just won't be pleasing to use, not like a solidly built CD Transport with real proper buttons and real physical interaction!
daytona600
10-08-2012, 17:40
I know very very little about computer audio but my thoughts are
Cd transports do sound different compared to a cheap transport , To the ultra expensive ones like esoteric
so why are cd rippers all £20quid dvd-roms surely a high quality ripper would get more info onto the hard disk in the first place
Once data is on the hard disc or solid state drive surely very high accuracy rip would lead to better sound to be outputed to your Dac of choice which if correctly clocked will give excellent results
Replay seems to very divided between lots of systems jpay foobar mediamonkey etc are these better or worse than each other
Do Nas make any difference to the sound quality or are you just better buying a all in one unit like a Olive HD or NVA TFS
You have to copy + back up copy + keep original CDs just in case as your hard disc will fail at one point & requires a lot of different boxes , cables , connectors , diplays etc
I can agree downloads 24/48 to 24/192khz are superior to redbook 16/44 as i have directly compared the two side by side But selection on line is just woeful if you like Real music
CD players unlike pc/ servers you just press play and you are off & never had one break down or not play a disc in twenty years simple convenience
But whats round the corner in Digital & what will all your expensive hardware be worth in ten years & will you get spares to repair the thing
Digital is getting there , i use Pc/SBT/Dac myself but mainly for background listening
But never mind all that Digiwank - Just drop the needle onto a record & ENJOY the music and forgot about Bit rates
there are billions of the buggers out there and they all sound great & turntables never buffer or lost a internet connection
Less than £100 I'd say!
I don't understand why people completely bypass decent PCI soundcards and go for problematic USB DACs and then some special software that is needed to get the audio over USB properly, perhaps some kind of special USB -> S/Pdif device that costs a few times more than a decent secondhand PCI card.. At least in the past USB soundcards for pro use were always problematic.
It's an odd world this music server fan boy world. It's like there's an attitude of sticking two fingers up to the high-end dealers yet for some reason they've never stuck two fingers up before by getting a decent hi-end CD transport together for cheap.
As if it's their first foray into DIY or something and that is all wrapped up in the enthusiasm.
I think anyone spending £2k odd on a transport from a dealer is crazy so of course freeing yourself from that if that's what you once believed was how it had to be is surely going to again raise some passion from within.
I though see a great transport in perhaps the kind of eyes as Lampizator - you can take a well built, reliable CD player from yesteryear and with a few tweeks make it a giant killer. Probably spend less in total than one of the NAS's mentioned in the posts above!
I take the long view, the holistic view though.
I think more in terms of a feeling of ease, of a synergy and therefore more of a kind of zen relationship with things I use, my hifi for example.
In general a computer is not very 'natural' in terms of a human interface. Of course we have all grown up with them and we learned to use them well but ultimately it is not very natural - I get eye strain, a bit of wrist RSI from my laptop trackpad and keyboard, bright light in my face is tiring, bad posture too either at a desk or laptop on a table or lap etc etc. Even the way you have to conceptualise files and how programs work etc to get them to do what you want is a learned and jarring interaction on the whole (linear menus v say individual buttons and controls on a physical interface).
Take a look at the studio world for example. It has pretty much all gone digital onto PCs. Sure, people at one time would do everything via mouse and keyboard shortcuts but that was 10 years ago! Because people are working on PCs all day long in these studios they have come to realise how 'unnatural' the systems are to use, how they stifle creativity, how they push you into thinking logically and analytically about everything rather than a real instinctive, response and interactive work flow.
So what do they do now? They spend thousands upon thousands on physical control surfaces! They wanted to get back to the physical interactions of the old mixing desks and transport punch in buttons, scrub wheels etc. I see today's music file server fans as being the same as studio people from the mid 90's - all enthusiastic about the possibilities but not thinking about how they are going to get on with it when used long term. Touch screens are a step in the right direction but still can't compete IMO to the feeling of a physical, weighted control wheel, button etc.
So I would never throw out a decent CD Transport, or even sell it on for the sake of a few hundred pounds. I'll set my music server up soon enough for higher bitrate things and my own recordings etc, vinyl rips perhaps and favourite CDs but it will be just another source not taking centre-stage.
With luck, maybe it will sound slightly better too but that extra sound quality would be there for special occasions, not for everyday use because it just won't be pleasing to use, not like a solidly built CD Transport with real proper buttons and real physical interaction!
I haven’t had any problems with my USB Dac or the software needed to transfer higher resolutions. It seems some do have problems but without wishing to offend it’s usually because of their lack of knowledge rather than a software or hardware fault.
I’ve been sticking my fingers up at Hi End audio for years.
If you’re going to go Lampizatroring I’m going to have to pass, the guy is one of the worst sort of audio rip off cranks out there imo.
If going holistic is what floats your boat then you’ll get no argument from me unless you’re going to say the audio sounds better because of it.
Yes, as I mentioned, there are the gadget enthusiasts. I sit in a very comfortable chair or on the sofa with a hand held mouse (pad free) with my audio library displayed on a screen with a type face I can read from the other side of the room and the album art on show.
None of the rest of what you write has much to do with the quality of audio reproduction and that’s all I’m interested in with regard to this topic. :)
The stresses involved when attempting to get my computer to talk to my DAC properly so it could output HD Audio files to the DAC nearly drove me around the twist. If the PC should ever go west I wouldn't bother trying to set it all up again for HD Audio playback, I'd stick to standard output via USB and be happy with it. To add insult to injury, Foobar seems to delight in making it impossible for me to rip CD's so I use WMP to rip them and output them as WAV files. It is quick, fuss free and intuitive, something Foobar completely fails at... :eyebrows:
None of the rest of what you write has much to do with the quality of audio reproduction and that’s all I’m interested in with regard to this topic.
Exactly John - if you would rather push buttons and play with dials and shiny discs than have a superior sound for less money, then work away I say :)
Exactly John - if you would rather push buttons and play with dials and shiny discs than have a superior sound for less money, then work away I say :)
Most people seem to have already spent more money than I have on my transport for example..
Marginal sound superiority according to some but NOT according to others. Depends on what people have heard and in what system and what they've compared to.
Far inferior long term user satisfaction IMO. Perahps people will long for a simple disc player after living with a file server for a long time? Maybe not..
Have both :eek: still for peanuts compared to the latest dealer/magazine pushed mega £ transport.
Why does it have to be black or white, one or the other?
I don't understand the religiousness going on here.. :mental:
Why does it have to be black or white, one or the other?
I don't understand the religiousness going on here.. :mental:
I can answer that for you. ;)
When I first joined this forum there weren’t many vocal file based audio enthusiasts.
Generally, and this has been the case throughout the audio industry, mention computers and audio and those who consider themselves the true audiophiles and arbiters of sound fell about laughing should you mention that your PC with a bit of tweaking sounded as good as their thousands of pounds worth of vinyl replay kit or CD player.
We, the file enthusiasts got shed loads of value judgment ridicule and largely ignorant arguments as to why file based audio was necessarily inferior, much like some you have put forward earlier.
I believe the truth was and still is that those who dismissed file based audio did it because they didn’t understand the first thing about computers and precious little about audio come to that, let alone having bothered to listen to what had been achieve largely by the DIY audio enthusiasts, preferring to base their opinions on what they got to hear if they bothered at all at their local Hi End store and the dogma spewed froth from the Hi End audio rags.
Well, it seems that perhaps the file audio enthusiasts may indeed have a point and aren’t a deaf bunch of computer geeks who cant afford the “good stuff”.
Hardly surprising the file enthusiasts who have put up with this nonsense for around ten years now take some delight in doing the ‘I told you so” bit.
Now some of those who indulged in some of the more aggressive ridicule seem to be saying “come on chaps, it really doesn’t matter about the format, it’s the music that matters and why don’t we all just be friends”
I believe it's called payback. :D
aha, I see... revenge!
"There are always two victims in revenge, the one you set out to hurt.. and yourself."
Some monk once said..
I remember now, it was Confusious:
"Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves."
So being hard set on one way to proove people they were right all along, they perhaps harm themselves by ignoring the benefits of a dedicated player and completely throwing out the idea of one.
I hope no-one is getting the wrong idea regarding my attitude to file servers - I'm mostly trying to balance the whole discussion as there are important things being completely overlooked a wierd blinkered, almost religious way.
As I've already posted in this thread, the idea that a CD should be better when the music was most likely recorded onto a PC in the very first place is daft.
Why should the vehicle of distribution be better than the original? A studio PC should be able to give the very best play back simply from being the original recording device.
I'm not convinced however that a generic, off the shelf laptop or Mac Mini would be better, that a relatively cheap USB output device should be better blah blah. You need to DIY a dedicated bit of hardware out of a PC (like a good studio machine).
But then the user interface .. blaghh. (think I've laboured that particular point already).
aha, I see... revenge!
"There are always two victims in revenge, the one you set out to hurt.. and yourself."
Some monk once said..
I remember now, it was Confusious:
"Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves."
So being hard set on one way to proove people they were right all along, they perhaps harm themselves by ignoring the benefits of a dedicated player and completely throwing out the idea of one.
I hope no-one is getting the wrong idea regarding my attitude to file servers - I'm mostly trying to balance the whole discussion as there are important things being completely overlooked a wierd blinkered, almost religious way.
As I've already posted in this thread, the idea that a CD should be better when the music was most likely recorded onto a PC in the very first place is daft.
Why should the vehicle of distribution be better than the original? A studio PC should be able to give the very best play back simply from being the original recording device.
I'm not convinced however that a generic, off the shelf laptop or Mac Mini would be better, that a relatively cheap USB output device should be better blah blah. You need to DIY a dedicated bit of hardware out of a PC (like a good studio machine).
But then the user interface .. blaghh. (think I've laboured that particular point already).
Hmm, Confusious didn't have a computer did he?
The modern age has meant a few changes for us all and many old proverbs need bringing up to date.
Revenge is best served over the Ethernet. :D
If you’re going to go Lampizatroring I’m going to have to pass, the guy is one of the worst sort of audio rip off cranks out there imo.
Can someone who posts their enthusiastic findings investigating CD players and DACs be a rip off? You either follow his DIY suggestions or not.
Perhaps it offends some people's technical sensibilities? You'd have to have a beef with half the industry in that case.. (yet oddly, his intentions are to stick two fingers up to that same side of the industry, or a half with a significant overlap with that other half, venn diagram style)
Hmm, Confusious didn't have a computer did he?
The modern age has meant a few changes for us all and many old proverbs need bringing up to date.
Revenge is best served over the Ethernet. :D
He probably did. Revenge could be served with beads on an abacus back then..
It's still true, metaphorically of course, even over ethernet.
You either follow his DIY suggestions or not.
You could apply this observation to your (from my perception) aggressive stance against file based audio too.
To be honest I'm a little tired of being attacked over it, all I ever try to do is offer up explanations of what I do and the reasons why, if you don't wish to try it yourself or don't believe it sounds better, then fair enough stick with what you have. But to suggest those that enjoy it and are prepared to offer advice and opinion are mental, then that's enough for me and I shall bow of out contributing further.
brian2957
10-08-2012, 20:57
You could apply this observation to your (from my perception) aggressive stance against file based audio too.
To be honest I'm a little tired of being attacked over it, all I ever try to do is offer up explanations of what I do and the reasons why, if you don't wish to try it yourself or don't believe it sounds better, then fair enough stick with what you have. But to suggest those that enjoy it and are prepared to offer advice and opinion are mental, then that's enough for me and I shall bow of out contributing further.
I followed your advice Tim and I'm sitting listening to my new server system with a big cheesy grin on my face enjoying my music more now than I have done for the last 30 years . You and Welder keep it comin mate.:)
''There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation. ''
-Herbert Spence.
bobbasrah
11-08-2012, 05:25
Given the option of building shelving units to take up over 4.5m2 of wall space, or just leaving the 3,000+ albums in the archive boxes and use the PC, I will leave things as they are thank you all the same.
I cannot remember the last time I seriously listened to CD on the separates, but it will be at least 2 years ago. I had no problems at all in setting up this system unlike it's predecessor, and the only upgrade I foresee is on the DAC.
Each to their own....
Before I ripped all my music to Flac, the back wall of my lounge was half taken up with about 8 of those tall Ikea CD racks filled with CDs...
woke up one morning and thought..naa, too much.
Now I have them all (and a lot more now) on the server, all accessible instantly on the big plasma with cover art, artists bio's the lot.
AND:
Set up playlists by genre mood whatever.
Can access music via my Android phone.
Spotify/Last FM
Online Radio from around the world @320kbs
Access to YouTube - music video's, Old Grey Whistle Test/ Top of the Pops archive...etc
Archive your movie collection in the same way :)
AND, BEST OF ALL..
Sounds better than your old CD player when using the PC through a decent Dac. :)
Yeah you need a Dac, but most of us have one already and if you dont you wont have to spend ££££ to get a good one.
Small bucks PROPERLY SET UP Server pc = BIG BUCKS Cd player sound wise plus there is so much more you can do with it home entertainment wise.
I'd argue that it gets you more into music which to me is the point of hifi
Now is a great time to make the switch, things have just shifted and CD has had its day in my opinion.
Sure there's always the collector but CD does not have the same appeal as vinyl - which exists in its own world and will always be separate.
You could apply this observation to your (from my perception) aggressive stance against file based audio too.
To be honest I'm a little tired of being attacked over it, all I ever try to do is offer up explanations of what I do and the reasons why, if you don't wish to try it yourself or don't believe it sounds better, then fair enough stick with what you have. But to suggest those that enjoy it and are prepared to offer advice and opinion are mental, then that's enough for me and I shall bow of out contributing further.
Who's attacking you Tim? What aggressive stance?
If your perception is that I have an agressive stance against file based audio then you're selectively reading my posts.
Again and again and again I've stated in posts that there's no reason logically that CD should sound better than the right file based player. Trusted ears around the forums debate whether in reality that is the case but I wouldn't doubt it out of hand. But file based is certainly full of both advantages AND compromises. Ignoring those compromises seems to be the theme in all these discussions so I wanted to readdress the balance.
It seems you're selectively reading them in a way that confirms to yourself that you are a victim being attacked!
Nothing I can do about that... you have to help yourself.
My use of a "mental" smiley is toward the kind of reaction above. It's audio FFS! And why not have a great CD transport AND file based player? Have the best of both worlds? Can only assume it's because it is an idioligical stance which is a bit mental to be honest.. Then people feel they have to publically congratulate each other on going file-based only as if there's some wierd feeling of superiority going on.
File based only aka iPod in a dock is the NORM. It's not something particularly special to congratulate each other about.
:rolleyes:
c'mon guys lets nip this in the bud.
No-body wants to read this pish
''There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation. ''
-Herbert Spence.
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.
-Bertrand Russel
-
:rolleyes:
c'mon guys lets nip this in the bud.
No-body wants to read this pish
You're right. The file fanatics need to calm down. :rolleyes:
Applies to you too chief. :)
Not really..
I'm trying to give a balanced view and filling in what is being overlooked about CD Transports in the hysteria of (one-sided) file server enthusiasm.
A balanced view is what is needed for the OP to make a good choice.
Going on sound quality alone is fine but isn't guaranteed to provide overall satisfaction! Besides which the winner in absolute sound quality is debated.
Overall satisfaction is very important psychologically in terms of enjoyment of music.
And why not have a great CD transport AND file based player? Have the best of both worlds?
Agreed and I use both in equal amounts.
Not really..
I'm trying to give a balanced view and filling in what is being overlooked about CD Transports in the hysteria of (one-sided) file server enthusiasm.
A balanced view is what is needed for the OP to make a good choice.
Going on sound quality alone is fine but isn't guaranteed to provide overall satisfaction! Besides which the winner in absolute sound quality is debated.
Overall satisfaction is very important psychologically in terms of enjoyment of music.
yes really.. :rolleyes:
Agree in giving the OP a broad view, but your being just as dogmatic as the guys "on the other side" :) ...
Its just like...opinion man.
Peace.
yes really.. :rolleyes:
Agree in giving the OP a broad view, but your being just as dogmatic as the guys "on the other side" :) ...
If you read my posts fully, you'll see I've not been dogmatic at all.
My posts have been long-winded, yes! Too many words to make sure the essence of my point is felt, yes! (not good at concise - always gets misunderstood).
But dogmatic? No
But people seem to react as if lack of full praise and endorsment of file based over all other ways of playing digital is somehow an attack and so respond in a blinkered and defensive way.
I guess, perhaps as Welder suggests, that is from always being attacked elsewhere for going all file based and carry it over to new discussions.
People need to read posts better and calm their reactions down a little.
Still no-one is discussing the dis-advantages of file based only to give a balanced view. I bet those fully into it would say there are none!
Think in terms of using a manual SLR camera and a compact digital.
On the former, everything is at your finger tips and you can do it all while the camera is up to your eye and not miss a thing through the lens, it's immediate and instinctive.
The compact digital is all access via menus but you have endless 'film' and more options and details you can adjust etc etc.
It's not black and white that one performs better even if one has a sharper image etc.
I didn't compare to digital SLR because the file servers we're talking about don't have the control surfaces connected for example.
Maybe that's something someone can talk about, how they've improved the control using a USB semi-pro studio controller?
But then the cost goes up , the complexity and smooth running more time consuming. It becomes more expensive than what I think you can set up a DIY great transport for. So we're reliant on sound quality choices and compactness (but surely those CDs need to still be kept somewhere else legally you're on dodgy ground keeping the rips..
Basically, whilst people are making great efforts and having great sound, it is still all a bit DIY and make do in some ways. If you're happy with that as it stands today at a low cost, then that is great.
Might as well have a good CD Transport too though cos they're cheap!
sq225917
11-08-2012, 18:37
Honestly...
Here's the truth.
Every piece of audio componentry design is a series of compromises and choices.
Some compromises are typical of one hardware platform while others are typical of another platform. That some designs exist that do not fall into these traps is a given. As is the fact that a competent and multi-skilled designer should be able to design around them all- given unlimited time and budget.
CD or PC, neither need sound a particular way. Both are capable of exemplary sound quality and neither platform has any valid technical argument over the other as any piece of hardware or software can be implemented in either platform.
Nat, files can be more fiddly to use, IT skilled people are ok with this. The discussion has become diificult partly due to a devil's advocate approach vs a passionate approach.
bobbasrah
11-08-2012, 18:46
Still no-one is discussing the dis-advantages of file based only to give a balanced view. I bet those fully into it would say there are none!
Thank god you are not a betting man Nat. The disadvantages for me would be having a display on to select music, and very occasionally retrieveing a CD case from Archive as some information is missing (although more often than not it gets googled).
There are advantages to both sides in truth depending on personal preferences, but in terms of VFM the file based route takes some beating IMHO.
Honestly...
Here's the truth.
Every piece of audio componentry design is a series of compromises and choices.
Some compromises are typical of one hardware platform while others are typical of another platform. That some designs exist that do not fall into these traps is a given. As is the fact that a competent and multi-skilled designer should be able to design around them all- given unlimited time and budget.
CD or PC, neither need sound a particular way. Both are capable of exemplary sound quality and neither platform has any valid technical argument over the other as any piece of hardware or software can be implemented in either platform.
That's true..
Everything is moving towards having a PC inside (well has been for years). The trick is to hide it so that it acts like a new type of machine, a well designed machine.
I'm sure I've read of CD players that essentially read at high speed, load into memory and play from a large memory buffer. Essentially the same as file based but with the first few seconds perhaps having to be played 'live' as it were. From then the technical aspect (playback not storage) of both are exactly the same.
You can get there I'm sure as a DIY person at home. It takes a bit of effort though and needs getting a bit more involved than just installing software packages.
So essentially the sound quality argument - it being the reason to make the choice between the two - is not really valid as in the end, the argument just becomes a DIY competition about who has made the best sounding digital replay. Many have gone the file based way and some DIYers on other forums may have made stonking transports for the same money or less.
A red herring comparing DIY v commercial product from a dealer - DIY will always win the VFM prize and quite often the sound quality prize too.
Thank god you are not a betting man Nat. The disadvantages for me would be having a display on to select music, and very occasionally retrieveing a CD case from Archive as some information is missing (although more often than not it gets googled).
There are advantages to both sides in truth depending on personal preferences, but in terms of VFM the file based route takes some beating IMHO.
Me too. Distractions like a display can be the difference between a soundstage popping out in 3D and it collapsing to just two dimensions again. It can take a fair bit to quieten your mind to hear the sound as it really is being played! So even if it is better sound technically, the system itself may well be intefering with your ability to percieve it in all its glory.
I think the VFM also comes from in what people are confident they can do themselves.
More people are confident with fidling about with computer software than electronics. I'm sure you can take a good but cheap transport from yesteryear and modify and build it up so it's also competing with the multi £k transports at any dealer.
Out of interest, if people are saying it has saved them from the wall of CDs they used to have, what have they done with all those CDs? Do they just have to store them somewhere else? Getting rid of them would end up just as illegal as illegal downloading so may as well have never bought them and saved thousands of pounds.
Out of interest, if people are saying it has saved them from the wall of CDs they used to have, what have they done with all those CDs? Do they just have to store them somewhere else? Getting rid of them would end up just as illegal as illegal downloading so may as well have never bought them and saved thousands of pounds.
Sorry I don't understand your last sentence. :scratch:
How does getting rid of CDs end up illegal?
*edit*
Tim "the terrible" explained it. ;)
For myself; I sold some, gave some to friends,kept a small amount and gave away the rest to charity.
How does getting rid of CDs end up illegal?
If you sell the CD Gary, you no longer own the copyright for the music, so you should delete it ;)
Copyright law is of course correct and fair and looks after the Artists primarily.
The CDs I sold will be deleted immediately.
(though I still own at least 70% of the copyright compared to what I paid and what I got for 'em...;)
The thousands of pounds I spent on CDs over the years doesn't mean I ever owned them.
guyhayton
11-08-2012, 22:50
I do keep my CDs in storage. My third line of backup, but also my 'right' to keep a lossless file on the computer disc. I have had lots of heated discussions with friends who dont understand that if you sell, donate or gift the original CD then you should delete the file as it then becomes an "unlicensed copy"
Yes I keep the original CDs but the beauty now is that they are in storage rather than attracting dust on mass shelving around the house. Convenience and decluttering was the reason why I went file based and I don't regret it - but i recognise its not for everyone, I am an advocate not a missionary.
I also drive a Honda. Why mention that... well I know people who only drive German cars and they extol the reasons why they made that decision and cannot understand why I bought japanese. Seems to me we all pays our money and takes our choices. Different Strokes for different folks.
Copyright law is of course correct and fair and looks after the Artists primarily.
Well..... seeing as many many artists end up bankrupt after being encouraged by their manager and label to spend spend spend (not realising they pay for it all out of their earnings) while the manager gets a percentage of that spend, I disagree.
It's the argument made but ultimately it's the label then managers then previous labels who get % cuts from sales written into the transfer contract who get "looked after".
One band I recently helped out a mate with (some gear driving) was half a million in debt from their last tour and album because they'd been encouraged to tour a big, multi-truck set, record in fancy studios with semi-famous industry session musicians etc etc. So this summer it was a transit van driven by the guitar tech around Europe while they got cheap flights, single cloth backdrop as stage decoration..
So re-paying debt to the label is all your CD money goes toward, not the artist.
And copyright law sees that you owned the bit of shiny polycarbonate but never owned the copy of the music, only the licence to play it (and sometimes not even on the machine you wish to play it on).
Yep, I do that with my 2009 Nokia N900 too.. drag and drop into the folder on the phone. ? Think it's pretty standard so don't worry if you forget to mention it.
I think the strap line of not needing to carry around a bag of CDs was around when the first MP3 players came out, before even the iPod. Or was it a bag of cassettes?
...MP3?!!!...I thought you were an 'audiophile' :lol:
sq225917
12-08-2012, 08:43
Nat, yup, there's relatively few disc spinners out there now that don't run some software platform beyond what one might expect to control the cd servo. Many of them are indeed, PC's in fancy boxes.
Tim "the terrible" explained it. ;)
Is that me? :lol:
Copyright law is of course correct and fair and looks after the Artists primarily.
The CDs I sold will be deleted immediately.
(though I still own at least 70% of the copyright compared to what I paid and what I got for 'em...;)
The thousands of pounds I spent on CDs over the years doesn't mean I ever owned them.
Well..... seeing as many many artists end up bankrupt after being encouraged by their manager and label to spend spend spend (not realising they pay for it all out of their earnings) while the manager gets a percentage of that spend, I disagree.
It's the argument made but ultimately it's the label then managers then previous labels who get % cuts from sales written into the transfer contract who get "looked after".
One band I recently helped out a mate with (some gear driving) was half a million in debt from their last tour and album because they'd been encouraged to tour a big, multi-truck set, record in fancy studios with semi-famous industry session musicians etc etc. So this summer it was a transit van driven by the guitar tech around Europe while they got cheap flights, single cloth backdrop as stage decoration..
So re-paying debt to the label is all your CD money goes toward, not the artist.
And copyright law sees that you owned the bit of shiny polycarbonate but never owned the copy of the music, only the licence to play it (and sometimes not even on the machine you wish to play it on).
I was being ironic Nat...
I was being ironic Nat...
I think he missed that . . .
bobbasrah
12-08-2012, 10:56
Me too. Distractions like a display can be the difference between a soundstage popping out in 3D and it collapsing to just two dimensions again. It can take a fair bit to quieten your mind to hear the sound as it really is being played! So even if it is better sound technically, the system itself may well be intefering with your ability to percieve it in all its glory.
I think the VFM also comes from in what people are confident they can do themselves.
More people are confident with fidling about with computer software than electronics. I'm sure you can take a good but cheap transport from yesteryear and modify and build it up so it's also competing with the multi £k transports at any dealer.
Out of interest, if people are saying it has saved them from the wall of CDs they used to have, what have they done with all those CDs? Do they just have to store them somewhere else? Getting rid of them would end up just as illegal as illegal downloading so may as well have never bought them and saved thousands of pounds.
Heck of a lot of assumptions or projections there. I said a display was a disadvantage over a CD player Nat, not a distraction. As to the problems you list, I confess to experience none, as it is blanked out mentally when listening to music, same as would be the CD display... Typing this on the plasma while 'Famous Blue Raincoat' is playing, is potentially a distraction, but would that not equally apply if I were playing a CD on a different machine to the computer I am typing on?:scratch:
If I look now to see what album I want to listen to next, is that any more a distraction than getting up from my listening position and looking through the CD rack? :scratch:
Some may have to fiddle with software, but apart from a straightforward initial setup, no issues to report, other than making sure I backup the collection from time to time. The thought of having to rip all that lot again is one I'd rather not consider. :doh:
The big plus for me is I can take a copy of my entire collection on a portable drive with the DAC/amp and phones - Hauling a CD player and amp plus the archive boxes on a project overseas would be a nightmare consideration...:mental:
I agree that some CD players are capable of tremendous performance, and there are many such forums on Marantz etc which are a goldmine for such mods, albeit heavily tilted toward DIY. If you are not DIY inclined (it is not difficult IMHO) you are either stuck with paying someone to do it or upgrading to a better machine at the dealers... :nocomment:
I can go either CD or file, but right now, to upgrade the CD player to the same quality as I get from file, is not a necessity.
I think he missed that . . .
I did... :lol:
Thought it was sincere and for mr policeman to read.
I did... :lol:
Thought it was sincere and for mr policeman to read.
oh I'm always sincere...
Heck of a lot of assumptions or projections there. I said a display was a disadvantage over a CD player Nat, not a distraction. As to the problems you list, I confess to experience none, as it is blanked out mentally when listening to music, same as would be the CD display... Typing this on the plasma while 'Famous Blue Raincoat' is playing, is potentially a distraction, but would that not equally apply if I were playing a CD on a different machine to the computer I am typing on?:scratch:
If I look now to see what album I want to listen to next, is that any more a distraction than getting up from my listening position and looking through the CD rack? :scratch:
Some may have to fiddle with software, but apart from a straightforward initial setup, no issues to report, other than making sure I backup the collection from time to time. The thought of having to rip all that lot again is one I'd rather not consider. :doh:
The big plus for me is I can take a copy of my entire collection on a portable drive with the DAC/amp and phones - Hauling a CD player and amp plus the archive boxes on a project overseas would be a nightmare consideration...:mental:
I agree that some CD players are capable of tremendous performance, and there are many such forums on Marantz etc which are a goldmine for such mods, albeit heavily tilted toward DIY. If you are not DIY inclined (it is not difficult IMHO) you are either stuck with paying someone to do it or upgrading to a better machine at the dealers... :nocomment:
I can go either CD or file, but right now, to upgrade the CD player to the same quality as I get from file, is not a necessity.
There was only one assumption; that you thought it was a disadvantage because it was a massive, in your face screen rather than a discrete little display. You didn't give any clues..
Why do you see it as a disadvantage then? Sounds like you find many advantages with it which is all well and good.
I was just giving my opinion regarding why using a bright colour screen of any type to choose music is a detractor for me. I also tend to play a CD and listen. When it stops, then I think about what I might do or play next.
I guess I listen to music in such a way such as allows me to get involved with it and not be thinking of other things, even about what I might do next.
I suppose most people are not like that such is modern life and multi-multi tasking, having a whole collection on a hand-held device meaning you skip about from track to track, people unable to concentrate etc etc.
There was only one assumption; that you thought it was a disadvantage because it was a massive, in your face screen rather than a discrete little display. You didn't give any clues..
Why do you see it as a disadvantage then? Sounds like you find many advantages with it which is all well and good.
I was just giving my opinion regarding why using a bright colour screen of any type to choose music is a detractor for me. I also tend to play a CD and listen. When it stops, then I think about what I might do or play next.
I guess I listen to music in such a way such as allows me to get involved with it and not be thinking of other things, even about what I might do next.
I suppose most people are not like that such is modern life and multi-multi tasking, having a whole collection on a hand-held device meaning you skip about from track to track, people unable to concentrate etc etc.
Erm, what has any of that got to do with the quality of sound? :scratch:
I guess I listen to music in such a way such as allows me to get involved with it and not be thinking of other things, even about what I might do next.
I suppose most people are not like that such is modern life and multi-multi tasking, having a whole collection on a hand-held device meaning you skip about from track to track, people unable to concentrate etc etc.
...oh non of us are able to get involved with music, unlike yourself? You are beginning to make an arrogant, ignorant, condescending tit of yourself...none intended of course ;)
...oh non of us are able to get involved with music, unlike yourself? You are beginning to make an arrogant, ignorant, condescending tit of yourself...none intended of course ;)
OOoooh Will; you're naughty. :eek:;)
OOoooh Will; you're naughty. :eek:;)
...I'll have to go off and stare at something shiny now, as I've obviously got some attention deficit issues...me and my hand held devices!!! ;)
Say it with music I say. ;)
Nthlnd-LRsU
bobbasrah
12-08-2012, 18:41
There was only one assumption; that you thought it was a disadvantage because it was a massive, in your face screen rather than a discrete little display. You didn't give any clues..
Why do you see it as a disadvantage then? Sounds like you find many advantages with it which is all well and good.
I was just giving my opinion regarding why using a bright colour screen of any type to choose music is a detractor for me. I also tend to play a CD and listen. When it stops, then I think about what I might do or play next.
I guess I listen to music in such a way such as allows me to get involved with it and not be thinking of other things, even about what I might do next.
I suppose most people are not like that such is modern life and multi-multi tasking, having a whole collection on a hand-held device meaning you skip about from track to track, people unable to concentrate etc etc.
Your one assumption was "Me too. Distractions like a display can be the difference between a soundstage popping out in 3D and it collapsing to just two dimensions again. It can take a fair bit to quieten your mind to hear the sound as it really is being played! So even if it is better sound technically, the system itself may well be intefering with your ability to percieve it in all its glory.". :scratch:
What was meant was that a display is required for the PC, unlike a CD player, that was all. Mine goes into blank after 1 minute unless I use the mouse or keyboard, only a blank screen to distract me :D
I have no problems with 3D soundstage, quieting the mind, or audio perception unless I have abused the Tempranillo...;) YMMV :cool:
As to the rest....:offtopic:
that tumbleweed I hear....? :dummy:
bobbasrah
13-08-2012, 16:28
that tumbleweed I hear....? :dummy:
Get much of that up Motherwell these days ? :scratch:
no, just on this thread...
Yep, I do that with my 2009 Nokia N900 too.. drag and drop into the folder on the phone. ? Think it's pretty standard so don't worry if you forget to mention it.
I think the strap line of not needing to carry around a bag of CDs was around when the first MP3 players came out, before even the iPod. Or was it a bag of cassettes?
...MP3?!!!...I thought you were an 'audiophile' :lol:
"MP3 Player" is a term. Besides which, lossless certainly wasn't around when MP3 players first came out. Daftee !
...oh non of us are able to get involved with music, unlike yourself? You are beginning to make an arrogant, ignorant, condescending tit of yourself...none intended of course ;)
Why have you taken that attitude, taken it personally? You've jumped on that from nowhere. A bit too quick to take issue with things.
Ok, perhaps it should read:
I listen to music in such a way so that I can get fully involved with it and not be thinking of other things, even about what I might do next.
If I'm thinking about what track to play next or anything much else, I personally find that I've kind of lost my involvement with it, it becomes a bit like background music to my thoughts.
If other people don't experience that, then that's great for them. You mention attention deficite.. well actually I think I genuinly have ADD (diagnosed both dylexic and ADD by different people in youth) which also brings about hyperfocus (more than most) as well as being easily distracted, so... make of that what you will.
People get into hifi for all sorts of reasons - some people love the SOUND, some people love complex MUSIC, some love LYRICS and (one-note) MELODY, some people love BANDS with loyalties to those bands and players like they might a footbal team..
For you to suggest that one reason to enjoy hifi is more superior than another is a bit off.. What's wrong with someone enjoying a massive collection and skipping through it a lot as background music AND enjoying good sound to boot?
As to the rest....:offtopic:
Choosing between file based and a CD player is also one of choosing what's best to match how you listen. IMO
Erm, what has any of that got to do with the quality of sound? :scratch:
The thread, as started by the OP, is about which will sound best and then which will outperform the other.
Well.. if every thread was strict and had to be concise then forums would loose a lot of debate and interesting chat (not claiming this one is!)
Take the performance point wider and it's more than just sound quality.
VFM keeps being mentioned. What's that got to do with the quality of sound either? Well... you can't come to a conclusion without it as you could just spend trillions on both and find you get to a point with both that no-one can tell the difference between them.
Mr C has stated that he's spent close to trillions on file based and still hasn't beaten CD Transports outright (err.. so not quite close enough to the trillions needed to make them sound the same, yet).
Another thing to consider is how one interacts with it and whether that effects your enjoyment and pleasure. They encourage different relationships with your collection.
For example, a "hidden" but unlimited library that you access through a kind of letterbox v a physical but space limited library that is fully visable at all times; With the former, who cycles through their whole collection regularly to see everything, remind themselves what they have? Maybe something forgotten will pop up on random play but statistically only after probably a year of random play might something particular pop up.. With a physical collection you can cast your eyes over it all quite quickly for forgotten ones.
People have stated that getting their massive wall of CDs out of sight has been a big improvement to their enjoyment of their living room and I guess to a kind of good feeling, peace of mind that comes with it too. What's that got to do with quality of sound?
What is quality of sound without full enjoyment and pleasure? How does one judge quality of sound without judging your own pleasure and enjoyment (please don't just say "measure it :eek: ".. )
bobbasrah
14-08-2012, 16:02
Choosing between file based and a CD player is also one of choosing what's best to match how you listen. IMO
Sorry Nat, that was not a question asked by the OP, so your methodology is not something on which I would comment, hence Off Topic.
sq225917
14-08-2012, 16:25
Nat, I think you'll find both Minidisc and DCC were out before the first MP3 players, and they both used lossless codecs, atrac and PASc ( an mpeglayer1 variant) respectively. Both Minidisc and DCC were on the market in 92, and lossless had been used for a decade before that in its original market of pro-video recorders as the basis for DIGI-Beta. The clue is in the name- Motion picture Experts Group (MPEG)
The first MP3 player was the MPman and that didn't come out until 97. I know that because I did the visualisation work for the design consultancy that did the electronics package.
You can see three of them pictured on the wall above my speakers in this picture.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5057/5543334023_ee411bdd3b_z.jpg
Sorry Nat, that was not a question asked by the OP, so your methodology is not something on which I would comment, hence Off Topic.
Are you saying it's a bad thing on forums to widen the topic of discussion of a thread past the specific wording of the very first post? :scratch:
Anyway the OP asks about "performance" seperately worded from "sound quality". Performance is lots of things.. including how a system encourages you to interact with your music in certain ways.
Nat, I think you'll find both Minidisc and DCC were out before the first MP3 players, and they both used lossless codecs, atrac and PASc ( an mpeglayer1 variant) respectively. Both Minidisc and DCC were on the market in 92, and lossless had been used for a decade before that in its original market of pro-video recorders as the basis for DIGI-Beta. The clue is in the name- Motion picture Experts Group (MPEG)
The first MP3 player was the MPman and that didn't come out until 97. I know that because I did the visualisation work for the design consultancy that did the electronics package.
You can see three of them pictured on the wall above my speakers in this picture.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5057/5543334023_ee411bdd3b_z.jpg
MPman rings a bell. Did the MPman end up on the front cover of Hifi News back then? Sure I've some magazine from the late 90s with one on the front.
Anyway, Shhhh! some people don't like "off topic" posts - just teasing Bob :eek:
Is that tumbleweed I hear....?
Get much of that up Motherwell these days ? :scratch:
Is that a euphamism? :lol:
Like Clive I am interested in why such huge differences in views between CD and file based music
There seems to be huge difference of opions I know some of that is the nature of forums as we all passionate about music.
I get great results from file based music but it is clear others have not experienced this
Is it to do with
a) Implementation of how how to get the best out of file based music
b) Our own preferences, experiences and beliefs
c) Never really hearing what a great Transport can do in the context of our own systems
d) Other
Well my view is a combination of points a) and b) John. I think its a kind of reverse placebo effect. There is definitely a mindset believing that you shouldn't/can't get good audio from a computer and its hard for some to shake that belief off, which is understandable. This is often backed up by a brief attempt at it, with disappointing results, which only confirms that initial belief and no further exploration is made. We have seen it here often, some give up but some carry on like Brian did and get rewarded with what is often described as the best sound they have ever had. I count myself in this group, as a number of years ago I tried it with a Xitel Hi-Fi link and got dreadful results with ground loop hum. I approached it again with some trepidation and got my eyes opened wide, but it took me awhile to get to where I am now. Its much easier now as there are numerous DAC's available and a growing band of people who are willing to help out, as well as software engineers who are constantly pushing the boundaries.
I have seen this skeptical and dismissive viewpoint firsthand from my best friend who as an ex-MD for Monitor Audio knows a little about sound and is a fanatical muso. He would always snub what I was doing but after a few visits the last time he was here he looked me in the eye and said "You've got a bloody good sound going on in this room Tim". He now wants me to organise a system for him as his 4 or 5,000 CD collection has taken over his living room (this figure is often adjusted when his wife is around!).
I wrote this on my website sometime ago and it pretty much sums up my opinion.
To get things in perspective I look at it this way, imagine if you were to buy a Technics SL-1210 TT that was set-up as a plain vanilla DJ deck, you get it home and put a record on .... great, it plays music so job done . . . . well not quite. For many people they would be happy at this point, but if you are looking to get the most from the deck you will probably want to take it further to make it sing and get your toes curling. File based audio is no different and the computer you are reading this on will play music and the majority are more than happy with the results. But will it sing and make your toes curl?, I doubt it and just like a basic turntable it will often require a number of additions to elevate it's sound quality to anything resembling audiophile performance. A home computer is not designed to play music, it's a jack of all trades and will likely have all manner of programs, drivers and system resources running all of which can interfere with playback and ultimately influence sound quality. In essence what is a typical CD player? Not much more than a DAC supplied with digital data from a spinning disc - computer audio is really no different and we all know that CD players don't all sound the same. So just plugging in a DAC and doing nothing else is likely to disappoint most audiophiles and re-affirm their opinion that computers are no good at playing music, which is easy to understand if all they’ve sampled is low bitrate MP3s played on low-price mass-market equipment.
Its not for everyone and it never will be and I am disappointed at some people who continually dismiss it, as this can taint others opinions and perhaps rob them of something they might really enjoy. Peer pressure can and does influence more people than you might imagine on forums, especially high profile ones like AoS. It does however make for interesting and lively debate at times ;)
bobbasrah
14-08-2012, 18:52
Nicely said Tim,
I cannot go "multi-multi tasking, having a whole collection on a hand-held device meaning you skip about from track to track" but do have a "massive, in your face screen" cannot consequently explore a “unlimited library that you access through a kind of letterbox”, have no need to “cycles through their whole collection regularly to see everything, remind themselves what they have? Maybe something forgotten will pop up on random play but statistically only after probably a year of random play might something particular pop up”, so switched to jazz genre and selected some late 50's Art Farmer instead, "such is modern life".....
"MP3 Player" is a term. Besides which, lossless certainly wasn't around when MP3 players first came out. Daftee !
The point I was making was that if you utilise lossless FLAC file based music properly, one can take advantages of it's portability and play it an a FLAC capable player...unlike CDs, unless you carry a bagfull
The topic is CD Vs File based playback...
If you consider convenience (at no loss of quality) to be a disadvantage then obviously there's no rationalising with you...time for you to stoke up the 'Aga', it's time for a cup of Tea...and don't be cheating with those tea-bags ;)
P.S. Perhaps you should keep your CD's at a friend's house, you could then think really think hard about next the CD you want to hear, write him a letter, and he could post it back the next day or so...just think of the rigour, concentration, and anticipation that would lead to!!!
Why have you taken that attitude, taken it personally? You've jumped on that from nowhere. A bit too quick to take issue with things.
Myself and most of the other file based users here have all owned, or do own, high quality CD players, we also all appreciate the high quality reproduction of music...and we've moved on to file based music, you on the other hand have not, how can you argue from your position of ignorance against those who have experience of both sides of the fence.
Your assumption that we have somehow sacrificed quality for functionality is both incorrect, and patronising.
It's unwise to criticise something you obviously know little about, or have limited personal experience of....IMHO of course :)
Can we keep it a bit less personal
Can we keep it a bit less personal
Ok John...:)
sq225917
15-08-2012, 07:28
I've been file based for 2 years now, but it's still no replacement for browsing a stack of discs. I'd like a wall that just had a picture of all my cd's on it so i could touch one and it would play, a handheld device is a poor interface no matter how you dress it up, with animated roll overs and suchlike. I don't miss putting the disc in, I have vinyl for that, but the user experience with file based music just isn't the same, it never will be.
The sound however is no different.
bobbasrah
15-08-2012, 07:53
I've been file based for 2 years now, but it's still no replacement for browsing a stack of discs. I'd like a wall that just had a picture of all my cd's on it so i could touch one and it would play, a handheld device is a poor interface no matter how you dress it up, with animated roll overs and suchlike. I don't miss putting the disc in, I have vinyl for that, but the user experience with file based music just isn't the same, it never will be.
The sound however is no different.
I suppose this is down to your own particular setup Simon, as there are various ways using digital storage on hdd....
I can flip between Icons or lists on the plasma making selections a breeze.
Never bothered with playlists so not sure if I select a number of albums whether the same icons would show up.
It seems inevitable that the interface between user and album will follow recent trends to enhance the user experience, even if the fundamentals remain much the same:scratch:
Perhaps one day a touchscreen equivalent will become available, by which time storage capacity will mean ALL the artwork can be accommodated as well, so the case and sleeve become redundant also.....;) Another nail in the coffin of real-life as some would have it...:eyebrows:
Another few weeks I guess and Nuno (OP) will be answering his own question anyway and looking back on the thread wondering how it became so temperamental....:cool:
I've been file based for 2 years now, but it's still no replacement for browsing a stack of discs. I'd like a wall that just had a picture of all my cd's on it so i could touch one and it would play, a handheld device is a poor interface no matter how you dress it up, with animated roll overs and suchlike. I don't miss putting the disc in, I have vinyl for that, but the user experience with file based music just isn't the same, it never will be.
The sound however is no different.
We all have our own preferences. For myself, I find browsing my own collection more of a frustration if I can't find what I'm looking for - I could arrange the collection is alphabetical order but that wouldn't survive a few drinks and would be really nerdy, I arrange roughly by genre instead (my records, CDs are stored). Browsing for me is for shops and other peoples' collections. What I find happens is that I know where certain albums are and zero in on those too much. With a file system view all albums are equal so I play a wider variety of music with file-based audio. But that's just me...
I believe the original question was (or should have been):
Would a good transport (as in physical disc spinner) outperform my PC when feeding the same DAC?
Well, thats an interesting question and i dont believe there are any clear answers besides; "It depends.."
The very latest posts also touches the subject of convenience and how you value that, and that must me one of the most subjective experiences of all...
Personally, i have gone from disc-based playback to PC-based to Mac-based while feeding same and different dacs and they have all been quite clear upgrades when only looking at audio quality. But my quriosity led me to try a Network player, a Marantz NA7004. This is a MidFi component pricewise, with two different interfaces for control of playback. Without getting into each little detail you can choose between controlling it from your iThingy/SmartPhone/Tablet or via the quite ordinary oldschool remote control.
And here comes the essence of this:
After years of playing digital audio via computers i have actually gone back to the less is more interface of controlling playback with the physical remote and getting less info from the display on the unit. (A three row fluorescent display, quite good even if it is a little small)
And you know, for me it has put music back in the center, no more fiddling about with the computer or tablet after you selected your music.
I still have access to all of my digital music (from a NAS) but my playing style has shifted back from flickering between songs and albums to be much more like the behaviour when playing vinyl records, you chose one album and play the whole thing. And i like it, a lot!
Whether one thing or another "outperforms" the other, ther is no correct answer, just different opinions.
My 5 "öre"
/Mike
I've been file based for 2 years now, but it's still no replacement for browsing a stack of discs. I'd like a wall that just had a picture of all my cd's on it so i could touch one and it would play, a handheld device is a poor interface no matter how you dress it up, with animated roll overs and suchlike. I don't miss putting the disc in, I have vinyl for that, but the user experience with file based music just isn't the same, it never will be.
I couldn't disagree with this more TBH - but then its all down to personal choice at the end of the day, what works for you wouldn't work for me and vice versa. Have you ever used a tablet to scroll through high resolution scans of cover artwork? Its fantastic, especially when you can expand the text and actually read it.
Browsing a stack of CD's used to drive me insane trying to find what I wanted and I would often give up and play what was easier. With 50+ year old eye sight and dim lights it was an obvious choice to try and find a more efficient solution - I really didn't like the clutter either, much rather fill the wall with some music related artwork. And after a long session of playing music, putting the buggers back again was a nightmare - so for me "the user experience with file based music just isn't the same, it never will be" applies to me too, but the other way around and thank goodness for that! ;)
I believe the original question was (or should have been):
Would a good transport (as in physical disc spinner) outperform my PC when feeding the same DAC?
The trouble is most file-based systems use USB and most transports use SPDIF so the same DAC isn't actually the same....it depends on the inputs being equivalent quality. Then you can argue whether the DAC or the transport/PC have the main responsibility for jitter reduction - there could be one answer for the transport and another for the PC.
The trouble is most file-based systems use USB and most transports use SPDIF ...
Not necessarily, i think you'll find that many users prefer NOT to use USB based transfer to their DAC's. I am one of them.. ;)
But, you may use an USB2SPDIF converter such as a M2Tech HiFace, MF V-Link or similar to enable higher bitrates etc. And in those cases you will be forced to see the whole source appliance up until the SPDIF signal as one unit. At least to make comparisons.
But of course, there will be no definitive answer, "It depends..." still rules. :)
/Mike
Not necessarily, i think you'll find that many users prefer NOT to use USB based transfer to their DAC's. I am one of them.. ;)
But, you may use an USB2SPDIF converter such as a M2Tech HiFace, MF V-Link or similar to enable higher bitrates etc. And in those cases you will be forced to see the whole source appliance up until the SPDIF signal as one unit. At least to make comparisons.
But of course, there will be no definitive answer, "It depends..." still rules. :)
/Mike
Yes I've been the USB/SPDIF route, but then you are comparing DAC with converter + DAC. As you say it all depends....people should do what they believe in and where possible listen to both. Ultimately it's probably more important people use the UI they prefer, ie silver disc or files - their choice.
From Roy Gandy - Rega:
“One can get significantly good results from a good computer and an external DAC connected via USB, which, all things being equal – and I have to be careful how I put this – would be able to rival a good CD player.
“There are advantages in using a computer as a source, such as superior error correction ability, which the limited processing power within the confines of a CD player will not be able to match.
“Why not the simplicity of just a laptop computer and a DAC?”
http://www.audiofi.net/2012/08/computer-audio-rivals-cd-regas-roy-gandy/
Even anti-USB Rega sort of say USB/files can be ok.
Your assumption that we have somehow sacrificed quality for functionality is both incorrect, and patronising.
It's unwise to criticise something you obviously know little about, or have limited personal experience of....IMHO of course :)
The problem with what you've written there is that I have never said that sound quality is sacrificed or even said that file based sounds inferior, in or out of my opinion. So.. :scratch:
In a sense you're having an issue internally with yourself about it. The 'we' you use kind of comes accross as if it's "us against the world" . As I say, comes accross that way to me, IMHO, and only you can know if that's right or not.
When presented with staunched positions on something in audio, I like to try to bring it round to considering other views, shades of grey rather than black and white.
Certainly on a forum, nothing is more sick making than everyone agreeing and sounding like a cult! ( That's c-u-L-t :lol: )
Like Clive I am interested in why such huge differences in views between CD and file based music
There seems to be huge difference of opions I know some of that is the nature of forums as we all passionate about music.
I get great results from file based music but it is clear others have not experienced this
Is it to do with
a) Implementation of how how to get the best out of file based music
b) Our own preferences, experiences and beliefs
c) Never really hearing what a great Transport can do in the context of our own systems
d) Other
Personally I think it is all 4.
For a) I don't see why it should be so difficult to get great sound, better sound than CD from file-based. Theoretically is should be better as there's so much time to sort out the flow of data rather than being on the fly off a relatively rough and ready medium.
Still, many people still don't find it as good.
Thinking about it makes me think it is just down to using off-the-shelf computer hardware with switch mode PSUs and high frequencies going on internally etc etc and then the software needed to override the unhelpful control of hardware by the again off-the-shelf O/S.
So then it does require some fiddling and bit of computer-geekery to get right.
For c) I get the impression that many many (maybe majority) who use file-based have come straight from say a relatively cheap CD player and not before used a seperate DAC either.
Some only hear the expensive transport in their local hifi shop and say it sounds crap in comparison - lots of people have this experience with other gear too, often walking away from a dealer smug that their home system sounds much better.
Please note: I'm not necessarily speaking of the people in this thread!
People who say they prefer a good transport seem to be in the catagory of comparing to transports that once were state of the art costing £thousands if perhaps a lot less now secondhand.
b) There's a lot of fixed mindset too in terms of what fiddling about with Hifi is all about. Computers and Hifi are different entities to many and getting rid in effect of a piece of hifi kit - perhaps a superbly designed, beefy bit of kit, really heavy build and a pleasure to operate - and replacing it with yet another cheap, boring computer is a kind of like selling your beloved art and buying some printed canvas from IKEA to adorn your walls, or selling your loved classic and buying a generic people carrier.. (make "garage space" for both!)
Then the belief of one being the only path to truth colours people's minds, emotional reasons to choose one over another (same with all hifi aspects).
A major factor though in enthusiasm for it is perhaps that you can get something together that's immediately pretty good from stuff you had anyway - most laptops I've had with a line out or even just headphone out have always sounded great straight off. Just that can beat many CD players - so you can then laugh at all the hifi geeks getting worked up about different bits of kit when this computer that isn't anything audiophile sounds great.
Reid Malenfant
16-08-2012, 19:54
Before I log off this evening I'd like to drop a possible spanner in the works & ask a question:)
I have a Krell DT10 transport, this cost about £10,000 when new in the mid to late 90s.
It cost loads simply because of the build of the thing, as well as using the best swing arm laser & mechanism ever devised.
So how can any cheap (& I mean that literally) computer transport, even if it has software that checks for errors, be as accurate?
I don't see that many DVD/CD/BD drives with metal mechanisms or decent optical glass lenses used in the reader/writers...
So fill me in, I'm all ears :D
What I'm saying is to better what I have, surely you'd need to use the same quality transport to read data from to your PC? Then I'd say I'd probably agree that file based audio would be better.
But with a cheap mech & laser, I'm not so sure :scratch:
Before I log off this evening I'd like to drop a possible spanner in the works & ask a question:)
I have a Krell DT10 transport, this cost about £10,000 when new in the mid to late 90s.
It cost loads simply because of the build of the thing, as well as using the best swing arm laser & mechanism ever devised.
So how can any cheap (& I mean that literally) computer transport, even if it has software that checks for errors, be as accurate?
I don't see that many DVD/CD/BD drives with metal mechanisms or decent optical glass lenses used in the reader/writers...
So fill me in, I'm all ears :D
What I'm saying is to better what I have, surely you'd need to use the same quality transport to read data from to your PC? Then I'd say I'd probably agree that file based audio would be better.
But with a cheap mech & laser, I'm not so sure :scratch:
My answer is that the Krell transport is fixing an old problem...how to read data reasonably accurately using 1970's optical technology (yes CD was dated when in hit the streets in the 80's). In the late 70s and early 80s a DEC RL01 removable disk drive had a capacity of 5MB.....so this is why CD didn't go down the route of file-based audio PCs (or PDP-8 / PDP-11).
Computers - error correction? They have error checking but if a file is mis-read the computer flags an error and it stops reading the file. It doesn't happen very often!
CD levels of data accuracy would render computers useless. This is why we have the likes of EAC with accuraterip & dbpoweramp to read & check a CD fairly reliably. There may be errors in the data when ripped but once it is ripped it's reliably wrong....and not too wrong.
Ali Tait
16-08-2012, 20:12
I haven't heard any transports of the likes of Krell or similar at home. What I can say is that the NVA I'm using now, along with Nick's valve dac is easily the best digital sound I've heard so far. However, a lot of the comments on using a laptop and dac are valid IMHO, at the recent sesh at my place very good sound was had from a laptop into a V link. When you look at the relative costs it's a no brainer really, I think it's pretty obvious that very good sound can be had for little outlay when you go the file audio route. Whether it's ultimately better than a great transport I cannot say, as I've not heard any in direct comparison. What I can say is that a home built server that cost 250 quid was not that far away from the NVA + valve dac. As ever when you get to this level, the rule of diminishing returns very quickly comes into force.
I have a suggestion for a future challenge
When we get the AOS show together why not someone bring a really good transport (then either Mark or Jerry along and John (Welder) Tim or Ali bring a computer based system and people can make their own judgements
Before I log off this evening I'd like to drop a possible spanner in the works & ask a question:)
I have a Krell DT10 transport, this cost about £10,000 when new in the mid to late 90s.
It cost loads simply because of the build of the thing, as well as using the best swing arm laser & mechanism ever devised.
So how can any cheap (& I mean that literally) computer transport, even if it has software that checks for errors, be as accurate?
I don't see that many DVD/CD/BD drives with metal mechanisms or decent optical glass lenses used in the reader/writers...
So fill me in, I'm all ears :D
What I'm saying is to better what I have, surely you'd need to use the same quality transport to read data from to your PC? Then I'd say I'd probably agree that file based audio would be better.
But with a cheap mech & laser, I'm not so sure :scratch:
You've answered most of the question yourself Mark.
You pay ten grand for a Krell transport because it's well built; the build quality doesn't necessarily equate to sound quality, something that many here seem to struggle with. ;)
I think others have covered the possible benefits of error correction and no moving parts in the data transfer process.
I have a suggestion for a future challenge . . .
Good idea John and maybe also to start with the source transports should be hidden, not to 'test' anyone by trying to differentiate them, but just so there are no preconceived ideas as to what they are actually listening too ;)
Mark, just in brief I have never heard a Krell and I don't think anyone is trying to say file based would exceed something like that, or even match it, but it would be interesting to try. But for me and this is the big one, I was at the point of upgrading and found I could get an excellent sound without spending too much money. Admittedly I was able to build my server and save even more, but not only do I currently have the best sound I have ever had, but also a very workable and easy way to play music. The end result is I play much more music and end up exploring so much more of my collection as a consequence. If people are happy with what they have and not at the point of an upgrade, then there's no need to change anything - but for me it was a wise decision at that time and now I have discovered the benefits, I would never go back.
I'm not sure why this subject seems to always end in a pissing contest, no system is better than another when used within the context of what the user requires from it and what their individual preferences are - it's the music that matters most and getting the best from your chosen system.
Anyway, I going back behind the sofa to look for those custard creams . . .
:sofa:
Ali Tait
16-08-2012, 21:30
Agree entirely.
bobbasrah
17-08-2012, 06:45
Agree entirely.
+2
I have no idea of how the Krell sounds Mark but that is one heck of a Transport you got.
I think it great that we have so many choices!
Truth be told.....if I had that Krell I reckon I'd still be spinning CDs, Mark you've got a great piece of kit that anyone would be proud to have.
Going to such design and build lengths does suggest to me that a lot of effort is needed to extract the best from the silver disc. Of course there a huge amount of technology behind file-based too but that was already developed in the form of PCs.
In a sense you're having an issue internally with yourself about it. The 'we' you use kind of comes accross as if it's "us against the world" . As I say, comes accross that way to me, IMHO, and only you can know if that's right or not.
When presented with staunched positions on something in audio, I like to try to bring it round to considering other views, shades of grey rather than black and white.
Certainly on a forum, nothing is more sick making than everyone agreeing and sounding like a cult! ( That's c-u-L-t :lol: )
we
[wee]
plural pronoun, possessive our or ours, objective us.
1.
nominative plural of I.
2.
(used to denote oneself and another or others):
i.e. Tim, Gazjam, Welder, and myself...in the context of the discussion!!!
if you think that's a cult it's up to you :doh:
Fair comparison tests have been done over and over again. I really can’t see the point of doing another. Some audio enthusiast I know won’t even consider ABX testing because they know the chances of them passing such a test are remote. Such tests are great for the audio enthusiast who has an interest in investigating what changes they can or can’t hear in their own systems. I use ABX software and hardware a lot but I don’t have any problem with others trusting their ears when it comes to their choices for their systems.
For me, problems arise when people put forward the idea that because something has a particular badge, or a particular price tag, or even in some cases a particular reputation, it is necessarily better than something else.
Everyone else has been very polite and accommodating where Mark has implied that his ten thousand pounds worth of Krell CD player must necessarily outperform a relatively cheap and often less well built computer. I’m not going to bother with the being nice bit, instead I’m just going to write, it probably won’t, learn to live with it Mark. :D
Nat has taken a slightly different approach and seems to be suggesting that those who are file/computer enthusiasts haven’t heard a top class CD transport having gone from a cheap CD player to PC and Dac combination and consequently don’t know what they’re talking about. :rolleyes:
This may, or may not be true, but many others have, some of who have very expensive and well regarded transports/players and it seems that a computer and Dac has performed as well as and sometimes better in their systems.
It’s a well used analogy but none the less true. A cheap electronic watch keeps as accurate time as a Rolex these days.
None of the above means you shouldn’t buy Krell or Rolex. I’m sure they’re nice to own, will outlast cheaper products and give greater satisfaction in many areas, but when it comes to their primary purpose, telling the time, one is as good as the other.
I think the truth for many of us is, and the vast majority of unbiased test tend to support this, we couldn’t tell one CD transport from another or a file server from a CD transport.
I’ve spent thousands of pounds and a horrifying amount of time on this hobby. I’ve tried experimenting with things that I know logic and science deems unlikely to make a difference and for various reasons, instead of discarding those changes that I couldn’t prove to myself make an audible difference one way or another, kept them in my system.
But, it’s my system and if my nice looking stack of exposure amps and my extreme cabling and all the other Hi Fi foo makes the tunes sound somehow better, I’m good with that. :)
we
[wee]
plural pronoun, possessive our or ours, objective us.
1.
nominative plural of I.
2.
(used to denote oneself and another or others):
i.e. Tim, Gazjam, Welder, and myself...in the context of the discussion!!!
if you think that's a cult it's up to you :doh:
Oh I dunno Will, I like to wear a pointy hat when I listen to my hifi..
Nat, do you do anything special as part of your hifi ritual?
Tying a brightly colored balloon to yourself might suit?
:D
Fair comparison tests have been done over and over again. I really can’t see the point of doing another. Some audio enthusiast I know won’t even consider ABX testing because they know the chances of them passing such a test are remote. Such tests are great for the audio enthusiast who has an interest in investigating what changes they can or can’t hear in their own systems. I use ABX software and hardware a lot but I don’t have any problem with others trusting their ears when it comes to their choices for their systems.
For me, problems arise when people put forward the idea that because something has a particular badge, or a particular price tag, or even in some cases a particular reputation, it is necessarily better than something else.
Everyone else has been very polite and accommodating where Mark has implied that his ten thousand pounds worth of Krell CD player must necessarily outperform a relatively cheap and often less well built computer. I’m not going to bother with the being nice bit, instead I’m just going to write, it probably won’t, learn to live with it Mark. :D
Nat has taken a slightly different approach and seems to be suggesting that those who are file/computer enthusiasts haven’t heard a top class CD transport having gone from a cheap CD player to PC and Dac combination and consequently don’t know what they’re talking about. :rolleyes:
This may, or may not be true, but many others have, some of who have very expensive and well regarded transports/players and it seems that a computer and Dac has performed as well as and sometimes better in their systems.
It’s a well used analogy but none the less true. A cheap electronic watch keeps as accurate time as a Rolex these days.
None of the above means you shouldn’t buy Krell or Rolex. I’m sure they’re nice to own, will outlast cheaper products and give greater satisfaction in many areas, but when it comes to their primary purpose, telling the time, one is as good as the other.
I think the truth for many of us is, and the vast majority of unbiased test tend to support this, we couldn’t tell one CD transport from another or a file server from a CD transport.
I’ve spent thousands of pounds and a horrifying amount of time on this hobby. I’ve tried experimenting with things that I know logic and science deems unlikely to make a difference and for various reasons, instead of discarding those changes that I couldn’t prove to myself make an audible difference one way or another, kept them in my system.
But, it’s my system and if my nice looking stack of exposure amps and my extreme cabling and all the other Hi Fi foo makes the tunes sound somehow better, I’m good with that. :)
great post John.
Reid Malenfant
17-08-2012, 17:53
I think you have what I was attempting to get at a little wrong John :eyebrows:
I'm going to try file based audio via my Oppo & it's Esata socket to a HDD, if it out performs the Krell I'll be happy as a pig in shit :D
Yes the Krell is a nice bit of kit, even nicer as it only cost me £540 delivered, but I'll honestly be happy if I can improve on the sound that I'm already getting. It doesn't matter to me what beats it either, only that if it can be bettered somehow, it'll be done :cool:
I was simply after a reasonable explanation of how a PC DVD drive could better a top quality transport.
bobbasrah
17-08-2012, 18:27
I was simply after a reasonable explanation of how a PC DVD drive could better a top quality transport.
Mark, consider that this is no longer a transport in the PC but a intermediary for the digital data. If ripping is done correctly, the HDD contains precisely what was contained on the CD, much the same as it was stored probably prior to being burned as a CD in the first place.;)
That the replay mechanism of the CD player is no longer part of the reproduction chain when it is played from HDD takes out most if not all of the variables that your CD player has to account for in normal replay.... That only leaves how that data is translated as a variable....:D
Whether that improves on what you have compared to the PC is a matter of how realistically it translates, much of which comes down to the DAC IMHO.:cool:
Reid Malenfant
17-08-2012, 18:29
& that is a reasonable explanation :)
Thank you, now things make much more sense :cool:
I was simply after a reasonable explanation of how a PC DVD drive could better a top quality transport.
Playing it directly from a PC DVD drive is not the best way to do it Mark, or wasn't that what you meant exactly?
This is Linn's explanation a little simple, but understandable;
Why does streaming sound better?
There’s a very good reason why we stopped making CD players. We discovered that streaming the music from the network sounds better than using a disc. CD players suffer from read errors and the moving parts interfere with the sound quality. If you rip, or import your music from a compact disc onto a hard drive, and play it through a Linn DS player, you get more of the music and none of the imperfections. With no moving parts and no reliance on discs, which scratch, or degrade over time, your music sounds brilliant forever.
Why CD players are limited?
CD players work by reading data from a disc and converting it into audio, almost simultaneously. Reading from a disc is a physical operation and things can go wrong; read errors do occur and they increase as the drive ages and the discs degrade. But there’s very little time to re-read or correct these errors. So a CD player has to guess and fill in the gaps. Some of the detail or richness goes missing. For the listener, it’s like the difference between a passable pianist and a virtuoso.
No read errors with rips
CD drives in computers operate at high speed without losing accuracy. Error correction techniques ensure that any read errors are spotted and corrected before moving on. If a little extra time is needed to check and re-read data then the time is taken to ensure that all the data is read correctly. Each section can be checked and re-read until it is exact. Each rip can be automatically compared online using a database of rips to confirm accuracy – if the rip is accurate then data integrity is guaranteed forever.
No moving parts in DS
The moving parts within a CD player also have a negative effect on its performance. The parts that are required to spin a disc and control the laser produce electro-magnetic disturbances which can interfere with the integrity of the audio signal and degrade the sound. A spinning hard disc has the same negative effect. By removing the drive from the music player, this source of interference is removed forever. Another reason to rip a CD as soon as you buy it and then stream the music to a Linn DS player.
Source: http://www.linn.co.uk/systems/network-music-players#how-it-works/3
Linn DS players work and sound exceptionally good, but are horrifically exepensive. I was considering one until John (Welder) told me to get a hold of myself in his normal inimitable way - I'm very glad he did ;)
Reid Malenfant
17-08-2012, 18:43
Playing it directly from a PC DVD drive is not the way to do it Mark, or wasn't that what you meant exactly?
No, I understand, but I was refering to the device doing the ripping :)
Cheers.
No, I understand, but I was refering to the device doing the ripping :)
Cheers.
Ah, I see - that's not so important although a good drive is more likely to give you consistent and accurate rips. These can be checked against known accurate previous rips from an online database to verify their integrity. Once you have a bit perfect copy of the original data from the CD written to your hard drive, you are half way there ;)
bobbasrah
17-08-2012, 18:58
Once you have a bit perfect copy of the original data from the CD written to your hard drive, you are half way there ;)
Halfway ? You now have a perfect copy, whatever else you do short of losing or over-writing it, it will always be perfect....;)
The rest of the system is a different matter.....:D
Reid Malenfant
17-08-2012, 19:01
Linn DS players work and sound exceptionally good, but are horrifically exepensive. I was considering one until John (Welder) told me to get a hold of myself in his normal inimitable way - I'm very glad he did ;)
Missed this :doh:
I'm effectively already sorted out as I mentioned earlier, all I need to do is rip to an HDD & then plug it into the back of my Oppo BDP95 via the ESATA socket & bingo :D
Streamed audio here I come...
The rest of the system is a different matter.....:D
That's what I meant by halfway there - the digital data is only half the equation ;)
bobbasrah
17-08-2012, 19:19
That's what I meant by halfway there - the digital data is only half the equation ;)
Fair enough Tim.... From the standpoint of the manufacturers, it perhaps makes more sense now why so many have withdrawn from CDP manufacture, yet there are so many Shigaclone etc builderss out there in DIY land, the CD is quite extraordinary as a medium even after all this time....:scratch:
I do hope Nuno does not get too upset by the responses to what he started :doh: off, he has been fairly quiet since.....;)
I think what has been more intriguing in this thread is how the negative interaction over file based has been so vocal, but the justifications are mainly physical, almost ritualistic....:eek:
I see this debate is moving forward with gusto.
I am happy to throw our doors open for PC <> dedicated transport sound quality exploration day.
We can put together a couple of transparent system that will easily reveal any possible differences between the digital transports.
You guys bring along your front ends, laptops, mac books and server based devices, dac's too if you wish.
I'll offer you a bit of fun for you gents, if any one on the day can match the performance of our standard everyday transport with their digital pc based system in red book format (16bit 44.1kHz) with a bit perfect rip or flac made from a ripped CD and certified bit perfect, using the same dac I will make you one of our 4D analogue to your desired length free of charge. You are more than welcome to bring any streaming devices for a work out too.
A Maximum of 10 can be catered for, refreshments will be provided.
What do you say fine fellows?
Tony
if any one on the day can match the performance of our standard everyday transport
. . . and how much would one of these be Tony?
I see this debate is moving forward with gusto.
I am happy to throw our doors open for PC <> dedicated transport sound quality exploration day.
We can put together a couple of transparent system that will easily reveal any possible differences between the digital transports.
You guys bring along your front ends, laptops, mac books and server based devices, dac's too if you wish.
I'll offer you a bit of fun for you gents, if any one on the day can match the performance of our standard everyday transport with their digital pc based system in red book format (16bit 44.1kHz) with a bit perfect rip or flac made from a ripped CD and certified bit perfect, using the same dac I will make you one of our 4D analogue to your desired length free of charge. You are more than welcome to bring any streaming devices for a work out too.
A Maximum of 10 can be catered for, refreshments will be provided.
What do you say fine fellows?
Tony
I say make it a fair trial and take an ABX box. Winner takes all. :)
Hello Tim
Safely not in the relms of the £10K Krell !
We normally use a £2700 model for around 90% of demonstrations, nothing more.
I see this debate is moving forward with gusto.
I am happy to throw our doors open for PC <> dedicated transport sound quality exploration day.
We can put together a couple of transparent system that will easily reveal any possible differences between the digital transports.
You guys bring along your front ends, laptops, mac books and server based devices, dac's too if you wish.
I'll offer you a bit of fun for you gents, if any one on the day can match the performance of our standard everyday transport with their digital pc based system in red book format (16bit 44.1kHz) with a bit perfect rip or flac made from a ripped CD and certified bit perfect, using the same dac I will make you one of our 4D analogue to your desired length free of charge. You are more than welcome to bring any streaming devices for a work out too.
A Maximum of 10 can be catered for, refreshments will be provided.
What do you say fine fellows?
Tony
Hi Tony,
I'd be up for the challenge. My new pc-based music player will take some beating I reckon :)
Put me on the list please,
P.s. would need wifi access to control it though.
i like to come along and hear (We can also hear mine as a back up as really simple to set up)
Hi John
More than welcome, I can set up two systems, both with enough transparency to make obvious any possible differences that may be identified.
You gents, can arrange your front ends, set them up however you want to, you are more than welcome to bring your cables too if you wish.
Bringing your own music shouldn't be a problem either, flash drives Ho!
My front end might not be up to John and Tim standards but it has gone up against some nice players and come out really well with CD based files
Wifi is no problem, Cat 7 is available for those chosing the hard wired route.
Dates
How does next Saturday or Sunday sound gents?
Where exactly are you Tony?
Very kind offer too.
Stratmangler
17-08-2012, 20:44
Wifi is no problem, Cat 7 is available for those chosing the hard wired route.
Dates
How does next Saturday or Sunday sound gents?
Cat7 is inappropriate if the hardware on either end of it is not designed to connect to a common bonded earth point.
Cat7 is inappropriate if the hardware on either end of it is not designed to connect to a common bonded earth point.
Thus far Chris,
I am more than happy with its data transfer capabilities and low latency.
Have yet to hear a wireless streaming device sound as good as a hard wired device.Hhowever I have an open mind and it never stops learning :)
Tim
We are located 4 miles from Junction 16 M25, 7 miles from J6 M4 or 5 miles from either J2 or J1 of the M40
I see this debate is moving forward with gusto.
I am happy to throw our doors open for PC <> dedicated transport sound quality exploration day.
We can put together a couple of transparent system that will easily reveal any possible differences between the digital transports.
You guys bring along your front ends, laptops, mac books and server based devices, dac's too if you wish.
I'll offer you a bit of fun for you gents, if any one on the day can match the performance of our standard everyday transport with their digital pc based system in red book format (16bit 44.1kHz) with a bit perfect rip or flac made from a ripped CD and certified bit perfect, using the same dac I will make you one of our 4D analogue to your desired length free of charge. You are more than welcome to bring any streaming devices for a work out too.
A Maximum of 10 can be catered for, refreshments will be provided.
What do you say fine fellows?
Tony
This sounds interesting I have a Pioneer DVD player which saw a properly set up usb setup off. Count me in if there is space ta.
Missed this :doh:
I'm effectively already sorted out as I mentioned earlier, all I need to do is rip to an HDD & then plug it into the back of my Oppo BDP95 via the ESATA socket & bingo :D
Streamed audio here I come...
The DVD drive will be reading the data over and over and over and so should be overcoming any problems in reading a disc from one-time errors. Only a big physical problem with the disc should stop it from being read correctly.
Ripping from a CD transport means capturing that one-time performance from the transport, not necessarily playing the digital data correxctly off the CD. So you should be ripping within the PC rather than from the Krell.
To answer perhaps the question before, DVD drive mechanism will be linear drive using plastic cogs for movement of the laser sled probably with a lot of loose tollerence in both the laser focus and sled movement and lots of vibration when spinning the CD. But reading at 64 x or whatever speed and all the time in the world to rip it and all the cross referencing to the checksum data to see whether the data is correct means it should be able to overcome the cheapness. I don't know much about checksums but people say it is completely accurate and unique to the data trying to be read.
So good for ripping but poor for single speed, on the fly replay like a CD transport.
Thing is though - perhaps a question for anyone who knows - how does the data from the CD get translated and stored as a computer readable file both on the O/S level and on a hardware (internally within the harddrive, the SATA protocol, across the PCI bus etc) level?
Is the CD data getting translated many times between different hardware protocols and can any of these translations be a weak link?
Obviously, a CD transport translates the CD data to a format directly understood by the DAC chip via S/Pdif (or not if using say I2S connection) by dedicated digital audio hardware designed specifically to do the job. So can this have an effect on sound?
. . . and how much would one of these be Tony?
I thought choosing file based was purely about sound quality, not value for money?
Comparing his transport price to your file based cost is comparing commercial to DIY, not file based v CD transport. All hifi is DIY at some point, in the R&D stages for example so DIY will never loose in principle.
Then how many hours do people spend setting up their PC and ripping CDs and how much is their time worth?
For some, spending the £2500 on the transport would be better value in terms of their time and money when measured by sound quality (actually, probably for most people as I'm sure people do spend weeks solid total of time in their lives just ripping CDs and organising metadata - probably could earn the amount to buy the transport in less time with a temp data-entry job!)
I thought choosing file based was purely about sound quality, not value for money?
Perhaps you would like to take the time to read my posts, as you clearly haven't or don't understand them as I have made it abundantly clear why I went done this route and how I got there? Even if my server had cost me around £2700 and sounded the same or slightly inferior to the transport suggested, I would still have chosen file based for the reasons outlined - why don't you seem to be able to grasp this Nat?
And give it it rest with "how much time does it take to do this and rip that" - we heard you the first time. If you don't think it's worth it then DON'T DO IT, your choice, but why do you feel the need to keep banging on about it.
Stratmangler
17-08-2012, 23:20
Thus far Chris,
I am more than happy with its data transfer capabilities and low latency.
Have yet to hear a wireless streaming device sound as good as a hard wired device.Hhowever I have an open mind and it never stops learning :)
How is this Cat7 networking implemented?
I see this debate is moving forward with gusto.
I am happy to throw our doors open for PC <> dedicated transport sound quality exploration day.
We can put together a couple of transparent system that will easily reveal any possible differences between the digital transports.
You guys bring along your front ends, laptops, mac books and server based devices, dac's too if you wish.
I'll offer you a bit of fun for you gents, if any one on the day can match the performance of our standard everyday transport with their digital pc based system in red book format (16bit 44.1kHz) with a bit perfect rip or flac made from a ripped CD and certified bit perfect, using the same dac I will make you one of our 4D analogue to your desired length free of charge. You are more than welcome to bring any streaming devices for a work out too.
A Maximum of 10 can be catered for, refreshments will be provided.
What do you say fine fellows?
Tony
I would be interested if only to hear all the different options...I'm just down the road from you ;)
I probarly could do Saturday
Neal and Yomanze,
Happy to accomadate both of you.
Chris
I purely use Cat 7 as a data transmission cable from the server to the front end, the server does no data conversion, just supplies the information to be decoded elsewhere. Why use a an envirmonent that conatins elements of electrical interference to produce a signal format that can be prone to the effects of the interference generated by a PC divered enviroment, even 12Vdc, mother boards and solid state ram etc.
Tim has the right idea, the majority of clinets switch the a streaming / storage device purely for convienece and a decent graphical touch interface.
Implimentation is key to any good system and PC fronted systems even more so.
Where exactly are you Tony?
Very kind offer too.
Hi Tim,
Are you thinking of going? It would be great to meet you and have a good listen to your music server.
@Tony, next Saturday is good for me.
Just a thought: Might be worth starting a new thread, as not everyone will be watching this one.
Cheers,
sq225917
18-08-2012, 10:40
Mr C, why not just use a dac that is correctly designed to filter out any crap coming in with the signal. A nicely buffered async dac with suitable galvanic isolation should do it.
Honestly if you can show that a transport is better than a PC front end all you are actually showing is that the dac is poorly designed for the tasks at hand.
Simon,
One than one to skin a cat
@Tony, next Saturday is good for me.
Just a thought: Might be worth starting a new thread, as not everyone will be watching this one.
Cheers,
Martin please do so,
We are happy to receive visitors after 10am next Saturday 25th
Contact details here
Contact information (http://www.coherent-systems.co.uk/contact.asp)
Tony
Mr C, why not just use a dac that is correctly designed to filter out any crap coming in with the signal. A nicely buffered async dac with suitable galvanic isolation should do it.
Honestly if you can show that a transport is better than a PC front end all you are actually showing is that the dac is poorly designed for the tasks at hand.
What's the proposed DAC Tony?
I must admit it would be very interesting to get the opportunity ABX a group of file servers against a group of CD players, so this is a great offer Tony.
It’s quite difficult for the ordinary enthusiast to get a chance to participate in such tests and relatively easy for dealers. My friends and I have done a few but obviously our comparisons are limited to our kit and anything on loan.
Hi Fi shows are usually too noisy and busy and it’s very hard to relax and ime at bake off type meetings most just want to listen to the various systems.
I’ve never quite understood the reluctance of the few dealers I’ve visited to set up ABX tests for their customers. Would they lose sales through doing this? Wouldn’t most people end up buying the one they thought looked best if they couldn’t make up their mind on audio qualities?
Not able to make till the afternoon
I hope someone like Tim or John can come along with their state of the art
I will probarly want to use my own DAC as know this can also make a difference
I've just started a new thread for the proposed event, so that everyone can see it and register interest.
http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19838
Martin
You are more than welcome to use your own dac's or we have a choice of ten units up to dual mono units fed by an atomic clock.
You gents can use what ever you feel comfatable with, you can feed them by what ever means you wish, USB, Firewire, AES, Dual AES, I2s, SPDIF, BNC, Ethernet.
I must admit, I did take around 6 months to be fairly happy I could take on a quality transport in a red book comparsion.
This is purely a bit of fun and a social event with the ability to listen to your equipment with genuinely transparent system.
Not forgetting the main reason why do this, the music.
Perhaps you would like to take the time to read my posts, as you clearly haven't or don't understand them as I have made it abundantly clear why I went done this route and how I got there? Even if my server had cost me around £2700 and sounded the same or slightly inferior to the transport suggested, I would still have chosen file based for the reasons outlined - why don't you seem to be able to grasp this Nat?
Ooo..
Whilst I realise linear threads with different 'conversations' going on at once can be confusing, you shouldn't assume that quoting someone means that the post is a direct reply aimed at that person. It might be your expectation but there are other ways of doing things and using the forum.
A few people in the thread have asked what my points have had to do with absolute sound quality and feel that anything discussed other than sound quality is off topic.
Yet, like me, you are bringing up other points too as they are important when choosing (like the OP is trying to do)... oddly though the other file based advocates aren't jumping down your neck. I was simply pointing that out.
And give it it rest with "how much time does it take to do this and rip that" - we heard you the first time. If you don't think it's worth it then DON'T DO IT, your choice, but why do you feel the need to keep banging on about it.
(who's "we" in the above? )
Who else has mentioned the time taken to rip etc as a factor in comparing costs of file based v CD transport?
Tim listen, if you like file based then DO IT, your choice. You don't have to post up on here banging on about it and recommending it to others though do you?
Oh wait... it's a discussion forum ... :doh:
Hi Nat,
Are you interested in joining us next Saturday? We'll be comparing CD transports with file-based front ends and seeing/hearing some v nice kit too. Not mention meeting each other too :)
See here for details http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19838
Could be a laugh and we might all be surprised by what we hear,
Ali Tait
20-08-2012, 11:22
Shame I'm too far away, it would have been interesting to hear how the NVA compares to all the other kit.
Yes would love to hear the NVA
Reid Malenfant
20-08-2012, 18:32
I'd love to hear the lot & compare my DT10, but with no transport (of any kind, other than a cycle) I may as well pee upwind into a typhoon :eyebrows:
I would love to hear your DT10 Mark :eyebrows:
Really hope to hear the DT10 in the future Mark
Reid Malenfant
20-08-2012, 18:48
Well I'm not hard to find, I don't very often go anywhere :rfl:
& it certainly isn't either :)
Hopefully one day guys :cool:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.