CD transports - do they matter? [Archive]

Phil Bishop

01-06-2008, 13:32

This thread is similar to one I have just read on digital replay - reality or epiphany or something like that - very interesting.

Just recently, I have been reading heated debates as to does a CD transport matter that much - the DAC is of overriding importance. Surely not? Of course, this all fits in with the ideas/debates of using a computer as source.

So to test the theory, I went out and bought the cheapest CD/DVD player I could find that had a digital output - £15 from Asda (£15 for a CD/DVD player - I ask you!). I then tried it through my acclaimed Beresford DAC versus the modified Arcam Alpha 5 transport I am using (same transport as used in some Naim CDPs I believe). Can I tell a difference in sound quality - I am trying, but I can't so far. Is it my ears? Anyone else tried this?

BajaGringo

01-06-2008, 17:07

I think that you are touching on one of the core issues in the digital debate. I am having the same problem in being able to hear a difference. I recently had this same discussion with a friend who thinks that we are breaking some un-written audio commandment in even making that statement. Maybe I am just an old fart and my hearing has degraded. If you think about it purely in theory it makes sense.

But what do I know?

alb

01-06-2008, 18:08

Phil.

There may be a difference in long term reliability and build quality, but soundwise i have struggled to hear much difference between transports.

You might never convince those with a vested interest in selling upmarket gear, or those who believe that good sound only comes at a price.

My wife uses a £16 DVD player with her system, and it's capable of good results. As a transport it sounds similar to my Pioneer DVD except that Pioneer doesn't vibrate in use.:)

Marco

01-06-2008, 18:42

Al,

I don't doubt that there would be little or no difference between two DVD ROM transport mechanisms playing CD because they will largely have been born from the same universal parts bin, and neither is designed to optimise an audio-only format such as CD. Results will likely be very different, however, when comparing a high quality dedicated Red Book CD transport to your DVD player.

Sonic differences between transport mechanisms most certainly do exist, and in the right context can be very significant. However when doing the comparison you need to use an appropriate reference otherwise you'll be unlikely to hear any difference.

Most CDP (and DVD) transport mechanisms these days are much of a much-ness - it's only when you hear something that's been seriously over-engineered down to the last detail using the highest quality bespoke parts and components (like, say, the TEAC VRDS-Neo used on the top Esoteric players and standalone transport units or the designs from the Japanese big boys of the late 80s/early 90s) that real differences become truly apparent.

Have a look at this link for some info:

http://www.teac.com/esoteric/Disc_transports_VOSP_and_VRDS-Neo.html

From the website:

ESOTERIC® disc players use proprietary disc transport systems, each designed to reduce noise, vibration, tracking errors and error correction.

That's basically it, highlighted above, and why bespoke top-notch CD-only transport mechanisms offer superior performance to the mass-produced plastic affairs used mainly these days, but it will cost you as serious engineering quality doesn't come cheap! Transport quality is one of the main reasons (along with NOS chipsets) why hi-end players from CD's 'heyday' (late 80s to mid 90s) sound quite different to most of what's produced today at virtually any price. Of course all this goes out of the window when lossless streaming of the necessary data is used to good effect with a computer.

I'll bring my Sony transport (and DAC) along to the forthcoming Chester fest, and you can compare it to your DVD player using the same DAC. I promise you it will be an enlightening experience ;)

Good thread this, chaps. I will contribute in more detail later!

Marco.

Phil Bishop

01-06-2008, 20:38

alb

01-06-2008, 20:41

Yes Marco, i would be disappointed if a serious CD transport didn't provide some audible benefit.
My comments were mostly aimed at Phils cheap DVD.

I know the CD Pro transport is superior to the Pioneer, hopefully Tony Moore will bring his along to Chesterfest. I might be tempted by one of these myself, but for the time being i like the convenience of being able to play DVDaudio.
I think the Chester meet would be an ideal opportunity for a spot of mixing and matching of CD players, amps and speakers. This has always been difficult to achieve at Owston due to the large number attending and limited time.
It's good to hear peoples stuff in the context of their own system, but it doesn't always give you much idea of the capabilities or compatibility of the individual components.
Looking forward to hearing some different equipment, sometimes it's a much needed reality check.

As a DIYer on a budget, the idea of spending large amounts of money is an alien concept, and this sometimes shows in my comments. Despite that I do keep an open mind to most things and am happy to be educated.

Marco

01-06-2008, 20:55

Thanks for all your contributions chaps, most enlightening. Marco makes the point that highly engineered transports can make a difference, but as he says one is entering a niche high end market which I, for one, can't afford (and don't feel at present inclined)to enter.

Phil, you can also pick up near mint second-hand examples of hi-end Japanese CDPs from the late 80s/early 90s such as my Sony X-777ES for around £450 (which incidentally weighs almost 20kg). This will quite simply outperform any other CD transport currently on the market, save perhaps the Esoteric players using VRDS-Neo. You can also still get the appropriate laser mechanism in the unlikely event that one should fail.

I get the feeling, though, from the sheer quality of its construction that mine will probably outlive me! Pride of ownership value is so much higher with quality equipment such as this, especially when you feel how silky smooth the drawer opens and closes with a gentle 'swish' every time you load a CD, compared to the noisy rattling monstrosities produced so often these days, and it reads the table of contents almost instantaneously, too :)

Here's a picture of the DAS-R1 DAC I'm using (I used to have the R1 transport but now use the X-777ES shown below in the second link):

http://www.thevintageknob.org/SONY/sonyesprit/CDPDASR1/CDPR1DASR1.html

X-777ES:

http://www.thevintageknob.org/SONY/sonyes/CDPX777ES/CDPX777ES.html

They don't make 'em like they used to!!

Marco.

lurcher

01-06-2008, 21:00

One option:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=120229

Marco

01-06-2008, 21:05

As a DIYer on a budget, the idea of spending large amounts of money is an alien concept, and this sometimes shows in my comments. Despite that I do keep an open mind to most things and am happy to be educated.

I appreciate that.

Like I said, Al, you don't need to spend a fortune. Second-hand top-notch Sonys, Marantz, etc from the right era are the way to go. In this instance Ebay (probably Germany or Holland) is your friend ;)

I'm looking forward to the Chester fest. I (with the help of some friends) should be able to bring some interesting kit along.

Marco.

Phil Bishop

01-06-2008, 21:17

Marco, Very interesting....of course I went straight on ebay and looked for the Sony transport...none currently selling. Can you give some other models for Sony/Marantz so I can keep an eye? The beauty of ebay, of course, is one can try these things and then, if they don't work, sell on making generally only a small loss (or maybe even a profit!). Phil.

Marco

02-06-2008, 21:31

Hi Phil,

Basically you're looking for something that's heavily over-engineered and, if possible, uses bespoke parts which are not used by every other 'Tom, Dick and Harry' CDP or transport.

Some of the models I would be looking at (note that certain ones will not come cheap) are:

Marantz CD7.
Marantz CD12.
Marantz CD94.

Sony CDP-507ESD.
Sony CDP-555ESD.
Sony CDP-605ESD.
Sony CDP-X707ES.
Sony CDP-X777ES.

Teac P1.
Teac P700.

Pioneer PD65.

There are also plenty more. Have a look through this site for examples:

http://www.thevintageknob.org/index.html

Be careful though - only go for ones that you can still get parts for such as laser mechanisms, etc, otherwise all you'll end up with is a nice looking ornament if something irreplaceable fails!

In order to find out that information you would have to contact the manufacturer directly or speak to someone such as Mark Bartlett from Audiocom International on the forum who has worked on most of these units and has a good handle on which still have parts available.

Good luck!

For those who would like to see what the ultimate CDP looks like, and probably the best the world has ever seen, I give you the Sony R-10/DAS-R10:

http://www.thevintageknob.org/SONY/sonyesprit/CDPR10DASR10/CDPR10DASR10.html

F*cking gorgeous... *THAT* is what you call a 'statement' CDP!!

Marco.

BajaGringo

02-06-2008, 22:30

Great Information Marco. One of the things I love about this forum. Going to check up on some of those you referenced...

Alan

03-06-2008, 08:53

"Sony CDP-507ESD.
Sony CDP-555ESD.
Sony CDP-605ESD.
Sony CDP-X707ES.
Sony CDP-X777ES.

Teac P1.
Teac P700.

Pioneer PD65."

One of these on ebay right now, I've had an eye on it but not the funds in my pocket right now.
It ends tommorrow morning around 10 am and it's at £100 now. Hope it's what you're after - good luck.:)

Marco

03-06-2008, 09:01

Hi Alan,

Can you post a link to it on Ebay?

Cheers,
Marco.

Marco

03-06-2008, 09:06

I presume it's this one:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Sony-CDP-555ESD-Cd-Player_W0QQitemZ170222565093QQihZ007QQcategoryZ327 2QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

If so, Phil, get in there my son! And it has the TDA-1541 S1 chips in it, too...

Marco.

Filterlab

03-06-2008, 10:08

The seller is truly a credit to the art of the photography. :doh:

http://i12.ebayimg.com/03/i/000/f2/fa/f94b_3.JPG

http://i16.ebayimg.com/01/i/000/f2/fa/fcb5_3.JPG

http://i18.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/f2/fb/0041_3.JPG

http://i12.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/f2/fb/0389_3.JPG

http://i8.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/f2/fa/f3da_3.JPG

This is on my watch list at the moment as it happens, along with a CDP-XA333ES.

Phil Bishop

03-06-2008, 11:13

Thanks all, you have all been so helpful. I may have a punt. What awful photos - first rule of ebay, get the photos right! I will let you know how I get on. Phil.

Phil Bishop

03-06-2008, 11:23

One other quick question - I assume all these have a digital output so one can use an external DAC? Phil.

Filterlab

03-06-2008, 11:28

Oh yes. Most decent players have both S/PDIF outputs (optical and coaxial).

Filterlab

03-06-2008, 11:31

Oh, check out the Sony 555ES also on ebay at the moment:

It'll definitely fetch a few quid! (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Sony-SCD-555ES-CD-SACD-player-Sony-ES-CD-SACD_W0QQitemZ260247219615QQihZ016QQcategoryZ3272Q QssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)

And when you see inside it's understandable why they're so sought after:

http://www.hifi-china.com/images_lab/52003611015402.picture

tfarney

03-06-2008, 13:08

Even I, the terminally tight, recognize the wisdom in what Marco is saying. I sure couldn't give anyone a technical explanation, but basic logic, to the extent that is available to me, says that an over-engineered, highly stable transport of a spinning disc reading data is bound to be a good thing. The foolishness of the endeavor comes in when you buy one new. What does such a transport cost these days? $2,000? $4,000 (I really do have to get a pounds to dollars calculator on my desktop)?

Mac mini - $500
small lcd monitor - $150
a terabyte of HD - $250
software - free

It's really easy math. So easy, in fact, that audiophiles seem to be getting it much faster than I thought they would. They can be a stubborn lot, hell bent on justifying every dollar they've spent. But they seem to be catching on to this one very quickly. For my part, I intend to print out Marco's list of over-engineered mass market transports and keep an eye out for them. It can't hurt to have one tucked away. Are any brands better than others when it comes to stocking parts for old models?

I still think audiophiles are holding on tightly to some digital illusions that are costing them dearly, but this one seems to be fading fast. A good thing if it results in better sound for more people.

Tim

Alan

03-06-2008, 14:46

Hi Alan,

Can you post a link to it on Ebay?

Cheers,
Marco.

Sorry I wasn't around chaps, busy day. Yes, Marco, that's it. There is also a 227 ESD (only £10 at the moment) which also shares the DAC chip in question, although being a cheaper model the transport may not be so solid.
Oh, and to my embarrassment I do not know how to post a link yet, though it would be useful: Is there a tips section here?:doh:

Phil Bishop

03-06-2008, 16:21

Ali Tait

03-06-2008, 17:22

Phil,you are asking the same questions as I am at the moment.The way I see it,having recently had a go with an extensively modded squeezebox (battery powered) with some rather expensive components in it,running FLAC files into my system,was that using a pc running lossless files is the way to go.We put the squeezebox up against my two cd players feeding into my Beresford DAC (Have an Audio note DAC coming next week) which while not the best transports in the world,have shown me that there is really no point in spending a lot of money on a transport nowadays.A much more cost effective way to me would be to use your pc (which you already have) as a transport and spend the money saved on buying a good DAC instead.We found that while the Squeezebox had been quite extensively modded at quite a high cost,it was no better fed directly into my amp (i.e. using the internal squeezebox dac) than the Beresford.In fact we could detect no difference in sound. (a fact that had been replicated elsewhere in a different system by the owner of the Squeezebox) Ok,all that says is that the internal DAC in the squeezebox is nothing special,but the point is,is that running the squeezebox through my Beresford was at least as good if not better than using my cd players as transport,one of which is a Pioneer PD-S505,which while not exactly high-end,is well known as being a good transport.So my take on all this would be to buy a Squeezebox or something similar,and use the large amount of money saved on buying a good transport to buy a very good DAC instead.It's what I intend to do.

Regards,Ali.

tfarney

03-06-2008, 19:08

Interested in the point I think Tim is making - why do we persist chasing expensive stable traditional CD transports when computers can potentially do the job so much better? This is the dilema I am having at the moment - continue with traditional CD (transport CDP/DAC) or go down the computer route as advocated by Rob and others. I have limited time and the computer route excites me, but also scares me a bit - it always takes time to get to know operating systems/software, etc - and also importing all those CDs! Also, computers lose their value/are updated very quickly - I hear rumours that computers with no discs (solid state flash drives) will be the norm in 2 years - to take the plunge now or not? Traditional CDPs at present seem to hold their value better, or am I wrong!

One thing for sure - I would never spend megabucks on a traditional CDP set up.....but maybe if I heard one I would!

Marco - I think you have just pushed up the prices of all those CDPs!

Phil

Fear not. Buy a Mac.

Seriously, OSX, with Core Audio, is the obvious choice, evidenced by the studios and editing suites full of the stuff. And the operating system, OSX is just more stable and more intuitive. Last but not least, there is iTunes. I know some people who don't like it, but I don't understand them. It is a marvelously-implemented little piece of software that is intuitive, powerful and virtually bug-free. The easiest way to do this is to go to your friendly neighborhood Apple Store and pick up a Macbook. Get the hard drives somewhere else; they'll be cheaper. And the process of ripping cds to hard drive. Well, yeah, it takes awhile. But it is kind of a cool process, because you handle every CD in your collection. Reminds you of what you have. Just set up the Macbook and hard drive in a corner somewhere and keep feeding it at commercial breaks, or between chapters, or whatever. In a few days you'll be done and all of your music will be at your fingertips and running from the most stable transport in the world -- RAM!

Then get rid of all those damn jewel boxes and put your cds in binders. The wife will love that.

Tim

Phil Bishop

03-06-2008, 19:23

Ali/Tim,

You are convincing me, along with others. Two really dumb questions. What is a Squeezebox and what is OSX? I can probably guess, but a bit of elaboration would be great. Tim, you seem to be advocating a Macbook, but you use a Mac mini?

Phil

Filterlab

03-06-2008, 20:00

Squeezebox (http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html) - a network music system. Not great in standard form but can me made to be good.

OS X (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X) - The tenth (essentially) incarnation of Apple's operating system and possibly the best available operating system in the world. The 'OS' bit refers to the 'operating system' and the 'X' bit as in 'ten'. A true macophile will say 'OS 10', an amateur will say 'OS X'. ;)

Phil Bishop

03-06-2008, 20:33

Thanks Rob!

Filterlab

03-06-2008, 20:33

Nay probs.

lurcher

03-06-2008, 20:48

A true macophile will say 'OS 10', an amateur will say 'OS X'.

And a professional software developer may find yet another word to use :-)

Filterlab

03-06-2008, 21:02

Hehehehe, yeah they can be a bit tricky to program for so I've heard.

Phil Bishop

04-06-2008, 09:50

Oh well, got outbid for that Sony CD player on ebay anyway, which is fine...gives me more time to evaluate options.

Ali - sounds like we are treading a similar path as I have a Beresford DAC. How do you find it? I think we should stay in touch as we are moving in the same direction.

Tim - sounds like you have already trodden that path!

Marco - I will still keep a weather eye on those CDPs, but having lost this one is fine ... gives me more time to research!

Phil

Audiocom AV

04-06-2008, 19:45

Hello

To all those looking for an explanation of why & how CD transports sound different here is a very good article from Stereophile;
http://www.stereophile.com/features/368/

Regards,
Mark Bartlett

Marco

05-06-2008, 08:10

Great link, Mark! I shall be saving it for future reference :)

I'll make some specific references to it later and offer my further thoughts on the subject.

Marco.

Phil Bishop

19-06-2008, 08:18

tfarney

19-06-2008, 10:06

Tim, Earlier on you posted the above interesting reply. Now I am thinking of getting into computer-based audio and two things interest me - "terminally tight" and mac mini. The mac mini is a cheap option and a neat one - does not take up much space! One can rip CDs, etc, using monitor etc from existing PC I assume. But how do you control mac mini when connected to hi fi system? Tell me more about the small LCD screen, etc. Is this what you are using? Phil.

I don't personally use a Mini, but an older iBook. If I had it to do from new, I would start with a MacBook, which would bundle cd ripper, control and screen, and open up the possibility of building a pretty inexpensive multi-room/system wireless network with the MacBook as the world's most elegant and complete remote control.

Where your internet modem is -- Airport extreme ($179 US), hard drives holding your music and backups (2X$120 US)

Behind each room system, plugged via optical into your DAC -- Airport Express ($79 US).

MacBook ($999 US) - anywhere, any room, controlling the systems or with a portable headphone amp/dac plugged in for private listening (a really great, slightly overkill solution is the Apogee Duet - $500 US)

Even if you needed an Express behind three systems, my math gets me to just over $2000 US, including the Duet for headphones and two 500 gig hard drives for storage and backup...less than the price of an audiophile cdp.

The only drawback I can see is the optical from the Express to DAC, and that's only a drawback if you believe in jitter. Personally, until someone can point me to an ABX or at least tell me what it sounds like, I'll go with the data, which indicates jitter is minor timing errors measured in picoseconds being thrown at a brain responding in long, slow minutes. I don't doubt that optical is more jittery than coax. I just doubt that anyone can hear it.

Tim

Phil Bishop

19-06-2008, 21:35

Thanks Tim, I think at the stage I am at, I am just looking at the potential for a computer to replace the CD transport side of things, not multi-room systems (yet!). From talking to various people including yourself, the iMac and MacBook seem to be the main contenders. My interest in this type of system stems from:

(1) The arguement that a computer may be a better digital source than a CDP as it reads CDs more accurately, playback from RAM, etc.
(2) Lifestyle! With youngish kids, record decks and even CDPs are a bit of a liability. As the kids grow up, they and me (!) want ipods and this can gel with a computer based system.
(3) The convenience of having a collection held digitally - being able to select random play from 100's of CDs, playlists, etc.

I would not be interested if the sound quality was inferior, but I hear it can be better than a conventional system on a £ for £ ($ for $) basis.

So at present, I am selling my old analogue gear to raise funds for a Mac and possibly a better DAC than the one I have now - see the "Private Exhibitions" page!

Thanks again

Phil

Mike

20-06-2008, 20:25

After reading through this again and again I've come to a conclusion. :)

I think the answer is 'NO'. ;)

Phil Bishop

20-06-2008, 21:59

Shian,

Your answer to what is "no"?

If it is "shall I investigate further all this computer mullarky" then my answer has been yes, then no, then yes again!

Phil

Mike

20-06-2008, 22:03

hehe...

My answer 'no', is in response to the thread title. :)

Mike

20-06-2008, 22:05

When I say

After reading through this again and again

I mean the whole thread. :)

Cheers,
Mike.

Marco

21-06-2008, 08:44

Well I would say "yes", most definitely, but it depends what you're looking for and what your circumstances are, as Phil has outlined.

I'll never sell my Sony even when I get a computer audio set-up :)

Marco.

Filterlab

21-06-2008, 10:04

I would say maybe, bearing in mind a reknowned hi-fi magazine use a Pioneer PDR-609 as a transport (admittedly sitting in front of a dCS Elgar) as a test source for amps and speakers. Saying that the PDR-609 is a marvellous player in its own right, but by no means high end.

The same magazine said whilst testing the Accustic Arts Tube DAC that it made no difference to the DAC what transport was popped in front of it - they even tried it with a £9.99 Alba DVD player if I remember correctly.

Phil Bishop

21-06-2008, 21:22

hehe...

My answer 'no', is in response to the thread title. :)

Yes, I should have realised this. I was so much in the computer audio frame of mind that I had forgotten the original thread topic. BTW, I don't think my answer to the thread topic is "no", rather "not that much". Rather line the Alba Rob mentions above, I was amazed at what a £15 Asda CD/DVD could do in front of a low budget DAC. However, I have not experienced the high end CDTs Marco has referred to - maybe if I had (or had a better system) my answer would be "yes". But for now, I am taken with the computer as source idea.

fiver

22-06-2008, 01:50

I'll never sell my Sony even when I get a computer audio set-up :)

Marco.

Hi, are they difficult to sell? why keep it if you are getting a computer.

Marco

22-06-2008, 06:53

Hi fiver,

Welcome to the forum :)

The answer to your question is no. I also have a computer (hence why I'm able to reply to you now ;)). It's a computer audio set-up I don't have yet. To that end I intend to buy a music server of some type in due course.

Where are you from and what system have you got?

Marco.

sastusbulbas

22-06-2008, 08:03

I still prefer proper CD transports to PC and Mac or DVD.

I am still interested in improving my computer audio at some point, but cost is prohibitive at the moment, and a manufacturer has bet me to the post with my dedicated audio PC transport/player based on touch screen, solid state HD and the like idea.

I am still waiting to see true 24/196 digital output and more free or less expensive downloads in this format.

fiver

22-06-2008, 09:14

Thanks Marco, I'm from Harborne, UK, W. Mids. I have Quad with a TD124, but at the moment I'm refitting to a computer based system. I don't think the music servers will catch on with audio enthusiasts. They cost ten times as much as as computer and from what I've heard, they don't sound as good. Some dealers are pushing them, but I think that is from the profit potential. Also I think they will appeal to wealthy people who want ready made convenience at the expense of sound quality. Also you can use valves with a computer system if you want to, although I've sold my Quad2's and now use 33/303 and 34/fm4/306.

Mr. C

22-06-2008, 09:14

Some good points raised here, though I feel the point has been missed, the ability to stream uncorrupted high definition digital data into a transference device with zero bit errors negates the need for a physical transport to be present verbaitum.
Our new reference reply system includes both transport and *stream drive*, the transport is purely used for customers own music and back cataloging, the differences are chasmic in the least descriptives terms.
Those in the future looking for 'real' sounds will not be using a traditional method of digital data transfer to the dac. Also as desirable as nos dac are in some quarters, their performance simply can not unleash the performance of the new formats.
Transports will still be very much in evidence for making the use for people current cd collection, until the achieve onto HD.
Most interesting times afoot :)

fiver

22-06-2008, 09:27

Mr C, is what you're saying, that for high definition audio,transports are dead except for inputting data files from discs.

Mr. C

22-06-2008, 09:47

Fiver,

The transport will slowly taper off in the next few years I feel.
Getting the very best from true high def formats will not involve a red book transport!
CD transports cannot transmit High def data, also dac's which up-sample red book to these high sample and bit rates (8 or 9 bits to the stock 16), do this by adding dither and interpolating the data by 2.5 or 4.5 times the original sample rate 44100hz.
And are NOT true high def, as you are start from the basic red book at 16 bit/44.1khz.
You need to stream the dac with the raw high def data at these sample rates (so not use the ASRC inside the dac) to really demonstrate the format's true potential
I personally prefer 88.2khz and 176.4khz sample rates for me they work better.
Most studios have been recording in 24/32bit and 192 up to 354khz for long while now.
These 'raw format studio masters' are then down sampled to red book, in essence the difference between a red book cd and a High Def master is close to 100 times more data, therefore the resolution difference is massive, so is the sound quality.
You physically have a much bigger 'pot' to work with.
Now a lot of people are going to react, you can not hear that far up the frequency spectrum, waste of time etc.
How about the harmonic structure to the musical passage? 1st. 2nd, 3rd harmonics, this opens up a large debate on human hearing and the effects of frequencies upto 100khz .
Thats a different thread lol!
The bottom line is it really does make a difference and then some, however it does not stop you enjoying your CD's any the less.
Within 18 months a lot more commercially available HD server/capture devices will be present in the market, giving more choice and value to the populous (imho)

purite audio

22-06-2008, 09:57

Yesterday I finally got around to ordering a dedicated 'audio' pc , from Millenium Music, i have leaned heavily on the advice of both Mike Stahl ( Stahl-Tek ) and Mike Ritter, the pc will have pipe cooling , a Lynx 16aes soundcard ( to provide a low jitter signal ) and 'wavlab' software which is compatible with every high resolution format, I will run the output into my Stahl DAC.
The plan is to burn cd's with exact audio copy, and then compare the 'streamed' cd to the standard optical transport, through the same dac. I have also purchased 'reference recordings' 176.4 24bit master HRx discs ,and again to compare these to the standard cd copy , cost of the complete pc about £1600.

Mr. C

22-06-2008, 10:04

Keith,

Thats a good basic way to get started on this ladder, which will make you smile, is when you put the vinyl on, how 'ordinary it sounds'
Good luck

purite audio

22-06-2008, 10:21

Tony Hi, I will let you know how I get on, the current crop of 'music servers' like the Naim don't seem to offer too much for the price being charged! Keep in touch, regards Keith.

Marco

22-06-2008, 10:57

Getting the very best from true high def formats will not involve a red book transport!

Hi Tony,

As I'm sure you know, a good transport comes into its own when you play CDs, and for people with quite a few of them and who want to hear them at their best and can't be arsed ripping them all to a hard drive (count me in!) there will always be a need for a top-notch CDP (transport & DAC or whatever) regardless of what happens with computer audio.

As for "true high def formats", I shall reserve judgement until I hear them for myself. No doubt though they are good, but the reason I remain slightly sceptical is that I've heard similar things before said about up-sampling and SACD - both of which are reputed to offer higher resolution but to my ears sound artificial and 'processed' compared to standard Red Book and well recorded bog standard CD respectively.

Vinyl done well, particularly in conjunction with valves, is still the best sound I've heard yet with hi-fi. However one is always on a learning curve, so I remain open-minded as ever to alternative possibilities :)

Marco.

Mr. C

22-06-2008, 12:00

Keith,
The key is in the data transfer and the ability not to 'contaminate' the data at the pc/mac.

Marco,

As I mentioned, the cd transport will not disappear completely it will remain fear not!
Ripping of the cd's and being 'arsed' I agree to a point, that is personal and jewel cases ala' gate-folds are still something palpable to collect and will remain an important part of 'collecting music'. It is a younger generation thing, however a true bit for bit copy of a red book cd is just that, there will be new software available I suspect in the next 6 months or so that will be truly and utterly zero latency.
About 2 months I was putting the finishing touches to a very special transport which we have been working on, imho the unit in original form is 'without peer' an Esoteric P-01.
Easily the best digital transport we have worked on and completed.
I have a few friends in the telecommunication industry who are great music lovers and hifi fans, they were keen to hear the machine before it was shipped back to the far east.
One of gents has been using server based music for a good couple of years, and had been badgering for a listen to the methods of transferring data via different networks.
The upshot was simple, a direct a<>b between the P=01 and the digital drive method as we shall call it. Conclusion running both methods into 5 different dac's (ranging from a Pet Tec P1a to a Zanden) identical cables, system etc. level matched too.
The cd drive while superb without question (better than ANY other transport I have heard to date), just could not hold a candle to the DDS on red book, the high res formats were just another planet.
Here's one to try, for a taster, try an Acram DV137, use the analogue outputs into the same pre you use and play a true 24/96khz dvd audio disc against any £5K CDP and compare the differences, then ask yourself is the cd player worth the extra? To some it maybe.
I will not get into the valves/Vinyl debate, they can sound beautiful without question, as can digital and sound state, its personal preferences only.
Lots to look forward too in the coming months I feel!

Marco

22-06-2008, 13:03

Tony,

The upshot was simple, a direct a<>b between the P=01 and the digital drive method as we shall call it. Conclusion running both methods into 5 different dac's (ranging from a Pet Tec P1a to a Zanden) identical cables, system etc. level matched too.
The cd drive while superb without question (better than ANY other transport I have heard to date), just could not hold a candle to the DDS on red book, the high res formats were just another planet.

I'm sure that was the case, however as I wasn't there myself to hear it I shall reserve judgement until if or when I do.

Can you explain a bit more please what exactly this "digital drive method" is?

I mentioned valves and vinyl purely because superbly pressed, well recorded vinyl, reproduced through valves is currently my benchmark in terms of audio quality, and it is this that I would be using to judge against these "true hi def formats" of which you mention.

I'm never automatically seduced by technology - only what gets me closer to the sound and feel of live music and how voices and instruments are actually heard in reality. The sound of any piece of hi-fi equipment for me must be musical, not merely 'impressive' in a hi-fi sense in terms of ultimate detail retrieval or 'smoother' or whatever. That's why I don't like the up-sampling effect or SACD because to my ears both fall into the 'impressive but not musical category'.

I will only embrace new technology if it's better (i.e. it produces more musical results) than what we currently have. That's the bottom line for me.

But like you say, there are possibly some interesting times ahead :)

Marco.

purite audio

22-06-2008, 13:31

I don't see hi-res replacing my vinyl, I just see it as another alternative, I have quite a few cd's and I would like to get the most out of them, if ripping and streaming offers a small improvement I feel that would be worthwhile , re hi-res I just hope music companies release their original digital masters, and that the whole thing doesn't end up in another format war.
Re the data transfer everyone I have spoken to believes a very low jitter signal is key and then obviously a superb DAC. As soon as my new PC arrives I will post my thoughts, Keith.

Togil

22-06-2008, 13:52

The 20,000Hz limit doesn't matter as otherwise why does so much equipment rolled off in the treble sound better, also live FM radio can be superb ( better than Vinyl ) However the sampling rate of 44.1 was a mistake.

Yomanze

22-06-2008, 15:03

Marco

22-06-2008, 15:20

Hi Keith,

I don't see hi-res replacing my vinyl, I just see it as another alternative, I have quite a few cd's and I would like to get the most out of them, if ripping and streaming offers a small improvement I feel that would be worthwhile

I completely agree - it is just another alternative and that's exactly how I intend to treat it. I have also heard more than a small improvement with ripping and streaming compared to playing CDs through even the best CDP, providing a high quality DAC is used. "High quality", though, meaning 'musical sounding' as I detailed before.

That's where NOS DACs come into their own, IMO. 24-bit may have more resolution, tick more hi-fi boxes, or whatever, but for sheer musical communication, realism, and accurate tonality I've not heard anything to compete with 16-bit Philips TDA1541 chips when implemented correctly. Modern DACs in comparison sound cold and clinical and thin.

re hi-res I just hope music companies release their original digital masters, and that the whole thing doesn't end up in another format war.

Same here!

Re the data transfer everyone I have spoken to believes a very low jitter signal is key and then obviously a superb DAC. As soon as my new PC arrives I will post my thoughts...

Please do :)

I also completely agree that a very low jitter signal with a superb DAC is the way to go. What I've found so far with many computer audio set-ups is the DACs being used are of dubious quality. The streaming bit is fantastic but then the signal is fed through some awful Burr Brown, AKM, or whatever (sorry I don't like them) and up-sampled to buggery resulting in just the type of artificial processed sound which I referred to earlier.

The key for me with streaming is to embrace old and new technologies to the greatest effect - that is unless the high definition formats Tony is referring to really do deliver the goods. If that's the case then I will gladly retire my Sony DAS-R1 for good, but as far as I'm concerned the jury is still out... All will be revealed I'm sure in due course!

Hans,

live FM radio can be superb ( better than Vinyl )

You are absolutely 100% correct! I've forgotten just how good live analogue FM broadcasts can be on a good tuner fed by a decent aerial as I no longer have a tuner. Perhaps the experience is not so good these days as broadcast signal quality isn't what it used to be but I have fond memories of listening to live concerts on BBC Radio 3 with a Naim NAT-01 and Ron Smith. The sound was truly fantastic such that you felt you could almost reach out and touch the performers.

You're right, live FM radio broadcasts done properly is as good as it gets. If these new high-res formats get anywhere near that then there will indeed be some cause for celebration! :)

Time will tell...

Marco.

Togil

22-06-2008, 16:15

You are absolutely 100% correct! I've forgotten just how good live analogue FM broadcasts can be on a good tuner fed by a decent aerial as I no longer have a tuner. Perhaps the experience is not so good these days as broadcast signal quality isn't what it used to be but I have fond memories of listening to live concerts on BBC Radio 3 with a Naim NAT-01 and Ron Smith. The sound was truly fantastic such that you felt you could almost reach out and touch the performers.

You're right live FM radio broadcasts done properly is as good as it gets. If these new high-res formats get anywhere near that then there will indeed be some cause for celebration! :)

Time will tell...

Marco.

There was quite a famous occasion ( in the sense that it was later mentioned in the HiFi press ) in the early 80s when a live Mahler symphony was later repeated as a digital recording and it sounded even better !!
The reason was that the original broadcast had been limited in its dynamic range

Marco

22-06-2008, 16:17

Yes the broadcast has to be spot-on with minimal pissing around of the signal, which is the case I believe with any music source.

Marco.

Mr. C

22-06-2008, 16:56

Marco,

The technology is out there now, a few companies are on the case and producing some superb results.
There will be NO format war, high definition data is just that, be it 96khz/24bit or 192khz/32bit, as long as your dac (the huge majority of dac produced in the last 8 years have this ability) can decode pcm/bit-stream, everyone can access it, not just the high end community.
Regardless of your thoughts, a properly impliment high def system easily trounces vinyl in every department by a large margin.
Now before you engage in the usual Marco 'shields up' full defensive rhetoric repost lol let me finish please!
People will not give up vinyl or cd's, the pleasure of using vinyl et al is and still will be there for thousands of people. A good majority of people have large collections on Vinyl and CD (my own collection while not in the realms of a few that post here, is a modest 3500 or so). Your cdp can act as a transport for your cd collection as well as your gateway to true high res as well. Not really a losing situation
A lot of classic recordings are analogue is nature, therefore a lot of these will not be available in true high res format (I suspect a few studios will have a go at whacking them through a top flight a to d and try squeezing yet more out of them!)
However this is not true nature of a high resolution recording, lots of pro's and cons on the music choice side I will not disagree.
As for the philips dac chip a lot here are fond of, the Zanden is the ultimate expression of this highly regarded dac-chip. I am surprised you did not pick this up Marco.
There is no need to try and justify to you, the format will take off as soon as people hear it correctly impliment and set up coupled with even modest equipment it can bring quality high end sounds to everyone.(which is not too long away now)

Marco

22-06-2008, 17:27

Tony,

Now before you engage in the usual Marco 'shields up' full defensive rhetoric repost lol let me finish please!

LOL. There's no such thing likely - nor has ever any existed. I champion what I believe in and what I think sounds good and offers excellent value for money. It's as simple as that. Others can disagree if they wish, that's just fine - everyone is entitled to an opinion.

However, no offence, but it will take a little more than you saying:

Regardless of your thoughts, a properly impliment high def system easily trounces vinyl in every department by a large margin.

before I accept it and believe it. I need to hear and judge things with my own ears first as ultimately they are the final arbiter of what gets used in my system.

Perhaps we could start the ball rolling by you outlining exactly how you think this "high def system" "trounces vinyl in every department by a large margin"? :)

And forget about hi-fi niceties - I'm referring to REAL improvements; stuff that transforms recorded music into a tangible, emotional, almost live experience, which is for me what good vinyl does over CD. If you start going on about micro and macro detail, frequency response, stereo depth or whatever I'll fall asleep ;)

As for the philips dac chip a lot here are fond of, the Zanden is the ultimate expression of this highly regarded dac-chip. I am surprised you did not pick this up Marco.

Well first of all I would not dream of spending that amount of money on any piece of hi-fi equipment, that's just not where my head is at these days. It's about maximum sound-per-pound and using my experience to achieve that. Almost every component I use now reflects that methodology.

Secondly, what makes you say the Zanden is the "ultimate expression" of the TDA1541 - because it's the most expensive? Have you heard every other player on the market past and present which uses that chip in order to come to that conclusion? Have you heard a DAS-R1, for example, especially an updated and modified one?

I've not heard the Zanden so I can't comment but some trusted ears I know have and according to them it's good but a bit laid back sounding compared to what I'm used to with the Sony. Now I was a bit shocked to hear that, and trust me these people have lots of experience with hi-fi and know a good sound when they hear one. They gave their reasons why they were a bit disappointed in the Zanden and I understand where they're coming from. However, as always I will reserve judgement until if or when I hear one myself. One thing for sure, it looks bloody amazing!

Marco.

SteveW

22-06-2008, 18:15

Perhaps the experience is not so good these days as broadcast signal quality isn't what it used to be but I have fond memories of listening to live concerts on BBC Radio 3 with a Naim NAT-01 and Ron Smith.....

You're right live FM radio broadcasts done properly is as good as it gets. If these new high-res formats get anywhere near that then there will indeed be some cause for celebration! :)

Time will tell...

Marco.

Just a heads up again really, if anyone is interested Ron Smith is still producing aerials, as I've said in another thread.

Recently got myself a Galaxie 17 (whilst the going is good). Still coming to terms with how good it makes my Linn Kremlin sound. In fact at the moment there are some amazing bargain tuners to be had...and some amazing music being broadcast.

Marco

22-06-2008, 18:21

I agree, Steve. How do you feel the sound quality of the broadcasts is these days compared to say when the Kremlin was launched - have you owned it that long?

Incidentally, I rate the Kremlin as one of the finest solid-state analogue tuners ever made.

Marco.

SteveW

22-06-2008, 20:17

I can't comment on the quality of broadcasts that far back, I only bought the Kremlin 3, or was it 4?, years ago. ( Care of Midland Audio Exchange)

All I can say is that I have listened to more radio in the last couple of weeks than I ever have.
For instance, I was waiting for my missus to finish some work this afternoon, so was just flicking through radio channels.

Caught the start of a programme of Great Voices of Bulgaria which was from the Bath Festival on Radio 3. The quality was astonishing..

..live recordings from what sounded like a large church or Cathedral (or would Bath have a Minster? I dunno). Great performances..
But the thing is, I wouldn't have bothered normally...its just that the quality of the broadcast captured the atmosphere you get in those places..all echoey and some reverb in the air. In the end, I learnt something about a different kind of music.
Job done then.

Marco

22-06-2008, 20:44

Interesting. Sounds like you had a good session :smoking:

Radio is (and always has) been a great source for discovering new music. If you ignore sound quality DAB is great for that purpose - the amount of different stations available is incredible.

I used to enjoy listening to BBC Radio 6 as there was always some interesting music on there. In the end however the shocking (bright and thin) sound quality did my head in and I sold the DAB tuner and bought some LPs with the proceeds! :)

I'd like to get a Magnum Dynalab or perhaps a good Leak Troughline with decoder at some point, providing of course that analogue radio is still available then.

Marco.

SteveW

23-06-2008, 07:21

My feeling is that FM radio will be around for a long long time.
DAB hasn't taken off. The quality is dubious, and coverage poor.
Majority of car radios continue to be FM, and few have the DAB option.

Think the broadcasting authorities were wildly optimistic when they first set out target dates..and these were based on a ground swell of acceptance that hasn't happened.

I also understand that the sampling quality is little better than mp3.

Hence..thats why I got a Ron Smith aerial whilst Ron is still making them. For a while there I was looking at DAB.
Now getting 58 dbuv from the Galaxie in the loft, compared with 40 from the roof mounted aerials I also have. The difference is astonishing. Mind you..its a big old bugger.

By the way, Infidelity in Kingston have a Kremlin selling for £650. Not bad for something that used to be nearly 4 times that.

Steve

Togil

23-06-2008, 07:39

Unfortunately they are hoping DAB stations will be listened to through TVs.

The other awful thing about DAB is that the portables are useless as the battery runs out within a few hours

Marco

23-06-2008, 07:50

Steve,

I tend to agree with you about FM radio. And like you say the groundswell of acceptance hasn't happened, which is quite refreshing as the general public are normally like sheep and simply follow the latest trends whether they are actually any better or not! :mental:

DAB is just plain shit. It's another example of convenience over quality in hi-fi which really does not appeal to my purist sensibilities.

Ron Smiths are fabulous things and I'm sure you're getting some lovely sounding music through your Kremlin. If I was in the market now for a tuner I might have been tempted by the one in Infidelity. However I have other priorities at the moment, namely modifying my valve amp.

Have you ever thought about getting into valves, Steve? It'll be interesting to see what you think when you come over. You'll even have the opportunity to compare my Yaqin to the ECS/Stealth monoblocks you so loved over at JW's. I think you'll be in for a surprise :)

Marco.

P.S Tony has gone very quiet regarding this high definition format thingy. Come on, Tony, I asked you some questions. Let's have some answers please!

nat8808

27-08-2008, 19:43

Just to chip in - the BBC have had digital converters at their transmitters for years and are low bit like 14 bit or so (maybe they've changed them now?), the transmitted signal being created from the digital signal. I also recently read an article in an old Hifi News written by Alan Shaw (the Harbeth designer) talking about how the 'faults' of vinyl are also good psyco-acoustic techniques to make things sound good to a human (stuff to do with noise floors etc). Quite interesting .. Could explain much of the preference that people have for vinyl and FM radio over some digital - Digital could actually be allowing our sensitive ears/brains to realise what has been recorded is not real, whereas analogue can provided psyco-acoustic distractions to mask the un-reality (and therefore be interpretted as more real) afterall, real life involves our ears/brains having to sort through a load of distracting information to focus on what is important at the time - to do that while listening to music that shouldn't really be there in our living rooms will make our brains feel at home so to speak.

My small experience with different transports demonstrated a large difference [sic] between the sound of a Meridian 200 Transport and 602 transport into a 601 processor (might have been a Cello Series 8 DAC actually, can't remember). The 200 had a much more 'weedy' sound - thinner, less weight, smaller soundstage. The 602 was more bloom-y, sweeter, wider sound, felt more real. I was surprised at the difference and makes me wonder if there's a (used) transport I should try that will raise the bar again by the same margin.

nat8808

27-08-2008, 19:56

Just to add, most of the stations I can pick up on DAB in central London just play the usual cheesy pap.. Seems to be being used to provide more MOR commercial stations. 6 Music is good though once you're out of the prime-time slots at least.

I mourn the days of proper, run by Robert Smith of the Cure, XFM when it was made up of speciality music shows, wide, wide range of music styles with DJs who were into each genre and playing mostly non-mainstream music. Oh well, ratings and money flow wins the day..

lurcher

27-08-2008, 21:18

Just to chip in - the BBC have had digital converters at their transmitters for years and are low bit like 14 bit or so (maybe they've changed them now?), the transmitted signal being created from the digital signal. I also recently read an article in an old Hifi News written by Alan Shaw (the Harbeth designer) talking about how the 'faults' of vinyl are also good psyco-acoustic techniques to make things sound good to a human (stuff to do with noise floors etc). Quite interesting .. Could explain much of the preference that people have for vinyl and FM radio over some digital - Digital could actually be allowing our sensitive ears/brains to realise what has been recorded is not real, whereas analogue can provided psyco-acoustic distractions to mask the un-reality (and therefore be interpretted as more real) afterall, real life involves our ears/brains having to sort through a load of distracting information to focus on what is important at the time - to do that while listening to music that shouldn't really be there in our living rooms will make our brains feel at home so to speak.

Yep, I have thought that for some time (about why analog that is in theory definatly inferior for red book CD, doesn't work as well as vinyl). I still keep coming back to this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley

BTW, 14 bits gives you more than 80dB S/N so enough for any tuner

StanleyB

27-08-2008, 21:48

BTW, 14 bits gives you more than 80dB S/N so enough for any tuner
Some of the 1st generation CD players that entered the hifi market in 1983/84 were 12 bit players. They sounded just fine.

lurcher

27-08-2008, 22:52

Some of the 1st generation CD players that entered the hifi market in 1983/84 were 12 bit players. They sounded just fine.

Yep, one of the games I can play with the CPLD in my dac is truncate the word length, I suspect the folks who crave for 24 bit reproduction might be a bit upset how 15 and 14 bit sounds,

Are you sure about the 12 bit? I know the early Phlips (Sony and Meridian) machines used 4 times oversampling with cunning noise shaping and 14 bit DACs

leo

27-08-2008, 23:43

Are you sure about the 12 bit? I know the early Phlips (Sony and Meridian) machines used 4 times oversampling with cunning noise shaping and 14 bit DACs

I think your right, I rescued an old Philips CD101 which has a pair of TDA1540's, I thought those was one of the oldest in commercial units.
Could be wrong though:)

Mr. C

28-08-2008, 08:25

When the original red book format was being finialised, differences between Sony and Phillips engineers happened over the Finial bit rate (which was indeed 14 bit) Phillips in the end getting their way!
I would agree with some of Lurcher comments on 14 bit resolution, some of the studio's we deal with still use a 14 bit mastering kit from time to time to obtain that 'specific' sound for various artists and bands. It does sound good too!
Personally I prefer 32 and 64 bit depth recordings (those these are very rare and we do have equipment that can reproduce this), purely down to the amount of information available that can 'paint the picture properly' when you hear these compared to red book it does make you realise how far red book is off the pace.
Interesting thread too.
Regards T.

lurcher

28-08-2008, 08:58

Personally I prefer 32 and 64 bit depth recordings (those these are very rare and we do have equipment that can reproduce this), purely down to the amount of information available that can 'paint the picture properly' when you hear these compared to red book it does make you realise how far red book is off the pace. Interesting thread too.

64 bit? Are you suggesting you have analog equipment that can resolve a S/N ratio of 387dB. Thats a ratio greater than 20000000000000000000 to 1.

What ADC or DAC are you using in that chain?

Or do you mean equipment that processes internally to 64bit precision?

Marco

29-08-2008, 09:05

Personally I prefer 32 and 64 bit depth recordings (those these are very rare and we do have equipment that can reproduce this), purely down to the amount of information available that can 'paint the picture properly' when you hear these compared to red book it does make you realise how far red book is off the pace.Interesting thread too.

Hi Tony,

You may be right, but we'll see what happens when I hear the Bel Canto DAC Steve will be auditioning, against my Sony! ;)

The CDPs built-in one was nothing to write home about...

All will be reported (as usual) on the forum :)

Marco.

StanleyB

29-08-2008, 12:59

Yep, one of the games I can play with the CPLD in my dac is truncate the word length, I suspect the folks who crave for 24 bit reproduction might be a bit upset how 15 and 14 bit sounds,

Are you sure about the 12 bit? I know the early Phlips (Sony and Meridian) machines used 4 times oversampling with cunning noise shaping and 14 bit DACs
Unfortunately for me, I was the guy selected by the repair company I worked for in the 80's (remember Lasky's?) to go on the various training courses and come back to train up the other staff. Sticks in my head as a sore thumb. The 12 bit players I remember are the Hitachi and the Fisher, which had the CD eject mechanism that pushed the CD upwards.

The 1st noted 14 bit player was the 14 bit, 4X oversampling Marantz.

lurcher

29-08-2008, 14:16

Unfortunately for me, I was the guy selected by the repair company I worked for in the 80's (remember Lasky's?) to go on the various training courses and come back to train up the other staff. Sticks in my head as a sore thumb. The 12 bit players I remember are the Hitachi and the Fisher, which had the CD eject mechanism that pushed the CD upwards.

The 1st noted 14 bit player was the 14 bit, 4X oversampling Marantz.

Ok, the one I was thinking of and have seen was based on the CD104

StanleyB

29-08-2008, 15:31

Ok, the one I was thinking of and have seen was based on the CD104
That came years later. Before that you had the CD100, CD101, and the CD303. I still got two CD104 laser unit. One is BINB. Might dump it on fleebay.

lurcher

29-08-2008, 16:43

I still got two CD104 laser unit. One is BINB. Might dump it on fleebay.

I might know someone who would be interested in that. I can ask him if you like?

StanleyB

29-08-2008, 17:14

I might know someone who would be interested in that. I can ask him if you like?
Sure, why not? I might even have the CDM-2 service manual as well.

lurcher

29-08-2008, 18:41

Sure, why not? I might even have the CDM-2 service manual as well.

Ok, I will pass the info on.

electric beach

02-07-2009, 23:03

Having read this thread I decided to try a quick experiment. I'm involved in the print industry and my company makes inks for printing CDs, so we get involved with the technicalities of producing inks that don't effect the spin of discs. A (musician but non-hifi) colleague argued the case for the superior ability of Blue Ray laser to read red book Cds. In theory this technology development needs to be highly accurate to read the smaller HD 'braille'. In theory the Blue Ray laser should read the disc extremely well. Sounded like heresy but...

I connected a PS3 and sat back expecting the worst. I was not disappointed. While quite dynamic, there was little soundstage or natural tone for a start. No bass, no finesse. The DAC would be voiced for games and films for one and with the R&D and hardware budget for the laser assembly I would imagine that nothing else in there is HiFi quality i.e. master clock.

I bought a cheap optical cable for a test, rigged up my MF TriVista DAC21 - and I can't turn it off!

My transport is usually a Consonance Linear 120, times like it has no right to but obviously does have it's shortcomings like any £800 player, so maybe I'm merely hearing the PS3 as a transport highlighting these faults and doing them better, while I'm missing the weaknesses. But it's sounding really dynamic, detailed, holographic with excellent instrument seperation and it's so musical it's just grooving like a bastard!

I feel guilty!! Can anyone bring me back down to earth with a counter experience or if you have the wherewithall, put a PS3 through your DAC for a second opinion. Maybe it just feeds the DAC21 what it needs and it's a synergy thing but I haven't even tweaked yet!!??