Printable View
This is, to my mind, the main theoretical advantage of music computers over CDs. Everything else being equal (and there's obviously a debate about that), removing the error correction built into CD playback should make things simpler. And I subscribe to the opinion that solutions should be as simple as you can make them.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexM
Hi Paul,
Yes, I guess that's exactly what it is. It certainly does the job, though!Quote:
This is merely a competently implemented computer dedicated to audio. I guess the reasons it sound better are likely linear power supplies and a particularly good cpu/board with well implemented software.
I've never said that the ingredients making up the TFS are revolutionary, far from it. However, the important things for me are that it sounds superb, and it's extremely user-friendly because it requires no technical computer knowledge whatsoever to operate it. Furthermore, the TFS is a neat 'all in one box' solution, without there being the need for a multitude of computer-related paraphernalia cluttering up my room.
I simply just control its functions from the screen on my laptop, which I already use every day, thus I don't need to buy any unwanted 'gadgetry'! All of that is crucially important to me :)
Yup - I'll be doing that later, now that I've got some cables long enough to go between the TFS and my preamp.Quote:
I think you need to listen to some 24/196 downloads before passing judgement on final quality.
There isn't a large difference. Perhaps my enthusiasm for the TFS, and all the new music it's allowed me access to, has clouded the reality slightly... Returning to my Sony CDP, and playing the original discs the files were ripped from, does not result in a case of 'Aw gawd, I can't listen to that anymore!' - far from it.Quote:
Also I am slightly perplexed by such a large difference between your CD performance and the streamed rips.
The ripped files, played through the TFS, do sound better, but the Sony still does a superb job reproducing music on CDs, albeit in the process sounding simply like a very good CDP player, whereas the TFS removes an artifice that, to my ears, is present in ALL CDPs I've heard, regardless of cost, which makes the listening experience more akin to that of when playing the best audiophile vinyl pressings on my T/T.
The effect is difficult to put into words, but those who own a top-notch T/T and file-based source (such as the likes of John, music room mod, and Clive) will know exactly what I mean. The TFS has a musical 'playability factor', and a way of getting to the fundamental core of what's present on digital recordings, like no CDP I've heard is capable of doing - and I've owned and heard some very good ones indeed.
Lol - no, it definitely isn't that! Trust me the Sony DAC is stunningly good. Please remember that it's choc-a-bloc full of the best modern components, after having been extensively modified by Audiocom, therefore it's not really 'old', in that sense. It simply combines the best of old and new technologies. Anyway, hopefully my explanation above helps you understand more about what it is I'm hearing.Quote:
This is likely down to transport derived jitter which would suggest your old Sony isn't so great in electrical terms.
Precisely. And that's why I'm using the TFS with my own DAC, although later I'll be revisiting using the built-in DAC of the TFS, with high-res files.Quote:
Also bear in mind a good modern DAC will be better in reducing jitter than 25 year old designs even with component modifications. I don't think the TFS dac is likely to be state of the Art. That is why the 'transport' version with dedicated dac will be the more desirable solution.
Bear in mind that I've compared the Sony to quite a few modern high-end DACs, and I've always preferred its way of music-making. Do you think that I'd be hanging onto it if I could simply go out and buy a modern DAC that easily outperformed it? If that was the case I'd do it, as within reason, cost isn't an issue.
Both the first and second times we've exhibited at Scalford, my Sony DAC was at the heart of the digital side of our system, on both occasions in conjunction with Steve Toy's (then) Bel Canto CDP, and we produced some superb sounds, which I'm sure anyone who was there and who can remember our demonstration, would attest to.
Nope, the Sony is staying put as my main DAC. What I have to decide now is whether the built-in DAC in the TFS is good enough for streaming high-res files, or whether I need to buy a better modern high-end DAC for that job. In that respect, all will be revealed in due course! :cool:
Marco.
A comment on hi def from me....I'm struggling with some it. Some is really great, I'm hearing really deep into the mix, atmosphere is fabulous. Other stuff though is can be quite poor in that I can hear limitations of the original recording or just plain bad mixing. This is with both new and old material. It seems some of the hi def material is "juiced up" to sound extra vivid but if the recording can't take it's rough, usually only a few notes at a time. So the extra resolution requires some care.
I totally get what Marco is saying
In the past I could listen to digital music as long as I did not hear my TT now I can swap and interchange them as much as I want 3 months ago if you asked me what was my favourite medium it would of been vinyl but now I just enjoy both . Also like Marco I want approach that easy and fits into my life
Do any of the TFS users know why I'm not getting any sound after switching from using the Sony DAC to the internal one in the TFS?
I've simply unplugged the digital coaxial cable, connecting my DAC to the TFS, and connected a pair of stereo interconnects from the Audio Out sockets on the back of the TFS to a line input on my preamp.
Result - no sound... :scratch:
Does the TFS have to be reconfigured in some way, so that sound comes out of the internal DAC?
Any help appreciated - cheers! :cool:
Marco.
What do the instructions say?
Or perhaps it doesn't come with any?
Lol - I don't have any.
Marco.
Have you tried rebooting it?
Marco, are you ripping to flac or wav? would be interested on your thoughts on the relative merits of each on such a source
I still think vinyl has a slight edge despite all my digital ranting. It's not even been a matter of how much the system cost; the record players I've heard and thought excellent have has such painstaking effort put into getting everything just so, this, and this has to me made the difference between a good system and, well very nice but, systems.
I never liked CD.
To my mind the great thing about file based audio and servers such as this, assuming the reported performance is accurate, is the cost v performance ratio.
I've seen thousands of pounds chucked at vinyl replay and later heard it demolished by a few hundred pounds worth of computer bits. This for me anyway is one of the great things about file based audio you can achieve stunning sound at a fraction of the cost of a top performing record player and this puts high quality audio within reach of a great many people who just couldn't afford the equivalent sounding record setup.
It really doesn't matter whether vinyl or file gives ultimately the best replay, what matters is a greater number of people can have access to excellent sound quality at an affordable price.
Anything that helps to reduce the "I've got such and such" snobbery and "it cost loads and because you cant afford it you cant have the same quality play back" has got to be a winner for everyone, except the snobs of course, and hopefully encourage a new generation of listeners who really do care about the quality of sound rather than impressing others with what they've bought.