advertisement


CD Transport, does it make much of a difference?

The Weiss MAN 301 plays CDs directly of the same file from a NAS they sound identical as you would expect, re the SBT I have a couple here, I don't use them in the main system, but I did use a MAC /dac before the MAN was introduced.
Keith.
 
But that is ultimately the same source playing cd's and files, so its not surprising that cd's and streamed files sound the same. I'm talking about comparing a dedicated cd transport with a laptop, that is not 'dedicated' to audio by any means, or a squeezebox, which is dedicated but decidedly budget.

It should be said however that I haven't messed around with different audio players etc (my Audivarna trial ran out before I got change to use it). So it may be that I can improve things.

I didn't come on to this thread looking for an argument about cd vs computer, just looking for advice on how to improve my computer source, since its a long way behind my cd/sacd transport.
 
Elephantears said:
If this is in relation to my discussion with Keith, this is not toslink, it is ST glass optical. The DAX Discrete does have toslink, but only for convenience on secondary sources, because its designer regarded it as inherently inferior.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is; ST / AT&T optical senders were the same solution that Deltec/DPA came to since it offers about 4x the bandwidth (20Mhz ish).

I was just drawing a line as to why standard optical is not a panacea when it it's just spdif data sent through a poor medium.
 
Elephantears said:
Try some experimenting. Perhaps you've not used a good cd transport for a while.

Or else my computer transport and streamer are just mediocre. Which is why I asked a question to item in the first place, asking in all sincerity how I can improve them.

I don't really understand why you are making this a priori point about transports when you yourself have said in other threads that the Squeezebox is a mediocre transport. This is not the first time I've pointed out this inconsistency in your point of view on transports.
Click to expand...

if you try them blind youll find there is no difference.

there cant be.
 
Since you get the same result from the SBT as the mac, it suggests the DAC is the problem. Either the optical input is its weak point - I don't know that DAC at all - or you don't like how the analog section has been voiced.

If you're using optical than nothing you do to the mac or SBT, is going to be of much use, as item's components are all to do with USB and forms of possible electrical interference which optical isolates the DAC from.
 
avole said:
Since you get the same result from the SBT as the mac, it suggests the DAC is the problem. Either the optical input is its weak point - I don't know that DAC at all - or you don't like how the analog section has been voiced.
Click to expand...

No, I love how the dac sounds, and it doesn't have an analogue section in the conventional sense, it outputs straight from the dac chip.

I've made it clear; cd transport sounds great, computer and squeeebox not so great, using the SAME INPUTS. Is it so difficult for people to conceive that my dedicated cd transports, one of which is specially reclocked, should sound better than a crappy laptop?

As I've said before though, my purpose here is not to argue but to ask how computers and budget streamers might be improved.
 
Alternatively, why not try without the EVO?

Have to say I've tried two CD players, one connected by coax and the other by toslink to a v-DAC, and a macbook using the optical out. All three sounded the same. Then connected the AE to the DAC and streamed wirelessly, again with a nul result.

Not relevant, to the thread, but using the AE's DAC produced an interesting result, in that the sound was definitely warmer, and not, in the end, unpleasant at all.

I don't have a particularly revealing system, by the way, so that may be part of it. The idea was for a non-fatiguing sound, at which it excels.
 
Andrew, are you using iTunes and what file type are you playing? Have you got all the setting correct at the computer end of things?

I personally have found that setting up a dedicated computer has brought improvements. Tiz by no means an expensive one, just built from well selected. full SSD components. IMHO it’s worth building a 'one off' for this purpose. In parts alone it cost me £450ish: Shuttle XS36V - £180. Crucial M4 512GB SSD - £235. Crucial 4GB RAM - £20. Plus PP. Software was additional; Windows 7 and JRMC17.


Another thing to make sure is volume/SPL levels are matched. Maybe download some form of audiotool for your iPad or Phone??
 
Raj, I would go for the dedicated computer option once I've heard evidence that a computer set-up can sound as good as cd through my DAC, but its not a USB optimised dac, so that might be a pipe dream. The usb-spdif conversion will have to be very good.

Regarding SSD, is this purely to reduce the noise of the spinning disc, or does it have other benefits? I say this as I've got a new Macbook Pro coming next week, but I'm wondering whether and Air would be better. I guess both are compromises from an audio point of view, but at least the Air is pure SSD.
 
IMHO the less moving parts the better, but there are ways of negating these effects by playing from memory in software’s. Personally I'm of the opinion that if the issue can be taken away rather than avoided then that's a better solution.

The USB to SPDIF conversion isn't a deal breaker or shouldn't be a difficult thing to achive with your DAC. Just pick the best you can find.
 
SSD won't make a difference in terms of audio performance, but if the noise of the hard disk bugs you, it will.

Why do you think a macbook pro would be compromised?
 
Elephant ears, are you decompressing files on the server or on the SBT. If you are doing it on the SBT then PC audio will likely sound worse than spdif input which does not have this computational overhead.

If you aren't using lossless compressed files from the PC, then ignore this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top