advertisement


CD Transport, does it make much of a difference?

How about this? If you have a jittery system then x can be different every time you acquire it. X can be 2 and 3. It's just one bit.

For those old enough to remember the Watts DustBug for LPs, maybe if your CDP is a wee bit on the jittery side, you should consider a JitterBug?

(I guess you'd have to be even older to remember that one... :) )
 
i did try my dvd player as a transport agnst my bel canto cd2 once, it was horrible
the bel canto was way more natural , currently have upgraded this to an msb cd 4 transport which is even better . more definition to sound and piano sounds really good although the cd2 is brilliant too [using bel canto dac and coherant 5d xlr digital]
 
This is a 'why do dogs lick their balls' question.
Keith.
Exactly what my Fundamental truth thread was trying to address.:)
Well, 'sincere' apologies to those who seem to think this sort of question shouldn't be asked - perhaps those of us who are just learning about this stuff should learn to be happy with our lot and just shut our gobs eh!

Anyway, thanks to everyone else who has helped by offering constructive comments, even if they conflict/contradict some of the others :D

From reading all this and doing a bit of research it seems to me that it's probably sensible to say yes transports will make a difference.

So, given I'm accepting that and want to keep my eyes open for a decently priced (say less than £300, preferably *a lot* less) transport that might give me a better bang than my CD52 II SE would the following be a good starting point (the list is based on transports mentioned in this thread):

  • Sony CDP-XB930 QS
  • Modded Philips player e.g. CD-940/CD-930 (with CDM9 transport as detailed on the Lampizator website, clunky page that!)
  • Meridian 206
  • Audiolab 8000 CDM
  • Marantz CD6000 KI
  • Wadia? (any specific models?)
  • Arcam 170
Have I missed any/anything I should add?
 
I know that we can't host needledrops or any recordings on PFM, but there is nothing to stop 2 or more individuals exchanging emails and then emailing privately between themselves. It may technically be illegal but I don't think that a couple of 30-second clips exchanged between individuals would be anybody's priority to prosecute even in the unlikely event of being able to detect it. It leaves Tony in the clear too, as once they are using their own emails it's no longer his concern.
 
Steve, surely just making a homemade recording of the human voice, copyrightable only to yourself would be good enough for the purpose, surely no one could have any problem with that?
 
I know that we can't host needledrops or any recordings on PFM, but there is nothing to stop 2 or more individuals exchanging emails and then emailing privately between themselves.
You can do it legally via a thread on the Audiosmile forum.

Paul
 
If you will insist on fetishising such about-to-break Dark Age platter claptrap, I would recommend the Meridian 500 Mk II or III: the best £150-400 CD transport I know.
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-5...0001&campid=5338728743&icep_item=280985269720
Thanks, now that didn't hurt too much did it ... :p

... although the £450.00 auction price on that one with a few days still to go might, and certainly breaks the £300 barrier mentioned above!
But maybe audition some 24/192 remasters via a good USB DAC first!
Happy listening . . .
I have/I am, as I believe I explained earlier in the thread it's not an either/or thing, I just want to have the option of playing CDs in a decent transport as well as streaming from my macbook/pc and ... being positively pre-historic by using my turntable.

It might make good business sense for you to evangelise about streaming but when you start to step over the line (even in others perception) into being sarky and dismissive it perhaps doesn't do so much for the business!

All praise the great god of steaming eh ... praise him, praise him! :rolleyes: ;)
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
I've been experimenting with this idea recently. A cheap and nasty unbranded DVD player sounded fantastic when fed via coaxial input to my Beresford Bushmaster (which is a remarkable DAC for the money) yet when my CDS2/XPS took over I was catapulted into another musical world entirely. It's a shame that the CDS2 doesn't have a digital output for me to find out what causes this. Was this purely due to the fact that the Naim DAC was massively better or was the Naim transport (well Phillips actually) better too?
 
Scott you would really need a cd player with a digital 'in' at the moment you are simply not comparing like for like.
Through the same dac,both optical and hard disc transports should sound the same.
Keith.
 
Scott you would really need a cd player with a digital 'in' at the moment you are simply not comparing like for like.
Through the same dac,both optical and hard disc transports should sound the same.
Keith.

I accept that in entirety Keith. It's the Naim DAC that I'm addicted to (and the CDS2 has a great one)!
 
I've been experimenting with this idea recently. A cheap and nasty unbranded DVD player sounded fantastic when fed via coaxial input to my Beresford Bushmaster (which is a remarkable DAC for the money) yet when my CDS2/XPS took over I was catapulted into another musical world entirely. It's a shame that the CDS2 doesn't have a digital output for me to find out what causes this. Was this purely due to the fact that the Naim DAC was massively better or was the Naim transport (well Phillips actually) better too?

Largely, but of course the transport was playing a significant role in that, too: the Naim DAC is better than the Bushmaster, and the Naim transport is better than the cheap DVD player: you were hearing the net effect of both upgrades.
 
It's quite easy to measure the difference the transport makes though a DAC. Even DACs which implement jitter reduction systems show some measurable differences with various S/PDIF sources.

However, the differences are tiny. I mean really tiny, tiny tiny...

The differences should be very significantly below audibility.
 
Thanks, now that didn't hurt too much did it ... :p

... although the £450.00 auction price on that one with a few days still to go might, and certainly breaks the £300 barrier mentioned above!

I have/I am, as I believe I explained earlier in the thread it's not an either/or thing, I just want to have the option of playing CDs in a decent transport as well as streaming from my macbook/pc and ... being positively pre-historic by using my turntable.

It might make good business sense for you to evangelise about streaming but when you start to step over the line (even in others perception) into being sarky and dismissive it perhaps doesn't do so much for the business!

All praise the great god of steaming eh ... praise him, praise him! :rolleyes: ;)

The auction linked was at £450, but includes the DAC, too . . . the transport only comes up on eBay semi-regularly at £150-400: right on the money. It sounds great, but any machine of that vintage will have some kind of failure in its sights at some point in the near future.

I thought I had pushed my comments about the Dark Ages far enough into parody - and combined it with a helpful recommendation - to have made clear that I wasn't being sarky or dismissive: you're a potential customer: I wouldn't be nasty to you!
 
Transports were - still are - a hard sell: the 'bits are bits' perception lingers. Perversely it's much easier to sell a USB cable than a better computer: a monstrous example of a sticking plaster on a broken leg!

Dealers with sense concentrate on selling DACs - all of which claim to homogenise transports anyways. We sell far more DACs than anything else, so we have a vested interest in supporting the status quo.

But the reality is that digital transports play an inescapably important role in a system: not a major role, like speakers - not even a major role in the source - but they're at least as influential as interconnects and speaker cable, for instance.
 
Well, 'sincere' apologies to those who seem to think this sort of question shouldn't be asked - perhaps those of us who are just learning about this stuff should learn to be happy with our lot and just shut our gobs eh!

Anyway, thanks to everyone else who has helped by offering constructive comments, even if they conflict/contradict some of the others :D

From reading all this and doing a bit of research it seems to me that it's probably sensible to say yes transports will make a difference.

So, given I'm accepting that and want to keep my eyes open for a decently priced (say less than £300, preferably *a lot* less) transport that might give me a better bang than my CD52 II SE would the following be a good starting point (the list is based on transports mentioned in this thread):

  • Sony CDP-XB930 QS
  • Modded Philips player e.g. CD-940/CD-930 (with CDM9 transport as detailed on the Lampizator website, clunky page that!)
  • Meridian 206
  • Audiolab 8000 CDM
  • Marantz CD6000 KI
  • Wadia? (any specific models?)
  • Arcam 170
Have I missed any/anything I should add?

Hi, your original question is a perfectly valid one and please read my reply in post 19.
The question you asked should be asked but the answer must be yes all DAC outputs are different and will sound different, not yes they are, oh no they're not and so on into infinity.:)
 
The auction linked was at £450, but includes the DAC, too . . . the transport only comes up on eBay semi-regularly at £150-400: right on the money. It sounds great, but any machine of that vintage will have some kind of failure in its sights at some point in the near future.
Aye to be fair that's true it does include the DAC.

Yup, have just replaced the drawer load mechanism on the 52 which is a known weakness so there are failures but I don't see any other problems with these being highlighted so far, maybe some players are more prone to major failures?
I thought I had pushed my comments about the Dark Ages far enough into parody - and combined it with a helpful recommendation - to have made clear that I wasn't being sarky or dismissive: you're a potential customer: I wouldn't be nasty to you!
Exactly and indeed you did but without a smiley in there the comments were ambiguous which, as I pointed out, some potential customers might read in a different way. I'm long enough in the tooth on forums, if not this one, not to loose any sleep about comments one way or the other but this forum can be a trice irritating sometimes when the 1% of willy waving, 'I've found the righteous path and all must follow and I'll argue the toss until they do' types get going and I guess I was showing some irritation at the fact there's another thread criticising the fact I started this one. Don't get me wrong though; a. many/most people here are fantastic, more knowledgeable than me and incredibly helpful, and b. in the greater scheme of things I don't ultimately care what the 1% say :p

Anyway, any other bargain "dark-age" players to look out for? :cool:

P.S. I often overuse smileys :rolleyes: ;)
 


advertisement


Back
Top