Blu ray player as cd transport

[ranjeetrain]

Let me join this controversial topic.

And how does a computer fare as a transport (USB input) compared to professional CD player, and a retail CD player?

I used to be in the camp that transport doesn't make a difference. This perception took a long time to change. Though I would not like to go ahead with posting my results on a public site unless I have subjected myself to DBT, but I have a feeling I will be able to pick the difference consistently.

On the other hand I think I might just post my test, and leave the result to people or till I can get it validated by taking a DBT with the help of friends. Let's see, till then I would say, I have heard transport making a difference.

 

[Dr.Kumar]

Kaushik,

All the error correction for data reading happens in the drive, none of it happens outside of it. Moreover, the Audio CD's do not have any separate error correction data like a normal Data CD. Audio CD's use full 2352 bytes per block (data cd uses 2048 bytes per block) and it has good amount of redundant data to interpolate erroneous data. The error correction systems are quite elaborate. Cyclic Redundancy correction used in CD's achieve correction rates above 99.9985%.

It used to be a very big deal for error correction and accurate reading 30 years back. Not so much in last decade or so. Drives are fast, more accurate, and better algorithms have made reading the data more easy. Moreover, The Accurate Stream technology implemented in modern drives makes errors a thing of past. Almost all the drives manufactured in last 5 years at least have the Accurate stream. Even PC data drives have it.

None of the player manufactures make their own drives. They just pickup the standard drives from OEM's. Most likely, the drive used in a high end player is same as the one sold in Walmart for $40. It's a moot point to talk about a particular player has better correction compared to others.

So if I pick up any good budget blu ray player and use it as a cd transport it ought to be good as any other? After all if it can read blu ray, it ought to be able to read cd correct?

 

[tirthankar]

Well, our views come with our own listening + Understanding how things work. I have compared Panasonic bdp-210, Pioneer DV79 and Marantz DV8400 in my setup. I don't understand why people have to bring in their setup into the arguments for these kind of things. I guess it helps bragging and the transport is actually a point to brag about. I won't say whether my analog chain is high quality (I leave that to others), but its quite decent comprising of Studio Monitors and Adcom Amp along with proper room treatments.

Which one make sense? Its just the digital data and getting transferred through a cable. People are trying to find differences when there is actually none.

Firstly .. if you look at my signature you will see that I don't have anything super high end. Just a mid-fi system optimized the way I like it. Neither is the transport I use anything extra ordinary. It is something used by thousands of people. So the argument of bragging about my system is invalid.
But still I can hear differences in transports on my system and hearing transports on systems thousands of times resolving than mine have only made things clearer.
Secondly, the two most important things on a transport are the clock and the power supply. Replace those two with something high quality and you can use anything capable of reading digital data reliably as a high quality transport.. including blu ray players. On off the shelf disc spinners these two are almost always compromised, by using cheap digital smps and cheap Chinese clocks. That's where those things fall short.

Error correction in software systems and error correction on audio systems are markedly different. In a software system you have garbled data at the recipient end and you can just read data again on request by the recipient. In audio systems it is a one way flow.. once the data is given and is out of the buffer (if any) there is no option for the recipient but to fill up missing bits with something to its fancy. Too many re reads will cause high jitter which is even more harmful. That's where accuracy of data read and transported to the DAC comes into play.

I don't undermine anyone's personal system. But nothing can open our eyes (ears) to the intricacies of audio more than listening to it on a high end well optimized setup.

 

[canchi]

From what I could glean out of the discussion above, if you take the DAC out of the equation, it all boils down to the hardware. What is that difference in the hardware of a cd player which makes it a better transport, a better laser and the like? OR is it the synergy between the hardware and its in-built circuitry and DAC that makes it a better player ?

 

[gobble]

Well, our views come with our own listening + Understanding how things work. I have compared Panasonic bdp-210, Pioneer DV79 and Marantz DV8400 in my setup.

All three are so budgety theres likely no significant difference between them hyeah: Besides one has to be born with high-end ears ...

Face it man! You are hopelessly middle class (ok just kidding!!)

I don't understand why people have to bring in their setup into the arguments for these kind of things. I guess it helps bragging and the transport is actually a point to brag about.

Because the proof of the pudding is in the hearing. What credibility will a poster have if he makes a claim based on a 5 minute listen versus reminding people that he owns one and listens to it night and day.

Its just the digital data and getting transferred through a cable. People are trying to find differences when there is actually none.

You and me and a whole bunch in the pro transport camp have our differences I guess ... but I didnt have to struggle hard to find them ...

As a reminder its not just digital data we are talking about but the timing and jitter and EMI and RF influencing it when moving the bits .... there have been numerous threads in the past debating this on HFV

--G0bble

 

[manoj.p]

Firstly .. if you look at my signature you will see that I don't have anything super high end. Just a mid-fi system optimized the way I like it. Neither is the transport I use anything extra ordinary. It is something used by thousands of people. So the argument of bragging about my system is invalid.

Sorry for coming across that way. But many times, I have been asked questions about the quality of setup and that trips me off. Something like you have to prove every time.

But still I can hear differences in transports on my system and hearing transports on systems thousands of times resolving than mine have only made things clearer.
Secondly, the two most important things on a transport are the clock and the power supply. Replace those two with something high quality and you can use anything capable of reading digital data reliably as a high quality transport.. including blu ray players. On off the shelf disc spinners these two are almost always compromised, by using cheap digital smps and cheap Chinese clocks. That's where those things fall short.

This is where most of the manufacturer's throw the marketing bits. No manufacturer designs their own drive. All the time, they choose what is available off the shelf. About the clocks, the drive's clock is hardly used during playback. It's the DAC clock that matters. Same thing about SMPS. SMPS does not affect anything as long as we are playing in the digital domain. SMPS may matter in the analog stage. But these things are so much progressed in last 10~15 years and designs have been much robust.

Error correction in software systems and error correction on audio systems are markedly different. In a software system you have garbled data at the recipient end and you can just read data again on request by the recipient. In audio systems it is a one way flow.. once the data is given and is out of the buffer (if any) there is no option for the recipient but to fill up missing bits with something to its fancy. Too many re reads will cause high jitter which is even more harmful. That's where accuracy of data read and transported to the DAC comes into play.

None of the players do software error correction. Robust software error correction uses online connection to the databases to get info on missing bits. EAC does have it and people use it during ripping.
But the data on the disc + drive itself is able to get correct data 99.9985% using CRC etc, which is pretty high itself. For missing data, the interpolation and concealment algorithms within the drive are pretty good as well.

About the jitter - I am not sure what's it is. No one knows what jitter sounds like and how to listen for it. But there is a big talk about it. Jitter is the timing mis alignment error and is measured in picoseconds. Hardly audible.

I don't undermine anyone's personal system. But nothing can open our eyes (ears) to the intricacies of audio more than listening to it on a high end well optimized setup.

Agree with this. But things remain as scientific ever. All we have to do is keep our eyes open and understand.

Please take my comments more as discussions and not as personal attack (it tends to happen because of the quotes used) I just mean to put forth the facts.

 

[manoj.p]

All three are so budgety theres likely no significant difference between them hyeah: Besides one has to be born with high-end ears ...

Face it man! You are hopelessly middle class (ok just kidding!!)

Agree with you completely. I am middle class and hence hopelessly hopeless. :yahoo:

On a serious note, the reason I acquired the Marantz and Pioneer is hoping that there would a difference going from a BD player. But alas, there wasn't none if used as a transport. There is a difference if I use analog out. Better be - cause these players are quite expensive compared to $150 Panasonic player.

As a reminder its not just digital data we are talking about but the timing and jitter and EMI and RF influencing it when moving the bits .... there have been numerous threads in the past debating this on HFV

--G0bble

Well, as long as we are in digital domain, EMI/RF should not matter at all. I know there has been lots of discussions about it. But no scientific tests have shown yet that EMI/RF alters the digital bits. About jitter, less said is better.

 

[manoj.p]

So if I pick up any good budget blu ray player and use it as a cd transport it ought to be good as any other? After all if it can read blu ray, it ought to be able to read cd correct?

Yes. If you want to know, I am using my panasonic blu-ray player with HDMI out for playing CD's.

 

[gobble]

Well, as long as we are in digital domain, EMI/RF should not matter at all. I know there has been lots of discussions about it. But no scientific tests have shown yet that EMI/RF alters the digital bits. About jitter, less said is better.

It affects the clocking ...

--G

 

[manoj.p]

It affects the clocking ...

--G

No, it doesn't, as long as dac clock is master.

 

[reignofchaos]

For the dac clock to be the master, won't you need a clock input in your transport? How else will you feed it an accurate clock? SPDIF does not have a channel for an independent clock - the clock is embedded in the data and that is the cause of all the mess.