CD player or ext. DA-converter?

[spirovious]

I want to improve not only CD but also MP3.Wave.
Hence thought of DAC.

 

[ajinkya]

Hi All,

I was reading this thread with interest because I saw similar views on transport etc. in other audio articles. Recently Cyrus released their newest CD player with all the bells and whistles and hoopla.Their justification for the increased cost is that the transport in the player is much better, less error-correction required since they do everything at the analog stage of the laser reading itself, so the DAC is simpler to design et all.

So I have a simple observation to make: If the transport (CD reading in general) is the source of so many performance problems, why are we not shifting to hard disk based storage, eliminating the transport entirely. Store all your music as FLAC/WAV in one HDD. Connect that to a good DAC and I don't see why we can't have an excellent digital source, with much more capacity, at a much lower price point.

Now I'm sure someone will claim that even HDD have disk heads that read data and do error correction, so the advantage is nullified. If so, I'd first like technical proof that the disk reading operation which in today's drives is very precise (and is used in Google servers to transfer unbelievable volumes of data per second), is not precise enough for transporting bits at the speed and accuracy required for music reproduction in a DAC. And secondly, in what conditions this effect is noticeable in the final DAC output.

There are many more operations in this world much more complex than musical reproduction and they don't seem to have issues with using HDD based data sources.

-Jinx.

 

[gobble]

Now I'm sure someone will claim that even HDD have disk heads that read data and do error correction, so the advantage is nullified.

For a normal PC, the Operating systems read-write operations for its own running might create latency/jitter issues, but in the case of a dedicated music player with solid state drive with nothing but music files on it it should be fine right guys?

Here is a link to portable FLAC players (scroll down) FLAC - links

I particularly like the Rio Karma player and I think I'll pick it up in a few months http://www.digitalnetworksna.com/shop/_templates/item_main_Rio.asp?model=261

Cheers

 

[venkatcr]

Ajinkya:

To answer your question - if you are using WAV or FLAC files, they are bit-for-bit copy of the original CD. Converting all you CDs to either of these formats, and then playing them perpetually is the way of the future. I already have over 300GB of music, and I am slowly converting all my CDs. By middle of next year, it will be only FLAC files that will be played in my house. And if you use EAC, you are even sure of the quality. Though very slow, I think EAC is godsend for conversion. The new version even comes with in-built FLAC support. Wheeeeeeee !!

But like the world had a number nay sayers when we moved from tape/records to CD, we will have people who will stick to CD for some more time. This will happen till the commercial consideration will force producers to start distribution only as computer files.

Here is a link to portable FLAC players (scroll down) FLAC - links

I particularly like the Rio Karma player and I think I'll pick it up in a few months Rio Audio : Rio Karma 20GB Player

Now about portable players and even dedicated music server, I have a pet gripe. No offense to Gobble.

If you have a PC at home (not a laptop), you already have 100% of the processing capabilities needed to create and play music in computer format. Why create one more in the chain such as a media server or portable player?

Ok, you have a PC with 2TBs and all music stored. Now how do I send the music to the stereo system or to the HT system. Very simple - use a wireless router, and something like a Squeezebox. With something like one transmitter and two receivers, you can send the music to your stereo, and HT system whenever you want. Now very high end sound cards with excellent DACs are available. And these will cost you 1/10th of a good CD Player such as the Cyrus.

My point is instead of looking for and spending on more players and worrying about how to transport your files, does it not make sense to centralize all your files, improve the sound system in your PC, and then use a simple wireless router to play the music?

The iPOD became popular as a portable player. Suddenly it is being looked as a music source for a home system and Wadia in minting money to allow you to send the music back to where it came from. Hello people, the music is already there in your home, remember? That is where you moved it from to the iPOD. You just have to find a simple way to play it.

Cheers

 

[thevortex]

For a normal PC, the Operating systems read-write operations for its own running might create latency/jitter issues, but in the case of a dedicated music player with solid state drive with nothing but music files on it it should be fine right guys?

Here is a link to portable FLAC players (scroll down) FLAC - links

I particularly like the Rio Karma player and I think I'll pick it up in a few months Rio Audio : Rio Karma 20GB Player

Cheers

In a dedicated HTPC, the read-write operations for the OS on other functions is limited. It is solely going to be used for media related operations.

 

[thevortex]

I agree, Venkat. The PC is the way to go! And if your PC has a good enough soundcard (or you use a DAC) and it looks decent enough to be located in the same spot as your AV system, then you are eliminating the need for a transmitter or a Squeezebox!

 

[gobble]

If you have a PC at home (not a laptop), you already have 100% of the processing capabilities needed to create and play music in computer format. Why create one more in the chain such as a media server or portable player?

My PC is not going to be next to my audio setup. Also I don't want to boot up and login and deal with the messy interface of an OS and also consume another 100W/per hour of power in the process. BTW do we have 20m long SPDIF optical cables in the market?

My point is instead of looking for and spending on more players and worrying about how to transport your files, does it not make sense to centralize all your files, improve the sound system in your PC, and then use a simple wireless router to play the music?

Wireless transmission is lossy - packets get dropped. The sending station will back off transmission by a random few milliseconds if the "channel" is busy. Jitter Jitter ...

Regards

 

[gobble]

I agree, Venkat. The PC is the way to go! And if your PC has a good enough soundcard (or you use a DAC) and it looks decent enough to be located in the same spot as your AV system, then you are eliminating the need for a transmitter or a Squeezebox!

PC DACs are not considered of audiophile quality although you will read a lot of hype about them. correct me if I am wrong.

This is what my mobo has btw:

Realtek

I will test and let you folks know the difference between a dedicated player and the comp someday

 

[thevortex]

My PC is not going to be next to my audio setup. Also I don't want to boot up and login and deal with the messy interface of an OS and also consume another 100W/per hour of power in the process. BTW do we have 20m long SPDIF optical cables in the market?




Wireless transmission is lossy - packets get dropped. The sending station will back off transmission by a random few milliseconds if the "channel" is busy. Jitter Jitter ...

Regards

Your PC does not need to be 20 metres away from your HT setup. Thats why modern HTPC's look chic and are powered efficiently while also considering noise vibration factors. Believe me, this field has seen a lot of advancement. Just dont skimp while spending on cases. And about power consumption, I dont see why they would be seen as power crazy monsters. Take a look at some of the power supplies on the market which are rated at 80+ levels.

About wireless transmission I dont have much idea but I would think that if setup within a home network instances of loss in packets would be negligible. Maybe somebody with first hand experience can relate better.

 

[thevortex]

PC DACs are not considered of audiophile quality although you will read a lot of hype about them. correct me if I am wrong.

This is what my mobo has btw:

Realtek

I will test and let you folks know the difference between a dedicated player and the comp someday

Gobble - the Realtek is nothing much to speak of I am sorry to say. Also the Realtek is probably an onboard sound system. But there are better soundcards - far far better ones on the market. If you take an analog out from those soundcards and feed them into an AVR - even a high end AVR, you are in for a shock at the difference in quality. Better of course.

 

[venkatcr]

My PC is not going to be next to my audio setup. Also I don't want to boot up and login and deal with the messy interface of an OS and also consume another 100W/per hour of power in the process. BTW do we have 20m long SPDIF optical cables in the market?

Just don't put your PC off at all. That is what we do in offices, no? But of course you will add to the Electricity Bill. Just joking.

And regarding the cable, you certainly can get 20 meter optical cables.

Wireless transmission is lossy - packets get dropped. The sending station will back off transmission by a random few milliseconds if the "channel" is busy. Jitter Jitter ...

I don't want to get into a lengthy technical discussion here, but listen to what John Atkinson and Wes Philips have to say about the Squeezebox.

John Atkinson

"Comparing the original CD on the Ayre C-5xe disc player, its digital output driving the Levinson DAC via a 1m DH Labs AES/EBU link, with SlimServer feeding an Apple Losslessencoded file to the Squeezebox with its digital output feeding the Levinson via the AudioQuest OptiLink-5, I was hard-pressed to hear much of a difference. Perhaps there was an increased sense of authority to the sound of the CD played by the Ayre used as a transport, a better sense of extended low frequenciesbut when I'm not listening seriously, the difference is irrelevant. Even when I am listening seriously, I have to strain to hear that difference (as long as I'm not listening to lossy-compressed files)."

Wes Philips

"But when I'd mention how good my combo of Slim Devices Squeezebox and Musical Fidelity X-DACV3 sounded playing my Apple Lossless Compression (ALC) files, several of my audiopals would still demure. "Surely you're not suggesting that a $300 front-end can sound as good as your Ayre C-5xe universal player?" Well, perhaps notbut near enough to clearly be high-end, and more than enough to offer hours of listening pleasure. "

In any case, at the end of the day, as my mentioned in my previous post, this concept is my personal opinion. In any case, at home I have the PC and wireless network running nearly 24 hours a day. So it make no difference to me. To me a PC with a Squeezebox sounds like a elegant solution.

Cheers

 

[ajinkya]

I'm going to go one step further with this... Wireless transmission in today's homes with pre-N 802.11 standards will not affect audio quality in ANY way. You have a theoretical bandwidth of 108 Mbps...practical bandwidth of at least 50 Mbps. This is ample for lossless audio...ample also for negligible delay transmission. And the micro to millisecond exponential backoff is not going to be hear by your ear in any perceptible way.

I have seen a simple MediaLounge transmitting DVD quality files in my friend's home network from PC to TV. There was no jitter, no artifacts, no stutter to the frame rate. If it can send that over without any perceptible delay, I do not see why the same does not apply for audio. I also do not see why such a combination ( a dedicated music server connected to external great DAC) does not qualify as truly HiFi. I feel that this categorisation is in the minds of the reviewer, not the merits/demerits of the technology. Some 'audiophiles' are just resistant to technology change....reminds me of AM vrs FM, BetaMax vrs VHS and LP vrs CD all over again.

I for one, am now in process of converting all my music to HDD and then researching on a good media streamer and DAC, with a gigabit Lan at home.
I'll update all as and when good news happens.

-Jinx.

 

[Nishanth]

Hi,

I want to improve my current setup & stereo SQ.
current setup-

DVD player - Onida
AVR - Onkyo
Fronts - Tannoy mercury F1 custom

I was advised to have dedicated CD player.
I am offered Marantz CD-63 for Rs.8k appxox.
But I dont want to go for many players at a time.

My Q is-

1.If I purchase only external DA-converter (DAC),will it do the job of CD player to improve SQ?
2.Is my idea to connect DAC with coax of DVD player will do the job?
3.Do DAC improve evenif I connect DVD player with analoge output?
4.Is marantz CD-63 a better SH option?

Why I choose DAC is that I can connect it to portable VCD player also.

So pls. guide me.

I would suggest you to visit a CA dealer with your DVD player and some CDs for auditioning. Try listening to your CDs on 3 different kinds of setups that I have mentioned below

1. Your DVD Player + AVR
2. Your DVD Player + DAC Magic + AVR
3. Decicated CD player like CA's Azur 740C/840C + AVR

Make sure that the link from the players is through an Optical out connection.

Sound is a very personal thing but I would recommend you to go in for a dedicated CD player instead of the DVD player + DAC setup. A good CD player will sound better than a DVD player + DAC combo.

 

[reignofchaos]

I'm going to go one step further with this... Wireless transmission in today's homes with pre-N 802.11 standards will not affect audio quality in ANY way. You have a theoretical bandwidth of 108 Mbps...practical bandwidth of at least 50 Mbps. This is ample for lossless audio...ample also for negligible delay transmission. And the micro to millisecond exponential backoff is not going to be hear by your ear in any perceptible way.

I have seen a simple MediaLounge transmitting DVD quality files in my friend's home network from PC to TV. There was no jitter, no artifacts, no stutter to the frame rate. If it can send that over without any perceptible delay, I do not see why the same does not apply for audio. I also do not see why such a combination ( a dedicated music server connected to external great DAC) does not qualify as truly HiFi. I feel that this categorisation is in the minds of the reviewer, not the merits/demerits of the technology. Some 'audiophiles' are just resistant to technology change....reminds me of AM vrs FM, BetaMax vrs VHS and LP vrs CD all over again.

I for one, am now in process of converting all my music to HDD and then researching on a good media streamer and DAC, with a gigabit Lan at home.
I'll update all as and when good news happens.

-Jinx.

I concur. Quite often I stream 720p content over my home Wifi network and it just runs fine. Its never ever a problem. Streaming uncompressed audio over wifi is a non issue .

 

[gobble]

I would suggest you to visit a CA dealer with your DVD player and some CDs for auditioning. Try listening to your CDs on 3 different kinds of setups that I have mentioned below

The marantz cd6002 is also considered audiophile and available for about 6K below the CA 640C. I would recommend you don't bother with a budget range CA player that costs so much more. Its not even worth a second thought. Unless you "want to afford" a 740c

Regards

 

[gobble]

I concur. Quite often I stream 720p content over my home Wifi network and it just runs fine. Its never ever a problem. Streaming uncompressed audio over wifi is a non issue .

'

True 802.11n standard is for streaming HD media. I was just bouncing off ideas - many seconds worth of data packets will flow before a backoff delay and next retransmission.

Although I am a total linux/network geek I chose to keep the wireless option as a secondary one. I didn't want the kludgy wireless hacks and technology pre-occupation to interfere in pure and simple listening experience. Compared to just opening your front door and using the remote to start some sound, booting your PC, fiddling with commands/scripts, the really stupid GUI and media player options on Linux compared to WM player... (and mind you I have build my own linux distro's so I am not a struggler on Linux). That too at 1AM in the morning when you just want to hit the bed and not deal with a PC (and incur its 60-70@ power consumption ) ...


I stilll opted to pay 18k for a dedicated player. I will stream DVD-A as a hobby project later. Will let you know how it goes.

Cheers

 

[ajinkya]

Why do all this? Just use a stand-alone media streamer like Popcorn Hour or its many variants, get a good DAC (DacMagic or Beresford for affordability), keep PC in sleep mode when not required for low power consumption. No need for WMP nor GUI nor any headaches at 1 AM.

With PopcornHour, you also have the option of an inbuilt HDD. Many others have the option of connection an external USB HDD, so network issues are absent. MediaMonkey allows you to keep a sleep timer so that the PC switches off when the playlist ends.

Retransmission of packets in today's network measures in millisecs, not secs. And all good media streamers buffer about 5 minutes of data/audio so retransmission jitter is also not a factor in quality.

If you still want reassurance, use a LAN, instead of a WLAN. At 1 Gbps, jitter is non-existent.


-Jinx.

 

[spirovious]

I would suggest you to visit a CA dealer with your DVD player and some CDs for auditioning. Try listening to your CDs on 3 different kinds of setups that I have mentioned below

1. Your DVD Player + AVR
2. Your DVD Player + DAC Magic + AVR
3. Decicated CD player like CA's Azur 740C/840C + AVR

Make sure that the link from the players is through an Optical out connection.

Sound is a very personal thing but I would recommend you to go in for a dedicated CD player instead of the DVD player + DAC setup. A good CD player will sound better than a DVD player + DAC combo.

So which can be better?
1.Marantz 6002 CDP
2.Budget DVDp + DAC magic(or Barasford)

 

[moserw]

So which can be better?
1.Marantz 6002 CDP
2.Budget DVDp + DAC magic(or Barasford)

One problem I see with some CDP is that they are just that CDP i.e. no support for mp3, flac, etc. A DAC on the other hand with even a budget DVDP will work great on most of the formats. BTW I have not seen the Marantz CD-6002 in action, but Beresford is really very good.

 

[spirovious]

One problem I see with some CDP is that they are just that CDP i.e. no support for mp3, flac, etc. A DAC on the other hand with even a budget DVDP will work great on most of the formats. BTW I have not seen the Marantz CD-6002 in action, but Beresford is really very good.

6002 is award winner & can play mp3,wav.
So whether to go 6002 or DAC magis(Beresford)?