I'm not a caveman, but transports have improved

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,300
775
1,698
The audiophile hoard is racing toward computer audio. But to my ears, a good transport beats the computer for picking off the bits. Furthermore, the audiophile press is not reporting the fact that transports have improved. A few days ago I listened to a transport from an Esoteric stack from a previous generation vs. the transport on the new one box K01.

K01 won. So if you want the best sound, get a transport for your DAC.
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
So if you want the best sound, get a transport for your DAC.

Based on what Caesar? What dedicated servers/computers have you compared against transports?
 

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,300
775
1,698
Based on what Caesar? What dedicated servers/computers have you compared against transports?

I am so beyond listening for fairly minor differences between gear, but when the guy ran the Scarlatti off his laptop and then played the same song off the full Scarlatti stack, the sound was more full and more natural. It was clearly better. The problem, of course, is that the transport costs $30K. But it was undoubtedly better. For those who only want the best and can afford it, it's a no-brainer.

However, I was really surprised that the one box K01 transport easily bested the best Esoteric transport from the previous generation.
 

Andre Marc

Member Sponsor
Mar 14, 2012
3,970
7
0
San Diego
www.avrev.com
The audiophile press...

...is not reporting on a number of things, which includes the fact that CDs are still selling in big numbers, despite being way down from its peak years.

The audio press is also exaggerating the spread of computer audio because they need a story line,
and the bulk of their advertising dollars are coming from digital based products like severs, DACs,
file players, and streamers.

Don't get me wrong, I am into computer audio, but I will have have a transport on hand for the foreseeable future.

The audiophile hoard is racing toward computer audio. But to my ears, a good transport beats the computer for picking off the bits. Furthermore, the audiophile press is not reporting the fact that transports have improved. A few days ago I listened to a transport from an Esoteric stack from a previous generation vs. the transport on the new one box K01.

K01 won. So if you want the best sound, get a transport for your DAC.
 

NorthStar

Member
Feb 8, 2011
24,305
1,323
435
Vancouver Island, B.C. Canada
Do you know that you can purchase a quality CD recorder for very little money,
and copy most of your CDs, and they will sound better?

Very true, with quality CD-R medias and the CD recorder engraving larger pits
and spaces between so that any laser can read with more accuracy those new CD-Rs.

* In digital, as in analog recording, try to find out the "engravers" machine recorders used in the transfers, so it gives you a good idea of the overall sound quality of them recordings. :b
...And the material use on those music mediums. ...Go to the source,
and the tools used to recreate it. ...From CDs, SACDs, LPs, R2Rs, ...
 

garylkoh

WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Sep 6, 2010
5,599
225
1,190
Seattle, WA
www.genesisloudspeakers.com
I am so beyond listening for fairly minor differences between gear, but when the guy ran the Scarlatti off his laptop and then played the same song off the full Scarlatti stack, the sound was more full and more natural. It was clearly better. The problem, of course, is that the transport costs $30K. But it was undoubtedly better. For those who only want the best and can afford it, it's a no-brainer.

I agree - if he's using his general-purpose laptop to compare to the full Scarlatti stack, the stack could very well be more full and natural. Until you build a dedicated music server, a good transport will easily better a computer. That's always a good way to sell a $30k transport.
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
I agree - if he's using his general-purpose laptop to compare to the full Scarlatti stack, the stack could very well be more full and natural. Until you build a dedicated music server, a good transport will easily better a computer. That's always a good way to sell a $30k transport.

For only $30,000 I'm convinced!:rolleyes:


Not directed to you Gary....

I'm sorry, but I don't care who you are...how the hell do you justify that kind of expenditure? Answer: NO ONE CAN. It's an elitist purchase ....plain and simple.
 

fas42

Addicted To Best
Jan 8, 2011
3,973
3
0
NSW Australia
Do you know that you can purchase a quality CD recorder for very little money,
and copy most of your CDs, and they will sound better?

Very true, with quality CD-R medias and the CD recorder engraving larger pits
and spaces between so that any laser can read with more accuracy those new CD-Rs.

* In digital, as in analog recording, try to find out the "engravers" machine recorders used in the transfers, so it gives you a good idea of the overall sound quality of them recordings. :b
...And the material use on those music mediums. ...Go to the source,
and the tools used to recreate it. ...From CDs, SACDs, LPs, R2Rs, ...
Though, Bob, this is a bit of a red herring. The CDR may be be "easier" to read for the mechanism, for all sorts of reasons but this makes absolutely no difference to the quality of the sound while it is in its digital form. The crappiest, and the most advanced, esoteric, expensive CD reader will pick up absolutely identical information from the disk in 99.99% of cases: where the muck hits the fan is at the immensely important point when the digital information is turned into an analogue waveform. A cheap transport, or poor disk means there is a lot of electrical noise, interference present at this key juncture, and down goes the SQ ...

Frank
 

NorthStar

Member
Feb 8, 2011
24,305
1,323
435
Vancouver Island, B.C. Canada
Frank, there has been comparisons by professional listeners who sweared that the new copies made on CD-Rs sound better than the originals!

I for one have a Yamaha CD recorder (CDR-S1000) and use Maxell CD-R MusicPro blank discs (with exceptional and several additional layers of quality material). And I swear too; they sound better than my original ones!
My Yammy CD recorder creates bigger pits and lands (the space between the pits), enabling higher recording accuracy. In fact, it raises recording quality to the level of professionally recorded music CDs (audio master quality recording).
And the DACS and ADCs are of high quality 24-bit/96kHz audio resolution, if that helps.

The problem with "most" commercial CDs is that they are of much inferior quality, with many handicaps; like pin holes, waves dilatation on the substrate, embossments (concave and convex), errors from the engraving, material defects, thin layer, uncentered holes, curvy (not flat) and cracked discs (inside), wrongly applied labels on the most sensitive side, too much glue, rough edges (at the extremity of the disc's diameter; you can take a razor blade and smooth it of), and other inconsistencies...

Check a JVC XRCD24 disc for example as compared to a regular CD. Or an SACD for that matter.

* If you want to (but you can do yourself too), I can provide you with some links, or articles from my high-end audio mags.

Some people believe, others don't. But the real proof of the pudding is in the listening. :b

And we won't go with records' (albums or vinyls or LPs) quality!

_____________________

--> If there are some typos, sorry (I did try my best).
 
Last edited:

fas42

Addicted To Best
Jan 8, 2011
3,973
3
0
NSW Australia
Bob, the quality of the disk is obviously an issue with LP, because here the mechanism for recovering the sound is mechanical, the quality of the "road" is all important for getting clean sound. But in the digital world, bits are really bits as they say, no matter how dusty, rusty and bedraggled they are the information about the sound is still identical: at that point "perfect" sound can still be recovered.

Why it often isn't though, is because the bits of electronics well away from the CD reading device are too flakey; the idio... , sorry, designers of the audio components actually believe what makers of various electronic parts say, that you only have to do such and such to get optimum performance.

So a simple scenario is this: an only reasonable CD player plays a roughly made CD. The actual physical bits of the CD player that do this then have to work hard, lots of sharp current pulses ripple through the player, the dodgey power supplies go all sloppy and inject muck back through the transformer which infects the house circuit which feeds the other components, and also corrupts the electronics which feed the signal across to the amp side of things. Also, digital circuitry has to work hard to correct all the errors; this is computer stuff, which generates very nasty radio frequency interference, spraying in all directions.

So, a so so player with a so so CD throws a lot of electronic dirt and muck around the place. The answer then is to either to make the player's job as easy as possible, by putting on a super "good" CD; or, work hard on the CD player to stop it being a bad neighbour to the rest of the system; or, isolate the badly behaving CD playing process from the good electronics, by putting an electronic black box or shield around the audio, analogue side of things ...

All of these techniques will work!

Frank
 

NorthStar

Member
Feb 8, 2011
24,305
1,323
435
Vancouver Island, B.C. Canada
Frank, dust inside a CD player (laser lens), or on the disc surface, affects trackability and playability.

A bad manufactured CD will sound ... or will not even play!
Or if it plays, it will 'burp' (digital castration noises)!
It ain't better or worse than a bad manufactured LP.

My music collection is full of bad manufactured CDs and LPs.
And digital noise is worst than analog noise! ...In my book anyway.

No matter how good your CD transport (or Turntable & Arm); bad stuff in bad stuff out!
Quality music recordings and quality mediums are the main ingredients in this entire audio business.

Put your money on quality recordings & mediums first, then pick a solid source to play them.
...Linear-tracking laser lens, linear-tracking ......... :b

It is the same in Video as in Audio. What is the best picture quality today? Blu-ray, that's what!

No?
 

fas42

Addicted To Best
Jan 8, 2011
3,973
3
0
NSW Australia
Frank, dust inside a CD player (laser lens), or on the disc surface, affects trackability and playability.

A bad manufactured CD will sound ... or will not even play!
Or if it plays, it will 'burp' (digital castration noises)!
It ain't better or worse than a bad manufactured LP.

My music collection is full of bad manufactured CDs and LPs.
And digital noise is worst than analog noise! ...In my book anyway.

No matter how good your CD transport (or Turntable & Arm); bad stuff in bad stuff out!
Quality music recordings and quality mediums are the main ingredients in this entire audio business.

Put your money on quality recordings & mediums first, then pick a solid source to play them.
...Linear-tracking laser lens, linear-tracking ......... :b

It is the same in Video as in Audio. What is the best picture quality today? Blu-ray, that's what!

No?
With digital, it either works, "perfect" sound; or it don't, ugly chirping sounds. But these days most transports should be able to read cleanly, even my almost worn out HT fellow handles most stuff reasonably well; library disks that have been used as beer coasters not so well!

But you can always polish away the defects: I have done this many, many times -- end of problem! Again, it either works, or it doesn't: there is no inbetween!

The recording quality? That is an entirely different issue ...

Frank
 

Orb

New Member
Sep 8, 2010
3,010
2
0
Some may remember awhile back (raised it a few times over the year) I posted how some of the high end products do not isolate USB as well as the Audiophilleo and Halide, from what I remember dCS were one of those that did not match those two bridge-converters.
Several different journalists at HifiNews have picked up on this effect with various USB DAC products (Paul Miller, Keith Howard, Jim Lesurf, John Bamford, all with great knowledge and experience), and why personally if going PC route I would strongly consider using either the Audiophilleo or Halide and use a DACs S/PDIF.
So it is possible the results would be closer if they had used either of the bridge products, just my views so I hope no-one takes this personally with their setup.

Cheers
Orb
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Stop reading the audiophile press and listen to what you like. There is no practical reason why any transport should sound better than the same dac fed by a well-executed server. There are several good reasons why the transport woud be the compromise. But if it sounds better to you, that's what matters.

Tim
 

asiufy

Industry Expert/VIP Donor
Jul 8, 2011
3,711
723
1,200
San Diego, CA
almaaudio.com
Orb,

Can you elaborate a bit on this issue with dCS' USB? Is it only on the Puccini U-Clock, or on the higher end stuff as well?

thanks,
alexandre

Some may remember awhile back (raised it a few times over the year) I posted how some of the high end products do not isolate USB as well as the Audiophilleo and Halide, from what I remember dCS were one of those that did not match those two bridge-converters.
Several different journalists at HifiNews have picked up on this effect with various USB DAC products (Paul Miller, Keith Howard, Jim Lesurf, John Bamford, all with great knowledge and experience), and why personally if going PC route I would strongly consider using either the Audiophilleo or Halide and use a DACs S/PDIF.
So it is possible the results would be closer if they had used either of the bridge products, just my views so I hope no-one takes this personally with their setup.

Cheers
Orb
 

garylkoh

WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Sep 6, 2010
5,599
225
1,190
Seattle, WA
www.genesisloudspeakers.com
Stop reading the audiophile press and listen to what you like. There is no practical reason why any transport should sound better than the same dac fed by a well-executed server. There are several good reasons why the transport woud be the compromise. But if it sounds better to you, that's what matters.

Tim

+1

I completely agree. If it sounds better to you, that's what matters. I had friends with lovely sounding systems, until they read that one of their components is not the uber-mega part that they thought it was - and they go into yet another pointless upgrade spiral.

IMHO the transport and the server are two different components. They both have their place. At this moment, there is still no easy way to rip SACDs. If you are happy with your existing transport, don't give it up. But, as soon as you can, explore the new frontier.
 

flez007

Member Sponsor
Aug 31, 2010
2,915
36
435
Mexico City
I have both a dedicated digital server (Mach2) and an average transport (Oppo/NuForce) feeding the same DAC (modified Havana) with the same Cox cable (Siltech) - yes I plug and un-plug the thing :) - in my system the transport sounds marginally better BUT I listen more thru the Mach2 due to the ergonomic factor.
 

garylkoh

WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Sep 6, 2010
5,599
225
1,190
Seattle, WA
www.genesisloudspeakers.com
Fernando, according to the website, the Mach 2 can output to USB, Firewire or Toslink. What do you use to link the Mach 2 to the Havana? We've done direct comparisons with the Oppo as a transport, and even with the built-in Oppo DAC, the Oppo sounds far better using a USB drive. Hence, the transport is "functional" and I am surprised that your Oppo sounds better as a transport than a server.
 

flez007

Member Sponsor
Aug 31, 2010
2,915
36
435
Mexico City
Fernando, according to the website, the Mach 2 can output to USB, Firewire or Toslink. What do you use to link the Mach 2 to the Havana? We've done direct comparisons with the Oppo as a transport, and even with the built-in Oppo DAC, the Oppo sounds far better using a USB drive. Hence, the transport is "functional" and I am surprised that your Oppo sounds better as a transport than a server.

Good question Gary, since I forgot to mention that I use a Stello USB/Coax converter between the USB output of the Mach2 and the Havana DAC - I tried to use the Oppo directly to the Havana via the USB output but - to my ears - it sounded a tad better with the Coax output, not sure how the Havana is wired as for different sampling/convertion rates between its different input options. (It is fair to say that I used a regular USB cable in my test).

Would you suggest to go back and try with a decent USB cable directly from the Oppo to the Havana DAC? I am all ears! :)
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing