Nice CDP vs. cheap transport + nice DAC?

[Mrvile]

I see people here dropping tons of cash on really nice CD players and such, but what is the advantage of having a nice CD player if a cheap, say $50 DVD player transport, would sound exactly the same if paired with a nice DAC? Or even if you do want the features of a nicer CD player, how would a $1000 Marantz be better than a $100 Sony if you're just going to be using the optical out (essentially the same sound from both players)? There's got to be something I'm missing here...

I'm talking strictly redbook, no SACD or DVD-A.

[Mr_Sukebe]

Assuming I'm reading your question right, you're asking whether a better transport makes a difference to sound from an external DAC?
If that's correct, then "it depends".
There's been a number of threads on the subject recently, would be worth checking them out.
Personally I believe that a better transport DOES make a difference, though a number of chaps seem happy to argue that it can't possibly make a difference.

One thought, would groups like Esoteric really get away with such expensive transports if it made no difference?

[Mrvile]

Originally Posted by Mr_Sukebe

Assuming I'm reading your question right, you're asking whether a better transport makes a difference to sound from an external DAC?
If that's correct, then "it depends".
There's been a number of threads on the subject recently, would be worth checking them out.
Personally I believe that a better transport DOES make a difference, though a number of chaps seem happy to argue that it can't possibly make a difference.

One thought, would groups like Esoteric really get away with such expensive transports if it made no difference?

Well the thing is, a nice CDP would use optical out, and a cheap transport would use optical out. Since it is completely unaltered sound (straight from the CD), wouldn't they sound exactly the same? So...wouldn't a $1000 Marantz SA8001 + a DAC1 sound exactly the same as a $100 Sony CE375 + a DAC1?

[noseallinit]

I dunno for I am sure not the one to ask but I have read articles and post that say a computer with a good DAC is as good as some of the more expensive CD players. I do believe that my iMac w/ MicroDAC feeding me NAD 710 Receiver sounds better than when I used me old NAD 510 CD player.

[Mr_Sukebe]

Originally Posted by Mrvile

Well the thing is, a nice CDP would use optical out, and a cheap transport would use optical out. Since it is completely unaltered sound (straight from the CD), wouldn't they sound exactly the same? So...wouldn't a $1000 Marantz SA8001 + a DAC1 sound exactly the same as a $100 Sony CE375 + a DAC1?

As I've already said, please have a scan at the recent threads on digital sources, there's already been a lot of debate on the subject.
From purely a theory perspective, as it's digital data, you'd think that there should be no difference. In practice you have missing data and jitter to contend with, the result being that some transports have better digital timing, thus reducing glare, hash and other grunge. Of course some people who've never heard a really good transport will probably dissagree, but there you have it.

[Kees]

Originally Posted by Mr_Sukebe

As I've already said, please have a scan at the recent threads on digital sources, there's already been a lot of debate on the subject.
From purely a theory perspective, as it's digital data, you'd think that there should be no difference. In practice you have missing data and jitter to contend with, the result being that some transports have better digital timing, thus reducing glare, hash and other grunge. Of course some people who've never heard a really good transport will probably dissagree, but there you have it.

X2.

[starscream]

Originally Posted by Mr_Sukebe

As I've already said, please have a scan at the recent threads on digital sources, there's already been a lot of debate on the subject.
From purely a theory perspective, as it's digital data, you'd think that there should be no difference. In practice you have missing data and jitter to contend with, the result being that some transports have better digital timing, thus reducing glare, hash and other grunge. Of course some people who've never heard a really good transport will probably dissagree, but there you have it.

x3

[fjf]

I never heard an expensive transport, so I am not going to disagree. All I can say is that a cheap CDP+decent DAC sound very well, and if the player dies, you don't have to get it repaired. Just get a new one. I am sure a good transport sounds very musical, but if any of the mobile parts die, you have to get it repaired, sometimes sending it to the other corner of the world.

In this hobby we lack double-blind tests. And subjectivity dominates. And if you get a very expensive source, you tend to believe it is extraordinarily good sounding. I can understand that. Whether or not this is real and worth it, depends on your wallet and your wishes.

[hciman77]

Originally Posted by Mr_Sukebe

As I've already said, please have a scan at the recent threads on digital sources, there's already been a lot of debate on the subject.
From purely a theory perspective, as it's digital data, you'd think that there should be no difference. In practice you have missing data and jitter to contend with, the result being that some transports have better digital timing, thus reducing glare, hash and other grunge. Of course some people who've never heard a really good transport will probably dissagree, but there you have it.

1) Bit errors on CD are at such a low rate as to basically be a non-issue, i.e one inaudible sub-ms error per 5 minutes seems to be par for the course unless the transport is really faulty. A poor transport may not handle damaged or really poorly pressed CDs or lower quality CD-rs as well but that is about it in terms of technical performance differences. On ordinary CDs my DVD and CD players perform identically well as transports.

2) Nobody has been able to show empirically that jitter at the level found in commercially available CD playing systems is anywhere near audible - there is a big thread on this elsewhere. I have just spent several hours blind testing the difference between a commercial CD and a jitter-free copy fo the same CD, there was absolutely no difference at all.

There are some intersting technical tests on transports at http://www.pcavtech.com/play-rec/

If you compare the Pioneer DV-525 (from 1999) and the Marantz CD67SE on their digital outputs both hit -130db on jitter distortion at 11khz which is a highly sensitive frequency for 60hz jitter - both are way below the noise floor for CD.

[hciman77]

Originally Posted by fjf

In this hobby we lack double-blind tests. And subjectivity dominates. And if you get a very expensive source, you tend to believe it is extraordinarily good sounding. I can understand that. Whether or not this is real and worth it, depends on your wallet and your wishes.

Actually DBTs are pretty easy to set up if you have a stooge or better stooges, though time-synching is very very difficult, I know I try this a lot and there is always a finite delay in switching.

As for long term blind listening there is no problem in principle but it just needs more effort if you are comparing physical components. There are many blind tests out there, sadly the most interesting ones I found were in spanish, or French sometimes differences are noticeable in blind testing, sometimes (more often) they are not.

In general blind tests show that audible differences that are obvious in sighted tests are much less obvious when visual cues are removed.

Make of that what you will. This does not mean that everything sounds the same, just that often two very different components do actually sound the same if you do now know which is which. I include in this an interesting case where a 12,000 euro Oracle Cd player was indistinguishable from a 200 euro DVD player.