new soundcard optical output search
Nov 19, 2005 at 4:03 AM Post #16 of 26
Having said this, it is debatable whether jitter results in audio differences or not. The jitter debate is along the same lines as cable debates.
 
Nov 19, 2005 at 8:54 AM Post #17 of 26
Quote:

Originally Posted by K2Grey
Having said this, it is debatable whether jitter results in audio differences or not. The jitter debate is along the same lines as cable debates.


rolleyes.gif


Quote:

Originally Posted by Asmo
like a squeezebox


I have a feeling that this may be the way to go. I just don't believe that a power supply as terrible as the one in my computer can be the start of a pleasing musical experience. At least with the squeezebox I can build a decent PS.
 
Nov 20, 2005 at 12:20 AM Post #18 of 26
IIRC, as far as power supplies go, one guy replaced the power supply in his computer (and he had a decent one to start with) and actually managed to measure lowered harmonic distortion or something like that on his soundcard.
 
Nov 20, 2005 at 9:59 AM Post #19 of 26
Well, I've read that jitter is important mostly if your DAC has an internal clock to eliminate it or not. If you hear differences, it may also be that your DAC does not cut the cake...and then you may improve it by getting a better soundcard, less jittery, or a better DAC, able to correct for it.
 
Nov 22, 2005 at 9:05 AM Post #20 of 26
Quote:

Originally Posted by fjf
it may also be that your DAC does not cut the cake...and then you may improve it by getting a better soundcard, less jittery, or a better DAC, able to correct for it.


Here's my DAC

504cary.jpg


and a link to some info: http://stereophile.com/cdplayers/504cary/

As I say, with it's own transport, or with other transports I've tried, it sounds considerably better than with the Chaintech feeding it. So, I think I am going to go for a squeezebox, build a nice PS, and see what happens.

If you read to the measurements section of that review, the Cary apparently as very good jitter rejection with the input similar to that of the internal transport, which suggests that the chaintech is not feeding a very high quality signal.
 
Nov 22, 2005 at 9:39 AM Post #21 of 26
EDIT: I've read that this CDP has digital in, so it should work as DAC. All I can say is that I do not hear differences between a CDP or the AV710 playing the same music file from a CD, feed digitally to a DAC. Maybe yours works differently from the digital in than from a CD, don't know. But I do not understand how a bit-perfect digital signal can be that much better than other. It sounds like magic. Perhaps the DAC in your CD player has no jitter correction, because its internal CDP has low jitter and there is no need to correct for it; this would explain the differences you listen to. The way to know for shure is to try a good dac with jitter correction
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Nov 23, 2005 at 9:27 PM Post #26 of 26
Quote:

Originally Posted by dsavitsk
Here's my DAC

504cary.jpg


and a link to some info: http://stereophile.com/cdplayers/504cary/

As I say, with it's own transport, or with other transports I've tried, it sounds considerably better than with the Chaintech feeding it. So, I think I am going to go for a squeezebox, build a nice PS, and see what happens.

If you read to the measurements section of that review, the Cary apparently as very good jitter rejection with the input similar to that of the internal transport, which suggests that the chaintech is not feeding a very high quality signal.


Cary makes nice players. 306/200 was very nice, and the new 306 SACD is fantastic. The transport used in 303/200 is Philips CDM12, which is industry standard but one I hate with a passion. One could not come up with cheaper-feeling transport if they tried. The fact other CDP's and Cary's own transport spanks Chaintech doesn't bode well for Chaintech, bit-perfect or not.

I think you will have to step up to Red Wine modded Squeezebox with coax digital out or Empirical modded Transit with coax to outperform CDP transports.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top