Originally Posted by 00940
You know, this is exactly the point where your reasonning goes bad.
Anyhow, wrt to the comparative, the TBAAM uses the C-Media CM-102 which really isn't an exciting chip at first sight. THD+N is -67.97db with a 10K load, which is poor. If you cannot distinguish the pcdp and the soundcard, it just proves that both your soundcard and pcpd are pretty bad
Yes, that is a fair point and I did have reservations about the TBAAM as a reference point. Frankly I was surprised someone did not pick up on that earlier. The SXLP240 has decent noise specs for a PCDP ~ 94db (with anti-shock off, worse with anti-shock on but not specified) .
If I wanted to do a tougher PCDP vs Soundcard test I do have an external Edirol a home which is rather better, in the end my office listening environment is just too noisy for critical testing as I did comment on later.
But, I took the PCDP home at the weekend and compared it against my proper home CD player which has far lower jitter and proper CD player type specs and also to an environment with much less noise.
I could not do level matched comparisons very easily due to the PCDP's
absurdly low output and the need to adjust the levels between players and it is hardly a scientific test. However, the egregious levels of jitter inherent in the PCDP (with anti-shock enabled) did not seem to translate to grotesque audible distortion compared with the CDPs.
Hardly conclusive I know, but it strikes me that if device A (PCDP) which has roughly 256 times the jitter (-55db vs -110db) of device B (CDP) is even close then maybe ultra-low jitter levels are not so important. Others have done the scientific tests on jitter properly and concluded the same.
If I get the chance this weekend I will digitize the analog feeds from CDP and PCDP and look at the waveforms, that should be more informative. Also I will do a anti-shock vs no anti-shock comparison. That should be interesting.