fordgtlover
Headphoneus Supremus
Clearly the answer is yes.
Thanks to all those who offered their views and experiences.
Cheers.
Thanks to all those who offered their views and experiences.
Cheers.
Can a computer be a decent audiophile source? - The answer is yes.
- Thread starter fordgtlover
- Start date
imported_Matt_Carter
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2004
- Posts
- 679
- Likes
- 10
Two completely different worlds. If it's computer hardware it's not audiophile.
Hardware’s based soly on logic. Audiophile's an art... get it right!
Hardware’s based soly on logic. Audiophile's an art... get it right!
Ahriman4891
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2005
- Posts
- 713
- Likes
- 10
^ Joke post?
fordgtlover
Headphoneus Supremus
Quote:
I'm a little unsure about what you are saying. Are you suggesting that a computer can't be an audiophile source because of some strange distinction between hardware that's dependant on logic (computer) and an Audiophile source that's dependant on ... something else - voodoo and belief - maybe?
| Originally Posted by Matt_Carter /img/forum/go_quote.gif Two completely different worlds. If it's computer hardware it's not audiophile. Hardware’s based soly on logic. Audiophile's an art... get it right! |
I'm a little unsure about what you are saying. Are you suggesting that a computer can't be an audiophile source because of some strange distinction between hardware that's dependant on logic (computer) and an Audiophile source that's dependant on ... something else - voodoo and belief - maybe?
poo
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Posts
- 1,133
- Likes
- 15
He uses a Slim Transporter so he can't be too against the idea...
Pibborando
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2006
- Posts
- 728
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
Guys, this is obviously a post by a highly disgruntled and SERIOUS Audiophi--errm, Artist. Excuse me.
| Originally Posted by Matt_Carter /img/forum/go_quote.gif Two completely different worlds. If it's computer hardware it's not audiophile. Hardware’s based soly on logic. Audiophile's an art... get it right! |
Guys, this is obviously a post by a highly disgruntled and SERIOUS Audiophi--errm, Artist. Excuse me.
fordgtlover
Headphoneus Supremus
Matt_Carter is using a Slim Transporter - well spotted poo.
His post must be for a laugh.
His post must be for a laugh.
Soundproof
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2007
- Posts
- 23
- Likes
- 0
Quote:
Exactly - and if you pick the right external DAC, it can serve as your preamp. To my ears, the Grace m902 does excellent service as such, and I have tried it on a variety of systems, including a setup with JBL's Everest speakers, and 2x2000W of McIntosh amplification of the unbalanced R/L output from the m902. Played lossless files from my MacBook Pro, connecting to the Grace through both TosLink and USB.
Sounded wonderful, good details, precise placing of sources in a wide and yet realistic soundstage - and that system should have been extremely revealing of potential distortion/flaws.
(The image shows the speaker. The McIntosh setup here is not of the MC2KW that was there during my "test".)
| Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif t's best, in my opinion to take the signal as a bit stream out of the PC via a digital audio out and then process the signal via the highest qualily external DAC. Now you've got yourself a clean analog signal to feed to your preamp. Done. |
Exactly - and if you pick the right external DAC, it can serve as your preamp. To my ears, the Grace m902 does excellent service as such, and I have tried it on a variety of systems, including a setup with JBL's Everest speakers, and 2x2000W of McIntosh amplification of the unbalanced R/L output from the m902. Played lossless files from my MacBook Pro, connecting to the Grace through both TosLink and USB.
Sounded wonderful, good details, precise placing of sources in a wide and yet realistic soundstage - and that system should have been extremely revealing of potential distortion/flaws.
(The image shows the speaker. The McIntosh setup here is not of the MC2KW that was there during my "test".)
fordgtlover
Headphoneus Supremus
^
Speakers $30,000
Power amp $30,000
DAC/preamp $1,700
MacBook Pro as your source, PRICELESS
Is this the poster boy for computer audio?
Steve Jobs would love this. Macbook Pro, a better source than an Uber expensive CD player, and you can type a letter to your Grandma while you listen.
Speakers $30,000
Power amp $30,000
DAC/preamp $1,700
MacBook Pro as your source, PRICELESS
Is this the poster boy for computer audio?
Steve Jobs would love this. Macbook Pro, a better source than an Uber expensive CD player, and you can type a letter to your Grandma while you listen.
Soundproof
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2007
- Posts
- 23
- Likes
- 0
Quote:
I didn't run direct AB comparisons with the Esoteric in the photo. But began the session (3 hours) with CDs on that, to get a feel for what the setup was tuned to do.
(Have used lossless computer files as playback source for a long time, and have compared them to CDs on various CDPs; not hearing any appreciable difference as long as hardware coloration is discounted).
Then I switched to the Grace and MacBook Pro. Played Apple Lossless files through a wide selection of music tracks and came away feeling nothing was lacking.
Had one concern: to feel completely at ease re synchronization and jitter, I'm going to pursue affordable solutions when it comes to a wordclock governing the playback chain on my main music system at home. (Benchmark's UltraClock is interesting in that respect but I'm going to look into other solutions).
We discussed whether the lower frequencies on some tracks were affected by a lack of such synchronization.
It was a fun afternoon. And those speakers produce incredible detail and dynamic range.
| Originally Posted by fordgtlover /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^ Macbook Pro, a better source than an Uber expensive CD player, and you can type a letter to your Grandma while you listen. |
I didn't run direct AB comparisons with the Esoteric in the photo. But began the session (3 hours) with CDs on that, to get a feel for what the setup was tuned to do.
(Have used lossless computer files as playback source for a long time, and have compared them to CDs on various CDPs; not hearing any appreciable difference as long as hardware coloration is discounted).
Then I switched to the Grace and MacBook Pro. Played Apple Lossless files through a wide selection of music tracks and came away feeling nothing was lacking.
Had one concern: to feel completely at ease re synchronization and jitter, I'm going to pursue affordable solutions when it comes to a wordclock governing the playback chain on my main music system at home. (Benchmark's UltraClock is interesting in that respect but I'm going to look into other solutions).
We discussed whether the lower frequencies on some tracks were affected by a lack of such synchronization.
It was a fun afternoon. And those speakers produce incredible detail and dynamic range.
Soundproof
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2007
- Posts
- 23
- Likes
- 0
Quote:
No. Would love to have those speakers, though.
It is set up in the main demo room of a hifi store in town.
I'm in the process of building my own AV room, and I'm "rehearsing" speaker/amp configurations.
I do know that I'll be pulling a lot of my music from files stored on harddisks - in Redbook and above resolutions, as well as lossless formats.
That's why I thought I should pipe up here, as I've been looking into the CDP vs. computer playback options for a while. There are a number of good strategies for getting excellent quality audio out of your computer (as pointed to in this thread) - and I wouldn't buy stocks in companies relying on building CD transports for their bottom line ...
That said - I do have an excellent (though not recent) CD-player connected to my m902 via digi-coax, and I can switch between that and the TosLink or USB INs with ease.
| Originally Posted by fordgtlover /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^ is it you rig? |
No. Would love to have those speakers, though.
It is set up in the main demo room of a hifi store in town.
I'm in the process of building my own AV room, and I'm "rehearsing" speaker/amp configurations.
I do know that I'll be pulling a lot of my music from files stored on harddisks - in Redbook and above resolutions, as well as lossless formats.
That's why I thought I should pipe up here, as I've been looking into the CDP vs. computer playback options for a while. There are a number of good strategies for getting excellent quality audio out of your computer (as pointed to in this thread) - and I wouldn't buy stocks in companies relying on building CD transports for their bottom line ...
That said - I do have an excellent (though not recent) CD-player connected to my m902 via digi-coax, and I can switch between that and the TosLink or USB INs with ease.
Wavelength
Member of the Trade: Wavelength Audio
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2005
- Posts
- 137
- Likes
- 25
Gang,
Quote:
Actually any computer would be better than a transport. See a transport cannot go back and re-read a track when it get's errors. For a computer and the right application mix it can re-read a track until it is error free save that to hard disk.
This is one of the biggest selling points of Computer Audio. Others such as ease of organization and selection. But I also think USB and Firewire are allot better transports (if done correctly) than SPDIF ever could be.
I have compared especially poorly made CD's on my high end transports as compared to ripped ones and the ripped ones always sound better. Some of the 80's era stuff sounds tons better on computer than a transport.
My transport has an error counter on it and it's pretty drastic with some cd's. I have that output hooked to a counter and it can get pretty high.
Another way to judge how good a cd will sound on a transport is rip it in iTunes and if the ripping is in the high 20's or so it will sound good on a transport. But if it rips under 10 then the transport will never sound as good as the ripped version.
Thanks
Gordon
Quote:
| Steve Jobs would love this. Macbook Pro, a better source than an Uber expensive CD player, and you can type a letter to your Grandma while you listen. |
Actually any computer would be better than a transport. See a transport cannot go back and re-read a track when it get's errors. For a computer and the right application mix it can re-read a track until it is error free save that to hard disk.
This is one of the biggest selling points of Computer Audio. Others such as ease of organization and selection. But I also think USB and Firewire are allot better transports (if done correctly) than SPDIF ever could be.
I have compared especially poorly made CD's on my high end transports as compared to ripped ones and the ripped ones always sound better. Some of the 80's era stuff sounds tons better on computer than a transport.
My transport has an error counter on it and it's pretty drastic with some cd's. I have that output hooked to a counter and it can get pretty high.
Another way to judge how good a cd will sound on a transport is rip it in iTunes and if the ripping is in the high 20's or so it will sound good on a transport. But if it rips under 10 then the transport will never sound as good as the ripped version.
Thanks
Gordon
Soundproof
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2007
- Posts
- 23
- Likes
- 0
Hi Gordon,
You're touching on something that had me quite pleased, once I realized it.
The CDP is just a way of getting the information off the disk and on towards the amplifier and speakers.
Placing that same information on a high-quality, fast harddisk - and having it read through a computer's more sophisticated setup of error correction and buffers has to be superior.
The challenge is then to ensure that the data goes uncompromised out of the storage device/computer and to the DAC.
Which Firewire or USB methods would you recommend out of a Mac? I have been using TosLink and USB.
You're touching on something that had me quite pleased, once I realized it.
The CDP is just a way of getting the information off the disk and on towards the amplifier and speakers.
Placing that same information on a high-quality, fast harddisk - and having it read through a computer's more sophisticated setup of error correction and buffers has to be superior.
The challenge is then to ensure that the data goes uncompromised out of the storage device/computer and to the DAC.
Which Firewire or USB methods would you recommend out of a Mac? I have been using TosLink and USB.
Quote:
Hirsch how would you say the transporter sounds in relationship to your Meridian G08, I think I have read where you prefered the transporter to the Wadia 301?
| Originally Posted by Hirsch /img/forum/go_quote.gif A computer can be part of a very nice system without even bothering about a sound card. I've got a computer set up as a music server. I use wireless ethernet to drive a Roku Soundbridge, SlimDevices Squeezebox 3/Bel Canto DAC2, and SlimDevices Transporter. So, three rigs are driven off of the same computer, which sits on my network and otherwise twiddles its thumbs. The computer itself need not be anything special, as the devices on the other end do the D to A conversion. The only real need is for big hard drives, if you've got a lot of lossless music. |
Hirsch how would you say the transporter sounds in relationship to your Meridian G08, I think I have read where you prefered the transporter to the Wadia 301?
Users who are viewing this thread
