[OverlordXenu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shambla /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just thought I‘d add my opinion to the discussion – just recently got into headphones properly (I had a pair of SR-80s hooked up to my integrated amp for a couple of years at university, but I don’t really count that) and currently have a pair of Senn HD-600s hooked up to a Meier Corda Aria. I have tried both my dedicated CDP connected to the analogue inputs on the Aria (a Rotel RCD-02 that cost about £400 a few years ago) and my MacBook Pro connected by USB to the Aria (using 320Kbps MP3 or 256kbps VBR AAC) and IMO there is no real contest - the CD player wins hands down. In places the computer actually sounds a touch more detailed, especially on good recordings, but it just sounds flat and uninteresting compared to the dedicated CDP. I guess that a lot of this will be due to the different DACs in the CDP and the Aria rather than the quality of the data fed to them and so you could argue that running the laptop through a better DAC would improve the sound, but then getting a new DAC for the CPD would do the same for that. I still use the laptop for its convenience when listening to music in the background, but for proper listening I go for the dedicated CDP every time.

Ok, let me get this straight. First, you used the CDP's DAC (that's what analogue is), and then you compared it to MP3 on a different DAC. So you compared two DAC's, and two different levels of encoding (lossless vs. lossy).

So what you just said means nothing at all.

 

[Jigglybootch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shambla /img/forum/go_quote.gif and currently have a pair of Senn HD-600s hooked up to a Meier Corda Aria. I have tried both my dedicated CDP connected to the analogue inputs on the Aria (a Rotel RCD-02 that cost about £400 a few years ago) and my MacBook Pro connected by USB to the Aria (using 320Kbps MP3 or 256kbps VBR AAC) and IMO there is no real contest - the CD player wins hands down.

Not to sound like a party pooper, but the fact that you were comparing an uncompressed CD to an MP3, each using a different DAC, completely invalidates your comparison.

 

[Shambla]

I never said that it was in any way a scientific apples to apples comparison, but if you actually read the thread (instead of seeing someone with 1 post who clearly must be a ****** who has no grasp of the incredibly obvious things you have pointed out) it is potentially relevant information for the original poster, especially considering the similarities in the phones and amp used.

First off, the differences in the DACs: If he switches to a dedicated CDP then he too will presumably be comparing different DACs so this is unavoidable - however, given that he is currently using a lower end Meier Audio amp than I am (which presumably has an equal or lesser quality DAC to my Aria) and is considering a newer and more expensive CD player than my Rotel (and therefore presumably has an equal or more likely better quality DAC), it seems safe to assume that as far as the effects of the DAC are concerned he will be better off with a CD player.

Second, the difference between lossy and lossless formats: To begin with I made a point of mentioning that I was using lossy formats because the original poster said he was using PCM which is of course lossless - I don't have any lossless audio on my laptop and I'm not going to start ripping it because I simply don't have the space. What I failed to mention is that I have also played CDs from the laptop, using it as a transport and while it sounded better to my ears than the lossy version I still preferred that sound from the the dedicated player. Note that I didn't say it was WORSE from a purely technical standpoint, I merely said I preferred that CD player. Oh and just to open up another can of worms I was under the impression that opinion was still divided on how severe the differences between lossy and lossless formats, especially on lower end equipment like that which is being discussed here.

 

[OverlordXenu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shambla /img/forum/go_quote.gif I never said that it was in any way a scientific apples to apples comparison, but if you actually read the thread (instead of seeing someone with 1 post who clearly must be a ****** who has no grasp of the incredibly obvious things you have pointed out) it is potentially relevant information for the original poster, especially considering the similarities in the phones and amp used. First off, the differences in the DACs: If he switches to a dedicated CDP then he too will presumably be comparing different DACs so this is unavoidable - however, given that he is currently using a lower end Meier Audio amp than I am (which presumably has an equal or lesser quality DAC to my Aria) and is considering a newer and more expensive CD player than my Rotel (and therefore presumably has an equal or more likely better quality DAC), it seems safe to assume that as far as the effects of the DAC are concerned he will be better off with a CD player. Second, the difference between lossy and lossless formats: To begin with I made a point of mentioning that I was using lossy formats because the original poster said he was using PCM which is of course lossless - I don't have any lossless audio on my laptop and I'm not going to start ripping it because I simply don't have the space. What I failed to mention is that I have also played CDs from the laptop, using it as a transport and while it sounded better to my ears than the lossy version I still preferred that sound from the the dedicated player. Note that I didn't say it was WORSE from a purely technical standpoint, I merely said I preferred that CD player. Oh and just to open up another can of worms I was under the impression that opinion was still divided on how severe the differences between lossy and lossless formats, especially on lower end equipment like that which is being discussed here.

If you're using the digital outs of a CDP (as a transport) and the digital out of the computer (as a transport) with the same CD, going to the same DAC, they will sound the same. Because it's digital. If you're using the CDP as a transport, or the computer as a transport, they are both sending the same bits to the DAC.

 

[Jigglybootch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shambla /img/forum/go_quote.gif First off, the differences in the DACs: If he switches to a dedicated CDP then he too will presumably be comparing different DACs so this is unavoidable...

Comparing different DACs with the same source material is one thing. Comparing different DACs with completely different source material is meaningless unless you compare all DACs with all source material.

 

[Shambla]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverlordXenu /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you're using the digital outs of a CDP (as a transport) and the digital out of the computer (as a transport) with the same CD, going to the same DAC, they will sound the same. Because it's digital. If you're using the CDP as a transport, or the computer as a transport, they are both sending the same bits to the DAC.

Clearly so - I never said otherwise. However I don't see how this point is relevant since it's not what the poster asked, or what I said I had done - nor is it in fact possible with either my Corda Aria or his MOVE since they both have only USB in for digital and I was under the impression that USB digital outputs weren't a common fixture on CDPs.

 

[Jigglybootch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shambla /img/forum/go_quote.gif Clearly so - I never said otherwise. However I don't see how this point is relevant since it's not what the poster asked, or what I said I had done - nor is it in fact possible with either my Corda Aria or his MOVE since they both have only USB in for digital and I was under the impression that USB digital outputs weren't a common fixture on CDPs.

I was under the impression that the OP was wondering if there would be a significant improvement running the analog output of a dedicated CDP to his amp compared to the built-in DAC of his Move. Maybe I misunderstood?

 

[Shambla]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jigglybootch /img/forum/go_quote.gif Comparing different DACs with the same source material is one thing. Comparing different DACs with completely different source material is meaningless unless you compare all DACs with all source material.

Ok I thought I had already posted this reply but it doesn't seem to have appeared, so here we go again. As I said in my previous reply, I did also use the laptop as a transport to play a CD using the DAC in the Aria and still preferred the CDP (though by a much smaller margin), despite the fact that the source material was identical. Again, for all I know the laptop is technically 'better', but I prefer the sound of the CDP, presumably due to the differences in the DACs.

 

[Shambla]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jigglybootch /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was under the impression that the OP was wondering if there would be a significant improvement running the analog output of a dedicated CDP to his amp compared to the built-in DAC of his Move. Maybe I misunderstood?

Yeah I though he was asking whether it would be an improvement switching from:

PC -> via USB into MOVE internal DAC -> cans

to:

CDP -> CDP internal DAC -> via analogue into MOVE -> cans

 

[Jigglybootch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shambla /img/forum/go_quote.gif Again, for all I know the laptop is technically 'better', but I prefer the sound of the CDP, presumably due to the differences in the DACs.

But you never tested the MP3s using the CDP DAC. So technically, it's not a valid comparison. But I really don't care that much. I'm just bored.

 

[Shambla]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jigglybootch /img/forum/go_quote.gif But you never tested the MP3s using the CDP DAC. So technically, it's not a valid comparison. But I really don't care that much. I'm just bored.

No I suppose it's not, but then my CD player doesn't support MP3 AFAIK and I don't really see why you would spend the money on a dedicated player and then play MP3s on it.

 

[vcoheda]

i have never met anyone who had a serious top of the line audio setup and who also used a computer as a source. there must be a reason for that.

 

[OverlordXenu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vcoheda /img/forum/go_quote.gif i have never met anyone who had a serious top of the line audio setup and who also used a computer as a source. there must be a reason for that.

Obviously the bits on CD's are better than the bit's on the computer, didn't you know that? Even if EAC in secure mode is used, and you encode to FLAC, and you use the same DAC, CD bits are better than computer bits.

Now excuse me, I have to go use my CD degausser so the bits are even better.

 

[audioengr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vcoheda /img/forum/go_quote.gif i have never met anyone who had a serious top of the line audio setup and who also used a computer as a source. there must be a reason for that.

You just dont get out enough. I have been exhibiting an exclusively computer-driven audio system at CES for 4 years now.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

 

[vcoheda]

i would be interested in hearing your Spoiler USB and comparing it to a high end player, but i don't know anyone who owns one and have never seen one at a meet (was not at the last int'l meet).