[vcoheda]

i think that part of the problem is that people say what they think is true, because of some theory/idea, but not based on personal experience. before you say a computer based system is as good as a stand alone player, be honest with yourself and actually compare the two - whatever computer setup you use versus a truly high-end player, i mean something that will leave little to no room for doubt. if they still sound the same then fine; but how many here have actually done that. i wonder. it is the same thing with aftermarket cables. a person says there is no difference between that and the stock cable and that they are a complete waste of money. you ask them what cables they have compared to the stock cable to reach this conclusion. they say none. but that it doesn't matter because according to x, y, and z there would be no difference anyway. but it does matter.

and again i'll repeat the statement i made before. i have never met someone who had a true high end audio system and who also used a computer as their source. and there must be a reason for this.

 

[vcoheda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by earwicker7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have both PC with an outboard DAC and a dedicated CD player. Both of them were carefully researched and are probably about the best you can get without going into crazy audiophile territory (please note that my version of crazy audiophile territory starts at about $10,000 a component, so keep that in mind). There is no comparison between the two, the dedicated CD player slays the PC. It's not that the PC sounds bad, because it actually sounds very good. It's that the CD player just sounds much more real. When I listen to the PC, I know I'm listening to a recording. It sounds very good, but there is just the tiniest hint of artificiality to it. With the CD player, it's very easy to get to the point where you think the musicians are in the room with you. If I'd never heard my CD player, I'd be of the opinion that there was no difference. But I have, and I can't convince myself otherwise just because "theoretically" there shouldn't be a difference. Hope this helps

yes. it does help. thanks for posting your real life personal experiences, instead of just telling me that bits and bits. i'm sure your system is quite excellent.

by the way, what is your current source. i do not see it in your profile.

 

[Icarium]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jigglybootch /img/forum/go_quote.gif I always thought it was the other way around. Plus, isn't EAC supposed to compensate for and correct jitter when ripping? Not trying to ruffle any feathers, just asking.

Well depending on who you listen to... jitter doesnt exactly creep in during the ripping process. Discrepancies do between the original and the rip. EAC corrects a lot of that and may one of the most accuracate ripping programs, but it is still not perfect. Nothing is, and probably nothing will be. Whether or not EAC is perfect to the point where your ears cannot tell the difference (Probably true for most people if not all shrug) that's between you and your ears ;p I'm not saying the difference I hear is due to this discrepancy for certain, more I am offering a possible source of that discrepancy. I certainly think its plausible shrug.

As for jitter? Well there are a multitude of theorized sources of jitter and some definitely border on the pseudo-mystical though no matter how crazy those theories are I don't necessarily rule them out (I try to keep an open mind when possible)... however there is one sure source of jitter and that's desync'd clocking between your computer and your dac on playback. Even if you feed your dac a bit perfect word stream there is mismatch between the clock in your computer and whatever clock your dac uses... this will cause distortion. Whether you can hear that distortion or not? Again between you and your ears.

 

[MGLDyson]

Jigglybootch,

I agree with you about maximizing what I already have at this point. Correct me if I am wrong. I am confident in waiting on the dedicated source until a little further down the road when I feel the return for my spent money will satisfy my tastes. Therefore, right now I will be focusing on the DAC and amp section. After the DAC and amp, then maybe a dedicated source like CDP or transport.

To all:

I didn't know I was opening such a can of worms on this subject. But thanks for all the input, again. If anything, hopefully I will be able to audition whatever equipment I will be buying in the future. Also, I will ask for opinions based upon experience.

 

[earwicker7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vcoheda /img/forum/go_quote.gif by the way, what is your current source. i do not see it in your profile.

Yeah, I know, I need to get my s**t together and put some stuff in there. It's a Resolution Audio Opus 21 with the reference level mod from Great Northern Sounds.

 

[vcoheda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by earwicker7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yeah, I know, I need to get my s**t together and put some stuff in there. It's a Resolution Audio Opus 21 with the reference level mod from Great Northern Sounds.

very nice. i have heard great things about the Opus. have not listened to one personally though.

 

[Jigglybootch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Icarium /img/forum/go_quote.gif EAC corrects a lot of that and may one of the most accuracate ripping programs, but it is still not perfect. Nothing is, and probably nothing will be. Whether or not EAC is perfect to the point where your ears cannot tell the difference (Probably true for most people if not all shrug) that's between you and your ears ;p I'm not saying the difference I hear is due to this discrepancy for certain, more I am offering a possible source of that discrepancy. I certainly think its plausible shrug.

That being said, couldn't it be reasoned then that no CDP transport is perfect and that a dedicated CDP is capable of equal, if not more discrepancies (on account of the meticulous nature of EAC)?

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jigglybootch /img/forum/go_quote.gif That being said, couldn't it be reasoned then that no CDP transport is perfect and that a dedicated CDP is capable of equal, if not more discrepancies (on account of the meticulous nature of EAC)?

Error correction on CDPs is in general extremely good these days, while reading a CD will generate a lot of errors the multi-layered error correction removes almost all errors and it would be unusual to get even one uncorrected audible error per CD, inuadible uncorrected errors do occur more often. On even my cheapo DVD and CD players audible errors are incredibly rare, maybe one every 5 or 10 CDs.

When I have used EAC even on brand new CDs in general I rarely get 100% quality on all tracks, some are 99.9% or 99.8%, this is across several different systems. Having said that tracks with 99.8% quality are rarely audibly bad. EAC cannot perform miracles if you have a badly scratched CD however.

 

[greggf]

I can't imagine spending even 20 minutes transferring one single CD, let alone 20 minutes X a zillion CDs. Get a life!

What are you guys, human beings, or accountants/librarians/engineers/geeks?

And what about, for most people, the noise of computer cooling fans whirring away? Doesn't that negate Benchmark DACS, HD6X0, K6/701, and numerous Raptors/Singlepowers/archaic tubes/tube rolling/opamp rolling/arrrrghing.................!

Let me know when computers are painless and perfect. For now, the "convenience" isn't, it's a royal PITA.

But in the meantime, I selfishly hope you geeks waste lots of your personal time perfecting things for the rest of us!!

 

[gregeas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif And what about, for most people, the noise of computer cooling fans whirring away? Doesn't that negate Benchmark DACS, HD6X0, K6/701, and numerous Raptors/Singlepowers/archaic tubes/tube rolling/opamp rolling/arrrrghing.................! But in the meantime, I selfishly hope you geeks waste lots of your personal time perfecting things for the rest of us!!

FWIW, my laptop is as quiet as any CD player I've owned, and for my Transporter system I have a near-silent server running under a table in another room.

I develop software for a living, so ripping CDs, and building silent PCs for that matter, is not intimidating. But I understand that some people remain uncomfortable with computers. To each his own.

 

[OverlordXenu]

My computer is whisper-quiet. I went through the trouble of silencing it for when I get a nice K1000 rig together some time this year.

 

[Jigglybootch]

My computer is pretty quiet. Even when I had open cans I never heard the PC noise over the music, and I don't listen very loudly.

And I resent the crack about engineers...

 

[audioengr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hciman77 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Error correction on CDPs is in general extremely good these days, while reading a CD will generate a lot of errors the multi-layered error correction removes almost all errors and it would be unusual to get even one uncorrected audible error per CD, inuadible uncorrected errors do occur more often. On even my cheapo DVD and CD players audible errors are incredibly rare, maybe one every 5 or 10 CDs. When I have used EAC even on brand new CDs in general I rarely get 100% quality on all tracks, some are 99.9% or 99.8%, this is across several different systems. Having said that tracks with 99.8% quality are rarely audibly bad. EAC cannot perform miracles if you have a badly scratched CD however.

Quality? I didn't know there was quality read-out on EAC. I only see the maximum level read-out. With loudly recorded tracks, this can be 99%

Where do I get the quality number from?

Steve N.

 

[AS1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can't imagine spending even 20 minutes transferring one single CD, let alone 20 minutes X a zillion CDs. Get a life!

I say this again, it doesn't take 20 minutes! Using dbPoweramp cd ripper it's only 3 minutes to rip to FLAC with a 2,5 Ghz computer.
It has also an Accurate rip feature. Your rip of each track is compared to other people's rip of the same track. This ensures a perfect rip.
Track information is filled in for you.

 

[cantsleep]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can't imagine spending even 20 minutes transferring one single CD, let alone 20 minutes X a zillion CDs. Get a life!

and we're here in headfi, spending hrs reading articles.

i think cdp sounds a little better for now but im pretty sure that, in a very near future, with proper setup, computer would sound more accurate.

sounding accurate doesnt mean that it sounds any better than not accurate ones. they say cdp are better than vinyl when it comes to sound quality but many still prefer vinyl so..

plus, pc feels soul-less, compared to cdp. but again, cdp, too, feels soul-less compared to vinyl..