[loveheadphones]

i'm begging for more transport suggestions

 

[eyeteeth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsaavedr Well Eyeteeth, no wonder Wilson used that as a showcase, the comparison is precisely just indicating how good the Wilson speakers The comparison is not very informative about the quality of the Ipod vs. the Krell CDP, for the very fact that the speakers were different, and the amps were different, and the cables were different, they were not just comparing the source, actually they were mostly comparing the speakers.

All true, although I would like to know what the awful 16k speakers were.

 

[tom hankins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by loveheadphones i'm begging for more transport suggestions

Check out one of the used Audio Research CD1 or CD2's. They make wonderful transports.

 

[TimSchirmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwood By CD "playback" we should include external DAC's and Sound Cards via Lossless compression, as well. -Ed

No, we shouldn't. It would be unfair since sound cards are inferior to dedicated components at the same price. High end digital processors should be judged with transports of the same pedigree in order to provide valid opinions on their unrestrained performance. As fun and convient as PC-based sources can be, they shouldn't be used as a reference. It is like putting a chanel gown on a pregnant crack ho and then entering her in a beauty contest.

 

[grinch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimSchirmer It is like putting a chanel gown on a pregnant crack ho and then entering her in a beauty contest.

hhahha tim wins best metaphor of the month!

 

[ServinginEcuador]

MAke sure to add the Toshiba SD-4900 to the under $100 DVD-A category for overachieving CDPs.

 

[Audio Redneck]

Just a bump and another vote for making this a sticky. Having given two DVD players as gifts this last Christmas, I wish this thread had been around.

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimSchirmer No, we shouldn't. It would be unfair since sound cards are inferior to dedicated components at the same price. High end digital processors should be judged with transports of the same pedigree in order to provide valid opinions on their unrestrained performance. As fun and convient as PC-based sources can be, they shouldn't be used as a reference. It is like putting a chanel gown on a pregnant crack ho and then entering her in a beauty contest.

Been partaking in the crack pipe there, I see? ......

-Ed

 

[chillysalsa]

For those searching for an analog sounding DAC under $600, go with a Scott Nixon TubeDAC w/ power supply. Or build it yourself, and get a 4.5A Ault power supply from Hosfelt, and come in under $350 with all hardware, easily.

 

[rsaavedra]

Come on Headfiers, I'm sure there are some more excellent digital sources that Headfiers have heard and can recommend. Again please check in the first posting of this thread the submission rules we are trying to follow, and then if you have some candidate(s), go for it and nominate it/them in their respective formats and price ranges.

 

[Welly Wu]

I vote the SONY SCD-333ES (stock) and SACDMods version. I traveled to CSA Audio Design in Upper Montclair, NJ and Audio Connections in Verona, NJ to hear these fantastic multi-disc players. I would say that the stock unit is very well worth its' street price of approximately < ~$500 USD for both Red Book CD and SACD playback. The SACDMod SCD-333ES sounded even better: the Red Book CD playback is somewhat competitive with my STOCK Pioneer Elite DV-59AVi but it is of a different character / nature but the SACD playback absolutely makes mine sound like doo-doo. Now that I've heard what a heavily modded stock player is capable of, I am even more certain that sending my DV-59AVi to ModWright LLC is the best bang for my buck option on the horizon. Yes folks, the SACDMods SCD-333ES sounded that good!

 

[cosmopragma]

Quote:

No, we shouldn't. It would be unfair since sound cards are inferior to dedicated components at the same price. High end digital processors should be judged with transports of the same pedigree in order to provide valid opinions on their unrestrained performance. As fun and convient as PC-based sources can be, they shouldn't be used as a reference. It is like putting a chanel gown on a pregnant crack ho and then entering her in a beauty contest.

LOL.Sounds like your own experience in the realm of computer based audio is two years old.You are dealing with Moore's law here, a new generation every year.Traditional audio is a snail.
Based on my own experience during the last months all I can say is that a 350 USD RME Soundcard used as a digital transport is all the accuracy you need.The SQ of the DAC section may be questionable ( mine is unmodded ), but the remaining "flaws" of the digital signal are far beyond audibility.
Edit: far beyond my hearing capabilities.

 

[Wmcmanus]

There is a Bel Canto PL1 on Audiogon for $4,200 right now... not a bad price for a $9,495 retail player. No, don't, no, don't, no...

 

[tom hankins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus There is a Bel Canto PL1 on Audiogon for $4,200 right now... not a bad price for a $9,495 retail player. No, don't, no, don't, no...

The Bel Canto PL1A lists for over 2500.00 less than the PL1. Anyone know or heard the differences in the two players? They are described, and look pretty much the same.

 

[xaipemw]

I hereby nominate the Arcam DiVA CD73t. I didn't search this thread to see if it was already nominated... but even if it was, I'd second that!

I recently wrote a review of this awesome source, which goes for approx. US $700, has a 24-bit DAC capable of 192mhz... and more. Check out my review for details about what I thought this player could do.

Highly recommended!