[JohnnyCanuck]

thoughts on Cambridge CXC transport vs cheaper $300 -$350 CD player (via S/PDIF coax) as transport to Bifrost Multibit DAC?

I've been using CD players feeding an external DAC for about a decade, first with a Bifrost, then later with a Gumby when it was introduced.

I bought a Cambridge CXC transport when the price on the V1 dropped about a year ago. I wasn't expecting much difference and, on most CDs there wasn't. On about 20% of my CDs though there was a HUGE improvement, particularly in the bass. It was like the difference heard when you replaced your meh power amp with a Vidar. Phase coherence seemed better on all CDs but that's harder to quantify apart from the differences in the bass.

So, I definitely recommend a CD transport over a CD player.

JC

 

[Odin412]

thoughts on Cambridge CXC transport vs cheaper $300 -$350 CD player (via S/PDIF coax) as transport to Bifrost Multibit DAC?

I use a Pro-Ject CD Box S with my Modi Multibit and I can't hear any differences between tracks played from the CD player vs from my laptop via USB. YMMV, of course.

 

[dajokr]

Speaking of Cambridge Audio, I recently got a CXC and CXN v2, which I'm running digitally (coax) out to a Gungnir (Unison). I also have a NUC (Roon Core) which is running into the USB input of the Gungnir. While my experiments with the Bifrost 2 unison USB in my desktop rig had the USB a clear front runner among the Bifrost's digital inputs, I am finding the CXNv2 [Coax] -> Gungnir to be superior to the NUC [USB]-> Gungnir. Mostly noticeable in the soundstage.

Anyone else finding they prefer another input to the Unison USB on the Gungnir? Or do you think the difference in 'transports' (CXNv2 vs. NUC PC) could be the difference?

 

[A Jedi]

I've A/B'd my CXC with the same songs (ALAC) off my Mac with Audirvana and I find something a bit more detailed with the CXC. Maybe a little more air up top? Just changing inputs on my Bifrost MB. It could be in my head or the difference between USB vs SP/DIF cables or Bifrost inputs. It's a very very small difference but it's there.

 

[Ableza]

Qtotal = 0.7 ??? or is "fast" related to rise time of the leading edge, or absence of overshoot or ringing?

In a subwoofer it's mostly related to group delay, which is an enclosure alignment effect more than a driver effect. Ported and horn-loaded systems exhibit the most group delay in room (with PR systems being the worst) which adds a reverb-like time delay effect to the acoustic field. This is perceived as "overshoot" and "ringing", terms with no real acoustic definition. It makes the soundfield decay time increase, and makes the subwoofer sound "slow" to most people. Choosing a driver that works well in infinite baffle (sealed) creates less of this effect, with a true acoustic suspension alignment as defined by Vilchur and Kloss resulting in the least. Designing for a Qtc of 0.6 to 0.7 generally represents the best tradeoff of transient response and low end extension. Choose a driver with a Qts of around 0.4-0.5.

The biggest contributor to poor transient response in a raw driver is its inductance, with higher inductance systems being worse than lower. So a driver with a low Le and with Qts around 0.5 built into a system with Qtc of 0.6-0.707 will be perceived as a "fast" subwoofer with better "attack" and lower rise time. And note that none of this depends on the size of the woofer diaphragm. That is not a factor in transient response.

 

[quimbo]

I use a Pro-Ject CD Box S with my Modi Multibit and I can't hear any differences between tracks played from the CD player vs from my laptop via USB. YMMV, of course.

I have a Shanling PCD300B CD player going into a BiFrost via coaxial. Bought it used for 260.00 in 2012 primarily because it had a remote with volume, it was my work CD player that i fed into a Tweak City Gizmo Class D Amplifier.

Having 3 inputs on the BiFrost provides so much flexibility. Flac on computer via Foobar and USB, Cowan Plenue MK II via Optical and Shanling via Coax.

Both Tweak City Gizmos have been replaced by Schiit and gifted to a family member

 

[StimpyWan]

In a subwoofer it's mostly related to group delay, which is an enclosure alignment effect more than a driver effect. Ported and horn-loaded systems exhibit the most group delay in room (with PR systems being the worst) which adds a reverb-like time delay effect to the acoustic field. This is perceived as "overshoot" and "ringing", terms with no real acoustic definition. It makes the soundfield decay time increase, and makes the subwoofer sound "slow" to most people. Choosing a driver that works well in infinite baffle (sealed) creates less of this effect, with a true acoustic suspension alignment as defined by Vilchur and Kloss resulting in the least. Designing for a Qtc of 0.6 to 0.7 generally represents the best tradeoff of transient response and low end extension. Choose a driver with a Qts of around 0.4-0.5.

The biggest contributor to poor transient response in a raw driver is its inductance, with higher inductance systems being worse than lower. So a driver with a low Le and with Qts around 0.5 built into a system with Qtc of 0.6-0.707 will be perceived as a "fast" subwoofer with better "attack" and lower rise time. And note that none of this depends on the size of the woofer diaphragm. That is not a factor in transient response.

I totally agree. In the past, I've always used speakers and subs with 8" and 10" woofers, until I heard a proper 12" Acoustic Research woofer. Detailed, with very good transient response. Deep and impactful. Yet, no bass bloat at all. A great woofer, in my AR58S speakers.

 

[renault4]

I've been using CD players feeding an external DAC for about a decade, first with a Bifrost, then later with a Gumby when it was introduced.

I bought a Cambridge CXC transport when the price on the V1 dropped about a year ago. I wasn't expecting much difference and, on most CDs there wasn't. On about 20% of my CDs though there was a HUGE improvement, particularly in the bass. It was like the difference heard when you replaced your meh power amp with a Vidar. Phase coherence seemed better on all CDs but that's harder to quantify apart from the differences in the bass.

So, I definitely recommend a CD transport over a CD player.

JC

I too have had a CA CXC for a number of years, first to feed a Bifrost-multibit/Loki mini/Valhalla 2 headphone setup and now feeding into Yggdrasil GS/Freya+/Vidar (soon to be mono)/Maggie 1.7i. I also just added a CXN(V2) and about four months ago, a Sol/Mani. For me, its less of a matter of which platform is better, but rather how the mood takes me. Do I want to discover new music or visit favorites with Qobuz from the comfort of my iPad, load up a CD, or carefully drop a stylus onto a vinyl disc, the latter two when I’ve had fun finding them while browsing in a record store. I am thankful that I am lucky to have this diversity of approaches.

I will be most interested to see what the new transport brings that raises the level over the CXC; though the price seems steep at first, I trust that there’s a lot going on inside there to make a noticeable difference from something not only like the CXC, but transports costing far more.

I’m also waiting for a balanced Loki and would be happy to beta test either that and/or the transport

 

[golfbravobravo]

The cutting lathes were labeled for Pitch and Velocity. So, we can blame it on the designers...!

many get it wrong! When the met guys quote wind velocity and they say xx mph it gets my goat.

But as Ms Jody says, there aren't as many curmudgeons with as much practice as you..........

 

[golfbravobravo]

Mmmmm bourbon....

that is all

I may have to try that stuff now I live here. My neighbors are all gaga about it........... One makes his own.

 

[golfbravobravo]

Dot matrix and daisy wheels! And I’m a young pup in this thread! Mind you, was 1986 really that long ago? Expo86 in Vancouver, anyone? And the floating MacDonalds on False Creek.

Pah! Real men used line printers........ (and/or Teletypes)

 

[JohnnyCanuck]

Pah! Real men used line printers........ (and/or Teletypes)

Right on! Five-level Baudot code is enough for anyone.

JC

 

[renault4]

Pah! Real men used line printers........ (and/or Teletypes)

In a former life, the joke going around after we commissioned one of the first Cray supercomputers—remember the water-cooled one with the bench around it?—was that someone had written a DOS emulator for the Cray—it ground the whole system to a halt when someone queued a job to the dot-matrix printer.....

 

[StimpyWan]

Oh yea, during the Schiit Q&A, there was a question about the CD transport that Jason wasn't sure about (I believe). Some one asked if the transport would support Indices; Index points? Index points are in the CD TOC PQ Subcodes. They're similar to Track ID's, which signify a Track Start and End (Pause) Points. But an Index Point to set to correspond to a movement change within the Track. Classical music symphonies used Index Points for that reason. But to work, the Indices have to be accessible by the CD player, otherwise you can't skip to the desired Index Point. Not all do. My old Denon DCD-1520 allowed you to access Index Points. It displayed them too, to let you know they were there.

In theory, a CD could be mastered for up to 99 Tracks. Each Track could also contain 99 Indices. Lot's of work to encode that many PQ Subcode Track ID's! I never had to, but a coworker had a master tape with 500 total Track/Index ID's!

 

[Brubacca]

The Transport price of $1300ish concerns me. I was completely on board when I was thinking under $800. Don't know why I was thinking that, but it was in my head. The reality is I listen to streaming and only wanted a CD transport because I have never owned a decent CD Player. I wouldn't anticipate becoming a CD primary user unless it blew away my streaming. I do have Unison on my Gumby, but at $1300 I'd probably spring for one of the Yggy GS if they still are out.