The best computer sound card is the equal of the best stand-alone CDP?

[Jasper994]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer What I am saying is at least, in the future, there will be a time when higher demand will somewhat level the playing field and make it possible for soundcards to get closer to stand-alone players, mainly because people will be more open to the idea of hifi-via PC.

The future is already just around the corner. Aside of audiophiles (and for that matter mostly old school audiophiles) most of the people I know use their computers and computer related gear as their sole listening sources. This is the reason we've seen a large number high-style and better sounding 2.1 speaker systems being released over the last year. Even many of the older people I know have transfered the bulk of their listening to computer sources. It's simply to convenient to ignore. Since they have to sit there for e-mail, they might as well be able to manipulate their playlists and enjoy music while they're sitting there. My family is this way, We have a surround system that is used for the home theater setup in the living room, but it's a rare occasion for any music to be played from it. Everyone in my house uses the various computers instead. Personally, I have all but stopped using DVD-A and thus my DVD-A player. The computer in far to convenient, you can change songs on the fly with just a few clicks, and build playlists that span hundreds of albums quickly and easily. Who in their right mind wants to get up to change the CD. The only reason to do it is because at this point in time, the best sources are still stand alone players. But alas very few people care about that. Most people never even attain the sound quality levels of todays high-end sound cards, let alone high-end CDP's...

 

[coolbluesurface]

Very well-spoken and insightful posts Iron_Dreamer and Jasper.

 

[darkclouds]

Audiophile soundcards are very unlikely. The demand will not be high enough for anyone to invest a substantial amount of money into developing. Furthermore, you can't build your system around just the card, you have to build a whole audiophile quality computer (which would not be cost effective). And that's just not feasible, physically, as part of an audiophile speaker setup (which is where the demand really is).

If we're talking about hard drive based music platform, that's a different story. I think that's where we're moving toward.

 

[cjr888]

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkclouds Audiophile soundcards are very unlikely. The demand will not be high enough for anyone to invest a substantial amount of money into developing.

This is really a lead in question, but define why 'audiophile soundcard' and 'professional soundcard' require different parameters.

I know we're following the typical circular audio discussion - pro vs. audiophile, tubes vs. SS, vinyl vs. digital, PC vs. X, musicality vs. analytical, but I believe there's no harm in that as long as everyone is polite about it.

The way I see it is things built at a price point (in both worlds), one camp wanting to extract as much as they can and keeping things technically the best it can be..while the other customizes (the dreaded word - musicality) But at the same time, software pretty much allows you to tweak things to the point of varying the sound much like swapping in and our components....in the same way that the 'audiophile' wants to customize their sound. So as long as your have a platform that is 'technically' correct, you have a wonderful platform to make the music be whatever you'd like....without the real estate and shipping....in the same manner that of how the original recording was created.....and customized based on their own budget and production values.

When it comes down to it though, aren't we for the most part talking about the transport and power supply? I hear a lot of complaints..in theory..about the PC being a noisy environment. Great -- what about the inherent jitter, noise, and clocking issues with silver discs? What about the capabilities of software? What about the benefits of a HD? What about controlling or eliminating the inherent noise in the same way that is done in 'audiophile' components?

Eventually in this discussion we will end up dissecting the component chain of digital playback....and end up with a hybrid ideal solution -- might as well speak of it now -- where are the ideals in source, receiver, dac and output, regardless of the 'boxed' ideas of a CPU+SoundCard-in-a-box, and a spinning-platter-with-dac-in a box? Where are the supposed benefits of the all out spining disc and the all out PC-as-source? Most opinions so far quote the inherent noise and power issues of a PC or the benefits of a HD as source. After that we're really talking about receivers and DACs and output topology. So is the magic or detriment simply at the source (HD/Memory/Buffer/Interface/Platter, the power supply, or the software? (depending on your opinion)

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkclouds Audiophile soundcards are very unlikely. The demand will not be high enough for anyone to invest a substantial amount of money into developing. Furthermore, you can't build your system around just the card, you have to build a whole audiophile quality computer (which would not be cost effective). And that's just not feasible, physically, as part of an audiophile speaker setup (which is where the demand really is). If we're talking about hard drive based music platform, that's a different story. I think that's where we're moving toward.

And a $4000 CD player is cost effective? I'm sure if you added up the parts cost they would get pretty close in price, but so would their performance.

How is this not feasible, physically?

-Ed

 

[halcyon]

Audiophile <> Geek (in the traditional sense).

Audiophiles look for the highest in sound reproduction, often with disregard to price. Many of them can't build stuff themselves. They don't often go by measurements, but by ear only. They are more often subjectivists than objectivists, based on my experience.

Geeks often know (or think they know) technology inside out. They like to build stuff, save bucks AND brag about it. They often believe in measurements more than non-geek audiophiles do. Many will scoff at people who pay $4000 for a component, because one can build the same inside a computer for $x00 and have it measure better.

That's my take at least. Of course there are several exceptions, but at least amongst the forum goers and magaziner readers I know, they are an exception.

That's why I also don't believe in Audiophile sound cards (i.e. cards aimed at non-geeks, costing a lot).

Geek wouldn't buy them, because they can/think they can build the same for much less. Traditional audiophiles won't buy them, because it's a computer setup, not easy to use and they don't have a 0 dB computer to begin with.

Maybe in the future will have more of the geek audiophile population, but at least today I see very little market for such a device.

Just my opinion, of course.

 

[darkclouds]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwood And a $4000 CD player is cost effective? I'm sure if you added up the parts cost they would get pretty close in price, but so would their performance. How is this not feasible, physically? -Ed

How much does it cost to build a $4k speaker? I'm talking about parts wise. Compare that to the parts necessary for a computer, including monitor and peripherals. We're not dealing with a bunch of computer geeks here. The upcharge to make their profit margins will have to increase quite a bit over a stand alone cdp.

How would you go about setting up a computer system as a main source for your speaker setup? Again, we're taking in the usual expected setup parameters.


By the way, how many people do you know that would drop 1k on a soundcard vs 1k on a cdp? I know alot more who would drop the 1k on a cdp. Most of the people that are currently using their comp for music really aren't into audiophile. They are simply using their comp due to convenience. My guess is, most of them are using a creative lab based card. I know tons of people who are like that. And I can guarantee you that none of them would even spend $500 on a soundcard. I'm not saying that there are no interest for such a product out there; it's just that the demand for such a product is too low.

 

[markl]

Quote:

What exactly are you trying to say by that?

Making a little harmless joke in repsonse to your stereotyping of "older people" as being doddering ignorant inept fools, as if that's the only possible reason for rejecting computer audio, and for patting yourself on the back for being so wise as to reject stand-alone sources. I'm only 34, I grew up with computers, my family had the very first Apple 2 way way back when. I work in high technology, and have managed a product line that included harware for computer-based telephony applications (cards/boards that fit in computers). So, it's a little soon for me to retire to the old folks home for doddering audiophiles with their Victrolas and scratchy old 78s.

Quote:

Also, because of us young people who favor ease of use are becoming such a dominate force I would guess that machines that only serve one purpose will eventually go away.

Not as long as there are people who demand the very best. You can still buy $50,000 turntables if you want one, they haven't gone away. What is missing are turntables at the low end of the market, you can't buy them anymore. Over the next 25 years, it may become harder to buy a low-end stand-alone CDP/DVD player, although there are still uses for them, places where it is not practical to stick an entire computer, so they still may linger anyway. Also, most people do not have their computers in their living rooms where their home theater rig is or their main music listening rig is. You're going to have to run an awful lot of wires from your computer to your receveiver through walls and under carpets... You're also always going to need a high-quality amp/receiver that will be a separate box from your computer in order to power your speakers.
Quote:

Aside of audiophiles (and for that matter mostly old school audiophiles) most of the people I know use their computers and computer related gear as their sole listening sources.

Eh, sonny could ya sepak up?

Most of your friends also listen to lossy compressed mp3s, have crummy systems and don't give a crap about sound quality too. Quote:

Who in their right mind wants to get up to change the CD.

Except vinyl lovers who have to switch their albums just to listen to *side two*. No wonder our nation is obese!

You can get a CD changer and load up 5 CDs if you wanted to. Also, if you listen to an entire CD at once, you have around 45 minutes on average of listening in which you don't have to get up even once. I know that sitting down and listening all the way through is something only we ancient decrepit audiophiles do anymore, but isn't that the essence of being a music lover? I think for todays young whipper-snappers with their ADD maybe they are not just listening to the music but always multi-tasking. maybe for that kind of listener, switching the song every 2 minutes might be essential. Quote:

The way I see it is things built at a price point (in both worlds), one camp wanting to extract as much as they can and keeping things technically the best it can be..while the other customizes (the dreaded word - musicality) But at the same time, software pretty much allows you to tweak things to the point of varying the sound much like swapping in and our components....in the same way that the 'audiophile' wants to customize their sound. So as long as your have a platform that is 'technically' correct, you have a wonderful platform to make the music be whatever you'd like....without the real estate and shipping....in the same manner that of how the original recording was created.....and customized based on their own budget and production values.

Quote:

Many will scoff at people who pay $4000 for a component, because one can build the same inside a computer for $x00 and have it measure better.

It always surprises me when people assume that expensive equipment somehow automatically measures badly or that the "secret sauce" of hi-end gear is distortion, that it's *inaccuracy* that is it's only selling point and reason for being. The people that make this stuff are by and large obsessed with the numbers, they aren't setting out to produce giant distorto-boxes. The high-end builders tend to be the uber-geeks of the industry, a lot of the best and brightest technical people are the ones who are able to start their own companies and pursue excellence. Their audience is also one hell of a lot more particular and more knowledgable about sound reproduction than the average guy off the street who can be happy with a boombox. They are going to be far more critical of their gear and are going to be listening more intently, so they can't really get away with making gear that is deliberately distorted or as distorted and colored as cheap mass-market stuff. That said, there have been examples of hi-end gear that measured badly, there was a piece of Cary gear that famously looked pretty bad in Stereophile's testing, but that's the exception rather than the rule.

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Not as long as there are people who demand the very best. You can still buy $50,000 turntables if you want one, they haven't gone away. What is missing are turntables at the low end of the market, you can't buy them anymore.

Sure you can... they just aren't nearly as common as they used to be. Try a search on "turntable" in the Amazon.com or epinions.com electronics section. Low end turntables are no longer common because vinyl is no longer common... simple.

People who demand the very best will also be demanding the very best sound card, provided they use a computer a lot during the day and want music at their fingertips. Know anyone who uses a computer for a good part of the day, needs to use headphones, and has limited desk space? They're a good candidate for a high end soundcard.

 

[darkclouds]

I sometimes listen to music via my comp, but only for background music while I'm working on something. This seems to be the case for quite a few people I'd imagine. Sure, I can invariably get better sound from my comp with a higher quality soundcard, but for my purposes, it's not necessary. Also, I don't know many people who listens critically via their computer. By critically, I mean using their comp just for music listening and not be simultaneously surfing the web or working with on comp.

 

[Hirsch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Eh, sonny could ya sepak up? Most of your friends also listen to lossy compressed mp3s, have crummy systems and don't give a crap about sound quality too. Except vinyl lovers who have to switch their albums just to listen to *side two*. No wonder our nation is obese!

Heh. I listen to lossy .mp3's a lot. Very convenient at work. At this exact moment, I'm using a Nomad Zen to drive an Earmax Pro and Grado PS-1. It sounds good to me. Is it as good as my VPI Scout, or newly acquired Wadia 301? Well, no. But it's close enough that it doesn't have to be ashamed.

I consider the major limitation of the device is that it does not support lossless formats. Computers do. However, computers are multiple use devices for the most part, and audio is usually not the highest priority. A great sound card is going to need the proper platform for best performance. IMO when somebody tackles that, and designs a computer, not just a sound card, geared for audio reproduction, the possibilities are wide open.

I have a fair amount of gear that I consider "high-end", and have heard gear that's higher up the chain in many areas. But the difference between a top CDP and a hard-drive mp3 player is astonishingly small, if you do the comparison (and use well-made mp3's). It would shock me if a computer using a lossless compression format couldn't do better than the Zen.

 

[fewtch]

Hirsch, I think you've pointed out something important. DACs have gotten so good that 44.1/16 digital has become much more of a level playing field (and they're still improving). As far as the complaints about bad power inside a PC, I have yet to see any hard data to back it up as a serious issue with the better cards (jitter, noise). The analog section on a soundcard typically amplifies the signal from the DAC only a little, which IMO nullifies much of the potential problem... the less amplification, the less noise amplified along with the signal. Using a good headphone amp with a soundcard really helps.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Making a little harmless joke in repsonse to your stereotyping of "older people" as being doddering ignorant inept fools, as if that's the only possible reason for rejecting computer audio, and for patting yourself on the back for being so wise as to reject stand-alone sources. I'm only 34, I grew up with computers, my family had the very first Apple 2 way way back when. I work in high technology, and have managed a product line that included harware for computer-based telephony applications (cards/boards that fit in computers). So, it's a little soon for me to retire to the old folks home for doddering audiophiles with their Victrolas and scratchy old 78s.

Well if you are 34 and consider yourself old, then you've got another problem entirely

I wasn't referring to you directly (and I don't know what would make you think I was), expecially considering you don't own "the best" stand-alone CDP, though I don't doubt that yours is very nice indeed. Perhaps I should have said people who did not grow up with computers, or people who own and can afford a $5-10000+ CDP, as opposed to the vague "older people," which left me open to you anti-computer-as-a-source ridderick.

Besdes, what's wrong with patting myself on the back for using a PC source? It is as good sounding as I can afford, plus it is extraordinarly convinient for someone who is on the computer many hours a day, and discreet and easy to transport for a student who has to move multiple times per year. Tell me where to find a cheaper source with better SQ, that is more convienient to use, transportable, and discreet, and I'll run after it like a lemming on meth

 

[roadtonowhere08]

To me, having a computer as a source is convinient and cutting edge. I can do so much more in regards to music with my computer than I could with a standalone. I can rip, encode, and edit music in seconds. Anybody with a computer and 200 bucks can instantly have an outstanding source. With computers dropping in prices, one could very well put together a $400 computer with the E-Mu1212M and kick any $600 CDP's ass, AND while surfing the net, editing music, and typing up a term paper. I am pretty sure that any internal PCI sound card can be in the same leagues as some of those abhorrently priced CDP's that I see on the net and in swanky magazines, but for the price there is no comparison. BTW, by using computers as sources, you can upgrade in the future and it won't make you homeless..... speaking of me, I don't know about the rest of these crazy bastards on this forum

 

[Scrith]

I still stand by my statement that the weak link of any audio system based on CD is the CD itself (which, even when brand new, cannot always be read without errors at 1x speed...so those $4000 CD players are sending BAD DATA to your $4000 amp and $20000 speakers / $1000 headphones). This fact makes the computer a MUCH better transport mechanism (especially when taking into account the convenience of music stored on a hard disk), in my humble opinion.

I agree with the idea that the ultimate source is probably an external DAC, or, if you absolutely must have a transport that doesn't involve computers, a CD player (like the Meridian one mentioned a few posts up) with a giant hard drive that is set up in such a way that it rips the CD to the hard drive using a lossless format before playing it, like us computer users are already doing.