Use high-end CD-players only as transport?

[Garbz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimpie Hmmmmm... Interesting, and very confusing! But I would imagine that a dedicated DAC of, say €200, should be technically better than a €200 CD-player? Of course, this doesn't mean it sounds better... So, instead of adding a modded Lite DAC-AH to my (very ancient) Toshiba SD-100E, I can better spend my money on a better CD-player! Interesting...

Yes but with a $200 DAC you still need a cdplayer. Add $100. Now is your $200 DAC better then a $300 cdplayer? To me it makes very little sense to design a system to include a DAC. Rather design a system to use a cdplayer and then add a DAC at a later time as an upgrade as funds increase.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimpie Okay, next question then... What's a good transport and why do I need one? By using a dedicated DAC, the DAC of the CD-player is skipped. Shouldn't any CD-player just do fine?

The DACs are entirely reliant on the jitter produced by the cdplayer. Some will say but the ...... is jitter immune. No it is not. There's currently no design on the market that accepts a standard S/PDIF input that is jitter immune. Jitter is defined as the time the data arrives to the chip relative to the clock pulse, produces artifacts during the actual conversion process. Poor players it's in the order of several hundred nanoseconds. Ideally this should be zero, but in practice some very good implimentations are in the low picoseconds range.

The example of how this effects choice of equipment: The Electrocompaniet CD and the DAC have identical DAC circuits. Yet a mid-fi cdplayer using the DAC can not get anywhere near the quality of the ECD itself. This is just one of many possible examples where I know that the circuits are the same but performance is different. So there's no reason to design a system around that flawed basis UNLESS, you only have $1000 for a cheap source. Then lateron you get the $3000 EC DAC and you end up with a system that can hold it's own against $4000 CDplayers.

Mind you this shouldn't be taken as gospel. There's both chalk and cheese in every device category. I'm sure you could easily find an example of a cheap cdplayer / dac combination that outclasses a dedicated cdplayer twice the cost. Just know that counterexamples also exist, and the technical advantages favour the standalone players.

 

[skyline889]

So something like the Krell CD-DSP, if I use it for both a CD player and a DAC (For my computer soundcard), would be better than using a seperate, dedicated DAC like a Lavry or a Krell Studio II and the CD-DSP and a soundcard as transports right?

 

[bordins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyline889 So something like the Krell CD-DSP, if I use it for both a CD player and a DAC (For my computer soundcard), would be better than using a seperate, dedicated DAC like a Lavry or a Krell Studio II and the CD-DSP and a soundcard as transports right?

I have audiotioned Krell KPS 25SC CDP, $20,000 price tag. It is rather for people who want to be thrilled, not for music appreciation. I prefer the signature of Accuphase DP-67 ($4,000) to the Krell's. Zhaolu D2.0 with a cheap (modern) DVD player is very close to the Accuphase's.

There is no Rule of Thumb. I believe a modded Zhaolu can outperform these players. Once my Zhaolu gets modded, I will take it to meet a top-of-the-line from Accuphase, DP-85. Wait and see.

Your ears will tell you which one is "better".

 

[felixkrull6]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garbz Mind you this shouldn't be taken as gospel. There's both chalk and cheese in every device category. I'm sure you could easily find an example of a cheap cdplayer / dac combination that outclasses a dedicated cdplayer twice the cost. Just know that counterexamples also exist, and the technical advantages favour the standalone players.

I actually agree with you but why do you think some high end cd players actually have the dac and transport housed in separate units? I've read some of your other posts in regards to this topic and I've found them to be quite interesting so please don't take my question as a challenge but it is proposed more out of curiosity.

 

[Sleestack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by felixkrull6 I actually agree with you but why do you think some high end cd players actually have the dac and transport housed in separate units? I've read some of your other posts in regards to this topic and I've found them to be quite interesting so please don't take my question as a challenge but it is proposed more out of curiosity.

They do, but the connections between transport and DAC are often more robust than those used in typical DAC/transport setups. For instance, the Esoteric P-03/D-03 combo uses separate L and R XLR connections and a Word Sync connection.

 

[purk]

Quote:

I have audiotioned Krell KPS 25SC CDP, $20,000 price tag. It is rather for people who want to be thrilled, not for music appreciation. I prefer the signature of Accuphase DP-67 ($4,000) to the Krell's. Zhaolu D2.0 with a cheap (modern) DVD player is very close to the Accuphase's. There is no Rule of Thumb. I believe a modded Zhaolu can outperform these players. Once my Zhaolu gets modded, I will take it to meet a top-of-the-line from Accuphase, DP-85. Wait and see. Your ears will tell you which one is "better".

Have you auditioned the above players in your own environment? My modded Zhaolu has the blackgate mods done by Eddie and it is still a bit behind my Stock Sony SCD-777ES and Toshiba SD9200.

 

[Garbz]

I'm not against separate housings. There's no reason that this couldn't sound better. The key here is the often proprietry connection, such as in Linn's case where the DAC unit has the clock in it and the CDplayer runs as a slave.

My gripe with the DAC / source combo doesn't extend beyond the usual setup which is a single S/PDIF connection. Many of the downsides of the S/PDIF interface has been addressed in professional (does not read audiophile) gear though use of dedicated external clocking and syncing units. If it wern't for the addition of carrying the clock signals separately which is common in the AES implimentations but not strictly part of the spec, then the AES/EBU and S/PDIF standards would be equally poor.

Once all the transmission bugs are sorted then the only disadvantage a DAC really has over an internal one is the added cost of receiving circuits. Even this isn't really needed if the I2S signal is the one transmitted between the units.

I'm not saying external DACs are crap, I'm just saying the implimentation of the standard used to connect them is inherrently flawed to the extent that an internal unit often has a very big technical advantage.

 

[GoRedwings19]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bordins I have audiotioned Krell KPS 25SC CDP, $20,000 price tag. It is rather for people who want to be thrilled, not for music appreciation. I prefer the signature of Accuphase DP-67 ($4,000) to the Krell's. Zhaolu D2.0 with a cheap (modern) DVD player is very close to the Accuphase's. There is no Rule of Thumb. I believe a modded Zhaolu can outperform these players. Once my Zhaolu gets modded, I will take it to meet a top-of-the-line from Accuphase, DP-85. Wait and see. Your ears will tell you which one is "better".

Do you mean the accuphase Dp-100/dc-101 combo? I thought that was their flagship until it got discontinued?

 

[bordins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purk Have you auditioned the above players in your own environment? My modded Zhaolu has the blackgate mods done by Eddie and it is still a bit behind my Stock Sony SCD-777ES and Toshiba SD9200.

Not in my environments, but I brought my Zhaolu to those environments. I have no impression that my Zhaolu sounds bright at all. It sounds dense/think and sweet. This may depend on the amplifiers and loudspeaks as well.

Don't get me wrong, I respect your impression about these units. Yes, your Zhaolu may be behind the other two players, in your environment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garbz Do you mean the accuphase Dp-100/dc-101 combo? I thought that was their flagship until it got discontinued?

It is another flagship, a single unit. A friend of mine has the Accuphase DP-85. Only a very few people have the DP-100/DC-101 combo. It should sound fantastic tough.

 

[purk]

bordins,

No biggie man. Maybe I'll try the Zhaolu with other digital cables, which one are you using?

Purk

 

[bordins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purk bordins, No biggie man. Maybe I'll try the Zhaolu with other digital cables, which one are you using?

Oritek X-1 (digital) and X-2 (analog) by Ori. He offers a trial period. You can try it.

 

[udo]

Interesting thread.
What about using Zhaolu D1.3 and D2.0/CS (both modded and with DY2000 and OPA2604's) with NAD C521BEE and T524 players?
Opinions? Facts?

 

[Bosk]

I'll dodge the issue of weather or not high-end players deliver better sound when used as transports than cheaper ones, and simply point out that sometimes it's nice to use an attractive player with great functionality, smooth operation, and a well crafted remote - even if it's analog outputs aren't actually being used.

 

[Chimpie]

Good question, coz it's pretty much the same price range!

Quote:

Originally Posted by udo Interesting thread. What about using Zhaolu D1.3 and D2.0/CS (both modded and with DY2000 and OPA2604's) with NAD C521BEE and T524 players? Opinions? Facts?

 

[rsaavedra]

This weekend I'll start the construction of a switchbox in order to do more extensive instant A/B comparisons of a Bel Canto DAC 2 and my heavily modded Toshiba 3950, same kind of A/B comparison Raaj, Mark and myself were doing at the recent FL meet.

The Bel Canto DAC2 is courtesy of Gene (agile_one) who generously allowed me to borrow it even if I was taking it overseas. He might sell it to me eventually if I want to keep it, which is likely.

Interestingly to me, I had instantA/B'ed my Toshiba with a Meridian and found absolutely no perceivable difference, this was playing "Buena Vista Social Club" at a meet couple of years ago. With the Bel Canto DAC 2 at a more recent meet, I didn't try that same CD, but I perceived differences with the Toshiba using some other CDs. The Bel Canto seemed to have a wider soundstage and better instrument separation at least with some recordings, particularly with Dire Straits' "Brothers in Arms". With some other recordings (e.g. Tool) the Bel Canto seems a bit brighter and somewhat strange, I preferred the sound from the Toshiba. With some others (Ana Caram) there was hardly any difference whatsoever. That made me think probably the Buena Vista Social Club simply was not an ideal recording to be used for comparing the Toshiba and the Meridian, and made me reach the conclusion that, in general, source comparisons are very dependent on the recording used to do the comparison.

In any case, I will do long and extensive comparisons of the Tosh and the DAC2 with several different recordings, and will eventually post my impressions in a dedicated thread.