New Cyrus SE? And is expensive transport good to buy?

admin_exported

New member
Aug 10, 2019
2,556
4
0
Visit site
I have Cyrus DAC X bought used from eBay because good review in this magazine and Euro strong so makes cheap for me.

I finally see the release of the matching transport on their site. I think new release:

http://www.cyrusaudio.com/product.asp?ProductID=98&text=indetail

If you read you see Cyrus have "expert engineers CV" and can make best ever transport. Do they mean better than Phillips or really the best of best like also Meridian, Audio Analgoe, Wadia, etc?

I am confused because my dealer doesn't like to order it in even though it is brand new out. He say people using "Slim Devices" and "Sonos" now because more access and harddrive ripping has more accurate sound.

But Cyrus say the difference is that they are better than computers and that computers are files not audio?

So dealer says use Slim Device or old DVD player 30 EUR! But then will the Cyrus SE make CDs much more music than the computer style?

Is it worth buying expensive CD transport in these years 2008 onwards?

Thanks,

Santino
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
drummerman:imo no

Do you mean no to the CD transport? And if so is it that the sound is less good?
 

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
3
0
Visit site
santino.b.it:

drummerman:imo no

Do you mean no to the CD transport? And if so is it that the sound is less good?

There are divided opinions about whether 'red book' (cd dedicated) transports/drives or ROM drives are better. Different companies, different solutions. The DAC is the most important part probably followed by the output stage. Others may disagree. Personally I would'nt invest large amounts in a dedicated transport.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
We only use Apple as a front end now as its noughts and ones are as good as any (they make most of the records for a start!) and the User interface is light years ahead. We made the change because our customers had. In our opinion CD players are fast becoming a thing of the Past.

Ash
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Is indeed interesting. My dealer say for me to buy "Airport Express" as only 100 EUR and told me to use iTunes with no losses and that it will suprise me. He seems excited and I don't think it will sound as good as real CD but will try it because sounds convenient and can be used like print server too and for parties. I may go to the mall after work.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
You need to consider the following:

A hard disk drive (HDD) and a PC will be able to deliver the music stored on it to a DAC in a bit perfect manner, this is because:
- a HDD in your PC will use a file system to find the data it needs - this means that it can use error correction to ensure that the information is always read with 100% accuracy (i.e. a computer application would not work if some of the coded instructions were wrong)
- many people think that a music CD is the same because they are used to installing software from CD-ROMS, etc. However the red book standard employed in audio CDs does not use a file system, the music is simply read sequentially like from a record. This means that the CD player usually only has one chance to get things right. The error correction, if any is also not very sophisticated - I think that if something can't be read then the CD player will simply substitute the missing value with something that "fits".

However despite the fact that the HDD/PC combo can send bit perfect music to your DAC this may not result in best quality audio if the original material that you are transmitting to your DAC has already been degraded when you ripped the file to your HDD/PC (i.e. your CD-ROM drive which you use to rip the music will not be able to get 100% of the information out of the disc on the first attempt just like the CD player ... it will probably be a bit worse). However this problem can be overcome with specialist software such as EAC which emplys more sophisticated error correction, re-reading of the disc many times over and comparison to on-line databases of results of other people's rips.

So in conlusion, yes a HDD/PC is the future provided that you take care to ensure that your original rips are as accurate as possible. And no a DVD player feeding a DAC will not sound as good as a CD player which has been designed to overcome the limitations of the red book standard (DVD discs use a file system which means that the transport/mechanism does not play as important a part as it does in a CD player).
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
CD's have departed from red book standard for some years now.
This has been discussed to death on numerous Forums, always with the conclusion that HD is best, but you need a good CD and mech to get the best read.

As far as DVD goes, it's quite wrong to suggest the sound won't be as good, especially as DVD A tracks are starting to appear and there may be many more if Record Producers have their way. They are fed up with what record companies do to CD to make them "commercial" and want the public to hear them as they were made. DVD A is full 24 bit and there are downloads available too.

The final point to bear in mind is that for almost twenty years now computers have played a part in record production, now it's a big one and Apple are the leaders. They are also Pixar, Disney and many other big movies too. IMO ( and about 120 million others) Itunes is the most successful and the most pleasant way to play music in any format up to 24 bit.

Having said all that, the questionable reliability of Optical Disc mechs in CD players has to be the significant factor in the purchase decision process.

Ash
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Ashley James:As far as DVD goes, it's quite wrong to suggest the sound won't be as good, especially as DVD A tracks are starting to appear and there may be many more if Record Producers have their way. They are fed up with what record companies do to CD to make them "commercial" and want the public to hear them as they were made. DVD A is full 24 bit and there are downloads available too.

The sound will not be as good if the DVD mech was designed with the intention of reading discs which employ a file system (why spend lots of money on a complicated mech when the file system will take care of ensuring you get bit perfect accuracy ... a DVD is not really that different from a HDD). Remember I was talking about CD playback and not playback of DVD Audio discs which use a file sysetm.

Please don't get me wrong. I am not a CD fanboi, far from it (I initially wanted to go the DAC/AMP route but was pursuaded, mostly by people on this forum that CD was still best if I wanted true hifi). Centrally stored music in digital format is the future (and probably the present) I simply don't like when people confuse the issues by claiming things like "buy this DAC and all your poorly ripped and compressed sources will sound like a £5k system".

It would be great if all music was available on DVD Audio disks in glorious HD quality however we all know were're not gonna get there. Few will be prepared to invest in such formats particularly as CD sales are suffering due to ever increasing downloads, so choice will be extremely limited and I as most other listen to music for its own sake ... so choice/availability is key to survival of any format.

As to 120 million people can't be wrong ... well ... ignorance is bliss. I have lots of friends who are happy with their mini systems being fed from a shuffle or nano ... until they hear what a proper system can achieve. In the right setup results can be excellent but numbers of people mean little. 9 out of 10 people continue to use the headphones supplied with the iPod despite the fact that the sound is pretty mediocre even ignoring the fact that they are damaging their hearing in the process by playing it at full blast to overcome outside noise. Maybe thats why they are happy with their iPods ... they are too deaf to hear the difference :p

Rant over :p
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I think the primary issue is CD mech reliability, they just aren't, they are unpredictable. Our experiences with them since '97 have been hell on earth and we're very relieved not to be making any more.

Rather than argue about which plays best I'll simply state that in the many comparisons I've made between lossless files and CD players, via a properly implemented DAC (it might be a manufacturers evaluation board, so as good as they can be), CD has never been better, only equal and usually worse because there are so still many indifferent CD players about.

In Audiophile Circles it's customary to knock iPods and talk about compromised sound quality and compression etc. This is foolish and it's quite wrong, although there are iPods that don't sound that great, some are surprisingly OK plugged into a hi fi system, which isn't what we'd recommend. We use iTunes and it plays 24 bit material that definitely sounds better than CD. It also has a vastly better user interface. In fact we don't bother with traditional separates much now because customers are shifting to Apple Computers or streaming devices, so these are what we use.

We also demonstrate with different levels of compression and with internet radio stations and every single visitor (you too, are most welcome) is absolutely astonished at how good even a P2P 128K download can sound. It isn't what they expect at all. We recommend lossless for anything that matters, but compressed files sound excellent if the kit is up to them and lot isn't and they are useful for mailing etc.

To us this means that it makes no sense any more to buy a CD player unless it's a throw away cheapie, far better to build a decent system around a domestically acceptable computer.

Ash
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Today dealer shows Airport Express (100EUR) against Cyrus CD transport. I can hear no differential.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Ashley James:I think the primary issue is CD mech reliability, they just aren't, they are unpredictable. Our experiences with them since '97 have been hell on earth and we're very relieved not to be making any more.

Rather than argue about which plays best I'll simply state that in the many comparisons I've made between lossless files and CD players, via a properly implemented DAC (it might be a manufacturers evaluation board, so as good as they can be), CD has never been better, only equal and usually worse because there are so still many indifferent CD players about.

In Audiophile Circles it's customary to knock iPods and talk about compromised sound quality and compression etc. This is foolish and it's quite wrong, although there are iPods that don't sound that great, some are surprisingly OK plugged into a hi fi system, which isn't what we'd recommend. We use iTunes and it plays 24 bit material that definitely sounds better than CD. It also has a vastly better user interface. In fact we don't bother with traditional separates much now because customers are shifting to Apple Computers or streaming devices, so these are what we use.

We also demonstrate with different levels of compression and with internet radio stations and every single visitor (you too, are most welcome) is absolutely astonished at how good even a P2P 128K download can sound. It isn't what they expect at all. We recommend lossless for anything that matters, but compressed files sound excellent if the kit is up to them and lot isn't and they are useful for mailing etc.

To us this means that it makes no sense any more to buy a CD player unless it's a throw away cheapie, far better to build a decent system around a domestically acceptable computer.

Ash

Hi Ash. There are many disadvantages of using computers as your mains source of music entertainment too. Here are some that I can think of:

They take longer to load up (vs Traditional seperates)

The fans on computers are noisy (especially laptops). This obviously is a major drawback if you're anally obsessive about maximizing sound quality!!

Laptops may not last that long given heavy usage (3-5 years on average maybe?),therefore, whole music collection etc in more danger of being lost unless you back up. (and lets face it, many don't, at least not regularly)

Constant maintenance needed (quite easy, maybe, but ripping in lossless etc etc takes time, and time nowadays, is short).
s
Family computers are for family access = potential catastrophe in terms of organization of music, deletions, addition of files, and what the hell is Kate Bush doing on my computer moments).

Staring at a screen all the time when playing music may give you an epileptic fit (if you're predisposed so). At the very least it takes away from the focus of your aural sense i.e listening!!

Lots of computers today are ugly and not as desirable as Hifi seperates, and that includes Apple. The last place I want a computer is next to me when listening.

People that aren't too bothered about high quality music reproduction will most likely use itunes etc through inexpensive pc/mac speakers. 1000 smackers for active speakers ain't cheap ya know, even if they are value for money

Theses are just some reasons why many (myself included) think Hifi in the traditional sense is the standard to beat. Computer based audio has a place but it's nowhere near the gold standard
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hi Jaxon

That was a really long post. I thought I'd add my thoughts and experience.

"There are many disadvantages of using computers as your mains source of music entertainment too. Here are some that I can think of:"

"They take longer to load up (vs Traditional seperates)"

*Macbook pro takes 15 seconds or less (i don't know exactly and frankly don't care because it's so fast you won't give it a second thought.)

"The fans on computers are noisy (especially laptops). This obviously is a major drawback if you're anally obsessive about maximizing sound quality!!"

*Not on the mac I own. The macbook pro is a laptop. It's very hard to hear the fan noise at all.

Laptops may not last that long given heavy usage (3-5 years on average maybe?),therefore, whole music collection etc in more danger of being lost unless you back up. (and lets face it, many don't, at least not regularly)

*You have a point here. Especially harddrives need replacing every few years. Taking in account the low price of harddrives and the relative ease of backing up, it's not a big deal for me.

Constant maintenance needed (quite easy, maybe, but ripping in lossless etc etc takes time, and time nowadays, is short).

*No registry or virus maintenance needed. Ripping lossless takes time once- I just let the computer rip a new cd every now and then, while I do something else-making a cup of tea for instance. This comment suggests to me you haven't really bothered to go beyond mp3s. Sounds to me like someone's experience trying to upload tunes from a cd to an mp3player using a windows machine running itunes. This is a drag and in no way as rewarding as lossless played through a good hifi.

Family computers are for family access = potential catastrophe in terms of organization of music, deletions, addition of files, and what the hell is Kate Bush doing on my computer moments).

* Use external hardrives for music or apple tv. Then there simply is no problem. Cheaper too.

Staring at a screen all the time when playing music may give you an epileptic fit (if you're predisposed so). At the very least it takes away from the focus of your aural sense i.e listening!!

*Could be problematic if you're sensitive to it. If you are, I will certainly advice against using a computer or maybe even a big screen tv. If you do have a tv and find no real problems watching, then you will certainly not be affected by an itunes/front row screen dsiplayed by a apple tv or mac mini connected to it. There no fast movement, just an uncluttered screen displaying 4 items on a black background.

Lots of computers today are ugly and not as desirable as Hifi seperates, and that includes Apple. The last place I want a computer is next to me when listening.

*I'd trade the looks from many hifi component for a mac mini or macbook any day! Clean design that nicely fits in. Not so easy with hifi components- although, to your credit, I must say the Primares are one of the best looking ones.

People that aren't too bothered about high quality music reproduction will most likely use itunes etc through inexpensive pc/mac speakers.

*Kind of a generalization, isn't it? I don't. Maybe many do, but then again apparently many buyers still use the crappy headphones supplied with their ipod.

Itunes isn't that bad and neither are computers for good quality music production. I know it's hard to believe. I was there too not too long ago.

If the OP above posts that to his best efforts he can't hear any difference between an expensive cd-transport and a cheap wifi transmitter, doesn't that tell you it's mainly the quality of the DAC that determines the outcome?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Solomon1:Hi Jaxon

That was a really long post. I thought I'd add my thoughts and experience.

"There are many disadvantages of using computers as your mains source of music entertainment too. Here are some that I can think of:"

"They take longer to load up (vs Traditional seperates)"

*Macbook pro takes 15 seconds or less (i don't know exactly and frankly don't care because it's so fast you won't give it a second thought.)

"The fans on computers are noisy (especially laptops). This obviously is a major drawback if you're anally obsessive about maximizing sound quality!!"

*Not on the mac I own. The macbook pro is a laptop. It's very hard to hear the fan noise at all.

Laptops may not last that long given heavy usage (3-5 years on average maybe?),therefore, whole music collection etc in more danger of being lost unless you back up. (and lets face it, many don't, at least not regularly)

*You have a point here. Especially harddrives need replacing every few years. Taking in account the low price of harddrives and the relative ease of backing up, it's not a big deal for me.

Constant maintenance needed (quite easy, maybe, but ripping in lossless etc etc takes time, and time nowadays, is short).

*No registry or virus maintenance needed. Ripping lossless takes time once- I just let the computer rip a new cd every now and then, while I do something else-making a cup of tea for instance. This comment suggests to me you haven't really bothered to go beyond mp3s. Sounds to me like someone's experience trying to upload tunes from a cd to an mp3player using a windows machine running itunes. This is a drag and in no way as rewarding as lossless played through a good hifi.

Family computers are for family access = potential catastrophe in terms of organization of music, deletions, addition of files, and what the hell is Kate Bush doing on my computer moments).

* Use external hardrives for music or apple tv. Then there simply is no problem. Cheaper too.

Staring at a screen all the time when playing music may give you an epileptic fit (if you're predisposed so). At the very least it takes away from the focus of your aural sense i.e listening!!

*Could be problematic if you're sensitive to it. If you are, I will certainly advice against using a computer or maybe even a big screen tv. If you do have a tv and find no real problems watching, then you will certainly not be affected by an itunes/front row screen dsiplayed by a apple tv or mac mini connected to it. There no fast movement, just an uncluttered screen displaying 4 items on a black background.

Lots of computers today are ugly and not as desirable as Hifi seperates, and that includes Apple. The last place I want a computer is next to me when listening.

*I'd trade the looks from many hifi component for a mac mini or macbook any day! Clean design that nicely fits in. Not so easy with hifi components- although, to your credit, I must say the Primares are one of the best looking ones.

People that aren't too bothered about high quality music reproduction will most likely use itunes etc through inexpensive pc/mac speakers.

*Kind of a generalization, isn't it? I don't. Maybe many do, but then again apparently many buyers still use the crappy headphones supplied with their ipod.

Itunes isn't that bad and neither are computers for good quality music production. I know it's hard to believe. I was there too not too long ago.

If the OP above posts that to his best efforts he can't hear any difference between an expensive cd-transport and a cheap wifi transmitter, doesn't that tell you it's mainly the quality of the DAC that determines the outcome?

Hi Solomon1.Thanks for the reply. All fair points, definitely. (I replied in new thread). Just to say, what I said is probably just down to my own experiences of computer audio on windows, and that i'm probably just too biased towards my current hifi setup! Take your point about Macs and will investigate further down the line (It'll take some effort though, if only because i'm lazy!! You know the Ipod headphones thing? Every person I know uses them- even I bought some seinheisser px 200 for 25 quid !
emotion-1.gif
.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts