• If you ever spot Spam (either in the forums, or received via forum direct message) please use the Report button at the bottom of each post to make sure a Moderator can handle it quickly. Thanks for your help in keeping things running smoothly!

NOT HAPPY with my mid-range hifi system

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

ISAC69

New member
Mar 13, 2012
73
0
0
MajorFubar said:
cse said:
I think this all proves that the CD is hear to stay. Too many people rely upon it for simple ease of use and excellent sound quality.
That's very true! Certainly for the short to medium future.

ISAC69 said:
sorry but streamer based system can not compete the sound quality of cds .
...but sadly that's ill-informed and misleading ********, as quite a few people, including me, keep telling you.
I am using myself digital files to hear music a and it's OK as a compromise (my cds only via my CDP ! ) but to hear that pepole take a good original cds and rip them

to a hard disk that seems to me total bul*** . a total waste of time .

MajorFubar I agree that only hi-ress files playing through a high end computer/streamer /DAC based system can be superior than CDP .
 

gregvet

New member
Dec 24, 2008
102
0
0
ISAC69 said:
I am using myself digital files to hear music a and it's OK as a compromise (my cds only via my CDP ! ) but to hear that pepole take a good original cds and rip them

to a hard disk that seems to me total bul*** . a total waste of time .

MajorFubar I agree that only hi-ress files playing through a high end computer/streamer /DAC based system can be superior than CDP .
I am afraid I couldnt disagree more. I use a linn majik DS streamer to access my lossless files. I can set up a playlist, or listen to whole albums, and scroll through my entire collection easily. I have thousands of CDs worth of music at my fingertips. I never have to worry that i may have put the CD back in the wrong box, or leant it to a friend.

The sound quality of lossless files through my Linn beats any CD player I have heard in my system, and indeed any CD player I have heard that costs less than several thousand pounds more than I would even spend on a CD player. Thats before you even get to HiRes files :)

I wouldnt go back to a CD player if you paid me.
 

omnibeard

New member
Dec 7, 2010
27
0
0
ISAC69 said:
I am using myself digital files to hear music a and it's OK as a compromise (my cds only via my CDP ! ) but to hear that pepole take a good original cds and rip them

to a hard disk that seems to me total bul*** . a total waste of time .

MajorFubar I agree that only hi-ress files playing through a high end computer/streamer /DAC based system can be superior than CDP .
Good grief. You are not agreeing with MajorFubar, he has stated no such thing - you are once again stating spectacularly uninformed opinion as fact. Do you know anything about this subject at all?
 

cheeseboy

New member
Jul 17, 2012
246
0
0
ISAC69 said:
I am using myself digital files to hear music a and it's OK as a compromise (my cds only via my CDP ! ) but to hear that pepole take a good original cds and rip them

to a hard disk that seems to me total bul*** . a total waste of time .

MajorFubar I agree that only hi-ress files playing through a high end computer/streamer /DAC based system can be superior than CDP .
wooooosh, somebody who blatently doesn't understand anything they are talking about :doh:
 

moon

New member
Nov 10, 2011
47
0
0
omnibeard said:
ISAC69 said:
I am using myself digital files to hear music a and it's OK as a compromise (my cds only via my CDP ! ) but to hear that pepole take a good original cds and rip them

to a hard disk that seems to me total bul*** . a total waste of time .

MajorFubar I agree that only hi-ress files playing through a high end computer/streamer /DAC based system can be superior than CDP .
Good grief. You are not agreeing with MajorFubar, he has stated no such thing - you are once again stating spectacularly uninformed opinion as fact. Do you know anything about this subject at all?
indeed, probably never heard of WAV, AIFF
 

SteveR750

Well-known member
Mar 11, 2005
511
16
18,895
gregvet said:
ISAC69 said:
I am using myself digital files to hear music a and it's OK as a compromise (my cds only via my CDP ! ) but to hear that pepole take a good original cds and rip them

to a hard disk that seems to me total bul*** . a total waste of time .

MajorFubar I agree that only hi-ress files playing through a high end computer/streamer /DAC based system can be superior than CDP .
I am afraid I couldnt disagree more. I use a linn majik DS streamer to access my lossless files. I can set up a playlist, or listen to whole albums, and scroll through my entire collection easily. I have thousands of CDs worth of music at my fingertips. I never have to worry that i may have put the CD back in the wrong box, or leant it to a friend.

The sound quality of lossless files through my Linn beats any CD player I have heard in my system, and indeed any CD player I have heard that costs less than several thousand pounds more than I would even spend on a CD player. Thats before you even get to HiRes files :)

I wouldnt go back to a CD player if you paid me.
I'm with you there, I see no need for a CDP - the only reason might be for the convenience, but it's easier to look up tracks on my phone than searching through racks of CDs. A CDP doesn't give you the option to create playlists, burning compilation CDs for the car, being able to play hi res, CD, even mp3 all out of one device.
I suspect that ISAC69 simply hasn't heard a properly set up PC Media Player, which is why a CA 640 sounds better to him.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I'd tentatively suggest that file playing, either by streaming or via hard disc players will become the norm.

At the moment, to achieve CD levels of SQ you need a decent streamer coupled with a reasonable DAC and a storage medium.

That will change as 'one box ' data storing/transport/DAC become less expensive and more available.

Once SQ from playing data files is comparable to CD then what not to like? Control of library functions from phones/tablets/remotes, no mechanical parts to wear out ( once large volume ssd storage is cheap enough ), instant access, Internet broadcasting functions.

Look at the demise of the lp and cassette, of course there are fans of both these formats still, but in the main they lost out to the more convenient, and for most, the more useable CD format, which gave better SQ at less cost.

What works for the masses is primarily cost and ease of use, decent SQ is a bonus.

Of course, users on such an esteemed forum such as this, with esoteric kit and a primary goal of SQ are a different proposition in regard to the SQ/cost equation, but now 'high end' manufacturers are getting products out there, the future of 'hifi' is the data file.
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
3
0
ISAC69 said:
but to hear that pepole take a good original cds and rip themto a hard disk that seems to me total bul*** . a total waste of time .
It might be a waste of time for you, but not for others, because everyone's requirements are different. That's absolutely fine. But get it out of your head that people who rip their CDs to a computer or streamer are all sacrificing sound quality for convenience. There's some absolutely incredible streamers and DACs out there that are easily as good as CD players.

A CD player is nothing but a simple streamer with a user-replaceable hard disc which is read optically by a laser. There is nothing about it which makes it inherrently superior to a streamer or a computer for playing audio. And that's not just my opinion, it's indisputable fact.
 

SteveR750

Well-known member
Mar 11, 2005
511
16
18,895
MajorFubar said:
ISAC69 said:
but to hear that pepole take a good original cds and rip themto a hard disk that seems to me total bul*** . a total waste of time .
It might be a waste of time for you, but not for others, because everyone's requirements are different. That's absolutely fine. But get it out of your head that people who rip their CDs to a computer or streamer are all sacrificing sound quality for convenience. There's some absolutely incredible streamers and DACs out there that are easily as good as CD players.

A CD player is nothing but a simple streamer with a user-replaceable hard disc which is read optically by a laser. There is nothing about it which makes it inherrently superior to a streamer or a computer for playing audio. And that's not just my opinion, it's indisputable fact.
In fact, it's inherently less accurate than streaming from a file saved on a hard drive or RAM. CD players employ a fair bit of error correction, though as ever, does it really make an audible difference (assuming the disc isn't damaged, when it clearly is audible)
 

ISAC69

New member
Mar 13, 2012
73
0
0
Hi Steve ,

I enjoy listening to looselless fies via my computer / DAC and it's OK but I found out that Classic music and jazz are lack of depth and exitement once I play classic and jazz cds on my CDP it sounds great : full of details , vivid and punchy .
 

The_Lhc

New member
Oct 16, 2008
1,176
1
0
ISAC69 said:
I enjoy listening to looselless fies via my computer / DAC and it's OK but I found out that Classic music and jazz are lack of depth and exitement once I play classic and jazz cds on my CDP it sounds great : full of details , vivid and punchy .
Right, so you're not using a streamer at all, you're using your computer, which probably means you don't have it configured correctly.
 

RobinKidderminster

New member
May 27, 2009
582
0
0
Hya ISAC. So many have told us that CD can't be 'better' than a digital copy yet you continually disagree. I suggest that you tell us how you produce and play your digi files. Maybe suggestions will help you to improve the sq? We should accept that the error correction element of a computer copy makes it 'better' than a cdp but obviously the final sq depends on the rest of the system. Hope this helps to differentiate between the facts of digital storage and the opinions and evaluations of particular playback equipment.
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
3
0
ISAC69 said:
Hi Steve ,

I enjoy listening to looselless fies via my computer / DAC and it's OK but I found out that Classic music and jazz are lack of depth and exitement once I play classic and jazz cds on my CDP it sounds great : full of details , vivid and punchy .
As above, tell us what you use and perhaps we can help you make it sound better. One thing that is absolultely certain, music won't sound worse just because it's stored on a computer hard drive and not a CD, so the problem lies elsewhere.
 

garyw77

New member
Dec 24, 2010
30
0
0
I really think ISAC69 must be doing something wrong with his PC playback, (assuming he is using proper lossless files?)

I use AIFF files both normal and Hi-Res on a Mac Mini with Itunes and Pure Music into a M2Tech Young DAC and haven't heard a CD player under many thousands come anywhere near the sound...

On top of this as already mentioned i have instant access to thousands of tracks and playlists with artwork all included... even remotely if required.. no brainer? :)
 

Overdose

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
279
0
18,890
Rips @ 256 VBR through iTunes on my Mac mini, sound no different to the ALAC files on my NAS through same system, which in turn sound no different to the orignal CDs played on the same system again.

It all sounds good from where I'm listening.

:cheer:
 

cse

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2008
97
5
18,545
Nevertheless, if you already have a good quality CD based system and listen mostly to classical/Jazz, it isn't really worth the effort to change over to a computer based system. I kind of want to, but feel in the end that the HI-FI industry is just drawing me in to spend more money when I don't really need to. High quality downloads are an attraction, but they cost more than CD's. Also, I already have many Hybrid SACD's, which wouldn't be improved upon. I think it's rather like those people who have adopted the Kindle for reading, as opposed to just sticking with paperbacks. Having a CD player, or reading a paperback, removes you from the need to worry about technology. Using a portable FM radio is another case in point, so much quicker and more reliable than using the internet for radio.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Stee_doc, I feel your pain re SB Touch. After initial set-up I've left it alone under "life's too short" mantra and the (likely) marginal benefits to my ear of the many wide ranging tweaks on offer. That said, for the money it's the only system I've found that let's me listen to 24/96 music (muse 2nd law) around the house (2x Touch) for £145-190) per unit. The SB Radios I've got don't do 24/96 but do 24/48 such as Peter Gabriel's So.
 

ISAC69

New member
Mar 13, 2012
73
0
0
cse said:
Nevertheless, if you already have a good quality CD based system and listen mostly to classical/Jazz, it isn't really worth the effort to change over to a computer based system. I kind of want to, but feel in the end that the HI-FI industry is just drawing me in to spend more money when I don't really need to. High quality downloads are an attraction, but they cost more than CD's. Also, I already have many Hybrid SACD's, which wouldn't be improved upon. I think it's rather like those people who have adopted the Kindle for reading, as opposed to just sticking with paperbacks. Having a CD player, or reading a paperback, removes you from the need to worry about technology. Using a portable FM radio is another case in point, so much quicker and more reliable than using the internet for radio.
+1 from me !

Agree with every word .
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS