i have a roksan kandy cd player i have been using it with my ca magic dac....i also have a old mission pcm7000 cd player....when i put it through my dac, it is so much better than the roksan? i dont understand? i was under the impression that cd player is just the transport and the dac does everything else? i think the trasport of the roksan is good? it reads cds fast as does the mission.. i think the roksan transport is a sony and the mission a philips...the only downside with the mission is put a hybrid cd in...it goes nuts! other than that it plays anything!
why does my old cd player sound better than my newer cd player going through my dac?
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
I can't avoid starting a war with this. But here goes.
While a transport should be a transport should be a transport. they're not. Some are better at reading CDs than others, they do so with less errors meaning that less correction (digital patching-up) is needed. Dare I say it, I also suspect there's an element of 'player A' working better with 'DAC x' than 'player B', while 'player B' works better with 'DAC y', irrespective of how well each player reads the CD. I can't back-up any of this with technical proof, ABX tests and indisputable graphs, but it is one of those things which stands up to logical reason. It's another one of those reasons why there's no substitute for auditioning a new piece of kit with the gear you intend to mate it with.
While a transport should be a transport should be a transport. they're not. Some are better at reading CDs than others, they do so with less errors meaning that less correction (digital patching-up) is needed. Dare I say it, I also suspect there's an element of 'player A' working better with 'DAC x' than 'player B', while 'player B' works better with 'DAC y', irrespective of how well each player reads the CD. I can't back-up any of this with technical proof, ABX tests and indisputable graphs, but it is one of those things which stands up to logical reason. It's another one of those reasons why there's no substitute for auditioning a new piece of kit with the gear you intend to mate it with.
MajorFubar said:
I also believe different transports make a difference......so there's a couple of us.....three if you include Shooter.
Hi there, well I'm not as experienced in Hi-fi as my friends here having only been into hi-fi for the past 8 years or so....I do want to share my epiphany with you. I once belonged to the "Dacs make all the difference and a transport has no effect" camp. However, as time passed I got to own better and better gear and my ears matured too (in a good way). It was only when I compared a marantz 5004 via dacmagic vs marantz cd63KI via dacmagic that I got to know how much difference a transport makes. The thing is that the digital signal is transferred to the dac but the transport producing the digital signal can be poorly implemented which causes a lot of problems (read error and jitter to name a few). The end result is disappointing sound quality. I am also a believer of having a better cdp than just trying to upgrade an existing cdp with a dac. Hope this helps!
My £10 Asus DVDRW reads audio CD's @ 40x standard speed with no errors. Really, not even the teeniest of errors.
So if anyones CD player is creating enough errors during a normal speed read to notice a difference in sound, I would suggest you dump that EDITED, as it clearly is not fit for purpose.
Errors my EDITED. This is the sort of thing WHF used to say before people got a clue.
So if anyones CD player is creating enough errors during a normal speed read to notice a difference in sound, I would suggest you dump that EDITED, as it clearly is not fit for purpose.
Errors my EDITED. This is the sort of thing WHF used to say before people got a clue.
Ah well we got this far down the page before the inevitable happened. That's really quite an achievement round here :roll:
People who know what they're talking about and whose living relies on designing HiFi systems say that the biggest weakness in a CD-based system is the CD and the process of reading it. By its nature, the process is inherrently error-prone. Linn have completely stopped making CD players: their streamers absolutely wiped the floor with their CD players no matter what DACs they put in them. If that has absolutely nothing to do with transports and reading discs because all transports are the same, perhaps you could tell us why it is?
And for the record, ripping a CD with a CD-ROM drive, which has the benefit of being able to make multiple attempts at reading data it didn't get right first time (you do have 'use error correction' ticked don't you?), is not remotely like a CD player, which is expected to do it all in real-time and can't go back and try again.
People who know what they're talking about and whose living relies on designing HiFi systems say that the biggest weakness in a CD-based system is the CD and the process of reading it. By its nature, the process is inherrently error-prone. Linn have completely stopped making CD players: their streamers absolutely wiped the floor with their CD players no matter what DACs they put in them. If that has absolutely nothing to do with transports and reading discs because all transports are the same, perhaps you could tell us why it is?
And for the record, ripping a CD with a CD-ROM drive, which has the benefit of being able to make multiple attempts at reading data it didn't get right first time (you do have 'use error correction' ticked don't you?), is not remotely like a CD player, which is expected to do it all in real-time and can't go back and try again.
MajorFubar said:
Nope, nope and nope. It doesn't do anything of the sort. No 'going back until it gets it right'. It's a straight read front to back. No 'error correction', just a straight read confirmed error free by comparing to multiple rips online.
And it is exactly like a CD player. MOST modern CD players have bog standard DVDRW drives / transport to cut costs.
Again, if a CD player is reading with errors, it isn't fit for purpose. Either that or learn to look after your discs a little better.
Rather than adopt a 'nope, nope, nope' dismissive attitude, perhaps you'd care to answer the question I directed at you: if transports don't make a difference, why are streamers more or less accepted to be better at audio-reproduction than CDPs.
Oh and you're wrong again: tick 'error correction' and your CD ROM *WILL* have a go at re-reading parts of the disc. Reading discs IS an error-prone process. There's NOTHING you an do to guarantee it will be error-free. That's why CDPs have error-correction algorythms built in. Therefore, obviously some CDPs will be better at it than others, even if that variance is not consistent and varies from disc to disc.
Do your homework before you get all high and mighty with your dismissive attitudes where everyone who disagrees with you is a moron.
Oh and you're wrong again: tick 'error correction' and your CD ROM *WILL* have a go at re-reading parts of the disc. Reading discs IS an error-prone process. There's NOTHING you an do to guarantee it will be error-free. That's why CDPs have error-correction algorythms built in. Therefore, obviously some CDPs will be better at it than others, even if that variance is not consistent and varies from disc to disc.
Do your homework before you get all high and mighty with your dismissive attitudes where everyone who disagrees with you is a moron.
MajorFubar said:
Well my Cd player doesn't miss a beat...... but then Philips made good transports didnt they?
idc
Well-known member
I am dubious about transports affecting sound quality because either the transport reads the data correctly and sends it error free or it does not. If it has errors in it, how do those errors translate into worse SQ? Surely if there is an error it will appear as a click or buzz or indeed no sound at all? How can a transport read a CD such that the subsequent reading produces a worse bass, or weaker treble than another transport?
I think that one way that a transport may affect SQ is to do with volume. Could the Mission CDP in combination with the DAC be producing a slightly higher volume than the Rocksan? The ear can detect slight differences in volume and louder sounds better than quieter due to clarity and dynamics.
I think that one way that a transport may affect SQ is to do with volume. Could the Mission CDP in combination with the DAC be producing a slightly higher volume than the Rocksan? The ear can detect slight differences in volume and louder sounds better than quieter due to clarity and dynamics.
MajorFubar said:
By who, you? Manufacturers who want to sell streamers? I stream myself, but for sheer convenience, not because it 'sounds better'.
MajorFubar said:
I don't 'tick error correction' because I use a proper ripper, not iTunes.
MajorFubar said:
Yes, and? Some read CDs as they were designed to do, and others, the type that read CDs so badly that it actually alteres the digital stream to the DAC to the point where the sound actually gets worse!? aren't fit for purpose, clearly. Any small errors will be corrected and will not affect sound quality. Bigger errors will not be corrected properly and you'll hear those as a click or a skip.
I've been doing my 'homework' for 25 years.
moon said:
Ok, it is a proper ripper, but other rippers guarantee a totally error free rip. iTunes cannot do that.
DBpoweramp, for example, will rip a track, compare that rip to an online database of error-free rips and if all's well, move on to the next. If there's errors (VERY RARE if you have a drive that does what it was designed to do) it will try another pass.
iTunes just doesn't give you this guarantee.
idc
Well-known member
I had more success ripping with itunes than I did with DBpoweramp.
This all boils down to does anything affect sound quality when a signal is in a digitial form? I do not think anything does. When in a digital signal the music either gets through uncorrupted or it does not. We know the affects of a corrupted signal, clicks, pops, no signal at all. But there is nothing to say that there is a way of transmitting a digital signal that differes from another way such that one signal will have an improved SQ over the other.
It all happens when the signal goes into analoge and hiots the speakers, that is where we get differences in SQ.
This all boils down to does anything affect sound quality when a signal is in a digitial form? I do not think anything does. When in a digital signal the music either gets through uncorrupted or it does not. We know the affects of a corrupted signal, clicks, pops, no signal at all. But there is nothing to say that there is a way of transmitting a digital signal that differes from another way such that one signal will have an improved SQ over the other.
It all happens when the signal goes into analoge and hiots the speakers, that is where we get differences in SQ.
idc said:
This. Also, to agree with the earlier poster, I don't believe streaming sounds any better or different than using a competent cdp as a transport. This is based on both the theory and my own experience.
Native_bon
Well-known member
Music & equipment have this really strange & weird way of changing. I got an audiolab M-dac to start with & thought it sounded much better than my Cambrigde audio 840c cdp. Then got a Rega dac again this is far musical. Then one day decided to go back to my cambrigde audio player. WOW. The 840c player was just so much musical., Detail & easy on the ear.
So I for one think trying to compare different equipment is not as straight forward as most may think. Now am back to my cd player again. Its a joy to listen to once again.
So I for one think trying to compare different equipment is not as straight forward as most may think. Now am back to my cd player again. Its a joy to listen to once again.
All cds (data CD-ROM and music CD-DA) need sofrware to read the data. In the PC world these are drivers. The software will contain read error detection and correction. Some errors can be fixed automatically without re-reading the data (usually single bit errors) but most will need the data tio be re-read from the CD.
CD Audio data (CD-DA) is stored interleaved and so it takes a number of reads to get all the parts of data that need to be un-interleavedto to form the data set that is actually played. Since this is done in real time play mode there us usually no additional error correcting on the PC depening on the PC driver software.
CD PC data (CD-ROM) is stored sequentially and the driver software does error checkeing and re-reading in order make sure that the data transferred is complete and consistent. If it finds errors it can not handle you will get disk read errors signalled up to the operating system. Since it does not matter if it takes say a few seconds to sort out a bit of data corruption it is not really noticable to the person reading the data.
This is why transports can be different as they will contain different software drivers to try and correct as much data errors it can iwithout it impacting on the overall timing of the play-back
I hope this make sence.
CD Audio data (CD-DA) is stored interleaved and so it takes a number of reads to get all the parts of data that need to be un-interleavedto to form the data set that is actually played. Since this is done in real time play mode there us usually no additional error correcting on the PC depening on the PC driver software.
CD PC data (CD-ROM) is stored sequentially and the driver software does error checkeing and re-reading in order make sure that the data transferred is complete and consistent. If it finds errors it can not handle you will get disk read errors signalled up to the operating system. Since it does not matter if it takes say a few seconds to sort out a bit of data corruption it is not really noticable to the person reading the data.
This is why transports can be different as they will contain different software drivers to try and correct as much data errors it can iwithout it impacting on the overall timing of the play-back
I hope this make sence.
BronC said:
Thank you for the technical insight.
I also suspect, the quality and isolation of components, as well as the power supply (type and quality) may also have a bearing.
:cheers:
Cno
idc
Well-known member
CnoEvil said:
But how does such have a bearing on subjective reports of sound quality differences? Is there anything in how data is read that can make better bass or clearer treble?
idc said:
That is a technical question that requires someone who is a qualified engineer to give proper answer - and even they don't always agree. Issues of data transfer, jitter handling, effects of proper isolation and the differences that power supplies can make, are best answered by such a person.
Just because I hear a difference, doesn't mean I can explain why.....and the likelyhood of you accepting any explanation that I can come up with is slim to none (and vica versa).....as this is a "Black Hole" that I don't wish to get sucked into, I am now withdrawing from this particular debate.
I just accept that, imo pretty obviously, some CD transports read CDs more accurately than others 'in one take' and so the data needs less error correction. I don't feel that I am accepting some strange 'emperors new clothes' logic that would make even Peter Belt scratch his chin.
As for ReValveIt, I cannot argue constructively with anyone who on one hand can't entertain the possibility that there are variances between transports which can have at least a minor influence on the sound quality, yet in the same thread argues some rippers on computers give worse/better rips than others.
So for that reason, as a famous man once said, "I'm out".
As for ReValveIt, I cannot argue constructively with anyone who on one hand can't entertain the possibility that there are variances between transports which can have at least a minor influence on the sound quality, yet in the same thread argues some rippers on computers give worse/better rips than others.
So for that reason, as a famous man once said, "I'm out".
From what I understand of digital data it either works or it doesn't, so either sound is accurate or you get no sound or pops/crackles if inaccurate.
However, I do remember a weird instance of installing a game many years ago.
The game would load and play but weird red lines would slowly appear all over the screen.
I tried reinstalling the game, same thing happened.
I tried various settings which helped but did not fix the issue entirely and affected other programs so put all the settings back to original.
I then levelled the PC correctly so it was not at an angle (it was tilted downward at the front).
I reinstalled the game and it worked perfectly.
With the amount of error correction PC's have and disc read errors when things go horribly wrong the game should not have installed. But it did. And it affected the game.
Therefore I am undecided as to if transports can make a difference, but from experience of something that should not be, that a transport may make a difference.
However, I do remember a weird instance of installing a game many years ago.
The game would load and play but weird red lines would slowly appear all over the screen.
I tried reinstalling the game, same thing happened.
I tried various settings which helped but did not fix the issue entirely and affected other programs so put all the settings back to original.
I then levelled the PC correctly so it was not at an angle (it was tilted downward at the front).
I reinstalled the game and it worked perfectly.
With the amount of error correction PC's have and disc read errors when things go horribly wrong the game should not have installed. But it did. And it affected the game.
Therefore I am undecided as to if transports can make a difference, but from experience of something that should not be, that a transport may make a difference.
If you don't hear the errors it does not necessarily mean that ur cd rom is reading it 100 percent correctly, it is also the error correction software at work. By the way, do let us know of the CD rom drive that reads every cd with 100 percent accuracy, a lot of people would kill for it.ReValveiT said:
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Ortofon m2 black sibilance cartridge or stylus? or something else
- Started by speedthing
- Replies: 24
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram