Challenging hiend cd player/transport result

[Windows X]

Well, I'm done feeding part and I'm more interested to see you making audition between NOS1 and hiend transport+dac combo in reference system and give us impressions from your test.

[Telstar]

Telstar, that's quite something to say from believable theory but they don't work like your believing theory at all. I suggest you to try making comparison if clock under 1ppm actually make no difference in any proper system first and then we can discuss this in details.

It's because usually ultralow ppm clocks are also better regarding other specs, such as NOISE.

Anyway, do you know that changing BNC cable, putting resonance control items and power conditioning like outlet and powercord in masterclock affacts sound in system?

Yes, I do.


[/quote]

[Windows X]

That's noise is part of improvements too but major part is stability of playback speed. You can read here for more information.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1276249490

[crisnee]

This may be a naive question, (please don't kill me for it, this is a tough thread) but why do we need either computers i.e. pcs, macs or cd players at all for playing music these days?

Plenty of components come with elements that play files from flash drives, usb disks and even esata disks. These elements are still only secondary and after thoughts, but they are getting more attention.

I recently acquired the Oppo BD93. I haven't tried it yet, but it plays flac, wav, mp3 and possibly other formats from usb and esata disks. Which means it has to have a computer of sorts to decode the files and play them. It does so in a much less noisy (electrically and physically) environment than a pc's. It's interface software isn't much but then the section is not much more than an after thought. My question is why do we need a whole pc when so much can be done with so little? I say so little because the main functions of the Oppo are Blu-ray, Sacd, Dvda and internet video streaming and the disc play is at the bottom of the list. Couldn't someone much more easily and cheaply build a little "black box" audio only player for data files, instead of trying to tame a pc for that purpose.

Is there something that pcs have in particular that is needed for audio? They were certainly not built with audio in mind, speaking of after thoughts.

Chris

[Flecko]

This may be a naive question, (please don't kill me for it, this is a tough thread) but why do we need either computers i.e. pcs, macs or cd players at all for playing music these days?

Plenty of components come with elements that play files from flash drives, usb disks and even esata disks. These elements are still only secondary and after thoughts, but they are getting more attention.

If there were a device that would be not as expensive and had very good sound quality, I would buy at once. But I think the big advantage of pc audio is, for a very low price you get very good quality.

[Per]

If there were a device that would be not as expensive and had very good sound quality, I would buy at once. But I think the big advantage of pc audio is, for a very low price you get very good quality.

Something like this

http://diyparadise.com/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemid=27

There is also a similar device with a built-in dac and headphone out

http://www.qlshifi.com/en/wzcapi/qa350.htm

(I have no personal experience with these devices whatsoever - so I do not know about real-life functionality / reliability) But they look interesting.

Per

EDIT 19:42 The qls-hifi site seems to be down / slow for the moment

[Flecko]

Something like this

http://diyparadise.com/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemid=27

Looks very interesting. Not expensive at all. Not very comfortable. Seems to sound nice. I think I would try this but I will spend the money on the Legato (btw.: I am back to 44.1/16 ). I will get a better sound from it, I am sure.
Thx for the link.

[Marcin_gps]

Something like this

http://diyparadise.com/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemid=27

Looks very interesting. Not expensive at all. Not very comfortable. Seems to sound nice. I think I would try this but I will spend the money on the Legato (btw.: I am back to 44.1/16 ). I will get a better sound from it, I am sure.
Thx for the link.

There's the digital interface from Audio-GD that some reported to be superior to jkeny's hiface.

[Flecko]

There's the digital interface from Audio-GD that some reported to be superior to jkeny's hiface.

You mean:

I stated earlier that he DI had a more natural sound. There is more cohesion to the music, the sounds and instruments fit in their right places. The DI still has some great instrument separation but the music still feels as whole  Contrary to the hiface jkeny mod the highs and perhaps upper mids are not overemphasized. Also, in terms of 2d soundstage, I find it perhaps a little wider with the DI but the hiface jkeny mod offers probably more depth but maybe that's because some frequencies are put more forward than others.

Also, I did notice with the DI that the very low frequencies (Bass) were considerably more present after more than a week of full use. I actually like a lot better the DI with the bass impact I get when I play my Wu-Tang tracks. However, perhaps the DI offers a darker sound than the hiface jkeny mod does. I'm wondering if that thick black background that we were talking about with the DI doesn't get in the way of the music that comes to your ears.

Sounds good but, ..., but I still think for 44.1/16 the legato would be better. Pat cares a lot about reflection, Kingwa not as much. He uses a second rca output beside the bnc output. That is a bad idea. The same thing as with the bnc input in my Ref7. Removing the rca input and going direct to the board with true 75Ohm coax made a "big" difference. Also the clock wouldn't be as well matched because it has to do different frequencies. And the legato is async. The legato seems to be figured out well. I am maybe a little to focused on the legato. But from my experience it seems best. The DI is also descirbed as more musical in an earlyer post. This is a statement that makes me suspicious. It can mean it sounds wrong because of false softnes. More cohesion in the music could be good but this can be an effect of less highs. If people are not sensitiv to this, they would call this a more coherent sound.

In an earlier post he wrote:

So far I can tell that the Hiface jkeny mod sounds better in terms of details, dynamics and soundstage (airiness and 3D spatial positioning of instruments or sounds) which is a big plus for me. However, I find that the DI doesn't have this over emphasize on highs that the Hiface has and I find the sound very musical.

The DI still needs a lot more burning in before I can make a definitive judgement on its sound signature.

If kingwa would design a more complete DI, in quality like the CD7 it would be easier to go for it.

[crisnee]

Plenty of components come with elements that play files from flash drives, usb disks and even esata disks. These elements are still only secondary and after thoughts, but they are getting more attention.

If there were a device that would be not as expensive and had very good sound quality, I would buy at once. But I think the big advantage of pc audio is, for a very low price you get very good quality.

That's just my point, why isn't someone producing this, it could/should be very inexpensive and much easier to deal with than a pc.

Let me paint a word picture. let's take the Oppo. As is it costs $499. It plays Bluray, Sacd, DvdA, Cd, Dvd, and various other disk formats. It streams Netflix and other internet video. Outputs 7.1 audio 24/192 dacs, 2 HDMI, and various digital, video, rs232, I/O, 10 - 100 internet, wi-fi dongle, 2 Usb 2.o and an Esata. It has 2 GB of memory. Plus other stuff I can't remember. It also sports a digital file player that plays mp3, wav, flac etc and sends video of your HD contents and what's playing to your TV or monitor. The content can be manipulated and played by remote control. This part is still fairly basic but apparently works fairly nicely. All that and more for $499.

Now suppose you strip away everything including the disk player and the good quality dacs, and leave only the digital file player, digital outs for your stand alone dac, video outs to your tv or monitor, Usb and Esata and possibly internet access I/O. Shrink the box. What have you got? Well it should be a very inexpensive, quiet, digital file player that can be accessed by remote via your tv or monitor. All you do is hookup your hard drives and you're ready to dance.

Obviously this is possible as demonstrated by those portable gadgets mentioned up a few posts and the Oppo.  But they all have too much other stuff. The gadgets have no video out and remote because they're mobile devices and the Oppo...

But I ask again, why bother with a pc when this so much simpler quieter device is begging to be manufactured. It seems the perfect project for someone like Peter, since it consists of software for playing files and an interface plus simple hardware. There'd be so much less to tweak, (of course audiophiles must tweak, so never mind).

Unfortunately I don't understand enough about the technicalities, if software in this non-pc environment would be too limited to reproduce really fine sound. Nevertheless, from what I've heard, it seems to have quite some potential and that with only limited funds and r&d thrown its way.

I'm just trying to inspire someone who can do this sort of thing to look into it. So look already.

Chris

[Suteetat]

But I ask again, why bother with a pc when this so much simpler quieter device is begging to be manufactured. It seems the perfect project for someone like Peter, since it consists of software for playing files and an interface plus simple hardware. There'd be so much less to tweak, (of course audiophiles must tweak, so never mind).

Unfortunately I don't understand enough about the technicalities, if software in this non-pc environment would be too limited to reproduce really fine sound. Nevertheless, from what I've heard, it seems to have quite some potential and that with only limited funds and r&d thrown its way.

I'm just trying to inspire someone who can do this sort of thing to look into it. So look already.

Chris

There are already plenty of media players that can store music files on HD and either has built in DAC or have digital output for external DAC such as Sonos, Logitech Squeezebox and some that can output both music and video such as Dune, Dvico etc etc. There are all rather inexpensive and have good networking ability for multiroom purpose. However, I find sonic quality is still not comparable to computer music server (Personally I used Sonos, still own Dune and Dvico). There are good for what they are and much more convenient than XXHighend but SQ needs to be improved. Personally, I also prefer
XXHighend/PC over Qsonix music server as far as SQ is concerned also.

[PeterSt]

But I ask again, why bother with a pc when this so much simpler quieter device is begging to be manufactured. It seems the perfect project for someone like Peter, since it consists of software for playing files and an interface plus simple hardware.

Brief for now : This is how I really started this all, back in 2005. I tried to improve on things -like conveniently loading files etc.- by tweaking JAVA (which is an interface language for devices as these), but it was too tedious, and still needed something like the TV to be on for control.
Now, many years later, it is what Suteetat says or implies :
It still needs the "super" environment and DAC, which will not be much more different than how the NOS1 is created (which in the very end is a 100% streamer, once you get the hang of what happens). But now there's one thing to start all over, and this is the control, user interface, *and* the (that) being dedicated, because no common Foobar etc. will be able to control it. So, it's just a design decision which at least I made with some full sense, but with the conveniency of the PC control, and the technicalities (and all pluses) of the streamer *and* the very best in th mean time.

Btw, the real "Oppo" times are from the age I mentioned (2005/2004), but back then I chose for a Momitsu. I'm not sure which of the two were first for network streaming; back then I could use the Momitsu for streaming from a friend's PC (over the internet).
I would dedicate Oppo as one of the most experienced, most ahead and stuff like that (also notice their kind of unique SACD digital output (older model I think).

Peter

[crisnee]

There are already plenty of media players that can store music files on HD and either has built in DAC or have digital output for external DAC such as Sonos, Logitech Squeezebox and some that can output both music and video such as Dune, Dvico etc etc. There are all rather inexpensive and have good networking ability for multiroom purpose. However, I find sonic quality is still not comparable to computer music server (Personally I used Sonos, still own Dune and Dvico). There are good for what they are and much more convenient than XXHighend but SQ needs to be improved. Personally, I also prefer
XXHighend/PC over Qsonix music server as far as SQ is concerned also.

Yes, all kinds of "players" exist. The problem is that 1.They all incorporate all kinds of parts that aren't part of what I'm proposing or looking for, i.e. dacs, streaming, lcd screens etc, 2.They are not meant to be audiophile gear for the most part.

I'm suggesting a very simple black box with a hard-drive interface (Esata, USB3) to connect to a drive with music files,  a digital out and/or an USB out to connect one's Dac, a video out to connect to one's external tv/monitor, and memory and software that is dedicated to decoding and playing back music files, and displaying a navigatible interface on one's tv/monitor.

All this is obviously possible and done on various systems from Ipods to high end portables to the devices you mentioned. But as I said, none of them keep it simple, nor do they put all their effort into creating a quality audiophile player.

I'll say one more time, It seems so much easier to go this route then to go the pc route and basically have to tweak the pc and Os forever to try you get to the state I'm suggesting, the simple audiophile dedicated black box. And the pc route gets ever more complicated as it now involves getting hold of a defunct Operating System (Vista), and then stripping it of everything that interferes with audio--basically everything, at which you're left with a relatively expensive box that was not meant for audio but that at this point is not good for much else. And it's too complex and frustrating a process for any but the most dedicated to endure for the sake of potentially high-end audio.

So, if anyone knows why my idea is not feasible, please let me know, so I don't go crazy trying to get someone to engineer this kind of black box.
And if y'all are gittin sick'a dis, no worries, I won't bring it up again (on my own anyway).

Chris

[Quest]

crisnee, i totally agree with what you are suggesting, and that is where some small PCs have come in to fill the gap. i have been keeping tabs of PCs like auraliti, the bryston bdp-1 (based on it), sonore, modded mac mini, etc.. honestly think we are still quite abit away from a perfect PC, but we are moving.. seems like many choose to exist on linux due to its low latency and simplicity. another way is to go for streaming but i'm not entirely convinced by streaming yet (in terms of SQ - e.g. ps audio pwd bridge) though technically it seems to move away from all the traditional PC related issues.

just to add my 2 cents on this topic in general, i have heard the difference between decent transports and PC fed into the same DAC many times, and unfortunately i feel transports still win as of now. it isn't a matter of detail level, soundstage, etc which seems obtainable. somehow it's the level of engagement or musicality and possibly this has to do with the timing and noise.

but as with all audio things, it is very subjective. the last time i did such a comparison at my home, even the visitors/listeners were split in opinion. out of 5 parties - 2 felt it was a preference and that there was no difference between PC and transport (tweakable difference), while 3 said 'PC is 90% of transport'. where it fell short are the areas i highlighted above. everyone's ear looks out for different things sometimes. my setup is not high end but difference is already discernible. we plan to host a round 2 session once i sort out my interface (with int202 or rme aes32). for high end, i can imagine that cdp is just hard to beat simply cos there are no equivalently priced PC u can spend on (e.g. vs $30k cdp, even if u want to put $30k into audio PC, i am not sure where that money will go).

i think if u were to plot performance/value on a chart, PCs would start at a higher point at the beginning but with a slow rising curve, whereas cd transports would start at a lower point and have a faster rising curve. where it intersects in terms of $$ is anyone's guess.. this mark is constantly moving due to the fast pace of evolution in PC music.

2010 seemed to be the year of async usb (i know, doesn't seem to help you guys who already using rme aes32 and weiss af1). i am hoping that 2011 will be the age of new interfaces, streamers or 'audiophile PCs' to solve the core fundamental issues..

[crisnee]

i have been keeping tabs of PCs like auraliti, the bryston bdp-1 (based on it), sonore, modded mac mini, etc..

Quest,

The problem with Bryston Bpd-1 for instance, it's over $2000. At the same time mid-fi companies are able to incorporate usb disk drive playback in Avr receivers and cd players that cost less then $500, and the usb playback is only an after thought. Have you listened to any of them? I haven't so I can't say anything about the sound quality. But it can't be awful. Some can even play flac and other better formats. So how are they producing it so inexpensively without using a pc?

Chris