Challenging hiend cd player/transport result

[Quest]

Quest, There's no reason to go on with this topic other than to point out an Hd-player if you run across one, or to speculate on why one hasn't been produced, or why you believe one will not or cannot be produced. Other than that I think we understand each other well enough--although that may not be obvious at first glance.

Well, I did give quite a few examples, but maybe you are not familiar with them or reject them because they perform more than 1 function (e.g. Bladelius which is a ripper as well), or just because you feel they are not built from ground up (e.g. Bryston which is on linux), or because a manufacturer has taken a different view (non hd player but streamer instead). That's fine. You are entitled to your view.

Honestly if you think stuff like Apple ipod is the best and simplest device, built from ground up for audio.. you can just mod it to have a larger harddisk, and mod it for a clean digital output into a DAC. Many portable rig owners have done this and I've heard quite a few. But please, give it a try yourself and let me know if you think it still sounds better than a CD transport of equivalent cost. I personally don't find portable players to be built for audio really - they are mobile entertainment devices (with video) and built to a cost and size requirement.

Funnily enough, since we are talking about ipod, latest trend seems to be adding on usb devices to it which acts as the host to reduce jitter. Like this:
http://www.aloaudio.com/algorhythm-solo/

To me, end of the day, we are pursuing this for the end goal of getting to better sound from computer files vs cd transport, and that was what I thought the whole purpose of this thread is about - especially in hi-end playback. I'm sure your suggestion is one way we can get there, but I'm also sure it isn't the only way we can get there.

[Suteetat]

Look like at CES Weiss is displaying its new music server MAN202.
However again, it might still do a bit more than a simple media player as it is also  a
ripper, ethernet, USB to external drive, firewire/XLR to external DAC, digital output via XLR/RCA
as well as analog XLR/RCA out.
Look like more highend companies are jumping into music server bandwagon now.

[Windows X]

MAN202? Reminds me another Sooloos-like product. I hope price wont exceed $10k.....$8k would be plausible.

Anyway, good ripping is dedicated PSU with something like Plextools + Plextor Premium(2) or Yamaha F1. Even powercord and resonance control of ripper drive affect ripped information.

[Flecko]

Anyway, good ripping is dedicated PSU with something like Plextools + Plextor Premium(2) or Yamaha F1. Even powercord and resonance control of ripper drive affect ripped information.

Have you tested this by comparing the bits of different rips of the same non scrachted cd? It should be the same, no matter what drive or what kind of PSU.

[Windows X]

Yes, I did. Here's what I tested for powercord.

1. use Plextools to rip track 1 from Kent Poon Audiophile Jazz Prolouge III.
2. Turn off computer
3. Change powercord from $10 stock ones to ASR Magic cord (I like this ones because it has 6 big caps for power filtering as I use switching PSU) and turn computer on again.
4. Open Plextools and rerip the same track using the same configuration
5. Try listening to song individually. Older ones is duller and has less transparency.
6. Try comparing bit transparency...pass. They're all the same.
7. Try checking file comparison.....they're different.....hmmm As putting clamp on spinning disc affect SQ so I wouldn't surprise of something like this actually affect output information

I understand that most computer audiophile people have a lot of misconceptions and delusions about how stuff really works and what that can cause changes in good/bad ways. If all drive can sound the same they we don't need Esoteric P-01 to P-05 or Sony SACD should suffice.

FYI: I use Plextor Premium TLA:0000 putting inside Thermaltake Mozart IP (Decent Aluminium case for its price)

[Flecko]

Interesting. I have made experiments like this too. In the end, the most important thing was the set up of the software. Are you using c2 correction? Have you tried EAC too? With EAC I can get the same results from two completely different pc setups. Bit by bit, not the smalest different. If power supply or the drive makes a difference, there should have been some differences. Can you explain what the bit transperency check is? What program have you used for file comparison?

[AUDIODIDAKT]

If you really like to test this:

Use the latest EAC version (there is a new version 1.0) and make sure your log looks (something) like this (1.0 version has log updates):
rip the whole album, F4 detect gaps, create cue sheet - non-compliant, use test&copy function to rip, then compare files, dont use plextools.
See how the crc calculations are matching, the albums "should" sound the same.
btw. This is not my log, just a log, i have a plextor drive too (PX-755), used plextools for a long time, also used a clamp ("de mat") before
used Taiyo-Yuden and gold discs in the past to burn my cd's, dont burn anymore, just rip.

maybe if you have results spread some filemail links around :-)

Roy

Code:

Exact Audio Copy V0.99 prebeta 5 from 4. May 2009

EAC extraction logfile from 26. October 2010, 8:59

Asura / 360

Used drive  : PIONEER DVD-RW  DVR-212D   Adapter: 1  ID: 0

Read mode               : Secure
Utilize accurate stream : Yes
Defeat audio cache      : Yes
Make use of C2 pointers : No

Read offset correction                      : 48
Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out          : No
Fill up missing offset samples with silence : Yes
Delete leading and trailing silent blocks   : No
Null samples used in CRC calculations       : Yes
Used interface                              : Native Win32 interface for Win NT & 2000
Gap handling                                : Appended to previous track

Used output format              : User Defined Encoder
Selected bitrate                : 128 kBit/s
Quality                         : High
Add ID3 tag                     : No
Command line compressor         : C:\Program Files\FLAC\flac.exe
Additional command line options : -8 -V -T "ARTIST=%a" -T "TITLE=%t" -T "ALBUM=%g" -T "DATE=%y" -T "TRACKNUMBER=%n" -T "TOTALTRACKS=%x" -T "GENRE=%m" -T "ALBUMARTIST=%v" -T "ALBUM ARTIST=%v" %s


TOC of the extracted CD

     Track |   Start  |  Length  | Start sector | End sector 
    ---------------------------------------------------------
        1  |  0:00.00 |  5:52.32 |         0    |    26431   
        2  |  5:52.32 |  5:53.47 |     26432    |    52953   
        3  | 11:46.04 |  8:26.45 |     52954    |    90948   
        4  | 20:12.49 | 10:33.21 |     90949    |   138444   
        5  | 30:45.70 |  5:45.15 |    138445    |   164334   
        6  | 36:31.10 |  8:15.34 |    164335    |   201493   
        7  | 44:46.44 |  7:45.64 |    201494    |   236432   
        8  | 52:32.33 |  6:28.58 |    236433    |   265590   
        9  | 59:01.16 |  9:13.57 |    265591    |   307122   
       10  | 68:14.73 |  9:25.04 |    307123    |   349501   


Track  1

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\01 - El-Hai.wav

     Pre-gap length  0:00:02.00

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC CEBAB780
     Copy CRC CEBAB780
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  2

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\02 - Regenesis.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 99.9 %
     Test CRC 2493BA9B
     Copy CRC 2493BA9B
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  3

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\03 - Altered State (album edit).wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 04943A16
     Copy CRC 04943A16
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  4

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\04 - Atlantis Child.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 2B9A57BD
     Copy CRC 2B9A57BD
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  5

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\05 - Erase.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC BDCED9F0
     Copy CRC BDCED9F0
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  6

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\06 - Halley Road.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 99.9 %
     Test CRC 0E63EA5D
     Copy CRC 0E63EA5D
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  7

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\07 - Longing for Silence.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 198253C7
     Copy CRC 198253C7
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  8

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\08 - Getsemani.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 7F1390ED
     Copy CRC 7F1390ED
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track  9

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\09 - Le dernier voyage.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC A1619745
     Copy CRC A1619745
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK

Track 10

     Filename D:\Asura - 360 (2010) [FLAC]\10 - Virgin Delight.wav

     Peak level 96.6 %
     Track quality 100.0 %
     Test CRC 3019430A
     Copy CRC 3019430A
     Track not present in AccurateRip database
     Copy OK


None of the tracks are present in the AccurateRip database

No errors occurred

End of status report

[Suteetat]

While I am not denying that power cord may affect the way CD is ripped but I have to wonder. First I have to declare that I don't really know what's involved in ripping CD, all those error correction etc but this is what's bothering me.
First, Kent Poon CD has wav files on it so technically it is not really ripping. It is just a matter of copying files from CD to hard drive. 
While I believe that playing CD in real time like music CD has many potential problem unique to audio playback such as jitter, copying  wav file from CD or ripping CD to hard drive is no
difference from copying any file from CD to hard drive, unzipping files from CD or installing program from CD-ROM. If there is a significant difference in file data as Xwindow said when changing
power cord and making file comparison then I expect we would get a lot more CD errors, uninstallable programs, corrupted data files from CD ROM.
If we cannot get bit perfect reading from data CD to a hard drive, how would most computer be able to function? If error correction from CD ROM is good enough for
data CD, why should it not be good enough for music data (when ripping, copying, not playing).
I never tried to compare these myself and just assumed that properly set up EAC/dbPoweramp should take care of those problems.
I recognizes differences in sound quality of CD transport when playing music. There is no denying that but real time music playback is one thing, reading and copying and processing data on a CD in a computer is quite a different matter, I believe.

[Flecko]

First, Kent Poon CD has wav files on it so technically it is not really ripping. It is just a matter of copying files from CD to hard drive.
While I believe that playing CD in real time like music CD has many potential problem unique to audio playback such as jitter, copying  wav file from CD or ripping CD to hard drive is no

If it was a wav file and you would get two different files just by adding some powercord, I would assume the drive is defective. If it is a normal audio disc, there are ways to get different results. The error correction is not that perfect for audio cd like we know from normal files. But if you set things right, like shown by audiodidakt, and have a non scratched cd, the resluts must be the same, for different drives, powercords, pc's.... Otherwise , something is realy wrong.

[Windows X]

1. I didn't copy aiff files from DVD disc of Kent Poon nor ever mention about DVD. Don't confuse this with CD ripping
2. I used to use EAC as primary ripper till I findout Plextor Premium+Plextools pwn Plextor Premium+EAC 1.0 to level that EAC doesn't bring music and dbpoweramp is even worse.

I took deep length of research about how CD Transport works in level of hiend reference class combining with knowledge from data communication, OS and hardware architecture like computer/electronic. I can give you explanation why powercord or resonance and vibration control affect ripped information but you wouldn't understand in a way that you should be. It's like explanation nature phenomenon to someone who doesn't study physic.

Let's put it in simpler way, assuming c2/cache/SOHA/etc. can make perfect rip, we wouldn't need Esoteric P-01/DCS Scarlatti  transport in audiophile market

[AUDIODIDAKT]

PROOF IT !
 

Rip one album with Plextools and EAC, then compare.
Plextools makes same rips as EAC.

Use cuetools to compare crc's

I'am openminded, but data should be data.

Not talking about playback-on-the-fly, where jitter can emerge.

[PeterSt]

Before this all runs off-track ...

6. Try comparing bit transparency...pass. They're all the same.
7. Try checking file comparison.....they're different.....hmmm As putting clamp on spinning disc affect SQ so I wouldn't surprise of something like this actually affect output information

It is this what confuses :

a. "Bit transparency" as such, implies "bit perfect", implies "all is bit per bit the same".

b. Different files ? impossible when combined with a.

So ...

Your means to check for bit transparency isn't correct (e.g. look at a HDCD light which says something but is no guarantee at all).
or
At checking the files the offset is different, and therefore the files are different. In this case bit transparancy can be maintained (theoretically).

In either case all says nothing. Of course, the different offsets may (or will) happen when using different drives to rip from.
Different offsets *will* sound different (throughout).

If this is not about offsets being different, but the files are anyway, as Flecko said : something is wrong to begin with, and no further observations or tests are necessary.
In the mean time (and in this case) your test for bit transparency fails as well (because it can't be).


To sum it all up :
If you state that a powercord will change the file outcome - or will state that any other varying means will change the file outcome - you are perfectly right things will be different / wrong etc.
It would be the first time though that I hear someone saying a thing like this, because it is 1000% obvious.

Claim 100% the same files, while they sound different - and then we'd have a rather normal case. Not that we understand much of it, but it is recognized and known to exist. Same problem if it were for you, but no advantage for a CDP which will only be (theoretically !) worse at this.
But come up with different files, and you are way behind facts. Still true (hence, I sure believe you), but something else is the matter, and it will be irrelevant to what it's all really about.

I hope I'm not confusing too much.
Peter

[Windows X]

From my experiences and knowledge, bit transparency doesn't necessary make identical information in output buffer. At least using different drive or application can pass bit transparency check but we know they don't sound exactly the same. Each to their own so I'll just share mine to level that it doesn't trouble me.

[AUDIODIDAKT]

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue41/ca_kentpoon.htm

3. Let's move on to ripping. As with the above, there are proponents that claim only certain software, and optical drives for that matter, can "accurately" rip a CD. That they can clearly hear differences between rips via different means; even though the rips are bit for bit perfect. Any thoughts on what is going on here? Is there an advantage to using specific ripping software or drives over another? Say iTunes, WMP, Max or whatever when compared to say EAC?

We had this test in our article too. From our test, the iTunes rip is as good as EAC/Plextor rips on a disc in good condition. It is not a big deal in ripping with today's computer resources. However an EAC or Plextor rip is only superior because it re-reads the data on a scratched disc and will tell you what's going wrong during the whole process. If the rip is bit for bit perfect, then you will not able to tell any difference because there is none. iTunes has a shuffle function. You can create an album playlist with all bit perfect, but different ripping method files. Work with a friend and play them in shuffle mode to see if you really can detect which is which.

7. What do you see as being the most important factor in getting the best sound in computer-based audio? That is what should the consumer address with the greatest concern when setting up a computer-based audio system?

Don't try to use money as measure of sound quality. For example, saying that a Mac Book pro can never sound as good as the $10,000 CD transport because of all the audiophile terms regarding their differences. This is a gap between the traditional audiophile and the new generation of audiophiles. The biggest concern in computer-based audio is the DAC. A good DAC will guide you through.

[Suteetat]

I took deep length of research about how CD Transport works in level of hiend reference class combining with knowledge from data communication, OS and hardware architecture like computer/electronic. I can give you explanation why powercord or resonance and vibration control affect ripped information but you wouldn't understand in a way that you should be. It's like explanation nature phenomenon to someone who doesn't study physic.

Let's put it in simpler way, assuming c2/cache/SOHA/etc. can make perfect rip, we wouldn't need Esoteric P-01/DCS Scarlatti  transport in audiophile market

May be you should try to explain otherwise stating that other people are too ignorant to understand your science is not a way to make constructive discussion.
Physics is not so exotic a subject, I am sure many people here have heard of it or even study it as well!