Do Transports Matter???


I borrowed an outboard D/A from a friend to try in my system. My intent was to hook the analog outs on my CDP to one input on my preamp and the analog outs of the DAC to another input so I could a/b my player with and without the DAC. However something is wrong with the digital out on my player because I couldn't lock a siginal with the DAC. So I grabbed my pioneer DVD Player and hooked it up as a transport. Everything sounds awesome, made a big difference in my system(won't go into details). The outboard also puts the DVD players onboard DAC to shame(well duh). But this of course also made me wonder if using a different transport(my cdp if it worked)would make any difference?? In reality the DVD player is reading the CD and sending 0s and 1s to the DAC where its reclocked anyway. I know that sometimes little things make a difference, even though on paper they shouldn't. Being this is my first expirence with an outboard DAC, I am just curious if what you use as a transport makes any difference
brianvoelz
Hi Brian!

After all these posts there's not much left for me to say. But IMO Transports play a great role in the digital chain, sometimes even bigger then DACs. And power Cords do make a difference too.
Cheers!

And Bye,Bye Redbeard...
It is normal for people to believe their senses instead of science. After all, there is a lot of historical precedent along these lines. I can imagine the frustration that Aristotle must have felt, after realizing the world was round, as he tried to explain to people that ships only appeared to fall off the edge of the earth as they went out to sea. People believed what they saw rather than science, which they didn’t understand.

The situation that we have been discussing here isn’t much different. We have a group of people who do not understand the science and technology behind digital electronics. They believe their senses, and rather than trying to understand the underlying cause and effect relationships that are responsible for their perceptions, and they prefer to believe in magical and mystical solutions that can not be explained through science.

The technology involved in Redbook recoding techniques is over 20 years old. Today, technology has advanced to the point where CDP technology is literally child’s play in the engineering community. To put it into perspective, in 1982 they were putting 5MB into a 5.25” HDD with 5 platters. Today, they are putting 80GB onto a single 3.5” platter. This is an 80,000+ fold increase in aerial density. Believe me, this wasn’t achieved by relying on mystical effects that we don’t understand. It was based on hard work by scientists and engineers in multiple disciplines. Technology, and our understanding of it, march on. So when someone tells me that there are unexplainable forces at work in the digital end of a CDP, I can’t help but laugh my head off.

There are market forces at work here as well. There is a lucrative cottage industry that supplies the audiophile community with nonsensical accessories. Many segments of this industry would dry up if the audiophile community became aware of the true cause and effect relationships at work in their systems. It is in the interests of these merchants to keep the community ignorant, and believe me, they do their best to muddy the waters.
I'm with you brother! Unfortunately, science is a dirty word and digital even more so. We are talking "audiophilia" here, no less. It exists because I heard it and don't be so bold as to call me on it! Now back to my cones and things...
Now where did I put that can of paint labeled 'transparent, clear, with a deep sound stage'?
Listening to audio is about sensory perception and not about a scientific analysis. I did not say in my previous post that science should NOT be used in hi-end audio, but that it should NOT be the only means we judge anything.

When the CD first came out scientist figured that the human ear could only hear 20hz-20khz (which is more or less true), and that one would only need to sample music at a rate of some 44khz to get a signal that was unnoticeably the same to the human ear from that of a traditional analogue signal. LMAO! All I can say is that I can tell from the next room whether my wife is playing a record or CD. The sound difference is painfully obvious.

Anyway, I would never say that technology has not succeeded in many ways. It has! And technology even gives us the music we get through our music systems. I am in wireless technology, and I love it.

However, I would STILL say a few things: Technology has not even come CLOSE to reproducing a human eye's capability. NOR has technology come remotely close to reproducing a human ear's capability. Nor has technology given us the artificial intelligence it would take for technology to tell us whether a particular 2 channel setup compares to live music.

Technology does not analyze reproductions of art. It is great at analyzing black and white thinkgs such as 1's and 0's.

Heck, one can even make the argument that our speakers can never 9and I do mean NEVER) sound like live music, because the way they reproduce the music is so vastly different than live music it is scientifically impossible for it to absolutley sound like the original.

I will readily admit that there are many things on the audio market which make fraudulant claims. Yep, there are many people out there who will readily take your money for a wiz bang gizmo that is supposed to sonically improve your system. HOWEVER, I know that certain AC cords make components sound A LOT different than the stock AC cords do. Not just little differences but HUGE differences. And I am not selling anything. I am not a dealer or manufacturer saying this. I have tried many AC cords and detailed some of my experiences in my reviews here at Audiogon.

Lastly, I will point to an Audio Reviewer who I have a little respect for. Check out Art Dudley's latest column in Stereophile where he talks about a power cord he just tried. I think he said it was the first cord he ever tried that he thought made a huge difference over stock. And Art Dudley is a pretty cynical guy (at least it sounds like that from his writing style). I take all reviews with a grain of salt, but it was very interesting reading Art Dudley's column. I personally think he needs to try more AC cords because he is only at the tip of the iceberg.

If you are a TAS fan, look at the review they wrote on the Kimber Palladium PK10. Also see Enjoythemusic.com for another review of the Kimber Palladium PK10.

Maybe this is a big audio conspiracy?

Maybe AC cords are the audio equilivilent of Big Foot?

Maybe I am INSANE? Maybe I cannot trust my senses?

Because what I am hearing, Redbeard, directly contradicts my sensory perceptions. And frankly, everyone's sensory perceptions that were around me when I was doing some listening.

Even my WIFE, who does not care a flip about hi end audio equipment, has heard a difference between the AC cords. And I was not telling her what one I preferred at all. She came to her own conclusion without any influence from me. Go figure...

I am friends with many people who love two channel, and we all principally agree that AC cords make big differences on components.

Maybe this is one big delusion???

Oh, and I never said that there were unexplainable forces at work. I believe I said no one has yet to explain to me why AC cords really make this much of a sonic impact. I have heard attempts at the explanation, but nothing that satisfies my curiosity. I am sure there is some scientific explanation. Until I haer an explanation that I can understand, AC cords remain mysterious to me. But in the end, it is not the factual explanation I am seeking, but the experience of listening to wonderful music.

KF