Is computer audio a bust?

Raymonda,
In terms of sales volume you may be correct, I haven't done any research to verify or deny. For my purposes it doesn't matter as I'm concerned only with how the product sounds and reproduces music. That's all I care about.
If you find that in your experience computer systems sound better then case closed, you made the right decision. I can't tell you what to like, that's strictly your call. I've heard many computer based systems over the years, some were very good and others weren't. Judging solely on sound quality I wouldn't think of exchanging my current digital front end for any of computer alternatives. Again that's just me, you and I will respectfully differ on this point. A dedicated high quality music server/transport is a potentially different story and I could see that possibility. I'm not persuaded by the computer options at all.
Charles,

Hello Keith,
I don't know the technical aspects of the TI 1794 chip. All I can attest to is that Shigeki Yamamoto found a way to get absolutely beautiful music out of it and for that I am very grateful for his talent and effort. I've added Duelund CAST capacitors (1pair) for output coupling and placed the DAC on a Star Sound Apprentice Stand. These two simple steps took it to an even higher level.
Charles,

Jesusa0,
What USB dac did you use for your comparison? The only Yamamoto dac you list is a YDA 1. As far as I can tell this is not a USB dac. Also it is from 2008 or so. There is a new dac from Yamamoto, a YTA 2 dac. This is a USB dac. It is a brand new model according to their web site. You state and I quote, "2.- USB to SPDIF converter. To my ears better resolution than connecting USB straight to DAC". So I ask what USB dac have you used to determine this opinion?

charles, the 1794 allows for direct coupling of the signal instead of out put capacitors,and there is more!, and as a seasoned audiophile that I know you are, this is best!, Incredible!

Charles....I find both done right to sound fantastic and I'm not trying to convince anyone one is better but rather that the premise that computer audio is bad....wrong or dead is way off base. Again..computer audio is the way most recording are created and sound fantastic.

Let me put it this way; a recent recording project did for a client, consisting of the group Spyro Gyra was a 26 track recording. If you were afforded the hardware....software....and tracks....would you like to have total control of your mix and afterwards would you burn it to a disc for playback in a cd player or would you save a 2 track file and use this as your playback reference? My guess is the later.....which is how most engineers keep and listen to their 2 track master mixes. Not that it doesn't get burned to a disc but that the file is saved, archived and referenced on a computer and a hard drive. A dedicated computer based system for sure but today, for most people, it is not hard to put together a dedicated computer based system.....and can cost a whole lot less than a sota cd player.

My point about Spyro Gyra was made because...In the not too distant future this might be possible.....at first I can see it starting with the ambient mix....then surround....then limited track mix....and then total mix. The variables that would need to be reconciled is distribution. ..royalies...and artist creative control. The latter is the biggest...but doable.

You might think that it could never happen but it could....copy protection of some sort could be applied...everything could be save in a cloud and payment could be fee for access. Your home hardware could be the restriction point for protection through software loaded on your computer.

Sound crazy...but so was the light
bulb....telephone....radio...and lp. All this can happen..and nd someday will. Sorry to take off an a tangent....but this is along way of saying computer audio ain't dead but rather just beginning.