Is computer audio a bust?


In recent months, I have had several audio acquaintances return to CDPs claiming improved SQ versus their highly optimized computer transports (SS drives, external power supplies, etc, etc).

I wanted to poll people on their experiences with computer "transports." What variables have had the most impact on sonics? If you bailed on computers, why?

I personally have always believed that the transport, whether its a plastic disc spinner or computer, is as or more important than the dac itself and thus considerable thought and energy is required.

agear
On the contrary, I know quite a few philes who would argue with you after having done both. I have heard computer fronted systems sound like crap even with whizbang dacs and big money ancillary pieces.

There could be many reasons why setups with "whizbang dacs and big money ancillary pieces" would sound less than desirable, and that'd hardly fall back on it being computer fronted. I bailed on CD-players (and realized the importance of transports) precisely because ripped CD's or downloaded files played back from harddrives bettered any CD-player solution we tried, at almost a fraction of the cost (easily by factor ~10, as per above). With a variety DAC's USB-connected to a laptop what shone through in each instanse was a markedly added sense of resolution, natural warmth, organic flow and clarity. CD-transports may have advanced (though I doubt they have in any significant way), but the optimization of PC-audio has evolved even more so.

Spinning a CD leaves you with a single sonic option, 16/44.1, via a physical disc that needs handling for each album; playing back from harddrive/PC/Mac potentially gives you all formats to choose from, and the whole of your music library at your fingertip. In all and in more than one sense that's hardly a "bust," and a whole community of computer audiophiles would likely agree. I'd wager PC-audio can sometimes be a daunting undertaking to set up (though it certainly doesn't have to), but that's relative to ones need for tweaking.
Because it will sound better with the Synchro-Mesh, that's why.

Bit-perfect is less important than low-jitter, and the resampling in the Synchro-Mesh is the best available now. Minimal impact on SQ.

It's 30-day money-back, less shipping, so the risk is low. If your system is resolving, it will make a big difference.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
Cerrot, you obviously hold a strong opinion about the evils of bitwise imperfections versus those of jitter in this context... Please explain in detail. G.
He's just never heard a Synchro-Mesh with a good power supply, or a recent Off-Ramp for that matter.

These don't continue winning shootouts for no reason.

Yes, I've heard the Bryston with the same PCI Juli@t board that Carrot uses. Its very good, but my USB interface still beats it and so does Synchro-Mesh.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio