2. digital
  3. 1166325813

Today's Transport War: Significant Differences?

I have been reading much these days about computer/hard-drive based transports as being a whole order of magnitude superior to traditional CD transports. In my reading, the camp who believes hard-drive based transports can render major improvements has been most notably represented by Empirical Audio. The camp which suggests that traditional CD transport techonology (or atleast the best of its sort--VRDS-NEO) is still superior has been most notably represented by APL Hi-Fi.

Each of the camps mentioned above are genuine experts who have probably forgotten more about digital than many of us will ever understand. But my reading of each of their websites and comments they have made on various discussion threads (Audiogon, Audio Circle, and their own websites) suggests that they GENUINELY disagree about whether hard-drive based transportation of a digital signal really represents a categorical improvement in digital transport technology. And I am certain others on this site know a lot about this too.

I am NOT trying to set up a forum for a negative argument or an artificial either/or poll here. I want to understand the significant differences in the positions and better understand some of the technical reasons why there is such a significant difference of opinion on this. I am sincerely wondering what the crux of this difference is...the heart of the matter if you will.

I know experts in many fields and disciplines disagree with one another, and, I am not looking for resolution (well not philosophical resolution anyway) of these issues. I just want to better understand the arguments of whether hard-drive based digital transportation is a significant technical improvement over traditional CD transportation.

Respectfully,
pardales
aplhifi
515 posts
 
We are not talking about the "external converter” and associates Steve, we are talking about the transport or the Noiseball which can not hold a candle against another transport featuring quiet linear power supplies. It's a fact. What good is external battery power supply when your data comes form the Noiseball? And BTW, the so called “super clocks” actually add jitter. But it sounds better right? So here is another puzzle to solve. :-)

Otherwise any DVD player or computer would sound satisfactory. Unfortunately, they don't. As far as I know Olive has a computer based solution (single box with control and HDD inside) with linear PS so that would be my best bet for starters.

But then again, it really depends on the level of audio quality one is after and what is his/her reference. Other than that Noiseball audio is more convenient, I admit. But what is up with evolution and mankind getting lazy? It was CD against Vinyl before now is the Noiseball against CD. It's funny! And why everyone around here forgets the High-Rez digital formats to which a CD is inferior, regardless of how it was processed.

Regards,
Alex
jsadurni
210 posts
 
Yes the Reconstrction Theory....
cics
43 posts
 
Nova Physics Group Memory Player is the latest buzz and is attracting rave reviews. It's essentially a computer with a tube based dac ($15k). You also get it without dac ($10k). One reviewer comments on how it outperforms the highly regarded Zanden front-end ($40k+).

So, yes its an evolutionary thing with a sweet benefit of lowering costs.
seandtaylor99
1,262 posts
 
The computer serves only to provide readable 1s and 0s, and evidently, despite their "noiseball" characteristics PCs are perfectly capable of reading 1s and 0s from CD roms, and hard-drives and streaming them over ethernet or USB without a single bit error. That's how you're reading this web site.

An external DAC can have its own power supply, and isolating any noise from the USB or ethernet inputs is not rocket science. Finally RAM based FIFO buffering and reclocking will feed the DAC a bit-perfect signal with noise removed and ultra-low jitter.

I understand that Alex produces respected machines, but I see no coherent engineering based arguments that refute any of what Steve (or I, or others) have said.
slothman
311 posts
 
Regardless of the way we choose to play our Redbook, it makes me wonder if those in control of the CD mastering process are truly as critical as we are in our listening. How perfect is the mastering process? For that matter, look around and see how many professional recording devices these days have a USB port - what do you suppose that's for? Connecting to a "Noiseball" I reckon. Tells me that somewhere in the recording process our beloved 1's and 0's are quite possibly passing through a Noiseball. If so, is it possible that some of that noise generated garbage is being passed on to us in the final product? Are we just trying in vain to fix garbage that was already there?

I'm using a Meridian 518 to send my 1 and 0's from my computer to my DAC. My SPDIF converter is a Waveterminal U24 - which happens to be a professional audio device with , you guessed it, a USB port. The Meridian is supposedly a unit that (according to the manual) has been used in the final mastering process by Chesky records and Sony Classical, to name a few. Considering the above, perhaps I am doing no worse with the end product than what is being done in the studios in the first place?
More to discover