2. pc-audio
  3. 130268-75799

Computer, CD transport or Network Player?

I currently have most of my music downloaded on my computer as FLAC files and listen to it through JRiver or Signalyst HQ (audio players for Windows) on my Dell desktop. The sound is amazing but I have a question and it is this:

Which do you find to have the highest sound quality;

1.  Redbook CD's directly played in a high quality CD transport?
2.  Ripped FLAC or Apple lossless files played through a high quality PC or MAC computer based audio player (such as JRiver or Signalyst for Windows or Vox or Clementine for MAC)?
3.  or music (from one's own private CD collection) loaded on a network player?

Using a DAC of course.
mewsickbuff
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
No difference - you can go any route provided

1) The DAC is a very good one (jitter immune and with a robust algorithm that reliably process all data inputs in the same manner)
2) The source files are bit perfect and there is no manipulation of volume or sample rate by the setup prior to the bitperfect data reaching the DAC.

everest_audio
285 posts
 
Agree that you can go any route provided, but, with respect to shadorne, I disagree that there is no difference. Even with DACs that handle jitter extremely well, I've still heard the differences between the options mentioned by mewsickbuff. How much of a difference is highly dependent on the quality of the system and the components in these scenarios, but they can be different for sure. My best results have been obtained with a dedicated network server/player. If you're using a network player that doesn't have storage and are accessing a NAS, the quality of the NAS will make a difference as well.
randy-11
1,913 posts
 
 I agree with shadorne, but one caveat - the quality of the design and implementation will decide among any of the 3 approaches.

Big money is not required, but careful attention to ground loops, noise injection and phase error will be important.  USB can be a problematic interface too.

The speakers, their locations, room treatments, and the SQ of the initial mastering & recording processes will all be much more important.

A rel. new DAC design will give better SQ/$ than older ones, so I would avoid used if older.

Your question would be an excellent one for the numerous audiophile and industry engineers at
https://www.computeraudiophile.com
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,428 posts
 
I prefer to transfer (WiFi) data instead of music.  Data does not contain timing thus computer itself (speed, playback program etc) is not important.  It can be done using WiFi, Ethernet or Asynchronous USB.   When you connect transport to a DAC then most likely it will be done using digital cable and S/Pdif protocol.  Timing of the D/A converter clock will be dependent on incoming signal timing and many factors can affect it, including digital cable itself, playback program, computer speed/setup and electrical noise.
mewsickbuff OP
237 posts
 
So it looks like either of these setups can work IF implementation is top notch. I'm not much for Spotify, Pandora, etc. because I like to listen to my own music. If I listen to an album sample & like most of what I hear I buy the CD. Would an SSD computer be better than the HDD I'm currently running? Does a network player with storage have any advantage over an SSD computer?
More to discover