2. digital
  3. 1229322889

why still buy a cd player?

I'm relatively new to the audiophile world, and I'm trying to understand why anone who has a sonos system (or alike) and has stored his files on a server in a lossless format would still want to buy a CD player for best audiophile music quality.

here's my thinking:

if a lossless rip format is used, the data stored after ripping on a digital hard-disk is as good as cd quality - by definition-,...

with sonos i can get that data anywhere in the house without errors

so the only thing that matters is the conversion from digital to analog and the follow-up amplification.

Now,

i can go from sonos to a pre-amp using a digital port, then the pre-amp determines the DAC quality.

or I go from sonos to an amp after using the DAC in the sonos (and use the analog connection to the amp)

If I were to have a CDP connected digitally to a pre-amp, the pre-amp DAC would determine the quality of the sound. In that case I might as well skip the CDP and fall back on my sonos and connect it digitally to my pre-amp.

So the only benefit from a CDP player would come from using the DAC and thus the analog out of the CDP. Is my logic correct?

If this is correct, than I would only have better sound quality with a CDP if the DAC of the CD player exceeds the quality of the DAC of my sonos and of my pre-amp. Is my logic correct?

If it is, and since I can imagine that most $500k CD would have better DAC than a sonos, the real comparison is to figure out of the DAC of my pre-amp is better than the DAC of my CDP. If it does, than no need for a cdp, just use sonos. If it doesn't then a cdp would still provide better quality. Is that correct?

So, the decision to by a
I can imagine that a good cdp would exceed the
mizuno
kgturner's avatar
kgturner
663 posts
 
i use a squeezebox 3 connected to a 47 labs shigaraki dac. i could not tell the difference between the sb3 and the shigaraki transport i was previously using. the 47 labs transport and the sb3 were compared using a supratek dual cabernet preamp, yamamoto a-08s, and von schweikert dB99-SE speakers.

no matter how many times i tired, i could not tell the two apart. all my cd's are ripped to .wav using eac. the way i saw it, if the sound quality is identical, why keep the more expensive and less convenient piece of equipment? now, i'm considering upgrading to a transporter/emm dcc2 combo. i should be able to head to head my 47 labs dac and the emm dcc2's dac.
brianmgrarcom
1,317 posts
 
Plus, as Mr. Schroeder states, whether you can actually surpass the sound quality of a high quality CDP is debatable.
Everything in this hobby is debateable, and is.

The goal may not be to "surpass the sound quality", as you say, but rather for convenience. Can it be done with no loss of performnce? In my opinion I see no reason why not; and my limited experience bears this out.

Like you, I found the thought of creating a hard drive based system a bit daunting, though I believe this is (and will be) improving. This is why I found the Wadia i170 so intriguing when I first learned of it, as it was a way for me to do such a thing that seemed easy enough to me, and was. (That said, it lacks some great features of a PC based setup.)

I see no reason one has to rule out either option, although the future seems to be hard drive based.

Brian
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
Brian, I experimented with the cheap transport concept when I reviewed the Benchmark DAC1 (and wrote my findings in that regard in the article). You are correct that it does a lot to "even the playing field" in terms of usage of inexpensive transports. However, there was still a noticeable difference in them when feeding the DAC1. The transport had a direct influence on the outcome, and without fail the higher quality transport, the better the result.

For someone on a shoestring budget the differences may not be worthwhile. The cheap cdp and reclocking DAC will certainly give decent sound. My thought is that if one goes that route it is very possible that the end result will not be significantly improved over Sonos to DAC.

At the price point it's more difficult to set up Redbook to easily best the Sonos/DAC combo. One cdp I wrote about which does outshine the Sonos is the Cambridge Audio Azur 840C. They are appearing now on the used ads here, so that might be an option. It would definitely be worth saving up for a player of that caliber, and it has a unique "flavor", a more expanded sound that would be different from the Sonos.

Another thought: I haven't done the homework (that's for Mizuno to do!) but if the same laser assembly is used in the lower end Azur cdp line then one of them might be excellent as a transport for use with the DAC.
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
It depends on the DAC being used.


Exactly see this and this and this.

Decide for yourself if you trust the published results from this manufacturer using Audio Precision test equipment or your ears.

If changing the transport makes a difference with a DAC1 then one (or both) of your transports is NOT reading the CD as "bit-perfect"

- either the transport is struggling to read a dirty scratched disc (clean or polish it) and it is making many interpolations and you can hear this (certainly audible when you have a disc with CD rot at which point interpolation becomes very obvious). In any case, a clean unscratched CD is the best starting point.

- or the transport is not applying Reed Solomon error correction properly (it has been known - transports error correction codes are not all properly designed so are not "bit perfect" neither are many computer audio playback algorithms, unfortunately)

Bear in mind that Solomon Reed error correction codes are used for satellites and other critical engineering applications where "bit-perfect" can be mission critical.
tgrisham
1,291 posts
 
Douglas_schroeder and Shadorne,

Thank you both for an interesting and civil discussion. I continue to learn and your posts are interesting, informative and well-mannered. Please keep up the good work. Disagreement is healthy when presented properly.
More to discover