2. digital
  3. 1277691270

Who has found happiness giving up cd player?

My system consists of Amati Anniversario speakers, Boulder 865 integrated amp, and Esoteric X-03 player. I like it. But I want to move to computer based sources. And if I do that, I'd like to go completely computer based, trade in my X-03 while my dealer will still give me full credit for it.

I've explored a lot of options. I know about the options with Mac or PC, through XLR or asynchronous USB or firewire, but I still don't know what to do. Go with something relatively cheap like the Ayre QB-9, and wait for the SOTA to advance? Invest in a dCS dac, upsampler, and clock, and expect to keep that for a long, long time? I like the idea of investing for the long term, but I don't want to end up enjoying my ripped CD's less than through my X-03.

It doesn't help that auditioning opportunities are somewhat limited, especially with my speakers and amp. Or that my dealer is adamant that I won't be happy replacing my X-03 with any computer based source, for redbook.

So my question is, has anyone found happiness replacing a mid range player like mine (or better) with an entirely computer based source? Anyone miss their transports?

Thanks!
Daniel
daniel_a
herman
2,256 posts
 
Right, it sure is a pain to have all of my music arranged by any of about 30 different ways (artist, genre, album, etc.) and be able to access any of them with just a few clicks of a mouse and the ability to do this from my comfy chair, the ability to play any or all randomly by shuffle play by album or song, to make and save playlists of any songs in my collection in any order, the ability to access hundreds of streaming radio stations and other music services, the ability with Pure Music to apply plug-ins for a variety of EQs or tone controls if I wish as well as triamp with no passive crossovers and time align my drivers, and many other things.

I didn't realize what a pain it is to have a computer based system! Now that I do I'll be sure to go back to a CD player and lose all of those painful features.

.
bar81
791 posts
 
Sounds like fun? Well, I guess if it's not about the quality, then more power to you.
herman
2,256 posts
 
Quality?

I've spent years building this system with sound quality always the number one priority. Why would you assume it is not?

I'm absolutely sure it can be better but I'll put my system up against just about anything out there.

.
bar81
791 posts
 
Herman,

My comments were not questioning how good your system can sound. My comments were directed at your reference to tone controls/EQs which are not generally associated with quality reproduction and neither are streaming radio stations and other streaming music. That level of reproduction quality is a long way from SACD and even CD for that matter.
herman
2,256 posts
 
Oh, for sure, streaming radio is not audiophile quality, but it is fine for background and discovering new music.

As for tone controls and EQ and I will have to differ. While many audiophile snobs turn up their noses they are powerful tools when properly implemented. They don't have any qualms about using a cable to tune their system but are shocked when someone suggests they do it another way, and a much easier and effective way. With my crossover points and slopes now selected in software I can fine tune them in ways impossible to do with passive ones. I'm afraid many are stuck in the past and don't have any idea how much software has improved and teamed with the computing power of todays computers it's time has come. Even using 64 bit calculations, a 3 way crossover, and time alignment my computer is just loafing.

It is indeed now state of the art sound.

.
More to discover