Is this the END of DAYS for the high end CD player

It is over. RIP CD players and CDs. You served us well in the end.

Did anyone actually try the original CD destruction tests? I seem to remember the adverts smearing CDs with jam or hitting them with a hammer then playing them. Oh the 1980s... Must have had great error correction back then!

I guess the next test will be to see how many thousand years in landfill sites it will take to decompose.

Wayneker, the CD drive in a computer is capable of retrieving the data on a CD perfectly. Not close to perfectly. Perfectly. Anything less, like a single bit out of place, and the OS you just loaded could be useless. While you can elect to bypass the error correction when ripping CDs, it isn't advisable. It is only within the software, where the data is converted from one representation to another, or in playback, that differences can arise.

And fragmentation has nothing to do with jitter. A modern disk drive can deliver data to memory far, far faster than is required for audio playback, no matter how the data is distributed. Again, the process results in perfect transfer -- not a single bit is allowed to be misplaced as it is lined up in memory.

As to noise, crosstalk, EMI, etc., they apply equally to a CD player. While it may be some time before someone creates a special purpose computer optimized for audio, the current general purpose ones are doing a pretty good job. Pro audio is almost completely computerized at this point. Long before you buy them, the music on your CDs has been through more computers than you can shake a stick at.

Agree with deframentation, I realized that.

However, I don't know if a computer can really retrieve every bit. If that's the case, I don't know why the same CD on Burmester 069 sounds better than the same files coming from a computer linked to 069's DAC. 069 has a modified CD drive use belt drive technology with error tolerance down to less than 1/3000 of an inch on both the spindle and every mechanism on the drive system. The belt drive keeps CD spinning's vibration to minimum hence, able to retrieve everything. It's not snake oil, there really is a difference!

As to noise, crosstalk, EMI etc... 069 is shielded, every circuitry is specific designed for that purpose..... I sincerely urge you to go listen to 069, wadia 971 CD transport, 931 master clock, and 922 mono DAC combo, dCS SACD/CD player or Esoteric CD/SACD players with the same CD and compare it to a computer as source...

After reading these posts, I still think I made the right decision. I just had my Esoteric UX-1pi modified by APL to include many 32-bit 2nd generation DACs and lots of other bills and whistles, including digital in and out. It is now an "M" (for APLers reading this). Although at some point I will probably reduce my CD's to a server of some sort so I can be better organized and find my music more easily, I have no plans on discontinuing to use my Esoteric transport. There IS a difference between transport and computer sourcing, and as long as I can still hear that difference, my money (and my CD's) are on the Esoteric.

Hi Fplanner2010,

what differences do you hear in your transport versus your server?

I have yet to hear a laser reading data from a cd sounding better than data from cache. In every case I found the laser in real time sounding a bit masked or vague in comparison. Not dissimilar to the addition of a really good clock.

I know Esoteric make great transports, but it is so out of date now as a way to transfer data. Surely what you are hearing is an issue with the computer set up or interface to your DAC?