Lossless Files Vs CD's

To the original post: You can achieve very low jitter using either computer/server playback or transport playback, however IME it is easier and less expensive to achieve the maximum performance using a server.

The main reason is that jitter from the CD transport is generally affected by the pits in the CD. When you rip the CD, the jitter in the pits is unimportant and does not affect the image that results or the server playback. The pits are only important for transport playback.

Once you have a digital image, you can apply low-jitter clocking hardware to it that will result in playback with lower jitter than even the best transports can deliver. The exception is the transport based on a CDROM drive that spools the data to a memory and then it is spooled out of the memory. This is essentially a server type playback.

Also, the playback software and CODECs will affect the playback depending on the lossless compression used. IF none is used, you will get the best result, by using native wav format.

Therefore, the result you will get with server/computer playback depends entirely on the playback software used, the format that you rip to and the playback hardware. The playback hardware can be a USB converter, USB DAC, Ethernet network interface or simply a S/PDIF interfaced from the computers PCI bus. The quality of the interface hardware and the power supply for each of these makes the difference.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Audiogoner, Steven Are you in CA? I would love to come to your place that you prove me wrong. No, seriously, i would the happiest guy in the world if you prove that I'm wrong, and i swear i'll post about it. And i'm not even discussing rewritten CD-R. Just prove to me (by audition) that your own CD ROM with source CD won't beat files ripped from it. Deal?

Dvavc - I'm in central Oregon, but I will be in CA at the Newport Beach show next weekend, Fri, Sat and Sun. My exhibit is in the Hilton room 1001.

"Just prove to me (by audition) that your own CD ROM with source CD won't beat files ripped from it."

I cannot do this at the show because I will not have a CD transport at the show, only an Antipodes server. If you come to Oregon (Bend area), I'll be happy to do this demo. Bring your best CD transport and disk. Just email me.

Virtually all of my customers have given up on CD transports in favor of computer audio because of the improved SQ. Some have even sold their vinyl setups. I have the posts on forums to prove this.

I highly recommend you come to the Newport show anyway. It will be an eye-opener for sure:

http://theshownewport.com/visitors/index.html

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Steven, this is not the point of the argument! This is exactly how people get derailed in their findings of the truth!) I'm talking about apples and you talking about potatoes. I'm not disputing jitter or whatever what is happening in playback. I assume (cause i don't know for a fact) that you right on that and if you had the original files which were copied to the CD by recording companies,it would play much better through comp because its jitter free or whatever. But this is not the point here. The point here is that you loosing the quality of the sound (SQ) right there when you ripping/converting PCM files from CD in to WAV on your comp. And said loss of SQ can't be compensated by jitter free playback. Whatever musical micro nuances lost in conversion they gone for good and you can't resurrect them by play it back by allegedly jitter free way.)

05-26-14: Dvavc
The point here is that you loosing the quality of the sound (SQ) right there when you ripping/converting PCM files from CD in to WAV on your comp.

FWIW, I see no technical basis for that contention (assuming the rip is done with software that assures bit perfect results), and it is certainly not proven by the experiment you described earlier, as I had indicated in my previous post. Nor am I aware of any other reported experiment supporting that contention.

Regards,
-- Al