Is computer audio a bust?


In recent months, I have had several audio acquaintances return to CDPs claiming improved SQ versus their highly optimized computer transports (SS drives, external power supplies, etc, etc).

I wanted to poll people on their experiences with computer "transports." What variables have had the most impact on sonics? If you bailed on computers, why?

I personally have always believed that the transport, whether its a plastic disc spinner or computer, is as or more important than the dac itself and thus considerable thought and energy is required.

agear
09-07-14: Tbg
My music server comes with a TEAC optical drive with Linux program for ripping with many checks for errors. I have found that ripping is much faster when the cds are treated with the Essence of Music cd treatment and clearly sound better also.
Does the time to treat a cd negate the shorter ripped time of a treated cd?

Since ripping is not real-time, it really doesn't matter IMO.
Joecasey, I agree but it does suggest that the longer time means that errors are more common, that Essence of Music reduces them. It probably does not mean much in ripping, but the ripping with the treatment sounds noticeably better, and I suspect that on a universal player would be quite a good deal better.
09-08-14: Tbg
Joecasey, I agree but it does suggest that the longer time means that errors are more common, that Essence of Music reduces them. It probably does not mean much in ripping, but the ripping with the treatment sounds noticeably better, and I suspect that on a universal player would be quite a good deal better.
There are tons of benchmarks extracting data off different mediums. It's a known issue and impact greatly magnified in real time.
Joecasey

Joecasey, I agree but it does suggest that the longer time means that errors are more common, that Essence of Music reduces them. It probably does not mean much in ripping, but the ripping with the treatment sounds noticeably better, and I suspect that on a universal player would be quite a good deal better.
There are tons of benchmarks extracting data off different media. It's a known issue and impact greatly magnified in real time.

I don't understand what this has to do with the improvement in the quality of the rip or with the speed of ripping.
EAC is a good program for extracting data from discs but for creating audio files WaveLab kills EAC. WaveLab is a full mastering program which allows for all kinds of flexibility from creating and mastering two track recordings to 48 track mixes. Yes....that is way more than you'll need but what it can provide for your 2 track data will amaze you. It has all kinds of plug ins that will come in handy. It also can help with system set up, too. Take a look at their website for more information. It is $500 well spent.