Is computer audio a bust?

Agear I did not intend to be confrontational or flip. I had considered your question as serious--and then thought of pimply faced teens who make faces or frown for family pictures; who go through that faze (phase) (are they out of phase at that time?) and move on to eventual maturity. I am hopeful the best is yet to come from computer audio-as I have yet to even bother with compressed audio in any form. So yes; I too bark at today's average computer quality but take encouragement from the AUDIOENGINEER contributing on the positive side from a seriously knowledgeable vantage point. Again I ask "would adding an original Alpha Dac make a worthwhile improvement to an Oppo 105D?" (And what would be the ideal interface?)

I have an Oppo, but I only use it for DVD and 3-D movies, and occasionally for VUDU streamed movies. My reference system is driven by USB from a customized Mac Mini.

If you want the Oppo to sound better for audio, then improve the source jitter. Adding an Alpha and using Oppo as a transport will not help IME. You have not solved the fundamental jitter issue.

There are a couple of ways to do this:

1) use the CD transport output from the Oppo or another transport spinning CD's to drive a Synchro-Mesh reclocker, located between the transport output and the Oppo coax digital input. If you can loop the transport output from the Oppo back into the coax input with a cable and that works, then this will work too. Its kind of like a tape-loop for digital that allows you to reduce jitter.

2) use an Off-Ramp 5 USB converter driven by a computer using USB to drive the S/PDIF coax input on the Oppo. It goes from USB to S/PDIF coax. This will allow you to play up to 24/192 tracks, unlike the system above. This requires a bit more work, but the SQ will be even better than the Synchro-Mesh. The work involves careful choice of computer, power supply for the computer, ripping software and playback software. More expensive, but worth it IMO.

Here are some tips on rippers and playback software, as well as the computer:
http://www.empiricalaudio.com/computer-audio/

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

10-21-14: Audioengr
"Barry Diament (recording engineer of some renown) did blinded comparisons of master files in either AIFF or WAV, and there was no discernible difference"

So what? Steve Nugent did the same comparison and found a significant difference.

This is entirely system and track dependent. Recording studios are notorious for compression and using inferior playback systems for their mixing.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Barry is an audiophile/engineer so that does not necessarily apply to him. His current hi rez recordings are some of the best I have heard. I myself go back and forth on this issue. I think AIFF is better than Apple lossless, and depending on my mood, I also think WAV is a little better than AIFF.

If you analyze people's opinions on SQ superiority of WAV versus AIFF or any other format, its a coin toss statistically. What does that tell us?

The next time you have a dinner party, do a blinded test for your guests and see what you get. I trust non-audiophile ears more....

0-21-14: Ptss
Agear I did not intend to be confrontational or flip. I had considered your question as serious

I assumed that but wanted to make sure...

I am hopeful the best is yet to come from computer audio

I feel the same. Sky is the limit, but much of it is embryonic.

Again I ask "would adding an original Alpha Dac make a worthwhile improvement to an Oppo 105D?" (And what would be the ideal interface?)

There's only one way to find out. I assume it would. I heard an Exemplar Audio modded Oppo and it was very good. John Tucker, like Steve at Empirical, does very good work and is an actual engineer.

One question I have for Mr. Nugent is why are current dacs overwhelmed by incoming jitter. Overcoming jitter is their raison d'etre. Is this an engineering shortcoming that we even need Overdrives, etc?

Thanks Steve.