Can a PC match the quality of the best CD players?

Thought I would chime in on this one...

In most "cheaper" PCs on the market, there are three cables coming from a DVD/CD drive in a computer; "general data", a "left/right analog" and a "digital" cable.

Therefore it is my experience and understanding that if you play a CD directly from the drive the signal passes over the "digital" cable which is a VERY poor grade cable that connects directly to the sound card on the computer.

However, if you "rip" the CD to the computer's hard drive first and then play the file off of the hard drive, you should and do get a better sound as it does not transfer over the poor quality "digital" cable from the DVD/CD drive.

Anyway, give it a try. I have noticed far better sound from the hard drive compared to the DVD/CD drive directly.

On a side note, the fans in computers and such really do destroy the audio quality. I have upgraded my HTPC to a fanless system entirely and it sounds much better.

If you are looking for a fanless solution that is really dedicated, or near dedicated, for audio, look at the Serener ITX PCs. With the NEC spinpoint drive, its dead quiet (that doesn't give you a huge amount of storage, but its networked to a 1TB Buffalo terastation in a remote location. I'm using one and my only complaint is that the blue LED on the front is like a friggin' laser.

http://www.logicsupply.com/product_info.php/cPath/49/products_id/372

Coffee_nudge,

Doesn't your Wadia have digital input? If yes, you should feed your computer data to Wadia to see if Bel Canto is the limiting factor and feedback to us. I am very interested in computer based audio system and willing to spend money on a good DAC if the end result is worthwhile.

Thank you all for your input. I understand the points about jitter, the need for an external DAC, and data being read from a hard drive being more accurate than data being read from a CD. Thank you Audioengr for the extremely informative Empirical Audio link.

Okay, so let's say for argument's sake that by following some of the tweaks in the replies above, and for the reasons stated in the Empirical link, by reducing jitter, that a computer has the potential to be better than a $5K CD player. But what about all of the non-audiophile hardware making up a computer?

Is the $100 Plextor CD burner I buy (not for playback, but necessary for reading CDs to get them into the computer) as good as the transport/laser in a $5K CD player? Surely this element is key as it is the 1st step where any sort of audio data copying/transmission - and the chance for errors - takes place.

And what about power supply? AFAIK the best PS for a computer doesn't cost much more than $100-$150 (Enermax, Antec). And if people are willing to spend 10 times that for an audiophile grade power cord going to their $5K Cd player, I have to assume that the PS in that CD player has got to be "better" (I guess that means in terms of noise and stable current output) than a $100 Antec. Is anybody out there using audiophile PS chords with their computer?

In a $5K Cd player, every component (PS, wire, solder point, circuit, transistor, etc., etc.) is (in theory anyway) maximized to the best that it can be in order to do ONE thing: reproduce music in the most accurate way possible. Doesn't it seem then that by using computer hardware components not designed with audiophile goals in mind, that the hardware of a computer is hampering (at least minimally and perhaps drastically) its'audiophile potential???

Actually, you don't need a burner to read CDs... ;)

The issue here is that if you proceed like some have recommended, *everything* behind the USB cord is isolated from the audio chain and--unless your computer is so bad it blows the buffering for the serial output or can't keep up with reading--will not affect the audio quality.

And, there are folks--like audioengr--who do audiophile mods for USB devices.