+- Devialet Chat (https://devialetchat.com)
+-- Forum: Devialet Chat (https://devialetchat.com/Forum-Devialet-Chat)
+--- Forum: Tweaker's Corner (https://devialetchat.com/Forum-Tweaker-s-Corner)
+--- Thread: The negative positive (/Thread-The-negative-positive)
Pages:
1
2
The negative positive - baconbrain - 02-May-2016
I have spent a considerable amount of time (and money) over the past couple of months building my new Win 10 music server with all kinds of bells and whistles. JCat USb Card, HDPlex External PSU, SSD HD, Roon, HQPlayer, Mutec MC3+ USB, Costly Cables, etc... and its sounds really good.
So, over the weekend I thought I would tweak my Subwoofer integration a bit and dug out my Sounddoctor Test CD which I have used in the past with good results. I decided to reactivate my Oppo 103 for CD playback and just connected it directly to my Dev via a plain jane coax cable. After going through the test, I decided to play one of the test tracks (Holly Cole's Don't Smoke in Bed) directly from the CD and it sounded good, really good.
It sounded so good that I started to wonder if all the time and money spent on my new server had really made such a big difference in the overall SQ when compared to my old CD / Oppo based solution ....
So, some of you (or all of you), are probably asking why have I decided to share this experience?
To be honest, I am not sure, but thought it might be food for thought as it clearly forces me to ask myself the question; "Is all of this high speed stuff really contributing to the jaw dropping, eye popping, & mind altering audio experience that it is sometimes propagated to do ..?"
BB
RE: The negative positive - Silvertouran - 02-May-2016
With even my modest setup ive done a direct comparison between it and just using a cd player and I can't tell the difference. Its just more convenient to have all the music in front of me on a screen rather than getting up and down to change CDs over.
I'm old and lazy. Haha
RE: The negative positive - hk6230 - 02-May-2016
I was told that a physical CD media is always better than FLAC files playback. Of course, I believe, your CD player also plays a major role for the better SQ. I had once compared my NUC+Roon+AIR playing a DSD64 format copy of "Rhapsodies by Leopold Stokowski" with a high-end German CD player (can't remember the brand and model) costing minimally 5000Euro, playing a CD version of the same album. The connection from the CD player to Le200 was a simple RCA cable. The winner: the CD Player.
So, I do believe what you claimed that your Oppo 103 sounded really good.
RE: The negative positive - Antoine - 02-May-2016
@baconbrain, that's a good reality check, but don't forget the convenience a streaming/music server solution brings!
The Holly Cole track (I know it, I have the same CD) is a very clean one, and will sound great at any system. A "better" test would probably be a more difficult production/recording.
Yesterday, for example, I heard Florence & The Machine's Shake it off song which I hadn't heard for quite some time, while that used to be one big 'loudness wars' mess it actually sounded better and more 'layered' than I ever heard.
RE: The negative positive - mdconnelly - 02-May-2016
I would agree that a good CD transport using the Devialet and it's DAC can sound better than a streaming solution. Of course, the answer is always it depends... on how you're streaming, the PC, software & network used for streaming and, of course, the quality of the music you're streaming.
I have a high-quality Oracle CD transport that, when playing high-quality CDs such as XRCDs or others, does sound better than the same music ripped and streamed. But streaming some of my high-res, well recorded music (music from Linn is a good example), sounds pretty awesome.
But personally, there's no going back. The convenience of having all my music at my fingertips, particularly when coupled with software like Roon, has spoiled me immensely. And, just like the evolution of CD quality playback, we're seeing the same quality improvements with streaming. The Sonore microRendu, I suspect, is a great example of that progress. Given the rate of change, it's hard to imagine that our CDs and CD players today will find much in a few years. Whether that's because services like Tidal will eliminate the need to own music or the quality of what we own and how we play it will continue to evolve and improve is hard to say. Likely both.
But, hey, I still have a vinyl rig and own a CD transport and occasionally use one or the other. Then again, I'm an aging dinosaur ;-)
RE: The negative positive - baconbrain - 03-May-2016
(02-May-2016, 14:44)Silvertouran Wrote: Its just more convenient to have all the music in front of me on a screen rather than getting up and down to change CDs over.
(02-May-2016, 15:03)Antoine Wrote: @baconbrain, that's a good reality check, but don't forget the convenience a streaming/music server solution brings!
(02-May-2016, 15:17)mdconnelly Wrote: But personally, there's no going back. The convenience of having all my music at my fingertips, particularly when coupled with software like Roon, has spoiled me immensely.
Guys,
Fully agree, there is no going back. The convenience factor is so high that it makes the time (and money) worth going the distance. Not to mention the fact, that it is just plain fun to tinker around with this stuff!
The quest continues.
BB (The ultimate couch potato)
RE: The negative positive - Confused - 03-May-2016
Ignoring the obvious convenience advantages of streaming, it does puzzle me why 'old school' CD players should out perform modern streamers and music servers. It occurs to me that that a music server has a number of technical advantages. First, a CD player has to read the CD in real time. A music server runs from a ripped file. This file can ripped from a CD using a modern ripper with 'paranoid mode' or similar, re-reading difficult sections for a long as it wants until it is happy with the result. Even then, you can use EAC / 'Exact Audio Copy' systems or similar, to compare the file to a data base of very many ripped CD's, so in theory giving you the most accurate version of a CD as possible. Once the file is ripped, it can be stored on an SSD drive, which is far easier to read than a CD with a laser etc. Furthermore, a music server can be a 100% solid state device, zero moving parts. A CD player needs a motor and other rotating components. Once the data is read, the technology on a CD player should be more or less identical to that in a streamer of music server. (more or less identical, clearly a music server will need to cope with 24bit, DSD formats or whatever, but when in 16/44 mode, the same)
So if I am right and streamers and music server have an advantage with the basic technology available, why is it CD players are still considered king with respect to sound quality?
Any ideas out there? I find this one a little baffling.
RE: The negative positive - deviousalet - 03-May-2016
Although the server has the advantages you mention over the CD player, if a CD player is designed to audiophile specifications it may inject far less noise into the data output than server which is operating at computer level not audiophile level. Many of the high quality CD players buffer to solid state memory before output anyway, but it is impressive that their spinning drive and laser creates less noise than a cheap server. We're also comparing a mature technology (CD players) to a new one (servers) and as with all such curves the mature will be eclipsed as the new matures, but old technology is often more effective than half-baked new stuff. Anyway, I think the difference is not due to any advantage of spinning optical media but rather due to the deficiencies of current servers.
RE: The negative positive - hk6230 - 06-May-2016
Today, I dug our my old Blueray player (China-made), put it on some isolators, and played some CDs. It is connected to my Le200 via toslink and I found the SQ really good. I think I have to explore more on this CD route.
RE: The negative positive - Pim - 06-May-2016
(03-May-2016, 12:46)Confused Wrote: Ignoring the obvious convenience advantages of streaming, it does puzzle me why 'old school' CD players should out perform modern streamers and music servers. It occurs to me that that a music server has a number of technical advantages. First, a CD player has to read the CD in real time. A music server runs from a ripped file. This file can ripped from a CD using a modern ripper with 'paranoid mode' or similar, re-reading difficult sections for a long as it wants until it is happy with the result. Even then, you can use EAC / 'Exact Audio Copy' systems or similar, to compare the file to a data base of very many ripped CD's, so in theory giving you the most accurate version of a CD as possible. Once the file is ripped, it can be stored on an SSD drive, which is far easier to read than a CD with a laser etc. Furthermore, a music server can be a 100% solid state device, zero moving parts. A CD player needs a motor and other rotating components. Once the data is read, the technology on a CD player should be more or less identical to that in a streamer of music server. (more or less identical, clearly a music server will need to cope with 24bit, DSD formats or whatever, but when in 16/44 mode, the same)
So if I am right and streamers and music server have an advantage with the basic technology available, why is it CD players are still considered king with respect to sound quality?
Any ideas out there? I find this one a little baffling.
I get what you're saying about ripping Confused. I have a CD of Anouk - Lost tracks. It's been one of my favourites for years and I scratched it to buggery when I was playing it in a portable CD player. Some songs were beyond repair. Until I ripped it with one of those programs that checks in a database whether or not you have all the bits. It took my laptop a full night (literally from late afternoon till the next morning) but it ripped it completely. I was amazed!
That's a bit of an extreme example but surely a ripped file into a memory of sorts has the advantage of perfect 'reading'