 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.180.238.183
Im wondering- is there any benefit to using a better quality CD transport when using an outboard DAC that reclocks the digital file and uses jitter reduction? Reason I ask is that I can get a demo Bryston BCD-1 CD player for $1400 (out of warranty). That said I already have a Sony SCD-XA5400ES SACD player and also a Luxman D-112 I can use for transports using their digital outs. Would I benefit from the transport in the Bryston over my Sony and Luxman?
Follow Ups:
When I first got my Audio Dac 2.1 I used my 5400 as a transport. Sounded very nice. I then got an Audio Note CDT II transport. Major improvement in sound. Yes the transport is very expensive but found it on Audiogon. What is interesting about Audio Note is they do no jitter reduction at all. Also they do not upsample or oversample as well as using no digital or analog filters. The sound of this system playing redbook cd's is better than any sacd on my 5400 or hi-rez including dsd on my Mytek. All I listen to is either redbook cd's or vinyl. I still enjoy vinyl the most
Alan
I agree, but i wouldn't mix and match, as a rule: Audio Note (UK) transports and Dacs pair extraordinarily well, at a high price. A compromise is the CD4.1x, reviewed by Art Dudley a couple of years ago. I am very happy with it, but like i said, it is a compromise: big box, but not big enough to fit all of a CDT-II and Dac 3.1 (or even a 2.1).
Observe, before you think. Think before you open your yap. Act on the basis of experience.
The short answer is, yes a better source of data will give you better results with an external DAC.
If you are a DIY enthusiast, then I would suggest using your Sony XA-5400ES as a transport and reclock the SPDIF output with a Tentlabs XO3.
I have a Cambridge Audio 840C as well as a Sony XA-30ES that I modified 15 years ago with a reclocked output. The modified Sony knocks the socks of a standard 840C. Using an Apogee Big Ben to reclock the output going into my (upsampling) DAC, still yielded a better result in favour of the Sony although the difference was very small.
Irrespective of the claims by the DAC manufacturer about being immune to incoming jitter, you can still discern a high quality source of data from a jittery one..
What DAC do you have and do you know how they achieve the jitter reduction/reclocking? Most DACs these days incorporate a sample rate converter and the manufacturers that make these claims about reclocking etc are actually trading on the fundamental operating principle of the sample rate converter (or interface receiver which may include the SRC egBurr-Brown SRC4392). The upsampling process involves regenerating the output data with respect to a different clock and so they decorrelate the output clock to the input clock. Hence the claim about reclocking and jitter reduction.
Very few designs truly reclock the bit clock from the receiver. If the design is intended to handle multiple sample rates (which is expected these days), it becomes complicated to have several reference clocks on board along with the associated electronics to match the corresponding base rate of either 44.1 or 48kHz. The electronics is not complicated, it is the layout - multiple clocks in a small space results in noise..which results in jitter...
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
You can probably get a sonic benefit by using a re-clocker. I use a modified Monarchy, which is inexpensive. Undoubtedly the Empiracle Audio version is excellent.
Transport-DAC combinations may offer different results (meaning that transports may be good with different DACs for complex reasons relating to jitter). I've modified a few transports and have always managed a worthwhile benefit from doing so.
All this being said, I go along with the poster who recommended not spending too much on the transport.
I think I have the Philips Pro 2 transport (Bel Canto CD-2), I notice huge differences from other transports into the same DAC. Philips sounds much better, more detail, very very stable transport.
I use a top loading mechanism, with a magnetic puck.
The transports are built like a tank, I was drunk one day and forgot to take off the puck and stop the cd from spinning, the disk flung into the air and I thought I was out of luck $3K, but I wasn't. If it can take that beating I give it my recommendation 100%.
Again it is about the sound, and that is really good.
What turned me off to looking for hi-dollar CD players was the fact that there are only so many spinners made.
CA, for example, uses the same Sanyo 101n basically thruout the line…from the least expensive 300 series to the 840 / and now the 851
I'd buy a mechanically stable player using the philips pro transport…….and make sure the digital out implimentations were stable and had good power supplys…….
Too much is never enough
It's too much money. The transport used in the Bryston BCD-1 is good but not by any means considered an elite unit - it is the Philips L1210 transport mechanism (no longer made). The same transport mechanism is in the dedicated Stello CDT200 transport as well as the Sim Audio Equinox and Audio Note entry level CD players.
You'll notice Bryston doesn't give 20 year warranties on things with moving parts - it's rather safe to give 20 year warranties to power amps and DACs and even a preamp - chances are most amplifiers from companies that give 5 year warranties will last 25+ years anyway. But when there is risk involved as there is with any machine that has a spinning motor - you won't see these long warranties (or the price will be high enough to expect the inevitable repair).
I read an article some years back that the "average" life expectancy of CD/DVD players was 7 years.
You would probably be better to get a TASCAM or TEAC machine that uses a VRDS transport or a Philips Pro2 or possibly a lightly used Pioneer Stable platter - people seemed to like them.
As for differences that depends. I have heard very little(usually none) differences in transports with some dacs and bigger differences with others depending on the DAC.
With the way the market is I would be loathe to invest heavily on transport. The big transport makers have stopped making them (Philips) so unless the smaller makers who are buying the transports build their own - it may be tough to get replacements.
My Line Magnetic CD player uses a hugely common Sony KSS 213C transport - there should be large numbers of them for quite some time - but Sony has stopped making them as well I believe. Perhaps a replacement can fit in the machine if it should fail.
Here is a list of transports so you can possibly find a machine for less money than the Bryston. But transports impact different DA converters differently and I suspect it's why a lot of blind listening sessions of transports end in failures - there are only so many transport mechanisms and many manufacturers use the exact same ones. They also often use the exact same DA converter chips - coupled with cheap players using cheap power supplies it is no wonder people struggle to tell one CD player from another.
Interesting. I notice that these are quite similar in build, save for the laser.
And I notice this as I went hunting for a new transport recently to play the circa 2K discs we have and found the Lite Audio LT-1. It used to use the Sony but is now supplied with the Samsung. It's a ncie design and supports the rather flimsy-looking Samsung transport well. It was about $600.
As it happened, I also bought the DAC-83 and US-1 USB> SPDIF convertor for good measure but, more importantly, I remembered to pick up a handful of the Samsung transports while they are still plentiful and available. The Sony can still be bought cheaply too.
See link below.
big j.
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
