| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Didital Things » High Quality Music Server / CD player (166 posts, 9 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 5 of 7 (166 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 3 4 5 6 7 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The commercial music servers...  Touch screen remote...  Didital Things  Forum     37  234873  01-10-2008
  »  New  About the DAW playback software...  Best hardware with best software...  Didital Things  Forum     11  69799  03-22-2008
  »  New  Recording/Playback software..  Free stuff...  Didital Things  Forum     14  63845  08-24-2008
  »  New  To Rip or not to Rip...  Ripping with better playback...  Didital Things  Forum     2  23107  03-18-2009
  »  New  The contra-ridicules solution for a good DAW?..  Happy to see this thread...  Didital Things  Forum     1  21603  06-18-2009
  »  New  DAW drives configuration and backup strategies...  Not expensive to recover DATA, avoid Corporate Recovery...  Didital Things  Forum     3  26288  10-05-2009
  »  New  Weiss Engineering DAC202..  Attenuation...  Didital Things  Forum     5  32346  06-21-2010
  »  New  Pacific Microsonics Model Two: What Platform, Software ..  XLR to RCA adaptor. Watch out...  Didital Things  Forum     1  17436  03-17-2011
  »  New  Windows Based Transport: A quiet and capable Source?..  DAE Firmware quality...  Didital Things  Forum     47  170517  11-01-2011
  »  New  Memory Player Box?..  Maybe I will not order the Pure Teflon capacitors after...  Didital Things  Forum     2  31933  11-03-2011
  »  New  Why I hate computer playback...  Higher power cpu...  Didital Things  Forum     17  75245  04-16-2012
07-21-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 101
Post ID: 22685
Reply to: 22684
USB 2.0
fiogf49gjkf0d
maybe useful :
http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/USB.html

and some notes from Dan Lavry :
http://www.head-fi.org/t/493152/low-jitter-usb-dan-lavry-michael-goodman-adaptive-asynchronous
07-31-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 102
Post ID: 22695
Reply to: 22685
Computer Audio
fiogf49gjkf0d
https://www.audialonline.com/topics/

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/wavelength2/brick_2.html


both J Gordon Rankin and Pedja RogicBelieve the properly implemented USB is better than SPDIF.


08-01-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rowuk


Germany
Posts 229
Joined on 07-05-2012

Post #: 103
Post ID: 22696
Reply to: 22695
Who cares what they think?
fiogf49gjkf0d
What is the argument USB vs SPDIF all about? Blowing smoke because the music is not in the center of the discussion, rather bogus technical hypothesis.

I do not even read that garbage anymore because 1) they have no technical background that relates numbers to sound quality 2) the quality of their writing is geared towards the deaf mainstream consumers, not those looking for better music.

There are hundreds of things more significant than the interface. These posts give me the jitters!


Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
08-02-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 104
Post ID: 22697
Reply to: 22696
This is objective not subjective
fiogf49gjkf0d
 rowuk wrote:
What is the argument USB vs SPDIF all about? Blowing smoke because the music is not in the center of the discussion, rather bogus technical hypothesis.

I do not even read that garbage anymore because 1) they have no technical background that relates numbers to sound quality 2) the quality of their writing is geared towards the deaf mainstream consumers, not those looking for better music.

There are hundreds of things more significant than the interface. These posts give me the jitters!


hey , i do not share that info to guiding you to better sound.
no body could relate numbers to sound quality even romy says his idea about 88.2khz upsampling is not correct in all condition.
Mr.Gordon just help us to have better objective view. he describe why properly implemented usb is a better way than spdif .


08-02-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rowuk


Germany
Posts 229
Joined on 07-05-2012

Post #: 105
Post ID: 22698
Reply to: 22697
If we are Rating, what are we rating?
fiogf49gjkf0d
Amir,you have now posted twice that "proper" USB is better than SPDIF. The problem is that it isn't, unless someone makes up rules to define their own sense of better. The problem here is that they have not defined anything that is better. Both methods have capability to exactly reproduce Redbook and hi res formats. So how to define better? One less device in the playback chain? Artificial declaration of jitter to be the root evil of all digital playback?

I tell my trumpet students not to "throw up" on the music stands during lessons. That means playing with no brain or context - impulsively without any sense of aestethics. Similarly, throwing up a magazine article without context to me is "throwing up".

Tell me what you think. You have had quite a bit of experience with all sorts of equipment. Can you separate "better" from sounds better? Do you have other experiences?

I have repeatedly done DAC shootouts - even during recording sessions and have to say that many times the buffer stage on the output of the DAC made a bigger difference than picking the SPDIF, USB or Firewire interfaces. For the shootouts, I use recordings (symphony orchestra) that I have made myself with a (very high quality) stereo pair of microphones (AB, MS, DECCA Tree, ORTF). No EQ, no limiting or compression. I have never been able to attribute the "problems" that I have heard to any interface. Maybe my ears are simply not good enough, but if that is so, I am very happy because then the interface is one problem that I do not have. Now, the "sound" of the DAC is another story altogether.


Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
08-03-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 106
Post ID: 22699
Reply to: 22698
USB
fiogf49gjkf0d
 rowuk wrote:
Amir,you have now posted twice that "proper" USB is better than SPDIF. The problem is that it isn't, unless someone makes up rules to define their own sense of better. The problem here is that they have not defined anything that is better. Both methods have capability to exactly reproduce Redbook and hi res formats. So how to define better? One less device in the playback chain? Artificial declaration of jitter to be the root evil of all digital playback?

I tell my trumpet students not to "throw up" on the music stands during lessons. That means playing with no brain or context - impulsively without any sense of aestethics. Similarly, throwing up a magazine article without context to me is "throwing up".

Tell me what you think. You have had quite a bit of experience with all sorts of equipment. Can you separate "better" from sounds better? Do you have other experiences?

I have repeatedly done DAC shootouts - even during recording sessions and have to say that many times the buffer stage on the output of the DAC made a bigger difference than picking the SPDIF, USB or Firewire interfaces. For the shootouts, I use recordings (symphony orchestra) that I have made myself with a (very high quality) stereo pair of microphones (AB, MS, DECCA Tree, ORTF). No EQ, no limiting or compression. I have never been able to attribute the "problems" that I have heard to any interface. Maybe my ears are simply not good enough, but if that is so, I am very happy because then the interface is one problem that I do not have. Now, the "sound" of the DAC is another story altogether.


I think you know that in objective audio rating discussion we do not score methods in absolute manner.
I mean if i say analog is better than digital , it do not mean all digital players sound crap in comparison by any analog sources.
when Mr.Gordon says proper implemented USB is better than SPDIF , it means the designer has better margin to get better sound via USB.
theoretically we could design ideal DAC via SPDIF but in real world we prefer USB because in equal condition it is a better method.

in computer audio using USB is better than converting USB to SPDIF .

about your DAC shootouts i agree you the most important priority is output stage. multibit and input interface are behind it.
jessika Dazzle use Gordon DAC, maybe he could help to discussion
08-04-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
wolfy
Posts 6
Joined on 07-16-2016

Post #: 107
Post ID: 22701
Reply to: 22696
Computer/usb, cd transport/spdif
fiogf49gjkf0d
I think the comparison of usb and spdif is usually, although we don't seem to acknowledge it, actually means computer/usb, cd transport/spdif.  In which case, in my experience, the latter seems to win out.  Even implementing the wasapi or asio there always seem to be something lacking on the computer side of things; not enough punch and vitality to the music.  I wish this was not so as the computer is very convenient and has so much potential, but again, too many variables with the computer makes it a pain to manage.  
09-26-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 108
Post ID: 22788
Reply to: 22701
CEC TL0X vs Berkeley Alpha USB
fiogf49gjkf0d
on Friday I will test CEC TL0X with MAcbook Pro/Berkeley USB to SPDIF Converter.
The Berkeley Alpha USB use the Wavelength Streamlength asynchronous code. Mr.Gordon Rankin programmed these codes and sold the patent to some company like Ayre, Berkeley, Halide Design and ...
 
System 1 :
CEC TL0X Transport / Purist Neptune AES/EBU Digital Cable 1m / AMR DP-777 DAC Bit-Perfect I mode 44.1khz 16bit /  Purist Neptune Interconnect / EAR 861 / Purist Neptune Speaker Cable / Living Voice Speaker.

System 2 :
Macbook Pro Retina 2014 (USB 3.0 output on right side of Macbook), 8Gig RAM, Core i5
MAC OS X Mavericks
Roon Labs Player Software (true Bit-Perfect mode with exclusive access)
Purist Audio Anniversary USB Cable 1.0m
Berkeley Alpha USB
All power Cables are Purist Audio Neptune Series 1.5m
Purist Neptune AES/EBU Digital Cable 1m
AMR DP-777 DAC Bit-Perfect I mode 44.1khz 16bit
Purist Neptune Interconnect
EAR 861
Purist Neptune Speaker Cable
Living Voice Speaker

All Power Cables are Purist Neptune 1.5m
no ground loop

i will report the result

Amir

09-26-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 109
Post ID: 22789
Reply to: 22788
Sure, but I doubt that anyone need to care about results besides you.
fiogf49gjkf0d
I might be not “getting” what you are doing but it looks to me that it is not near close to “CEC TL0X vs Berkeley Alpha”. The Berkeley Alpha is just an interface to get stream of DAW but CEC TL0X is digital transport.  We have no idea what kind data acquisition front end AMR DAC has. So basically you will be testing CEC TL0 running into AMR DP-777 vs Macbook->Roon Labs->Berkeley->running into AMR DP-777. That might be an interesting practical test but in reality you will not be testing juts the above-mentioned chain but you will be testing else the quality of the CD production that will be running on CEC TL0X.  I do not know where you will get a WAV file that would be analogous to the CD master and you have no idea HOW the CD was made from that master. What I am trying to say is that you might find one or another playback option is preferable in your specific case but it would not necessary be an universal conclusion for anything.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
09-27-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 110
Post ID: 22792
Reply to: 22789
Audio CD -> Rip PCM (AIFF) -> Roon Player -> Apple Core -> Apple USB Driver -> Gordon USB Code (Berkeley) -> SPDIF -> DAC
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
I might be not “getting” what you are doing but it looks to me that it is not near close to “CEC TL0X vs Berkeley Alpha”. The Berkeley Alpha is just an interface to get stream of DAW but CEC TL0X is digital transport.  We have no idea what kind data acquisition front end AMR DAC has. So basically you will be testing CEC TL0 running into AMR DP-777 vs Macbook->Roon Labs->Berkeley->running into AMR DP-777. That might be an interesting practical test but in reality you will not be testing juts the above-mentioned chain but you will be testing else the quality of the CD production that will be running on CEC TL0X.  I do not know where you will get a WAV file that would be analogous to the CD master and you have no idea HOW the CD was made from that master. What I am trying to say is that you might find one or another playback option is preferable in your specific case but it would not necessary be an universal conclusion for anything.


Audio CD -> Rip PCM (AIFF) -> Roon Player -> Apple Core -> Apple USB Driver -> Gordon USB Code (Berkeley) -> SPDIF -> DAC
Audio CD -> CEC TL0X -> DAC

quality of the CD production is not important because we rip it. if  CD production is bad then rip data is bad and if CD production is good then rip data is good.

I rip an Audio CD (16bit 44.1khz) in Apple DVD-Rom (Apple USB SuperDrive) by dbpoweramp software. dbpoweramp has secure mode ripping and in this mode it get true PCM data from Audio CD then store it in AIFF format.
AIFF is a true bit-perfect PCM format with no loss and no compression.
AIFF is like WAV format. both FLAC and AIFF are lossless but AIFF and WAV sound better than compressed FLAC.

dbpoweramp and EAC (exact audio copy) softwares claim they rip bit-perfect PCM data. you can even check the data with AccurateRip site.   

after ripping Audio CD and playing AIFF in Roon software then we play the same Audio CD in CEC TL0X and the test condition is not relative to CD production quality.

Roon Software play AIFF in bitperfect mode but we should care the data goes to process by Apple Audio Core and Apple USB Driver before sending to Berkeley.
some people claim they tested data transfered from USB and some (not all OSX versions) OSX versions will pass data bit-perfect. they claim they measured output data by electronics device.
MR.Gordon Rankin claims the Streamlength asynchronous code in Berkeley Alpha USB will transfer data bit-perfect and apple usb driver do not change data.

if we believe apple core and apple usb driver and Gordon codes transfer data bit-perfect then we could compare CEC TL0X by Macbook/Berkeley.


about AMR DP-777 :
AMR DP-777 use a tube buffer before DAC for better SPDIF square wave . after tube buffer it use jitter reduction circuit (you can bypass it) .
this player has a classic mode dac inside. thorsten use bit-perfect 16bit 44.1khz non-oversampling philips r-2r dac with no digital/analog filter.
in the end it use a tube buffer after DAC. thorsten is fan of r-2r Philips TDA chips.

the output wave form of DP-777 has no rigging in bitperfect mode.

finally is should say i do not claim PCM data is 100% bit-perfect in Rip/Macbook/Berkeley , I just share other people views in computer audio business.

10-02-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 111
Post ID: 22801
Reply to: 22792
CEC TL0X Berkeley USB to S/PDIF
fiogf49gjkf0d
friday we had a good test , we use Roon Labs software.

tone was very similar in both CEC and Berkeley but i am not sure about our system tone resolution because we connected a push-pull amplifier to 2way living voice speaker.
in our test Berkeley was good on mid and high , very smooth very natural like CEC.
both sounded dynamic but CEC had 25% more depth, air, micro dynamic.
"depth" do not mean larger soundstage , it means deeper image like LP sound. berkeley with 1500$ PAD USB cable was compress.

we test an Acoustic Revive single core USB Cable , a hp printer usb cable and Purist audio anniversary usb cable.
hp cable was easy to listen but it was not transparent.
Acoustic Revive was transparent and very low noise but it was very very compress.
PAD was a-little noisy with better micro dynamic but it was compress.

i guess the problem come from usb cable. these designers like AC Conditioner designers just kill dynamics. they remove noise but then kill the dynamic.

I try to find a good USB Cable and a good S/PDIF cable. 

USB cables like AES/EBU cables are twisted pair and designing a good twisted pair is harder than Coax cables. coax is better than twisted pairs in many ways.
USB cable designers try to filter noise and it seems designing USB cable is even harder than AES/EBU cables.
12-19-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 112
Post ID: 22896
Reply to: 22801
Some updates
these are my findings about computer audio after some trial error:

1. computer audio is very very hardware/OS/software dependent. computer structure is multi task (time sharing) and using it as a real time single task processor is not easy.
even small extra process load on cpu dramatically change the sound. wav and flac are the same but Wave/AIFF sounds better than Flac because cpu should unzip Flac before sending to port. i do not know why a small extra process will affect the sound even in a powerful cpu like core i5.
if you select a fast/powerful cpu/ram and optimize OS/Software then you will get better sound . optimizing OS/Software is even more important than selecting powerful hardware. linux could be customise better than other os but mac osx is not bad , you can use renice command in osx terminal.
i renice coreaudiod priority to -20 and the result is unbelievable.
the best software on mac is Roon labs. it is far better than other bit-perfect softwares like ammara/audirvana/bitperfect .
i use CAD optimization script and i use linux renice command to increase roonlabs and coreaudiod priority in system.
http://www.computeraudiodesign.com/Computer%20Audio%20Design%20OSX%20Optimization%20Scripts%20V1.3.zip
http://bencane.com/2013/09/09/setting-process-cpu-priority-with-nice-and-renice/

then you should use good linear power supply for PC , good battery or good LSPU should be use to get good sound.

2. computer audio needs gordon rankin codes. i use berkeley alpha usb to spdif converter.berkeley use Gordon Rankin for Streamlength asynchronous code.
i do not why but i think without gordon codes you will not get good sound.

3. purist anniversary is the best usb cable in my setup even better than Acoustice revive and curious .

I bet you hear good sound even better than over 50k$ transports. our last test was CEC TL0-X vs my Berkeley , they sounded very similar.

my current setup :
Macbook Pro mid 2014 Retina 13″ (USB output on right side of Macbook), 8Gig RAM, Core i5 + External HDD (Thunderbolt port)
MAC OS X Mavericks + CAD optimization Script + iTunes EQ off
Roon Labs Player Software (true Bit-Perfect mode with exclusive access) + AIFF File Format
Purist Audio Anniversary USB Cable 1.0m
Berkeley Alpha USB (Gordon Rankin for Streamlength asynchronous code) + Purist Aquila AC Cable 1.5m
AMR DP-777 DAC (BNC input)
12-19-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
ArmAlex
Iran
Posts 82
Joined on 02-15-2009

Post #: 113
Post ID: 22897
Reply to: 22896
Computer vs TL0
Amir wrote:I bet you hear good sound even better than over 50k$ transports. our last test was CEC TL0-X vs my Berkeley , they sounded very similar.
This idea was not shared among everybody present in that test. There was fundamental difference between Computer  and TL0 sound. We all could not agree even on effectiveness  of Berkeley USB to SPDIF convertor in the chain, some of us preferred Mac book directly connected to AMR 777SE.
12-20-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 114
Post ID: 22898
Reply to: 22801
Compress dynamic
 Amir wrote:
fiogf49gjkf0df
i guess the problem come from usb cable. these designers like AC Conditioner designers just kill dynamics. they remove noise but then kill the dynamic.



the dynamic increased after power cord break-in and using some software optimization (CAD optimization Script + iTunes EQ off + renice coreaudiod) .
12-24-2016 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 115
Post ID: 22899
Reply to: 22896
My revision
 Amir wrote:
these are my findings about computer audio after some trial error:

1. computer audio is very very hardware/OS/software dependent. computer structure is multi task (time sharing) and using it as a real time single task processor is not easy.
even small extra process load on cpu dramatically change the sound. wav and flac are the same but Wave/AIFF sounds better than Flac because cpu should unzip Flac before sending to port. i do not know why a small extra process will affect the sound even in a powerful cpu like core i5.
if you select a fast/powerful cpu/ram and optimize OS/Software then you will get better sound . optimizing OS/Software is even more important than selecting powerful hardware. linux could be customise better than other os but mac osx is not bad , you can use renice command in osx terminal.
i renice coreaudiod priority to -20 and the result is unbelievable.
the best software on mac is Roon labs. it is far better than other bit-perfect softwares like ammara/audirvana/bitperfect .
i use CAD optimization script and i use linux renice command to increase roonlabs and coreaudiod priority in system.
http://www.computeraudiodesign.com/Computer%20Audio%20Design%20OSX%20Optimization%20Scripts%20V1.3.zip
http://bencane.com/2013/09/09/setting-process-cpu-priority-with-nice-and-renice/

then you should use good linear power supply for PC , good battery or good LSPU should be use to get good sound.

2. computer audio needs gordon rankin codes. i use berkeley alpha usb to spdif converter.berkeley use Gordon Rankin for Streamlength asynchronous code.
i do not why but i think without gordon codes you will not get good sound.

3. purist anniversary is the best usb cable in my setup even better than Acoustice revive and curious .

I bet you hear good sound even better than over 50k$ transports. our last test was CEC TL0-X vs my Berkeley , they sounded very similar.

my current setup :
Macbook Pro mid 2014 Retina 13″ (USB output on right side of Macbook), 8Gig RAM, Core i5 + External HDD (Thunderbolt port)
MAC OS X Mavericks + CAD optimization Script + iTunes EQ off
Roon Labs Player Software (true Bit-Perfect mode with exclusive access) + AIFF File Format
Purist Audio Anniversary USB Cable 1.0m
Berkeley Alpha USB (Gordon Rankin for Streamlength asynchronous code) + Purist Aquila AC Cable 1.5m
AMR DP-777 DAC (BNC input)


i should add CEC is clearly better in micro dynamics in all frequency. CEC is more linear and fuller in dynamics like a LP.
Macbook/Berkeley is very good but not as good as CEC in micro dynamics. macbook/berkeley is a-little less stable sounding in comparision by CEC.
stable sounding in my idea means stable music flow.

we had a good test some days ago. we used EAR DAC 4 to drive power amp directly without any preamplifier at first then we inserted a preamplifier between EAR DAC4 and Power amp.
adding pre amp to the chain had similar effect on sound when we switched from berkeley to CEC . adding preamp increase microdynamics and sound became fuller , using CEC increase microdynamics and sound became fuller.
01-25-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 116
Post ID: 22931
Reply to: 9117
BBB
 nycparamedic wrote:



After living with my current custom Linux music server does not leave me wanting anything much when it comes to playing music:

A PC Engines ALIX single board computer in a small aluminum enclosure and running Voyage Linux. The music playing software, MPD, is based on the client/server model. The ALIX board runs the server daemon, and any other device in the house controls and displays a GUI.

The ALIX board is a completely silent and fanless single board computer that only consumes 4 watts of power. The CPU is an x86 compatible AMD Geode running at 500Mhz; no need to compile special software. 256mb of RAM allows me to buffer FLAC files %100 to RAM before playing. The device has 2 USB ports, one of which is used to feed a USB DAC. There is no VGA, mouse, keyboard, or onboard video.

Voyage Linux is a stripped down version of Debian Linux desinged to run on embedded or low power devices, such as the ALIX. It can run off of a compact flash card as small as 128MB and runs entirely in RAM. Most importantly, it keps Debian's APT package manager; installing software such as MPD and ALSA is only one apt-get command away. On the server it is configured with no audio software mixers, and MPD is given a direct hardware address of the USB DAC thus affording bit-perfect output.

The MPD server daemon allows the ALIX server to do one thing very well: play music. MPD fetches FLAC files via NFS from my bedroom computer, buffering one song at a time completeely to RAM. I can control the MPD server from multiple clients, which can all be connected at the same time. MMPC on a Nokia N800 tablet, and GMPC on the bedroom computer. There are a multitude of MD clients to chose from. from bluetooth phones to the iPod Touch.




have you checked Beaglebone Black boards?
it seems Beaglebone Black make more sense in comparison by other single board computers. it separates USB bus from Ethernet bus. it is even more simple than ALIX boards.
I am interested to make a music server by Beaglebone Black and low latency real time kernels like Xenomai . it responds less than 100u seconds and is 10 times faster than powerful PCs.
Beaglebone Black is not powerful and i do not need powerful cpu because i just play bit perfect with no audio processing (upsample and ...).
i have looked a long time for a good PC music server and i think big powerful computers like CAPS v4 are not my cup of tea.
some people believe even very powerful PC with no optimized big OS like windows could not sound as good as low power minimal real time single boards.


02-16-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
wolfy
Posts 6
Joined on 07-16-2016

Post #: 117
Post ID: 22975
Reply to: 9207
Cd transport vs. computer
Yes Romy, this is exactly my finding.  Take an  a to d transfer, vinyl rip, if you will, and listen to it on the computer via usb to dac.  Then, take the same, preferably wav file, transfer it to disc and listen on cd transport.  My experience is file played on cd transport sounds superior.  Why?  Does anybody know? Why so much mystery around digital audio?  
I don't think it's the cd rom's problem.  Extract a file, whether audio, or pure data file for software operating system, and all bits are 100% rendered which is simply verified by the size of the file.  Bits are bits!  Is it possible that the cd transport to dac simply has less overhead to deal with and bits are rendered with the least amount of interference from the operating system?  Are there layers and layers of processing on the computer which inhibit the purest d to a conversion, and which are avoided on the cd transport?  
02-18-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 118
Post ID: 22976
Reply to: 22975
Very much opposite.
Wolfy, I do not know how you might agree with me but your findings are exactly opposite. I did not rear the post above (I do not remember them) but I never ever advocated that a CD sound beater then a raw file the CD was mane from, At least it was NEVER my experience.



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-18-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
wolfy
Posts 6
Joined on 07-16-2016

Post #: 119
Post ID: 22977
Reply to: 22976
Re "The media is the bitch."
  Sorry, I misread, or rather read into, your comment.  Still, my experience is that the file sounds better, to me,   on the cd player than  on the pc w/ usb dac.  Not because of the cd is superior media, it is not.  I can't refute the stated problems inherent  with laser media.  
I'm trying to say that the cd transport sounds better to me and transport/dac and  may be less encumbered than file rendered from the computer  via the operating system.  I'm speculating.
02-18-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
xandcg


Rio de Janeiro, BR.
Posts 162
Joined on 09-07-2014

Post #: 120
Post ID: 22978
Reply to: 22977
So many variables.
It has some many variables involved what make in practice very "system dependent".

A CD transport follow (more or less) a constant design, while each PC can have so many differences between each other it is impossible to make a statement.

At the (normal) PC side we have several parts¹: motherboard (with several different parts in it), fans, ssd/hdd, PSU, processor, memory (I use RDIMM only), etc. all of them can contribute for the result, specially with noise, and none of then was designed with audio in mind. Well, there are the audio cards but everyday day people use more and more USB DACs.

IMHO, the only way to avail it with (more or less) parity between them would be using a proper built DAW² or a commercially available DAW. Something like Aurender N10 should be interesting to add in the mix, because it has a FPBA and seem quite well made.

¹not to say OS, files system, BIOS/UEFI, drivers...
²as Romy already said on this forum, he is a developer and certainly he know how to proper build a DAW.



Think for yourself, do not be sheep.
02-18-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
xandcg


Rio de Janeiro, BR.
Posts 162
Joined on 09-07-2014

Post #: 121
Post ID: 22979
Reply to: 22978
Custom MOBO.
Now, this subject made me remember (apparently) Supermicro do custom motherboards, even just one.

Would be interesting to try a very minimal motherboard with a very low clocked processor, PCIe M.2 support (or even DOM module), RDIMM, and with just a IMPI/serial console as "extra" feature - no graphic card.

But the main point would be the possibility to try to have the board made using linear regulators instead of the usual switching ones, if possible.

Now, a interesting point is: would SPF+ do bring better results (sound-wise) for network stored music than Ethernet?

Lampizator sell this "Komputer" product: http://lampizator.eu/Fikus/KOMPUTER_-_MUSIC_SERVER.html

Komputer_Lampizator.jpg

The only thing would interest me on it is the power supply and maybe the box. I do not care at all about the software he is using on it, and ever less for Asus consumer MOBO.

I will evolve this idea later.



Think for yourself, do not be sheep.
02-18-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,545
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 122
Post ID: 22980
Reply to: 22978
Nope, it was not me.
 xandcg wrote:
²as Romy already said on this forum, he is a developer and certainly he know how to proper build a DAW.

Hm, I do not think I ever said it ether. As a software engineer I have for sure expertise but: I am absolutely ignorant in computer hardware and I did nothing serious in my professional life with sound processing. So under no circumstances I would feel that I have any advantages over anybody else in construction of DAW. In fact when I did it I was shooting absolutely blind and I have make any claims how performance of my DAW relates to performants any other DAWs out there. So, please, let be sane about it.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-18-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
xandcg


Rio de Janeiro, BR.
Posts 162
Joined on 09-07-2014

Post #: 123
Post ID: 22981
Reply to: 22980
A mistake then.
 Romy the Cat wrote:
 xandcg wrote:
²as Romy already said on this forum, he is a developer and certainly he know how to proper build a DAW.

Hm, I do not think I ever said it ether. As a software engineer I have for sure expertise but: I am absolutely ignorant in computer hardware and I did nothing serious in my professional life with sound processing. So under no circumstances I would feel that I have any advantages over anybody else in construction of DAW. In fact when I did it I was shooting absolutely blind and I have make any claims how performance of my DAW relates to performants any other DAWs out there. So, please, let be sane about it.


Ok, sorry, that affirmation was a mistake then.



Think for yourself, do not be sheep.
02-18-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
xandcg


Rio de Janeiro, BR.
Posts 162
Joined on 09-07-2014

Post #: 124
Post ID: 22982
Reply to: 22981
Musica Pristina.
Eventually, they may have a interesting product:

http://musicapristina.com/about/
http://musicapristina.com/6-aspects-digital-audio/



Think for yourself, do not be sheep.
02-19-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 161
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 125
Post ID: 22984
Reply to: 22978
Aurender N10
 xandcg wrote:
It has some many variables involved what make in practice very "system dependent".

A CD transport follow (more or less) a constant design, while each PC can have so many differences between each other it is impossible to make a statement.

At the (normal) PC side we have several parts¹: motherboard (with several different parts in it), fans, ssd/hdd, PSU, processor, memory (I use RDIMM only), etc. all of them can contribute for the result, specially with noise, and none of then was designed with audio in mind. Well, there are the audio cards but everyday day people use more and more USB DACs.

IMHO, the only way to avail it with (more or less) parity between them would be using a proper built DAW² or a commercially available DAW. Something like Aurender N10 should be interesting to add in the mix, because it has a FPBA and seem quite well made.

¹not to say OS, files system, BIOS/UEFI, drivers...
²as Romy already said on this forum, he is a developer and certainly he know how to proper build a DAW.


i have heard the Aurender N10 is not good
Page 5 of 7 (166 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 3 4 5 6 7 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The commercial music servers...  Touch screen remote...  Didital Things  Forum     37  234873  01-10-2008
  »  New  About the DAW playback software...  Best hardware with best software...  Didital Things  Forum     11  69799  03-22-2008
  »  New  Recording/Playback software..  Free stuff...  Didital Things  Forum     14  63845  08-24-2008
  »  New  To Rip or not to Rip...  Ripping with better playback...  Didital Things  Forum     2  23107  03-18-2009
  »  New  The contra-ridicules solution for a good DAW?..  Happy to see this thread...  Didital Things  Forum     1  21603  06-18-2009
  »  New  DAW drives configuration and backup strategies...  Not expensive to recover DATA, avoid Corporate Recovery...  Didital Things  Forum     3  26288  10-05-2009
  »  New  Weiss Engineering DAC202..  Attenuation...  Didital Things  Forum     5  32346  06-21-2010
  »  New  Pacific Microsonics Model Two: What Platform, Software ..  XLR to RCA adaptor. Watch out...  Didital Things  Forum     1  17436  03-17-2011
  »  New  Windows Based Transport: A quiet and capable Source?..  DAE Firmware quality...  Didital Things  Forum     47  170517  11-01-2011
  »  New  Memory Player Box?..  Maybe I will not order the Pure Teflon capacitors after...  Didital Things  Forum     2  31933  11-03-2011
  »  New  Why I hate computer playback...  Higher power cpu...  Didital Things  Forum     17  75245  04-16-2012
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts