• 12-16-2006, 04:55 PM
    hermanv
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    ...edit...The other advantage over a CD player is that if you do your rips carefully (e.g. using error-correction software like Exact Audio Copy) you can get bit-perfect sound. CD players, by contrast, give you errors.

    This intregues me a great deal. I have always wondered why with CD players going for 20K and up, no reviews have done error rate measurements. They never even bother mentioning how many of the error correction layers are implemented. Some players are quite proud of custom transports, CD clamps, top loading etc. Lot of hype, little meat.

    Do you have any links to sites that have measured the error rate, the effectiveness of the Audio Copy error correction? Error comparisons player to player or player to computer?
  • 12-16-2006, 05:08 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hermanv
    Do you have any links to sites that have measured the error rate, the effectiveness of the Audio Copy error correction? Error comparisons player to player or player to computer?

    Exact Audio Copy is "exact" -- That is, for 99.5% of my CDs, I was able to get a 100% perfect, error-free copy. For the other .5%, the CD was too scratched or damaged to make a perfect copy.

    Here's the website:

    http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

    Somewhere on there it will explain how the error-correction process works.

    As far as CD players, I don't know. But it's going to depend on what CDs you put into it, that's for sure.
  • 12-16-2006, 05:26 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    Mike check my PM I sent you but what exactly is the purpose of having the audio signal being produced elsewhere?

    To avoid jitter caused by the computer's noisy electronics.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    What exactly is jitter?

    Errors in clocking the PCM signal. Here are some references:

    http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/diginterf1_e.html

    http://www.lessloss.com/about.html

    Quote:

    And for those of us who have a pretty much inaudible pc (thank silentpcreview.com) what steps would we need to take to allow us to use the computer as our main source. I'm almost done ripping my 800+ cd collection onto my computer (WAV). Now I need to get some nice speakers and I assume a USB DAC or would you suggest something different. I hear USB DACs decrease jitter by being more "native" (whatever that means) to the computer.
    I don't know a great deal about USB DACs; other people (likely on other forums, such as hydrogenaudio) could address this better.

    Quote:

    Also what exactly is the squeezebox and how does it actually work. I understand that it's wifi but is the PCM signal processed at the squeezebox or the computer?
    It isn't necessarily wifi, you have the option of using it wired (like I do).

    The PCM signal is generated at the Squeezebox, not the computer. That results in less jitter.

    Quote:

    What is the point of an external DAC when the squeezebox's output isn't USB but rather through coaxial.
    The Squeezebox has both digital/coaxial/optical outputs as well as analog outputs. It has its own internal DACs, but they aren't quite as high quality as something you can get for much more money, which is why some of us use the digital out into an external DAC. A high quality DAC can render jitter inaudible.

    Quote:

    Wouldn't that be more "jittery" than the wired option through USB.
    No, not if you use a high quality external DAC.

    As far as the analog outs of the SB, it would depend on what external DAC or USB DAC you compared it to, I suppose.

    But frankly, the SB's internal DAC is pretty damned good for a $250 device that does as much as the Squeezebox does.
  • 12-17-2006, 01:17 AM
    avgjoe
    Wow very comprehensive and easy explanations but one question was left unanswered. I assume the basic purpose of buying an external DAC is to "dejitter" the audio signal but I read somewhere that spdif signals are full of jitter and thus according to my logic:
    1. computer via wifi/ethernet to squeezebox (ok)
    2. audio signal processed in squeezebox (i assume it's similar to an external soundcard)
    3. thru spdif to external DAC (confused- wouldn't there be a loss of quality because the spdif is supposedly "inferior" and causes jitter)

    Also do you seem to know anything about the transporter and what are the primary differences between it and the squeezebox. I assume the transporter, as it is a hell of a lot more expensive, probably has a much better onboard DAC...
  • 12-17-2006, 05:05 AM
    Dusty Chalk
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    I assume the basic purpose of buying an external DAC is to "dejitter" the audio signal ...

    No, the basic purposes of an external DAC are (1) to provide a better output than your soundcard, and (2) to move the conversion to analog away from the computer.
    Quote:

    ...I read somewhere that spdif signals are full of jitter...
    All digital signal are full of jitter. It's not a function of the type of signal (PCM, USB, whatever), it's a function of the implementation. A well-implemented PCM signal over SPDIF can have low jitter. "You heard" "You read somewhere" -- these sources of yours seem to be incorrect, I would stop listening to that person.
  • 12-17-2006, 07:58 AM
    Rock789
    one has the Scott Nixon USB Tube DAC as an option...
  • 12-17-2006, 09:13 AM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    I assume the basic purpose of buying an external DAC is to "dejitter" the audio signal

    A good DAC can reduce the jitter to an inaudible level, so I'd say that's one of the purposes of buying an external DAC. For example, some DACs (like the Lavry) do this by storing the signal in a buffer and re-clocking it from scratch.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    but I read somewhere that spdif signals are full of jitter

    Not necessarily, but jitter tends to be a bigger problem with SPDIF signals. It's really a poor implementation of technology in this regard.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    and thus according to my logic:
    1. computer via wifi/ethernet to squeezebox (ok)
    2. audio signal processed in squeezebox (i assume it's similar to an external soundcard)
    3. thru spdif to external DAC (confused- wouldn't there be a loss of quality because the spdif is supposedly "inferior" and causes jitter)

    If the external DAC is good, it will "clean up" the jitter problem, reducing it to an inaudible level.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by avgjoe
    Also do you seem to know anything about the transporter and what are the primary differences between it and the squeezebox. I assume the transporter, as it is a hell of a lot more expensive, probably has a much better onboard DAC...

    I haven't seen/heard a Transporter yet, but yes, better DAC, cleaner power supply setup, more inputs and outputs, better quality components all around, etc.
  • 12-17-2006, 09:21 AM
    Mike Anderson
    By the way, for all the obsession about jitter, we're really talking about very subtle differences these days.

    When CD players and other digital music devices first came out, it was a noticeable phenomenon because the problem wasn't terribly well understood. People criticized the poor quality of digital sound, with some justification.

    But nowadays, I just don't see it as a huge problem. For one thing, you have to have a very good rig downstream to hear any differences. Unless you have a really good set of speakers, you probably aren't going to appreciate much of a difference between the Squeezebox and the Transporter, or a $300 DAC and a $10,000 DAC.

    The other thing is that peoples' ability to hear subtle differences in sound varies tremendously. Some people really do have "golden ears", but a lot of us do not.

    I have a pretty damned good setup myself -- Magnepan 3.6/R speakers and a reference quality amp -- but I'm not even sure I could pick out the difference between the Squeezebox's analog outs and my Benchmark DAC1, if you were to blindfold me.

    I highly recommend you try the Squeezebox by itself before you spend the dough for a DAC. The SB really is a pretty damned good source for the analog signal. Since it has digital outs, you can always add a high end DAC down the line if you decide you want to blow the extra dough for some reason.

    Essentially, you're going to get a much, much bigger bang for the buck if you put any extra money towards other parts of your system, like the speakers, room treatment, and so on. Or, a half-decent room correction setup (like the Behringer DEQ2496) will have a very dramatic effect on the sound that anybody in the world can hear.
  • 12-17-2006, 10:26 AM
    Fergymunster
    Get A CD player
    If I were you a would get a CD player.My chioce would be the new Rega Apollo or the Rega Saturn in that the what you have is a stand alone CD player.In other words there is no need for a seperate DAC.With the arrival of these and some others seperate DAC's are now becoming a thing of the past.There was a time when seperate DAC's were needed because of the sensitivity to jitter but is no longer the case as the times are changing, thus my suggestion of the Rega Apollo or if you can afford it the Rega Saturn.
  • 12-17-2006, 11:07 AM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fergymunster
    With the arrival of these and some others seperate DAC's are now becoming a thing of the past.

    No way are standalone DACs becoming a thing of the past. Perhaps that's the case in conjunction with CD players (I wouldn't know about that), but more and more people are moving to computer-based audio, and it makes all the sense in the world to have a standalone DAC for the reasons stated above.
  • 12-17-2006, 12:23 PM
    Fergymunster
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    No way are standalone DACs becoming a thing of the past. Perhaps that's the case in conjunction with CD players (I wouldn't know about that), but more and more people are moving to computer-based audio, and it makes all the sense in the world to have a standalone DAC for the reasons stated above.

    I'm just saying that my solution in a stand alone CD player is a more simplfied approach in reducing the effects of jitter.Mind you no source is totally immune to these effects.Also technology is advancing so rapidly that there are more and more choices in how you want to listen to your music.It's just that in my opinion your solution has a greater potentail for jitter in that your passing the signal through several components.Sure seperate DAC manufacturers arn't going out of buisness any time soon as long as people keep buying them.
  • 12-17-2006, 03:08 PM
    Mike Anderson
    There's no doubt that a standalone CD player would be a simpler setup, but you can get jitter just as low with a computer setup.

    More importantly, when you say "just buy a CD player", you are ignoring what the computer can do for you in terms of music management. When you get to the point where you have more than a thousand CDs worth of music, as do I, the computer's ability to let you play and search the music is unsurpassed.

    And then there's Internet radio, which is how I discover most of my new music these days.

    People who see my setup in action are blown away. And they always say, "How did you find this music?" :idea:
  • 12-17-2006, 04:54 PM
    Carl Reid
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    More importantly, when you say "just buy a CD player", you are ignoring what the computer can do for you in terms of music management. When you get to the point where you have more than a thousand CDs worth of music, as do I, the computer's ability to let you play and search the music is unsurpassed.

    I'm 100% in agreement with that statement... I only have around 300 CDs, but even so... using a CD player is a pain in the @$$... especially compared to the convenience of using my MAC as a music library.... Even a simple thing like being able to adjust the volume on individual tracks in the ITunes Menu to ensure that all my songs play at the same volume... so I don't need to mess with my remote when I have a playlist running...

    The only way I would recommend a dedicated CD player now, would be if you have a very limited CD collection and enjoy getting up to change discs whenever you want to hear a different album....

    As for the supposed inferiority of computer audio... well I just sold my stand alone CD player on Friday and I have absolutely no regrets about that decision... I honestly think that digital source has the absolute least impact on the overall sound of your setup... well maybe cables have less impact :idea:
  • 12-17-2006, 05:15 PM
    Fergymunster
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    There's no doubt that a standalone CD player would be a simpler setup, but you can get jitter just as low with a computer setup.

    More importantly, when you say "just buy a CD player", you are ignoring what the computer can do for you in terms of music management. When you get to the point where you have more than a thousand CDs worth of music, as do I, the computer's ability to let you play and search the music is unsurpassed.

    And then there's Internet radio, which is how I discover most of my new music these days.

    People who see my setup in action are blown away. And they always say, "How did you find this music?" :idea:

    The convience of your sound sources stored by your computer is a plus.However, with my Rega Saturn each CD is thoughly analized before you push the play button.It's new procedure in a CD player's and one that makes the sound quality exceptionable.With that said I'm sure that there are many who will go your route but the sound quality stored in a computer is hardly the equivalent to a quality CD player especially if your listening to internet radio and this is the crux of our argument.For me I can take the time to listen to one CD at a time while at home.When not at home then the door is wide open,Satellite radio,I-pod Hd radio etc...the list goes on and on.
  • 12-17-2006, 05:24 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fergymunster
    However, with my Rega Saturn each CD is thoughly analized before you push the play button.It's new procedure in a CD player's and one that makes the sound quality exceptionable.

    You're talking about error-correction.

    Read through the thread above. With the computer, you have the ability to do error-correction in ripping the CD, and you can get a 100% error-free copy unless the CD is too physically damaged (which is extremely rare, in which case your Rega won't read it perfectly either). And I didn't have to spend hundreds or thousands of bucks on a CD player to get error-correction; there's software that will do it for free:

    http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fergymunster
    With that said I'm sure that there are many who will go your route but the sound quality stored in a computer is hardly the equivalent to a quality CD player...

    If you do it right, it is every bit as good as you get with a high end CD player... Read through the thread above, there's no point in explaining this yet again.

    Have you actually heard a well-done computer setup running into a high end DAC, or something like the Transporter? Or even the Squeezebox?

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fergymunster
    ... especially if your listening to internet radio and this is the crux of our argument.

    No, that's not the crux of my argument at all. The Internet radio is just the icing on the cake.

    And believe it or not, you can get Internet radio that sounds pretty decent, depending on the bit rate. A lot of people wouldn't know it from the CD.
  • 12-17-2006, 05:56 PM
    Fergymunster
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    You're talking about error-correction.

    Read through the thread above. With the computer, you have the ability to do error-correction in ripping the CD, and you can get a 100% error-free copy unless the CD is too physically damaged (which is extremely rare, in which case your Rega won't read it perfectly either). And I didn't have to spend hundreds or thousands of bucks on a CD player to get error-correction; there's software that will do it for free:

    http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/




    If you do it right, it is every bit as good as you get with a high end CD player... Read through the thread above, there's no point in explaining this yet again.

    Have you actually heard a well-done computer setup running into a high end DAC, or something like the Transporter? Or even the Squeezebox?



    No, that's not the crux of my argument at all. The Internet radio is just the icing on the cake.

    And believe it or not, you can get Internet radio that sounds pretty decent, depending on the bit rate. A lot of people wouldn't know it from the CD.

    Why don't you do a search of the Rega players as I did a search with your silly little sqeeze box idea.You have no idea what your talking about.On the same note same people are going for the Bechmark DAC and Lavry DAC's when you have an exceptionable CD player in that of the Apllo for $995.I'll repeat one more time your Transporter,Sqeezebox or your sepearte DAC tandem is a very around about way to listen to your music.
  • 12-17-2006, 06:55 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fergymunster
    Why don't you do a search of the Rega players as I did a search with your silly little sqeeze box idea.You have no idea what your talking about.On the same note same people are going for the Bechmark DAC and Lavry DAC's when you have an exceptionable CD player in that of the Apllo for $995.I'll repeat one more time your Transporter,Sqeezebox or your sepearte DAC tandem is a very around about way to listen to your music.

    I don't claim the Squeezebox, by itself, is an audiophile component. It costs $250 for godsakes. But plug the digital out into a good DAC, and you absolutely can get audiophile sound. There's nothing "round about" about it at all.

    I know all about your Rega CD players. Your Saturn costs how much? Oh yeah - a couple thousand dollars.

    Meanwhile, I can do error-correction on my computer for free. Then I can spend half what you did and get a DAC with an analog stage every bit as good as what's in your CD player, and that will, for all intents and purposes, eliminate any jitter problem.

    In addition to all that, I get the power of managing thousands of songs on my computer.

    I asked you if you've ever listened to a high quality computer setup, or if you've even heard something like the Squeezebox for that matter. You did not respond, so I take it your answer is "no".

    You have no basis to say I don't know what I'm talking about, when you yourself know basically nothing about how to do audio on your computer. Like everyone else here who thinks you can't get good quality sound out of a computer, you've never actually heard one.
  • 12-18-2006, 03:59 AM
    Dusty Chalk
    I have both. They both have their utility.

    Carry on.
  • 12-18-2006, 09:19 AM
    Fergymunster
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    I don't claim the Squeezebox, by itself, is an audiophile component. It costs $250 for godsakes. But plug the digital out into a good DAC, and you absolutely can get audiophile sound. There's nothing "round about" about it at all.

    I know all about your Rega CD players. Your Saturn costs how much? Oh yeah - a couple thousand dollars.

    Meanwhile, I can do error-correction on my computer for free. Then I can spend half what you did and get a DAC with an analog stage every bit as good as what's in your CD player, and that will, for all intents and purposes, eliminate any jitter problem.

    In addition to all that, I get the power of managing thousands of songs on my computer.

    I asked you if you've ever listened to a high quality computer setup, or if you've even heard something like the Squeezebox for that matter. You did not respond, so I take it your answer is "no".

    You have no basis to say I don't know what I'm talking about, when you yourself know basically nothing about how to do audio on your computer. Like everyone else here who thinks you can't get good quality sound out of a computer, you've never actually heard one.

    In your first responce to me you said"I wouldn't know about that"refering to CD players.So your argument holds no water since you havn't listened to a quality CD player.Also you poked fun at my Saturn which really isn't necessary.Even a $400 CD player will out perform your childish set up.Also I have a big smile on my face listening to my Saturn through headphones while your fiddling around with some silly apparatus around your computer.
  • 12-18-2006, 09:35 AM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fergymunster
    In your first responce to me you said"I wouldn't know about that"refering to CD players.

    Not quite - what I said was that I wouldn't know about whether standalone DACs are still being used by people who use CD players:

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    No way are standalone DACs becoming a thing of the past. Perhaps that's the case in conjunction with CD players (I wouldn't know about that), but more and more people are moving to computer-based audio...

    I promise you, I have heard very good CD players. But more importantly, I don't doubt for one second that you are getting excellent sound out of your CD player.

    What I'm saying is that it's also possible to get excellent sound out of a computer + DAC, or something similar.

    Quote:

    .Even a $400 CD player will out perform your childish set up.
    Please explain why or how. If you aren't basing your statement on actual experience (and it is clear you are not), can you back it up using technically accurate, logical analysis? Exactly how does my setup fail to perform as well? At what point in the digital signal chain is the signal getting degraded, and how?
  • 12-18-2006, 10:54 AM
    hermanv
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    Not quite - what I said was that I wouldn't know about whether standalone DACs are still being used by people who use CD players
    ...edit...
    What I'm saying is that it's also possible to get excellent sound out of a computer + DAC, or something similar.

    Stand alone DACs are not a thing of the past, not that many use them, they imply a degree of dedication and complexity (not to mention cost) that is too much for many audio buffs. A good DAC costs about the same as a good player. In my experience the external DAC usually sounds better at a given price point than a player with built in processing.

    I have switched to a music server, I guarantee many of you will in the near future. A music server is just another way of saying a computer. Although music servers are obviously speciallized for audio, mine contains a 160 Gbyte hard disk, a playlist organizer, an internet port, a wireless hub allowing multiple music programs run in different rooms simultaneously and obviously a microprocessor with small keyboard and display window. It also connects easily to a computer to import internet music, download songs or manipulate the stored music using iTunes or a similar program. It has internal DACs, (they stink). The external DAC gets me back to truly first class music reproduction with all the conveinience of a flexible storage media (that incidentally has a better error rate the optical CD readers).

    The server provides nearly instantaneous access to all the songs, no gaps when switching from one album to the next. Songs can be strung together in any order and favorites can be saved in a list form for each family member, easy listening, party music, dance, you name it. It's the way to go. The brand I bought is inexpensive but the software is somewhat buggy, I assume improvements will come along as the player allows new software to be downloaded when available.
  • 12-18-2006, 10:57 AM
    Fergymunster
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    Not quite - what I said was that I wouldn't know about whether standalone DACs are still being used by people who use CD players:



    I promise you, I have heard very good CD players. But more importantly, I don't doubt for one second that you are getting excellent sound out of your CD player.

    What I'm saying is that it's also possible to get excellent sound out of a computer + DAC, or something similar.



    Please explain why or how. If you aren't basing your statement on actual experience (and it is clear you are not), can you back it up using technically accurate, logical analysis? Exactly how does my setup fail to perform as well? At what point in the digital signal chain is the signal getting degraded, and how?

    My reasoning is only in relation to jitter and this why I jumped in to the discussion in the first place.My thinking was your computer as a source is a hot bed for jitter.Ok,so you move down the chain until you filter the jitter to acceptical levels.I have no doubt that's what you set up is doing.My approach in this process is simplified in that you only have one source.However,you got me because I havn't listened to your set up so I can only go by what you tell me.So now this agrument is becoming pointles as both are approaches limit the jitter to acceptical levels.Which source or sources people choose in the end only time will tell.
  • 12-18-2006, 01:17 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fergymunster
    My reasoning is only in relation to jitter and this why I jumped in to the discussion in the first place.My thinking was your computer as a source is a hot bed for jitter.

    You understand that jitter is a result of inaccuracies in synchronizing the clock signal, right? And you understand that the clock signal is embedded in the SPDIF signal, right?

    Well then you can see that it's impossible for the computer to be a source of jitter in my setup, because the computer is not generating any SPDIF signal, and hence it is not generating any clock signal.

    All the computer is doing is storing the song files, and sending the files over a network to another device where the SPDIF signal gets generated from scratch. The files aren't even decoded by the computer -- in my setup the computer holds FLAC files (with a small handful of MP3s). These are compressed files, and don't get decoded until they get to a device that is about 20 feet away from the computer.

    So please explain, how can the computer possibly be a source of jitter when it isn't generating a clock signal, and when it's 20 feet away from the place where the clock signal is generated?
  • 12-18-2006, 02:40 PM
    Fergymunster
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    You understand that jitter is a result of inaccuracies in synchronizing the clock signal, right? And you understand that the clock signal is embedded in the SPDIF signal, right?

    Well then you can see that it's impossible for the computer to be a source of jitter in my setup, because the computer is not generating any SPDIF signal, and hence it is not generating any clock signal.

    All the computer is doing is storing the song files, and sending the files over a network to another device where the SPDIF signal gets generated from scratch. The files aren't even decoded by the computer -- in my setup the computer holds FLAC files (with a small handful of MP3s). These are compressed files, and don't get decoded until they get to a device that is about 20 feet away from the computer.

    So please explain, how can the computer possibly be a source of jitter when it isn't generating a clock signal, and when it's 20 feet away from the place where the clock signal is generated?

    Your still around,look I'm busy listen to my headphones
  • 12-18-2006, 05:15 PM
    musicman1999
    Sorry guys,i am a music lover first,so my Arcam stays until my Moon arrives in the new year(hopefully).A big part of the music experience for me is going through my cd collection,about a thousand strong,and finding something there that i have not heard in a while,and reading the booklet at the same time.I understand that it is more convienient to store them on a hard drive but i don't see it in my near future.

    bill