You can settle this argument with science. Record the digital output from both transports and then null sum it, if you get silence there is zero difference between them.

I have a high-end Cambridge blue ray player and a very nice Yamaha CD player. I buy CD/DVD players from the 90's the little silver ones, they sound just as good as my more modern expensive ones for only 10 to twenty five dollars. I just buy them and stock pile a good supply and give some away to people trying to put a system together on a budget.

@1amagayfemale69

4 ай бұрын

Send me one haha

Pearl did the same sort of test, but did not disable the external DAC re-clocking. Three young, expert subjects could hear no differences. So your result is misleading BS. Of course if you rig the test for digital outputs and still use the recovered clock from from the transport data stream, there will be differences. Those FIFO input buffers and accurate clock on a decent DAC are there for a reason. When the DAC is used properly, only uncorrected bit data errors from the transport matter.

Colour me skeptical about different CD players sending a bit stream to the same DAC sounding different. Out of the analogue outputs, yeah I can see that (differences in convertors etc). I'd be very interested to see a frequency response plot from the analogue outputs of that outboard DAC for each transport. I recently bought a new Bluray player that has only an HDMI output and I use my receiver to do the conversion. Very happy with the results.

Great video. I had several folks beat me up when I said the AXA35 sounded fatiguing compared to a Sony Blu-ray player connected to a Schiit Modi DAC lol

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Lol. After this test, I am selling most of my players and will go on the hunt for the perfect player/transport/DAC combo.

@ForeverAnalog

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew can't wait to see what you land on - as we all know, the hunt is always the best part!

« Transparency » is a word often used in audiophile reviews. It’s hard to figure what it actually means but I can tell you I understood right from the first seconds playing my CEC CD5! I will probably never sell it.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I made an audiophile dictionary on my website lol because I find myself having to use it to decipher some of these obscure terms 😅

I have a Pro-Ject DS3 transport that I like very much. My DAC is a DCS Bartok so it certainly helps quite a bit...Together they sing.

I have done numerous tests with CD/DVD transports and was surprised how easily I could hear the differences among different units.

Thank god all my audiophile gear is budget and thrifted.. but from good brands, Yamah, Technics, etc. I don't need the stress to worry that this is better than that in my system. I just love eating popcorn on the sidelines and watching others burn their money. Oh that gear is superb you say?! Well good for you!

@mykandrew

11 ай бұрын

It's always great to reach the point of self content.

Nice video! I have improved my iMac as a source to my older Metrum Octave Dac over the past year or two. I have an oppo BD 103 that I’ve tried via optical. And I have my cd player- Synthesis Pride which took significant audition time to pick out. The cd mfg has the advantage of tuning a cohesive unit. Using the spdif output isn’t what the design was optimized for. I’d guess a transport is though. Adding an iFi spdif iPurifier 2 at the input of my dac, and using an iFi iPower X to power it improved things a lot for my iMac source. It might be worth trying in this type of test. I appreciate a skilled listener’s perspective Mike! I’ll certainly tune in for more of your videos! I also fuss more about tweaks and tuning :)

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I love ifi's offerings, and I will definitely try those components on my PC.

@ScottoGrotto

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew I really “thought” I had a good chain from iMac to dac, so much so that it seemed a dac was the next upgrade. Prior chain - Pangea Ag usb cable > lps - audiophellio2 > 25’ coax to Metrum octave. Improved chain: with Pangea XL usb cable ( separate data and power lines ), lps > iFi usb ipurifier 3 > audiophellio2 > 25’ coax > iFi spdif iPurifier2 with upgraded iPower X. Each of these made noticeable improvements. Literally the dac sounds completely different in a good way, cleaner, more uniform freq response, much better bass definition, more distinct coherent imaging. Not as sensitive to computer activity. Using Amarra Luxe as the player in bypass mode. But sounds better now with Amazon Music HD too.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

@@ScottoGrotto did you notice a difference with the Pangea USB cable? I've always been curious if those things actually work! 🤔

@ScottoGrotto

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew usb cables or Pangea usb cables? I was a little skeptical, but yes, it does make a difference. I may have tried an audioquest carbon at some point too. I’ve tried the old Pangea pocc, the solid silver or Ag, and most recently the XL. Each sounds different. But the Pangea cable designer says it’s important to keep the power and signal side away from each other as in the XL. Reviews at audio advisor, were reporting significant improvements of the XL over the silver ( which was better to me than the pocc ). These use better cardas copper. The Pangea usb cables and their power cables and some of their silver plated hdmi cables have been good. The Ag cable seemed clear after breaking in, had more liveness than the mellower pocc. The XL is more refined sounding with more image density and better low end freq. Have not had as much luck with Pangea headphone extension cable, or interconnects. My first iFi test was the iSilencer + coming off the computer. It helped in some ways - punchy, clarity, frequency range, but lost some depth. Adding the iFi usb ipurifier 3, created a more relaxed, layered, refined sound. iFi in the newer generations of purifiers are using better caps which take some hours to realize their full potential.

Thanks Mike. Would love to see you revisit the KLH Model 3.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

That one is long gone, unfortunately. It was ok, not as good as the Model 5, though, in my opinion.

Hi Mike and Others! Great Video! Also Great seeing My Friend "Mike Galusha"! I have seen some more Videos on KZread about using Blu-Ray or DVD Players as Transporters Compared to Regular CD Players. So I decided to Bring My Oppo BD93 out of Hibernation Since it had so many Great Reviews back in the Day; used it as a transporter. Also, I Experimented with switching Back and Forth using Coaxal and Optic. To Me, the Optic sounds Better. I remember doing the same thing with some different Audio Equipment and came to the same conclusion choosing the Optic and the same Brand I use this time. But I had to Transfer the Optic cord back to My LG 4k Tv because it only uses an Optic cable, I only had one. So when I ordered a couple of Optic Cable from Amazon. Replace the Coaxal with the Amazon Optic Cable. It sounds close to like the Coaxal. Then I took the Old Optic cable from the LG Tv back to the Oppo 93 and there was the Magic That Emotional Quality Sound! Unless My Brain Playing Tricks on Me or the Amazon Optic Cable needs some Burn in time.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Mike has been a mentor and dear friend to me. On the sequel I will cover a lot more, I felt the video needs a sequel to try different cables, different dedicated transports etc.

@stephenhamm280

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew Yes Mike G. Been Sweet and Kind to Me! And had worked and Repair My Audio Equipment at a decent Charge. Etc... If only I live closer! Lol... I'm looking forward to Your next Sequel Video on Different Cables and Different Transports! Etc... Thank You!

where do I find the equipment you use?

I only ever once heard a huge difference between two CD-players that were hooked up to the same DAC. One sounded fine, the other thin and metallic. This was a difference that was so big that even the biggest sceptic would have been unable to deny it. The reason for the difference was simple: one of the transports was showing defects in the laser sled mechanism and probably also adjustment of the laser (Sony KSS-150 or similar, these don't self-adjust like more modern drives) .

@user-pd5pw4xv9w

4 ай бұрын

Sounds like a fault or a config issue.

I used Philips blue ray player and it's digital out for dac, sound great

Audio is in the Ear of the beholder.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I fully agree.

I also agree 100%. I can hear the difference between my Marantz CD 63 II KIS compared to my yamaha CDN500. I am taking about only CD transport via coax output to external DAC (thus by right should have bypass the DAC in the CD player). My Marantz is fuller and heavier in bass extension, Yamaha sound thinner thus kind of larger sound stage, guitar sounds more cutting. I test it with the song, "Women" from Scorpion. Then I compared the 2 CD transport with my Pioneer DVD DV2032K player, and the cheaper DVD player, has no detail and sounds congested. So, I am now a true believer!

Mike! How much fun are you! I loved this video 👏

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Thanks so much! Glad you enjoyed it!

Interestingly, I did a similar test with my Rotel CD player to the coax input of my Schiit Modi 3 against an external CD ROM drive plugged into my laptop and into the MODI via USB. I listened using DT 770 studio monitor headphones, and came to a different conclusion... Many variables at play though.

Fascinating ! The other issue is to try to understand if the sonic differences were very subtle or very obvious... as well as the $$$ differences of the players .. One would expect a $500k car will perform a lot better than a $50K car but the majority of people will just get the $50K car as it is "good enough" for most. ???

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

"Good enough" is fine for the greater part of the population. It's complacency because of a restricted budget. For those that want to truly find audio nirvana, that's when they cross over and test and compare until they find the perfect sound for them. Just like cars, the $500k car will be a complete experience inside and out and a lifestyle change, even though the $50k car could very well compete in speed. Great comment, thanks P G!

Do you capture and mach all of this?

As an engineer and experienced audiophile I was totally impressed with this video. incredibly accurate and correct. A man with brains AND the balls to share the truth. Bravo!

@mykandrew

8 ай бұрын

Thank you very much!

@ThinkingBetter

3 ай бұрын

As an audio engineer including digital audio engineer, you can read data from a CD using a few Dollars USB CD drive that is bit perfect and can even run applications on your PC where data errors are not allowed (unlike music). A DAC output will sound identical if the data to it is identical and the clock is managed well by the DAC oscillator with adequate buffering to avoid constant PLL issues eliminating audible jitter. It's not the CD transport that will create jitter but poor design in the DAC. You can contain your entire music collection on a micro SD flash drive the size of a finger nail costing a tiny fraction of a "CD transport" with data being perfect and the DAC being in full control of the data flow eliminating jitter. People don't understand that jitter is mostly an issue of bad digital audio architecture with a source clock and a DAC clock that are not completely aligned causing a PLL having to deal with it. Actually a CD transport is the worst media concerning jitter. Even streaming is working as pull on demand allowing a single clock in the DAC to manage the flow precisely. Yes, streaming nowadays can easily be done jitter-free and data-error-free with much higher audio bandwidth than what a CD can do. Gradually conservative audiophiles are starting to realize this.

@ThinkingBetter

3 ай бұрын

I forgot to add that of course a digital source connected electrically can potentially add digital noise to the analog output stage of a DAC, but while I often hear this argument, it's mostly imaginary. Modern DACs can output well above 110dB SNR (much better than CD) measured with a source device connected because the analog output stage is designed with proper power supply filtering and isolation. If you know how to design audio circuits, you also know good audio is mostly about careful and passionate engineering and most often your BOM cost doesn't need to to be expensive to make things excellent.

I did a similar listening test a while ago : Sony DVD player into roksan dac vs audiolab CD transport. The Sony sounded very digital, and flat while the CD transport sounded more fluid and spacious. The difference was night and day.

@mykandrew

24 күн бұрын

Many of the naysayers have never done an actual listening comparison, I’m glad you noticed a difference!

8:06 a more expensive CD transport can very well provide better sound quality due to a higher quality transport mechanism Superior error correction capabilities cleaner power supply better vibration control improved output stage design these factors contribute to the accurate reading and transmission of digital audio data which ultimately affects the performance of the DAC and the resulting sound quality There are no "superior error correction capabilities" - the best algorithms to do error corrections using the additional error correction bits stored on an audio CD is well known and easy to implement. Its like claiming an expensive calculator would be able to some up the items on your cash register strip more accurate than a 5 USD china calculator. It can´t.... Same is for the transport itself - the technology used to read data from a CD using a laser pickup is available for more than 40 years - and it did its job 40 years ago already - meaning it does (under normal circumstances and with a normal not damaged CD) not create more reading errors than could be fixed by the error correction. Same is for vibrations - the laser pickup in every CD player needs (and has) a "stabilizer" which keeps the laser beam on the track - and this works also for normal vibrations in your living room. There is also no need for "accurate transmission" to the DAC itself - as long as the quality is not to bad the DAC can still decode the digital data perfect - so some noise on the signal does not matter.

My transport of choice is the Yamaha DVD S2300 mk II. It’s vintage, made in Japan, but built like a tank and plenty of in and outs..

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I'll have to look into it. I always like hearing new components!

3:36 Was the jitter eliminator bypassed for the digital out tests? If so, what happens if it's enabled?

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

There's jitter reduction on the Yulong, and it was turned on for this evaluation

If the DAC is separate, the music server is simply transporting digital data, and not deliberately altering that data in any way, then it cannot make any difference whatsoever to the sound quality beyond not messing it up. The power supply doesn’t matter, the circuitry doesn’t matter, the cabling doesn’t matter (unless you’re running over 50m), oxidisation of components doesn’t matter, the shielding on the case doesn’t matter. If there’s some sort of problem with jitter then it’ll be screamingly obvious because jitter is never ‘subtle’. Think about this: digital data has been around for decades now. Take a digital file that originated in 1980s, and has been copied from computer to computer, disk to disk, USB stick to USB stick, sent over WiFi and down a gazillions cables, losslessly compressed and decompressed… and its contents will be EXACTLY the same. The is a fact that can easily be validated by comparing the binary data in any copy with the original. This is a major feature and use case of digital encoding. We can also do run this comparison with streaming data but collating it, and comparing it to the original. Unless something has gone horribly wrong, then it will be totally and absolutely identical, no matter which transport streamed it. The *only* way a file *could* be different is if lossy compression were allowed… but that’s up to the user. It’s the same with streaming, the data cannot change unless it undergoes lossy compression… so don’t use Bluetooth to stream music, and don’t encode music in MP3 etc. The sound absolutely is altered by electronic considerations at each part of the analogue chain, and also in the digital to analogue conversion stage (more of this in a moment), but not within the digital realm itself, not unless it’s undergoing some sort of processing intended to colourise it. 
 Even the choice of speaker cable has INFINITELY more impact on the sound than digital transport does (meaning slightly less than zero). For avoidance of doubt, lossless digital transport that isn’t undergoing any sort of deliberate processing to alter its contents, has absolutely ZERO impact on sound. 
 The noisiest power supply in the world will not affect the fidelity of digital data, not unless it somehow reaches a point where the system’s operational integrity has been compromised. For example a computer system with a horrible power supply does not affect the reproduction of MS Excel documents in the slightest. The numbers in the spreadsheet are not impacted, and do not change because the power supply is ‘noisy’… not unless it’s so bad that the computer cannot even be booted. The data being streamed enters is first collated into a buffer for error checking and correction. Under normal circumstances it will leave the buffer 100% correct. The only way that wouldn’t be the case is if there was massive issue with data corruption that wouldn’t be subtle. So no, a better clock won’t make any difference to something as trivial as streaming stereo audio from one device to another because they’re all up to that job. Where a superior clock becomes critical is inside or attached to a digital mixing system, where it might be transporting say… 128 channels data independently, that need to be perfectly synched across multiple devices over a network. Even in that scenario, if the clock isn’t up to the job then it won’t result in degraded sound, what will happen is, that devices will return clocking errors and disconnect from it. Same goes for anti-vibration measures. Non-SSD hard drives certainly can be affected by vibration… and should that happen then it will be hugely noticeable because the device will probably hard reset itself… but until that point it will faithfully reproduce the data with 100% accuracy. Unless the drive head crashes and destroys the disk. But outside of those scenarios it will not impact sound quality. In simple terms: digital is on or off. Sometimes I read or watch hifi reviews, and start to doubt my own sanity. These people talk about digital comms as though that were a form of analogue, where components play a part in the sound. This simply isn’t true; data doesn’t have a sound in the same what that the postal worker’s handwriting is irrelevant to the contents of the mail he or she delivers. The DAC is a different matter… but even here there’s a crucial piece of information that most people aren’t aware of: while no human has evolved who can hear beyond 24bit depth @48KHz, there is a physical issue with digital to analogue conversion that hasn’t yet been overcome by engineering. The long and short of it is that DACs function much better at higher sample rates, like 88.2K, 96KHz (and upwards into rapidly diminishing returns). So if you’re a practiced listener, who can discern a slight but noticeable difference between 96KHz audio and 48K audio, then that’s why. It’s not that your ears are picking up more frequencies or greater resolution; it’s just that DACs are not well optimised when running at 44.1KHz or 48KHz. Not even the really expensive ones. A cheap DAC running at 96K will likely work better than an expensive DAC running at 48K. This was an unforeseen flaw when the CD standard was devised as 16bit dept @44.1KHz. As an aside, only a child with exceptionally good hearing can distinguish the difference between a 48KHz sample rate vs a 44.1KHz sample rate, and only really practised listeners with good hearing can discern 24bit depth from 16bit depth. To all intents, 16bit depth @ 44.1KHz is at or beyond the limit of what *most* people can hear, due to the Nyquist rate. The advantage of using a higher sample rate is that the DAC will make a better job of the conversion. When it comes to digital transport though, choose a transport based on how good it looks, how good its build quality is, how good its connectivity and functionality are… because the one thing it shouldn’t do is alter the sound quality. If a digital transport does affect the sound, independently of the DAC, then there are five possibilities: 1. It’s actively and deliberately altering the underlying data as it streams that to the DAC, so as to colour the music. This is just sneaky software engineering, and not due to a lead encased power supply, anti-vibration measures, or cables made of gold. 2. It’s communicating with the DAC at 88.2K or more. 3. It’s outputting at a slightly higher volume (due to digital trim). 4. There’s a short circuit between the headphones. 5. The person listening to it is an ‘influencer’, and there’s an obvious reason as to why they are able to find the time to make those sorts of videos. I’d be interested to hear any scientific explanations of how cables, power supplies, or shielding magically alter digital data… Hope this was helpful!

@mykandrew

4 ай бұрын

Have you tried a similar comparison?

@user-pd5pw4xv9w

4 ай бұрын

@@mykandrew - I’m a qualified computer scientist, who’s also been involved in sound engineering for the past 25 years. The only thing I’d be able to compare is how much processing the device is doing, or how much digital trim is being added. You can do this by streaming the data into a file, and comparing that to the source file. Ideally the device should be doing zero processing otherwise it’s colouring the audio. If the device adds a little digital trim, then the output volume will be slightly louder, which can make is *seem* better, since it’s more audible. If you connect the digital transport to the DAC using asynchronous USB, then its clock never comes into play, so there won’t even be any jitter. Instead all the data is shovelled into the DACs buffer, and the DAC clocks itself. Even if you use S/PDIF, clocking is so good these days that any jitter will be well below the noise floor and therefore inaudible in all but the very worst devices. In terms of errors… well I’d expect one of those to occur on asynchronous USB, that’s operating within it’s specified cable lengths, roughly once every 10,000 years. That said 2-channel PCM isn’t really stressing it much as opposed to say 8K video, so probably even less frequent in reality.

Great video, actually looking for a new cd transport. Leaning towards Luxman

Nice to see my Oppo BDP-83 in the mix! Though, I do not have the SE, no big deal... I use the GearFab digital breakout box to strip out the 1's and 0's to send the audio signal to my Venus II 12th DAC... What a difference in SQ using that DAC. The better clocks, etc... I would be hard pressed to get rid of the old girl, she plays everything from my SACD's to DVD's, BD's, Cd's, etc... And, having the sound sent via digital coax to the Venus, bypassing the Oppo DAC, really makes it a keeper. I am sure I could get better sound out of a new and more expensive transport, but then I lose all of the enjoyment the Oppo brings.

I have several CD players a Marantz, Technics and Sony and the Technics is the better sounding of the three and its 39 years old.

Very good video and tactfully done. I do believe that the transport will make a difference also. Thanks for doing the tests and for your opinions.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your support and the kind words.

Was hoping you'd test via Toslink since it would eliminate any possibility of noise from the cheaper transport affecting the results.

I’m still using a decades old Denon 3520 ( THE BEAST!)

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

That is a beast I would love to hear it someday!

This is really helpful. I'm considering the CDC transport from Cambridge Audio. I already have the CXA81 and the CXN-V2 so this would complete the CX trinity. I, like you, was simply skeptical and didn't want to be the fool to spend the extra money. Thanks for your work. Looking forward to seeing more on this.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the feedback, Scott. I am certain you'll be happy with the CDC.

@cv507

6 ай бұрын

just dönt... my a85 amp just ´schätz dövvn spöRädicälly and read similäiR reports online -.- yes avm göt even möre expen$ive... x202 es very decent as i read with teac vcrs or so 2500 $ thingey. maybe a bürmeestäR€ v??v

I think that was an excellent summary... but I think you DO need to take it further. First off, unless you have a very badly damaged disc, the error correction should not matter. All transports should have two levels of correction that will result in a PERFECT output. (These are mathematical, based on the data itself, and should all be "equally perfect".) So, as long as your errors don't exceed the limits of that error correction, they don't matter. The third level of error correction - interpolation - should NEVER end up being used. Second off, assuming that the transport doesn't resample, the data itself should be the same. There's no real room for variation there... either the data is the same or it isn't. You can actually record the data from the output and compare it to the CD... (And, when you rip CDs on a computer, the data is actually verified to be absolutely perfect.) The only remaining issues then become jitter and noise. But THOSE depend quite heavily on the DAC you happen to be using. DACs range from being very sensitive to jitter and noise to being virtually immune to them. So, if the DAC you have is immune to those two things, then your transports WILL sound identical. And, if your DAC is sensitive to one or the other, then the transport is going to make a difference. Note that there are different types of jitter and of noise... So, if your DAC is sensitive to either, it may be sensitive in different ways and different degrees. However, what you will find is that actually measuring sensitivity to noise or jitter is very difficult, and requires rather complex and expensive test equipment, and neither DAC manufacturers nor transport manufacturers provide anywhere near detailed specs on either. So... Yes... if you had a PERFECT DAC then all transports WOULD have to sound identical. But, of course, there is no such thing as a perfect DAC... But that does mean that you should expect very different results with different DACs.

@keithlevkoff8579

5 ай бұрын

@@nicksterj What you said is true, or should be, for the DAC inside the CD player... because the data is sent, more or less directly, from the data buffer to the DAC... However, when you use an external DAC, things get a lot more complicated. When you read the data out of the CD player's data buffer, using the CD player's clock, that clock then becomes "embedded" in the data. Then, when you send that data to a separate DAC, the DAC must follow the clock that is embedded in the data and CANNOT use its own clock. And, if the clock in the CD player is imperfect, or the signal gets distorted in the cable between the CD player and the DAC, then the resulting clock will no longer be perfect. (And, yes, apparently even the tiny speed variations in many "pretty good" clocks can cause enough distortion in the output signal to be at least slightly audible.) In order to be able to use its own clock instead, the DAC must have its own high-quality clock, and it must also have some way to regulate the flow of the data. And, since the data coming from a coax or optical connection only goes one way, the DAC has no way to "tell" the CD player to send data slower or faster... so it must "let the data get a little bit ahead, and store some data in its own buffer, in case it needs it to catch up later". As it turns out, there are other ways of doing this, which involve something called an asynchronous sample rate converter", which some DACs use, but they make the design of that DAC much more complicated... and, as noted in the test results here, if the DAC fails to make those clock "corrections", or doesn't make them perfectly, then differences in the clocking on the transport may be audible. (Remember that an error or variation in the clock has much the same result as an incorrect value on a data point... the resulting "point" is "in the wrong place".) There are a whole bunch of "little black boxes" whose sole purpose is to "reclock the data"... and at least some of them do make an audible difference with some CD transports and some DACs. (But that's a whole separate, and rather complex, subject...) Now, when you use an ASYNCHRONOUS USB connection, the clock IS controlled by the DAC... With that type of connection the DAC requests the data and the DAC inserts the clock. And, even though the data must still travel over the connection, the timing and data clock ARE controlled by the clock in the DAC... This is why a properly designed DAC with an asynchronous USB input SHOULD be immune to the quality of the transport mechanism (as long as the data itself is perfect). HOWEVER, while this type of connection is the norm these days for connecting computers to DACs, and a few "computer-based" streamers also offer it, CD transports almost never do. (So, with CD transports, and most DACs, the DAC is forced to "lock onto and follow" the clock that is being sent by the transport... over the cable between them... and through quite a bit of circuitry along the way... and hopefully apply some sort of internal "correction" to avoid being affected by stuff like this.)

Mike, Ya gave me the Idea of Experimenting with a few Blu-Ray Players. Well, Really I've already thought about it. Lol... You Reminded Me and Maybe Speed up the Process of Experimenting with an Older Panasonic Blu-Ray player BD55 (which had some good reviews but was really selling out), a newer Panasonic UB820 4k Blu-Ray Player, and the last of the Oppo UDP-203 4k Blu-Ray player. Most of the time I'm looking at movies and sometimes I'm Streaming used to be Pandora, but now My Favorite is SomaFM: Groove Salad (Chill). Now My Cds becoming like Me playing My Albums; sometimes wanting to hear a different Sound Quality. Or the Music I have not heard in a Long time! Etc... What a Fun Hobby! Now that I think about it, Mike G. might have Mention You to Me. If I Remember Right, told him I look at a lot of KZread on Audio-Video Related On My 4k Tv. Right now on My Computer, so I'm able to comment but not on the TV. Again Great Video, Thank You For Everything!

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Experimenting is the most fun because you get to hear the artwork that the engineers were creating inside these devices.

@stephenhamm280

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew Yes, I Love it! Getting the Most out of Your Audio Products sometimes Requires Experiments! Even at Low prices! Like You Say Mostly for Fun!

I own this Cambridge CD player for months and for money invested it is a very good thing. Yes, bad remastered new CD`s will still sound horrible on it, there is nothing that Wolfson DAC can repair. But majority of CD`s sound excellent on it. It doesn`t replicate the warm sound of vinyl, like some more expensive CD players want to do, but it sounds like a quality standard redbook CD player. Crystal clean.

It's not just sound but speed on loading, and button response. People often forget that a DVD player is noticeably slower loading and often does not have as many features from buttons as it is designed to operate through a visual interface, not buttons or remote. Nobody talks about how important interface is.

Fantastic video, thank you guys for doing this. Amazing resource along with all the other folks on youtube testing cables and equipment with all the snake oil ripped out.

very informative video. Thanks, Mike!

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I always appreciate your support!

Just getting back into music(with an old set of ears, lol), and will be purchasing a new CD player or Blue Ray Player - is there typically a material difference in sound quality b/w a CD transport and Blue Ray transport other than the video side all other things being equal?

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I agree with the other comment. Go for a CD player if you don't need the Blu-Ray option. However, now I am inspired to do another video about this subject in itself.

@garydumas3148

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew thanks Mike & AT - now onto CD player research…

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

@Gary Dumas I have several reviews on relevant players. Check them out. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out. 😊

Back in their glory days I was a Levinson dealer for many years. Their Reference DAC (No. 31.5) was $9000. The matching Reference DAC (No. 30.6) was $17,000). Below that was their No. 37 transport at 4k and their No. 360S DAC at $8,000. So 26K for a world class CD player. But if you wanted to save some, many were tempted to do the Reference DAC and lesser transport. Wrong choice. The 31.5 paired with the lesser DAC for $12,000 was clearly superior to the lesser transport through the Reference DAC. Most were very skeptical but it was easily shown to be the case.

@mikeg2491

11 ай бұрын

This old stuff is so fascinating, I just got a a 1988 accuphase cd transport & dac that retailed for $13k back in the day, no fooling it sounds better to my ears than my Chord Dave and this is almost 40yo digital technology. I experimented with feeding Spotify into the dac and it was musical bliss, haven’t tried feeding the transport into the Dave though. I think a lot of people fail to mix and match components to get the best of what they got, I know my Grado headphones can sound either fatiguing/screechy or nirvana-like off the same gear in your home just depending on how you chain them together. How many people get new speakers or headphones and return them thinking they’re crap just because they don’t have the right synergy behind it?

I just picked up an Onkyo DX-C390 6 disc changer with vector linear shaping circuitry and direct digital path for $100 open box from Best Buy. It’s normally $350. Got the 4 year warranty for $20. Sounds great paired with my Yamaha A-S801.

I saw the title and had hoped that you were comparing transports and not CD players. I'd be interested in these same units going through the same external DAC.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

They did. They went through the Yulong DAC.

@macgeek2112

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew ahh. I walked away for a moment and must have missed that part. Good to know. I have a couple Sony UBP-X800 4K Blu-ray players and I use one of them for CDs going through my Denefrips Ares II DAC. I don’t have much listening time with it but I am interested in a “real” CD transport/player. Your comments on the Cambridge were enlightening and has steered me in another direction. Thanks.

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

That's what they did, but they disabled the DAC clock so the test is crap.

I totally agree AND disagree with you. A drive CAN make a big difference in a real time system, when the DACs input chipset allows systematic timing errors to pass and proceed into the conversions clocking. As soon as the clocks deviation contains a spectrum different from random noise or hiss, this jitter makes disharmonic distortion. Sometimes up to levels you simply want to switch off. As soon as a sophisticated input chipset eliminates those jitter frequency's - better: shifts them out of the audio band to subsonic or HF hiss, the drive (or cable or whatever influences the jitter spectrum) can no more influence the performance. Those DACs will NOT allow to detect the drives characteristic. In your Video you have bypassed the DACs Jitter filter, clearly visible in the display. Repeat the test with Jitter filter activated. If it keeps what it promises, you hardly find out which drive is active...

The logical answer is that most, if not all, CD players post-process the audio on the digital end. Considering how digital audio works, it would be _literally imposible_ for the transport itself to have _any influence at all_ over the sound quality. Now, I'm not saying the video is wrong, rather that there must be another explanation for the test results. Scientific method. Consider all possible variables.

What about a stand alone dvd player,sony,panasonic,etc.As long as it has a digital coaxial ouput in the back to hook up to an external dac then forward threw RCA cables to speakers for cd listening...thoughts?

i got the cambridge cxc and want to upgrade to the jays cdt 2. This video confirms it probably will sound better

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I can't confirm anything about Jay's Audio other than it's a CD transport. However, Primare, I feel, could give it a run for its money.

@Biefstukje

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew Thanks for the info. But if im upgarding i want a i2s port. Not many CD players/transports have those :(

Excellent test! For the similar price to the Lyngdorf you can buy the Jay's Audio CDT2 which has an OCXO clock and should reduce jitter sent to the Dac even more.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I'm hoping that hits the test bench soon!

@connorduke4619

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew Sounds fantastic. Btw based on my research of all other audio channels + demos + forums, the best price comparable Dac to hook up the Jay's to (preferably with i2s) is Musician Audio Aquarius. That is the front end I plan to invest in shortly anyway.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

@@connorduke4619 another piece I will have to look into as well.

@connorduke4619

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew Musician Aquarius (like the Jay's) has an OCXO clock which is a massive advantage, but the overall design is high quality. Also it easily beats the highly rated Denafrips Pontus on an A-B test here: kzread.info/dash/bejne/g55m1Kegmaqpcrg.html Also it even beats the far more expensive Denafrips Terminator Plus in terms of dynamics according to other demos from another respected reviewer.

And to be curious what was the source material?Genre ect.

I always wondered about this, but from another viewpoint: CD transport to DAC vs Flac send through the USB connection (to same DAC). Again this should sound identical, but it doesn't. When playing CD's (via optical) the sound always sounds more 'heavy/ hard-edged' ; it makes me want to lower the volume just for that. When playing FLAC ; the sound is crisp and 'light' in a very nice way. (CD player is a Marantz CD17 mk2 through Audiolab M-Dac).

@keithlevkoff8579

5 ай бұрын

There's a lot more going on than you seem to think... When you play a FLAC file on a computer the actual data should be the same as was on the original CD (FLAC files are lossless assuming they were encoded correctly). However, when you use an optical connection, you are forcing the DAC to use the clock that is embedded in the data. Depending on the source, this clock may or may not be very good and, depending on the DAC, the DAC may take measures to "repair or improve it", or it may not. The same would be true if your DAC has an old-style "isochronous" USB input. However, if your DAC uses an "asynchronous" USB input, which most modern DACs now do, then with that USB input the clock is controlled by the DAC, and the quality of clocks in DACs also varies rather widely. And, in addition to all that, many modern DACs also include other methods for "improving" or "fixing" the quality of the clock after they receive the signal. Odds are that the "heavy hard edged sound" you are hearing is the result of the clock that is being received over that optical connection along with the data not being very good... and the DAC having limited or no ability to correct it once it is received.

@Asphodellife

5 ай бұрын

Thanks. That would mean though that connecting through the (asynchronous) USB input gives superior sound than the optical port on the same DAC. The Marantz is a somewhat older player, but was considered high end at the time, maybe i'll try with a modern transport and see what happens (as I can't hear any difference in sound when switching between the CD players' optical output and it's analogue output ' ). @@keithlevkoff8579

you right, i dont believe the result. even if they tricked you and used the same source each time you would most likely say you heared a difference.

Interesting. For your next tests please include a non-mechanical transport (such as SDCard based reader)... as a reference point.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

That's a great idea, I will keep that in mind.

I was a ones and zeros guy who burned my cds to a roon source with an inexpensive dvd cd rw Either streaming from qobuz or my nas into my dac. Had a few dollars and there was a clearance in a project rs box. It is a pure cd read box laser reader and it doesn’t read cd rw disks. I have been buying used cds and haven’t used my turntable in weeks. Just amazing dynamics of cd with the natural sound of analog

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Very nice! I'm glad you are having fun with it! That is what it's all about!

Would be good to takes a recording from the speaker outputs for each of the tests and examine the data.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

This was meant to be only a subjective test. Perhaps for the sequel, I will do objective tests.

@UXXV

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew that would be excellent. Not doubting anything but hard data is fantastic. Techmoan did one recently testing the green pen trick on CDs this way.

where you bought that shirt!! its awwsomeee , share link please

@mykandrew

4 ай бұрын

michael-andrew-shop.fourthwall.com/products/cd-logo-tee

Apparently, for an extra $100, the Cambridge CXC is quite a step up from the AXC variant in other reviews that I have seen.

I can easily believe this. I have a Lampizator Amber II dac, which I have personally tweaked. This is the successor to my Meridian 206. 35 years old. It's beaten everything I've put against it, except the Lampizator. The source I use for my Lampizator is the coaxial SPDIF. The transport I use is my Meridian 206. Admittedly, I have not experimented with different transports, although I am keen to do so. I experienced a quantum leap in quality when I upgraded my SPDIF cable. The cable is handcrafted by an audiophile friend, using materials he won't disclose to me. I experienced a further improvement when changing the factory fitted RCA SPDIF sockets with WBT. I did these one at a time, between source and dac. The first was impressive. The second blew me away. It was the last bottleneck (externally, at least). Myth: it's all 0's and 1's, so a digital cable makes no difference. Not true. The Y domain is digital indeed. This much IS true. The X domain is time. Jitter is a real thing. I was skeptical too, until I did some experimenting. I'm ever so glad I did this. If I had listened to consensus, I would have pre-concluded that it's all snake oil and I would have joined the flat-earth society for audio.

Ok so you didn't have a single dedicated CD "transport" in the mix.

I'm not surprised in the least. Anybody who says CD players (and transports) all sound the same obviously have not heard a good CD player.

@Negatywny2

Жыл бұрын

you know that especially those good ones should sound the same as they just dont alter the sound? xD

@michaelcollins2473

Жыл бұрын

@@Negatywny2 Huh?

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Agreed, Michael. I was actually really taken back by how different they were. I was expecting small subtle differences, but when I tested the Blu-ray player, it was painfully obvious.

@michaelcollins2473

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew The absolute best CD (SACD) player I have ever heard/used in my system was an Esoteric. Just my experience. It was mind boggling. My son even said to me (on Pink Floyd's SACD copy of Have a Cigar...) "I have never heard that song sound like that before. That was amazing." I have never been more proud of my system.

@dannytse8767

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelcollins2473 So were you playing the SACD layer or the CD layer of the Pink Floyd disc? Not quite sure from your post.

Can't all this be compensated with a dejiter re-clocker device in between the transport and the DAC?

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

It could be, but that's not what we were trying to accomplish with this particular test.

@chebrubin

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew I am thinking you put a Moon Audio from Cary, NC digital adapter in between or use USB and i2s to your favorite DAC. Game over. Audio is going to sound as good as the DAC output reclocked. Better speedier Bass. I am still using a Camelot Dragon 5.1 SPDIF Dragon dejitter device from 20 years ago for up to 24 / 96 stereo.

Then not all drive units are equally quiet either. and by that I don't mean the sound that comes out of the speakers. a step up would be devices that can play 24 bit eg DVD Audio or Blu-ray Puré audio or perhaps DSD i.e. SACD

100% agree. Clean, beefy analog power supplies and low jitter are the key to getting digital audio to sound good.Once engineers understood the importance of low jitter (and maybe more importantly how to achieve) digital sound finally lived up to the original hype.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

We still have ways to go with the mass market stuff.

@joseph-ow1hf

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew Like most things, there is a point of diminishing return on price to performance. So I suppose the question becomes, what is the price for entry into the the realm of very good sound? I dunno, as I've not bought in new audio gear in years. The only good advice I can give to stay on a sane budget is to buy higher end gear used or factory refurbs rather than lower end stuff new. People flip perfectly good equipment all the time.

@Wizardofgosz

10 ай бұрын

No one can hear jitter. It's well into the noise floor. It doesn't manifest itself like xruns or digital skipping, it's just noise.

@scotteaton4868

9 ай бұрын

Jitter mgmt is also negated by the DAC, not the transport

@user-pd5pw4xv9w

4 ай бұрын

This explains why all the Excel spreadsheets on my PC look blurry. It’s because it doesn’t have a linear power supply!

I'm still a little fortunate to have one cd player,. my old cd player cdp-770

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

That's awesome. Keep it! 😀

Love the channel. I think you do believe you heard a major difference. Now I have old ears, and can only say that I can not tell the difference between my Cambridge cxc Transport and Yamaha CD player running through a schiit multibit. Not a dam thing. And it drives me nuts. The one good thing I guess is my Cambridge stack looks clean as hell and matches. I wish I could hear a difference, because I think my CDs sound a whole lot worse than streaming or vinyl. Now that's a whole other story where people would say...nope. Vinyl is the worst. so who the hell knows.

@mykandrew

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for the kind words. Luckily for us sound is subjective!

@marcjohnson9270

2 ай бұрын

Vinyl is king and I can't remember when a cd ever went up in value.

Tip, no background music when talking

@andrehendrik

Жыл бұрын

good call/agreed -- it's distracting

@samidebs3559

Жыл бұрын

He’s romantic 😳

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

The background music adds ambiance, and the sound level is considerably lower than my voice. The music is at -26db. My voice is at +5db. Shouldn't be distracting. It's lofi beats, lol 😆

@andrehendrik

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew I like your channel: trust me dude, it's distracting

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I appreciate that, Andre! I'll work on a better solution. 😌

What if these transpoorts are fed into a streamer such as an Auralic Aries G2.1 and then to the dac. Would there still be a big difference?

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I would go directly to the DAC.

For the ultimate comparison you could have thrown in a dedicated transport like the Cambridge CXC.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I want to leave some interesting comparisons for the sequel ;)

@nunofernandes4501

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew ah!

The main reason for the diiference in what you hear from a transport is Jitter and Error correction, althogh error correction is only going to happen now and then. A true reconstruction of the sine waves is only posible with 0 jitter, even a few hundred pico second can be measured on simple equipment. Still There may be other reasons as well.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Agreed. I just didn't realize how polarizing jitter and other variables in a CD/DVD player can make such a difference.

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

That's why DACs use FIFO buffers and their own clocks. Transport jitter has no effect at all in that case. Jitter is a non issue in modern digital equipment unless the DAC is junk.

Why wasn't the Primare DD15 not in the test?

I have ripped my CDs to FLAC files. I currently use my Sony UBP-X800M2 to stream from my 256 GB thumb drive to a Marantz AV7704 Sound processor (32 bit AKM 4458VN DAC). The rest of the system (for 2 channel) includes Emotiva XPA-1 Gen-1 monoblocs driving Magnepan 2.7 QRs and a swarm of subs (5). Should I expect an audible improvement were I to use a DAC with a price point of say a Geshelli J2 which you review elsewhere and feed unbalanced analog into the AV7704?

@michaelwright1602

Жыл бұрын

I'm not Mike, but I would say yes you should hear a difference, how much will depend on your gear. I never had any luck sound wise using an AVR, my last was the Denon X4400H, a pretty decent unit. I sold it to my buddy and went two channel. I kept my Emotiva XPA-2 amp, using it right now on a mix of Denafrips and Schiit Audio amps and preamps. I just installed the Venus II 12th, which replaced the very good sounding Ares II. KLH Model 5's and two SVS SB-3000 subs providing the sound. You know, it will depend on that Marantz unit, even with pass through or pure audio, I was never happy with the sound out of that Denon. I would give the Geshelli a try, everything I have heard regarding their DACs has been nothing but positive. And I will say this, DACs do matter.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

What Michael said, me too ;)

Hi i understand that the da8 has a jitter reduction feature Did you engage that? Some dacs perform a reclocking of the incoming digital signal In the best case this should make the final sound less dependent from the source Thanks a lot

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

The manufacturers of expensive transfers would prefer you not tell anyone about this.

@user-pd5pw4xv9w

4 ай бұрын

Jitter really isn’t an issue this century as it’s well below the noise floor on all but the worst devices.

I picked up a Arcam alpha 7se off ebay just to see what the fuss was about with this player for £100 it sounded better with much more detail than my Audiolab 6000cdt with a rega dac .

Intereating video! Back in 1995, Quad was for sale, and my accountants were examining the company's books prusuant to purchasing the company. (In the end we lost out to Mission.) During a factory visit, David told me that the most important thing about a CD player was a completely monotonic DAC, assuming that the transport was adequate. (We spoke a lot more about the loudspeakers, which were far more interesting to me.) In those days, most CD transports and their error correcting electronics were far from perfect: thumping a typical CD player not hard enough to make it stop playing would lead to a pretty accurate audio representation of a thumping sound. What do you think has changed from then (apart from the fact that expensiv external DACs are used in high end systems)?

Means the Sony has more jitter than the Cambridge or the Lyngdorf. But it illustrates that in order to have a clean S/Pdif coax or tos!ink there is a lot of work to do on the clocks and buffering of both the transport and the receiving dac. So connect your Sony Blu-Ray player through HDMI instead since it carries both data and timestamp to your HDMI "in" of the receiver/DAC and live long and Prosper.... There is nothing magic done in the transport : the tonal, dynamics and stereo sound stage information is on the CD, it just gets Lost in translation Somewhere when data is no longer locked to its Time in the machine. Invest in HDMI, not fancy Hi-Fi.

I'm curious how the new audiolab 9000 and 7000 cd-transports perform...

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

It would be an interesting test. On the digital side, I would guess they would be practically identical.

@gerlachsieders4578

Жыл бұрын

​​​@@mykandrew thank you for your kind response Mike, and I suppose you are right. Still, they could be an improvement to the 6000 CDT, they invested in a separate power supply, shielding the circuits etc. Either way, I am happy many brands still do R&D on CD(t) players, cause CD's are still my go to source (I use my 6000a play-streamer only for Internet Radio, wich is awesome by itself!). All the best Mike!

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

@@gerlachsieders4578 thank you for the kind words. The world of digital audio has become quite exciting!

@markgallagher5908

Жыл бұрын

That's a question I'm looking forward to getting answered, there is a review comparing the 6000 and 9000 on the tube somewhere. I have the 6000 so I'll have to get around to auditioning the 9000, but I can't see the 7 being a whole lot better than the 6 due to the comparative price between the two.

So when you did the transport comparisons, did you switch between A and B each time knowing it was A or B (though not knowing what A or B was)? Did you switch some number of times for each comparison. Sounds like maybe you only listened to the Sony once, and maybe switched more times with the others? Is this how your testing went.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

In the video, both Mike and I explain how it went, and I specified that I consolidated all of my findings for times sake. Mike deliberately tried to make it more difficult by sometimes playing the same player twice or switching between players randomly. I did not know what player was playing during the test.

@R00m1o1

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew but you didn't provide results showing how often you were wrong or right about whether there was an actual switch versus hearing the same player twice. The first stage of blind testing is simply proving you can hear a difference. You skipped that in reporting your results and went straight into describing the differences.

The details of how you connected the equipment is not clear. You are comparing transports so presumably you are using the digital output from each transport? Coaxial? Optical? Same for each transport? If you used the analogue outputs (surely not) then you aren't comparing transports and you would likely hear differences. If comparing the transports only could you consistently pick each transport? Every time? Having personally conducted a similar test (different transports but comparing cheap with expensive) there was, as you would expect, no audible difference. Call me unconvinced!

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

In the video, I said we used the same coax cable for each transport in the digital test.

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

He did not use the DAC clock. If he had, jitter would be meaningless.

If error correction was a major player for the degraded sound quality in inferior transports, how do data CDs with very similar, if not the same, mechanicals in their drives manage to not be corrupted when read? Is it the process of error correction itself? Can we get an engineer that worked on creating the pickups and electronics for CD layers and transports to weigh in? Most reviews and comparisons are treating CD players/transports as grey boxes that are only partially understood.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Watch my video on Jitter, and that will explain a lot, I will do my best to get an engineer for the follow-up video to explain how he designs the CD players in detail.

@MikeDS49

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew Thanks. I'm looking forward to the next video. I watched the video, and understand what jitter is, and generally how it affects audio (secondary peaks so many dB down from the main peak of a pure tone). Would all of the jitter caused by the three sources be corrected by the jitter eliminator on the DAC? If so, what's left to account for the differences you heard? I admit, I am still in the bits-is-bits (once gross jitter is accounted for) camp yet!

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

I'm an engineer. If the DAC buffers and reclocks the data then transport jitter is irrelevant. It just needs to deliver the sample bits without errors. We see this nonsense all the time. It helps sell a lot of useless gadgets.

@MikeDS49

Жыл бұрын

@@nehocm123 Thank you!

I think the idea that all transports sound the same plays a role in why many people believe that vinyl is the superior format. Notice how this same logic isn't applied to turntables. If you compare an expensive turntable to a cheap Blu-ray player obviously the turntable is going to sound better. But to someone who believes that all CD transports are the same, they will assume it's the format at fault and not the player.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

CORRECT!

@thomaswalder4808

8 ай бұрын

"If you compare an expensive turntable to a cheap Blu-ray player " Jitter is on a more abstract level using data at the wrong point of time. That happens also to a turntable if its rotation speed is not 100% correct and 100% constant. If you compare the variances of even an high end turntable with the jitter of an average CD player the turntable has a much higher jitter ... "obviously the turntable is going to sound better." That is far away from obviously. At the end "sound better" is a subjective rating - like Pizza smells better than Spaghetti....

I wonder if a modern DAC that internally buffers and reclocks the S/PDIF signal would have successfully minimized the differences. Interesting test and results.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

In the next video, I will post results using a Holo May.

@medonk12rs

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew ... fed via SPIF the Holo May will also sound differently depending on the transport used. 🙂

@razisn

Жыл бұрын

@DavidW not true

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

That would be unkind to the makers of expensive transports.

In the case of not using an external DAC and the sound comes out through the analog output, it is absolutely logical that there are differences, the internal parts of the DAC can modify the pure sound and change the curve for better or worse, but if the output is digital to an external DAC that is impossible, it is like being told that a zip file passed through ethernet is different from one passed through wifi to another machine, they have no logic whatsoever, if the source transfers the 0s and 1s without altering what it reads from the CD there can be no differences if the external DAC is the same, to believe that this is possible I would have to put an analyzer of the digital signal that shows me in some way all the 0s and 1s transported and that these are different in some parts. I believe that it is nothing more than snake oil.

You should try the Schiit URD, the unison USB out sounds interesting.

@mykandrew

9 ай бұрын

Waiting for @schitt on that one.

I've test with my 2 identical cd into ca cxc v2 and onkyo c7030, from cxc use coax to eversolo dmpa6 me and optical to ca cxa81. From onkyo use optical to eversolo dmp a6me and rca into cxa81. Its sound different. But not sure which one better between onkyo vs cxc v2. But for sure the best option is use dmp a6 me for dac.

Thanks, finally someone using science and blind tests to evaluate equipment!

I wish you took Cambridge dedicated transport 600usd worth for such test instead of their budget CD player

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

Unfortunately I don't have an unlimited stock of CD players.... yet 😆

technics and philips cd transport 4/19 is the best invention.

Measurements are fine and all, our ears will only detect so much.

I look at it this way. I could have chosen a long time ago to have a kick ass audio system. I still have a mostly vintage mostly Sony set up in the basement. I chose to have a kick ass music collection instead.

Yet, a 20€ Pioneer DVD-R Drive (connected to a 100€ Intel Nuc running Windows Server and Jriver) easily thrashed my WADIA 860 used as Transport and connected to the same SMSL D1SE DAC...🙄

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

That's a $10k CD player... I guess that's not a very good look for Wadia. Hope you kept your receipt.

@konstantinost3185

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew Nah, that's almost a 20 years CD Player bought second hand many years for way less than its listing price, in any case it's a good indicator of much affordable great sounding Digital Audio has evolved, especially the last 2-3 years. BTW, Jriver reads the CD Disc multiple times at high speeds and uses Data Buffers until it gets it right, something that CD Transports are not capable off, downside is that they are bit mechanical noisy to spin a CD Disc 48x faster, there's a solution to this problem though.

Isn't a cd transport a device without an internal dac ? I believe, it should only read and output a digital signal in an orderly manner to an external dac.

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

He wasn't using the DAC internal clock and blaming transport jitter. It's bs.

The pits and lands of a CD, read by the laser, create light pulses. A CD Transport outputs only digital data as usually both electrical and optical pulses. Digital coax and digital optical S/PDIF connections. A CD Player will usually output both digital pulse forms as well as an analogue signal. The built in DAC converts the pulses into an electrical signal for output on RCA jacks. I am currently using a dedicated CD Transport and separate DAC, never to look back. I have found it is the DACs which sound much more different from each other. The difference in what is used as a transport is more about quality of the digital signal, how good, noise floor, jitter, clarity etc.

@thomaswalder4808

8 ай бұрын

"The difference in what is used as a transport is more about quality of the digital signal, how good, noise floor, jitter, clarity etc." What is the "clarity" of a digital signal?

@XX-121

Ай бұрын

@@thomaswalder4808 yeah, it's funny how every computer disc drive in existence can rip the exact same data from a cd verified by the accurate rip database but not a single cd player manufacturer can get it right. must need a better power cord for that cd player? LOL i hear paul mgowan's got one with CLC copper for $600 he'll sell you that'll fix it right up. (CLC = Cobra Lube Coated)

@thomaswalder4808

Ай бұрын

@@XX-121 Really funny - even a 30 USD China CD-ROM can read the exact data from an audio CD 8-times (or even more) faster than normal playback speed. There must be some real magic why CD transports costs 2000 USD to do the same 🙂

So I assume that music streamer quality makes same impact with DAC. Output quality, power supply, etc of streamer. Your thoughts .? Everything in a chain impacts results

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

You are absolutely right. Your system will always be as good as its weakest link.

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

The whole point of a digital equipment chain is that the bits coming out are the same as the bits going in. If your DAC can't buffer and clock then it has to use the timing from the last device prior. That's what happened here. Don't do that.

@jmp622

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew thanks. Upgrade power supply to my Node2i , or upgrade the streamer all together? Hate to discard it. I currently feed it to Gustard A26 DAC.

@elkeospert9188

Жыл бұрын

@@mykandrew " Your system will always be as good as its weakest link." By far the weakest link in playback of digital music are the amplifier and the speakers.

@user-pd5pw4xv9w

4 ай бұрын

The you’d also rightly have to assume that every time that audio file has been copied or sent from one PC to another, or even the same PC to itself, that it would have been slightly degraded due to the lack of a linear power supply, antivibration damping, and a mega expensive clock??? Except that simply isn’t the case, and this video is entirely measuring ectoplasm.

A more convincing test would include multiple people from varying backgrounds.

Nice to hear somebody talk about jitter again. It makes huge difference in the digital domain. You might also notice that people who are into streaming in most cases avoid talking about jitter including the manufacturer

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

With the advent of better clocks and output stages in components, thankfully, jitter isn't as horrible as it was in that Sony player 😉

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

If the DAC is buffering and reclocking the samples then jitter is irrelevant.

@jwester7009

Жыл бұрын

@@nehocm123 Almost no one does that. It opens up for other problems

@elkeospert9188

Жыл бұрын

@@jwester7009 Every streamer does buffering

@elkeospert9188

Жыл бұрын

"It makes huge difference in the digital domain. " The funny thing is, that "digital jitter" is no topic in the "digital domain" - except for "audiophiles"...

The transports make large sonic differences You could have added a computer drive or games console to extend the sonic response,I have a Phillips cd 473 16bit the sound and field amazing but to play sacs disks a Sony blueray but not for cd s.

Wish there was audio samples of all of the players. Would like to see if I would come to the same conclusion.

@mykandrew

6 ай бұрын

You could do your own experiments with CD players and transports that come your way. Everyone’s ears are different for sure. What sounds great to one person might not be the best thing for the next.

@ChrisStoneinator

5 ай бұрын

Over... KZread? Are you daft?

kzread.info/dash/bejne/hnWDrqmsg5WdgpM.html&ab_channel=PearlAcoustics Here is the Pearl test. Pay close attention to the second part where the digital outputs are connected to the external DAC. It's just an asynch file transfer in that case. The fact that old protocols allowed an old DAC to recover shaky timing from the bit stream has no relevance. The only way to explain what Mike found is that he did not use the DAC buffer/clock functionality.

@ericjensen9091

Жыл бұрын

Michael Cohen, will using my Marantz CD6005 with an outboard dac be as good as with a dedicated transport like the Cambridge or Audiolab?

@ericjensen9091

Жыл бұрын

Do all dacs have dac/buffer clock functionality? I confess I don't understand this.

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

@@ericjensen9091 Generally yes, and most DACs are flexible regarding buffering and clocking to support a variety of sources and connection protocols. The best approach to understanding digital audio is to avoid explanations from those trying to sell you very expensive stuff.

@nehocm123

Жыл бұрын

@@ericjensen9091 I'll also claim that connecting your disc player and streaming endpoints to a decent modern HTR using HDMI will result in audio quality indistinguishable from fancy external DACs. Any difference will originate in downstream analog stages. Spend your money on nice speakers in a nice room with nice furniture to sit on and good Scotch to sip while listening.

@ericjensen9091

Жыл бұрын

@@nehocm123 Thanks, and your YT subscription list has some interesting channels.

Great video. My experience matches your findings. I've done the same testing, albeit with the limitations of my hifi system. My integrated amp is a Hegel h120 and speakers are Revel performa 3 M106. I tried 3 CD players as transports to the Hegel internal DAC (AKM4490 chip): Rega Apollo (wolfson dac), Pioneer Elite SACD (burr-brown dac), Yamanha BD/SACD Player (not disclosed). They all sound different. Rega is full bodied and musical, a real pleasure. The Pioneer was very detailed but rather thin sounding. The Yamanha sounds ok, closer to the Pionner, but a notch below in overall sq. The key issue is that all three sound different, especially the Apollo. Funny enough, when I try them as players, using the internal DACs, I can't hear a real difference compared to the Hegel DAC, although they all use different dac chips. So, whatever the "science" says, there's no doubt transports make a difference. It's not all about the DAC. Cheers.

@mykandrew

Жыл бұрын

I've been wanting a Rega for so long! That's a great system. 👍

Very interesting results as I was from the school that ones an zeros on a transport should sound the same. So that might twist my arm to get a transport in the 300-600 range, but I would be hard pressed to get anything over $1000 as I am also a believer of diminishing returns. So the $3000 CD player I still see as a purchase that should have one committed to the local insane asylum.