What do you use as a transport?

warnerwh · « **on:** 19 May 2006, 04:40 am »

Have wondered what everybody uses as a transport. Many people seem to claim cd players will work/sound better than a dvd player. There's also been discussion stating that a single disc player will outperform a changer as a transport. This last one I have to wonder about. I'm no EE so if someone can explain why this must be I'd like to understand.

bhobba · « **Reply #1 on:** 19 May 2006, 04:44 am »

Quote from: warnerwh

Have wondered what everybody uses as a transport. Many people seem to claim cd players will work/sound better than a dvd player. There's also been discussion stating that a single disc player will outperform a changer as a transport. This last one I have to wonder about. I'm no EE so if someone can explain why this must be I'd like to understand.

I have found no audible differences between a cheap panasonic DVD and an expensive Rotel player - so I simply use the panasonic. But that is so old hat - rip it all to PC and use that.

Thanks
Bill

bhobba · « **Reply #2 on:** 19 May 2006, 04:47 am »

Quote from: bhobba

Quote from: warnerwh
I have found no audible differences between a cheap panasonic DVD and an expensive Rotel player - so I simply use the panasonic. But that is so old hat - rip it all to PC and use that.

The following may be of interest.
http://www.tweakaudio.com/Panasonic%20DVD%20player%20mods.html

Thanks
Bill

warnerwh · « **Reply #3 on:** 19 May 2006, 05:44 am »

I tend to agree with you. I just ordered a new Sony DVPNC 555es dvd changer as a transport. Technically a reason why this piece won't work as well as any transport I don't know, then again I'm no EE either.

Presently I'm using a Sony DVD player I bought a couple of years ago as a transport and the sound in my room is truly outstanding. Technically I suspect that these players are able to put out a digital signal about as accurate as any unless you spend thousands and then I doubt it would be very audible.

The Panny dvd players are too slow for me. The user interface I don't care for either. The sound though isn't bad as I tried the one we use in our home theater to see how it sounds. I think it cost 130 dollars brand new a couple of years ago.

Recently shopping for a new transport I noticed that cd changers are hardly being made anymore. Recently I had a Marantz 8260 which sounded excellent but had problems as they commonly do so I sold it. The downside was only having one disc. I like to have several in there so I can just change discs if I'm in the mood for something different.

sturgus · « **Reply #4 on:** 19 May 2006, 06:08 am »

I just bought a Pioneer 578 to use as a transport. My old trusty Pioneer PD-75 is starting to have some read issues. Four days into listening tells me I have a long way to go before it sounds anywhere as good as my PD-75. I hope it gets better but not holding my breath. Maybe it just needs some breakin time.
Sturgus

DSK · « **Reply #5 on:** 19 May 2006, 06:59 am »

Quote from: warnerwh

Have wondered what everybody uses as a transport. Many people seem to claim cd players will work/sound better than a dvd player. There's also been discussion stating that a single disc player will outperform a changer as a transport. This last one I have to wonder about. I'm no EE so if someone can explain why this must be I'd like to understand.

It used to be that changers were based on convenience rather than sound quality and as such used cheaper transports and other parts. Also, there was more 'play' in the tray etc which could lead to greater reliance on error correction and reduced sound quality. Early DVD players mostly sounded poor for CD music, possibly due to them trying to be all things to all people, but with companies directing more funds to DVD players and less and less to CD players, some DVD players may not be too bad now.

Each time a disc player reads a CD it will encounter errors which it tries to remedy with simple error correction, but it may never get a perfect read. This can lead to less than optimal sound. When a program like EAC rips a CD to hard disk, it performs as many re-reads as required to get a perfect rip. Every time this rip is played back it will therefore use a perfect read and not have to work overtime trying to correct errors.

There are EE types on these boards that may laugh at my simplistic explanations and perhaps misuse of terms but, in general I think the gist is correct.

Hope this helps.

bubba966 · « **Reply #6 on:** 19 May 2006, 07:10 am »

I'm using one of these.

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/product/detail/0,,2076_15020671_37625,00.html?compName=PNA_ProductDetailComponent

Makes a damn fine transport...

Rocket · « **Reply #7 on:** 19 May 2006, 09:58 am »

Hi,

Funnily enough i bought Dsk's perpetual technologies p3a/modwright level 1 and subsequently had it upgraded to level 2 and i bought a p1a.

I've been using a marantz cd4000 cdp for a couple of years until recently. I'm currently borrowing a pioneer pds507 which has a g&d clock and digital output board modification. G&d no longer exists (a modding co. from the us) but built really good products.

I can hear and improvement when comparing the modified pioneer to my stock marantz cdp. Although not a huge improvement it is enough for me.

Regards

Rod

JLM · « **Reply #8 on:** 19 May 2006, 10:18 am »

Old School: Same as with direct drive vs belt drive turntables (you could easily hear that belt sounded better).

New School: Rip-em (to your hard disk) baby

mjosef · « **Reply #9 on:** 19 May 2006, 07:46 pm »

I found that a stand alone CD player usually beats a dvd player when using the on board internal dac, I have no experience with out board DACs, so can't comment there.
As for cd changers, I love the convience of loading up 5 discs and just letting the music play for five hours, random play is nice too. My Cambridge Audio 540C single cd player sound more dynamic(louder?) than my 5-disc HK 8385 changer. The HK 8385 sounds better than my Philips 795 (upsampling)dvd changer using their on board dacs.
I am entertaining the idea of building my next computer as an audio/HT source...dual core-64bit...I just cringe at the task of converting all those CDs (and LPs) into binary bits and pieces...

BrassEar · « **Reply #10 on:** 19 May 2006, 10:20 pm »

The Squeezebox 3 is my transport and I will never go back to DVD or CD-based transports.

GHM · « **Reply #11 on:** 20 May 2006, 02:22 am »

I also find it hard to hear differences in transports. This article seems to explain why we hear the differences we do in transports. It also shows that even the cheapest player reads CDs nearly perfect. How does jitter sound. I'm not ready to let go of my DVD player as a transport. Maybe one day ...no time soon though.

Eric · « **Reply #12 on:** 21 May 2006, 03:55 pm »

I am using a Stello CDT-200

joeling39 · « **Reply #13 on:** 29 May 2006, 01:53 pm »

Hi,

Based on my limited experience, transports do make a difference. I believe the way each machine processes digital signal makes a big difference. Years ago, I installed the trichord clock III to my marantz CD63KI & it made a huge difference to the player. Soon after, I purchased a second hand Theta Pearl dedicated transport expecting it to sound superior to the Marantz but in reality, it was the opposite. Transplanting the clock to the Theta rectified that. Therefore, my contention is that whichever player spend more effort on the conversion of the data on the cd to spdif (or equivalent) will sound better.

Moving on, I am using a PC (fanless P4) as a transport now (EAC rip playback on foobar with ASIO) then USB out to a clock conditioner modded by Empirical audio then to DAC using SPDIF. DAC fitted with async reclocking. This sounds as good or slightly better than the Theta with clock.

My guess on why multidisk transport may has the potential to sound worse is that generally, the multidisk player is normally the budget model with more effort spent the the multidisck mechanism rather than the signal processing part of the machine compared to a single disk machine. Therefore, with inferor signal processing section, it may sound poorer. Just my opinion.

Regards,
Joe Ling
Malaysia

PS : This is my first post on any audio forum in more than 1.5 years. Glad to be back. Thought I have totally lost interest.

PhilNYC · « **Reply #14 on:** 29 May 2006, 02:02 pm »

Quote from: warnerwh

Have wondered what everybody uses as a transport. Many people seem to claim cd players will work/sound better than a dvd player. There's also been discussion stating that a single disc player will outperform a changer as a transport. This last one I have to wonder about. I'm no EE so if someone can explain why this must be I'd like to understand.

I've spoken to some DAC designers who say that a DVD transport mechanism works better than a CD mechanism, mostly because the tolerance specifications for the lasers reading the data are tighter for DVDs, and that they are far more accurate for reading CDs. Related comment from one designer who said SACD-capable transports read CDs better because of the angle of the laser design.

As far as single-disc versus changer, it mostly has to do with the electrical nosie associated with the changer/carousel motor...

(and fwiw, I have three transports...an Oracle CD1000, EA-modified Sony S7700, and a Squeezebox 2)...

Gordy · « **Reply #15 on:** 29 May 2006, 03:39 pm »

I've been using a stock Denon 2900 for about 2 yrs. now, feeding a moded P3a for over a year. The P3a was modified with battery supply, BG supply caps and bnc's by RWA about 8 mos. ago, which was a much bigger improvement in sound quality than the original opamp, 75ohm resistor and soft recover diodes mods.

Last week I added an Olive Symphony to the mix and the stock audio out bests the above in most aspects and gives a very serious run at a Denon 2900 / Turbo moded ECD-1 combo. Unfortunately, a serious family medical issue (dad's home now

) prevented me from any serious listening and I only started listening to the Olive's dig. out to the dacs yesterday