Raymonda,
In terms of sales volume you may be correct, I haven't done any research to verify or deny. For my purposes it doesn't matter as I'm concerned only with how the product sounds and reproduces music. That's all I care about.
If you find that in your experience computer systems sound better then case closed, you made the right decision. I can't tell you what to like, that's strictly your call. I've heard many computer based systems over the years, some were very good and others weren't. Judging solely on sound quality I wouldn't think of exchanging my current digital front end for any of computer alternatives. Again that's just me, you and I will respectfully differ on this point. A dedicated high quality music server/transport is a potentially different story and I could see that possibility. I'm not persuaded by the computer options at all.
Charles, |
Hello Keith,
I don't know the technical aspects of the TI 1794 chip. All I can attest to is that Shigeki Yamamoto found a way to get absolutely beautiful music out of it and for that I am very grateful for his talent and effort. I've added Duelund CAST capacitors (1pair) for output coupling and placed the DAC on a Star Sound Apprentice Stand. These two simple steps took it to an even higher level.
Charles, |
charles, the 1794 allows for direct coupling of the signal instead of out put capacitors,and there is more!, and as a seasoned audiophile that I know you are, this is best!, Incredible! |
Charles....I find both done right to sound fantastic and I'm not trying to convince anyone one is better but rather that the premise that computer audio is bad....wrong or dead is way off base. Again..computer audio is the way most recording are created and sound fantastic.
Let me put it this way; a recent recording project did for a client, consisting of the group Spyro Gyra was a 26 track recording. If you were afforded the hardware....software....and tracks....would you like to have total control of your mix and afterwards would you burn it to a disc for playback in a cd player or would you save a 2 track file and use this as your playback reference? My guess is the later.....which is how most engineers keep and listen to their 2 track master mixes. Not that it doesn't get burned to a disc but that the file is saved, archived and referenced on a computer and a hard drive. A dedicated computer based system for sure but today, for most people, it is not hard to put together a dedicated computer based system.....and can cost a whole lot less than a sota cd player.
My point about Spyro Gyra was made because...In the not too distant future this might be possible.....at first I can see it starting with the ambient mix....then surround....then limited track mix....and then total mix. The variables that would need to be reconciled is distribution. ..royalies...and artist creative control. The latter is the biggest...but doable.
You might think that it could never happen but it could....copy protection of some sort could be applied...everything could be save in a cloud and payment could be fee for access. Your home hardware could be the restriction point for protection through software loaded on your computer.
Sound crazy...but so was the light
bulb....telephone....radio...and lp. All this can happen..and nd someday will. Sorry to take off an a tangent....but this is along way of saying computer audio ain't dead but rather just beginning. |
Pkoegz
You´re right I have to clarify that point.
I used a TEAC UD-501 DAC which has USB connection. One day I decided to connect a V-Link USB to SPDIF converter to the TEAC and, to my ears, I found more openness. But the the real deal was the USB external power supply (a Chinese one that I don´t remember the brand), suddenly I got more illumination.
When I compared the Esoteric-Yamamoto combo over the MacBook Pro plus Teac UD-501 DAC (USB direct or not) the first combo gave me more resolution and body (besides, the Yamamoto bass reproduction bettered the Teac´s).
Again, a transport like the Esoteric beat a transport like a MacBook Pro plus the external parafernalia mentioned.
Hope this helps.
Daniel |
09-01-14: Raymonda
I'll say it again.....computer audio is how 99.9999 percent of all music is recorded.....mixed and mastered today. Playing back files on your computer has the potential to be as close to the final mix as possible.... Raymond, philistines like Charlesdad, Jesusa0, Granngyring, and Audiolabyrinth inspired me to start this thread.... |
Hello Raymonda,
I certainly get your point and I don't believe computers are bad or wrong. I just find in its current state of development they aren't worth the trouble or hassle for me. Grannyring's post above summarized it so well. We do agree, to each their own.
Charles, |
Charles...my computer system is the least hassle playback medium I have. It is easier than cds and vinyl. The only thing easier is my tuner. |
Raymonda,
If it's hassle free for you that's good.I seem to hear more experiences similar to Grannyring's. He put a lot of time and effort into his computer system. CD is about as simple as it gets in my view.
Regards,
Charles, |
Agear, waite a minute, I thought I was out of this sinceless thread!, please carry on, but without my mention please, I have said all that I can here, what more must I say?, I poped in to talk to charles about the Burr-Brown dac chips, LOL!, Not computer audio!, cheers. |
Charles1dad -- ... I certainly get your point and I don't believe computers are bad or wrong. I just find in its current state of development they aren't worth the trouble or hassle for me. Grannyring's post above summarized it so well. We do agree, to each their own. "in its current state of development" - intesting, and quite contrary to my own experience. To my ears the "state of developement" in regards to PC-audio was mature many years ago in trumping the sound of CD players easily (more on that below). What kind of "trouble or hassle" are you referring to - technical issues? Some six years ago I borrowed a bunch of CD players in the $2-3k range for evaluation being that I was about to invest in a new digital front end. None of them really floated my boat, so to speak, so in my further search and more or less by accident I came across a dealer who was into selling studio-based equipment, and he recommended that I tried out harddrive-based playback. Just to get a bearing on the potential of PC-based playback he then sent me a ~$250 Carat D/A-converter, which I hooked up to my bare bones Acer laptop. Playing files from Windows Media Player (simply plug 'n play - no soft- or hardware optimization, whatsoever) what followed was hard to fathom; as witnessed by a couple of friends I invited over for the shoot-out - all of them very much into high quality audio playback - there was unequivocal consensus that the Carat/Acer combo sonically flew right right past all the CD players I had borrowed (C.E.C, Jungson, Rega among them) - and that, mind you, at under 1/10 of the cost compared to the most expensive of the polycarbonate disc spinners, and through the most basic of setups. Trying other DAC's via my then Acer laptop only cemented initial impressions. As an added bonus I felt (the outlook of) having the whole of my music library at my fingertips extremely freeing, indeed a relief, so this sealed the deal for me - as it has ever since. Any glitches that may be primarily software-related here can occur, albeit rarely, but it depends on the specific implementation. To me it's a non-issue. That is to say: I definately concur with poster Raymonda here as his impresssions and views reflect my own as well. But indeed, to each his own. |
That is to say: I definately concur with poster Raymonda here as his impresssions and views reflect my own as well. But indeed, to each his own. It's a personal decision to live life half full or half empty. If half empty, you are missing out on lots of good stuff. There will always be failures with the simplest task. |
Joecasey -- It's a personal decision to live life half full or half empty. If half empty, you are missing out on lots of good stuff. There will always be failures with the simplest task. What exactly are you implying here, and how does that relate to the above? I simply stated that I agree with Raymonda on this subject (a particular area in which he and I seem to be in the minority) - namely, that computer audio is rather a blessing than a bust - and inquired on the nature of what Charles1dad found to be a "hassle." It seems to me you're bitter; it must be sad living life "half empty" - mine is certainly joyous as in "half full to the brim." |
Joecasey --
If I completely misread you reply, I'm sorry. Just forget my first one to you if I did.. |
Grannyring's decision to return to a CD player is a move I'm sure he'd not consider "half empty". He seems happier than ever since ditching the computer. Really though, this 1/2 full,1/2 empty applies to neither format. There's a ton of music available with both and we will choose what fits us best.My CD jazz collection just keeps expanding with beautiful recordings I keep discovering. Good luck and happy listening to all regardless of your preferred path.
Charles, |
Phusis,
I believe Joecasey is supporting your perspective. |
Charles1dad --
Indeed, thanks - once I got around to re-read it, I suspected he was supportive of my views.
Joecasey --
My apologies... |
09-03-14: Phusis
Joecasey --
If I completely misread you reply, I'm sorry. Just forget my first one to you if I did.. This more recent dialogue is an half empty affair thanks to Joe audio jihadist Casey. |
09-03-14: Phusis
Joecasey --
If I completely misread you reply, I'm sorry. Just forget my first one to you if I did.. This more recent dialogue is an half empty affair thanks to Joe-audio-jihadist-Casey. I am now thoroughly annoyed.... |
News flash.....Every recording studio in the world has decided to get rid of their computer based system. They don't know what they are going to use but they say that after listening to a cd player they realize how bad their computer based recording systems are. Just a bit of humor to stress a point. |
09-03-14: Charles1dad
Grannyring's decision to return to a CD player is a move I'm sure he'd not consider "half empty". He seems happier than ever since ditching the computer. Really though, this 1/2 full,1/2 empty applies to neither format. There's a ton of music available with both and we will choose what fits us best.My CD jazz collection just keeps expanding with beautiful recordings I keep discovering. Good luck and happy listening to all regardless of your preferred path.
Charles, I'm trying to make a general point and has nothing to do with Grannying or cd vs music server. One can use failures for excuses in not trying or successful results for inspiration. Basically the old Nike slogan, Just Do It! Just tired of people making excuses not trying computer audio because Joe Blow had problems. How about the success stories? |
.
Computer audio for me is kind of like exercising. I know it's good for me, I know if I keep at it that it will give positive results. I know that in the beginning it could be a little uncomfortable, but if I want long term results, I need to fight through the initial discomfort.
The real key for me is that I just have to get started...snd stick with it.
. |
09-03-14: Mitch4t
.
Computer audio for me is kind of like exercising. I know it's good for me, I know if I keep at it that it will give positive results. I know that in the beginning it could be a little uncomfortable, but if I want long term results, I need to fight through the initial discomfort.
The real key for me is that I just have to get started...snd stick with it. and ask for help when necessary. |
Joe ,
I can appreciate you're happy with computer audio and that's fine. I guess you take this issue more seriously than I. For me they don't sound better and thus I felt no need to to take it further. You chose that direction and that's good for you. I see no point in turning this into some battle, it isn't that important. I'm forced to work with computers all day at work and feel comfortable with them. Just don't want them in my audio system at home, for those who do, enjoy.
Charles, |
I agree with Raymonda on this subject - namely, that computer audio is rather a blessing than a bust I agree with that too. Computer audio sounds better here. Also, once CD's are ripped, I find the accessibility of the music to be much easier than dealing with physical media. The contenders are MUSE Erato II player (MUSE's last top player before Kevin went on to play with HRT) against a 2012 mini with the full works by Mojo Audio using Pure Music (with upsampling to 24/88, memory play and less-is-more) into the Metrum HEX DAC. I have no interest in convincing others what to like in their systems but, in my system, the computer source sounds better and will likely remain my primary source. |
09-03-14: Charles1dad
Joe ,
I can appreciate you're happy with computer audio and that's fine. I guess you take this issue more seriously than I. For me they don't sound better and thus I felt no need to to take it further. You chose that direction and that's good for you. I see no point in turning this into some battle, it isn't that important. I'm forced to work with computers all day at work and feel comfortable with them. Just don't want them in my audio system at home, for those who do, enjoy.
Charles,
Charles1dad (System | Threads | Answers | This Thread) Frankly I could care less what anybody do except for myself. Like you, I'm just contributing and offering my .02. Nothing more and nothing less. |
Hi Joe,
Agree!
Regards,
Charles, |
So there...posted twice for emphasis.
In all seriousness, it still intrigues me that plastic remains in the game due to perceptions of SQ superiority. I have been reading about the Devaliet stuff recently (thanks Erik), and even a reviewer type admitted to preferring the slightly more analog presentation of a Wadia spinner.
Again, for the record, I respect and believe my fellow philes who still cling to plastic (JesusaO/Danaiel, I was not trying to out you as a rube) in the name of SQ. I am not a true computer devotee but rather a lazy streamer type (Auralic Aries). Streaming technology can put you in the same ballpark as a computer and/or plastic spinner minus the hassles of either platform. Just my two cents. Arguably, it can still require modding or tweaking to to this, but I like to leave that up to people who feed their kids designing audio equipment rather than thumb my way through things as Joe DIY. |
09-02-14: Raymonda
Charles....I find both done right to sound fantastic and I'm not trying to convince anyone one is better but rather that the premise that computer audio is bad....wrong or dead is way off base. Again..computer audio is the way most recording are created and sound fantastic.
Let me put it this way; a recent recording project did for a client, consisting of the group Spyro Gyra was a 26 track recording. If you were afforded the hardware....software....and tracks....would you like to have total control of your mix and afterwards would you burn it to a disc for playback in a cd player or would you save a 2 track file and use this as your playback reference? My guess is the later.....which is how most engineers keep and listen to their 2 track master mixes. Not that it doesn't get burned to a disc but that the file is saved, archived and referenced on a computer and a hard drive. A dedicated computer based system for sure but today, for most people, it is not hard to put together a dedicated computer based system.....and can cost a whole lot less than a sota cd player.
My point about Spyro Gyra was made because...In the not too distant future this might be possible.....at first I can see it starting with the ambient mix....then surround....then limited track mix....and then total mix. The variables that would need to be reconciled is distribution. ..royalies...and artist creative control. The latter is the biggest...but doable.
You might think that it could never happen but it could....copy protection of some sort could be applied...everything could be save in a cloud and payment could be fee for access. Your home hardware could be the restriction point for protection through software loaded on your computer.
Sound crazy...but so was the light
bulb....telephone....radio...and lp. All this can happen..and nd someday will. Sorry to take off an a tangent....but this is along way of saying computer audio ain't dead but rather just beginning. Ray, I appreciate your input. You highlight the harsh reality of the situation and that is that plastic is going away. This thread is really an academic exercise. If anyone is paying attention, CD sales are lagging significantly due to the phenomenon of streamed content and downloads. Its a good thing as Ray insinuates since you have control over your own content choices in terms of resolution, etc. Ray, for personal listening, what gets you closest to the master? RB, 24/96, what? Thoughts on DSD? |
Network-based audio playback is definitely the future as it is for multimedia in general. Just as there has been an explosion of manufacturers jumping into the DAC business, more network players are right around the corner.
If you're using your PC or MAC as a DAC or digital source hardwired to a DAC then sure you can argue all day and night about the pros/cons of USB, firewire or any other physical interface, quality of PSU's, fan noise or whatever. But if you're streaming your music over wifi (not bluetooth in its current state) then it won't take long for those variables to be made irrelevant by the very nature of how networked computers work - hardware and software layer abstraction.
So long as your network is up to par, a $200 chromebook will feed your networked DAC the same file as a $2,000 gaming rig. And home based networks have been more than capable of doing this for a long time with minimal router tweaking by users.
Additionally, you can't talk about computer based audio in terms of quality without admitting that in terms for, DISCOVERY, computer-based audio is already unparalleled and getting even better.
For the record, I've been building gaming PC's from scratch for years. All the music I buy nowadays is vinyl (new or used) and I use Rdio extensively. |
Tortilladc, I agree with you that a $200 chromebook would sound as good as a $2000 game rig. Both would be little better than MP3.
I am not interested in such noise. |
I record in either 24/48 or 24/96 for my multi track gigs. Admittedly I'm a small fish in the world or recording engineering. The beauty of digital is that once I mix down to track and master the mix a file copy of that 2 track will sound the same as the master. The only difference will be in sound will occur due to the difference in playback hardware. I've never worked in DSD but many rave it's sound.
When I archive and transfer analog tape I use 24/96. Believe it or not there is a current argument claiming that properly dithered 16/44 or less, is all that is needed to to maximize the transfer resolution of any analog tape. I've been involve in some of these discussion and don't subscribe to this belief and argue that my own listening test tell my ears otherwise but these folks are smarter than me and throw all kinds of math and science at me telling me I'm buying snake oil and only gilding the lily by using anything beyond 16/44.
If anyone is interested in my work, which is all on location live concert recording, I would point you to Frank Vignola Trio with Bucky Pizzarelli, Live Standards or Felipe Salles, Timeline, or Ronnie Leigh, live at Apple Jazz...to name a few. These are only available in cd but I do have the hi res 2 track master mix. I also have 3 more releases coming out next month.... 1 is a limited run surround mix, the second is a blue ray dvd....which will have 24/48 audio and the 3 will be a mostly acoustic jazz concert on cd. All of these will be released on the Apple Jazz lable.
I'm not trying to pedal my wares but give you a frame of reference from which I speak, albeit, just a very small part of a much larger industry. |
Raymonda,
Thanks, I look forward to finding these CDs of yours and listening, I love jazz.
Charles, |
I had always been very skeptical about the sound quality of computer-based digital playback. It seemed convenient but not very musical. After hearing a Wavelength Brick driven by a Mac Mini at a show a few years ago, my perspective changed.
I have had a Sony 5400ES, a modwright-modded Sony 9000ES, an Ayre CX-7 and many other highly regarded disc players that retail for up to $3500, but none of them compared to what I heard at this show (where they won the best of show award).
Since then, I purchased the Mac Mini and Wavelength Brick and was loving it. About a year ago I upgraded to the Ayre QB-9. In many ways, it sounded better than the Brick, but something was missing.
A few months ago, I upgraded to the Wavelength Cosecant V3 with their best DAC module - Denominator - and their high speed motherboard. This DAC now plays digital files up to 24/192 and sounds incredible. The Cosecant is probably the most musical and enjoyable component I have ever purchased, and I started buying audiophile gear in 1980. In fact, there are some high resolution discs that in many ways actually sound better via my Mac Mini/Amarra/Cosecant than they do on my vinyl rig (see system).
Computer Audio IS very convenient, but this DAC has the lowest measured jitter of any DAC (according to John Atkinson), and many have found that ripped files played back via computer are reproduced better than $10,000 transports. Another great benefit is that my wife finds it so convenient amd enjoyable, that she listens to music a lot more and does not object to upgrading my gear.
I HIGHLY recommend trying one if these Wavelength DACs with a computer. I never knew digital files could sound so musical. |
Tortilla is right about the value of using a network to get the data to the player. I agree 100%. It makes what you use as the computer essentially irrelevant in regards to sound quality. As long as there is enough storage and processing power streaming is a trivial task for most any computer made in the last 10 years. I have tried many configurations this way and the sound quality does not vary into same DAC. Whereas sound quality with computer based play software is all over the place. USB implementation is a significant factor as well, but software used to play seems to be the biggest variable I hear to-date. |
09-06-14: Mapman
Tortilla is right about the value of using a network to get the data to the player. I agree 100%. It makes what you use as the computer essentially irrelevant in regards to sound quality. As long as there is enough storage and processing power streaming is a trivial task for most any computer made in the last 10 years. I have tried many configurations this way and the sound quality does not vary into same DAC. Whereas sound quality with computer based play software is all over the place. USB implementation is a significant factor as well, but software used to play seems to be the biggest variable I hear to-date. +1 |
What's one of the better computer audio software available to rip music to cds for playback through my cd player for my system?, Thankyou gentleman in advance. |
Steinberg's WaveLab. It is a mastering program and has many useful plug ins. It is more than you need but many of the things it provides will be exceedingly useful. |
What advantages does WaveLab offer over dBPowerAmp or EAC? |
09-07-14: Audiolabyrinth
What's one of the better computer audio software available to rip music to cds for playback through my cd player for my system?, Thankyou gentleman in advance. Audiolabyrinth, What do you rip and burn to cds? Downloads? So you're creating another level of work and transformation. Interesting! |
My music server comes with a TEAC optical drive with Linux program for ripping with many checks for errors. I have found that ripping is much faster when the cds are treated with the Essence of Music cd treatment and clearly sound better also. |
Hi Joecasey, and every one, I have on my computer Ashampoo studio 8, I burn cds to computer to blank cds for recording, full format, no compressed files, and yes, down loads to, and un compress them to normal format to go on cd for play back, I just do not know if the soft ware I have that my computer repair friend put on this computer he built for me is High-end, I know fellas, Do Not laugh here at me, Though I still believe computer audio cannot match a good digital or analog cable on a profound dac or cd-player, I would like to learn from all of you!, I do need to be with the times!, maybe a state of the art music server would be great, like I believe TBG may be getting?,currently, I would like to attempt to do my best with little money to achieve best results for recording?, I am going to write down the three software recommendations thus far, how much money does something like this cost, what do any of you think about the Ashampoo studio 8 I mentioned?, cheers. |
09-07-14: Tbg
My music server comes with a TEAC optical drive with Linux program for ripping with many checks for errors. I have found that ripping is much faster when the cds are treated with the Essence of Music cd treatment and clearly sound better also. Does the time to treat a cd negate the shorter ripped time of a treated cd? Since ripping is not real-time, it really doesn't matter IMO. |
Joecasey, I agree but it does suggest that the longer time means that errors are more common, that Essence of Music reduces them. It probably does not mean much in ripping, but the ripping with the treatment sounds noticeably better, and I suspect that on a universal player would be quite a good deal better. |
09-08-14: Tbg
Joecasey, I agree but it does suggest that the longer time means that errors are more common, that Essence of Music reduces them. It probably does not mean much in ripping, but the ripping with the treatment sounds noticeably better, and I suspect that on a universal player would be quite a good deal better. There are tons of benchmarks extracting data off different mediums. It's a known issue and impact greatly magnified in real time. |
Joecasey
Joecasey, I agree but it does suggest that the longer time means that errors are more common, that Essence of Music reduces them. It probably does not mean much in ripping, but the ripping with the treatment sounds noticeably better, and I suspect that on a universal player would be quite a good deal better.
There are tons of benchmarks extracting data off different media. It's a known issue and impact greatly magnified in real time.
I don't understand what this has to do with the improvement in the quality of the rip or with the speed of ripping. |
EAC is a good program for extracting data from discs but for creating audio files WaveLab kills EAC. WaveLab is a full mastering program which allows for all kinds of flexibility from creating and mastering two track recordings to 48 track mixes. Yes....that is way more than you'll need but what it can provide for your 2 track data will amaze you. It has all kinds of plug ins that will come in handy. It also can help with system set up, too. Take a look at their website for more information. It is $500 well spent. |
Thanks, Raymonda. Since my interest is only in extracting files and not in remastering, I will stick with EAC and dbPowerAmp. |
My mind keeps floating back to what is the optimal digital interface for connecting your "computer" to a dac. As Clio suggested earlier in the thread, I am wondering whether Ethernet is inherently superior to other options such as USB. More technical heads out there than moi please chime in.... |
What I like about Ethernet is there is no timing involved from the NAS to the streamer. Also, in my case since the streamer and renderer are one and the same, the clocking is done at only one point in the chain. In my opinion this is probably the simplest signal path.
Now to leverage my Lessloss DAC I just purchased an Auralic Aries. This set up will require a cable between it and the DAC with asynchronous clocking. Not necessarily a bad thing, just one more step in the chain. It will be interesting to see how this set up works out.
FWIW I also own an Audiophileo USB converter. It's in the closet right now, but it served me quite well before I put all my eggs in the Ethernet basket. |
