Who listens primarily to Redbook CD?


My primary (only, actually) source is a CEC TL5 Transport feeding an Audio Note Kit 1.1 NOS DAC through a Cerious Technologies Graphene Extreme AES/EBU digital cable. They are both decked out with CT GE power cords, Synergistic Research Quantum Black fuses, Herbie's Audio Lab Tenderfeet isolation footers, plus other misc. tweaks.

Sounds great, and I have very little desire to add another source. Pretty much all the music I want is available on CD, and is usually quite cheap. I hope to upgrade to an AN factory DAC (3.1x/II, or better, would be nice), and a Teo Audio liquid metal digital cable (I have their Game Changer ICs, and absolutely love them!) in the future.

Who else is happy with Redbook CD as their primary source?
tommylion

Showing 4 responses by shadorne

Several 1000 CD ripped to a hardrive using iTunes about 10 years ago. Some HD tracks hi resolution material. More recently Tidal. I like the way I can sync my iPhone and get a compressed lossy version of my complete catalog for the car.

I discovered Benchmark DAC1 about the same time and I now own a DAC 2 also and a DAC 3 is being shipped to me right now.

To add to what Georgehifi said: About 15 years ago R2R DACs were indeed better sounding than early Delta Sigma DACs. However early Delta Sigma issues (glare) have been resolved and their performance currently far exceeds R2R.

I would add that I use a Mac Mini and optical to the DAC. I use a digital volume setting of 1 and an app "BitPerfect" to ensure iTunes original file sample rate is preserved all the way to the DAC (Bitperfect controls the Mac audio output and ensures it changes on the fly to match the original file sample rate). I believe it is best to let the DAC handle the original bitperfect file and do all conversion (upsampling) to analog.

For Tidal, I use the Tidal app and set it to highest quality and also to control audio output sample rate to match the original Tidal source file sample rate.
@teo_audio   

I am am aware that R2R DACs are impossibly expensive - this is because they are trying to compete with the latest 21 bit resolution of Delta Sigma and the technology is limited by the ability to build a resistor ladder to such high accuracy as to be competitive with Delta Sigma.

How this is conflated to mean that R2R is better?? Only if you equate more expensive with better...

I had R2R ladders in several older generation CD players but current Delta Sigma DACs are far superior (at least to my ears.)
It is well known that the optical reader of a CD is motorized. It has been shown that oscillations in this motor (as it attempts to read a spinning disc) can induce via these fluctating power supply demands a subsequent spurious jitter in the CD player output. This is why a copy of a CD might play better (or not) on a particular drive. It is nothing to do with bits but all to do with mechanical reading of the spinning disc data using a servo motor that is drawing power in a cyclical manner from the same power supply used to covert the digital to analog...
I should add that current leading converters use very many parallel 1 bit Delta Sigmas to reduce SN. This eliminates the major drawback of a Delta Sigma 1 bit converter. The linearity and consequently low THD is the major advantage of Delta Sigma 1 bit over a ladder 16 bit DAC. Since the noise issue of early Sigma Delta DACs has been resolved (by using many in parallel) their sound has improved and surpassed R2R ladders DACs to my ears and IMHO. I believe the performance measurements of current leading Delta Sigma DACs support my contention - unsurpassed SN, THD etc.