@kraftwerkturbo
Just for discussion: if there are such "big" differences between different transports (devices that optically read CD and spit out zeros and ones, from $30 to likely $3,000, I’m sure someone has thrown together a $30,000 transport), shouldn’t there be a similar "big" difference between "CD drives" (connect to computer; spitting out zeros and ones AFAID)?
Transports are all about getting the pulse code modulated bits to the DAC, with as much timing accuracy as possible. Avoiding sending noise to the DAC is also important.
A CD is data storage medium, holding the same data as what would be on a computer’s spinning disk drive or solid state drive.
A CD player is a transport and DAC contained in one box, sharing one power supply. There are some incredibly good CD players, and some pretty bad CD players, and everything in-between.
There are CD transports, that look just like a CD player. You feed it a CD, the same as you would with a traditional CD player. But those CD transports have no DAC functionality. Those CD transports only read the bits contained in the CD media, and send those bits to a DAC. Since a CD transport is designed to perform that singular function, it will (generally speaking) do a better job than ones that are built in to a CD player.
I have never used a stand-alone CD transport., because 1) I do not like juggling CDs, and being limited to only a handful of songs that will fit on a CD, and 2) I have no room in my rack for both a DAC and a CD transport.
That is why I play music from files stored on my computer. But that is not good for sound quality, unless you insert a transport between the computer and the DAC (which is what I did).
The above allows me to have access to thousands of music files, organized any way I choose, and get the benefits of excellent sound quality. And my transport did not cost $30,000 (none do, as far as I know).
There are many digital-to-digital converters (DDCs) to choose from. They take a computer’s bit stream (or a streamer’s bit stream) and the DDC re-clocks the bits to feed your DAC very accurately timed bits. That level of accuracy will vary, depending on the DDC box that you choose.
I am using Berkeley Audio Design’s Alpha USB Series 2 (there is also a reference model, for twice the price). My DDC (or re-clocker) cost $2,245.50 and is supposedly one of the best DDCs, at any price. It did wonders for my music’s sound quality. But it is stressed by Berkeley’s engineers and reviewers to use its AES/EBU output, to feed your DAC, and to use a quality AES/EBU cable (and that can be quite expensive).
Another DDC candidate that I was considering was Singxer’s SU-6, which is under $1,000 and people have left only positive reviews and comments about it.
The goal with a DAC is to feed it the cleanest, best timed bits as possible. That relies on the box that is connected to the DAC (or the built-in CD transport, when using a CD player). Everything else upstream takes a back-seat to the box that feeds your DAC the bits. That is what generates the big sound quality differences between transports. And the better transports will also have less noise.
By the way, DDC’s tend to be small, and lightweight. I had no room in my rack for mine. But I was able to place it next to my rack (or even strap it to the side of my rack), due to it being small and lightweight.
