Accessible, yet elite sounding, musical CD machines. Current vs next upgrade

@richardbrand oh is that so? Interesting, I’m more of a fan of burr brown. And my Grok Ai app told me it was burr brown, but looks like you’re right. Also this is a dual transport and player. So CDs are actually making a huge comeback, and lots of people are discovering they like the sound of physical 44.1khz media, a lot of the times with non oversampling DACs! Who would have thought. But I do a lot of Roon streaming, and I upsample to DSD 512 with an apple Mac Mini. That’s 8 times the quality of SACD, so for resolution and reference sound quality, I’m covered friend. Just looking for any and all cd players and transports, and I’m open to SACD options. Also, if you’ve never heard an A/B test of USB vs i2s, it’s dramatic. You’ve got to hear it for yourself. I don’t understand the 

Still on the fence. If I decide on a transport, I’ll like get the Shandling SCD3.3 SACD Player which can function as bit a transport and a player.

@jbuddha882 I’ve been drooling..

Hopefully the next step isn’t launching spit 😉

@jbuddha882 

I think almost every player can function as a transport - that is output digital signals.

When evaluating dacs, I really recommend getting hold of their data sheets.  You then have to look for what is not there.  If they don't mention DSD, it is London to a brick they have to be fed digital down-converted to PCM.  Down-converting loses resolution or timing or both.

Up-sampling to DSD512 won’t improve on the resolution of the original content any more than oversampling will increase the resolution of a CD.  Both do make it easier to design gentle low pass filters rather than the ’brick wall’ filters needed with non-oversampling CD dacs, but claiming 8 times the quality of SACD ... ?

I never suggested USB was better than I2S.  At least I2S delivers a continuous ’stream’ of values.  USB is a packetised set of technologies that sporadically delivers audio packets which have to be buffered and re-clocked. In streaming mode, USB cannot guarantee packets won’t disappear!

I’d suggest HDMI which is purpose designed for high resolution audio and video, and delivers a continuous ’stream’ of values.

For the life of me, I cannot see how two transports outputting native HDMI can sound different when played through the same DAC.  No doubt somebody will enlighten me

@richardbrand when using HDMI (= I2S) connections from source to DAC SQ is VERY dependent on the source as it is transmitting the clock. 

You make this point about I2S.

I was not quite right in my previous post.

I2S is, as @richardbrand stated is a protocol that was designed to move data internally.  Starting (I think) back in the '90s when data was moved over coax or optically, with the clock recovered from the data stream, engineers started developing the idea of extending I2S to use between boxes.

Initially I2S was transmitted over RJ45 wires but has since moved to use HDMI cables.  In the audio world an HDMI cable between a source and a DAC will be carrying I2S.  This is very different from the use of HDMI to carry video and sound (etc.) between a DVD player and the TV monitor.

USB was developed in the late '90s specifically to move data between computing components.

If you enter "Explain the technical benefits (like avoiding clock recovery) of using I²S over USB" into Google you will get a lengthy explanation that has (being generous) traces of AI slop to it.  In particular are claims that using the source's clock is an advantage - even though that clock signal has been transmitted over a cable where noise can be picked up.

To summarize, given decent components and cables: over USB, SQ depends on how good the DAC is; over I2S, (carried on an HDMI cable)  SQ depends on how good the source, the cable and the DAC are.