2. pc-audio
  3. 1320006647

difference beetwen pc audio and hi-end?

If somebody could write about difference between pc audio sound and for example dcs scarlatti,accuphase or emm labs. If for example dcs has 10 level (the best?) so when somebody who knows this (dcs) sound set pc audio (for example:realtek configuration audio HD)what number give this pc sound?, 3? 4?
I know that this very difficult. But if someone can set pc audio to compare a little with hi-end myabe write here . And if someone (like me) never heard dcs what can he hear the difference. If this difference will large,very large or very very large.Sory for my English. I come from Poland (Ancient Audio).
Thank You
p.s
In many tests in Poland dcs is the best. Is this really truth? It must be very very good system, but for example there are even more expensive systems.
awidyne
koegz
317 posts
 
Driven a ferrari, own the debussy and slept with Bo. Debussy best of the three! Certainly a lot, lot better then the "Marantz CD7".
orpheus10
8,668 posts
 
PC is much cheaper. I have gotten improvement in sound for $200. utilizing PC that would have cost a minimum of $1000. before I discovered PC. Yesterday I compared the sound from my "playlist" to a Marantz transport feeding a DTI before going into a DAC, and the only difference was volume. After synchronizing a CD on the transport with the computer "playlist", I was able to go back and forth through the duration of the CD. The only difference was volume; I had to turn the volume up on the "playlist". PC DAC was the Musicstreamer II.
adamlau
17 posts
 
I prefer near-field listening on my PC. First reflections, everything sounds detailed. Sub under the desk helps out with movies and those times when additonal bass is desired. Water cooled system with acoustically treated case means my computer is dead silent when the fans are turned down. Listening to music, skipping through a recently torrented file while browsing AudiogonN at the same time. Digital multitasking is priceless. Aside from the transport, I do not see why PC audio should be in any way, shape, or form be inferior to conventional stereo setups. SACD workarounds include PS3 stereo rips to 24/88.2. AF/AP/DCC/MFSL/HDtracks material can all be ripped losslessly. And you can use the same preamp/amp, DAC, speakers, interconnects, treat the room...
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
There is no reason why a competently designed computer audio system (generally Mac, not PC) will not beat the highest end CD player or transport. Competently designed is the key. It is important to pick the right manufacturer. Most of the high-end systems at RMAF now use computer audio, and virtually all of the rooms that get best of show from TAS use computer audio.

It does require that you make some correct decisions along the way however, such as using the right playback software and ripper and a good master clock in the computer interface. As in all digital playback systems, the master clock is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, period.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
pettyofficer
462 posts
 
Didn't DCS write a paper on how to set-up Computer Audio?
Somebody help out here! Awidyne, how much money were you
concidering investing in a System? DCS is some serious
money, but can be done via one of their DAC's-and one of
their transports plus PC Digital Audio Feed. These days you
can have both with many manufacturer's. Just not sure of the continued availability of CD Format for Ripping. I
would make sure that whatever DAC you use, can decode-
16/44.1, 24/48, 24/88.2, 24/96, 24/192, 24/196. You might
eventually want to experiment with High Rez. Downloads.
More to discover