2. digital
  3. 1405364620

Is computer audio a bust?

In recent months, I have had several audio acquaintances return to CDPs claiming improved SQ versus their highly optimized computer transports (SS drives, external power supplies, etc, etc).

I wanted to poll people on their experiences with computer "transports." What variables have had the most impact on sonics? If you bailed on computers, why?

I personally have always believed that the transport, whether its a plastic disc spinner or computer, is as or more important than the dac itself and thus considerable thought and energy is required.

agear
electroslacker
375 posts
 
I bemoan the unintended consequences of digital technology--from the idling of workers, to looking at a screen instead of being in the physical world. There is also something elegant and beautiful about analog solutions, be they fascinating tonearms, exotic cables, are engineering monuments for spinning a CD.

That said, a quality USB cable can do a phenomenal job of delivering a digital stream from a computer to a DAC, where the final quality and subjective preference is determined by the chosen DAC.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Very interesting Nonoise. It is limited to Redbook, but that's 99% of most music libraries. I have other industry friends who argue the problem is not source material but hardware. Redbook done right is more than good enough. DSD and hi rez are not a necessary parachute in their minds. Just better transports. That is honestly the logic behind this thread.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
07-19-14: Mapman
I'll be steering clear of proprietary hardware and software as much as possible moving forward, especially any computer hardware from one off companies.

This stuff is still changing to rapidly. I think Android makes a versatile platform for companies to build high quality digital A/V applications on.

A standardized digital output that can feed a high quality DAC of ones choice is all that is really needed.

I agree with most of that except the last sentence. I would like that to be true in theory, but modding your Bestbuy grade streamer can make dramatic improvements. Depends on your goals and level of audio OCDness....
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
07-18-14: Mapman
PLEX media server and player appliations is a very good place for anyone to start with that is looking for good sounding computer audio without a major investment in a lot of proprietary hardware, like SOnos, BlueSound, or Squeezebox in the past.

I agree. That was the platform I started with in 2006. The paradox is (for me) computer audio is best with no computer. You need a disembodied, streaming entity (that is ideally designed with audio in mind).

As stated earlier in the thread, spinning plastic is plain silly after you experience the joy of music navigation provided by "computer audio." You are baptized into a much larger world of music (at least I have). That being said, WHY ARE SOME PEOPLE STILL RETURNING TO CDPs? We have had several responders who have posted as much (and have been ignored).

WHAT ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT VARIABLES FOR SQ IN COMPUTER AUDIO?
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
07-17-14: Audioengr
Audiolabyrinth, I have a nice 1905 Gramaphone, which is really easy to use. Does not even require power. I dont listen to it much though because the SQ sucks.

Your CDP will also be relegated to the other antiques soon, trust me.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Steve, people have been saying that about CDPs since the birth of "computer audio," and yet here people are with contrarian opinions.

Steve, I have always enjoyed and learned a lot from your posts. That being said, can you state in specific terms what measurable variables are responsible for the improved SQ you perceive? Black and white statements like the one you made above make for good ad copy, but don't reveal anything. Reminds me a little of Roger Sanders. A stark, old Testament prophetic mindset.
More to discover