Thank you all for your input. I understand the points about jitter, the need for an external DAC, and data being read from a hard drive being more accurate than data being read from a CD. Thank you Audioengr for the extremely informative Empirical Audio link.
Okay, so let's say for argument's sake that by following some of the tweaks in the replies above, and for the reasons stated in the Empirical link, by reducing jitter, that a computer has the potential to be better than a $5K CD player. But what about all of the non-audiophile hardware making up a computer?
Is the $100 Plextor CD burner I buy (not for playback, but necessary for reading CDs to get them into the computer) as good as the transport/laser in a $5K CD player? Surely this element is key as it is the 1st step where any sort of audio data copying/transmission - and the chance for errors - takes place.
And what about power supply? AFAIK the best PS for a computer doesn't cost much more than $100-$150 (Enermax, Antec). And if people are willing to spend 10 times that for an audiophile grade power cord going to their $5K Cd player, I have to assume that the PS in that CD player has got to be "better" (I guess that means in terms of noise and stable current output) than a $100 Antec. Is anybody out there using audiophile PS chords with their computer?
In a $5K Cd player, every component (PS, wire, solder point, circuit, transistor, etc., etc.) is (in theory anyway) maximized to the best that it can be in order to do ONE thing: reproduce music in the most accurate way possible. Doesn't it seem then that by using computer hardware components not designed with audiophile goals in mind, that the hardware of a computer is hampering (at least minimally and perhaps drastically) its'audiophile potential???
Okay, so let's say for argument's sake that by following some of the tweaks in the replies above, and for the reasons stated in the Empirical link, by reducing jitter, that a computer has the potential to be better than a $5K CD player. But what about all of the non-audiophile hardware making up a computer?
Is the $100 Plextor CD burner I buy (not for playback, but necessary for reading CDs to get them into the computer) as good as the transport/laser in a $5K CD player? Surely this element is key as it is the 1st step where any sort of audio data copying/transmission - and the chance for errors - takes place.
And what about power supply? AFAIK the best PS for a computer doesn't cost much more than $100-$150 (Enermax, Antec). And if people are willing to spend 10 times that for an audiophile grade power cord going to their $5K Cd player, I have to assume that the PS in that CD player has got to be "better" (I guess that means in terms of noise and stable current output) than a $100 Antec. Is anybody out there using audiophile PS chords with their computer?
In a $5K Cd player, every component (PS, wire, solder point, circuit, transistor, etc., etc.) is (in theory anyway) maximized to the best that it can be in order to do ONE thing: reproduce music in the most accurate way possible. Doesn't it seem then that by using computer hardware components not designed with audiophile goals in mind, that the hardware of a computer is hampering (at least minimally and perhaps drastically) its'audiophile potential???