the current PS Audio Transport, PST, is significantly better than all their previous transports...I have owned the previous 2...all used with the PS Audio Directstream DAC...
CD transports; do they really matter
In my pursuit of total sonic harmony, I have been investigating whether a CD transport ( to replace my bulky and aged Luxman CD player ) would be a good option. I had an interesting conversation with the manufacturers rep of a respected brand regarding his companies CD transport. He basically said its all in the DAC, the transport, as long as its not a cheap component, does not make much or any difference. So, I ask does it really matter?
128 responses Add your response
@charles1dad Thank You for sharing your experiences and how the impression made from the new device proved to offer attraction to the measure where it influenced the choice that was made to exchange the PWT for the Project CD Box RS2 T. After the reports I have read, I have the pre-empted thoughts that I am to encounter a similar experience. As stated I can receive a demonstration of Jay's Audio CDT's as there are models on demonstration local to my home. With a little thought put into the planning, I might be able to have a home loan of the Project and use the PWT, Project and Jay's all in one demonstration session. @jl35 Thank You for your contribution and making your thoughts on the performance of the Perfect Wave PST known, especially how it is comparing to the PWT Model that I use. The PST model will cost approx' £6500 ($9000)in the UK. This figure is beyond the value I would go to as a price for a Transport. As an additional preparation, does it make sense to continue with a COAX Cable as the CDT > DAC Interface, if their are upcoming demonstrations being planned, or will another type of umbilical cable be better to be used for the intended demonstrations?
|
probably best not to have any pre conceptions as they may influence your conclusions. Just go into each listening session session with an open mind. Learn how to listen critically. Ask yourself how the music communicates at an emotional level. Remember YOU are the one who is going to have to live with the choices you make. |
It depends. I use an old sub--$100 Pioneer universal player with the first version of Pioneers outstanding transport mechanism, playing through a Bel Canto DAC, and it has a solid bass which outperforms any Sony mechanism played through that same DAC. A better mechanism is a better mechanism, whether it is in a transport-only body or not. As a frugal retiree but a life-long audiophile I always look for these "serendipitous" paths to audio nirvana, and there are more than you might think. |
Charles, your response to @jasonbourne52 (about confirmation bias) is priceless! 👍😁👌 |
Genuine question for audio-union:
[I distribute CEC. Jitter is going to be the lowest with a belt drive transport. The noise level will be lower with a belt drive because the motor is farther away from the noise sensitive laser head. Suspension system of the transport, you usually can not see the suspension system if there is one, are important to keep the noise down. It turns out CD playback is sensitive to vibrations. The lower the vibration sensitivity of laser head / disk turntable, the lower the noise in the data stream to a DAC.
Wouldn't the wow & flutter from the belt drive mechanism introduce jitter as well? And as age passed, wow & flutter will get worse and the belt also needs to be replaced. How can one be sure that the tension on the belt is even throughout the chain after replacing?
Thanks. |
of course the belt drive thing is CEC marketing. They make very good transports, but to suggest that they are inherently superior because of their drive mode is taking things a little bit in the direction of the marketing department. As you suggest belt drives introduce problems of their own that are not inherent to direct drives. |
+1 A friend had the CEC TL2N (Which I believe utilizes 2 belts?) for a number of years. He purchased a P.S.Audio Memory PWT and in his audio system both sounded very well. They provided different sonic presentations and some listeners preferred one over the other (No surprises with that). Point is they were highly competitive and the PWT is not belt driven. So as is often the case, there are multiple ways of "skinning the cat". Belt drive and direct drive mechanisms if executed at a high level can be very viable options. I do agree that attention paid to limiting vibration is critical for improving the sound quality of CD transports. There are numerous ways to achieve this as well. This is one key aspect (Among others) that seperates the higher quality and better built/engineered transports from cheaper made units. |
@majorc
Thank you. I understand.
Yes, you are correct. However, high end equipment will incorporate transports in heavy dampening structures to reduce vibration, feed the exceptionally clean power, isolate from electronic noice and get a tremendously better sound quality. Also, you need a system of a certain level of resolution and fidelity before differences in transports start making a difference. In general, the better the system the more obvious and important the sonic differences in a transport. |
I absolutely agree ghd… just referring to comparing inexpensive CD players used as transports… I’ve never really liked them as transports, much prefer something like the Cambridge CXC…I believe comparing these CD and DVD players is likely to show little difference, but does not prove that transports are not extremely important
|
[Yes, you are correct. However, high end equipment will incorporate transports in heavy dampening structures to reduce vibration, feed the exceptionally clean power, isolate from electronic noice and get a tremendously better sound quality. Also, you need a system of a certain level of resolution and fidelity before differences in transports start making a difference. In general, the better the system the more obvious and important the sonic differences in a transport.]
From my experience, you don’t need high end gears to hear differences in cd transport.
Few yrs back I walked into a showroom and tested the Cambridge Audio CXC vs the Audiolab 6000CDT. The setup was all Cambridge audio equipment and speakers was floorstand around USD1200. Can’t remember exact models but they were all mainstream entry level stuffs.
The CXC sounded slow and lack of bite and attack. I bought the Audiolab. Throughout the whole listening audition, the sales guy kept quiet. Until the payment stage, he said all who came in to audition these two chose the Audiolab and they said the exact same thing as what I heard. It’s really a pure blind test.
The CXC and AL transports are entry level cheap stuffs. And yet under the same playback sys produced audible differences that anyone can clearly pin point. And we’re also looking at drawer vs slot mechanism.
I also did a comparison test at my friend’s house. He has a USD450 China brand CD player and a cheap USD80 Pioneer dvd player. Both coax digital out to his Parasound DAC preamp, and the CD player beats dvd hands down.
I’m thinking those players majorc tested must be really crap stuffs, cos no way a proper CD transport would have no audible differences, as what I’ve experienced from the CXC vs 6000CDT. Definitely not some psychology made up illusions there. |
"I have tried many transports and can not hear a difference between an expensive transport and a cheap blu ray player from best buy - " & "I can’t recall the models but a toshiba dvd player, an NAD cd player, sony blu ray player, Denon cd player, and a couple others - nothing very expensive although the NAD was a well built model. " It doesn’t really seem that you have allowed yourself an opportunity to really evaluate if an ’expensive’ transport positively impacts SQ. I think that if you tried even a modestly priced transport, say a Cambridge CXC, or Audiolab 6000 that you would likely hear an SQ difference, let alone via an even better quality transport beyond those. |
Exactly on point! None of the lower level CD players on his list would come close in sound quality to the modestly priced Audiolab 6000. Not to mention something like the CEC TL5 or SimAudio 260D transport that takes you to an even ( higher level of sound quality from the Audiolab 6000 transport. And yet you can go further upward with Jay’s Audio CD transports and certainly Pro-Ject RS2T. IMO @majorc needs to gain exposure and listen to the better quality CD transports and then compare these to the CD players he cited. I believe that there’s no doubt he would easily recognize the significant improvement gained with better built and executed/implemented transports. Charles
|
Another factor that is worth emphasis is the level of the home audio system. As you improve the quality of the speakers, amplification, cables etc. resolution and overall sound quality improves. You are now capable of hearing more and the differences amongst the transports become ever more obvious and distinctive. Charles |
[Any thoughts regarding playing ripped CDs from a hard drive and how that compares to different levels of transports?]
Glad you asked.
A good well built ROM drive will yield better rips. And also store those rips into SSD instead of spin disks.
I can recommend this Pioneer ROM:
I have the older S11j (non X version). The good thing about this Pioneer is that they have a software/utility that allows you to slow down the spin speed. From my experience, the slower speed you use to rip, the better the SQ. Less vibration and less read errors. The X version has more rubber/silicon to damp vibrations. Really good stuff!
I have older rips from Plextor, LiteOn and Asus ROM drives but this Pioneer takes the crown. And yes, I sepnd many many hours ripping and re-ripping the same CDs using different ROM drives for many years.
Of course if you buy a very expensive CD/SACD transport with much better damping and much lesser read errors (Esoteric VRDS), it is going to sound better than CD rips.
Even though CD music is just 1s & 0s, but the amount of errors play an important part. That’s why in the golden era of ROM drives, there are many websites reporting read and write errors of different brands and models.
If record companies were to re-digitise their master analog tape into hi-rez files and you can buy them direct (DSD or 32/768 wav), think there won’t be a need for transport, but more on the higher end interface instead (eg. USB or I2S ports)
Hope this answer your question. |
