CD transports; do they really matter

@majorc

 

[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.

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 

Thank you - I'm glad I jumped in to this thread. Any thoughts regarding playing ripped CDs from a hard drive and how that compares to different levels of transports? I know some have stated that only the highest quality transports will best HD playback.  

@facten

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

 

 

@majorc

"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.

Jays Audio has a new transport coming out at 5K 

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

 

@majorc

 

Thank you. I understand.

 

@jl35

 

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.

lots of CD and DVD players use the same transport...

DAC: ifi micro idsd   No Preamp - the DAC has a volume control  - ran direct to quicksilver M60 monoblocks - speakers Eminent technology LFT 8Bs.  

@majorc 

 

And the DAC, preamp, amp and speakers you played them through?

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.   Yes the A/B was with the same coax cable and dac.  I usually hear any fine differences but could not.    

@majorc 

 

Can you tell us the brands and models of those transport you've tested?  Also did you test them on the same equipment like A/B test?

 

 

I have tried many transports and can not hear a difference between an expensive transport and a cheap blu ray player from best buy - but the dacs make a huge difference. However, I know many claim that ripping and playing from a hard drive is better than any transport.....

@pesky_wabbit

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.

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.

Genuine question for audio-union:

 

[I distribute CEC.

Charles, your response to @jasonbourne52 (about confirmation bias) is priceless! 👍😁👌

Hi All,

Any thoughts on NuPrime CDT-8, -9 or -10 transports?

Thanks! 

A better mechanism is a better mechanism, whether it is in a transport-only body or not.

never a truer statement, let your ears decide, not someone else‘s prejudices..

                          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.

The preferred digital cable for PS Audio gear seems to be the I2S. In terms of value the PS gear was typically sold for 40+% off by the big dealers before they went to direct sales 

I have the pre-empted thoughts

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.

Completely missed the Bel Canto e.One CDt3 transport. Part Time Audiophile favorite.

I have had one for a couple years now and the only transport I would consider in it's place would be the 260D by Simaudio.

 

@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? 

 

 

 

 

  

the current PS Audio Transport, PST, is significantly better than all their previous transports

Well then 3 terrific choices,  new P.S.Audio,  Jay's Audio CDT2 MK III and the Pro-Ject CD Box RS2T. 

Charles 

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...

@pindac

 I was hoping to be offered a few thoughts from a member or two,  on what was the new experience and noticeable difference that they encountered, to help them make the decision to exchange the device.

Hi

I share your admiration for the P.S.Audio Memory PWT.  It is in my opinion an exceptionally good CD transport and furthermore very reliable. I owned this transport purchased new and kept it for 12 very enjoyable years. It has stood the test of very well and still one of the better quality choices available today.

The existence of the Pro-Ject CD Box CD Box RS2T transport  caught my attention as It had received high praise from former PWT and Jay's Audio CDT2 MK  II owners. The Jay's Audio CDT2 owners familiar with the PWT preferred the Jay's. 

I can say without hesitation that as good as my PWT is, the Pro-Ject RS2 transport is better across the board.  Simultaneously more resolved, dynamic more of an organic and fluid presentation. It did this with the supplied SMPS wall wart.  It is truly an excellent CD transport that elevated to stunningly good/superb when I replaced the wall wart with a LPS.

Obviously you'd have to listen and judge for yourself.  Based on anecdotal and unscientific feedback from owners the ranking appears to be 

Pro-Ject CD Box RS2T 

Jay's Audio CDT2 MK II/III

P.S.Audio PWT (Previous generation) I haven't seen comparisons with the current SACD/CD transport. 

Charles 

       

I do fully understand the reply.

There are ex PWT owners who I believe at one point of ownership were content with this choice.

I also know there are members within this forum, of which some will have experienced this and have exchanged the PWT for a Different Model/Brand of CDT or even possibly did not continue with a CDT and took on another digital source.

I was hoping to be offered a few thoughts from a member or two,  on what was the new experience and noticeable difference that they encountered, to help them make the decision to exchange the device.

       

Cannot believe a rep would say that about his own products.

at least he had the decency to identify himself as such.

too much “silent running“ going on

nobody here has a DAC/PWT synergy or CDT/PWT interaction databse that they can immediately refer to and spit out an answer. These are issues that you can only resolve for yourself by listening. Even if somebody were to give you an answer, how are you sure that their taste is going to be the same as yours? It’s a bit like asking someone to tell you what pair of speakers to buy. And people do that too..

I am relatively new to using a CD as a source for a replay in my system.

I have built a very satisfying Analogue LP Source system over 30 Years and do not feel there is much I can change to make a major improvement, but I a do know I can change the presentation if wanted as the overall system is very adept at resolving detail.

About Six Yeas ago, I decided to try out CD in the System for the first time.

I used a Cambridge Brand CDP that was used in my Son's Bedroom Separates System.

There was something about the convenience I liked and the idea of not needing to be vigilant, not like when using a LP and Cartridge.

The idea that when a CD was being played, my Stylus was not subjected to usage wear was also attractive.

The CDP used was not able to endear myself, and the overall was unattractive to be thought of as a main source, more of a background music replay.

Wind the Clock Forward, a friend had been modifying Sony CDP's to be working as a Valve CDP.  I had supplied ears on a few occasions to assess the work being carried out on the different models to varying specifications and cost values of exchanged components.

A loan of a CDP was offered and when used, I got it immediately, the CD Source was quite attractive and I had no concerns about using it, I also purchased a large quantity of CD's as the outcome.

Wind the Clock Forward, an offer of a Bespoke Built Valve DAC was made to me to purchase. This DAC was produced by the person who had mentored my friend through the CDP Modifications.

I accepted and made the purchase, that was delivered to my friends home to be picked up.

Modified CDP's vs Bespoke Built DAC>Cheapo CDP's was carried out for a few hours and the DAC Combo was performing in a very attractive manner.

I was a very happy customer.

The DAC was in my mind, deserved of a CD Input that was to allow it to really show itself off, and after a period time the DAC was taken to an event where Vinyl Replay was the main presentation, and at the end of the day a demonstration was given of the DAC coupled to a the PS Audio PWT.      

I and a few others in attendance were blown away, by the demonstration, especially when the day had been demonstrating TT Set Up's approaching           £8 000 - £20 000, replayed on a system with a value of approx' £150 000.

Today I own the PS Audio PWT > Bespoke Built DAC, it has been Tube Rolled and there is a New Level of Performance as the result, and I  have a Trialled COAX Interconnects to a variety of values and do believe I have this interface as good as it can be.

With this additional investigations and work carried out on the DAC, I was feeling there was not much need to look further to raise the performance level further.

The information being shared in this thread, suggests there are most likely experiences for myself to be encountered, that are worthwhile pursuing and  attempting to arrange to receive a demonstration of a different model of CDT.

Very Fortunately there are a range of Jay's CDT's at a Dealership quite close to my home. 

Is there a synergy between the DAC and PWT that will be hard to surpass?

Is there a CDT that will make the PWT appear to be a less attractive option?  

        

Everything matters. 
 

I just upgraded my Marantz SACD 30n with the McIntosh MCT500 transport two days ago . I like my decision so far. 

i have Chord DAC which supposedly does the same. Unfortunately I can hear the difference between an average CD player digital out and a good transport, or even a CXC vs a Wadia

I have used a Genesis Digital Lens since it came out (with a Pioneer PD-65 as transport), which eliminated jitter. Always assumed it more or less solved transport issues.  Would a modern transport, eg the Project, really improve things?

If anybody remembers way back Theta sold a transport that was actually a DVD player 

yes, but did you actually ascertain if it was a good sounding transport, as that was its function.?

@cdc

I haven’t heard the Pro-Ject CD Box DS2T but based on reviews and word of mouth it is quite good. The RS2T is over 3x the cost of the DS2T. For this additional money you get the latest top CD loading tech, Stream Unlimited CD Pro-8/Blue Tiger servo is integrated as a complete unit. Also much attention and engineering was applied toward vibration and resonance management. I strongly suspect that you’d be very pleased with the DS2T if you decide not to go with the RS2T.

Charles

@jasonbourne52

Confirmation bias is rampant here

Yep, here we go again, the tired and lame retort of confirmation bias. When someone is unable to put forth a cogent argument, there’s the good ole fallback position. This shows no respect or acknowledgement of what multiple listeners have heard and experienced . That requires too much thought and contemplation.

It’s much simpler and lazy to just discount what others take the time to post here and report. If it does not fit your belief system and preconceived notions, No problem as it’s merely confirmation bias. A fair number of people have posted their respective results when moving on to or comparison with a better quality CD transport (Same can be said for better music server/streamer). Nope, doesn’t matter as they are all just fooling themselves and delusional. Oh, and of course  the obligatory  " They are foolishly wasting their money ".

Yet for some inexplicable reason the person advocating "There is little to no difference amongst the components " is to be accepted and believed without any push back or question? Really, how So? One aspect that’s rarely acknowledged by those trumpeting confirmation bias is that it can be applied in both directions.

One can be so entrenched in their own beliefs and perspective that they are incapable of accepting any outcome that differs from their predetermined rigid expectations.

Charles

Confirmation bias is rampant here! If anybody remembers way back Theta sold a transport that was actually a DVD player (intact including front fascia and buttons) inside a metal case for thousands of $$$! The reviewers at TAS loved it - along with other audiophools! Nothing like a fancy case and a high price tag to attract the gullible! It is easier to con someone than to convince someone that they have been conned!

In my experience, a CD transport over a CD player is the way to go.  I began using my CD player as a transport when I bought a new DAC as it was sonically better than the CD player's internal DAC.  After a period of time, I took a chance and replaced the CD player as a transport with a used 47-Labs Flat-Fish transport and again, heard a noticeable sonic improvement.  Recently, I upgraded to a new CD transport (Jay's-Audio CDT-2 Mk 2), it was obvious that this new transport was sonically better than the 47-Labs transport.  Plus it has several types of outputs rather than just SPDIF.  I'm using the HDMI I2s output from the Jay's-Audio.  The older 47-Labs Flat-Fish is still a good transport, but the Jay's-Audio transport has proven to be more sonically satisfying to me.  If your CD player's transport/circuitry is of really high quality, you may not experience the need for a separate CD transport, however with the number of really high-quality DAC's out there, as well as reasonably priced high-quality CD transports available, you may want to do a comparison for yourself.  I personally don't know of a CD player that matches the sonic quality of a great CD transport and DAC combination.  This is also because I like to spin discs and don't necessarily want to load it into my music-server.  

Why not? He was completely upfront about it and contributed to the conversation in a helpful way, offering another way of seeing things, making some good points for consideration. 

All the best,
Nonoise

Cannot believe a rep would say that about his own products.

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.

Turns out the basic design of the transport makes a difference to the playback of a CD. Belt drives will always outperform a direct drive transport in my opinion as an engineer.

I always tried to separate components in order to free to improve step by step my beloved music system. The DAC is becoming as much as important as the Preamp: let's say that DAC is a sort of Digital Preamp: I have an Esoteric D03 with 2 different digital sources: CD (Esoteric P03) and Streamer / Internet Radio Auralic Aries 2.1.

I'm thinking to connect my PC and watch stream video files (HD monitor) and pass the digital signal to the DAC then to my preamp. How many input an integrated CD/DAC machine could have?

In my opinion it is matter of flexibility other than quality etc.

I would have to agree that all transports are not created equal. Take in consideration that a CD spins at nearly 500 rpms at the center of the disc and decreases to appx 200 rpms at the circumference producing a constant linear velocisty. No easy feat. In addition very high EMI/FRI and Jitter build up at the Digital output and input jacks. Some use Ferrite Chokes to remedy this. The better players treat their digital outputs as a forethought rater an afterthought. Some Engineer (Naim) hand wire their digital out circuitry as closely as possible to the output Jack’s. Cut down on any long internal circuitry runs to reduce jitter/noise.

Niam uses a CD magnetic puck to hold the disc in place and hand wires their output circuitry very closely to the digital in/output conditions.

N

@mdrone 

You initiated this thread with a sincere question and naturally you can expect a range of different replies/opinions. However I feel that although well meaning, people posting saying transports do not much matter are really doing a disservice to the inquiring OP. I can't think of a single example where a cheap CD Rom based unit sounds anywhere near as good as a well engineered, high quality and well implemented CD transport. 

If someone can cite an actual example I'd love to know what it is.

Charles

They absolutely make a difference!

I have tried four options and can hear the difference between all four when used as a transport feeding my Bel Canto E1x integrated amp/dac -

Bel Canto CD-3T CD transport (best sounding)

Marantz SA-K1 Ruby SACD player (next best)

Oppo BDP 103 BluRay player

Yamaha CD-S1000 SACD player

The answer is YES!

 

If you have opened up a CDP or a DVD-Rom drive and look at how the disc spins, you'll noticed there's a lot of wobbling.  This creates a lot of reading errors and need to be corrected.  The error correction for the CD is often "acceptable"  and not true original data.  In the peak of Rom drives era, there are many websites doing tests and looking at errors and correctable errors via scope, how well each brand and model does.  The least read errors with best correction algorithm wins.

 

The same goes for cd/SACD players.  Many brands have their own way of having a very high quality read from the disc to start, eg. using glass lens on the laser pickup, having 3 laser to track and averaging out the errors, using a bigger heavier clamp, reducing spin speed, adding light noise to the red laser, using green laser as pickup, etc etc.  All these are to aim at minimising read errors so less correction is needed.

 

After the read, next up is the data processing before sending to digital out.  This part makes another difference in sound quality.

 

I've not heard the Project or Jay's.  What I can sum up from my experience is:  Basic entry good quality transport is the Audiolab 6000CDT, next upgrade would be the Cyrus XT signature transport, higher end goes to YBA transport with a blue laser, and the ultimate transport goes to Esoteric with their VRDS mechanism.  The first 3 only do red-book CD.

 

There are many other players and transports I heard like the CEC, Marantz, Pioneer, Oppo 205, Cambridge Audio, Mark Levinson, Roksan, but my vote goes to those 4 only.

 

Have fun shopping for a new transport.  Let us know what you finally decide to go  with.