2. digital
  3. 1099765036

Silly Question...does a transport have a "sound" ?

I'm thinking of upgrading to a dedicated transport (like an Accustic Arts Drive I, AM Mephesto II.X or even a ML 37) from the Sony DVP-9000es I'm using now. I'm locked in on my dac (Kora Heremes II), which I love.

My question is, do transports from different manufacturers have significantly audible "sonic signitures" that I should consider when deciding what to mate to the Kora? (e.g., hifi-ish/fast/cold/analytic vs. analog-like/polite/bloomy/warm).

To go even further down this slippery slope, are there discerable differences between, say, a Teac VRDS 3.2 mechanism and a Phillips CDM Pro2 or a C.E.C. belt drive?

I've read a lot of posts here and on AA that've provided some clues, but was wondering if anyone with significant experience with multiple brands of transports could share some of their experiences.

In other words, is the transport "sound/signiture" something worth paying a lot of attention too, or should I just worry about mechanical things like stability, isolation, etc. Thanks.
garyk

Showing 3 responses by rockvirgo

rockvirgo
587 posts
 
Using a musicbank Nakamichi CD Player 2 was convenient but as a transport with a Theta Pro Prime IIa DAC cymbals sounded separate from the rest of the music program, as if there was a gap between them and the rest of the music. Substituting a Theta Data Basic II resolved the glitch and made the whole stream sound coherent. So yes, transports do impact the sound.

The biggest worry with transports is reliability. On that score, buying new is a big advantage. Considering a $2,000 unit will need repair within 10 years or less, and be all but worthless if it's not maintained, that's $200 per year to listen to CD's!

Nowadays the industry seems focused on DVD/CD hybrids, not only as a selling point, but doubtless because the makers of CD-only mechanisms no longer support them. How many manufacturers still offer a CD-only dedicated transport at the $2,500 or less price point?
rockvirgo
587 posts
 
Bits may be bits but once you admit that their sequence requires very precise timing you may have to swallow the sad fact that no clock is perfect. This means clocking, moving and reclocking digital signals is imperfect too. Dig deep to consider that no two of anything electrical are exactly alike. Listeners who fork over long green for the best products pay for the intensive testing, culling, segregating and matching of minute parts. Does this low tolerance for acceptable errors manifest better sound? Only you can decide that. In a world where speaker wire, its configuration, insulation, termination and even its placement are subject to intense inquiry and decision, some find that everything matters.
rockvirgo
587 posts
 
Regarding the "no physical reason" argument, a short story:

Alfred Einstein liked his pipe. One time he digs into his pocket and displays a wooden kitchen match. He shows it around and asks everyone to describe it. The listeners note it has mass, molecular composition, color etc. Then A.E. breaks the match in two. What's different about it now? he asks... The moral: the same match, broken and unbroken, exists in time...

So OK, back to those pesky electrons, ignoring any physical reason for transports to sound different, hows about a temporal one?
More to discover