Transport Question

from

Bits are bits. If you accessed your banking data from a different computer would it change? No, of course not! Digital data, whether banking/financial or music, remains inviolate regardless of how many times it is transferred or where it is stored. That is the fundamental premise of Digital. The old Analog ideas do not apply! All transports and servers have to output the same data streams. Only audiophools believe that spending more and more on a transport/streamer gets them better sound quality. You should beware of the anecdotal claims made by the 'golden ears" crowd. Like the eyes fooled by optical illusions, the ears are also fooled - especially by sighted testing/comparisons.

Keep and use your Rotel, particularly since it is new. Unless you are so insecure/misguided that you absolutely must buy a shiny new toy!

don‘t know anything about the SIM, and you don‘t specify which Rotel you own so impossible to give direct advice.

Unfortunately transports do make quite a difference. Whether an upgrade will bring you tangible benefits commensurate with cost is something only you can find out by directly comparing your CD player with transports within your price range. Sorry no easy way out.

I upgraded to a 260D but can’t offer you an opinion relative to the Rotel as I haven’t heard it. The only ways you’ll get an objective answer is a) try the Sim in your system and a/b versus the Rotel and decide yourself; or b) hope that someone actually has had whatever Rotel you are referring to and the Sim 260D. Otherwise, it is all conjecture.

One thing you can reliably do is ignore the generalized better transports don’t matter narrative.

.

I too am in the "digital is digital" camp.   Assuming your transport isn't having issues, a different transport will result in no changes.   I think your money is better spent upgrading your DAC.  My DAC is the most expensive single component in my system.  

All a banking system requires is the ability to print a bunch of fonts accurately representing an amount of currency, which is a far cry from reproducing sound accurately. Not even a nice try.

All the best,
Nonoise

The Rotel is an RCD -1572

@nonoise : Whether it’s financial data, music data or video data the base form is the binary code. That is why a computer can read an optical disk and store/playback all three. 

Digital theory shows that transports all are equivalent, especially with modern DACs that control jitter very well. However, my experience has been that transports make a large difference in the sound from any DAC I have used.

Why do transports make such a difference? Everyone will have a reason, but I don't think any of us knows for sure.

I had a 260D (sold in favor of playing files) and thought it was a very good transport, so yes, I think it would be a good choice. Better than the Rotel? Never having tried the latter, I don’t know -- but I suspect yes.

@jasonbourne52 , Binary code is one thing. Getting it from one place to another is something else. The cheapest system of source, cabling and endpoint can successfully transmit data for banking purposes as long as it meets industry standards. It's just a printout and not music.

Anyone here with cable TV knows that despite all the tight and proper crimps, connections and measurements showing that it's working properly, the picture still sucks compared to a decent blu ray player. I've had techs over many a time and they hook up their meters and everything is working to spec and yet it still stinks. We all just settle for less and fill in the missing parts in our heads, ignoring the flaws.

The same goes for music. Too much goes on with all the connections and distances involved and with no general agreement on which is the better way of doing it, unless one thinks like you do. Thankfully, I don't.

All the best,
Nonoise

@jasonbourne52 - "Far from scientific!"

I think if you read my post, you will find no claims of scientific validity. I know of no suitable tests of this propositiion that are double blind and adequately account for Type I and Type II statistical error. In fact, I don’t know of any peer-reviewed, published experiments that explore differences among transports.

I would add that without people's reporting their experiences, science (if it were funded) would not know what to investigate. The ideal, after all, is to produce sound that is subjectively convincing.

If audio were entirely a scientific endeavor, no one would play LPs, and we’d understand why SACDs sound better to many, despite being hugely overspecified and having a large HF noise envelope. But they do and they do and as Nelson Pass said: "It’s entertainment, not brain surgery."

 The reason why a cable video stream is often poorer quality than from a player is the common practice of compressing (discarding data) done by the providers. They do this also to music files. That’s why I stick to physical media for music and video.

OP you'll never know until you try.I don't see how you could go wrong by searching out another brand that has a sturdier build quality.

I have a 260d and find it to be excellent in terms of design, build quality and responsiveness. Previously, I owned an Electrocompaniet EMC-1up, which was also first-rate, but as I was using its built-in DAC, and am now using an external (Denagrips Pontus II) DAC, it would be an apples to oranges comparison.

The Moon certainly sounds terrific in my system, but I have never tested it against a different transport.

Ok, first bits may be bits… but how you get them matters like night and day. There is no debate among audiophiles and enthusiasts that have tried. Huge jumps in sound quality among transports and streamers is so obvious anyone can hear it. Not subtle in any way. Fooling around with inexpensive or unresolving systems might mask it. But with any experience the difference is like night and day… just like a cheap turntable, or phonostage, amp or speakers.. 

@ghdprentice 

+10!!! Well expressed, 

Really interesting how often this topic  arises.  CD transports/music servers-streamers/turntables.  The "quality"  of these critical sources absolutely make a sonic difference. 

Charles 

Really interesting how often this topic  arises

i find it it quite depressing

Slightly off topic but in my opinion people that says a good transport is a wast of money and will not sound better obviously have not heard a difference.

1) They have equipment not capable of producing quality music.

2) They never bothered doing a caparison and simply state their opinion.

3) Don't know how to evaluate and listen to music or are legitimately tone deaf.

I know many individuals with a trained ear and quality equipment that can hear the difference.

@lak 

👍

Charles

Yes, the topic arises a lot. But you have to figure lots of folks roll through here during purchases for a month or two then are replaced by new folks. Then technology moves on constantly changing the value equations.

@lak 

Yes.

And certain people have a very strong ego driven compulsion to repeatedly make assertions easily refuted by simply utilizing one's ears. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

@stuartk 

assertions easily refuted by simply utilizing one's ears. 

You mean that one  could make determinations by actually listening?

What a remarkably novel idea.😊 +1 Stuart.

Charles 

 

@charles1dad 

It apparently is novel, for some !  !  !  ;o)

 

Telling newbies they cannot, of all things, depend upon their own ears is supposed to help them? 

 

the sensory denial politburo tends to prey on the naive..

They either can't hear it or they can't afford it, which is all they need to decry it.

more likely won‘t hear it I would think..

Most here I think would know how critically important mechanical vibration and quality isolation is to the sound quality of audio gear.

Just this aspect alone should show that all related equipment including transports will vary in sound reproduction.

@pesky_wabbit 

"the sensory denial politburo tends to prey on the naive"

Unfortunately, yes. Perhaps we can say "inexperienced", given that "naive" can have a pejorative connotation ? 

They hold little sway over those who've already experienced reality for themselves.

@lpretiring 

"Most here I think would know how critically important mechanical vibration and quality isolation is to the sound quality of audio gear."

Yes. And, those whose open-ended questions suggest naivete/inexperience are less likely to have experienced this for themselves and so, are most vulnerable to the disinformation promulgated by the "___ (insert components) all sound the same"  brigade. 

 

 

@lak4 

Correction please!

"I know many individuals with a trained ear and quality equipment WHO THINK they can hear the difference."

A 50c computer disc transport has a read error rate of 1-2 bits per million.  You ain't gonna hear that.  Spend no more.  Concentrate on trying to solve the insoluble conceptual problems with digital sound: jitter, clock error, clock integration between player and DAC.  If you can.

 

Thanks @jasonbourne52.   You sure got your feet on the ground.

a case of mass delusion has been detected and corrected by our politburo, take no notice of previous advice and carry on..

@jasonbourne52  … 

whilst I fully appreciate the huge catalogue of music and the obvious convenience 

that streaming brings,  for my part I would agree with you re physical media.