2. digital
  3. 1229322889

why still buy a cd player?

I'm relatively new to the audiophile world, and I'm trying to understand why anone who has a sonos system (or alike) and has stored his files on a server in a lossless format would still want to buy a CD player for best audiophile music quality.

here's my thinking:

if a lossless rip format is used, the data stored after ripping on a digital hard-disk is as good as cd quality - by definition-,...

with sonos i can get that data anywhere in the house without errors

so the only thing that matters is the conversion from digital to analog and the follow-up amplification.

Now,

i can go from sonos to a pre-amp using a digital port, then the pre-amp determines the DAC quality.

or I go from sonos to an amp after using the DAC in the sonos (and use the analog connection to the amp)

If I were to have a CDP connected digitally to a pre-amp, the pre-amp DAC would determine the quality of the sound. In that case I might as well skip the CDP and fall back on my sonos and connect it digitally to my pre-amp.

So the only benefit from a CDP player would come from using the DAC and thus the analog out of the CDP. Is my logic correct?

If this is correct, than I would only have better sound quality with a CDP if the DAC of the CD player exceeds the quality of the DAC of my sonos and of my pre-amp. Is my logic correct?

If it is, and since I can imagine that most $500k CD would have better DAC than a sonos, the real comparison is to figure out of the DAC of my pre-amp is better than the DAC of my CDP. If it does, than no need for a cdp, just use sonos. If it doesn't then a cdp would still provide better quality. Is that correct?

So, the decision to by a
I can imagine that a good cdp would exceed the
mizuno

Showing 2 responses by ckorody

ckorody
643 posts
 
My personal experience and bias suggests that it is not easy to achieve excellent sound with a CDP source especially on a budget... too many issues with the design and manufacture of the product, and especially SPDIF implementation.

But lets set that aside for the moment. I would argue that the hard drived based route has a lot of other advantages. I sum this up in the concept of "rip once, use many". Your digital library not only offers random access and does away with yards of ugly jewel cases; it is also portable. Want to use a USB DAC in one room, no problem. Want to download to an iPod, iPhone, AppleTV or iAnything - no problem.

Plus there is a whole host of innovative services emerging, internet radio etc - none of which require a CDP.

Because it is consumer, mass market technology ease of use gets easier daily.

The only big exception that I can see at this point in time is if you are interested in very high resolution formats - DVD-A, SACD, 384 etc.
ckorody
643 posts
 
Mizuno - you are getting some excellent advice.

I want to make sure that you are clear that using a hard drive as a transport instead of a CDP is somewhat of a game changer in terms of what it requires of a DAC.

Eliminating the problems associated with a 35-40 year old electro-optical-mechanical spec is not a trivial thing. When you are ripping to disc the drive is simply reading bits - something computers do everyday, all day long generally correctly.

When you are playing back from a hard drive once again all you are reading is bits. So many of the artifacts that are associated with real time playback - especially jitter - largely disappear.

While I am not an engineer, I am convinced that most of the money in top of the line CDPs and DACs has historically gone to dealing with problems associated with real time and also with SPDIF implementation.

While it is not perfect, this is a giant step forward.
More to discover