Will computer to DAC replace transports and cdp's?

There is a point at which reducing jitter further becomes irrelevant alongside other issues, but I acknowledge some will differ on when enough is enough.

I totally endorse the Squeezebox as a great way to get computer-based audio without having a PC in the room, but to get great sound out of it you really need a DAC that has excellent jitter-rejection. The best news on this front is the Lavry DA10 'Black', which brings 'synchronous reclocking with deep buffering' down to the $1000 mark. You will also need such a DAC with many of the devices that are used to get SPDIF out of a computer. The other alternatives are to get a DAC with a master clock output and a computer card that is word clock capable; or to get a DAC that supports asynchronous USB audio (just because the device is USB does not mean you automatically get the benefits of asynchronous mode). Note that some DACs use an asynchronous sample rate convertor in the signal path to reduce jitter but these DACs actually change the signal as a result. The success of these depends on how well they are executed (from the Benchmark, Bel Canto, Audiomeca, Nagra, Audio Aero) but it does bother me that they change the original signal.

Aplhifi, your beliefs don't gel with my experience. Sure, computer to DAC sound can sound poor, just as CDP's can. But equally I have been able to get computer stored audio to match or better good transports from Meridian, Teac, Audiolab and Theta. I am not saying that these are the best there is, but nor are they poor.

Far from being classy I thought that put-down was rude and somewhat childish. But perhaps I should put that down to cultural differences.

So that I can have more respect for you beliefs, can you explain the experiences you have had with computer to DAC sound that have led to those beliefs?