Are Transports dead?

[mauidan]

I don't use the Emotiva for my main system. I'm currently have a Datasat RS20i SSP in the rack. And while the DACs in the RS20i May or may not be as good as the dCS DAC, the combination of the audio coming from the server to the SSP is as good as or better than the combination of the audio from the dCS transport to the dCS DAC.

I can't explain why that is the case but that decision was made in a very blind test - the server solution was selected 100% of the time. So put a great server with a great DAC, and stand alone CD players are no longer relevant if your goals are convenience and great audio.

YMMV!

Glad you're happy with your new HT gear.

I only listen to two channel audio via transport or file player into my DAC..

 

[Al M.]

There's just no real science behind why a transport to DAC or CDP would be better than a properly setup (not difficult btw) server/DAC arrangement.

"There's just no real science behind why an analog turntable would be better than a properly built CD player." (Digital engineers, 1982)

That was before the detrimental effects of jitter and non-linearity of DACs, for example, were discovered and scientifically documented.

Not that I have an analog turntable or really believe an exotic transport is superior, but just sayin'. You never know. RF noise from a server might be one candidate to look at (in fact, Shunyata now has a power conditioner, the Hydra DPC-6, designed to eliminate precisely that problem).

By the way, if your DAC has a great internal clock, this should take care of jitter. Under those circumstances it is not evident why the sound from a server should be better than from a transport. See also my comment in post # 10.

___________

Addendum: there is also no real science as to why 24/192 should be superior to 16/44 (I know, you may counter with 16 bits not being sufficient for dynamic range, but no real-world system even reaches a 96 dB dynamic range, so that argument is moot in practical terms).

 

[Elberoth]

State-of-the-art CD transports vs USB/SPDIF converter shootout

 

[jfrech]

Hmm....more fuel for our friendly debate - The Absolute Sound compares SACD to DSD download...

...Seems the interface is the key...

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/comparing-sacd-to-a-dsd-download-a-follow-up-report/

 

[Elberoth]

Hmm....more fuel for our friendly debate - The Absolute Sound compares SACD to DSD download...

...Seems the interface is the key...

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/comparing-sacd-to-a-dsd-download-a-follow-up-report/

They are still comparing different implementations. CH gear is know to sound much better via the Ethernet input than USB.

To get the best SQ out of your files via the USB input, you need to invest heavily into a proper PC setup. There is a big difference in SQ between your regular Mac and fully optimised PC (say running Win Server 2012 + Audiophile Optimiser, Jcat USB card and linear PSUs).

 

[microstrip]

They are still comparing different implementations. CH gear is know to sound much better via the Ethernet input than USB.

To get the best SQ out of your files via the USB input, you need to invest heavily into a proper PC setup. There is a big difference in SQ between your regular Mac and fully optimised PC (say running Win Server 2012 + Audiophile Optimiser, Jcat USB card and linear PSUs).

Adam,

We are waiting for your future comparison of your current file server versus the Trinity CD drive playing physical CDs...

 

[microstrip]

I can think of several other forums where the same poll would have yielded a very different result. (...)

Does it really matter? We are here for WBF and its great members opinions ...

 

[Elberoth]

Adam,

We are waiting for your future comparison of your current file server versus the Trinity CD drive playing physical CDs...

Trinity CD transport is nothing more than a PC server with slot it CD-ROM drive in a matching box.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Apparently they are. By the way, current poll score:
Transport, only source, 13; transport secondary source, 4; no transport, 5.

Certainly, this poll and the responses here present only a small slice of the audiophile universe, but more and more it appears the anti-transporters live in an alternate reality where ideology based on perceived facts trumps actual facts on the ground.

What reality and facts are those? Do they live in a reality where the fact that they don't use a transport is changed by the fact that more audiophiles on this board do? Or do they live in a reality where their belief that there is no advantage to a transport, relative to a well-executed server, is changed by the fact that more audiophiles on this forum use transports? Or last but most ridiculous, do they live in a reality where the advantages of a transport are suddenly more concrete and quantifiable than opinion, because more audiophiles on this forum use transports?

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

That seems quite obvious by now.

If you include CD players under the umbrella of "transports," and all who have mentioned companies like Oppo clearly do, there's nothing anecdotal about it.
The bottom has fallen out of the market. WBF is not a market. High-end barely is.

Tim

 

[Al M.]

What reality and facts are those? Do they live in a reality where the fact that they don't use a transport is changed by the fact that more audiophiles on this board do? Or do they live in a reality where their belief that there is no advantage to a transport, relative to a well-executed server, is changed by the fact that more audiophiles on this forum use transports? Or last but most ridiculous, do they live in a reality where the advantages of a transport are suddenly more concrete and quantifiable than opinion, because more audiophiles on this forum use transports?

None of the above. The alternate reality that transports are dying and everyone jumps onto servers, which is obviously not the case. And yes, high-end is barely a market, but that is not the point. Stand-alone transports have always been for the audiophile market only, small as it may be, and it appears within this tiny market transports are neither dead nor dying.

 

[rockitman]

None of the above. The alternate reality that transports are dying and everyone jumps onto servers, which is obviously not the case. And yes, high-end is barely a market, but that is not the point. Stand-alone transports have always been for the audiophile market only, small as it may be, and it appears within this tiny market transports are neither dead nor dying.

Most of my digital music is on cd's or DVD-r....I have little interest going through the effort to rip 1000's on discs to files and then organize them with meta data on a server. Sure a server is more convenient, but for a mainly analog guy like myself, I have little interest spending 100's of hours to convert from disk to server. Transports are far from dead...at least for me.

 

[Al M.]

I have little interest going through the effort to rip 1000's on discs to files and then organize them with meta data on a server. Sure a server is more convenient, but for a mainly analog guy like myself, I have little interest spending 100's of hours to convert from disk to server.

Precisely. And I don't even think I'll get a sonic benefit out of it, see post # 10 -- unless someone actually performs a comparison on my DAC to demonstrate otherwise.

 

[rockitman]

Precisely. And I don't even think I'll get a sonic benefit out of it, see post # 10 -- unless someone actually performs a comparison on my DAC to demonstrate otherwise.

I also agree about the sonic benefit issue. It certainly hasn't been proven to me that a server sounds better than a hi quality transport or vice versa.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

None of the above. The alternate reality that transports are dying and everyone jumps onto servers, which is obviously not the case. And yes, high-end is barely a market, but that is not the point. Stand-alone transports have always been for the audiophile market only, small as it may be, and it appears within this tiny market transports are neither dead nor dying.

Ah. In the rareified world of high-end audiophilia, where a "transport" is an optical drive only, no DAC, of course you're right. In the rest of the world, optical discs for playing music are all but dead.

Tim

 

[edorr]

Most of my digital music is on cd's or DVD-r....I have little interest going through the effort to rip 1000's on discs to files and then organize them with meta data on a server. Sure a server is more convenient, but for a mainly analog guy like myself, I have little interest spending 100's of hours to convert from disk to server. Transports are far from dead...at least for me.

For the price of a half decent power cord you can get someone to do it for you.

 

[rbbert]

Ah. In the rareified world of high-end audiophilia, where a "transport" is an optical drive only, no DAC, of course you're right. In the rest of the world, optical discs for playing music are all but dead.

Tim

Really? Even with a 15% decline from 2012, over 160 million CD's were sold in the US in 2013. Not thriving, but hardly all but dead.

 

[mep]

Really? Even with a 15% decline from 2012, over 160 million CD's were sold in the US in 2013. Not thriving, but hardly all but dead.

Yeah, but most of them sold on Amazon for less than a $1.00 each. Big deal.

 

[Al M.]

Really? Even with a 15% decline from 2012, over 160 million CD's were sold in the US in 2013. Not thriving, but hardly all but dead.

Yes, and to think that Mr. and Mrs. Everyman/woman over age 35 or 40 are going to jump to transfer all their existing CDs onto a server or an iPod seems a bit of a stretch.

 

[rbbert]

Yeah, but most of them sold on Amazon for less than a $1.00 each. Big deal.

You forgot a 0 ($10) but it's still a reasonable point