Are Transports dead?

[rockitman]

Same here.

Now that PS Audio has the DirectStream DAC, it would be nice if they updated the PWT to also play SACDs.

That would be nice, but there would be license fee's. They wouldn't pay the fee for HDCD unfortunately, so the discs I have that way I need to rip to 24/44.1 via dBpoweramp onto DVD-r. A bit inconvenient.

 

[mauidan]

They may not be dead (yet) but once you get used to the conveninece of a server and access via iPad (and, I might add, the sound qualiy), there is no going back. I have a Universal Transport (Oppo) but it's primary use is Blurays (and the 3 or 4 multichanell SACDs I have) as I have no intention of burning them. And for what it's worth, my server replaced a dCS stack.

Just read about a guy on another forum who got rid of his server/Lampi DAC and now plays CDs on his Aesthetix Romulus.

Looked at your system, do you really think the $269.00 Emotiva XDA-2 sounds better then the dCS DAC you had?

 

[BlueFox]

Seems that the market for stand alone transports is dying and maybe dead. Same may go for the all-in-one CD player. Are these devices passé? Who here only uses a hard drive on a computer or an Ipad/tablet as their only digital source?

I rarely use my SACD player anymore. It occasionally is used to evaluate a new CD to determine if the CD is worth ripping for my Bryston BDP-1 file player. However, I did use it last night to play the new Jack White CD for my poker buddies, and I ripped it today.

 

[Al M.]

Yes on the convenience and of course they are because physical media is dying. And this is no loss to SQ or anything else.

Stand-alone transports have always been for the audiophile market only. And among audiophiles they are neither dead nor dying, as this thread clearly shows contra those who insist to claim otherwise.

 

[Jazzhead]

Add me to the CDT + DAC camp . Convenience yes , but haven't yet heard a file replay system match a well set up RBCD SOTA duo , when it comes to SQ.

 

[Al M.]

Add me to the CDT + DAC camp . Convenience yes , but haven't yet heard a file replay system match a well set up RBCD SOTA duo , when it comes to SQ.

Also not a file replay system playing hi-rez files?

 

[DaveyF]

Poll added...let's see how the members here vote. Anyone want to add options, please do so.
I voted CD transport as my only digital source, BUT this might be changing soon...we shall see.

 

[Evolusean]

If they thought the market for standalone transports or all-in-one CD players were dead, Simaudio Moon would not have come to market recently with a new Neo series of transport and player. I am happy they did; it was timely for the demise of my 20-year old Wadia 8 transport (trouble finding tracks). The Neo 260 DT transport sounds great and costs only $ 2K. I am the proud owner of one and still use it as the sole source for my music, feeding a Berkeley Alpha DAC 2. CD is where all the music is that I listen to; 98 % of it is solely available on CD and not on hi-rez (well, in my opinion CD is high-resolution).

I like the physical feel of CDs and don't see a reason to burn them to file; the great internal clock of my Berkeley DAC theoretically takes care of jitter according to its designers' claims, and practically as well, as tested. Jitter removal from the transport source is the only explanation why my Wadia 8 and the new transport sounded not just similar, but precisely identical on the Berkeley DAC as verified by comparing over several days.

I'm in total agreement with you...
Especially the part about the physical feel of the disc.

I call my transport my digital turntable

 

[mauidan]

Poll added...let's see how the members here vote. Anyone want to add options, please do so.
I voted CD transport as my only digital source, BUT this might be changing soon...we shall see.

Love to participate in your poll, but I use both my transport and NAS server every time I listen.

 

[Bodhi]

I own a tube rbcd player which is my primary digital source and still enjoy buying cd's, reading the artist's liner notes & interacting with the media. Moreover, I don't see rbcd's and the transports which spin them dying off any time soon. There is a growing variety of high res RBCD formats incl: XRCD24, K2HD, DXD, SHM CD, Platinum SHM CD, Blue-spec CD2, Chesky Binaural + series etc. Victor (JVC) also plan to develop a new HD cd to rival 24/196 HD downloads, so I don't see a pressing need for an SACD player. In fact, I plan on upgrading to a higher end rbcd player in the future. Ultimately I envisage a high end server somewhere in the mix, but am in no rush at all.

 

[flez007]

I use an Electrocompaniet CDP but just as a transport, only digital source since I gave up my Mach2/Mytek based digital server (acumulating dust at the closet).

 

[jfrech]

Hi, I just voted. Unless downloads seriously improve, I'll keep my transport in use-it plays my digital media the best.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Questions like this one should always be qualified, because without that, it's two questions with different answers:

1) Are transports dead in the audiophile market? -- A) No. Cassette isn't dead in the audiophile market and we're waiting for the resurgence of the Victrola.

2) Are transports (cd players) dead in the mainstream music market? -- A) Decomposed.

But watch for a comeback in 20 years or so, when the young start a trend of "spinning silver." Vintage CD players will be all the rage. Used CD stores will flourish. Old audiophiles will complain that the trend is forcing up the price of media, and now popular used CDs are running forty, fifty dollars, even. An outrageous price to pay to play on their 200 pound, six-figure transports.

Tim

 

[dallasjustice]

What are the difference between CD transports (not CD player/DAC) and media server? What is the same?

They both read digital data from a storage medium.
They both use microprocessors.
The CD transport can only deliver the digital signal to the DAC via a jitter prone interface.
The computer in combination with a modern DAC interface delivers the digital signal via a jitter free interface.

 

[FrantzM]

What are the difference between CD transports (not CD player/DAC) and media server? What is the same?

They both read digital data from a storage medium.
They both use microprocessors.
The CD transport can only deliver the digital signal to the DAC via a jitter prone interface.
The computer in combination with a modern DAC interface delivers the digital signal via a jitter free interface.

Conclusion? Transports must die

 

[mep]

Conclusion? Transports must die

The funny thing is that some people are talking about how they like to handle the physical medium meaning CDs and SACDs. These are the same people who couldn't be bothered with LPs. Now they are in love with reading the liner notes on CDs under a microscope.

 

[dallasjustice]

Conclusion? Transports must die

I only have one vote in the market so it's not my decision. I personally don't understand why someone would buy a digital CD transport today.

 

[mep]

I only have one vote in the market so it's not my decision. I personally don't understand why someone would buy a digital CD transport.

Let's face it, there are digit heads that swear CDs sound better when played from a transport than from digital file on a computer.

 

[dallasjustice]

Let's face it, there are digit heads that swear CDs sound better when played from a transport than from digital file on a computer.

And I don't dispute their findings. There are some types of jitter that can be euphonically pleasant to some folks.

 

[jfrech]

And I don't dispute their findings. There are some types of jitter that can be euphonically pleasant to some folks.

Hi, if you're ever in Austin, swing by. I think you might be a little bit surprised and your conclusion may not apply to all transports by all makers in all systems...and I suspect there is something more going on than just reading the digits off a hard drive, memory chip or optical drive...or "some types of jitter that can be euphonically pleasant"

Guess I am Mep's digit head...