Are top-loading CD transports better than front loading?

[MadFloyd]

I've been told by one DAC designer that a top loading CD transport will always be better than a front loading one.

If anyone has any insight on this topic, please share!

 

[exupgh12]

I've been told by one DAC designer that a top loading CD transport will always be better than a front loading one.

If anyone has any insight on this topic, please share!

although i can find logic in his comment (less moving parts), i wonder what was your DAC designer's explanation for his opinion?

 

[dcathro]

I use an older style player with a CDM4 mechanism. These were implemented by Philips with a draw mechanism that triggered a rudimentary spring loaded clamp onto the disc. I have modified this to be top loading with a magnetic puck which is superior (no friction).

Later Philips transports were implemented so that when the drawer closed a magnetic puck would drop on the disc. I cannot see a huge problem with this type of draw loading.

 

[microstrip]

I've been told by one DAC designer that a top loading CD transport will always be better than a front loading one.

If anyone has any insight on this topic, please share!

I would say most times, but not always. No magic or religious reason - just because in a top drawer it is possible to implement a more controlled drive system, with less moving and logically resonating parts. I have no doubt that all the drawbacks of a front loading CD transport can be overcome, but probably it will cost a lot more than the equivalent top loading.

IMHO the front loading Vivaldi transport is by a large margin the best transport for the Vivaldi stack. The cost of producing the robust and rigid TEAC Esoteric VRDS Neo™ is extremely high, and is completely independent and isolated from the loading system. Probably it would be cheaper if it was a top loading system.

 

[charles1dad]

Agree with @microstrip that a front loading CD tray transport can be done in an excellent manner albeit at a higher cost.

I suspect that the implementation of a high quality top loading CD transport is simpler to accomplish and less expensive. Some of the very finest High End transports utilized the top loading drive mechanism approach.
Forsell is but one historic example. Gryphon current product CD player. Definitely others.
Charles

 

[MadFloyd]

although i can find logic in his comment (less moving parts), i wonder what was your DAC designer's explanation for his opinion?

Pardon my late response, but this is what he said:



Generally any proper CD transport will sound better than any computer audio, streamed or played from a local drive.

But multidisk players can't compare to a proper 16/44.1 Redbook only CDT...as crazy as it sounds 16/44.1 CDs sound better than HD CDs, SACDs, DVD-A, or whatever, played on a multidisk optical drive.

And top loaders sound notably better than tray loaders. Top loaders have less mechanical resonance which translates to less error correction.
All transports are set up to do a certain amount of error correction and then to interpolate to create a smooth output.

Less mechanical resonance translates to more bit perfect and less interpolated output.

What I would highly recommend would be one of the Jay's Audio CDTs: their $5K Redbook only top loading CDT-3 MkIII is my current reference and beats any CDT I've heard for up to $25K.

 

[Elliot G.]

Generally any proper CD transport will sound better than any computer audio, streamed or played from a local drive.


I personally don't agree with his statement. Just because he can't do it doesnt mean that others can't.

 

[AMR / iFi audio]

I would say top loaders have some advantages when it comes to fewer moving parts, but they are sometimes overloaded with a too-heavy puck. Additionally, you need better bearings since you have a mass ion top of the axle with no support other than the engine.

 

[cpcat]

Assuming this is true: “Less mechanical resonance translates to more bit perfect and less interpolated output.”….

Then shouldn’t a non compressed file played from memory be the best of all?

 

[MadFloyd]

Assuming this is true: “Less mechanical resonance translates to more bit perfect and less interpolated output.”….

Then shouldn’t a non compressed file played from memory be the best of all?

I think that's a very valid question!

 

[AMR / iFi audio]

Assuming this is true: “Less mechanical resonance translates to more bit perfect and less interpolated output.”….

Then shouldn’t a non compressed file played from memory be the best of all?

Well, I don't have a CD player anymore... Digital is streamed with the Zen Stream, and when I want something physical, I have a turntable.