CD Transport vs Music Server

[audiobomber]

"Streaming" lumps in local files streamed from a NAS or server, with music streamed from the internet, i.e. Tidal, Qobuz, Amazon HD. I haven't heard Qobuz, but Tidal and Amazon HD are markedly inferior to streamed local content, IME.

Internet music is awesome for its variety, but not something I could be happy with as a sole source. My music is stored on a NAS, including my LP's, which I ripped at 88/24.

 

[Asbas]

Hi
With Streamning i will recomend EVO.
CD Transport:
5: Jays Audio mk2
4: Denafrips Avatar
3: Jays audio mk3
2: Pro-Ject rs2 t
1: Tascam cd9010 (TEAC proff. drive and used in studios)

I like to listen to the shiney discus.

I have Heard Jays Audio, Denafrips Avatar in My own system.

I have not heard Pro-Ject rs2 t in my system or Tascam.

I have friends who have Heard the Tascam vs the Pro-Ject and they tell me that the Pro-Ject is ok but not near the Tascam.

I Will have the Tascam in My system within 2 months and can give you my opinion if you like.
Regards

 

[sujay]

I admit it has been some time since I have heard servers in the system or done shoot-outs...and digital changes by the day, certainly the year. But I really do like the Zanden transport with its matching DAC. And it also is the Philips Pro top loading design (Pro 2). Its officially the longest running component in the system (13 years with 1 interim upgrade during that time).

My experience is similar with my Burmester top loader which also uses the philips pro 2. I have had it since 2006......flawless! A month ago I just played the CDP through it’s built in DAC module and I was shocked how musical it still sounds..... it’s not at the level of my dedicated lampizator DAC but still.......

 

[taww]

Quick updates:

- My Pioneer BDP-80FD Blu Ray is still in the system as a transport, and I still think it sounds damn good despite the build quality being total crap. I need to fix the flimsy clamp holder from causing tray from sticking - if I don't keep a disc in the drive at all times I can't open it!
- I had a Panasonic DP-UB9000 Blu Ray for a bit, and while it was built like a tank and did some things better than the Pioneer, overall I didn't feel it was much of an improvement and returned it. It was a damn good video player/streamer on my 4k OLED TV though.
- I picked up a Cambridge CXC and am breaking it in now. Given how popular it is, I figured this would be a good "budget reference" for comparisons.
- I have a PS Audio PerfectWave SACD Transport on the way.
- I fetched all my CDs and SACDs out of storage. It's not a huge collection, but at least I'll have enough material to work with now.

 

[taww]

I have to admit I am kind of flabbergasted at how good the Pioneer sounds as a transport. Now that I have all my CDs at hand, I’m able to listen to recordings I know inside out. Not only does it sound superior to my FLAC rips on my Intel NUC - DirectStream Bridge via Roon, it’s much nicer than the Cambridge CXC. The Cambridge is ok but it sounds like what I remember CD to sound like… a little aggressive, flat and tonally disjointed. The Pioneer sounds… dare I say it… analog? Listening to Lisa Batiashvili’s Bach album, there’s a lovely sense of space and gorgeous tone. It really nails the timbre of the violin crossing from the A to E string perfectly. The CXC has some of the E string stridency we endured for decades with digital, and FLAC via Roon loses some of the instrument’s resonance and body.

I’ll give the CXC some more break-in, and we shall see how the PS Audio PWT sounds… @Asbas my interest is piqued by that Tascam but it looks impossible to find! Project RS2 vs. PS Audio could be interesting.

 

[Asbas]

I have to admit I am kind of flabbergasted at how good the Pioneer sounds as a transport. Now that I have all my CDs at hand, I’m able to listen to recordings I know inside out. Not only does it sound superior to my FLAC rips on my Intel NUC - DirectStream Bridge via Roon, it’s much nicer than the Cambridge CXC. The Cambridge is ok but it sounds like what I remember CD to sound like… a little aggressive, flat and tonally disjointed. The Pioneer sounds… dare I say it… analog? Listening to Lisa Batiashvili’s Bach album, there’s a lovely sense of space and gorgeous tone. It really nails the timbre of the violin crossing from the A to E string perfectly. The CXC has some of the E string stridency we endured for decades with digital, and FLAC via Roon loses some of the instrument’s resonance and body.

I’ll give the CXC some more break-in, and we shall see how the PS Audio PWT sounds… @Asbas my interest is piqued by that Tascam but it looks impossible to find! Project RS2 vs. PS Audio could be interesting.

Yes, that Tascam is very, very, very hard to get your hands on. I have not heard the RS2 T vs PWT in my system, but the jungle drums play in Pro-Ject RS2 T favor.

 

[longinc]

Quick updates:

- My Pioneer BDP-80FD Blu Ray is still in the system as a transport, and I still think it sounds damn good despite the build quality being total crap. I need to fix the flimsy clamp holder from causing tray from sticking - if I don't keep a disc in the drive at all times I can't open it!
- I had a Panasonic DP-UB9000 Blu Ray for a bit, and while it was built like a tank and did some things better than the Pioneer, overall I didn't feel it was much of an improvement and returned it. It was a damn good video player/streamer on my 4k OLED TV though.
- I picked up a Cambridge CXC and am breaking it in now. Given how popular it is, I figured this would be a good "budget reference" for comparisons.
- I have a PS Audio PerfectWave SACD Transport on the way.
- I fetched all my CDs and SACDs out of storage. It's not a huge collection, but at least I'll have enough material to work with now.

@taww Thanks for sharing experience. Would love to hear your impressions of the PS Audio Perfect SACD transport when you receive it.

 

[charles1dad]

The Tascam CD9010 seems to be a multi-feature unit aimed at broadcast studio professional usage. The Pro-Ject CD BOX RS2 is purely dedicated to Redbook CD playback in a home audio environment. It uses the latest Stream Unlimited CD PRO-8 drive mechanism (Which replaced the discontinued Phillips CD Pro-2 drive. Seems that the Tascam and Pro-Ject have very different use objectives.

I'd be nice to hear them in direct comparison, not certain the Tascam is necessarily the better option for home audio listening. Professional audio components aren't by default superior sounding to dedicated purposed home audio components. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...YQFnoECBIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0GPxFS_41HV9DDrurFApcY
Charles

 

[Addicted to hifi]

The Tascam CD9010 seems to be a multi-feature unit aimed at broadcast studio professional usage. The Pro-Ject CD BOX RS2 is purely dedicated to Redbook CD playback in a home audio environment. It uses the latest Stream Unlimited CD PRO-8 drive mechanism (Which replaced the discontinued Phillips CD Pro-2 drive. Seems that the Tascam and Pro-Ject have very different use objectives.

I'd be nice to hear them in direct comparison, not certain the Tascam is necessarily the better option for home audio listening. Professional audio components aren't by default superior sounding to dedicated purposed home audio components. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...YQFnoECBIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0GPxFS_41HV9DDrurFApcY
Charles

Welcome Charles 1 dad to wbf.

 

[charles1dad]

Thank you I approach that.
Charles

 

[taww]

Update

 

[longinc]

Update

View attachment 83921

@taww so, how does it sound? we are holding our breadth.....

 

[taww]

@taww so, how does it sound? we are holding our breadth.....

Well I shouldn’t spoil it all with some hasty judgement before anything is run in, should I?

let me collect some thoughts but a few observations:

- When I unboxed it I heard a loose screw rolling around inside and the tray wouldn’t open. Ruh roh. Fortunately it was a very easy fix and all is well now but that was an odd issue. I’ll ask PSA about it.

- I am using a generic HDMI cable for the I2S connection to the DirectStream DAC, and have AES/EBU and coaxial connected as well. You can seamlessly switch between inputs on the DAC and I am struggling to hear any differences between them. I have been shopping for a fancier HDMI…

- Need to listen much more , but yes, it does sound good. It’s subtle but I’d describe it so far as very quiet with that hard-to-attain combination of detail and smoothness.

- Meanwhile, I discovered that the Cambridge CXC is sounding better with break-in, and is quite sensitive to a change in power cable/conditioning. I replaced the stock cord with an Audience forte and tried with and without filtering (Audience ar6 TSSOX). It’s sounding a good bit smoother and less “shouty” now.

 

[Kingrex]

I'm re-visiting this concept. I was talking with Ben of Mojo Audio. They no longer make Servers. They only make DAC. I don't know the technical inner workings of a transport vs a server. Ben said something along the lines of a server has to send the file throught chips or clocks or something and he finds its messes with the timing and robs the sound. He said a transport operates different. In my words, less processing of the signal and therefore sounds much better.

I complained I have 2000 files and no CD. He said to rip my favorites onto a blank disc and try it in a transport. Ben said a CD is so superior he no longer has a server in his reference system. They are only for finding new music and background.

What do the technical minds know here. Does anyone know how a transport, spdif to DAC differes from a server USB to a DAC. Is the CD process eliminating unnecessary processing by a computer core?

 

[Theburbster]

I'm re-visiting this concept. I was talking with Ben of Mojo Audio. They no longer make Servers. They only make DAC. I don't know the technical inner workings of a transport vs a server. Ben said something along the lines of a server has to send the file throught chips or clocks or something and he finds its messes with the timing and robs the sound. He said a transport operates different. In my words, less processing of the signal and therefore sounds much better.

I complained I have 2000 files and no CD. He said to rip my favorites onto a blank disc and try it in a transport. Ben said a CD is so superior he no longer has a server in his reference system. They are only for finding new music and background.

What do the technical minds know here. Does anyone know how a transport, spdif to DAC differes from a server USB to a DAC. Is the CD process eliminating unnecessary processing by a computer core?

Firstly, I have to say that I agree with Ben, his experience mirrors mine. I have posted previously that I took a long expensive journey down the file based music rabbit hole, before finally, by chance trying a far cheaper transport that my server set up, which yielded significantly better results. There are people who swear that a good server setup is a superior solution, no read errors, buffered stream etc.(not to mention Hi Res files) but that was not my experience, CD transport was far more natural with huge soundstage depth.
Technical reason why? Mmm, my thoughts are that it is down to the increased electrical noise and the additional complexity of a server setup. I have said this before, but I think in time the server solution will surpass CD just not yet. You have processors, memory chips, SSD's, USB bus and drivers, the operating system software and the music playback software, they all make a difference. A CD transport, has one simple job with dedicated, purpose built circuitry that is way simpler and generates far less HF noise.
Be interested to hear what others say, as when you start to think about it technically, and consider how the CD transport has to read its bit stream, and compare that to the reliability of say a SSD on a server, you would assume that the server would be the superior solution. It was completely counter intuitive to me just how much better a CD transport was.

 

[Al M.]

Firstly, I have to say that I agree with Ben, his experience mirrors mine. I have posted previously that I took a long expensive journey down the file based music rabbit hole, before finally, by chance trying a far cheaper transport that my server set up, which yielded significantly better results. There are people who swear that a good server setup is a superior solution, no read errors, buffered stream etc.(not to mention Hi Res files) but that was not my experience, CD transport was far more natural with huge soundstage depth.
Technical reason why? Mmm, my thoughts are that it is down to the increased electrical noise and the additional complexity of a server setup. I have said this before, but I think in time the server solution will surpass CD just not yet. You have processors, memory chips, SSD's, USB bus and drivers, the operating system software and the music playback software, they all make a difference. A CD transport, has one simple job with dedicated, purpose built circuitry that is way simpler and generates far less HF noise.
Be interested to hear what others say, as when you start to think about it technically, and consider how the CD transport has to read its bit stream, and compare that to the reliability of say a SSD on a server, you would assume that the server would be the superior solution. It was completely counter intuitive to me just how much better a CD transport was.

Yes, I have similar experiences:

Another should I add vinyl thread (post #97)

I also suspect the computer audio problem is related to noise (even with Ethernet, for some reason).

For my CD transport I use a reclocker, as specified in the link; makes quite a difference.

 

[alfa100]

Cd sounds better. I speak from experience.

 

[charles1dad]

I readily acknowledge that I don't use a digital server or know much about them. I have no doubt whatsoever that people do achieve excellent sound quality using servers as their front end source. Ben of Mojo Audio comments are very interesting (He has built/sold servers at one time) so his observations have some level of gravitas.

I would not be surprised to discover that building a successful good sounding server may be a more difficult task as compared to a good sounding CD transport. It could certainly be the case that a transport is simpler and more straightforward. Particularly if the transport is narrow focused and exclusively dedicated to Redbook CD playback rather than attempting jack of all trades type of transport.

I have owned the Pro-Ject RS2 Transport for about 4 weeks. It uses the Stream Unlimited CD PRO-8drive mechanism and the Blur Tiger -84 servo card (Rather than the discontinued Phillips CD Pro-2 drive mechanism ). It has one purpose and that's CD playback, no DVD, Blue ray etc. I can confidentially report that the sound quality is superb! A wonderful merger of high resolution/definition capability it also an exceptionally organic character with utterly natural presentation of tone and timbre.

For anyone truly interested in very upper tier Redbook CD playback this transport is genuinely splendid. It is a clear step above my trusty and excellent P.S.Audio PWT which I've owned quite happily for over 9 years. IMO still one of the best CD transports still available. However the Pro-Ject is sonically and musically better from A to Z. It is small in physical dimensions (Shoebox form factor) yet huge in its performance.
Charles

 

[matthias]

I was talking with Ben of Mojo Audio. They no longer make Servers. They only make DAC. I don't know the technical inner workings of a transport vs a server. Ben said something along the lines of a server has to send the file throught chips or clocks or something and he finds its messes with the timing and robs the sound. He said a transport operates different. In my words, less processing of the signal and therefore sounds much better.

Rex,
very interesting, do you know which transport Ben is using?
Thanks

Matt

 

[Kingrex]

I'm still hoping someone with real technical understanding can describe how a signal from a CD differs from a server. I though they were both computers and had hardware that processed the data. But maybe I was wrong. Maybe the transport only sends the bits to the DAC.

Ben mentioned the Project transport and said with a little modifications to the power supply and some well applied damping and RF shielding if can give shocking results. This is why I am asking. I was looking at a new DAC and he has 2 choices. One is already optimized for SPDIF feed by a transport. The other is a little more optimized for USB and fed by a server. I am starting to lean to a unit I can feed with a transport for optimum playback. I would never give up my server because they sound amazingly good. But they are getting hela expensive. $20K and $30K. And a hopped up transport can be had for $4K. And maybe best a server in performance.

What is a little disturbing is the rabbit hole. I already ripped a lot of CD to drive. Then I heard files of CD ripped off a robot like I used, and files ripped off a purpose built unit like the Ultra Silent Ripper. You can hear the difference. Not suppose to be the case. So I can only assume the reverse is the same. If I were to love a file I have, would I need a special burner to get the most from it.