Topic: Newbie CDP & Other Audio System Questions

[dips15]

Just like cars, these items start losing market value the moment you get them. You'd be lucky to only lose 1k from the resale, it's normally closer to 30%-40% loss based on selling prices here (and if you buy brand new).

There are great budget CDPs, and I do find them enjoyable. It was just a matter of "what if" in my case. Curiousity killed the cat: "What if I had that other CDP, I wonder how it would sound." It was an enjoyable journey though.

A good inexpensive DAC may indeed be all you need, so don't shy away from trying one. In case you decide to go the CDP route, it's difficult to go wrong with the high-value offerings from NAD, Marantz, Cambridge Audio, Rotel, Denon, etc. Arcam's Diva line is also selling at a 50% discount, which makes it quite irresistable. Each has its own sound, so it's still best to hear them. If you're into tubes, Cayin and Bada may be a couple of price-comparable options.

Exactly.  With bigger ticket items, you'd lose a lot more.  I'm pretty sure you could have already bought an entry level or even midrange CA, NAD or Marantz CDP with the amount you've lost in all that shuffle.  I don't want to experience that, although I am pretty sure that I won't have the budget to change gears that often.  Who knows, I may be entirely happy with an entry level CDP or DAC.

[Stagea]

  Who knows, I may be entirely happy with an entry level CDP or DAC.

Precisely. Only you can know what makes you happy.

Start auditioning (or buying) and see which one works for you.

[Stagea]

I just found a graphic representation of the effect of jitter. The black line is from a CD source connected via I2S (CD Player with Internal DAC). The grey line is a high end PC audio interface connected via SPDIF to the same DAC.



In this case, it's about a 12dB difference. Definitely substantial. If a run off the mill DVD player is used instead of the PC used in this test, jitter might even be much higher.

Transport and connection type matters if you care enough about it.

[rascal101]

There are simple ways to minimize the effects of jitter like the replacing the rubber footing via spikes (and mounting the DVD/CDP on a stable surface), placing a granite block on top of the DVD/CDP, securing the screws that hold the transport (via an adhesive) etc.

[Stagea]

I guess the changes could make a difference when it comes to external vibration induced jitter.

As for the screenshot that I posted, I think the increase jitter in this case was mostly electronic in nature, because the spdif source did not grab the data off physical media (unless part of it was caused by mechanical vibration causing issues with the crystal clock, or microphonics in other components).

[rascal101]

In that case maybe replace the ceramic cap (typical due to very low capacitance value reqt) in clock circuits with polystyrene cap.

[romymartinez]

I just found a graphic representation of the effect of jitter. The black line is from a CD source connected via I2S (CD Player with Internal DAC). The grey line is a high end PC audio interface connected via SPDIF to the same DAC.



In this case, it's about a 12dB difference. Definitely substantial. If a run off the mill DVD player is used instead of the PC used in this test, jitter might even be much higher.

Transport and connection type matters if you care enough about it.

Hi Sir,

Very interesting. Can you share the link of the article where you found this graph?

Thanks!

[Stagea]

http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/diginterf1_e.html

I just found this link. Some might find this useful... it has a graphic representation of part of what I was talking about (the SPDIF vs. I2S part), and a better laid out explanation.

If you go through it, it should become more obvious why separate transport and dac sources would typically need to cost more (or at least be more elaborate) to reach the performance of a good CDP.

Here are some more controversial links:
http://www.stereophile.com/reference/193jitter/index.html
http://www.stereophile.com/features/368/index.html

[romymartinez]

Here is a nice introduction on the subject of jitter, published after the above-cited Stereophile article.

It was written not by an audio journalist but by a credible audio engineeer, the lead DAC designer from Analog Devices, Inc.

http://www.theaudiocritic.com/back_issues/The_Audio_Critic_21_r.pdf

The article starts on page 10.

[Stagea]

Nice read sir Romy.

ASRC devices in Page 19, as I understand it are upsampling devices (non-integer asynchronous upsampling).

I've had five DACs utilizing this technology. One running the TI SRC4192/3, another the TI SRC4392, and three using AD ADSP-BF532 processors. They all sounded different (except for two of the AD devices since they were identical). I think they differ mostly because they ran different software, connected to different partnering DAC chips, which were then hooked to unique analogue stages (of course they also used differing board designs/layouts, shielding, power supplies, input receivers, S/PDIF to I2S converters, and other components).

Based on the article, the use of these ASRC devices should reduce the impact of input stream jitter. However, I can still quite clearly hear differences (or I think I do) between digital sources through each DSP/DAC combo. It seems to be more perceptible when running higher resolution data, but it is still detectable with redbook quality streams.

Basing just on my limited experience with them, disc transports do appear to sound different (the AD devices seem to show this more than the TI equipped ones). However, PC S/PDIF sources seem to vary more (one sound board can sound very different from another). Some sound boards (or S/PDIF interfaces in this case) are so sensitive to electrical noise that turning on/off certain power management and spread spectrum options could make a minute but audible difference (I suppose these boards would sound quite different when plugged into different computers too). I was outputting bitperfect streams via WASAPI during those tests, so I have doubts that the differences are audio processing related.

[romymartinez]

If someone has two CDP players of the same model with both SP/DIF output and input (e.g., Cambridge Azur 840C), it might be interesting to run the following comparison:

Run 1: Use Palyer1 normally, with its LR analog out connected to the preamp / integrated iamp.
Run 2: Use Player2 as outboard DAC and Player1 as transport, the two CDPs connected via SP/DIF using good quality interconnect and LR analog out from Player2 connected to the preamp/amp

[Stagea]

Hi Romy,

I've done this quite a few times before. I've hooked up the following sources to my 740C, 840C and a borrowed C565BEE:
1. Cambridge Audio 340C
2. Cambridge Audio 640C
3. Cambridge Audio DVD 99
4. Pioneer DV-220V-K
5. Pioneer BDP-320
6. PC Source
7. CA 740C
8. CA 840C
9. NAD C565BEE
10. A few other things that I might not remember anymore.

I've also connected most of the said players to the following DACs:
1. MF V-DAC
2. MF X-DAC V3
3. CA 740C
4. CA 840C
5. NAD C565BEE
6. A few AV Receivers (none of them worth mentioning)

So far, none of the combinations sounded as good as the 740A, the 840A or the C565BEE on its own. I'm sure more exotic dacs can do better. I'm curious how a Naim DAC or something from Orpheus Labs would sound --- but these are already quite beyond my audio budget.

If someone has two CDP players of the same model with both SP/DIF output and input (e.g., Cambridge Azur 840C), it might be interesting to run the following comparison:

Run 1: Use Palyer1 normally, with its LR analog out connected to the preamp / integrated iamp.
Run 2: Use Player2 as outboard DAC and Player1 as transport, the two CDPs connected via SP/DIF using good quality interconnect and LR analog out from Player2 connected to the preamp/amp

[romymartinez]

Hi Sir,

That's one helluva of experimentation!   

The result, I'll surely keep in mind in my next source upgrade.   

Regards,
romymartinez

[dips15]

Just to share an observation I had when I visited the high-end AV store accross SnS, showing that the source does really matter.  (Can't quite recall the exact name of the store, but I'm sure you all know it.) 

When I went in, the owner(?) or at least the more knowledgeable guy there was busy talking to another customer.  So another guy who looked like their security guard (naka-baraong kasi eh), who still knew some stuff about their merchandise and hooking stuff up assisted me.  Thing is, he placed a CD inside the C200 which was fitted with a BD-Rom drive.  Sound was pretty distorted especially at the high end.  It was at this point that the person who could have been the owner asked where the CD player was and asked the other guy to use a proper player... a Shanling toploader.  SQ was clearly night and day.

What I just don't get is that, I doubt that they would use analog connections for the PCH C200 and probably used either HDMI, optical or digital to connect to their AVR which was either a ROTEL or an ARCAM.  (I also forgot to ask how it was connected.)  Shouldn't the amplifier be the one that would decode the cd in that case and still give out decent sound?

[Stagea]

That's Audio Visual Driver. They have excellent gear there, especially inside their "high end room" hehehe.

If the AVR is the one decoding, jitter can be quite obvious in this arrangement. Most AVRs don't have very high tech DACs when handling plain PCM (and they usually don't reclock), which means that the effects of transport and interface/interconnect jitter could get very audible. Revealing gear exaggerates this, as you could clearly hear the degradation caused by the front end.

Using a dedicated CD player through an analogue connection resolves the jitter issue, since the CDP uses a good transport that is I2S-connected to its internal DAC.

Aside from this, the CDP may have a nicer DAC and analogue side than what's inside the receiver. 

[dips15]

That's Audio Visual Driver. They have excellent gear there, especially inside their "high end room" hehehe.

If the AVR is the one decoding, jitter can be quite obvious in this arrangement. Most AVRs don't have very high tech DACs when handling plain PCM (and they usually don't reclock), which means that the effects of transport and interface/interconnect jitter could get very audible. Revealing gear exaggerates this, as you could clearly hear the degradation caused by the front end.

Using a dedicated CD player through an analogue connection resolves the jitter issue, since the CDP uses a good transport that is I2S-connected to its internal DAC.

Aside from this, the CDP may have a nicer DAC and analogue side than what's inside the receiver. 

Excellent gear indeed.  That's why I don't dare go into that high end room.

hehehe.

[Stagea]

CMIIW:
Most modern av receivers have integrated DSP-CODECs that handle majority of its functions (even those few with separate components still have much higher integration compared to dedicated audio gear). To keep costs and crosstalk down, the signal path is usually quite simple. Most of them don't seem to do reclocking and fractional upsampling. This makes them more prone to jitter, among other things.

@ dips15

Have a listen to their Electras and their Arcam gear on sale. I think they match quite well.