Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport (Read 6676 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Hi!

I wish to know why to use a CD transport could be nice or be better than standard DVD or Blu-Ray or 4K Blu-Ray player when I use any digital output.

I know some CD transports can have I²S, AES/EBU (XLR 3) or AES3 (BNC) outputs; or it can oversample or it can handle two or more CD's. And I suppose that, all players has buffer for avoid jitter and lag isn't a problem for my.

Please don't confuse CD transport with CD player. An CD Player has digital to analog converter and it can have digital outpus. An CD transport only has digital outpus.

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #1 –
Don't get fooled by that snake oil. What you want to do, is to rip to computer and play from there.

A secure CD ripping application can spend time re-ripping wrong bits to get them right. A CD/DVD/Blu-Ray player/transport needs to deliver whatever it has at a pace of - you guessed it - 1 second per second.

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #2 –
Quote from: gagorial on
I wish to know why to use a CD transport
No reason exists, other than preventing Pavlovian psychogenic drama in audiophile pea brains, by using one.
YMMV.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #3 –
Quote
I wish to know why to use a CD transport could be nice or be better than standard DVD or Blu-Ray or 4K Blu-Ray player when I use any digital output.
There's no advantage.   You are basically building your own DAC instead of using whatever is built-into the player, or the DAC in your home theater receiver etc.    And most audio DACs, even the cheap ones, are better than human hearing.

Quote
And I suppose that, all players has buffer for avoid jitter and lag isn't a problem for my.
Yes, jitter is a made-up problem.   It exists but it's not audible.   People have done experiments artificially introducing jitter.    It has to be way-worse than anything not-broken and then it's perceived as background noise.

Quote
An CD transport only has digital outputs.
Most Blu-Ray players only have digital outputs (usually just HDMI).

I read somewhere that it's now "illegal" (or will soon become illegal) to include analog outputs on Blu-Ray players because it's a way of bypassing copy protection.  

That wouldn't apply to CD players because CD players don't have copy protection.   (The S/PDIF audio output on a Blu-Ray or DVD player is also not copy protected.)

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #4 –
Quote from: DVDdoug on
And most audio DACs, even the cheap ones, are better than human hearing.

Not really, do you know a problem called pre- and post-ringing, phase shift and high frequencies attenuation?
You can review graphs about filters from specifications from Sabre ESS Technology. Yes, I know that, only one filter can cause high frequency attenuation (linear phase slow roll-off) and ringing only is audible with sampling frequencies below 44.1kHz (not the case for CDs/DVDs/Blu-Rays)

Quote
Most Blu-Ray players only have digital outputs (usually just HDMI).

Where I live is easy get Blu-Ray players the output from S/PDIF coaxial or Toshlink.

Quote
I read somewhere that it's now "illegal" (or will soon become illegal) to include analog outputs on Blu-Ray players because it's a way of bypassing copy protection.


It Isn't illegal, the problem is about trademark, according to the negotiations between they accept the new terms and conditions and about get easiest renovation to this.

But now with Netflix and so, Blu-Ray isn't very popular in comparison with DVD when internet access and smartphone were very weird. But, why to still buying physics movies when exist now YouTube, qBitTorrent…?

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #5 –
I thanks you, I don't buy this snake oil. :)

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #7 –
I wonder how many CD transports have a dedicated CD Digital Audio drive instead of a cheap CD-ROM drive.

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #8 –
Quote
Not really, do you know a problem called pre- and post-ringing, phase shift and high frequencies attenuation?

You can review graphs about filters from specifications from Sabre ESS Technology.
Here at HydrogenAudio we ONLY care about what we can actually HEAR.     We DON'T CARE about measurements or charts & graphs (unless you want to use those aids to analyze or explain what you are hearing).    

In fact TOS #8 (which you agreed to) says you MUST demonstrate your ability to hear a difference with a scientific, blind, ABX Test (or similar) before making claims about audio quality.

And no, I've never actually heard those things from a CD player.  ;)  I've heard an occasional click or skip from a defective CD and that's about it.   But, I don't claim to golden ears, and I'm over 60 years old with some high-frequency hearing loss.   I'm just a "picky" and "critical" listener.   And I consider it a blessing that I can't hear every tiny-little MP3 compression artifact, etc.!     :D

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #9 –
Basically, many audiophiles are idiots with more dollars than sense.

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #10 –
Quote from: NateHigs on
Quote from: ajinfla on
Quote from: gagorial on
I wish to know why to use a CD transport
No reason exists, other than preventing Pavlovian psychogenic drama in audiophile pea brains, by using one.
YMMV.
Nonsense. A CD player is way quieter than your average PC. It also consumes a lot less energy
Troll reading comprehension fail
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #11 –
Quote from: DVDdoug on

Here at HydrogenAudio we ONLY care about what we can actually HEAR.     We DON'T CARE about measurements or charts & graphs (unless you want to use those aids to analyze or explain what you are hearing).    

In fact TOS #8 (which you agreed to) says you MUST demonstrate your ability to hear a difference with a scientific, blind, ABX Test (or similar) before making claims about audio quality.


It's is out of this topic (CD Transports), but I thanks that you care and promote forum TOS. And I just read this about objective/subjective. When I wrote that someone don't have problems over 44.1kHz sampling frequencies, previously I measured with the ESS 9038PRO graphs the frequencies of ringing and I observed ringing with some filters are ultrasonic or below hearing threshold. I could create a synthetic test for prove that ringing can be heard if I calculate how many samples per second use for an impulse response test file. I also know that exists masking effect. Also ringing can be amplified by headphones or loudspeaker when it unfortunately coincide with the ringing from these. But I asked me this, does they use with those headphones or loudspeaker with suitable DAC at highest sampling frequency for measurements?
 

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #12 –
Quote from: NateHigs on
Quote from: ajinfla on
Quote from: gagorial on
I wish to know why to use a CD transport
No reason exists, other than preventing Pavlovian psychogenic drama in audiophile pea brains, by using one.
YMMV.

Nonsense. A CD player is way quieter than your average PC. It also consumes a lot less energy
An Android smartphone is even quieter, no moving parts at all.
a fan of AutoEq + Meier Crossfeed

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #13 –
Quote from: magicgoose on
Quote from: NateHigs on
Quote from: ajinfla on
Quote from: gagorial on
I wish to know why to use a CD transport
No reason exists, other than preventing Pavlovian psychogenic drama in audiophile pea brains, by using one.
YMMV.

Nonsense. A CD player is way quieter than your average PC. It also consumes a lot less energy
An Android smartphone is even quieter, no moving parts at all.
You can build a fanless PC and use an SSD for a really quiet PC.  Cases and heat sinks might get a little on the BULKY and tricky to put together side depending on your component choices.

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #14 –
Quote from: Chibisteven on
You can build a fanless PC and use an SSD for a really quiet PC.  Cases and heat sinks might get a little on the BULKY and tricky to put together side depending on your component choices.

You could use an Rasberry Pi, the 4th gen needs a heatsink but no active cooling. And it is powerful enough for a lot of tasks, like playing a CD or playing music in general.

Re: DVD OR Blu-Ray player VS audiofile CD Transport

Reply #15 –
Quote from: binaryhermit on
Basically, many audiophiles are idiots with more dollars than sense.
Nah, this perception-being-fooled is part of how our brain (mis)interprets our senses. It isn't stupid, it is actually quite necessary to make a fuzzy processing of not-completely-clear information - in an evolutionary context is is genius. It is easy to fool, sure. But audiophoolery isn't really special - feelgood is marketed and sold at every corner.

The consequence:
(double) blind testing is not only for idiots - it is essential to overcome human nature-induced misinformation