Will computer to DAC replace transports and cdp's?

Clio09, well, actually, since I've learned the hard way, I was thinking to just wrap up the iPod with magnetic material and fill it up with Epoxy and some Silicone and offer it at $550. Battery power supply for it is in the works too at additional charge of course. Ultimately, I am also going to remove its video and display capabilities for even more amazing sound.

Wish me luck!

Regards,
Alex

Helpdesk,

"The best jitter reduction scheme is to clock the transport from the DAC"

Really, how so? Would you please elaborate? For example, would you please explain to us how would you eliminate the jitter of a PLL MULTI-Clock generator with just providing it a FREQUENCY reference which is usually done with VCO??? I'm dying to hear your answer.

"Therefore, the sound from a server based system will not be better than the EMM combo originally mentioned, even if an EMM DAC is used."

True, but this has nothing to do with the usual clock syncing.

"The EMM DAC must convert incoming PCM to DSD in order to convert to analog. If the servers sound card has a clock input and can be re-clocked by the EMM DAC, then you can come close to the EMM transport /DAC combo."

True again but it does not really have to do anything with the clock because the EMM CDSD transport is simply superior (working as a combination with the EMM DAC) to the computer based audio. The fact that the CDSD feeds DSD to the EMM DAC, and also the non-PLL syncing between the two, are two of the many major reasons.

And finally to answer the original question of this thread:

"Will computer to DAC replace transports and cdp's?"

The answer is NO, if superior audio quality is desired of course. Otherwise we might as well get I-PODs.

Regards,
Alex

Drubin, You can sure run the latest iPod to a DAC if you want, with similar results. :)

I'd agree that the Computer Audio has a potential and a future, but there are many issues to be addressed first with it, if that "last bit of sonic excellence" is required, and believe me, the "last bit" is a "huge bit". :)

I would prefer to keep all the reasons for my self (for now) because otherwise I'd be providing proprietary information. When the time comes, you will be one of the first to find out what I mean.

Regards,
Alex

Ecka, this is interesting. The CDSD is feeding DSD to the DAC and in the case with your computer card the PCM also gets converted to DSD when it hits the DAC. Since I have an idea what is going on in the CDSD, it is possible that your computer would sound almost the same.

Regards,
Alex

Steve,

.....The fact is that computer-driven audio is intrinsically superior to reading of optical disks. The only way CD's can compete is if they are read into a FIFO buffer and then read out with a precision clock, which is essentially just equivalent to computer-driven anyway....

Again, even a 15 years old CD player has a built in FIFO buffer as well as C1 and C2 error correctors. I am not sure about your “modded CD transport”, but ALL of today's universal players also feature large RAM buffers and spin the disc at x2 to x10. The data output is free of error and jitter. So, as you see, the statement that computer audio is "intrinsically superior" is not exactly true. Not to talk about the fact that computer audio is not even remotely close to the reading accuracy of the Esoteric's VRDS-NEO transport, or even some of the older Sony and Philips top line CD transports.

There are many, many factors that come into play for best digital reproduction. The computer audio has the potential combined with great convenience. Sonically, it is very good, but still not quite there yet compared to well engineered "classic" digital boxes. Well, may be some day. :)

Regards,
Alex

Steve, does your device also provide the master clock for the I2S bus?

Thanks!
Alex

Steve, I see, this explains it. However, please be aware that as good as it looks, there are problems transmitting separated Data and Clocks via single cable, especially in the case master clock is included.

The only "problem" with S/PDIF is the master clock recovery which is done from the Bitclock by multiplying it and PLL-ing it. This of course results in high jitter in the master clock. But since 44.1 (or multiples) sampling is of primary use with your application, you can easily use one of the latest Crystal or AKM S/PDIF receivers and configure it in Master Mode with own master clock generator. In this case the master clock is on-board with the DIR and DAC and if precision external XO or TCXO is used you can have as low as 5-10pS (RMS) jitter. This will be free of the problems with the I2S cable.

I've found the above solution superior to direct I2S transmission. I think you should try it too, especially if you’re planning to introduce your own designed DAC box.

Regards,
Alex