Is computer audio a bust?


In recent months, I have had several audio acquaintances return to CDPs claiming improved SQ versus their highly optimized computer transports (SS drives, external power supplies, etc, etc).

I wanted to poll people on their experiences with computer "transports." What variables have had the most impact on sonics? If you bailed on computers, why?

I personally have always believed that the transport, whether its a plastic disc spinner or computer, is as or more important than the dac itself and thus considerable thought and energy is required.

agear
"there is a 600% to 1000% mark-up on the retail prices out there anyway"

That may be true from a few big companies, but most of these high-performance cables require huge investments to get the first batch made or they are completely hand-made and very labor intensive. Exotic materials like silver and expanded Teflon are generally not available in off-the-shelf cabling from any manufacturer. Certainly not in a USB cable. I know because I have looked. The designer must actually custom order 10,000 feet just to get these made. Fabricators will not even touch a 1000 foot order.

Computers are not obsolete either by any means. I actually use a win2000 workstation now for 15 years with the same hard-disk drive. The likes of Intel and the PC makers would have you believe that you MUST HAVE the latest technology and operating systems. They actually have marketing/development groups dedicated to developing apps and uses that require more powerful CPU's, more memory etc.. in order to get you to upgrade your PC.

The fact that most peoples PCs are fine for what they use them for and therefore they are not upgrading is a testament to the fact that they are not obsolete. This is precisely why PC sales are down.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
AGear, yes, correct...I only have 15 DSD128 albums BUT they sound so good, i want to hear them from time to time and CDP is useless for that.

Also, it went without saying that the implementation of BOTH would be top notch, otherwise it would not be a fair fight.

As for upsampling, again, I would recommend and did specify a top notch application like HQ Player with adjustable parameters.

Sorry, but its not pleasant to descend for the HiRez bubble to RBCD land and no my collection is at most 80% RBCD. LoL

Native DSD128 rules! Hehehehe
@ Audioengr, Hi Steve, your last post about computers was really what you do, most people buy, as you said, the newest greatest whatever computer, then, like I said, when they go to walk out the store, another computer is better before the door hits them in the ass, however, my desk-top computer works great for me, kinda old, your intel chip you developed is one tuff proccessor, it's the Intel core 2,,, you did have a hand in the development of this proccessor??, of course I am running windows 7 on it instead of the vista that was on it originally.
Audiolabyrinth - I was a design team lead on the Pentium 2 many years ago. It was a "slot 1" processor.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
07-19-14: Bhobba
The improved SQ has to do with reduced jitter which is easier to accomplish without the moving parts of a mechanical transport being involved.

The real value of computer audio is not that is SQ is inherently better - transports can sound as good - but its rare - its the paradigm shift it engenders of being able to tap into you entire music library from your litening position with something like an iPad.

Agreed....