I’ve been reading of late about how CD Transports can make a difference. Since I have an extensive collection of CDs that I’m keeping, been looking at getting a dedicated CD Transport for a dedicated headphone setup. (Audiolab CDT 9000)
Currently use a Magnetar UDP 800 that I switch in between the headphone setup and the loudspeaker setup. It does a pretty good job as a CD Transport. Not sure the CDT 9000 would help, but some reviews out there seem to suggest that a high quality dedicated transport would improve CD playback.
My attitude is that unless you have seen lab test measurements for the Audiolab CDT 9000 that PROVE it performs better than the Magnetar UDP 800, don’t spend your money.
I came of age in the 1970s, reading magazines like High Fidelity, Stereo Review, and Audio. Back then, Hi-Fi enthusiasts wouldn’t dream of making a major investment in audio equipment without first seeing reliable, independent lab tests that showed the component was substantially better than previous models. Today, I’m mystified by Internet “reviews” published by self-appointed experts who promote a piece of equipment like a CD transport after they’ve listened to a few albums and their golden ears alone have assured them it’s worth every penny.
(I’m also mindful of all the recordings I could buy for the $1500 cost of that CD transport.)
So, that’s my two cents’ worth on the subject…
But, as Oscar Wilde said, “The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it”, and if you’ve got the burning desire plus the spare cash to acquire the CDT 9000, you can certainly go for it.
Thanks for the feedback. I came of age in the early 80s for high end audio. I used to read AUDIO regularly, and learned a lot from it. Stereophile at least does conduct measurements.
I have to agree with you about all the internet reviewers with 100% subjective opinions that really do not add to the knowledge base.
There just is not many reviews about disc spinners anymore. The last one I remember was for the Oppo 205.
I would reckon “jitter” would be the key component of the digital stream. The read ahead function of the CDT 9000 seems like a good feature.
Personally I think it’s inconceivable that at this point different CD transports make an appreciable difference. Jitter is an easily solved problem, as is grounding and shielding, and even budget players are quiet. What would you be looking to improve in what you already have?
Get any old transport. Rip your CDs to an uncompressed digital format such as FLAC using Exact Audio Copy (free). EAC will check your rip for accuracy versus other copies of the CD in online databases.
Once you have confirmed that your file is accurate, play the digital copy and set the CD aside. If your disc is bad, get another copy somewhere.
EDIT: My logic for shifting to digital copies follows from (1) CDs tend to degrade over time and the error rate may increase for a 1980s pressing regardless of your transport, and (2) each CD is a physical item and may have unique flaws. Many discs have pinholes in the reflective layer and you can see light through them. Not good.
A verified digital copy sidesteps everything physical, to include jitter, grime, scratches, etc. Just copy the digital files every few years to ensure they don’t degrade either.
Interesting. I have been transferring CDs over time to USB sticks. I have a LOT of CD’s to transfer.
Been using Foobar 2000 to achieve this. I don’t even bother with .flac anymore. Memory is so cheap, may as well keep it in .wav. I’ve noticed (subjectively) that .wav seems to sound just a ever so slight better than .flac.
Just stumbled on a significant sonic upgrade using Foobar. The recent release of PGGB-RT Real Time Upsampling software works wonders with CD files. Running the existing CD files at 24 bit/176.4 KHz, the sound from the Bel Canto 2.8 DAC is much better. Best part, it doesn’t cost anything. Extremely impressive. It literally transforms CD quality to Hi Res quality.
Thanks for the heads up. My DAC is NOS, so I want to see if this changes/improves the sound. I’m using the 32 bit version of Foobar because one of my plugins isn’t compatible with the 64 bit version, but if I like the sound, maybe this will be a good excuse to upgrade Foobar.
If you haven’t already read this, I just found a 6 page thread on this plugin on the Audiophile Style forum. Haven’t read it yet, but knowing that forum, I’m assuming it has a ton of advice on settings and tweaks.
Thanks for the link. After reading the posts on the link, I switched around the primary headphone setup to use the Topping DX9 in DAC mode. The 768 KHz is simply amazing, much more pronounced than the 176.4 KHz.
I’m using a older Alienware 13 that does have 16GB. The 44.1 KHz files upscale to 768 successfully, but upscaling 192 KHz files is too much.
I’ll do some research and get a new computer with 8 core and 16 GB. I may eventually spring for the paid version.