PC as a transport

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Hello all,
I would like to explore the options of setting up a PC as a transport for 2 channel music system.
After reading various forums, I feel I know less than ever before.
I would like to ask for opinions on some specific questions that I am struggling to find answers for.

First of all, should I get a good quality sound card installed in PC and drive an external DAC via SPDIF, AES, Toslink, USB (if DAC has any of these digital input interfaces)?
Or should I get an external USB to SPDIF converter and drive DAC via whatever interface (SPDIF, I2S, etc.)?

What would be recommended in each of these scenarios, if any is advantageous, what DAC, what converter, what sound card?

How do the following DACs compare to each other, considering that PC will be transport one way or the other, Benchmark DAC-1, Lavry DA10, Altmann Attraction, Apogee mini-dac with USB or firewire or Rosetta?

If external USB to SPDIF (or whatever) is prefered, which one? Any opinions on Konnekt 24D and Edirol UA-101?

After reading various comments, it seems all or some of these have some fundamental flaws? For example, Benchmark DAC-1 USB implementation not executed well, or has issues with PC versa MAC, native drivers usage?

Did anyone achieve exceptional performance with PC as a transport, how was it accomplished?
Or is PC hopeless t this time, should I consider MAC, which one, what OS?
What would professionals use?
Is it too early to get into this?
 
Here is my 5 pennies worth opinion.

1. Computers are excellent as transport devices. Whether you choose a PC or a Mac (or rather Windows or Linux or OS X because a Mac can run all 3) is a matter of personal taste. There is a lot more applications to choose among on Windows platform but on the other hand some OS/X apps are unbeatable in terms of UI, user friendliness, and easy setup. For each application type you will find 1 – 2 apps for OS/X and 5 – 10 for Windows. Platform choice will not affect the resulting audio quality if you get all other things right. However, if you want a computer that is silent in itself (I do) then it’s easier to find quiet Mac than quiet PC. Most modern Mac notebooks and minis are silent, most PC’s aren’t. The real problem is that noise specifications aren’t published and that most reviews and lab tests don’t measure this important property.

2. Generally you get better results by getting digital signal out of the computer and doing digital-to-analog conversion outside. Even if there are some excellent internal sound cards with state-of-the-art DAC, the interior of a computer is electrically noisy and that noise propagates to your internal analog output(s).

3. If your computer has a built-in digital sound output (often optical or coax S/PDIF) then you don’t need external USB/Firewire connected interface box. On the other hand you still need an external DAC. Some of these external USB/Firewire connected boxes have excellent DAC and that may be a reason for using them anyway.

4. Currently I’m using M-Audio Audiophile USB box (which originally is intended for mobile recording studios) with excellent results. There is a corresponding Firewire connected device too. Both work on Windows and OS/X platforms. I’m using its analog output to drive my headphones and its digital output to drive an A/V receiver and soon directly digital loudspeakers. I’m also using its analog input to get microphone signal and its digital input to get uudecoded audio output (Dolby Digital and DTS) from DVD and DVB units into computer.

/Mikael
 
I'm mostly using my PC as a transport, especially when i'm learning and don't want to switch cd's all the time :)
I have had a few soundcards (from the SB live to audigy as well as a audiophile 2496) but they didn't give me the sound that my cd player could. Because i also have a MD player with a digital input i started using that as a D/A and it was far-much better than the audigy, even when it was upsampling :dead:
Because upsampling is as worse as you can get i went looking for another way to get the digital signal to my MD player without oversampling the signal.

I found the PCM2604 from TI and build it conform the datasheet and after some testing build it in my MD player. The output stage was then already build and fitted in my player. If i have some spare time i will make some new pictures and do some new measurements.

On my site the player is still without the USB interface.

http://midiserver.student.utwente.nl/sitestuff/apparatuur/sony_md_mds_je530/minidisk.htm
 
I dont listen from PC frequently and mostly are lossy compressed MP3 or MTV in Divx/Xivd, none of them are high quality to begin with. but i found that not all SPDIF output are made equal, atleast comparing the Asus P4P800 onboard digital out and SB Live's.

i dont need to describe with words, just one, the difference is-- significant. i dont have a reasonable explanation, they both upsample to 48KHz, they both received by Denon DCD-S10. i would thought both are digital, both should sound the same as the same DAC was used. but they just didnt. :xeye:
 
i recently did comparison between "sound blaster live!" and external dac "ciaudio"(spdif signal fed from sb live!)
i tried real hard to notice any difference :) , with closed
yes, different kinds of music, fast input switching. nothing. no difference. same sound, imaging, everything.
and i quickly noticed difference with monica dac, it softens
tsss tsss high sounds. maybe it has high frequency roll off,
i didn't measure it.
so, to me, external dac does not
offer any advantage over high quality sound card.
 
MisterTwister said:
i recently did comparison between "sound blaster live!" and external dac "ciaudio"(spdif signal fed from sb live!)
i tried real hard to notice any difference :) , with closed
yes, different kinds of music, fast input switching. nothing. no difference. same sound, imaging, everything.
and i quickly noticed difference with monica dac, it softens
tsss tsss high sounds. maybe it has high frequency roll off,
i didn't measure it.
so, to me, external dac does not
offer any advantage over high quality sound card.
You know that the SB Live has a hardware lock on 48k samplerate ? so it really doesn't matter whether you use the DAC of the live or an external, the upsampling is already done. So your sound will be damaged all the way...
 
Moderator
Joined 2002
Paid Member
I can't use my CD player any more. Just too used to my PC.

I have an old machine (A643200+, nForce3 board) that is dedicated to music listening. An e-Mu 1212M performs DA internally, and is a candidate for modding and upgrade. The TV doubles up as a monitor.

Apart from the fact that it blows my NAD c521 (modded) out of the water in the midrange, it is way too convenient, with playlists, full remote control once you add a wireless keyboard/mouse.

All my CDs are ripped to Wav files, can't bear to listen to MP3 on this system. Only deficiency is a slightly lean bass (compared to both the NAD and my M-audio Delta 66).
 
I am using a passively cooled pc in my living room as my transport.

A couple of things that I can recommend.

Operating system.

I have been using Windows Media Centre as my operating system. Untill recently I was using XPMCE though recently upgraded to VistaMCE.

Firstly using MCE makes the whole system come together. The PC takes over from your CD player, Video Recorder, TV the lot. Another nice feature is you can recieve internet broadcasts as well....

Secondly... Changing to Vista is a worthwhile upgrade, particularly if you are using an internal soundcard. The way Vista manages its sound is much better than XP did. The quality is audibly better.

Thirdly... Vista manages TV recording better as well. They have made some improvements on quality.

The MCE remote is easy to use and makes navigating your music collection a joy.

I was using a SB Live 24. (Dont really like it) but now its purpose is to send SPDIF to my back from retirement Cambridge Audio DacMagic1. My plan next is to build a USB or firewire DAC.

So IMHO thumbs up for convenience, functionality and if you are going the PC route, Vista Media Centre is the only software I would use.

PS. I am finding Vista a little buggy, but I am not sure wether it is the very slow processor I am using, the network drive that has never been perfect or just MS teething problems.
 
alleycat said:
I think that a USB DAC gives you maximum versatility. You can use it with any PC or laptop, and no hassles when you decide to upgrade.


I completely agree. However integration is undoubtedly preferable expecially in a livingroom.
This is my system, basically a mini-pc plus an usb dac:

http://www.simonecapretti.eu/Audio/MoSAP2/MoSAP2.htm

The usb dac is the DDDAC1543MK2 already well known in this forum.

The only drawback in comparison to a standalone CD-player is the noise of the harddrive.
I hopefully waiting for a 500Gb static harddisk... :)
 
I go this way too, Sangram – all CDs are ripped onto hard disk (FLAC in my case) and put away. There is so much more you can do with your music collection stored electronically as compared to physical media that CDs feel obsolete today. Searching for one specific track among 10 thousands other tracks for example. Imagine going through all the 600 physical CDs and compare that to simply specifying search condition in your music library manager/player. Or playing random tracks from your collection, or making perceived volume level for all tracks equal. And then we have cover art images and other pertinent info such as Artists, Album, and Track names automatically displayed on your big screen. And playlists, and party mode, and…

I also agree on your MP3 view. While 320 kbit/sec MP3 isn’t bad at all, it is excellent in fact; it is not the same as lossless. There are some clearly hearable differences if you use good audio equipment and there is some kind of boring, all-equalizing fog over the music if you listen a lot to MP3. There are also some subtle differences in timbre for individual instruments. Acoustic guitar decays much faster in MP3 and drums and cymbals are much more dry.

You are saying that e-Mu 1212M DAC is better than NAD c521 DAC in the midrange and that M-audio Delta 66 and NAD c521 DACs are better than e-Mu 1212M DAC in the bass area. Could you compare NAD to M-audio?
 
Moderator
Joined 2002
Paid Member
Actually the NAD has a slightly more pleasant sound, mellow and the detail is delivered slightly differently, 'cloudy' isn't the right word, maybe 'misty'.

The Pro cards are a little harsher on bad recordings and sound, since they are not 'voiced' (though I doubt products at the price pint of this NAD are 'voiced'). And a horrible amount of output offset on the mAudio (>8mV!) that requires amps to have an input cap. the 1212 by comparison has about .1mV on its output, so can feed an amp directly without issues.

The NAD uses a 1710u/5532, and the Delta uses a combination DAC from AKM. The 1212M is CS4398 with some NJM/JRC opamps, forgotten which ones.

As for the bass, the NAD trounces everything else pretty soundly, and the differences in midrange don't stand out enough to notice except under critical listening, so the biggest factor is really having 300 CDs in CD-Quality without having to get up and change them, wins me over. Can switch from Sheryl Crow to Bruce Springsteen to Counting crows, is three button presses as compared to three walks.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.