N.B. I forgot to mention that I also tested my Audiocom Signature modified Oppo 105D and Marantz CD-94 MkII along with the rest. Had to cut that part out to make it short! N.B. 2 After the video I also did a blind test with my wife (she has very good ears) and my daughter (8 years old). She noticed a fairly big difference as players and just some differences as transports (wasn't expecting that). As player she preferred the Ayon as transport the majority!
Good video, and so truthful, that you express about the shock about the minimal differences between the CD-Transports. My experience in Comparison of two Cd-Transports was something else: McIntosh MCT 80 (5980 Euro) vs Audio Analogue AADrive (2450 Euro). The MCT 80 sounded more detailed and more fluid than the italian product. After it I heard the compact BlueRay-Player Panasonic DMB-BBT01 EG (349 Euro) via Toslink-Cable. And the difference to the MCT 80 was bigger than that of the Audio Analogue. The Panasonic is from ten years ago. Is it possible, that modern cheap transports are so much better?
The first sample sounded more dynamic with more sound stage but only marginally. The big question is how little do you have to spend to achieve the sound quality of the Ayon? If you're going to buy a CD transport it might as well have the convenience of a CD changer like the Yamaha CD-C603 or SACD Playback like the Yamaha CD-S1000 or DVD-Audio playback. I'd love to see some of these thrown into the ring and tested. Also I'd like to hear a selective range of DACs with the Ayon. €200 - €500 - €1000 price ranges Great video and thank you for taking the time to put it together.
@anadialog thanks a lot! During COVID time me and my friends had a lot of time so we did a test... 3 different DAC converters, 3 different transports, 4 different CD players used as transports and 2 cheap DVD players including one found in the trash. We tested them for 2 days ... conclusion: 1. before you come up with the idea of buying an independent transport - listen for yourself! 2. To discover the nuances of the chosen transport, you must have a really good set and have "experience in listening"! 3. The DAC will have a greater impact on the sound, not the transport itself! 4. Calculate how much you want to spend on a new transport and DAC - because you will 99.9% get a greater effect by investing this money in a new amplifier and/or speakers!
Fully agree, more impact is speaker, after amps. Anyway a good transport can give you a better user experience in terms of of silence of usage or appearance. I have old Technics SL-PS900 as transport. Not the best for sound but wonderful.
Shocking Review. I can't tell you how happy I am that I stumbled upon this video of yours while I was looking to upgrade my CD transport. My understanding, If it were tested with a 1000 euro CD transport instead of a 40 euro CD transport, the difference will be much more difficult to notice. I'm much clearer about which direction to go now. Thanks a lot Guido. 🙏
Thanks for this! Appreciate your honesty and style. I had a very different experience when I recently purchased an Arcam CD5 based on reviews which touted qualities I like. I did an A/B comparison with my Vecteur L4 CD (used as transport), and the result was VERY easy to hear. The Arcam sound and images were thin and laterally compressed while the Vecteur's sound was full, rich, and compelling. In addition, the soundstage was completely different as well, the Arcam's being somewhat anemic while the Vecteur's was LUSH. So, while your comparison was pretty stunning in its findings (Majority vs Ayon!), my comparison of two transports more closely aligned in supposed quality and cost was stunning in another way; it showed that transports can sound INCREDIBLY different. Cheers!
I appreciate the honesty and straight way of this presentation. As old saying declares: even with the best transport, the digital one wont be onner and the zero wont be zeroer. Digital 1 is 1 with the scrap transport and with the state of the art transport too. There might be minor diferences, of course. So fully agree.....
I did this experiment 3+ years ago. My main player is a Panasonic DVDA player that cannot play CDRs, MP3s or SACDs. For a secondary player I tried several DVD & Blu-ray players with a Schiit Modi DAC. The test CD had a blemish & a small scratch. Only the Sony BDP-S1700 & S6700 Blu-ray players* played thru the CD defects, so I settled on the S1700 as my secondary player. *an S3700 should work too. Most modern DACs are good**. What sets them apart is the quality of: the DAC's output buffer amplifier, the amplifier's power supply decoupling & the use of good analog electrical engineering principles in design & layout of the DAC & printed circuit board. **the DAC should contain a phased-lock-loop circuit to remove jitter*** from incoming clock. ***cheap players cannot afford a low jitter clock.
Congratulations on an honest test and for confirming what basic science shows us about digital audio transmission! It’s great to see someone recognize that, as long as the digital signal reaches the DAC intact, even a super cheap transport can sound as good as a high-end one. Digital audio is transmitted as data, and the DAC’s job is to convert it into sound, handling any timing or jitter issues along the way. Many of us already know this, which is why we often rely on affordable transports paired with quality DACs for excellent sound. Also the same applies with streamers, we know a cheap Raspberry Pi does as good a job as a high-end streamer as long as they are both connected to the same DAC. Yet people still choose to spend several thousand dollars on a streamer that doesn't sound better than a Raspberry Pi. Subscribed. PS: Some AliExpress CD transports look really beautiful with gorgeous wooden details and slick modern designs. And with the right DAC they also sound amazing!
That’s a bombshell! You are demonstrating “expectation bias” - expecting your more expensive component to sound better! Love your work, and your focus on the OG elements of HiFi that are where my heart lies. Back in California I also have two pairs of Altecs (16 ohm Flamencos and 16 ohm 1957 604C/D. Love your Model 19s. I’m in a small studio in Hawaii until the end of the year so I have to be space conscious and have the smallest Klipsch RP-500m II running from a 10W Pass First Watt SIT-4 from a nice digital source. A lot of sound quality in a small footprint. Maybe next year when I relocate back the mainland US I will submit both systems to your channel: 1) analog: TT and tube into the 604 and 2) digital: DAC into SIT-4…into the Flamencos or possibly DeVores for smaller footprint and attractive design in a main living room. Again thanks for all of the great content. Mahalo!
Thank you for being honest,if I were in your shoes I'd be in therapy in a mental institution,$10.000.00 vs a $35.00 cd transport or stand alone was so so close I'm speechless as to both tests were horrifying close and I'm in shock!!!!! You must do a part 2 or follow up to this.
The honesty is invaluable here. Even to say that there is a very subtle difference or practically no difference indicates that the differences are small enough to be less important than many other much larger factors like ambient noise, the listener's level of physical fatigue, and the temperature of the drivers in the loudspeaker or headphone. Obviously many of us will still hammer away at the last tiny details, but this lets us all know that transports are not going to be big game changers. Even knowing exactly what he's listening to, Guido has no motivation to find the lack of differences that he has.
Data is data and when they are identical, so is the sound. In fact, any CD drive that can manage computer app files must have perfect data read capability or it simply won’t work. The notion you have to pay anything extra for a “transport” to sound superior is plain idiocy. Best argument for these overpriced boxes is the enclosure cosmetics.
@@ity1311 Streaming win also on not having any mechanical noise besides providing much more music, costing less, provide much higher music resolution (data bandwidth) and no errors (lossless and no CD scratches).
Thanks so much for your honesty. I was expecting a significant difference through their own DAC more than the transport. I could detect a difference but not an amount I would be happy with paying the extra. I still use my CD transport and am happy with size and quality of the Project player.
I wasn't surprised about outcome being used as transports but as players that surprised me and I basically did this test almost 20+ years ago with a used CD player I'm still using today and 2 high end CD players at the time my dad had. Back then that was a more noticeable difference with the internal DACs.
Totally understand why it is hard to 1) do this and 2) share this kind of result but you are AWESOME for sharing it. I have done a lot of A/B tests of different transports--hoping to find a difference honestly. I haven't been able to decide which is which reliably in a blind test so I am not surprised with this result. Keep doing your thing. You got a subscribe out of me for this!
Great and honest vid. And yes, as a transport super close but with the internal dacs, the Majority had quite a smeared low end and nasty sibilance on the higher frequencies. Cheers.
In the first set of rips, I thought "B" had very slightly better transient definition perhaps at the expense of some air. In the second set of rips, I also preferred "B." Between the first "B" and the second "B", I preferred the second "B." It had a slightly better definition on the vocals and some more air in general over the first "B." However, the differences were very slight. Thanks for another fascinating video!
no way, in both situations i picked out the better player, without playback or lying about it. and in a room in front of your system there will be more differences, but also the differences are definatly not justifying the price difference.
16 Bit 44 kHz PCM is absolutely no rocket sience. If the data can be read by the transport without any error correction altering the data its identical. In fact you can compare the files bit by bit and get the same result. Nice honest test you did here ❤
Thanks for another great video, Guido. Very much appreciate your honesty. If it’s any consolation, when you played the track through their own DAC, i immediately heard the better sound coming from the Ayon 35 mk2.
@@anadialog There’s some truth in that but i figure the price difference will be also be in how quiet the player spins, how much sturdier it is built, its longevity (my Technics, Akai, JVC, Marantz, NAD dedicated CDPs all stood the test of time. I don’t believe any of my DVD players ever did. - Van (Belgium)
I've ran these tests myself with different CD players comparing a 30 dollar one vs a 330 dollar one and a 110 dollar one. When hooked up to a DAC they all sounded the same. With analog out only the $30 one sounded any different but that I think is because the RCA outputs were SO badly designed that there was an issue. I applaud you for this video and the fact you're not peddling snake oil on this.
On my channel the empirical audiophile I have tested the McIntosh DA converter compared it to a Conrad johnson premiere 9 tube DA converter. They are both night and day different. The McIntosh sounds digital while the Conrad Johnson sounds more analog. They are both very revealing DA converters, but they sound completely different from each other.
Very interesting video. With the number of people watching RUclips for self validation, I am sure you will get a lot of interesting comments. 🙂 I guess the only question remaining about these cheap players is about their consistency and durability over time.
Indeed it's a topic that gets a lot of people worked up for reasons unknown to me. It really doesn't matter if it makes a difference. I could blindly determine which machine is which - but that is completely irrelevant for the rest of the world. Actually, the only real reason I got a (relatively) expensive transport is that I want it to last for at least 20 years - 17 to go now.
. Why would a Transport have an expensive, temperature controlled Clock when 99% of DACs will ignore & re-clock anyway? I don't want to pay for useless features. Acid Jazz, Funk & Brass 🔈🔉🔊
I was shocked as i was listening with my HD820 headphones. In track 2, I could hear even more difference in the first note of the Acoustic Bass and, overall, sharper and maybe more separation. Then, I tried using my monitoring system(Focal Trios), and I got the same result i heard. (My room and speakers are relatively treated, and the call is rated.) Maybe there is still a little bit of a loudness difference normalizing them that makes this illusion. But i could listen to the difference and don't know this album to judge which one is the nearest to the absolute master as i noticed more overall sharpness in track two. The first note of the AC Bass is different in these two tracks, and, of course, track number one sounds more flat and suitable as the reference, but as you mentioned, i was expecting a huge difference(even10%), which is critical environment less is more:) Thanks for your great videos. Most people and new generations don't know what an excellent listening environment and high-quality sound are.✨
Another interesting video Guido, but my experience of this sort of thing is quite different. I have an Oracle CD1500mkll in my main system and recently added a Denafrips Venus ll DAC-the DAC in the Oracle being a 15yr old 128x overampler is very good but a bit lacking in midrange warmth/fullness. The Venus fixed that beautifully to my ears-much more analogue to my old ears but that's what I grew up with. I still listen to analogue FM radio on an ancient Naim NAT-01 and vinyl on an Qracle Delphi V turntable. Context aside, I tried out my 20yr old Cambridge Azur cdplayer (£250 back then) as transport into the Venus out of interest and was gobsmacked at the the difference, the Cambridge definitely benefited from the better DAC but was nowhere near the Oracle by any parameter. I know time and tech wait for no man, but in my experience well designed, well implemented and well built kit stands the test of time. Which suits me fine as I am not a neurotic box swapper continually chasing imaginary perfection. It is all an illusion afterall. But good food for thought-this will definitely jangle a lot of gear first audiophiles. Maybe not a bad thing.... Love your channel and sharing of your own audio journey. Hoots from Sunny Scotland
Hey! Thanks for sharing your experience. For me the question of the video is still standing because I am sure that others like you are genuinely experiencing a more pronounced difference
FM....I used to live very close to New York City and used to listen to fm all the time on either a McIntosh 65b tuner or to go back a bit further a McIntosh MR55a tuner. To me they both sounded great. I also used to listen to AM on a Fisher TA600 which had great bass and made AM stations sound marvelous.
My understanding regarding digital input is that bits are bits so transports funtion perfectly or do not function at all. Dacs are different. I bought a schitt modi 3+ about 4 years ago. Previously i had been playing my digital collection through the analog output on my dell latitude laptop. I was skeptical that the modi would make a difference. It made a world of difference. I was honestly blown away by the improvement. It was real and dramatic.
Wow, truly amazing a great review. This brings me back to the test you had done by a university of the copper materials structure in a type of fancy interconnect - well done !
Don't forget to count the number of oxygen atoms in the copper or lack of them or is that in the sterling silver in the wires.............you know oxygen pure bs yadda yadda.........
Very honest review, Guido, unlike most of the stuff audiophiles tend to post here. The only thing in which a CD transport can influence is jitter, but that’s a problem we solved more than 30 years ago. That being said, if you take the digital output of two distinct players in working condition, one really cheap, and other really expensive, record them (digitally) to audacity and compare the files, you’re going to see they are completely IDENTICAL, down to every single bit. That being said, the only thing that can influence the sound that comes out of any kind of CD player is it’s analog components, like the DAC’s power supply, amplifier or low pass filter. The whole transport thing is just snake oil, mathematically proven. Get a CD transport that you know that will last long, or just something you find aesthetically pleasing, hook it up to a good DAC, and enjoy perfect digital sound without having to sell your two kidneys. As to why people tend to hear differences between two transports, even when the same DAC is used, it happens because they WANT to hear these differences, maybe not deliberately, but subconsciously. The best way to prove it sounds identical is to perform an all digital recording (hook it up optically or via the coax cable to a PCM recorder at 16-bit 44.1khz and then check the files later). They should be exactly the same.
Yet it's clearly audible and directly traceable back to particular transports. No one disputes the DATA is identical, yet something else - electrical noise being passed to the DAC perhaps - results in differing sound quality.
@VideoArchiveGuy The data is all there is. There's nothing else going on. Audiophiles in my opinion are deliberately ignorant to the matters of psychology that affect how they perceive things. It's just an absolute cognitive bias festival. 😂
3:14 I paid only $15 for a 2010 model Sony Blu-ray player that can also play SACDs at a thrift store. I don't really use it as my V60 is more than sufficient in nearly all cases. The reason you probably don't notice a difference in your rips could be that the audio itself is passing through the Lyra's own internal DAC. It's worth doing a video to test the V60 DAC because my internal testing showed that it was better than even my brother-in-law's DJ equipment.
Wow, you totally confirmed what I had suspected for a long time about CD transports… Thank you so very much for your honesty and at the same time I’m sorry for you as well. That answer has to kinda sting. I appreciate you making this video and you have one more subscriber now 😁
Just wanted to thank this gentleman for the time he took and for the uploading, being honest, just sharing what he feels is right. I also want to thank all the commenters, all of you folks put together are helping me 'put together', lol, a newer system, kinda.
Even on my iPhone I thought track A was the better transport. Here’s my experience. I have a jays audio cdt3 mk2. I changed to a better digital cable and heard clear improvements. I then got a Lector CD transport and the difference in sound was immediately obvious. It gave a darker sound and there was more inner detail. A quick Google search showed that others had found the same. The improvements are mostly subtle and depend on how good the rest of your system is. Some improvements like naturalness take a bit longer to appreciate. I have made numerous improvements to my system and they all add up. 10 very minor tweaks might be almost indiscernible on their own but when combined give an obvious improvement. Bottom line is digital sounds great even when done cheaply, but there are many improvements that can be made to get it closer to the vinyl nirvana.
i have listened to first track comparison. you are right. there are minor diferences in bass region, a bit fuller sound from expensive transport. from cheap transport sound is straight line, a bit sound like mp3 compression, but better.
After years of working in Hi-Fi I have come to the conclusion that all things sound more alike than not, and the more you are around gear the more it all blurs together and the novelty wears off. I still love it, don’t get me wrong, but it isn’t magic, it’s more a science and a simple one at that but with a touch of art. Differences are always very subtle if at all. Now I just look for products that have objective science backing them up, and plainly state that they are going for accuracy/transparency. The pixie dust and snake oil be damned. I’m not saying don’t buy expensive components, and I’m not saying that boutique tube amps for example aren’t cool, but don’t be fooled by them either.
It’s a bit like wine tasting, if you drink it immediately and compare and concentrate, maybe spit it out after you can tell the difference. Start drinking and multitasking and getting drunk off it and it becomes less apparent. Same goes for music, the less you focus on the details the more it sounds the same.
How about the differences between cd players using their internal dacs through their rca outputs. Presumably you would say there would be little difference in sound quality between ones of the same price, say around £700. What about the differences between one at £700 and one at £2000 ?
@@Chris-nd5se it depends on the individual products themselves. Some CD players have legitimately good DACs. As for DACs, find one that is measurably transparent, and that’s all you need. For example an Eversolo A8 or an RME ADI-2 sounds better to me though subtlety than some much more expensive DACs. And those two are measurably transparent. In my experience stuff that falls into the “mid-fi” price bracket tends to be the best value. A lot of entry level stuff leaves much to be desired but a lot of Uber hi-fi stuff is just ridiculous.
I have to admit I was flabberghasted by the closeness of the two and have to admit that, in the case of the transport-only test, I guessed incorrectly.
I went quickly into the A-B testing when i saw their section's titled early in on the bar-menu, i don't normally comment before seeing all of a video but in this case.. (just in case I hear something that might psychologically taint my first impressions & make me want to go back & reconsider what i heard as unaltered each time in test A & B & a good few times too by sliding back where each time I thought Test A had a more tuneful & deeper bass & lower end. I did wondered v.slightly if in test-B, her vocal might be a tad more prominent but my perceived 'drop' in lower frequencies of Test B, like all below 350'ish hertz where the "richness" of voice & music tone lays, (to various degrees & equipment dependent) ..may have given that impression, but I ='ly slightly preferred her voice in test A. (heard via tv's digi-out into arcam surround amp but set to 'stereo direct' which turn off the sub* (*only o.k. 4'films i.m.o. & speakers) ..& switched to play through the main stereo's floor'standers, as I do for hearing or A - B'ing hi-fi equipment on-Tube, subtleties can be heard with good vid' recordings) Now I'll watch all the video. P.S. i genuinely expected to hear no difference at all or struggle very hard to hear one, that was not the case. In total ignorance of what costs & spec's the transports have & what info' may follow in the vid, if now offered any one of the 2 after what I heard, i'd have to choose test A's transport.
It would have been nice to see pure digital recodings of the audio output of both players. Then comparing the audio with software such as Audacity to prove that there is no difference when using them as transports. (I personally did this test and there was literally 0 samples of difference when comparing two identical files.) Techmoan does this when comparing audiophile snake oil and every time, it proves that literally no difference is present in the audio.
This is true. Improvements in CD technology and error correction means that most equipment can do a bit-perfect transfer. In the early days, there were a lot of variations between players but that's more or less gone.
Excellent video content. I have come around to just using my computer and a decent DAC and an external computer disc drive. I really like ripping on M-Discs and SSD hard drives and just rip straight uncompressed files. The large scale A/B testing of DACs, $7 versus the world, seemingly compels the notion that DACs are overrated as well but the output of the newly formed analog stream needs a properly designed analog output preferably into a pre-out for me. I like to avoid dedicated preamplifiers if possible. There is a lot of confirmation bias in wanting to believe the $70k CD transport is far superior to anything lesser. If the CD mechanism and laser reader are able to accurately read and output a clean digital stream and that stream is pushed through the audio chain accurately, then after that do what you think best with that digital stream. I absolutely love the fact that cool expensive things exist. I am no ASR drone. I think that if you are going to devote your time and treasure to music listening focus on the speakers and to a lesser extent the amplifier. I tend to like a bit of harmonic distortion but that is personal preference. Just my opinion and not here to argue about it.
Okay those who say transports sound different do Hard drives or USB stick sound different because this is what you are saying, I would say that better transports read scratched discs better and are more reliable and longer lasting to a degree providing parts are available. As for DAC's is it the DAC chip or the analogue stage that makes a difference I suspect the latter. So if I do hear differences what is actually better what I prefer or what measures better?
Hi Guido, Interesting video and topic. I have been in the Audio World for many years now. Done a lot of listening to everything out there since the 1980's. Tried SET'S and many different brands etc. I ended up with what I thought at the time was the best of both worlds! You spoke on Transformers, Tubes etc. I got tired of needing to match Output Tubes when time to upgrade etc I like your McIntosh 30's! I had 2 225's.25watts a channel! Ran in Mono with Mark Levinson Dual Mono Pre Amps with separate power supplies for each Pre Amp! Those were the days! ML 6's as I remember! Anyway, I ended up fascinated with the OTL concept! I went with Atma-Sphere M60 Mono's Balanced! All Point to Point Wiring and the nicest thing was they use inexpensive Tubes! They don't need to be matched either. There are 8 per amp and I bought a bunch when Sovtek was available in The New York from main distributor! The amps have a very fast slew rate which seems to have great benefits to the sound! The Bass is Soo much better that the SET's that I have heard. The Soundstage also wide and deep! I believe Ralph Karsten is a Genius and when the Circlotron Design Pattent ran out from the early 1950's I think. He picked it up and started working on his improved version by adding a true balanced design! Using multiple Single End Triode Tubes that were readily available and didn't need expensive matching etc. Hence: The best of both worlds! For me anyway! I'm into Music more than playing around with Tube rolling etc. Been there done that! Anyway. I owned several versions of the Atma -Sphere amps. From the 200 watts per channel to the 100 watts per channel to the M60's at 60 watts per channel! Like Goldilocks and the 3 bears! I ended up with these! So just my thoughts on the Tube Amp discussion! Goldenears
Thanks for sharing your experience, always interesting to learn about one’s journey. There is always something to learn. You seem to have found your balance and that is priceless! The Atma-spheres seem amazing!
I remember transports and dacs from early 90's, the arguments about jitter and error correction etc, we had items like the Sony CDP-R1/DAS-R1 combo (saved for two years for this combo in the early 90's just for it to end up not being shipped), CD transports built like battle ships. We had items like the Marantz CD-63, tin and plastic. I also remember later hearing the TEAC VRDS T1 outperform the Technic's SL-PA10. Both looked impressive and both in the same middle road price point of £500, though the VRDS was not actually a VRDS mechanism, and the SL-PA10 was appalingly basic inside, simply the same transport mechanism as lesser costly complete players in a heavy good looking case, with only optical output. The Teac simply had better digital output circuitry and internal layout. Much of this was in the days before dacs vastily improved, I remember even someone involved Benchmark in an old forum argument commenting that indeed with old dacs there was more need and more noticeable differences with some transports and dacs. To this day I would rather have a really well made CD transport if using CD into a dac, but modern pricing has went insane, and its now simply basic components in heavy cases. Modern dacs have made the importance of acurate read once transports less of an issue, but there is no pride of ownership in having some tin box running a DAC's error correction circuits into overdrive. I am a ludite, I rarely listen to CD in this age of streaming, yet still run items like Theta, Genesis, EAD legacy digital sources with the old CD standard dacs for those old CD's, but if I ever need a new DAC, I wont be spending £8000 on a model when there are plenty of sub £1000 models available that actually do 90% plus of the performance.
TDLR (however that goes). I'm 61, very new to 'new' HiFi. Everyone's help and opinions, are appreciated. Although you're probably going to be laughing soon... Other than using an older Onkyo TXNR 686 receiver with some Klipsch floor speakers, my only other 'system' I've used is (was, they're boxed up) most of my life is my Yamaha m80/c80/t80 setup that I bought back in 1984-85, when I was on Okinawa. I don't remember off the top of my head the model number of the Yamaha speakers or the Yamaha CD player I bought back then (I'd never heard of a CD, until I went to Okinawa, they were the most incredible thing!), I'm too lazy to go pull them out and look at the model numbers... Anyhow, back to the Onkyo...I just bought and hooked up tonight, a Modi, plugged into an AudioLab 6000CDT. I plugged in some really old optical/cable/rca's I've had laying around for years. Tonight was my very first experience with a DAC/new CD player. My headphones, you folks are going to laugh (I doubt anybody has made it this far, lol), but I'm using sennheiser's Xbox game 1 (something like that) headphones. I have learned a lot recently from all of you folks, that speakers and headphones should be a priority. And to me that makes sense, because that's where we're listening through. But at the moment, these sennheisers are all I have. So using the Xbox series x player, keeping the volume the same on the amplifier and headset, I compared the Xbox with the Onkyo/new stuff/old cables. I don't know how to describe it, but there was a difference, a difference that I preferred toward the Onkyo setup. So keeping with the newer setup, using the Modi switch (I hope it doesn't blow it up) but as the music played through the 6000cdt, I used the Modi switch to switch back and forth between the optical and the cable inputs and there was a difference to me. I prefered the optical, although, regardless, what an incredible sound difference in the music I've listened to for years, seems new. Anyhow... However, I don't have any good cables to swap out, I'll be ordering some, just so I know I've got the newer stuff. I'll finally finish by saying that, I can remember back then when I bought the new Yamaha gear (with my Laser Disk player! What?!), I did have headphones for the barracks, I just don't recall what they were, but oh my gosh, what a difference plugging in a CD, with the m80 's meters bouncing, tweaking the knobs on the 'parametric', I think it's called, equalizer! It just sounded so incredible, it's hard to believe that it wouldn't sound any good anymore, compared to this new stuff. If the uploader deletes my 50 paragraph comment, I understand, if anyone's made it this far, I appreciate each and every one of you, because actually, this is really a fun experience! Ron, Yosemite California.
Thanks for sharing that and glad to see you are enjoying your system, regardless the level. It’s cool that you got your gear early directly at Okinawa, were you were stationed there?
@@anadialog Yes. Kadena Air Base. I was part of the Air Naval attachment, from the island of Diego Garcia. Cool info, back then, the SR-71 (Japanese refer to it as Habu) was stationed there.
Interesting! I had a similar experience. I have a PrismSound Callia DAC, and at one stage I was using a $50 DVD player to play CDs. So then for the sake of improvement, I got a Rotel CD11 Tribute player ($600 or so) - and I couldn't tell the difference. However, more recently I was lucky enough to get a 1983 Revox B225 CD player. It has dual mono Philips TDA1540 DACs and the CDM0 transport. And - it sounds amazing! To be honest it doesn't sound like it's playing CDs at all; it sounds more like my turntable. I would suggest that trying a vintage CD player might be just the ticket for those looking for a less "digital" sound from CDs (in fact the B225 doesn't even have a digital out).
Thanks! I actually did, I also tested my Marantz CD-94 MKII (which includes a TDA1541 single crown) as a transport but not much of a difference once again. As a player, sure! Here is the video of the Marantz: ruclips.net/video/ByClVQevxqo/видео.htmlsi=PN8n4DDK5JMtGhRX
@@anadialog My friend's Arcam Alpha 5+ that he uses a transport (or CD player) uses the same DAC chip and Philips CDM 9 mechanism. It sounds great as a transport. Maybe it's missing some resolution but I could listen to his system all day. He is a boutique cable manufacturer and electronic maven who built very fine electronics and modified the Arcam (5 Sparkos regulators, Panasonic storage caps, etc). Big difference is in bass-his $1000 mini-monitors have a 4.5" mid-woofer and a high end soft dome tweeter, me-$110,000 Von Schweikert VR9 SE Mk2 with 15" Foundation Class D amp powered built-in subs. First time he recognized that someone has a better sounding system.
huh. less digital i mean what does digital sound like to you to begin? vinyl is almost always from digital ps (unless from about 95’ and earlier l), and the fidelity from cd is actually better that vinyl. crazy huh
@@chinmeysway I have 31,300 LPs which are not from digital masters. I also have 16,600 CDs which derive from analog and digital recordings. With either my Topping D70s or Lampizator Poseidon, digital when the mastering/remastering is well accomplished, sounds as good as analog even if it often sounds different. I have a higher end system to compare with a Jay's Audio CDt3 Mk3 transport, pair of Westminster Lab REI monoblock amps and the aforementioned Von Schweikert VR9 SE Mk2 upgraded speakers. My analog is a VPI TNT VI upgraded, Townshend seismic sink, radically upgraded SME IV and Dynavector 20x2L (so, it sounds beautiful and dynamic with 90% of my LPs).
" It has dual mono Philips TDA1540 DACs and the CDM0 transport. And - it sounds amazing! " You are aware that the TDA1540 DAC is a 14 bit (yes 14 not 16) DAC? "To be honest it doesn't sound like it's playing CDs at all; it sounds more like my turntable." The resolution of a very good turntable playing a vinyl LP is comparable to about 10 bit So yes - the TDA1540 is "closer" to a turntable 🙂
Hi Guido, transport wise I've also similar experience and therefore focus on external DAC. My assumption is with newer players, they are all more or less using the same mechanical/optical transport, as not many are producing high quality CD componets anymore! Therefore I prefer vintage player, like my lovely modified Sony's by Swobodia Audio, those are in a different league, like Accuphase DP 720. Any you also see why the very good vintage CD laser/transport are not available anymore 😉
I had kind of come into this expecting that there wouldn't be much difference when comparing the CD players as a transport. It is the DAC that is most important here and what affects the sound most. I COULD hear a difference when the CD players with their own DACs were played and the B clip definitely had better stereo separation and was clearer. However, both CD players with the DAC is better and frankly, I couldn't tell the difference. While some might argue about clock issues and transport build and stability, but I think you can get that in a any higher grade home, or even a commercial CD transport. I have had Pioneer CD/DVD transports that lasted for YEARS and the reason being is that they are well built. I mostly use the DVD players because they seem to handle burned discs better. Also most have both Toslink and Coaxial digital outs. I just bought myself a Pioneer V8000 DVD player because I wanted a display. I only paid $70 for it and the unit is built like a tank! I am probably going to pair this up with a Geshelli J2 DAC as I have heard very good reviews about that DAC. So that would be my "hi end" CD player. No need to spend $600 or more on a CD transport only. Or $1000's on a CD player when an outside DAC is usually better anyway. Save your pasos and do as the OP says. Don't feed the trolls! Oh! as a bonus, the unit will play DVD's too!
My late 90s Sony dvd-cd sounds fine with just a straight rca hookup, though it's clear that you will need a dedicated dac, depending on your system budget, for better soundstage, imaging etc..Like you said. Your ears are the final judgement.
Hi Guido - I've a very nice Japanese, C.E.C. Double-belt drive CD Transport >> a pretty high quality R2R Ladder DAC = As close to analogue, but without the pops/crackles/surface noise/etc. [Although I *do* also* have a decent mid-range Rega t/table w/ a good separate phono pre-amp, too]. I really enjoy the sound of my CD transport w/ seperate DAC combination very, very much. I do like the sound of my AES/EBU cable as the connection source... N.B. I'm not into streaming; it doesn't really interest me that much; nothing for or against the medium whatsoever. I'm not really that obsessed w/ 'bit sample' rates either - a good 'Red Book' non-'brick-walled' CD is fine - overly compressed newer release CD's that I've come across from time to time, though....Yuch! No thanks. CD sounds fine to my 40+ yrs. as a pro-musician/producer/etc. So, I'm very easygoing re; other people's preferred sources - as long as people are still listening to music, then that's a good thing; esp. new artists from the independent labels around the world. So many great new bands/artists around. Thanks, as always for a thought-provoking, interesting, well-balanced video. Very best regards from Japan, (ex-Scotland).
The thing about a transport is it's one of the main areas that use use to interact with the hifi, a smooth CD draw and nice actions on the buttons add to the experience.
Best honest audio review I've ever seen .I too have had high quality audio equipment since the early eighties and only now in my fifties can admit I was wrong. I have started to buy the cheap Chinese audio products which truly amaze me .......
Amazing video! Thanks for making this! Really puzzling with such a "supposed quality gap"! Great public service! Comforting my thoughts about spending more time and money choosing the speakers first and above all!
They both sounded the same to my ears in the first test and honestly I'm not surprised, given that they were digitally transferring the music to the DAC. I recently bought a new transport that only has an HDMI output and that's fine with me, because I'm going to use an external DAC anyway. Even the sound out of the cheap players analogue outputs is pretty good. It just goes to show how good consumer grade converters and audio more generally is now. I'd be interested to see the results up on some test equipment and see if there are any objective, measurable differences.
My suggestion to anyone considering going down the rabbit hole is listen to whatever it is you are interested in the lowest format first and if you like the sound characteristics then try a more expensive version. What you will find is if sound quality is what you like not the sound of a song via genre, lyrics etc is you will waste money trying to make a recording that lacks something to you by spending money on versions and/or equipment. Some stuff just wasn't recorded well.
Very interesting experiment. I used the Questyle M15i dangle and there was noticeable differences between the 2. On the 1st test the Bass was the major difference and on the second test the staging (3D) and her voice was the major differences. Thank you
After downloading the samples I have concluded that the Ayon is clearly superior to the cheaper player. Played back on my system, the Ayon produced a far better soundstage and more solidity and presence in the vocals.
The Majority internal DAC was more sibilant than the Ayon internal DAC. As for using them as transports, as long as both can read the CD and get the data to the outboard DAC reliably and without jitter, I would expect them to sound the same when using the outboard DAC - it is the DAC that you are listening to.
what a cd player does is reading 1s and 0s, like 001100101010111001, and converts it to sound via DAC. as far i know there's also an error correction something built into the cd player. it's same as a harddisk or usb-stick reading 1s and 0s, DAC converting it to sound. correct me if i'm wrong. i'm no audiophile, i'm just a noob, but i like listening to music.
Yes, but there is interpolation and other filters that do have an impact, plus digital signals travel in an analog form (voltage) so many things can go wrong and change. But I guess that the T+A DAC and modern drives are so good that this is greatly reduce now.
Trying this out at home now. Trying to use my Bluesound node as the DAC through the hdmi in from the Majority. Still not working. I did a test with my tv and the Majority is sending pic and sound, then when I try just using with blue sound just as a cd transport…. No go. Any ideas for me would be greatly appreciated!
@@anadialog thanks for your reply! unfortunately it looks like to bluesound only accepts eARC Might try running though TV next. Love the channel and thank you for all of the great videos you keep producing! Best wishes from BK,NY:)
My friend come over with a Jay"s Audio CDT2 MK3 CD Transport, I have a Oppo 103 DVD player, running with my beloved Bryston BDA-3 Dac, we A/B them back and forth as transports. My god there was very little difference, maybe just a hair bit more nuance in the Jays. Am I crazy hearing things or is this the reality of CD transports?. Love your channel, Chow Claudio
Transports made a big enough difference in my setup, especially those that allow one to use an external clock. It made me almost want to relisten to my entire collection. The biggest explanation I can muster is the difference in jitter performance (if you're using S/PDIF). The interesting part is the effect of the clocked transport is not universal i.e. you can hear practically no difference for certain types of music, but a drastic difference in other types of music, most significantly is soprano vocal work. Without clock, when the soprano sings with vibrato note, you can hear an unstable "screech" (hard to describe), that almost instantly gives away that you're listening to digital audio. Once that "screeching" sound is absent with clocked transport (must use a good clock), then it really does approach good analog playback. If one is using asynchronous USB, then the DAC needs to have a very good clock, or can be externally connected to a good clock because the transport will act as the slave clock. I encourage you to try out an Esoteric transport and connect it to an external clock and see if you can identify any differences. Not saying Ayon is not a great player (I'm sure it's a great player), but I've also used a streamer much more expensive than the current Esoteric N-05 with clock and Marantz SA-7S1 with clock, but every time the clocked devices beat out my more expensive streamer that does not have external clockability, when using the same DAC. As always, your miles may vary.
Pardon my inorance, kind person. Why use the streamer as opposed to a PC? I noticed recently many ppl swear by these devices & I have been looking into them but not getting the point of them. Thanks (I'm not dissing u, I'm genuinely curious)
@@Zimmy_1981 My first streaming/NAS system was based on Mac Mini, but the problem with that was music sounded strident and flat. But as my system got upgraded, you really begin to hear the differences in soundstaging, layering, smooth but with high resolution. The system no longer needed to be warm to sound smooth i.e. neutral and smooth is attainable. Several factors played into this: jitter performance with a good clock (external in my case), less EMI interference, no longer needing to rely on noisy switching power supplies. Again I think PC/Mac based servers/streamers are fine, it seems all the elements of music are there at first, but once I switched over to a good transport, music sounded more whole and has more ability to move you emotionally because all the missing elements I didn't realize were missing became more obvious. Hope that helps
My friend has a dac and external clock, i must say i was shocked how analog and good it sounded compared his other dacs.. At some point i must look into these external clocks..
I was kinda expecting that, a bitstream at the end of the day is always the same, if there's a difference it must be in the jitter and/or electrical noise (unless you connect via optical) or maybe ground loops, that it's possible that it's what you hear. As far as re-digitalizing the analog output my guess is that you need a REALLY sensible registering rig in order not to flatten out the differences, something with roughly the value of what is playing. It may seem crazy but to some regards a well trained human ear can be better than a digital ADC on some specific tasks, our spatial positioning of sound is kinda mindblowing, so are certain stuff like ability to distinguish between the pour of cold and hot water, or to feel that the silence sounds different in some conditions like when you are on a mountain. All stuff that we do pretty easily but we fail to describe how we do hear these differences.
I have a CD Transporter Audiolab 9000CDT and a Bluray Player from Panasonic, the DP-UB9004, and I don't hear any differences digitally with coax. The CD transporter will still remain, so I can protect the Panasonic, which only works for films.
Thank you for your work, it confirms my thoughts and observation the last years. I hope this truth reaches more public and CD gain some more attention.
It's a scientific fact, datastream is the same, no matter what transport unit you are using; problem comes when some unit (dvd players) have a no bit-perfect output or lack seamless reading (even some old cd audio transport unit if i'm not wrong). So, cheap units will break before, may be a bit more noisy.. but datastream must be the same, so sound quality depends all on dac and its analog output. That's it, a 30 dollars transport will sound exactly as a 500, 1000, 10.000 bucks one.
@@r423fplip Listen to classical music, and you'll often be able to hear certain CD players during the silence. And it's precisely the newer ones that are noisy. No such problem with my TEAK VRDS 25, but with my latest CD player, whose drive is that of a computer built into a living-room hi-fi box! It's the same when playing a CD on a PC: the motor makes itself heard!
This is the thing about digital music - there is not a huge gulf between the basic gear and the high end gear. It's there (I got the second test right), but the difference is not huge. Analogue, on the other hand is a different matter - there is a _massive_ difference between the information picked up by a Crossley turntable and a Linn Sondek. Some of the equipment B/S about analogue reproduction is actually in part justified because cartridges, arms, etc actually can make a huge difference, but with digital, as you've just demonstrated, it's far more subtle and is often pure, unadulterated B/S. You may just have exploded a bomb underneath the rarefied world of Hifi.
I think you're right, the gulf is not enormous but it can be significant between players. (The difference between enjoyable and compelling.) For phonos, a better question might be about whether the difference between a Linn Sondek and a nicely equipped Pro-ject Carbon is "massive."
At the beginning of this video I assumed the result was clearly the Ayion. Very great honesty in your videos. I came to the same conclusion when I tested my T+A SACD player against my first Technics CD player from the 90s. I can't hear any difference. My ears are not good enough. 👂😭
Well, this was sort of expected. The difference would be their build quality and longevity. I have been using those cheap CD/DVD players and they last not more than a couple years - most likely laser pickup issues, but not worth repair. On the other hand, the Denon transport in my main system has been running for 34 years without a hickup.
Thanks for the very welcome and honest opinions. I do wonder why is it a surprise that quality audio electronics is no longer expensive. We take for granted phones and computers that cost a few hundred dollars that are more powerful, capable and of higher quality than ones that cost many times more ten years ago. Why should hifi be any different? I think may of us might be too embarrassed to admit that most front end digital gear is really rather good and the differences are now very subtle indeed. We like the shiny expensive things and to impress other audiophiles. It also underlines a psychological aspect of our hobby: "it costs more and has more expensive components so it must be better". Not only that, but many of us are into our later years and our hearing is, to be blunt, fairly degraded. I have come to the conclusion that I can no longer hear subtleties between things like digital filters (mainly because the changes are in the higher frequencies) but I can hear more broad effects, such as sound staging, dynamics and bass extension, so I guess that's more of what I value now.
Well I have to say that in both tests (Transports and players) I could guess correctly the expensive one (ayon), There are differences of course, a trained ear can hear them, even through YT and a cheap set of headphones.
I purchased an old Onkyo DX-7500 CD player from the late 80s. At the time it was Onkyo's best player available, and the specs are incredible. It weighs 14lbs and even had a metal tray for the CD. It touts 18x over sampling and has some tech that isolates the power supply from the other components to reduce interference and so on. It was $800 in 1988 which is about $3,000 in today's dollars. It sounds no different than the $250 Onkyo 6-disc changer that they still produce the same.
I'm shocked. In both comparisons, I thought Ayon had the little extra sound as better, but it turned out that Majority played it. There were 3 reference points when listening that I chose to compare. First high tones were better and especially a party with cymbals, second is the letter S which sounded more natural, softer and sounded more like S than Z-ish and third is the dynamics. In both cases I thought it was Ayon who played better but it turned out to be wrong.
High-end cars can be similar. But most enthusiasts know well the difference between a Maserati and a Lamborghini. Some people want status and luxury. Others want the highest possible performance. And they are both correct.
If a transport works properly, there won't be any difference, because they all will output a bit-by-bit perfect stream. Faulty clock or disc reading errors - ta-da! You WILL hear difference. But if all system works as they are intended to do - you won't be able to define which is which during a blind test. A DAC itself (external or internal) WILL obviously sound differently due to different reasons. But transport itself - won't.
Of course everything sounds different. The perception of sound happens in people’s minds and if they imagine it’s going to sound different, it definitely will sound different.
I continue to discover the same thing that it's very hard to hear differences between digital devices. I clearly hear difference between Analog and Digital. I would expect that you'd get a good reading off the disc but possibly more jitter with the cheaper rig. Maybe going into a good DAC corrects that. I'm not surprised that the rips are hard to tell apart. I always have trouble with that. What I can hear between good and cheap digital gear is a difference in the noise floor. That leads to hearing more low-level detail. I don't hear it in your rips on the two players using their built in DACs, but I know I hear it at home. I don't know if that's a product of the conversion or simply better electronics in the more expensive units. Thanks for the video.
Why is no one just recording digital output from both transport and do binary comparison? That will end 'all transport be same' argument one way or another.
Hi Guido. As I have mentioned before cd players aren't a thing one should throw too much money into since no matter what it can never get better than the limitations of the format. If a transport works as it's supposed to you wont get a bang worth the buck, and if the DAC's people spend a fortune on are more than a name/snake oil they will just reveal that we need a format with higher resolution. (Preferably studio resolution so we don't have to settle for compressed medias and the best simply is standard for everyone). One good thing that can be said about the format is that it's probably the most socially fair since everyone can afford decent sound and don't have to envy the wallet swingers who won't get much more than placebo effect for wasting their money. Stay cool Mate. All the best from Denmark.
Obviously we are listening to those different tracks coming from RUclips in phone / tablet speakers. Any different source on this setup will sound alike. I'm absolutely not questioning the judgment of the comparison, but it remains a personal judgment and perception. As we know, in any audiophile system it may have a bottle neck and this can be the DAC, speakers, electronics, the room and so on. If there is any bottle neck elsewhere, the source - despite of its quality - may have a limited impact on the final result. I have had a very different experience when it comes to the quality of the CD transport. Again, we have different setups, different perceptions, different tastes and so on... Not questioning the comparison as it's always nice hearing different opinions. Thanks for sharing!
Well, the tracks are available for download in full resolution like almost all my videos. Personal judgement in perception is partially incorrect, meaning that there are trends, it is not completely subjective just as a good wine, car or the beauty of a girl are true for MOST people, that is what I mean for trends. In this case the digital signal is captured from the analog output of the DAC by a Prosm Lyra 2, a high quality professional converter as the T+A DAC of the first conversion. After discussing with a lot of people it appears clear that the DAC is so good that it is reclocking everything so precisely that the results are almost identical and that is why they sound so good and so similar to each other. The rest of the chain is top notch. I would never do this test and teach these conclusions if I wasn’t sound on all these aspects. People who follow my channel know my honesty and integrity.
I’m sort of not surprised. My understanding from watching a few videos over the year from Paul at PS Audio, there is probably not going to be much different between a CD transport vs a cd/dvd/blueray player connected to a good DAC. This is because the reading technology hasn’t changed much since the late ‘70’s/early 80’s. Now a CD transport with a good DAC can sound better than top of the line Sony player from the 80’s. Like anything, it all depends on your equipment and the sound you are after. I do appreciate your honesty about your listening experience. Recently I saw a RUclips’er who some how finds cherry vintage stuff and who also sells high end stuff as well. The RUclips’er went on for 30+ minutes talking how a $1500 to $3000 CD player was going to sound night and day different than an 80’s CD player connected to a DAC. As you are hoping the RUclips’er was trashed in the comments. For me, I’m a vinyl guy and only get CD’s when it’s the way it was released, usually in the 90’s.
Hi Guido, yes Apple did a lot improve in regards of their ADC architexture 😊 A lot is written about GaN HEMT (electronic magazines). Clever concept he combined, it's too pricey for class-d, but on the other hand look at other hifi-manufacturs out there!, like Avik, Devialet or Naim! My best class-d recommendation is still until today the little LSA Warp1 (price/quality and unusual class- signature. No I'm still not coninced about Class-D! . Thanks for your time & efforts!! Gerald
Well, at least you can hope that the expensive player's transport and optics are more reliable 😂. As for the first test, I am sure that even the perceived differences you mention do not really exist. The same DAC receives the same string of 1s and 0s from 2 different sources and decodes them in the same way - there can be absolutely no difference imo.
WARNING: Google translate :) I didn’t download the samples, I listened on RUclips. In the first test I chose A, I heard the difference only after several dozen listenings, the bass depth is a little more pronounced. In the second test, when I already knew what I needed to listen to, I chose B from the second listen, I realized that it was the same deep bass. Live difference should be more noticeable, so you can rest assured that your Ayon sounds better :) But I’m surprised how well a cheap CD player holds up in terms of price-quality ratio, you can easily use these in your audio system if you don’t have an extra few thousand dollars and you’re not a perfectionist.
back in the 90's I knew so many audiophiles just using playstations to play their CDs... Transport wise, I think expensive transports are a crook. Good external DAC though... for your digital source, this is where money should be spent, imho. Thanks for the vid.
My little Sprout 100 only has room for an optical in for a CD to use the internal Sprout DAC. Is there a converter you can recommend, or another cheap CD transport I should consider? Thanks for taking me to school here. I subscribed to your channel--I'm a newbee
Welcome aboard! The whole difference here, as we have established in the comments, is the reclocking of the DAC. That is why differences are so subtle. Apart from that, it's difficult to suggest a good converter on a budget. I noticed significant improvement only in high-end models besides beeing a segment in constant evolution. The good suggestion in this sense is probably a TOTL Topping. For transports I made a dedicated video some time ago to which I would add the Shangling ET3 (not cheap): ruclips.net/video/Gl563onzwqU/видео.htmlsi=41mLlPi7iKTAMwVu Apart from that, I suggest getting a vintage player. Excellent value for money and excellent sonics! And you can always add a DAC to it just make sure it has at least a SPDIF output.
I totally agree with you on disk spinner, the DAC will make the difference! And in many cases after you get into the $500-$1200 dollar DAC’s you realize you have to step into the $10,000+ neighborhood to realize another significant improvement in sound. Thanks for your review, it is refreshing to hear the unexaggerated truth!
I thought the difference between the Ayon as transport was clear, I immediately felt the relaxed nature of the sound disappeared immediately track B started. It’s the first time I was so confident of which was which on RUclips.
I noticed no real difference between the two when used as transports but I didn't use headphones. When the players used their internal DACs I spotted the Ayon but the difference was subtle.
Im pretty sure that if you use a toslink or a spdif digital output it's impossible to found the default of the transport drive, but the digital to analog output part of the DAC it's another story every DAC shoud sound a little bit different. So a good DAC a good amplifier and speaker make the difference not the drive, it's not the same with tape and LP the mechanical part have an importance.
so, my two cents… Apart from appearance, features, controls, boot time, or possible jitter/errors, zero and ones should be zeros and ones, right? The sound character, separation, tone, etc, are decoded and created by the DACs. Not only am I not surprised that you heard little difference between the dirt cheap and mega bucks players when used strictly as transports, but I wouldn’t be so sure you heard anything replicatably unique. Although I don’t have a separate DAC, I have owned several CD players over the past few years that did sound quite differently. I had an old Sony from the early nineties that just sounded ok, then a Onkyo I purchased new back in 2018, featuring Burr/Brown DACs, which sounded significantly better, but skipped of you simply looked at it wrong. I had two players for a while, an OPPO DVD/CD/SACD player I bought from a customer, as well as an early 2000s Pioneer Elite DVD/SACD player I bought from a neighborhood garage sale for just $10. Side by side, I was surprised when the Pioneer sounded better. Sold the OPPO and kept the Pioneer. It’s sounds marvelous. I have no urge to upgrade unless it dies.
![ANA[DIA]LOG](http://yt3.ggpht.com/K0qr1ndqDdGUyxbMUYesdA0KM3wZ-_upZ4bvQR8Vi_Ie1773eXoIXY2VblfzWYRJnwxd5pVrbXw=s48-c-k-c0x00ffffff-no-rj)
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
N.B. I forgot to mention that I also tested my Audiocom Signature modified Oppo 105D and Marantz CD-94 MkII along with the rest. Had to cut that part out to make it short!
N.B. 2 After the video I also did a blind test with my wife (she has very good ears) and my daughter (8 years old). She noticed a fairly big difference as players and just some differences as transports (wasn't expecting that). As player she preferred the Ayon as transport the majority!
please put them in a second video!!! 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
i was about to suggest that you try something with the legendary philips CDM1, but looks like you got that base covered. :)
Good video, and so truthful, that you express about the shock about the minimal differences between the CD-Transports. My experience in Comparison of two Cd-Transports was something else: McIntosh MCT 80 (5980 Euro) vs Audio Analogue AADrive (2450 Euro). The MCT 80 sounded more detailed and more fluid than the italian product. After it I heard the compact BlueRay-Player Panasonic DMB-BBT01 EG (349 Euro) via Toslink-Cable. And the difference to the MCT 80 was bigger than that of the Audio Analogue. The Panasonic is from ten years ago. Is it possible, that modern cheap transports are so much better?
CD 94? I had a CD 95 that I loved. Belts kept malfunctioning. Had to give up
The first sample sounded more dynamic with more sound stage but only marginally. The big question is how little do you have to spend to achieve the sound quality of the Ayon? If you're going to buy a CD transport it might as well have the convenience of a CD changer like the Yamaha CD-C603 or SACD Playback like the Yamaha CD-S1000 or DVD-Audio playback. I'd love to see some of these thrown into the ring and tested.
Also I'd like to hear a selective range of DACs with the Ayon. €200 - €500 - €1000 price ranges
Great video and thank you for taking the time to put it together.
I have to say that this was probably the most brutally honest video review I've ever seen on RUclips. Well done, well done indeed.
@anadialog thanks a lot!
During COVID time me and my friends had a lot of time so we did a test... 3 different DAC converters, 3 different transports, 4 different CD players used as transports and 2 cheap DVD players including one found in the trash. We tested them for 2 days ... conclusion:
1. before you come up with the idea of buying an independent transport - listen for yourself!
2. To discover the nuances of the chosen transport, you must have a really good set and have "experience in listening"!
3. The DAC will have a greater impact on the sound, not the transport itself!
4. Calculate how much you want to spend on a new transport and DAC - because you will 99.9% get a greater effect by investing this money in a new amplifier and/or speakers!
Nice!
Fully agree, more impact is speaker, after amps. Anyway a good transport can give you a better user experience in terms of of silence of usage or appearance. I have old Technics SL-PS900 as transport. Not the best for sound but wonderful.
Solid advice. I did something similar, not extensive, and came to the same conclusion.
For once, someone who has done the homework and come up with the truth, save your cash for the DAC and analog parts of the system.
huh quite a non explanation on comparing the characteristics sonically of the components you mentioned.
Shocking Review. I can't tell you how happy I am that I stumbled upon this video of yours while I was looking to upgrade my CD transport. My understanding, If it were tested with a 1000 euro CD transport instead of a 40 euro CD transport, the difference will be much more difficult to notice. I'm much clearer about which direction to go now. Thanks a lot Guido. 🙏
You could get two 40 euro players, just in case one goes wrong.
Thanks for this! Appreciate your honesty and style. I had a very different experience when I recently purchased an Arcam CD5 based on reviews which touted qualities I like. I did an A/B comparison with my Vecteur L4 CD (used as transport), and the result was VERY easy to hear. The Arcam sound and images were thin and laterally compressed while the Vecteur's sound was full, rich, and compelling. In addition, the soundstage was completely different as well, the Arcam's being somewhat anemic while the Vecteur's was LUSH. So, while your comparison was pretty stunning in its findings (Majority vs Ayon!), my comparison of two transports more closely aligned in supposed quality and cost was stunning in another way; it showed that transports can sound INCREDIBLY different. Cheers!
I appreciate the honesty and straight way of this presentation. As old saying declares: even with the best transport, the digital one wont be onner and the zero wont be zeroer. Digital 1 is 1 with the scrap transport and with the state of the art transport too. There might be minor diferences, of course. So fully agree.....
I did this experiment 3+ years ago. My main player is a Panasonic DVDA player that cannot play CDRs, MP3s or SACDs. For a secondary player I tried several DVD & Blu-ray players with a Schiit Modi DAC. The test CD had a blemish & a small scratch. Only the Sony BDP-S1700 & S6700 Blu-ray players* played thru the CD defects, so I settled on the S1700 as my secondary player. *an S3700 should work too.
Most modern DACs are good**. What sets them apart is the quality of: the DAC's output buffer amplifier, the amplifier's power supply decoupling & the use of good analog electrical engineering principles in design & layout of the DAC & printed circuit board.
**the DAC should contain a phased-lock-loop circuit to remove jitter*** from incoming clock. ***cheap players cannot afford a low jitter clock.
Congratulations on an honest test and for confirming what basic science shows us about digital audio transmission! It’s great to see someone recognize that, as long as the digital signal reaches the DAC intact, even a super cheap transport can sound as good as a high-end one. Digital audio is transmitted as data, and the DAC’s job is to convert it into sound, handling any timing or jitter issues along the way. Many of us already know this, which is why we often rely on affordable transports paired with quality DACs for excellent sound.
Also the same applies with streamers, we know a cheap Raspberry Pi does as good a job as a high-end streamer as long as they are both connected to the same DAC. Yet people still choose to spend several thousand dollars on a streamer that doesn't sound better than a Raspberry Pi.
Subscribed.
PS: Some AliExpress CD transports look really beautiful with gorgeous wooden details and slick modern designs. And with the right DAC they also sound amazing!
That’s a bombshell! You are demonstrating “expectation bias” - expecting your more expensive component to sound better! Love your work, and your focus on the OG elements of HiFi that are where my heart lies. Back in California I also have two pairs of Altecs (16 ohm Flamencos and 16 ohm 1957 604C/D. Love your Model 19s. I’m in a small studio in Hawaii until the end of the year so I have to be space conscious and have the smallest Klipsch RP-500m II running from a 10W Pass First Watt SIT-4 from a nice digital source. A lot of sound quality in a small footprint. Maybe next year when I relocate back the mainland US I will submit both systems to your channel: 1) analog: TT and tube into the 604 and 2) digital: DAC into SIT-4…into the Flamencos or possibly DeVores for smaller footprint and attractive design in a main living room. Again thanks for all of the great content. Mahalo!
Thank you for being honest,if I were in your shoes I'd be in therapy in a mental institution,$10.000.00 vs a $35.00 cd transport or stand alone was so so close I'm speechless as to both tests were horrifying close and I'm in shock!!!!! You must do a part 2 or follow up to this.
The honesty is invaluable here. Even to say that there is a very subtle difference or practically no difference indicates that the differences are small enough to be less important than many other much larger factors like ambient noise, the listener's level of physical fatigue, and the temperature of the drivers in the loudspeaker or headphone. Obviously many of us will still hammer away at the last tiny details, but this lets us all know that transports are not going to be big game changers.
Even knowing exactly what he's listening to, Guido has no motivation to find the lack of differences that he has.
Data is data and when they are identical, so is the sound. In fact, any CD drive that can manage computer app files must have perfect data read capability or it simply won’t work. The notion you have to pay anything extra for a “transport” to sound superior is plain idiocy. Best argument for these overpriced boxes is the enclosure cosmetics.
@@ThinkingBetter
And spinner mechanical noises...
@@ity1311 Streaming win also on not having any mechanical noise besides providing much more music, costing less, provide much higher music resolution (data bandwidth) and no errors (lossless and no CD scratches).
Thanks so much for your honesty. I was expecting a significant difference through their own DAC more than the transport. I could detect a difference but not an amount I would be happy with paying the extra. I still use my CD transport and am happy with size and quality of the Project player.
I wasn't surprised about outcome being used as transports but as players that surprised me and I basically did this test almost 20+ years ago with a used CD player I'm still using today and 2 high end CD players at the time my dad had. Back then that was a more noticeable difference with the internal DACs.
Totally understand why it is hard to 1) do this and 2) share this kind of result but you are AWESOME for sharing it. I have done a lot of A/B tests of different transports--hoping to find a difference honestly. I haven't been able to decide which is which reliably in a blind test so I am not surprised with this result. Keep doing your thing. You got a subscribe out of me for this!
Great and honest vid. And yes, as a transport super close but with the internal dacs, the Majority had quite a smeared low end and nasty sibilance on the higher frequencies. Cheers.
In the first set of rips, I thought "B" had very slightly better transient definition perhaps at the expense of some air. In the second set of rips, I also preferred "B." Between the first "B" and the second "B", I preferred the second "B." It had a slightly better definition on the vocals and some more air in general over the first "B." However, the differences were very slight. Thanks for another fascinating video!
no way, in both situations i picked out the better player, without playback or lying about it. and in a room in front of your system there will be more differences, but also the differences are definatly not justifying the price difference.
16 Bit 44 kHz PCM is absolutely no rocket sience. If the data can be read by the transport without any error correction altering the data its identical. In fact you can compare the files bit by bit and get the same result. Nice honest test you did here ❤
Thanks for another great video, Guido. Very much appreciate your honesty. If it’s any consolation, when you played the track through their own DAC, i immediately heard the better sound coming from the Ayon 35 mk2.
Thanks! Glad you did and in person it is even more noticeable but…not enough IMO, not for that kind of money
@@anadialog There’s some truth in that but i figure the price difference will be also be in how quiet the player spins, how much sturdier it is built, its longevity (my Technics, Akai, JVC, Marantz, NAD dedicated CDPs all stood the test of time. I don’t believe any of my DVD players ever did. - Van (Belgium)
No surprise. Thanks Guido to share your experience.
Sir. Just you won a huge credibility. Hosnet youtuber as you we need in this world.
Thank you for your output about this topic.
I've ran these tests myself with different CD players comparing a 30 dollar one vs a 330 dollar one and a 110 dollar one. When hooked up to a DAC they all sounded the same. With analog out only the $30 one sounded any different but that I think is because the RCA outputs were SO badly designed that there was an issue. I applaud you for this video and the fact you're not peddling snake oil on this.
This price range is pretty low to make valid conclusions, believe me...
I have a £2000 cd transport, and the WiiM mini into a dac is better. £89 !
Bravo Guido! I have listened to LOTS of cd players ...there were a few differences sometimes but always VERY subtle.
The first sane hi-fi enthusiast i have stumbled over, Thanks ;-)
On my channel the empirical audiophile I have tested the McIntosh DA converter compared it to a Conrad johnson premiere 9 tube DA converter. They are both night and day different. The McIntosh sounds digital while the Conrad Johnson sounds more analog. They are both very revealing DA converters, but they sound completely different from each other.
This test is on transports, not converters (or only in a minor way when mentioning differences between players)
Very interesting video. With the number of people watching RUclips for self validation, I am sure you will get a lot of interesting comments. 🙂 I guess the only question remaining about these cheap players is about their consistency and durability over time.
Indeed it's a topic that gets a lot of people worked up for reasons unknown to me. It really doesn't matter if it makes a difference. I could blindly determine which machine is which - but that is completely irrelevant for the rest of the world. Actually, the only real reason I got a (relatively) expensive transport is that I want it to last for at least 20 years - 17 to go now.
. Why would a Transport have an expensive, temperature controlled Clock when 99% of DACs will ignore & re-clock anyway? I don't want to pay for useless features.
Acid Jazz, Funk & Brass 🔈🔉🔊
I was shocked as i was listening with my HD820 headphones. In track 2, I could hear even more difference in the first note of the Acoustic Bass and, overall, sharper and maybe more separation. Then, I tried using my monitoring system(Focal Trios), and I got the same result i heard. (My room and speakers are relatively treated, and the call is rated.) Maybe there is still a little bit of a loudness difference normalizing them that makes this illusion. But i could listen to the difference and don't know this album to judge which one is the nearest to the absolute master as i noticed more overall sharpness in track two. The first note of the AC Bass is different in these two tracks, and, of course, track number one sounds more flat and suitable as the reference, but as you mentioned, i was expecting a huge difference(even10%), which is critical environment less is more:) Thanks for your great videos. Most people and new generations don't know what an excellent listening environment and high-quality sound are.✨
Another interesting video Guido, but my experience of this sort of thing is quite different. I have an Oracle CD1500mkll in my main system and recently added a Denafrips Venus ll DAC-the DAC in the Oracle being a 15yr old 128x overampler is very good but a bit lacking in midrange warmth/fullness. The Venus fixed that beautifully to my ears-much more analogue to my old ears but that's what I grew up with. I still listen to analogue FM radio on an ancient Naim NAT-01 and vinyl on an Qracle Delphi V turntable. Context aside, I tried out my 20yr old Cambridge Azur cdplayer (£250 back then) as transport into the Venus out of interest and was gobsmacked at the the difference, the Cambridge definitely benefited from the better DAC but was nowhere near the Oracle by any parameter. I know time and tech wait for no man, but in my experience well designed, well implemented and well built kit stands the test of time. Which suits me fine as I am not a neurotic box swapper continually chasing imaginary perfection. It is all an illusion afterall. But good food for thought-this will definitely jangle a lot of gear first audiophiles. Maybe not a bad thing.... Love your channel and sharing of your own audio journey.
Hoots from Sunny Scotland
Hey! Thanks for sharing your experience. For me the question of the video is still standing because I am sure that others like you are genuinely experiencing a more pronounced difference
@@anadialog As a wise man once said "If you want to listen to great digital, don't listen to great vinyl"
FM....I used to live very close to New York City and used to listen to fm all the time on either a McIntosh 65b tuner or to go back a bit further a McIntosh MR55a tuner. To me they both sounded great. I also used to listen to AM on a Fisher TA600 which had great bass and made AM stations sound marvelous.
My understanding regarding digital input is that bits are bits so transports funtion perfectly or do not function at all. Dacs are different. I bought a schitt modi 3+ about 4 years ago. Previously i had been playing my digital collection through the analog output on my dell latitude laptop. I was skeptical that the modi would make a difference. It made a world of difference. I was honestly blown away by the improvement. It was real and dramatic.
Did the same but with a Macbook Pro and a Cambridge DAC Magic. The difference was substantial.
Wow, truly amazing a great review. This brings me back to the test you had done by a university of the copper materials structure in a type of fancy interconnect - well done !
Don't forget to count the number of oxygen atoms in the copper or lack of them or is that in the sterling silver in the wires.............you know oxygen pure bs yadda yadda.........
Very honest review, Guido, unlike most of the stuff audiophiles tend to post here. The only thing in which a CD transport can influence is jitter, but that’s a problem we solved more than 30 years ago. That being said, if you take the digital output of two distinct players in working condition, one really cheap, and other really expensive, record them (digitally) to audacity and compare the files, you’re going to see they are completely IDENTICAL, down to every single bit. That being said, the only thing that can influence the sound that comes out of any kind of CD player is it’s analog components, like the DAC’s power supply, amplifier or low pass filter. The whole transport thing is just snake oil, mathematically proven. Get a CD transport that you know that will last long, or just something you find aesthetically pleasing, hook it up to a good DAC, and enjoy perfect digital sound without having to sell your two kidneys.
As to why people tend to hear differences between two transports, even when the same DAC is used, it happens because they WANT to hear these differences, maybe not deliberately, but subconsciously. The best way to prove it sounds identical is to perform an all digital recording (hook it up optically or via the coax cable to a PCM recorder at 16-bit 44.1khz and then check the files later). They should be exactly the same.
Yet it's clearly audible and directly traceable back to particular transports.
No one disputes the DATA is identical, yet something else - electrical noise being passed to the DAC perhaps - results in differing sound quality.
@VideoArchiveGuy The data is all there is. There's nothing else going on. Audiophiles in my opinion are deliberately ignorant to the matters of psychology that affect how they perceive things. It's just an absolute cognitive bias festival. 😂
3:14 I paid only $15 for a 2010 model Sony Blu-ray player that can also play SACDs at a thrift store. I don't really use it as my V60 is more than sufficient in nearly all cases. The reason you probably don't notice a difference in your rips could be that the audio itself is passing through the Lyra's own internal DAC.
It's worth doing a video to test the V60 DAC because my internal testing showed that it was better than even my brother-in-law's DJ equipment.
Wow, you totally confirmed what I had suspected for a long time about CD transports… Thank you so very much for your honesty and at the same time I’m sorry for you as well. That answer has to kinda sting. I appreciate you making this video and you have one more subscriber now 😁
Just wanted to thank this gentleman for the time he took and for the uploading, being honest, just sharing what he feels is right.
I also want to thank all the commenters, all of you folks put together are helping me 'put together', lol, a newer system, kinda.
Even on my iPhone I thought track A was the better transport. Here’s my experience. I have a jays audio cdt3 mk2. I changed to a better digital cable and heard clear improvements. I then got a Lector CD transport and the difference in sound was immediately obvious. It gave a darker sound and there was more inner detail. A quick Google search showed that others had found the same.
The improvements are mostly subtle and depend on how good the rest of your system is. Some improvements like naturalness take a bit longer to appreciate. I have made numerous improvements to my system and they all add up. 10 very minor tweaks might be almost indiscernible on their own but when combined give an obvious improvement.
Bottom line is digital sounds great even when done cheaply, but there are many improvements that can be made to get it closer to the vinyl nirvana.
Appreciate your bold honesty. It's why I have been a subscriber for around four years!
i have listened to first track comparison. you are right. there are minor diferences in bass region, a bit fuller sound from expensive transport. from cheap transport sound is straight line, a bit sound like mp3 compression, but better.
After years of working in Hi-Fi I have come to the conclusion that all things sound more alike than not, and the more you are around gear the more it all blurs together and the novelty wears off. I still love it, don’t get me wrong, but it isn’t magic, it’s more a science and a simple one at that but with a touch of art. Differences are always very subtle if at all. Now I just look for products that have objective science backing them up, and plainly state that they are going for accuracy/transparency. The pixie dust and snake oil be damned. I’m not saying don’t buy expensive components, and I’m not saying that boutique tube amps for example aren’t cool, but don’t be fooled by them either.
It’s a bit like wine tasting, if you drink it immediately and compare and concentrate, maybe spit it out after you can tell the difference. Start drinking and multitasking and getting drunk off it and it becomes less apparent. Same goes for music, the less you focus on the details the more it sounds the same.
How about the differences between cd players using their internal dacs through their rca outputs. Presumably you would say there would be little difference in sound quality between ones of the same price, say around £700. What about the differences between one at £700 and one at £2000 ?
@@Chris-nd5se it depends on the individual products themselves. Some CD players have legitimately good DACs. As for DACs, find one that is measurably transparent, and that’s all you need. For example an Eversolo A8 or an RME ADI-2 sounds better to me though subtlety than some much more expensive DACs. And those two are measurably transparent. In my experience stuff that falls into the “mid-fi” price bracket tends to be the best value. A lot of entry level stuff leaves much to be desired but a lot of Uber hi-fi stuff is just ridiculous.
@@lukerestlessstudios Thank you for your response. What price bracket would you say is mid-fi for cd players ?
I have to admit I was flabberghasted by the closeness of the two and have to admit that, in the case of the transport-only test, I guessed incorrectly.
I went quickly into the A-B testing when i saw their section's titled early in on the bar-menu, i don't normally comment before seeing all of a video but in this case.. (just in case I hear something that might psychologically taint my first impressions & make me want to go back & reconsider what i heard as unaltered each time in test A & B & a good few times too by sliding back where each time I thought Test A had a more tuneful & deeper bass & lower end. I did wondered v.slightly if in test-B, her vocal might be a tad more prominent but my perceived 'drop' in lower frequencies of Test B, like all below 350'ish hertz where the "richness" of voice & music tone lays, (to various degrees & equipment dependent) ..may have given that impression, but I ='ly slightly preferred her voice in test A. (heard via tv's digi-out into arcam surround amp but set to 'stereo direct' which turn off the sub* (*only o.k. 4'films i.m.o. & speakers) ..& switched to play through the main stereo's floor'standers, as I do for hearing or A - B'ing hi-fi equipment on-Tube, subtleties can be heard with good vid' recordings) Now I'll watch all the video.
P.S. i genuinely expected to hear no difference at all or struggle very hard to hear one, that was not the case. In total ignorance of what costs & spec's the transports have & what info' may follow in the vid, if now offered any one of the 2 after what I heard, i'd have to choose test A's transport.
It would have been nice to see pure digital recodings of the audio output of both players. Then comparing the audio with software such as Audacity to prove that there is no difference when using them as transports. (I personally did this test and there was literally 0 samples of difference when comparing two identical files.)
Techmoan does this when comparing audiophile snake oil and every time, it proves that literally no difference is present in the audio.
This is true. Improvements in CD technology and error correction means that most equipment can do a bit-perfect transfer. In the early days, there were a lot of variations between players but that's more or less gone.
True but to do that you need a USB output that the Ayon does not have or a special interface that can capture pure digital from coax (hdmi is easy).
Excellent video content.
I have come around to just using my computer and a decent DAC and an external computer disc drive.
I really like ripping on M-Discs and SSD hard drives and just rip straight uncompressed files.
The large scale A/B testing of DACs, $7 versus the world, seemingly compels the notion that DACs are overrated as well but the output of the newly formed analog stream needs a properly designed analog output preferably into a pre-out for me.
I like to avoid dedicated preamplifiers if possible.
There is a lot of confirmation bias in wanting to believe the $70k CD transport is far superior to anything lesser.
If the CD mechanism and laser reader are able to accurately read and output a clean digital stream and that stream is pushed through the audio chain accurately, then after that do what you think best with that digital stream.
I absolutely love the fact that cool expensive things exist.
I am no ASR drone.
I think that if you are going to devote your time and treasure to music listening focus on the speakers and to a lesser extent the amplifier.
I tend to like a bit of harmonic distortion but that is personal preference.
Just my opinion and not here to argue about it.
Okay those who say transports sound different do Hard drives or USB stick sound different because this is what you are saying, I would say that better transports read scratched discs better and are more reliable and longer lasting to a degree providing parts are available. As for DAC's is it the DAC chip or the analogue stage that makes a difference I suspect the latter. So if I do hear differences what is actually better what I prefer or what measures better?
Hi Guido, Interesting video and topic. I have been in the Audio World for many years now. Done a lot of listening to everything out there since the 1980's. Tried SET'S and many different brands etc. I ended up with what I thought at the time was the best of both worlds! You spoke on Transformers, Tubes etc. I got tired of needing to match Output Tubes when time to upgrade etc I like your McIntosh 30's! I had 2 225's.25watts a channel! Ran in Mono with Mark Levinson Dual Mono Pre Amps with separate power supplies for each Pre Amp! Those were the days! ML 6's as I remember! Anyway, I ended up fascinated with the OTL concept! I went with Atma-Sphere M60 Mono's Balanced! All Point to Point Wiring and the nicest thing was they use inexpensive Tubes! They don't need to be matched either. There are 8 per amp and I bought a bunch when Sovtek was available in The New York from main distributor! The amps have a very fast slew rate which seems to have great benefits to the sound! The Bass is Soo much better that the SET's that I have heard. The Soundstage also wide and deep! I believe Ralph Karsten is a Genius and when the Circlotron Design Pattent ran out from the early 1950's I think. He picked it up and started working on his improved version by adding a true balanced design! Using multiple Single End Triode Tubes that were readily available and didn't need expensive matching etc. Hence: The best of both worlds! For me anyway! I'm into Music more than playing around with Tube rolling etc. Been there done that! Anyway. I owned several versions of the Atma -Sphere amps. From the 200 watts per channel to the 100 watts per channel to the M60's at 60 watts per channel! Like Goldilocks and the 3 bears! I ended up with these! So just my thoughts on the Tube Amp discussion! Goldenears
Thanks for sharing your experience, always interesting to learn about one’s journey. There is always something to learn. You seem to have found your balance and that is priceless! The Atma-spheres seem amazing!
I remember transports and dacs from early 90's, the arguments about jitter and error correction etc, we had items like the Sony CDP-R1/DAS-R1 combo (saved for two years for this combo in the early 90's just for it to end up not being shipped), CD transports built like battle ships. We had items like the Marantz CD-63, tin and plastic.
I also remember later hearing the TEAC VRDS T1 outperform the Technic's SL-PA10. Both looked impressive and both in the same middle road price point of £500, though the VRDS was not actually a VRDS mechanism, and the SL-PA10 was appalingly basic inside, simply the same transport mechanism as lesser costly complete players in a heavy good looking case, with only optical output. The Teac simply had better digital output circuitry and internal layout.
Much of this was in the days before dacs vastily improved, I remember even someone involved Benchmark in an old forum argument commenting that indeed with old dacs there was more need and more noticeable differences with some transports and dacs.
To this day I would rather have a really well made CD transport if using CD into a dac, but modern pricing has went insane, and its now simply basic components in heavy cases. Modern dacs have made the importance of acurate read once transports less of an issue, but there is no pride of ownership in having some tin box running a DAC's error correction circuits into overdrive.
I am a ludite, I rarely listen to CD in this age of streaming, yet still run items like Theta, Genesis, EAD legacy digital sources with the old CD standard dacs for those old CD's, but if I ever need a new DAC, I wont be spending £8000 on a model when there are plenty of sub £1000 models available that actually do 90% plus of the performance.
TDLR (however that goes).
I'm 61, very new to 'new' HiFi. Everyone's help and opinions, are appreciated. Although you're probably going to be laughing soon...
Other than using an older Onkyo TXNR 686 receiver with some Klipsch floor speakers, my only other 'system' I've used is (was, they're boxed up) most of my life is my Yamaha m80/c80/t80 setup that I bought back in 1984-85, when I was on Okinawa.
I don't remember off the top of my head the model number of the Yamaha speakers or the Yamaha CD player I bought back then (I'd never heard of a CD, until I went to Okinawa, they were the most incredible thing!), I'm too lazy to go pull them out and look at the model numbers...
Anyhow, back to the Onkyo...I just bought and hooked up tonight, a Modi, plugged into an AudioLab 6000CDT.
I plugged in some really old optical/cable/rca's I've had laying around for years.
Tonight was my very first experience with a DAC/new CD player.
My headphones, you folks are going to laugh (I doubt anybody has made it this far, lol), but I'm using sennheiser's Xbox game 1 (something like that) headphones.
I have learned a lot recently from all of you folks, that speakers and headphones should be a priority. And to me that makes sense, because that's where we're listening through.
But at the moment, these sennheisers are all I have.
So using the Xbox series x player, keeping the volume the same on the amplifier and headset, I compared the Xbox with the Onkyo/new stuff/old cables.
I don't know how to describe it, but there was a difference, a difference that I preferred toward the Onkyo setup.
So keeping with the newer setup, using the Modi switch (I hope it doesn't blow it up) but as the music played through the 6000cdt, I used the Modi switch to switch back and forth between the optical and the cable inputs and there was a difference to me. I prefered the optical, although, regardless, what an incredible sound difference in the music I've listened to for years, seems new. Anyhow...
However, I don't have any good cables to swap out, I'll be ordering some, just so I know I've got the newer stuff.
I'll finally finish by saying that, I can remember back then when I bought the new Yamaha gear (with my Laser Disk player! What?!), I did have headphones for the barracks, I just don't recall what they were, but oh my gosh, what a difference plugging in a CD, with the m80 's meters bouncing,
tweaking the knobs on the 'parametric', I think it's called, equalizer!
It just sounded so incredible, it's hard to believe that it wouldn't sound any good anymore, compared to this new stuff.
If the uploader deletes my 50 paragraph comment, I understand, if anyone's made it this far, I appreciate each and every one of you, because actually, this is really a fun experience!
Ron, Yosemite California.
Thanks for sharing that and glad to see you are enjoying your system, regardless the level. It’s cool that you got your gear early directly at Okinawa, were you were stationed there?
@@anadialog Yes. Kadena Air Base.
I was part of the Air Naval attachment, from the island of Diego Garcia.
Cool info, back then, the SR-71 (Japanese refer to it as Habu) was stationed there.
It's very likely that both transports sound similar because the T+A dac is reclocking the digital streams.
Agree and most modern dacs reclock data so transport quality is less important overall.
Interesting! I had a similar experience. I have a PrismSound Callia DAC, and at one stage I was using a $50 DVD player to play CDs. So then for the sake of improvement, I got a Rotel CD11 Tribute player ($600 or so) - and I couldn't tell the difference. However, more recently I was lucky enough to get a 1983 Revox B225 CD player. It has dual mono Philips TDA1540 DACs and the CDM0 transport. And - it sounds amazing! To be honest it doesn't sound like it's playing CDs at all; it sounds more like my turntable. I would suggest that trying a vintage CD player might be just the ticket for those looking for a less "digital" sound from CDs (in fact the B225 doesn't even have a digital out).
Thanks! I actually did, I also tested my Marantz CD-94 MKII (which includes a TDA1541 single crown) as a transport but not much of a difference once again. As a player, sure! Here is the video of the Marantz: ruclips.net/video/ByClVQevxqo/видео.htmlsi=PN8n4DDK5JMtGhRX
@@anadialog My friend's Arcam Alpha 5+ that he uses a transport (or CD player) uses the same DAC chip and Philips CDM 9 mechanism. It sounds great as a transport. Maybe it's missing some resolution but I could listen to his system all day. He is a boutique cable manufacturer and electronic maven who built very fine electronics and modified the Arcam (5 Sparkos regulators, Panasonic storage caps, etc). Big difference is in bass-his $1000 mini-monitors have a 4.5" mid-woofer and a high end soft dome tweeter, me-$110,000 Von Schweikert VR9 SE Mk2 with 15" Foundation Class D amp powered built-in subs. First time he recognized that someone has a better sounding system.
huh. less digital i mean what does digital sound like to you to begin? vinyl is almost always from digital ps (unless from about 95’ and earlier l), and the fidelity from cd is actually better that vinyl. crazy huh
@@chinmeysway I have 31,300 LPs which are not from digital masters. I also have 16,600 CDs which derive from analog and digital recordings. With either my Topping D70s or Lampizator Poseidon, digital when the mastering/remastering is well accomplished, sounds as good as analog even if it often sounds different. I have a higher end system to compare with a Jay's Audio CDt3 Mk3 transport, pair of Westminster Lab REI monoblock amps and the aforementioned Von Schweikert VR9 SE Mk2 upgraded speakers. My analog is a VPI TNT VI upgraded, Townshend seismic sink, radically upgraded SME IV and Dynavector 20x2L (so, it sounds beautiful and dynamic with 90% of my LPs).
" It has dual mono Philips TDA1540 DACs and the CDM0 transport. And - it sounds amazing! "
You are aware that the TDA1540 DAC is a 14 bit (yes 14 not 16) DAC?
"To be honest it doesn't sound like it's playing CDs at all; it sounds more like my turntable."
The resolution of a very good turntable playing a vinyl LP is comparable to about 10 bit
So yes - the TDA1540 is "closer" to a turntable 🙂
Thank you for your honesty. What an amazing recording that is…and it sounds awesome on both players. 👍
Hi Guido, transport wise I've also similar experience and therefore focus on external DAC. My assumption is with newer players, they are all more or less using the same mechanical/optical transport, as not many are producing high quality CD componets anymore! Therefore I prefer vintage player, like my lovely modified Sony's by Swobodia Audio, those are in a different league, like Accuphase DP 720. Any you also see why the very good vintage CD laser/transport are not available anymore 😉
I had kind of come into this expecting that there wouldn't be much difference when comparing the CD players as a transport. It is the DAC that is most important here and what affects the sound most. I COULD hear a difference when the CD players with their own DACs were played and the B clip definitely had better stereo separation and was clearer. However, both CD players with the DAC is better and frankly, I couldn't tell the difference. While some might argue about clock issues and transport build and stability, but I think you can get that in a any higher grade home, or even a commercial CD transport. I have had Pioneer CD/DVD transports that lasted for YEARS and the reason being is that they are well built. I mostly use the DVD players because they seem to handle burned discs better. Also most have both Toslink and Coaxial digital outs. I just bought myself a Pioneer V8000 DVD player because I wanted a display. I only paid $70 for it and the unit is built like a tank! I am probably going to pair this up with a Geshelli J2 DAC as I have heard very good reviews about that DAC. So that would be my "hi end" CD player. No need to spend $600 or more on a CD transport only. Or $1000's on a CD player when an outside DAC is usually better anyway. Save your pasos and do as the OP says. Don't feed the trolls! Oh! as a bonus, the unit will play DVD's too!
My late 90s Sony dvd-cd sounds fine with just a straight rca hookup, though it's clear that you will need a dedicated dac, depending on your system budget, for better soundstage, imaging etc..Like you said. Your ears are the final judgement.
Hi Guido - I've a very nice Japanese, C.E.C. Double-belt drive CD Transport >> a pretty high quality R2R Ladder DAC = As close to analogue, but without the pops/crackles/surface noise/etc. [Although I *do* also* have a decent mid-range Rega t/table w/ a good separate phono pre-amp, too]. I really enjoy the sound of my CD transport w/ seperate DAC combination very, very much. I do like the sound of my AES/EBU cable as the connection source... N.B. I'm not into streaming; it doesn't really interest me that much; nothing for or against the medium whatsoever.
I'm not really that obsessed w/ 'bit sample' rates either - a good 'Red Book' non-'brick-walled' CD is fine - overly compressed newer release CD's that I've come across from time to time, though....Yuch! No thanks.
CD sounds fine to my 40+ yrs. as a pro-musician/producer/etc. So, I'm very easygoing re; other people's preferred sources - as long as people are still listening to music, then that's a good thing; esp. new artists from the independent labels around the world. So many great new bands/artists around. Thanks, as always for a thought-provoking, interesting, well-balanced video. Very best regards from Japan, (ex-Scotland).
The thing about a transport is it's one of the main areas that use use to interact with the hifi, a smooth CD draw and nice actions on the buttons add to the experience.
Best honest audio review I've ever seen .I too have had high quality audio equipment since the early eighties and only now in my fifties can admit I was wrong. I have started to buy the cheap Chinese audio products which truly amaze me .......
Also some higher end DAC’s are more immune to the input signal. A lesser DAC may have exposed a bigger difference between the transports.
Amazing video! Thanks for making this! Really puzzling with such a "supposed quality gap"! Great public service! Comforting my thoughts about spending more time and money choosing the speakers first and above all!
They both sounded the same to my ears in the first test and honestly I'm not surprised, given that they were digitally transferring the music to the DAC. I recently bought a new transport that only has an HDMI output and that's fine with me, because I'm going to use an external DAC anyway. Even the sound out of the cheap players analogue outputs is pretty good. It just goes to show how good consumer grade converters and audio more generally is now. I'd be interested to see the results up on some test equipment and see if there are any objective, measurable differences.
My suggestion to anyone considering going down the rabbit hole is listen to whatever it is you are interested in the lowest format first and if you like the sound characteristics then try a more expensive version. What you will find is if sound quality is what you like not the sound of a song via genre, lyrics etc is you will waste money trying to make a recording that lacks something to you by spending money on versions and/or equipment. Some stuff just wasn't recorded well.
In the second test the second track has a voice with more focus and is clear that it was the Ayon
Very interesting experiment. I used the Questyle M15i dangle and there was noticeable differences between the 2. On the 1st test the Bass was the major difference and on the second test the staging (3D) and her voice was the major differences.
Thank you
After downloading the samples I have concluded that the Ayon is clearly superior to the cheaper player. Played back on my system, the Ayon produced a far better soundstage and more solidity and presence in the vocals.
The Majority internal DAC was more sibilant than the Ayon internal DAC. As for using them as transports, as long as both can read the CD and get the data to the outboard DAC reliably and without jitter, I would expect them to sound the same when using the outboard DAC - it is the DAC that you are listening to.
what a cd player does is reading 1s and 0s, like 001100101010111001, and converts it to sound via DAC.
as far i know there's also an error correction something built into the cd player.
it's same as a harddisk or usb-stick reading 1s and 0s, DAC converting it to sound.
correct me if i'm wrong. i'm no audiophile, i'm just a noob, but i like listening to music.
Yes, but there is interpolation and other filters that do have an impact, plus digital signals travel in an analog form (voltage) so many things can go wrong and change. But I guess that the T+A DAC and modern drives are so good that this is greatly reduce now.
Trying this out at home now. Trying to use my Bluesound node as the DAC through the hdmi in from the Majority. Still not working. I did a test with my tv and the Majority is sending pic and sound, then when I try just using with blue sound just as a cd transport…. No go. Any ideas for me would be greatly appreciated!
Make sure you are using at least a 1.4 hdmi cable. Then try fiddling around with the bluenode input prefs but Ibam sure you have already done that
@@anadialog thanks for your reply! unfortunately it looks like to bluesound only accepts eARC Might try running though TV next. Love the channel and thank you for all of the great videos you keep producing! Best wishes from BK,NY:)
Thanks for sharing us your audiophile learning path… but most for all for your brave honesty!!! Regards.
My friend come over with a Jay"s Audio CDT2 MK3 CD Transport, I have a Oppo 103 DVD player, running with my beloved Bryston BDA-3 Dac, we A/B them back and forth as transports. My god there was very little difference, maybe just a hair bit more nuance in the Jays. Am I crazy hearing things or is this the reality of CD transports?. Love your channel, Chow Claudio
Thanks! When you have a very good DAC the transport…is just that, a transport. Very little coloration!
Thank You,
Transports made a big enough difference in my setup, especially those that allow one to use an external clock. It made me almost want to relisten to my entire collection. The biggest explanation I can muster is the difference in jitter performance (if you're using S/PDIF). The interesting part is the effect of the clocked transport is not universal i.e. you can hear practically no difference for certain types of music, but a drastic difference in other types of music, most significantly is soprano vocal work. Without clock, when the soprano sings with vibrato note, you can hear an unstable "screech" (hard to describe), that almost instantly gives away that you're listening to digital audio. Once that "screeching" sound is absent with clocked transport (must use a good clock), then it really does approach good analog playback. If one is using asynchronous USB, then the DAC needs to have a very good clock, or can be externally connected to a good clock because the transport will act as the slave clock. I encourage you to try out an Esoteric transport and connect it to an external clock and see if you can identify any differences. Not saying Ayon is not a great player (I'm sure it's a great player), but I've also used a streamer much more expensive than the current Esoteric N-05 with clock and Marantz SA-7S1 with clock, but every time the clocked devices beat out my more expensive streamer that does not have external clockability, when using the same DAC. As always, your miles may vary.
Pardon my inorance, kind person. Why use the streamer as opposed to a PC? I noticed recently many ppl swear by these devices & I have been looking into them but not getting the point of them. Thanks (I'm not dissing u, I'm genuinely curious)
@@Zimmy_1981 My first streaming/NAS system was based on Mac Mini, but the problem with that was music sounded strident and flat. But as my system got upgraded, you really begin to hear the differences in soundstaging, layering, smooth but with high resolution. The system no longer needed to be warm to sound smooth i.e. neutral and smooth is attainable. Several factors played into this: jitter performance with a good clock (external in my case), less EMI interference, no longer needing to rely on noisy switching power supplies. Again I think PC/Mac based servers/streamers are fine, it seems all the elements of music are there at first, but once I switched over to a good transport, music sounded more whole and has more ability to move you emotionally because all the missing elements I didn't realize were missing became more obvious. Hope that helps
My friend has a dac and external clock, i must say i was shocked how analog and good it sounded compared his other dacs.. At some point i must look into these external clocks..
I think he had clocked the dac and streamer to same clock, or something similar..
Ivansfchan, you seem to be a very easily influenced person, I must say...
I was kinda expecting that, a bitstream at the end of the day is always the same, if there's a difference it must be in the jitter and/or electrical noise (unless you connect via optical) or maybe ground loops, that it's possible that it's what you hear. As far as re-digitalizing the analog output my guess is that you need a REALLY sensible registering rig in order not to flatten out the differences, something with roughly the value of what is playing. It may seem crazy but to some regards a well trained human ear can be better than a digital ADC on some specific tasks, our spatial positioning of sound is kinda mindblowing, so are certain stuff like ability to distinguish between the pour of cold and hot water, or to feel that the silence sounds different in some conditions like when you are on a mountain. All stuff that we do pretty easily but we fail to describe how we do hear these differences.
I have a CD Transporter Audiolab 9000CDT and a Bluray Player from Panasonic, the DP-UB9004, and I don't hear any differences digitally with coax. The CD transporter will still remain, so I can protect the Panasonic, which only works for films.
Thank you for your work, it confirms my thoughts and observation the last years. I hope this truth reaches more public and CD gain some more attention.
I wouldn't thought I would ever give a like to this channel and here I am, totally shocked, giving you a like! :)
It's a scientific fact, datastream is the same, no matter what transport unit you are using; problem comes when some unit (dvd players) have a no bit-perfect output or lack seamless reading (even some old cd audio transport unit if i'm not wrong).
So, cheap units will break before, may be a bit more noisy.. but datastream must be the same, so sound quality depends all on dac and its analog output. That's it, a 30 dollars transport will sound exactly as a 500, 1000, 10.000 bucks one.
The main problem is that low-end appliances are noisy, you can often hear the mechanism turning !
You can hear the mechanism when the music is playing, how old is your cd player.
@@r423fplip Listen to classical music, and you'll often be able to hear certain CD players during the silence. And it's precisely the newer ones that are noisy. No such problem with my TEAK VRDS 25, but with my latest CD player, whose drive is that of a computer built into a living-room hi-fi box!
It's the same when playing a CD on a PC: the motor makes itself heard!
This is the thing about digital music - there is not a huge gulf between the basic gear and the high end gear. It's there (I got the second test right), but the difference is not huge. Analogue, on the other hand is a different matter - there is a _massive_ difference between the information picked up by a Crossley turntable and a Linn Sondek. Some of the equipment B/S about analogue reproduction is actually in part justified because cartridges, arms, etc actually can make a huge difference, but with digital, as you've just demonstrated, it's far more subtle and is often pure, unadulterated B/S. You may just have exploded a bomb underneath the rarefied world of Hifi.
True!
I think you're right, the gulf is not enormous but it can be significant between players. (The difference between enjoyable and compelling.) For phonos, a better question might be about whether the difference between a Linn Sondek and a nicely equipped Pro-ject Carbon is "massive."
At the beginning of this video I assumed the result was clearly the Ayion. Very great honesty in your videos. I came to the same conclusion when I tested my T+A SACD player against my first Technics CD player from the 90s. I can't hear any difference. My ears are not good enough. 👂😭
Very nice video. I would be interested in a test between a good basic turntable and a pricey one, both with the same cartridge
Well, this was sort of expected. The difference would be their build quality and longevity. I have been using those cheap CD/DVD players and they last not more than a couple years - most likely laser pickup issues, but not worth repair. On the other hand, the Denon transport in my main system has been running for 34 years without a hickup.
Indeed that is a plus for a quality player/transport
Thanks for the very welcome and honest opinions. I do wonder why is it a surprise that quality audio electronics is no longer expensive. We take for granted phones and computers that cost a few hundred dollars that are more powerful, capable and of higher quality than ones that cost many times more ten years ago. Why should hifi be any different? I think may of us might be too embarrassed to admit that most front end digital gear is really rather good and the differences are now very subtle indeed. We like the shiny expensive things and to impress other audiophiles. It also underlines a psychological aspect of our hobby: "it costs more and has more expensive components so it must be better". Not only that, but many of us are into our later years and our hearing is, to be blunt, fairly degraded. I have come to the conclusion that I can no longer hear subtleties between things like digital filters (mainly because the changes are in the higher frequencies) but I can hear more broad effects, such as sound staging, dynamics and bass extension, so I guess that's more of what I value now.
As always, your videos are excellent.
This was very helpful.
I thought track A was better
Well I have to say that in both tests (Transports and players) I could guess correctly the expensive one (ayon), There are differences of course, a trained ear can hear them, even through YT and a cheap set of headphones.
I purchased an old Onkyo DX-7500 CD player from the late 80s. At the time it was Onkyo's best player available, and the specs are incredible. It weighs 14lbs and even had a metal tray for the CD. It touts 18x over sampling and has some tech that isolates the power supply from the other components to reduce interference and so on. It was $800 in 1988 which is about $3,000 in today's dollars. It sounds no different than the $250 Onkyo 6-disc changer that they still produce the same.
I'm shocked. In both comparisons, I thought Ayon had the little extra sound as better, but it turned out that Majority played it. There were 3 reference points when listening that I chose to compare. First high tones were better and especially a party with cymbals, second is the letter S which sounded more natural, softer and sounded more like S than Z-ish and third is the dynamics. In both cases I thought it was Ayon who played better but it turned out to be wrong.
A huge amount of high end audio is an absolute con.
High-end cars can be similar. But most enthusiasts know well the difference between a Maserati and a Lamborghini. Some people want status and luxury. Others want the highest possible performance. And they are both correct.
If a transport works properly, there won't be any difference, because they all will output a bit-by-bit perfect stream. Faulty clock or disc reading errors - ta-da! You WILL hear difference. But if all system works as they are intended to do - you won't be able to define which is which during a blind test. A DAC itself (external or internal) WILL obviously sound differently due to different reasons. But transport itself - won't.
Of course everything sounds different. The perception of sound happens in people’s minds and if they imagine it’s going to sound different, it definitely will sound different.
I continue to discover the same thing that it's very hard to hear differences between digital devices. I clearly hear difference between Analog and Digital. I would expect that you'd get a good reading off the disc but possibly more jitter with the cheaper rig. Maybe going into a good DAC corrects that. I'm not surprised that the rips are hard to tell apart. I always have trouble with that. What I can hear between good and cheap digital gear is a difference in the noise floor. That leads to hearing more low-level detail. I don't hear it in your rips on the two players using their built in DACs, but I know I hear it at home. I don't know if that's a product of the conversion or simply better electronics in the more expensive units. Thanks for the video.
This is an ear opening video. Thanks so much for this objective and honest video. This is why I LOVE you channel. Thanks so much for all that share.
Thank you so much! Love “ear opening video” 😂
Why is no one just recording digital output from both transport and do binary comparison? That will end 'all transport be same' argument one way or another.
Hi Guido.
As I have mentioned before cd players aren't a thing one should throw too much money into since no matter what it can never get better than the limitations of the format. If a transport works as it's supposed to you wont get a bang worth the buck, and if the DAC's people spend a fortune on are more than a name/snake oil they will just reveal that we need a format with higher resolution. (Preferably studio resolution so we don't have to settle for compressed medias and the best simply is standard for everyone).
One good thing that can be said about the format is that it's probably the most socially fair since everyone can afford decent sound and don't have to envy the wallet swingers who won't get much more than placebo effect for wasting their money.
Stay cool Mate.
All the best from Denmark.
Obviously we are listening to those different tracks coming from RUclips in phone / tablet speakers. Any different source on this setup will sound alike. I'm absolutely not questioning the judgment of the comparison, but it remains a personal judgment and perception. As we know, in any audiophile system it may have a bottle neck and this can be the DAC, speakers, electronics, the room and so on. If there is any bottle neck elsewhere, the source - despite of its quality - may have a limited impact on the final result. I have had a very different experience when it comes to the quality of the CD transport. Again, we have different setups, different perceptions, different tastes and so on... Not questioning the comparison as it's always nice hearing different opinions. Thanks for sharing!
Well, the tracks are available for download in full resolution like almost all my videos. Personal judgement in perception is partially incorrect, meaning that there are trends, it is not completely subjective just as a good wine, car or the beauty of a girl are true for MOST people, that is what I mean for trends. In this case the digital signal is captured from the analog output of the DAC by a Prosm Lyra 2, a high quality professional converter as the T+A DAC of the first conversion. After discussing with a lot of people it appears clear that the DAC is so good that it is reclocking everything so precisely that the results are almost identical and that is why they sound so good and so similar to each other. The rest of the chain is top notch. I would never do this test and teach these conclusions if I wasn’t sound on all these aspects. People who follow my channel know my honesty and integrity.
Guido will be the brand ambassador of Majority. Next week they will not be able to serve the audiophile needs. 😂
same!
🤣🤣🤣
I’m sort of not surprised. My understanding from watching a few videos over the year from
Paul at PS Audio, there is probably not going to be much different between a CD transport vs a cd/dvd/blueray player connected to a good DAC. This is because the reading technology hasn’t changed much since the late ‘70’s/early 80’s.
Now a CD transport with a good DAC can sound better than top of the line Sony player from the 80’s. Like anything, it all depends on your equipment and the sound you are after.
I do appreciate your honesty about your listening experience. Recently I saw a RUclips’er who some how finds cherry vintage stuff and who also sells high end stuff as well. The RUclips’er went on for 30+ minutes talking how a $1500 to $3000 CD player was going to sound night and day different than an 80’s CD player connected to a DAC. As you are hoping the RUclips’er was trashed in the comments.
For me, I’m a vinyl guy and only get CD’s when it’s the way it was released, usually in the 90’s.
Hi Guido, yes Apple did a lot improve in regards of their ADC architexture 😊 A lot is written about GaN HEMT (electronic magazines). Clever concept he combined, it's too pricey for class-d, but on the other hand look at other hifi-manufacturs out there!, like Avik, Devialet or Naim! My best class-d recommendation is still until today the little LSA Warp1 (price/quality and unusual class- signature. No I'm still not coninced about Class-D! . Thanks for your time & efforts!! Gerald
Well, at least you can hope that the expensive player's transport and optics are more reliable 😂. As for the first test, I am sure that even the perceived differences you mention do not really exist. The same DAC receives the same string of 1s and 0s from 2 different sources and decodes them in the same way - there can be absolutely no difference imo.
More reliable. It’s either a 1 or 0
WARNING: Google translate :)
I didn’t download the samples, I listened on RUclips. In the first test I chose A, I heard the difference only after several dozen listenings, the bass depth is a little more pronounced. In the second test, when I already knew what I needed to listen to, I chose B from the second listen, I realized that it was the same deep bass. Live difference should be more noticeable, so you can rest assured that your Ayon sounds better :) But I’m surprised how well a cheap CD player holds up in terms of price-quality ratio, you can easily use these in your audio system if you don’t have an extra few thousand dollars and you’re not a perfectionist.
Exactly, there is a difference but they are too darn close…
back in the 90's I knew so many audiophiles just using playstations to play their CDs... Transport wise, I think expensive transports are a crook. Good external DAC though... for your digital source, this is where money should be spent, imho. Thanks for the vid.
My little Sprout 100 only has room for an optical in for a CD to use the internal Sprout DAC. Is there a converter you can recommend, or another cheap CD transport I should consider? Thanks for taking me to school here. I subscribed to your channel--I'm a newbee
Welcome aboard! The whole difference here, as we have established in the comments, is the reclocking of the DAC. That is why differences are so subtle. Apart from that, it's difficult to suggest a good converter on a budget. I noticed significant improvement only in high-end models besides beeing a segment in constant evolution. The good suggestion in this sense is probably a TOTL Topping. For transports I made a dedicated video some time ago to which I would add the Shangling ET3 (not cheap): ruclips.net/video/Gl563onzwqU/видео.htmlsi=41mLlPi7iKTAMwVu Apart from that, I suggest getting a vintage player. Excellent value for money and excellent sonics! And you can always add a DAC to it just make sure it has at least a SPDIF output.
I totally agree with you on disk spinner, the DAC will make the difference! And in many cases after you get into the $500-$1200 dollar DAC’s you realize you have to step into the $10,000+ neighborhood to realize another significant improvement in sound. Thanks for your review, it is refreshing to hear the unexaggerated truth!
I thought the difference between the Ayon as transport was clear, I immediately felt the relaxed nature of the sound disappeared immediately track B started. It’s the first time I was so confident of which was which on RUclips.
Absolutely agree, at least using (very good) headphones. Maybe with speakers the difference is less noticeable (?!?)
I noticed no real difference between the two when used as transports but I didn't use headphones. When the players used their internal DACs I spotted the Ayon but the difference was subtle.
Im pretty sure that if you use a toslink or a spdif digital output it's impossible to found the default of the transport drive, but the digital to analog output part of the DAC it's another story every DAC shoud sound a little bit different. So a good DAC a good amplifier and speaker make the difference not the drive, it's not the same with tape and LP the mechanical part have an importance.
so, my two cents…
Apart from appearance, features, controls, boot time, or possible jitter/errors, zero and ones should be zeros and ones, right? The sound character, separation, tone, etc, are decoded and created by the DACs. Not only am I not surprised that you heard little difference between the dirt cheap and mega bucks players when used strictly as transports, but I wouldn’t be so sure you heard anything replicatably unique.
Although I don’t have a separate DAC, I have owned several CD players over the past few years that did sound quite differently. I had an old Sony from the early nineties that just sounded ok, then a Onkyo I purchased new back in 2018, featuring Burr/Brown DACs, which sounded significantly better, but skipped of you simply looked at it wrong.
I had two players for a while, an OPPO DVD/CD/SACD player I bought from a customer, as well as an early 2000s Pioneer Elite DVD/SACD player I bought from a neighborhood garage sale for just $10. Side by side, I was surprised when the Pioneer sounded better. Sold the OPPO and kept the Pioneer. It’s sounds marvelous. I have no urge to upgrade unless it dies.