Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site


In the Forum: Didital Things
In the Thread: Windows Based Transport: A quiet and capable Source?
Post Subject: Clarification?Posted by item on: 11/2/2011
fiogf49gjkf0d
I'm not sure I'm clear what you're saying . . . if we're talking about using a CD mechanism to read files in real-time, during playback, we're entering a world of pain. Engineered solutions to the problems thus presented are expensive and specialised - and entirely not in our remit.

If we're talking about using a CD mechanism to rip files, leisurely - perhapsĀ  apart from the playback environment - then the challenges are as much software as hardware, and are entirely - simply - to do with bit-integrity. Best practice here is already engineered into the computer: it knows how to move bits very reliably from A to B. Some drives are better suited to this job than others, but in our experience most are - perfectly - good enough for this task, as a null test will prove beyond question. I don't therefore recommend - or specify - anything expensive.

During the HiFi World test, a mixture of FLAC, WAV and AIFFs ripped from CD using Max and EAC on a variety of drives were compared with CDs and hi-res downloads from HD Tracks.

Given that the same file played from computer storage can sound better than from any disc-based transport, I don't see any role for an optical drive beyond moving data once, slowly, from CD to SSD or HD.

Apologies if the post above came across as 'lightweight marketing'. I was only trying to make the point that CD transports, which probably peaked at the turn of the millennium, are hard for any computer to better with respect to 16/44.1 playback . . . because by default the computer has so many deleterious components.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site